Covid-19 discussion thread

[MyNameIsTerry]

Meanwhile, in another act of insanity enforced by that cretin Rees-Mogg:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...metre-22119390

No wonder this country is a laughing stock.

At some point our Parliament might wake up and smell technology. The quant walking into lobbies should have gone ages who. Much better to press a button like they do in the devolved assemblies.

[MyNameIsTerry]

Apparently you can be fined £100 lowered to £50 if paid within 14 days.

I don’t see it specifically pertaining to having sex with someone, more that being in a home or staying overnight in another household.

It’s impossible to enforce but they have to try something.

The media are just trying to get clicks by making it about sex. But it's just about being in someone's house and not social distancing just as before they said don't visit anyone. It's obviously unenforceable just as it was when two people met on a street and only exists to give the police additional powers should they need them.

However we can now meet with one other household and have a social distance party of up to 6 in the garden so some forms of sexual entertainment may be possible...

[Pamplemousse]

At some point our Parliament might wake up and smell technology. The quant walking into lobbies should have gone ages who. Much better to press a button like they do in the devolved assemblies.

Have you seen how many tried online voting and then said "oh, but that wasn't how I meant to vote!" though? Clueless, utterly clueless.

The government is very fond of the phrase "not fit for purpose" - the best thing financially for the country would have been for Pugin's monstrosity to have been torn down and a new, modern building put up outside London. It would have been far cheaper than refurbishing that dreadful Gothic confection.

[AntsyVee]

Some people in my country are trying to stop voting by mail. Why? Because that might mean more people will vote and then they won't get the election results that they want. Sad and pathetic, IMO.

[Pamplemousse]

Some people in my country are trying to stop voting by mail. Why? Because that might mean more people will vote and then they won't get the election results that they want. Sad and pathetic, IMO.

Oh, this is a persistent one here in the UK, Vee. The usual suspects object to postal ballots here for pretty much the same reasons. One recent example here:

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/nigel-farage-on-postal-voting-system-1-6122275

I've heard DJT's objections and they're the same as we hear here: the people who have postal votes are "the wrong people" who won't vote for him. Never mind you're disenfranchising people who cannot get to a polling station, by virtue of physical disability or infirmity, or not even being in the country at the time of an election!

[fishman65]

I don’t know why YouTube would bother banning him, he says absolutely nothing of note.

He reads documents out aloud without sharing where he acquired them and who wrote them. He could have been reading something he scribbled himself on the back of a cigarette paper, for all we know.

Furthermore, his claims that behavioural scientists advised government to put forward the message of high risk to people is absolutely not surprising. We all recall the early attitudes toward this virus, how it was an “old persons disease” and would only affect you if you were immunosuppressed. That all might be true but what he fails to mention is that the idea of pushing personal risk was to slow the spread.

I also like how he constantly refers to this virus as a “flu” when any self respecting doctor would know that coronaviruses are not influenza viruses. As ever, his contention that this virus is no more dangerous than seasonal flu is explained away by saying that the government is manipulating the numbers. He gives no evidence for this, he just says they are and that’s it.

Perhaps this “doctor” would like to explain why the excess deaths in the UK alone have been higher on average in every month of this year so far than preceding years. Perhaps he could explain why a government is deliberately locking down the country and then, in his own words, says that our economy will collapse and take us back decades. Please “doctor”, explain why any government would want to do that?

What we have here is a bit of a delusion of grandeur as he constantly makes reference to how right he is about everything. The need for a lockdown is a debatable topic but I would like to know how guys like him can say that we didn’t need one based on data that only became apparent after 2 months of lockdown. Isn’t it fair to say that those numbers of cases and deaths would be far different with no lockdown? Again, that’s debatable, but I fail to see how anyone can be patting themselves on the back and calling themselves correct right now.

Nothing this man says is in any way groundbreaking, and if you think it is then you should really get your critical thinking skills in check.

Ah but what he's saying is much more exciting than that boring Dr Campbell.

[fishman65]

Take away Johnson's background and he behaves like the "feckless scum" the tabloids love to have a routine two minute hate of. No attention span, multiple children with multiple women, he doesn't even know how many kids he has.

This is just so true Pamplemousse and how those tabloids conveniently ignore it. Instead they use harmless sounding words like 'buffoon' as if Johnson can't really help it. You should email that sentence to the DM.

[AntsyVee]

Well, it's nice to know we aren't alone in this...but sad at the same time. Democracy is about giving more power to the people, not disenfranchising them.

We also have these people who think that there is going to be this huge election fraud, and they think that so many of our elections have been fraudulent. But there's been no proof. Other than the tampering of Russia in 2016, we have no evidence of domestic tampering.

[MyNameIsTerry]

Some people in my country are trying to stop voting by mail. Why? Because that might mean more people will vote and then they won't get the election results that they want. Sad and pathetic, IMO.

That's just politics. It's the same reason why some parties want to lower vote age, it's nothing to do with engaging with younger people. They waffle on about giving younger people more responsibility but only with the vote, the vote they want, and not with other rights older people have. It's nonsense. If those same young people said they wouldn't vote for those parties you can guarantee they wouldn't offer it.

The postal vote cuts both ways here, I think. Older generations are more likely to vote Tory and they are more likely to have a postal vote.

[MyNameIsTerry]

Have you seen how many tried online voting and then said "oh, but that wasn't how I meant to vote!" though? Clueless, utterly clueless.

The government is very fond of the phrase "not fit for purpose" - the best thing financially for the country would have been for Pugin's monstrosity to have been torn down and a new, modern building put up outside London. It would have been far cheaper than refurbishing that dreadful Gothic confection.

I can't remember that. Just the politicians or us? Electronic voting already takes place in the assemblies.

No doubt remote voting will bring the same conspiracies and worries about the big Russian bogeyman or any other shady bunch over here whether Cambridge Analytica or Momentum since both engage in such dodgy stuff...