Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[atomised]

739 as per news conference.

That later total includes non hospital deaths so still a difference from the previous Thursdays hospital figures

 

[Si Gull]

He has just confirmed that only 73000 were tested. Hate the man but he's not wrong. Frankly, it's a good effort to get to 73000 but I'd have a hell of a lot more respect if the government had just said, "sorry, we tried but couldn't quite make the target" rather than just manipulating the figures to make themselves look good.

No surprise there. How anyone believes any figure claimed by anyone about anything at the moment is beyond me. At a time when people deserve to hear the truth obfuscation, spin and lies abound, sadly.

 

[pocketseagull]

He has just confirmed that only 73000 were tested. Hate the man but he's not wrong. Frankly, it's a good effort to get to 73000 but I'd have a hell of a lot more respect if the government had just said, "sorry, we tried but couldn't quite make the target" rather than just manipulating the figures to make themselves look good.

He even praised Yodel for getting them out of a hole.

 

[jabba]

He has just confirmed that only 73000 were tested. Hate the man but he's not wrong. Frankly, it's a good effort to get to 73000 but I'd have a hell of a lot more respect if the government had just said, "sorry, we tried but couldn't quite make the target" rather than just manipulating the figures to make themselves look good.

I thought they were the ones tested in the new labs, with another 39,000 done in Hospitals/PHE so over 100K?

 

[Si Gull]

No surprise there. How anyone believes any figure claimed by anyone about anything at the moment is beyond me. At a time when people deserve to hear the truth obfuscation, spin and lies abound, sadly.

If true, getting 125k tests out is good going; but it's not the same as performing 100k tests.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Hancock mentioned in that press conference that the fact they have passed 1,000,000 tests is some kind of important benchmark. I guess we are supposed to celebrate this totally meaningless number for some reason, but he didn’t elaborate.

 

[Hugo Rune]

The government have done brilliantly by getting to 73,000 tests DONE yesterday. Odd they still need to play politics by trying to lie and spin their war to 122,000. I suppose they are playing to their supporters rather than the majority of the Country.

 

[Beach Hut]

I suppose they are playing to their supporters rather than the majority of the Country.

The majority of the country voted them in.

 

[clapham_gull]

The majority of the country voted them in.

 

[knocky1]

The majority of the country voted them in.

Less than a third of the population voted them in.

43.6% of a 67% turnout.

 

[Beach Hut]

Less than a third of the population voted them in.

43.6% of a 67% turnout.

If people cannot be bothered to vote then they will probably get ther outcome they don't want, however, a lot of hard left labour seats were lost last time round.

 

[GT49er]

If people cannot be bothered to vote then they will probably get ther outcome they don't want, however, a lot of hard left labour seats were lost last time round.

.... and we all know why that was! But that's for other threads than this one.

 

[Swansman]

Less than a third of the population voted them in.

43.6% of a 67% turnout.

Wtf 67%. Is it usually like that over there?

As someone who believes the real power is located above politicans, I never vote. So I'm quite impressed. But still, its weirdly low, why didnt people vote?

 

[Sorrel]

Wtf 67%. Is it usually like that over there?

As someone who believes the real power is located above politicans, I never vote. So I'm quite impressed. But still, its weirdly low, why didnt people vote?

December and cold? People who didn't care? People who considered themselves in a "safe" seat?

There are plenty of reasons why people don't vote. If more people did vote the chances are the end result would be about the same (elections are pretty much a very large opinion poll).

 

[Notters]

Wtf 67%. Is it usually like that over there?

As someone who believes the real power is located above politicans, I never vote. So I'm quite impressed. But still, its weirdly low, why didnt people vote?

Because they didn't like any of them.

 

[Weststander]

December and cold? People who didn't care? People who considered themselves in a "safe" seat?

There are plenty of reasons why people don't vote. If more people did vote the chances are the end result would be about the same (elections are pretty much a very large opinion poll).

Some people simply have no interest in politics, instead just getting on with life, they find politics and politicians dull, distracted by far more exciting or happier things.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Wtf 67%. Is it usually like that over there?

As someone who believes the real power is located above politicans, I never vote. So I'm quite impressed. But still, its weirdly low, why didnt people vote?

I usually vote but couldn't be bothered this year. My seat has a 20000 majority, I'd been up half the night with a baby, shit weather, busy day at work.

 

[RossyG]

I thought this article raised interesting points.

https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/who-controls-british-government-response-covid19-part-one

 

[Machiavelli]

Wtf 67%. Is it usually like that over there?

As someone who believes the real power is located above politicans, I never vote. So I'm quite impressed. But still, its weirdly low, why didnt people vote?

It was 59% in 2001.

 

[Swansman]

It was 59% in 2001.

Looking closer it seems UK is pretty much average in voter turnout, compared to the 87% here. Thought most Western democracies were around 80-90% but today I learned.