Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov’s first post GE2019 poll has the Tories 20% ahead
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov’s first post GE2019 poll has the Tories 20% ahead
Clearly these are really excellent numbers for Johnson but partly this is explained by the almost total lack of opposition. The biggest battle that Johnson’s had to fight has been with his on party on his plans for Huawei.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
So far Johnson has said next to nothing which would upset anyone. He hasn't actually done much except get the WA through Parliament.
There are a number of issues coming down the road which may well prove problematic for his new voting coalition so we'll see how the polls look in say 12 or 24 months.
Its value is not primarily in prediction. I'm fairly sure it won't be anything like as bad as that. The value of the model is in providing a framework for the data as it comes in, to see if it is tracking worse or better than the current assumptions, and to inform decisions and preparations.
Are we just looking at the mortality rate (≈ 3%) and assuming everyone will be exposed?
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2020-01-28/swiss-manufacturer-stadler-wins-contract-to-build-new-362m-metro-fleet/
https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/1222109785480482818?s=20
https://twitter.com/RealCornmanC/status/1221974176149528577
A very interesting discussion on Sky by experts seemed to endorse Boris decision on Huawei if he does actually go ahead
I have no intention of doing anything special on friday but may watch the media coverage and will listen to Boris's speech.
Time to dial down triumphalism by leavers to be honest and move the dial forward
The Chinese number is likely not deliberate underreporting; there's no way they'd have been able to test and confirm that many cases in so short a time.
And don't forget the incubation period is up to two weeks, so many of the infected will not yet have developed full symptoms (or died).
No doubt there is also some number of unreported deaths... so the true mortality rate is mostly guesswork at this point.
My guess (FWIW) is that it's considerably less than 3%, but no doubt we'll know a great deal more within a couple of weeks.
That said the space race has largely now transcended sovereign powers and is the domain of the private sector. Which might be good. Or it might be like Weyland-Utani Corporation.
I met a man who wasn't Jez
He wasn't Jez again today
He was Sir Keir Starmer
(I think the last line needs some work)
The public is utterly dismayed by labour's uncritical and complacent. reaction to defeat. We won the argument FFS. Do us a favour,.
its perfectly clear that all the candidates are planning to offer is the same utterly rejected wine in relabelled bottles. Even Lisa Nandy. In fact, especially Lisa Nandy.
Labour are like a monopoly utility supplier. They think they can serve up any old sh8te and still be in with a shout of government because there is only one other provider and the latter can;t be in government for ever.
Starmer quite clearly had precisely zero to offer the inhabitants except 'listening'. A point he hammered to death. Or ignoring, as its otherwise known.
IF there's someone worse at holding the rubble that remains of labourr's wall than Corbyn its him. They are going to lose bigger in those constituencies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_modelling_of_infectious_disease
I think the Virus model I referred to does assume a 100% eventual exposure with a 3% mortality rate and so the end state is easily computed: 3% of the global population. The model is just showing the timing and spread. But the 100% and 3% are both dubious assumptions. We shall see.
EDIT In the article the R0, the basic reproduction number, is the 2.5 infection rate assumption.
You are talking about within the membership e.g. NickP? Because I can tell you that down at my local almost no one can stand the sight of Jezza.
https://twitter.com/VLubev/status/1222110064380710918?s=20
On the headline figures, I'm assuming this won't be a day when PB Unionists will be indulging their occasional taste for Scotch subsamples (like Scotch pies but with even more dubious ingredients).
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-not-equipped-to-run-britain-say-three-in-four-voters-a4294081.html
Still, let's see how many people enjoy the sight of Starmer after three years as Labour Party leader.
(The German tweet below translates as "the first German patient...", which is nicely ambiguous.)
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/where-coronaviruses-come-from-67011
https://twitter.com/Sillyshib/status/1222095013666082817?s=20
Let's hope not.
Source: https://www.eutimes.net/2020/01/breaking-coronavirus-hits-15-fatality-rate-83-infection-rate-for-those-exposed/
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
On Andrew & extradition:-
1. He has not been charged. People are not extradited simply to answer questions.
2. Authorities may want to question someone to see if they have potentially relevant evidence, not simply as a suspect.
3. Before agreeing to any interview with any authority - especially overseas - any sensible person should get proper legal advice to determine:-
(a) in what capacity they are being interviewed ie an initial chat? Or formal deposition? As a witness or suspect;
(b) this is critical as the rules & laws applying to each differ & determine how the meeting should go, where it takes place, what can be asked, what use can be made of any statement etc. It essential to ensure that the person being interviewed does not have their legal rights prejudiced - whether under English or US law;
(c) this is something that is usually advised on & discussed between the lawyers acting for the individual & the authority. The latter will - if they are in a different country - need to make a formal request in compliance with the relevant laws, MoUs etc. This takes time & effort.
In my experience US authorities hate this & try everything they can to avoid complying with such requirements, partly because it takes effort, partly because their case for asking may not be that strong, partly because they like to pretend astonishment that countries have different laws to the US & partly because they are arrogant enough to think that the rest of the world should simply do what they say. Such pressure should be resisted at all costs. Believe me. I bear the scars. The press conference yesterday looks like grandstanding by the US authorities to put public pressure on rather than making a proper request, if in fact they have a legal basis for doing so.
(d) once the legal basis for the request has been agreed & how it is to be done etc then it can go ahead. It would be normal - & good - practice for the contents of what is said not to be revealed publicly.
(e) if Andrew is a potential suspect then the whole process is much more prolonged & complicated.
But whether as a witness or potential suspect Andrew, like everyone else, is entitled to the benefit of our laws & the protections under them. He should get good lawyers to advise him and should co-operate within the scope of the law. No-one - absolutely no-one - should engage with the US authorities on any matter whatsoever without the benefit of good legal advice. Enforcement authorities are not your friend.
Andrew may well be an arse with no judgment whatsoever & a questionable sense of morality etc etc but I really hate the way people rush to assume that someone must be guilty depending on whether they like someone or not rather than on the basis of any properly tested evidence. And by that I don’t mean a TV interview. Worth also remembering that the only court in the US which has looked at the alleged claims against Andrew threw them out.
"Some people ask how we have got to a position where we are needing to even consider using Chinese technology.
The answer is because Western countries failed to think strategically about protecting or nurturing their own full spectrum telecoms industry over the last two decades.
Companies went bust or were taken over. Meanwhile Beijing pursued a focused long-term strategy to become a leader in the technology."
We should be ashamed of ourselves as a country. Instead of the endless guff about buccaneering spirit away from the shackles of the EU perhaps we should look at how we do in high tech industries.
I think we know how short.....
So, statistically very dubious indeed.
Nonetheless, the broad picture looks somewhere between alarming and very alarming.
Lots of unknowns.
Fire up the Farage...
Maybe HS2 will be given the green light too
I’ve seen the consequences of decisions like that in finance. The results are rarely pretty and almost invariably cost far more than any possible advantages or the costs of doing something different.
https://twitter.com/LettersOfNote/status/1222130867381862403
https://twitter.com/bbcnickrobinson/status/1222130843038208006?s=20
What a prick Delingpole is.
Yep, it was Jolyon and Andrew and A.C. wot swung it.
https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/1222129218177380352
I'm sure normal service will soon resume.
What a shameful decision by this government who have wanked on about sovereignty and now have handed a large chunk of that to China !
I believe though that Britain is on the verge of entering another golden age. And that Boris Johnson is set to join Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher as one of the three great Conservative Prime Ministers of the last 100 years.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/09/06/boris-has-drained-the-swamp-saved-the-conservatives/
Brexit is over and it is correct to take economic decisions that save us billions and at the same time act as a leader to the many nations who are about to do the same and agree to use Huawei
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51283059
But probably not a bad one in the circumstances. (& I am very far from a Johnson fan.)
And Byronic was concerned for the sanity of diehard Remainers...