Why is Johnson's speech at the Munich conference hailed in some quarters, even by some journalists that should know better, as "a major policy speech" with "substance"? I went to read it expecting for once to be pleasantly surprised. Alas! Thread

It is full of the usual misplaced optimism not backed by any serious analysis, jingoism & digs at other EU leaders with transparent, nearly servile efforts to regain favour with the new US administration. A few examples:
The speech starts with the trademark rethorical device beloved of the UK right (whether to attack "woke' culture or pro-EU sentiments): A wildly exaggerated overblown simplistic statement that you then go on to "disprove"
So a dig aimed at Macron for saying NATO needs to adapt to changing circumstances and flattery towards America : "As you’ve seen and heard earlier, America is unreservedly back as leader of the free world and that is a fantastic thing."
Then the self- agrandissements : notice all the "I" & "Global Britain"
Then (irony klaxon), the PM who by mysterious means ensured exclusivity of supply for vaccines manufactured on its territory to the clear detriment of its nearest "friends" (having received vaccines from EU factories when its supply was short) exalts the "flames of cooperation "
👇says the man who pulled his country out of Europe security institutions to the horror of his immediate predecessor making it more exposed to terrorist threat, the same man who casually disregarded (even recently poured oil over) the simmering tensions in Northern Ireland.
Then 👇 pathetic boast: I have got a big one too (hey, Joe, remember all those big defense procurement contracts)
Followed by another Brexit boast & a dig at the (naturally slower more cumbersome) EU. But ask yourself: which sanctions matter more to Putin? EU's or UK's?And which UK party wanted to pull out of the Human Right Convention & threatens to "rewrite" the Human Rights Act?
Then new dig at the EU & pat on Biden's back: this time about the EU/China investment Agreement which 1) merely ensures the same competitive advantages to EU cnies as to US ones 2) includes - contrary to US's arrangements- some leverage due to China's committments slave labour
Britain always had "sovereignty" over its defense policy. The "Transatlantic Quad" was operational & has been much weakened by Brexit. As for the "new resolve" of our European "friends", it has nothing to do with what Britain does or does not do.
Fawning to the point of being obsequious & yet another dig at the EU. Completely ignore the question mark on the health of US democracy raised by recent events.
And finally a clichés ridden conclusion, high on hopes, light on facts
Flattery to the US, sly attacks on the EU (particularly France, our major European defense partner which is at striking odds odds with the supposed aim of the speech ), trademark boosterism, overblown statements on Britain's role, overuse of the word "Britain"
(is NI to be dumped?) , if this is a "great speech" of "substance", what is a poor Johnson's speech? The major achievement is that the sentences hang together & it was blissfully short.

More from Government

Which metric is a better predictor of the severity of the fall surge in US states?

1) Margin of Democrat victory in Nov 2020 election
or
2) % infected through Sep 1, 2020

Can you guess which plot is which?


The left plot is based on the % infected through Sep 1, 2020. You can see that there is very little correlation with the % infected since Sep 1.

However, there is a *strong* correlation when using the margin of Biden's victory (right).

Infections % from
https://t.co/WcXlfxv3Ah.


This is the strongest single variable I've seen in being able to explain the severity of this most recent wave in each state.

Not past infections / existing immunity, population density, racial makeup, latitude / weather / humidity, etc.

But political lean.

One can argue that states that lean Democrat are more likely to implement restrictions/mandates.

This is valid, so we test this by using the Government Stringency Index made by @UniofOxford.

We also see a correlation, but it's weaker (R^2=0.36 vs 0.50).

https://t.co/BxBBKwW6ta


To avoid look-ahead bias/confounding variables, here is the same analysis but using 2016 margin of victory as the predictor. Similar results.

This basically says that 2016 election results is a better predictor of the severity of the fall wave than intervention levels in 2020!

You May Also Like

**Thread on Bravery of Sikhs**
(I am forced to do this due to continuous hounding of Sikh Extremists since yesterday)

Rani Jindan Kaur, wife of Maharaja Ranjit Singh had illegitimate relations with Lal Singh (PM of Ranjit Singh). Along with Lal Singh, she attacked Jammu, burnt - https://t.co/EfjAq59AyI


Hindu villages of Jasrota, caused rebellion in Jammu, attacked Kishtwar.

Ancestors of Raja Ranjit Singh, The Sansi Tribe used to give daughters as concubines to Jahangir.


The Ludhiana Political Agency (Later NW Fronties Prov) was formed by less than 4000 British soldiers who advanced from Delhi and reached Ludhiana, receiving submissions of all sikh chiefs along the way. The submission of the troops of Raja of Lahore (Ranjit Singh) at Ambala.

Dabistan a contemporary book on Sikh History tells us that Guru Hargobind broke Naina devi Idol Same source describes Guru Hargobind serving a eunuch
YarKhan. (ref was proudly shared by a sikh on twitter)
Gobind Singh followed Bahadur Shah to Deccan to fight for him.


In Zafarnama, Guru Gobind Singh states that the reason he was in conflict with the Hill Rajas was that while they were worshiping idols, while he was an idol-breaker.

And idiot Hindus place him along Maharana, Prithviraj and Shivaji as saviours of Dharma.