Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
That's only going to happen when Cummings is gone, like it or not
Not good it’s boring as fuck, we need to focus on the real issues
Try telling this guy it’s as boring as fuck you moronNot good it’s boring as fuck, we need to focus on the real issues
Most deaths in Europe, most deaths per capita. How did the lame excuse for a lockdown work out? Now we haven’t even got the death rate as low as other countries and we’re throwing caution to the wind.Was lockdown to prevent a massive uncontrollable peak yes or no?
No one ever said it was until deaths or infections had reached a certain point.
Im not a tory or a lefty, but I've had enough. The MSM have made people believe this is necessary. It isnt anymore. We did what we were meant to do.
By all means if it fires back up again or there is a second wave ( which wont happen) then bring in the restrictions.
Not good it’s boring as fuck, we need to focus on the real issues
Was lockdown to prevent a massive uncontrollable peak yes or no?
No one ever said it was until deaths or infections had reached a certain point.
According to the public this is a real issueNot good it’s boring as fuck, we need to focus on the real issues
The second condition of lockdown sort of did.
It said a sustained or consistent reduction in the number of deaths. I'm not too sure that's been achieved.
Thats a fair point, however, does go back to the while 'died WITH COVID' not OF.
Numerous people, and one i know first hand have had this. Friend of mines nanna, in a care home last few years. Terminal cancer, was going to go at any point bless her and 89 years old.
Death certificate stated suspected Covid. He was livid, as were the family. She wasnt tested. Didnt show symptoms other than a cough. However it was lung cancer she had.
A hell of a lot more of these examples online also. Worrying. Just what is the true amount? Double what we've been told or a quarter?
I tend to err on the side of the latter, hence my postings at the minute
Thats a fair point, however, does go back to the while 'died WITH COVID' not OF.
Numerous people, and one i know first hand have had this. Friend of mines nanna, in a care home last few years. Terminal cancer, was going to go at any point bless her and 89 years old.
Death certificate stated suspected Covid. He was livid, as were the family. She wasnt tested. Didnt show symptoms other than a cough. However it was lung cancer she had.
A hell of a lot more of these examples online also. Worrying. Just what is the true amount? Double what we've been told or a quarter?
I tend to err on the side of the latter, hence my postings at the minute
Thats a fair point, however, does go back to the while 'died WITH COVID' not OF.
Numerous people, and one i know first hand have had this. Friend of mines nanna, in a care home last few years. Terminal cancer, was going to go at any point bless her and 89 years old.
Death certificate stated suspected Covid. He was livid, as were the family. She wasnt tested. Didnt show symptoms other than a cough. However it was lung cancer she had.
A hell of a lot more of these examples online also. Worrying. Just what is the true amount? Double what we've been told or a quarter?
I tend to err on the side of the latter, hence my postings at the minute
Thats a fair point, however, does go back to the while 'died WITH COVID' not OF.
Numerous people, and one i know first hand have had this. Friend of mines nanna, in a care home last few years. Terminal cancer, was going to go at any point bless her and 89 years old.
Death certificate stated suspected Covid. He was livid, as were the family. She wasnt tested. Didnt show symptoms other than a cough. However it was lung cancer she had.
A hell of a lot more of these examples online also. Worrying. Just what is the true amount? Double what we've been told or a quarter?
I tend to err on the side of the latter, hence my postings at the minute
But that works both ways regarding the recording of deaths.
Excess deaths is probably a good indicator and that is up at 60,000.
I just think, that like a lot of people,. I thought the daily deaths would be below where they are now before we eased lock down further.
Excess deaths are not a good idea during the pandemic. The final analysis will evaluate excess deaths beyond the time period and smooth any subsequent reductions
He's chatting whiffThat's why excess deaths is a useful statistic to look at.
But it doesn't back you up, quite the opposite.
The number is around 60,000 deaths.
They are a great way of looking at it.Not a good idea because they make your precious Boris looks dreadful you mean.
If we were any where near remotely competent in dealing with this crisis then people would probably feel most assured and less likely to be up in arms about any suggested easing. Suggestions like yours would be part of a clear, thought out and coherent plan (see NZ for example)
These changes are purely based on ideology - because they sure as hell aren’t based on any scientific fact.
Excess deaths are not a good idea during the pandemic. The final analysis will evaluate excess deaths beyond the time period and smooth any subsequent reductions
But that works both ways regarding the recording of deaths.
Excess deaths is probably a good indicator and that is up at 60,000.
I just think, that like a lot of people,. I thought the daily deaths would be below where they are now before we eased lock down further.
Nobody is saying it wasn’t to prevent an uncontrollable peak. They are simply explaining why we are more likely to see a second peak when other countries are yet to - because we are opening up with way more cases in the community.Was lockdown to prevent a massive uncontrollable peak yes or no?
No one ever said it was until deaths or infections had reached a certain point.
Im not a tory or a lefty, but I've had enough. The MSM have made people believe this is necessary. It isnt anymore. We did what we were meant to do.
By all means if it fires back up again or there is a second wave ( which wont happen) then bring in the restrictions.
No way he'll be leader at the next election.
If there's one thing he hates it's scrutiny, and there will be all manner of inquiries at the end of all this, and there's no way he'll stick around for that.
He'll probably wait till Brexit is 'done' so he can take the credit for that, then he'll bugger off.
That day cannot come soon enough.
I wonder if half the reason for not extending the transition period is so he can retire sooner rather than later...
Why would he do that ratings are excellent all things considered
What have ratings got to do with it? Aside from the ambition I don’t think he wants the job or can be arsed to do it and will be doing the after dinner speaking circuit as soon as he can, as you suggested yourself. He won’t go before Brexit is “done” though and as he has zero sense of responsibility rushing it through won’t trouble him even if it makes the process needlessly harmful. Will also give them plenty of time to say “fresh start” and “lessons have been learnt” before the next election.Why would he do that ratings are excellent all things considered
What have ratings got to do with it? Aside from the ambition I don’t think he wants the job or can be arsed to do it and will be doing the after dinner speaking circuit as soon as he can, as you suggested yourself. He won’t go before Brexit is “done” though and as he has zero sense of responsibility rushing it through won’t trouble him even if it makes the process needlessly harmful. Will also give them plenty of time to say “fresh start” and “lessons have been learnt” before the next election.
He is anti Gove and will play the game out until Gove is not electable - Gove has the ear of many elements of the press and he will wait until Gove is an irrelevance
Fucking shithouses
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
WowFucking shithouses
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Margaret Thatcher also had the Falklands crisis to pull her through. Boris is having his Falklands moment and fluffing his lines.Remember thatcher at one point had a minus 60 rating in her first year and averaged minus 14 across her tenure - anyone with any political knowledge shows this actually will not worry him in the slightest
Boris is probably looking for a weaker country as we speakMargaret Thatcher also had the Falklands crisis to pull her through. Boris is having his Falklands moment and fluffing his lines.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?