China Coronavirus

[Kidder81]

Sir Keir Starmer wouldn't look out of place as a soap opera lothario character. Hard to take him serious as leader of the Labour Party but did well putting it to Boris yesterday.

I would take him a lot more seriously than his predecessor

[johnnycool]

i noticed that boy Stamer(who I know nothing about but die hard labour people seem to hate) wrote a letter to Boris about his inaccurate information with regard to the nursing homes. I would love to see someone write a letter per lie and then next election bring out all the letters with all the lies.

Starmer is more to the Blairite side of Labour by the looks of it and this pisses off the Corbynites/Momentum crowd by the sound of it.

He comes across as far more competent but was allegedly the brains behind the Labour Brexit strategy of putting the negotiated deal back to the electorate which didn't go down well in the Labour heartlands.

[imtommygunn]

It's a very split party which could really do with deciding if it is actually a socialist party or not. Yeah he is more likely to be tory lite but anything has to be better than the current incumbents.

[thewobbler]

It's a very split party which could really do with deciding if it is actually a socialist party or not. Yeah he is more likely to be tory lite but anything has to be better than the current incumbents.

I think I've mentioned it before on this thread, but recent elections have proven yet again that English people seem to have an innate distrust of real socialism, to the point that the Tories could have electioneered without a single broadcast, poster or interview, and with Roland Rat as their PM candidate, and the voters still would have picked them ahead of a party led by a proper lefty like Corbyn.


Labour's simple choice as a party is to embrace this knowledge and eventually regain power under the guise of Tory-lite, or to ignore it, and ultimately implode as a viable opposition party.

[RadioGAAGAA]

I think I've mentioned it before on this thread, but recent elections have proven yet again that English people seem to have an innate distrust of real socialism, to the point that the Tories could have electioneered without a single broadcast, poster or interview, and with Roland Rat as their PM candidate, and the voters still would have picked them ahead of a party led by a proper lefty like Corbyn.

Arguably, by putting Boris et all in front of cameras - they did worse than electioneer without a single broadcast, poster or interview... and still got a landslide victory.

Labour's simple choice as a party is to embrace this knowledge and eventually regain power under the guise of Tory-lite, or to ignore it, and ultimately implode as a viable opposition party.

Is the aim of a political party to represent the politics that are important to it, or to seek power for power's sake?

[thewobbler]

I think I've mentioned it before on this thread, but recent elections have proven yet again that English people seem to have an innate distrust of real socialism, to the point that the Tories could have electioneered without a single broadcast, poster or interview, and with Roland Rat as their PM candidate, and the voters still would have picked them ahead of a party led by a proper lefty like Corbyn.

Arguably, by putting Boris et all in front of cameras - they did worse than electioneer without a single broadcast, poster or interview... and still got a landslide victory.

Labour's simple choice as a party is to embrace this knowledge and eventually regain power under the guise of Tory-lite, or to ignore it, and ultimately implode as a viable opposition party.

Is the aim of a political party to represent the politics that are important to it, or to seek power for power's sake?

It's an awkward question to answer. Ostensibly the party should be centred upon firm political beliefs and policies.

But if the will of a country is not socialist, then a socialist party shouldn't really be considered the opposition party. They're really just making up the numbers, like the Green Party.


So to rephrase. The challenge to Labour is whether they are ready to accept that as a party, they are more likely to  convert the English electorate's thinking towards socialism through small steps, than big steps... which will necessitate being "Tory lite" for at least one term. And if not, then can they accept that in the medium terms, they are not a viable opposition party?

[mackers]

The breakthrough with the anti-body tests overnight seems to be significant.  At least the scientists will be able to ascertain whether having the virus provides immunity against further infection.  I presume the hope that comes from this is that if this can be proven then a treatment or a vaccine moves much closer.  Is that the case or am I reading too much into this?

[Jeepers Creepers]

The breakthrough with the anti-body tests overnight seems to be significant.  At least the scientists will be able to ascertain whether having the virus provides immunity against further infection.  I presume the hope that comes from this is that if this can be proven then a treatment or a vaccine moves much closer.  Is that the case or am I reading too much into this?

Its the hope that kills! Any optimism I read about always gets pissed all over the next day.

[GetOverTheBar]

The breakthrough with the anti-body tests overnight seems to be significant.  At least the scientists will be able to ascertain whether having the virus provides immunity against further infection.  I presume the hope that comes from this is that if this can be proven then a treatment or a vaccine moves much closer.  Is that the case or am I reading too much into this?

Its the hope that kills! Any optimism I read about always gets pissed all over the next day.

Optimism doesn't sell, get likes or raise your profile.

Unfortunately.

[Ed Ricketts]

I think I've mentioned it before on this thread, but recent elections have proven yet again that English people seem to have an innate distrust of real socialism, to the point that the Tories could have electioneered without a single broadcast, poster or interview, and with Roland Rat as their PM candidate, and the voters still would have picked them ahead of a party led by a proper lefty like Corbyn.

Arguably, by putting Boris et all in front of cameras - they did worse than electioneer without a single broadcast, poster or interview... and still got a landslide victory.

Labour's simple choice as a party is to embrace this knowledge and eventually regain power under the guise of Tory-lite, or to ignore it, and ultimately implode as a viable opposition party.

Is the aim of a political party to represent the politics that are important to it, or to seek power for power's sake?

It's an awkward question to answer. Ostensibly the party should be centred upon firm political beliefs and policies.

But if the will of a country is not socialist, then a socialist party shouldn't really be considered the opposition party. They're really just making up the numbers, like the Green Party.


So to rephrase. The challenge to Labour is whether they are ready to accept that as a party, they are more likely to  convert the English electorate's thinking towards socialism through small steps, than big steps... which will necessitate being "Tory lite" for at least one term. And if not, then can they accept that in the medium terms, they are not a viable opposition party?

Stamer - 56.3%
Long Bailey - 27.6%

It looks like they've accepted it. The idealist wing had their shot with Corbyn. They'll get another go in about a generation.

[Jeepers Creepers]

The breakthrough with the anti-body tests overnight seems to be significant.  At least the scientists will be able to ascertain whether having the virus provides immunity against further infection.  I presume the hope that comes from this is that if this can be proven then a treatment or a vaccine moves much closer.  Is that the case or am I reading too much into this?

Its the hope that kills! Any optimism I read about always gets pissed all over the next day.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/14/is-the-coronavirus-antibody-test-approved-by-public-health-england-a-game-changer

Q&A re the new antibody test.

[Ed Ricketts]

Studies in Spain and France the last couple of days suggesting only around 5% of the population have been exposed to the virus. Further waves seem inevitable if the bulk of the population is still fertile ground for infection. These new antibody tests by Roche will first be put to work clarifying this picture.

[glens73]

The coronavirus slayer! How Kerala's rock star health minister helped save it from Covid-19

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/14/the-coronavirus-slayer-how-keralas-rock-star-health-minister-helped-save-it-from-covid-19

Puts the West to shame

[JoG2]

Studies in Spain and France the last couple of days suggesting only around 5% of the population have been exposed to the virus. Further waves seem inevitable if the bulk of the population is still fertile ground for infection. These new antibody tests by Roche will first be put to work clarifying this picture.

I haven't studied a science book for 24hrs, and know less than Karen has forgotten, but how is the bit in bold even possible? 5%?

[trailer]

Studies in Spain and France the last couple of days suggesting only around 5% of the population have been exposed to the virus. Further waves seem inevitable if the bulk of the population is still fertile ground for infection. These new antibody tests by Roche will first be put to work clarifying this picture.

I haven't studied a science book for 24hrs, and know less than Karen has forgotten, but how is the bit in bold even possible? 5%?

It's a best guess probably. Based on a model. In reality they haven't a clue how many are or have been infected. They simply can't without a proper testing regime.