The Politics Thread 2020

[Sith Happens]

1 minute ago, SchtivePesley said:

Personally I think that any politician who has been caught breaking or flouting the lockdown rules we are all being expected to adhere to should resign. It should be a matter of principle

Meanwhile - the door is now open for 140,000 people who have been fined for breaking lockdown rules to appeal against the fine

It certainly does create an us and them divide.

 

 

[TuffLuff]

5 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Would you like a bacon sandwich that you scruffy so-and-so?

 

No thanks, you IRA supporting communist

[Archied]

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

I disagree with the vast majority of his opinions, but I do love him.

More fulfilling than the bigs at Hillsboro I suppose , each to their own

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Van Gritters said:

It would still be pointless going to the town everywhere would be shut apart from a supermarket.

Depends if you want to sit by the river

[Archied]

58 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

While I think Cummings should have resigned...is Keir Starmer not being a bit hypocritical demanding he resign having recently promoted Stephen Kinnock who traveled hundreds of miles for a birthday celebration to break lockdown rules?

 

With you 100%on that if true

[Angry Ram]

3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Which livelihood, he has a few? Oh and that's an 'unelected' man who is doing his best to 'quote AngryRam: break-up the Civil Service' replacing it with 'jobs for the boys/family'!

So, yes.

Would like to see that so called quote of mine saying anything about jobs for his boys.. Oh wait IT NEVER FICKIN HAPPENED.

[TramRam]

1 hour ago, Paul71 said:

While I think Cummings should have resigned...is Keir Starmer not being a bit hypocritical demanding he resign having recently promoted Stephen Kinnock who traveled hundreds of miles for a birthday celebration to break lockdown rules?

 

You should know Politics doesn't work like that, Kinnock wields no power, He's in opposition so as things stand it was a minor story at the time, Some wasted print space and a quick interview...job done, Now, If his Wife Helle Thorning-Schmidt was still Prime Minister of Denmark there would be a story, The same goes for Tahia Ali, Only important as to deflect the Cummings story.

 

[Wolfie]

I am not defending Cummings & he may well be the antichrist but it would be hypocritical for me to judge him when I have used common sense and bent the restrictions occasionally:

• I have exercised more than once a day
• A few of my journeys and shop purchases have not been "essential"
• Last week I had a socially distanced meet up in my parents' garden, when it should have been one-at-a-time.

It just seems to me that there are an awful lot of people in glass houses throwing stones. Maybe he has bent the rules he helped put into place but can many of those people claiming the moral high ground say they are without sin, where the strict lockdown rules are concerned?. Except for Eddie, anyway.

[Sith Happens]

1 minute ago, Van Wolfie said:

I am not defending Cummings & he may well be the antichrist but it would be hypocritical for me to judge him when I have used common sense and bent the restrictions occasionally:

• I have exercised more than once a day
• A few of my journeys and shop purchases have not been "essential"
• Last week I had a socially distanced meet up in my parents' garden, when it should have been one-at-a-time.

It just seems to me that there are an awful lot of people in glass houses throwing stones. Maybe he has bent the rules he helped put into place but can many of those people claiming the moral high ground say they are without sin, where the strict lockdown rules are concerned?. Except for Eddie, anyway.

Im shielding but still go for a walk, bike ride, well away from people, i have my mum and dads shopping delivered and drop it off and have had a conversation from several metres away.

So im certainly going against guidance of the shielding letter, although i personally feel thats what it is, it cant possibly be a one size fits all.

I know people who have totally gone against the rules, a close friend has been in his elderly mums home and painted it, also had her round for tea and lunch with no social distancing. So I am sure lots of us have done things we shouldnt.

I guess we arent writing the rules though and you would expect those governing the country to be a bit more respectful of them regardless of what side of the house they sit on.

[Sith Happens]

7 minutes ago, TramRam said:

You should know Politics doesn't work like that, Kinnock wields no power, He's in opposition so as things stand it was a minor story at the time, Some wasted print space and a quick interview...job done, Now, If his Wife Helle Thorning-Schmidt was still Prime Minister of Denmark there would be a story, The same goes for Tahia Ali, Only important as to deflect the Cummings story.

 

I think there is a dislike factor, very few people will have an opinion of Stephen Kinnock, I dare bet if it had been Dianne Abbott then the media would have made much more of it.

[Gritstone Ram]

5 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Im shielding but still go for a walk, bike ride, well away from people, i have my mum and dads shopping delivered and drop it off and have had a conversation from several metres away.

So im certainly going against guidance of the shielding letter, although i personally feel thats what it is, it cant possibly be a one size fits all.

I know people who have totally gone against the rules, a close friend has been in his elderly mums home and painted it, also had her round for tea and lunch with no social distancing. So I am sure lots of us have done things we shouldnt.

I guess we arent writing the rules though and you would expect those governing the country to be a bit more respectful of them regardless of what side of the house they sit on.

My missus worked out if she met up with her mother and I met up with her father then in theory only one person was meeting up with one other member of a household. 

[nottingram]

1 minute ago, Van Wolfie said:

I am not defending Cummings & he may well be the antichrist but it would be hypocritical for me to judge him when I have used common sense and bent the restrictions occasionally:

• I have exercised more than once a day
• A few of my journeys and shop purchases have not been "essential"
• Last week I had a socially distanced meet up in my parents' garden, when it should have been one-at-a-time.

It just seems to me that there are an awful lot of people in glass houses throwing stones. Maybe he has bent the rules he helped put into place but can many of those people claiming the moral high ground say they are without sin, where the strict lockdown rules are concerned?. Except for Eddie, anyway.

Anything like that is a judgement call, probably not ones that go by the letter of the regulations in place but when done correctly can be done safely. Personally I feel if you can meet up with one parent it is daft that you can’t meet with both, likewise exercising can easily be done without going near anyone else. Essential shopping is a grey area, what I deem essential is different to what someone else may deem essential so I would struggle to judge anyone too much for going shopping, unless they are then blatantly not exercising any sort of distancing while doing it.

However, I would assume you didn’t knowingly have or suspect you had Covid (or anyone you are living with or coming into contact with) while doing any of those activities. That is the crux of it for me. Cummings’ wife strongly suspected she had it and he strongly suspected he would therefore get it which is supposedly why they did what they did. The trouble is, at the time London was a huge hotspot for it, there were many places in the country that hadn’t yet seen many reported cases, Durham being one of these. Surely the entire point of lockdown was to mitigate the chances of this highly infectious disease spreading quickly. Cummings admitted yesterday that not only did they take the disease up there, his wife and son entered a hospital with it - surely that is beyond any sort of reason?

A senior government official breaking lockdown whilst with family who had or strongly suspected they had the disease that the whole foundation of lockdown was built around?! To me that is not reasonable, it isn’t ‘bending rules’. It is a flat out breaking of them and one of the most serious ways that they can be broken. 

And that’s before we get onto his little jaunt to a nice tourist hotspot while he was up there, or his illegal drive to check his eyesight while his child was in the car with him depending on whom you believe. Not sure which is worse.

He and his government have effectively eliminated any control they had over the virus over the last few days. Lockdown can not now be taken seriously when we have been told it was completely reasonable behaviour (and even good parenting) for somebody to knowingly take the disease outside of their own home with them. While the measures are in place I am sure most people will adhere to them, but I certainly don’t think they can now be criticised if they don’t

[AndyinLiverpool]

10 minutes ago, nottingram said:

Anything like that is a judgement call, probably not ones that go by the letter of the regulations in place but when done correctly can be done safely. Personally I feel if you can meet up with one parent it is daft that you can’t meet with both, likewise exercising can easily be done without going near anyone else. Essential shopping is a grey area, what I deem essential is different to what someone else may deem essential so I would struggle to judge anyone too much for going shopping, unless they are then blatantly not exercising any sort of distancing while doing it.

However, I would assume you didn’t knowingly have or suspect you had Covid (or anyone you are living with or coming into contact with) while doing any of those activities. That is the crux of it for me. Cummings’ wife strongly suspected she had it and he strongly suspected he would therefore get it which is supposedly why they did what they did. The trouble is, at the time London was a huge hotspot for it, there were many places in the country that hadn’t yet seen many reported cases, Durham being one of these. Surely the entire point of lockdown was to mitigate the chances of this highly infectious disease spreading quickly. Cummings admitted yesterday that not only did they take the disease up there, his wife and son entered a hospital with it - surely that is beyond any sort of reason?

A senior government official breaking lockdown whilst with family who had or strongly suspected they had the disease that the whole foundation of lockdown was built around?! To me that is not reasonable, it isn’t ‘bending rules’. It is a flat out breaking of them and one of the most serious ways that they can be broken. 

And that’s before we get onto his little jaunt to a nice tourist hotspot while he was up there, or his illegal drive to check his eyesight while his child was in the car with him depending on whom you believe. Not sure which is worse.

He and his government have effectively eliminated any control they had over the virus over the last few days. Lockdown can not now be taken seriously when we have been told it was completely reasonable behaviour (and even good parenting) for somebody to knowingly take the disease outside of their own home with them. While the measures are in place I am sure most people will adhere to them, but I certainly don’t think they can now be criticised if they don’t

morally, they can’t enforce it. Not sure they are that bothered. 
 

politically, if there is a second spike, people won’t forget. They will be bothered by that. Especially as it will put the brakes on replacing the civil service with companies owned by their mates. 

[Stive Pesley]

38 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

It just seems to me that there are an awful lot of people in glass houses throwing stones. Maybe he has bent the rules he helped put into place but can many of those people claiming the moral high ground say they are without sin

That's a fair point, but if any of us had been caught - we'd be looking at a fine.

He's been caught and is looking at a camera telling us that he will not apologise, has no regrets, won't resign, doesn't care how it looks and we can all kiss his arse

It's not about glass houses, it's about principles of who rules apply to and who they don't

 

[rammieib]

1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said:

Personally I think that any politician who has been caught breaking or flouting the lockdown rules we are all being expected to adhere to should resign. It should be a matter of principle

Meanwhile - the door is now open for 140,000 people who have been fined for breaking lockdown rules to appeal against the fine

I see what you did there - typical British press thing. On the 15th May it was 14,000 fines, not 140,000 fines.

Also - I guess you know that all 14,000 have 'extenuating circumstances' which apply to the rules? 

 

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

Would like to see that so called quote of mine saying anything about jobs for his boys.. Oh wait IT NEVER FICKIN HAPPENED.

I was replying to Curtains and the point of yours I quoted was:

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

'quote AngryRam: break-up the Civil Service'

Never mind mate, we're in a post-truth society, you fit right in! ?

[Wolfie]

24 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

That's a fair point, but if any of us had been caught - we'd be looking at a fine.

He's been caught and is looking at a camera telling us that he will not apologise, has no regrets, won't resign, doesn't care how it looks and we can all kiss his arse

It's not about glass houses, it's about principles of who rules apply to and who they don't

 

Not sure about that. I remember seeing stories of people driving to the Lake District and then being lectured by the police and sent home (not fined).

Hard to say unless we know what people have been fined for.

Anyway, if I go on about this, it'll look like I'm trying to defend him, which I'm not. I just hate hypocrisy, wherever it comes from.

[i-Ram]

16 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

That's a fair point, but if any of us had been caught - we'd be looking at a fine.

He's been caught and is looking at a camera telling us that he will not apologise, has no regrets, won't resign, doesn't care how it looks and we can all kiss his arse

It's not about glass houses, it's about principles of who rules apply to and who they don't

I haven’t seen as much of yesterday’s events as many, but I did tune in just before Kuenesberg rose to ask the first question and watched all the hacks stand before him. The bit I have highlighted doesn’t match the Cummings I witnessed.

I remain unsure of whether he should go, but unless something comes out that contradicts his “story” I think just about on balance he should stay. I guess if l was a Remainer I would see it differently because I think much of the guff going on now links back to Brexit rather than COVID. 

What is clear is that Johnson and his team have lost a lot of political capital in their baking and showing of this shitcake.  I know a good few of you want the icing/cherry to top the cake off but I say be happy that the current crop of Tories are giving your boys a very good chance to recover its 80 seat swing requirement.  Be interesting to see how Starmer plays this given his team seem to have more COVID rule breakers than the Tories.

[Stive Pesley]

21 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I haven’t seen as much of yesterday’s events as many, but I did tune in just before Kuenesberg rose to ask the first question and watched all the hacks stand before him. The bit I have highlighted doesn’t match the Cummings I witnessed.

There was pretty widely reported footage of him being asked by a reporter to admit that it doesn't look good and he replied "who cares whether it looks good" (or words to that effect).

[Angry Ram]

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

I was replying to Curtains and the point of yours I quoted was:

Never mind mate, we're in a post-truth society, you fit right in! ?

You conveniently missed the jobs for the boys part but hay ho.