Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party?

[chrispmartha]

biggbn said:

A Winner Is You said:

Supports the lockdown until the R rate is below 1

https://order-order.com/2020/11/01/starmer-we-need...

Just to remind us that both parties are 2 cheeks of the same arse

Did he not call for a lockdown a few weeks ago and Boris suggested he did not know what he was talking about?

Yes he did, Boris said he ‘hadn’t got a clue’.

[bitchstewie]

biggbn said:

Did he not call for a lockdown a few weeks ago and Boris suggested he did not know what he was talking about?

[Gogoplata]

biggbn said:

A Winner Is You said:

Supports the lockdown until the R rate is below 1

https://order-order.com/2020/11/01/starmer-we-need...

Just to remind us that both parties are 2 cheeks of the same arse

Did he not call for a lockdown a few weeks ago and Boris suggested he did not know what he was talking about?

He called for a "Circuit Break". That's different

[biggbn]

Gogoplata said:

He called for a "Circuit Break". That's different

The difference please?

[768]

biggbn said:

Gogoplata said:

He called for a "Circuit Break". That's different

The difference please?

The lockdowns would've started earlier.

[markyb_lcy]

biggbn said:

Gogoplata said:

He called for a "Circuit Break". That's different

The difference please?

The “circuit break” was meant to be activated earlier and for a (shorter) pre-defined time of 2-3 weeks.

Part of the selling point of the circuit breaker was to avoid a longer national lockdown.

I am sure however that the former would have turned into the latter as after just 2-3 weeks we would be saying it’s “too early to judge” whether it had the desired effect.

Fwiw I agree neither with the circuit breaker or this longer national lockdown.

As for how Starmer and Johnson will come out of it I thoroughly expect Johnson to take an absolute battering at the despatch box over it, including from the rebel backbenchers on his own side.

Edited by markyb_lcy on Sunday 1st November 12:19

[chrispmartha]

768 said:

biggbn said:

Gogoplata said:

He called for a "Circuit Break". That's different

The difference please?

The lockdowns would've started earlier.

Erm, yes, that’s the point.

Boris’ reluctance to lockdown then U turn is an easy ‘win’ for starmer

[768]

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

[chrispmartha]

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

He wasn’t just ‘reluctant’ he was telling the people that were saying it was necessary didn’t have a clue.

Johnson looks inept just as he did at the start of the first lockdown

Talk about dither and delay ;-)

[Gogoplata]

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

I thought Boris made it perfectly clear when announcing the local tier system that he'd take tougher measures if needed be, and that he wasn't gong to rule out anything.

[swisstoni]

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

This use of U-turn really is getting old.
Is half of Europe full of hopeless politicians U-Turning.
Or are they reacting to events like any Govt would?

[chrispmartha]

swisstoni said:

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

This use of U-turn really is getting old.
Is half of Europe full of hopeless politicians U-Turning.
Or are they reacting to events like any Govt would?

Youd have a point if it was only this issue that he has u turned on, its a growing list.

[markyb_lcy]

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

Johnson will be entirely at liberty to make that point ... and watch it fall flat on the floor.

Perhaps, having known he may find himself in a position where he felt he reluctantly would end up doing it anyway, he (and cchq) might have thought better of characterising Starmer’s position as “not having a clue” and negligently plunging the country into economic catastrophe.

In not following sage and later Starmer in a 2-3 week lockdown and then doing the very thing that shorter lockdown was stated to avoid (a longer national lockdown), he has completely shot himself in the foot. The characterisation of the other side of the argument mobilised to score cheap points has increased the ammo his enemies will now use to shoot him down with.

[markyb_lcy]

swisstoni said:

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

This use of U-turn really is getting old.
Is half of Europe full of hopeless politicians U-Turning.
Or are they reacting to events like any Govt would?

Who knows. I let the citizens of those countries worry about and hold to account their own governments. I really care only about what ours is doing and saying.

[bitchstewie]

swisstoni said:

This use of U-turn really is getting old.
Is half of Europe full of hopeless politicians U-Turning.
Or are they reacting to events like any Govt would?

It's a bit of both.

There's nothing wrong with changing your mind when the facts change.

When you play politics and literally run campaigns (see above) calling other people out for advocating the thing your own scientific advisors recommended you do only to do it yourself longer and deeper just a couple of weeks later makes you look incompetent.

[768]

The proposal to sage was suggested to buy four weeks, which is problematic given Christmas. There were an order of magnitude more cases when Starmer proposed it, so I'd imagine it might have bought us four days.

[swisstoni]

markyb_lcy said:

swisstoni said:

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

This use of U-turn really is getting old.
Is half of Europe full of hopeless politicians U-Turning.
Or are they reacting to events like any Govt would?

Who knows. I let the citizens of those countries worry about and hold to account their own governments. I really care only about what ours is doing and saying.

I would have thought it would be useful background info no matter what.

[markyb_lcy]

768 said:

The proposal to sage was suggested to buy four weeks, which is problematic given Christmas. There were an order of magnitude more cases when Starmer proposed it, so if imagine it might have bought us four days.

It’s been stated before but Starmer only supported the circuit breaker the day after it became common knowledge when the SAGE meeting minutes were released.

How much less that would have bought us, is anyone’s guess (and I’m not going to guess because I don’t believe in the initial sage assessment let alone feel confident or qualified enough to make a 2nd one relative to it).

Just wanted to make sure people were aware that Starmer supported sage as soon as it was reasonably possible to do so.

[biggbn]

768 said:

I'm not sure it's a u-turn to be reluctant to lockdown but do it when you have to anyway.

Agreed, it was his language on the way to this decision that is the problem, mocking and belittling anyone who disagreed with the system he had implemented. For someone so clever, he doesn't half set some linguistic traps into which he unfailingly falls...

[bitchstewie]

768 said:

The proposal to sage was suggested to buy four weeks, which is problematic given Christmas. There were an order of magnitude more cases when Starmer proposed it, so I'd imagine it might have bought us four days.

I think the point is that he proposed it as soon as he had access to the information Sage published.

He literally couldn't have supported it any sooner.

Johnson presumably had access to that information immediately and chose not to act.

I rather suspect that's the bit that the public will remember.