On the subject of universities more generally - I have noticed no difference in the quality of the teaching between my undergraduate redbrick and my current ex-poly. If anything, in my experience, the ex-poly is better.
That doesn’t surprise me. In ex polys, staff are hired because they can teach and that is the main focus of their role. If they don’t get it right, they’re out.
In a Russell Group, they are hired to research and teaching is a nuisance activity they sometimes do to show off how brilliant they are. If they can’t farm it out to PhD students on £10 an hour, that is.
If you have got into a Russell Group university you should really be able to research and teach yourself, you are paying for seminars and lectures from experts in their field not to be spoon fed
Yes, that’s what you pay for, but most of the time you don’t get them. You get their doctoral students instead.
There's a large element of sentimentality to theme tunes, especially to ones we associate with our childhood.
When I was at uni (2000-2003) I used to go every Thursday to a nightclub with an 80s theme. It would at one point play the theme tune to the The A-Team and Jim'll Fix It* and that always got an excited reaction more than any song.
Where I used to work there was a Sandwich van that went around at lunchtimes that like an ice-cream truck would play a song when it arrived. It was the song that Channel 4 used to use for their Cricket coverage.
Long after we've forgotten lyrics to a song from our childhood we can probably all remember our favourite theme tunes from when we were young. If I hear the theme tune to He-Man, or Captain Planet, or Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles, or Cheers or other stuff from then it will still now make me smile. And so too will hearing the themetune to MOTD or Grandstand or other stuff we grew up with.
Doesn't mean we need to keep broadcasting or watching Grandstand or MOTD etc anymore now. As has been recognised for one of them.
* You wouldn't do that nowadays!
Yes you're right. It's all nostalgia. Much of it pleasant but with exceptions such as one you mention. Good tune though -
I swear half of the population my age, even when we've got dementia and can't remember people's names, will still be able to say every single word of this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBe0VCso0qs
I found the Valentines posts to those working on this a few days ago genuinely moving. It must take real courage to expose yourself every day like that for the benefit of others.
I'm not confident Baron Adonis has quite grasped counterfactual history and how it operates.
The pivotal event (and arguably the cause of Brexit and so much else) was the global financial crash which happened after Blair left office. It's hard to imagine how it would have played differently with Blair at No.10 and Brown at No.11.
By 2010 Blair would have been PM for 13 years and it's hard not to think a degree of voter fatigue would have set in. Would he have done worse than Brown? Probably not but perhaps not so well and I can't imagine Nick Clegg wanting to prop up another five years of a Blair-led Labour party so Blair would have gone and we'd have had the Coalition.
Brown would probably have led Labour after 2010 but would he have prevented a Cameron majority in 2015? That's one to discuss.
Six months ago I was assured that the nominee would almost certainly be one of Joe Biden, Beto O'Rourke, Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders.
It might yet be, of course, but such certainty looks ill-judged now.
There's a Nate Silver tweet from September that says (and I'm paraphrasing here) "This nomination will be a battle between Warren and Biden, and I see it going all the way to the Convention".
Well, the second half of the prediction is looking good...
He was all over the news for days all because the cowardly rat decided after being married for 27 years that he was homosexual. The outpourings about his bravery was pathetic.
Ah that one. OK. Wonder what was deemed the most brave - the coming out or the being married for 27 years?
The allegedly about to be fired so it was career enhancing to do it when he did?
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
I'm not confident Baron Adonis has quite grasped counterfactual history and how it operates.
The pivotal event (and arguably the cause of Brexit and so much else) was the global financial crash which happened after Blair left office. It's hard to imagine how it would have played differently with Blair at No.10 and Brown at No.11.
By 2010 Blair would have been PM for 13 years and it's hard not to think a degree of voter fatigue would have set in. Would he have done worse than Brown? Probably not but perhaps not so well and I can't imagine Nick Clegg wanting to prop up another five years of a Blair-led Labour party so Blair would have gone and we'd have had the Coalition.
Brown would probably have led Labour after 2010 but would he have prevented a Cameron majority in 2015? That's one to discuss.
But the comparison is with Corbyn. Here’s my reply to Burgon: ‘So in 13 years in government, Labour lost around twice as many votes as Corbyn managed to lose in two while in opposition to Boris Johnson?’
(Of course, this isn’t entirely fair. For 75% of that time he was in opposition to Theresa May.)
On the subject of universities more generally - I have noticed no difference in the quality of the teaching between my undergraduate redbrick and my current ex-poly. If anything, in my experience, the ex-poly is better.
You’re doing the CPE/GDL or a degree (and no, the University of Law doesn’t count)? If the former, that’s a glorified A level so all teach, no research. It’s process more than anything else.
I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please
I am not sure I had heard of Caroline Flack before hearing the tragic news of her suicide. I think it should be a big story, but not for the reasons that it is.
The sad fact is that no-one ever thinks of the psychological pressure of the accused, whether they are guilty or innocent, but particularly for the innocent. Processes drag on for months and months. Everyone thinks of the "victim", though the pressure on the accused, particularly the wrongly accused can be horrendous. Imagine what it must have been like for those accused by Carl Beech! Horrendous.
If only we had a PBer who had spent months on remand in the Scrubs accused of a very serious crime, what an insight that would give us.
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
On the subject of universities more generally - I have noticed no difference in the quality of the teaching between my undergraduate redbrick and my current ex-poly. If anything, in my experience, the ex-poly is better.
You’re doing the CPE/GDL or a degree (and no, the University of Law doesn’t count)? If the former, that’s a glorified A level so all teach, no research. It’s process more than anything else.
Well, we have to do a mini dissertation. And my undergraduate engineering degree required very little research - you could call that a ‘glorified A-level’ if you want.
The staff are on the whole ex-judges, ex-barristers, and ex-solicitors, rather than academics. I appreciate that.
I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please
I am not sure I had heard of Caroline Flack before hearing the tragic news of her suicide. I think it should be a big story, but not for the reasons that it is.
The sad fact is that no-one ever thinks of the psychological pressure of the accused, whether they are guilty or innocent, but particularly for the innocent. Processes drag on for months and months. Everyone thinks of the "victim", though the pressure on the accused, particularly the wrongly accused can be horrendous. Imagine what it must have been like for those accused by Carl Beech! Horrendous.
If only we had a PBer who had spent months on remand in the Scrubs accused of a very serious crime, what an insight that would give us.
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
The question then is which runs out of money first? Are they funding 2 plus primaries ahead or just to the next one?
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
The question then is which runs out of money first? Are they funding 2 plus primaries ahead or just to the next one?
I think it is even more urgent. Sanders is building the big mo at the moment and needs to be stopped.
As far as I'm aware Coronavirus still hasn't killed anyone who wasn't either Chinese or was in China at the time. (There have been one or two people outside one of those categories but not the other).
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
It’s the tragedy of the commons, or the tragedy of the democratic nomination, if you will.
Right now, neither of them have any good reason to quit: both could still plausibly become nominee.
Buttigieg: because he’s come a narrow second (twice) and is fresh, moderate, well-rounded and charismatic and would be a great contrast to Trump. He could end up as the compromise candidate.
Klobuchar: because she’s smart, effective and experienced, markedly exceeded expectations in New Hampshire and could appeal to both wings of the Democratic Party as a compromise candidate.
Until one or the other’s funding dries up, or they get decisively battered in the polls, neither will quit.
Personally, I don’t think that’ll be until the other side of Super Tuesday - at least.
As far as I'm aware Coronavirus still hasn't killed anyone who wasn't either Chinese or was in China at the time. (There have been one or two people outside one of those categories but not the other).
The taxi driver in Japan? Had Chinese customers but didn't go there.
I'm not confident Baron Adonis has quite grasped counterfactual history and how it operates.
The pivotal event (and arguably the cause of Brexit and so much else) was the global financial crash which happened after Blair left office. It's hard to imagine how it would have played differently with Blair at No.10 and Brown at No.11.
By 2010 Blair would have been PM for 13 years and it's hard not to think a degree of voter fatigue would have set in. Would he have done worse than Brown? Probably not but perhaps not so well and I can't imagine Nick Clegg wanting to prop up another five years of a Blair-led Labour party so Blair would have gone and we'd have had the Coalition.
Brown would probably have led Labour after 2010 but would he have prevented a Cameron majority in 2015? That's one to discuss.
Blair couldn’t have survived as Labour leader (internally) until 2010. In fact, that’s basically what did for him in 2007.
Had he stayed he’d have carried the can for the Great Recession and the Lisbon Treaty as well as Iraq War.
If (by some miracle) he’d stood for a fourth term with Labour support then the SNP might have swiped a few more seats in Scotland, and he retained a few more southern marginals, but I don’t think the result would have been that much different.
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
Harvard Professor or Hong Kong banker? Take yer pick.
The quotation comes from a medical doctor in HK that the banker links to. The professor is using a very simple model and arithmetic for which we don't have any useful inputs. He may be right of course but we just don't know.
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But just abut the worst thing you could do, in the middle of an epidemic, is hold The Olympic Games, inviting thousands of athletes and millions of tourists from all over the world, so they can catch the bug and take it home.
The organisers must be living in dread. Massive blow to the Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
Worth noting that Steyer has no "on the ground" infrastructure, and has relied on carpet bombing Nevada with TV adverts.
I'm also super sceptical of any poll that has Warren + Sanders at just 20%.
That being said... if this poll is vaguely right, then this primary could be anyone's. There's just six points between Steyer and Sanders. And just three between second placed Klobuchar and Sanders.
Aren't Netflix bringing back He-man? Not sure how well that will go down with the woke brigade.
It's Netflix, it will be woke He-Man. Tbh, I'm not expecting much, SPE had the project and then sold the production rights to Netflix because they couldn't make anything of it and the internals on the hype indices were quite bad.
Shame about the lawn - and what is your view on use of fossil fuels, the removal of solar panel icentives and the pending end of electric car subsidies?
Damn good news as the economic pressures of scale and capitalism has reduced costs to end the need to subsidies ever so marginally less environmentally damaging cars.
As far as I'm aware Coronavirus still hasn't killed anyone who wasn't either Chinese or was in China at the time. (There have been one or two people outside one of those categories but not the other).
Anyone speculated that it might be a genetic weapon yet?
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
It’s the tragedy of the commons, or the tragedy of the democratic nomination, if you will.
Right now, neither of them have any good reason to quit: both could still plausibly become nominee.
Buttigieg: because he’s come a narrow second (twice) and is fresh, moderate, well-rounded and charismatic and would be a great contrast to Trump. He could end up as the compromise candidate.
Klobuchar: because she’s smart, effective and experienced, markedly exceeded expectations in New Hampshire and could appeal to both wings of the Democratic Party as a compromise candidate.
Until one or the other’s funding dries up, or they get decisively battered in the polls, neither will quit.
Personally, I don’t think that’ll be until the other side of Super Tuesday - at least.
If we really have a situation where there are four or five plausible players in place for Super Tuesday, and Sanders continues to do well (i.e. 25-30%), but not incredibly well (i.e. breaking 30% nationally), then I don't see how we get a candidate with 50% of the delegates come the Convention.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
Worth noting that Steyer has no "on the ground" infrastructure, and has relied on carpet bombing Nevada with TV adverts.
I'm also super sceptical of any poll that has Warren + Sanders at just 20%.
That being said... if this poll is vaguely right, then this primary could be anyone's. There's just six points between Steyer and Sanders. And just three between second placed Klobuchar and Sanders.
Junk it, it has 50% over 65's, almost double the share of 2016.
Nevada has not repeated the N.Hampshire law that reduced turnout of those under 30 by half.
Also Nevada probably won't be able to finish counting before S.Carolina or ever.
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But just abut the worst thing you could do, in the middle of an epidemic, is hold The Olympic Games, inviting thousands of athletes and millions of tourists from all over the world, so they can catch the bug and take it home.
The organisers must be living in dread. Massive blow to the Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I just saw a convincing YouTube vid by a statistician which claims that the early spread of Coronavirus in Japan exactly matches the early spread in Wuhan.
Which suggests the Olympics are doomed.
That’s rather worrying, to put it mildly. It almost certainly means we’re looking at an uncontainable global pandemic. Other countries can’t use the draconian tactics used by China for containment and quarantine of millions of people.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
It’s the tragedy of the commons, or the tragedy of the democratic nomination, if you will.
Right now, neither of them have any good reason to quit: both could still plausibly become nominee.
Buttigieg: because he’s come a narrow second (twice) and is fresh, moderate, well-rounded and charismatic and would be a great contrast to Trump. He could end up as the compromise candidate.
Klobuchar: because she’s smart, effective and experienced, markedly exceeded expectations in New Hampshire and could appeal to both wings of the Democratic Party as a compromise candidate.
Until one or the other’s funding dries up, or they get decisively battered in the polls, neither will quit.
Personally, I don’t think that’ll be until the other side of Super Tuesday - at least.
If we really have a situation where there are four or five plausible players in place for Super Tuesday, and Sanders continues to do well (i.e. 25-30%), but not incredibly well (i.e. breaking 30% nationally), then I don't see how we get a candidate with 50% of the delegates come the Convention.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
All very true, but Super Tuesday is just two weeks away.
Who do you see dropping out by then, particularly given the unpredictability of the polling?
Eugenics is foolish. Research into genetics today reveals that your 'code' is not engraved in stone - it can change during your life. Therefore it is pointless to try and find a set of what we think are perfect traits and replicate them. It is nutrition that matters - nutrition is the real key to health, not some silly blueprint.
It doesn't surprise me that Dawkins believes in it either, the man is a prize fool.
Hang on.
We know selective breeding works for other animals - the entire bloodstock industry would not exist without it. So why would you assume that it doesn't work for humans?
It works to accentuate certain of their characteristics. It doesn't work to make them healthier - often the opposite is true of selectively bred animals.
Interesting quote in the medical link in that piece:
"So far this epidemic has infected 71,309 people and caused 1,775 deaths. In comparison so far in the USA this winter influenza has infected 22-31 million people and resulted in between 12,000 and 30,000 deaths."
A useful sense of perspective.
Flu is not going to infect 40-70% of the world, tho.
Harvard Professor or Hong Kong banker? Take yer pick.
The quotation comes from a medical doctor in HK that the banker links to. The professor is using a very simple model and arithmetic for which we don't have any useful inputs. He may be right of course but we just don't know.
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But just abut the worst thing you could do, in the middle of an epidemic, is hold The Olympic Games, inviting thousands of athletes and millions of tourists from all over the world, so they can catch the bug and take it home.
The organisers must be living in dread. Massive blow to the Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
Its about 10,000 athletes and an irrelevant number of additional tourists. In London 2012, there were actually fewer tourists than would normally be expected that time of year as non Olympic tourists chose to go elsewhere.
Aren't Netflix bringing back He-man? Not sure how well that will go down with the woke brigade.
It's Netflix, it will be woke He-Man. Tbh, I'm not expecting much, SPE had the project and then sold the production rights to Netflix because they couldn't make anything of it and the internals on the hype indices were quite bad.
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But juste Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I just saw a convincing YouTube vid by a statistician which claims that the early spread of Coronavirus in Japan exactly matches the early spread in Wuhan.
Which suggests the Olympics are doomed.
That’s rather worrying, to put it mildly. It almost certainly means we’re looking at an uncontainable global pandemic. Other countries can’t use the draconian tactics used by China for containment and quarantine of millions of people.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
Twitter is a gold mine of scariness on this subject
eg There's an epidemiologist who reckons the actual resolved case mortality ratio, ie the cases which have finalised one way or the other (cure or death) is 14%, not 1-2%.
He's surely wrong? But it is impossible to tell, through the fog of lies and censorship draped over China
Put the iPad down...repeat put the iPad down...step away from the screen...
Worth noting that Steyer has no "on the ground" infrastructure, and has relied on carpet bombing Nevada with TV adverts.
I'm also super sceptical of any poll that has Warren + Sanders at just 20%.
That being said... if this poll is vaguely right, then this primary could be anyone's. There's just six points between Steyer and Sanders. And just three between second placed Klobuchar and Sanders.
Junk it, it has 50% over 65's, almost double the share of 2016.
Nevada has not repeated the N.Hampshire law that reduced turnout of those under 30 by half.
Also Nevada probably won't be able to finish counting before S.Carolina or ever.
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
Eugenics is foolish. Research into genetics today reveals that your 'code' is not engraved in stone - it can change during your life. Therefore it is pointless to try and find a set of what we think are perfect traits and replicate them. It is nutrition that matters - nutrition is the real key to health, not some silly blueprint.
It doesn't surprise me that Dawkins believes in it either, the man is a prize fool.
Hang on.
We know selective breeding works for other animals - the entire bloodstock industry would not exist without it. So why would you assume that it doesn't work for humans?
It works to accentuate certain of their characteristics. It doesn't work to make them healthier - often the opposite is true of selectively bred animals.
(1) It does work for humans but it happens voluntarily (e.g. intelligent attractive people tend to marry each other creating intelligent attractive people) - this is one of the things that makes “social mobility” hard, and there’s not much you can do about it. In Western societies it’s broadly stable as most intelligent attractive people have 2.1 children.
(2) We’ve decided (rightly in my view) that whilst we could breed out some unhelpful genes and disabilities from humans selectively the ethics are utterly appalling and we’d far rather live with them and have a free society instead.
(3) A modern healthcare and welfare system largely makes both (1) and (2) feasible in delivering stable societies as we can support those who don’t have as strong an ability to succeed, as well as those who are disabled.
If it all totally broke down we wouldn’t be a million miles away from other species: the weak, ill and disabled would die, strong males would be naturally selected through fighting over land, resources and women, and strong women through survival (or not) through childbirth.
Worth noting that Steyer has no "on the ground" infrastructure, and has relied on carpet bombing Nevada with TV adverts.
I'm also super sceptical of any poll that has Warren + Sanders at just 20%.
That being said... if this poll is vaguely right, then this primary could be anyone's. There's just six points between Steyer and Sanders. And just three between second placed Klobuchar and Sanders.
Junk it, it has 50% over 65's, almost double the share of 2016.
Nevada has not repeated the N.Hampshire law that reduced turnout of those under 30 by half.
Also Nevada probably won't be able to finish counting before S.Carolina or ever.
Eugenics is foolish. Research into genetics today reveals that your 'code' is not engraved in stone - it can change during your life. Therefore it is pointless to try and find a set of what we think are perfect traits and replicate them. It is nutrition that matters - nutrition is the real key to health, not some silly blueprint.
It doesn't surprise me that Dawkins believes in it either, the man is a prize fool.
Hang on.
We know selective breeding works for other animals - the entire bloodstock industry would not exist without it. So why would you assume that it doesn't work for humans?
It works to accentuate certain of their characteristics. It doesn't work to make them healthier - often the opposite is true of selectively bred animals.
That's an artifact because there is no incentive to breed for healthiness - you want the fattest sheep, fastest horse etc. No reason not to breed for healthiness if someone wants to make it worth your while. (And in fact there are programs for various dog breeds to breed out various genetic deformities, which seem to work).
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But juste Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I just saw a convincing YouTube vid by a statistician which claims that the early spread of Coronavirus in Japan exactly matches the early spread in Wuhan.
Which suggests the Olympics are doomed.
That’s rather worrying, to put it mildly. It almost certainly means we’re looking at an uncontainable global pandemic. Other countries can’t use the draconian tactics used by China for containment and quarantine of millions of people.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
Twitter is a gold mine of scariness on this subject
eg There's an epidemiologist who reckons the actual resolved case mortality ratio, ie the cases which have finalised one way or the other (cure or death) is 14%, not 1-2%.
He's surely wrong? But it is impossible to tell, through the fog of lies and censorship draped over China
I read that there's a secret contingency plan to drain the blood of survivors dry in order to enable thousands of others to survive via innoculation...
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
...
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
It would make a brilliant novel or TV series. Call it "Survivors" and feature crappy weather shots in disused chalk quarries.....
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But juste Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I just saw a convincing YouTube vid by a statistician which claims that the early spread of Coronavirus in Japan exactly matches the early spread in Wuhan.
Which suggests the Olympics are doomed.
That’s rather worrying, to put it mildly. It almost certainly means we’re looking at an uncontainable global pandemic. Other countries can’t use the draconian tactics used by China for containment and quarantine of millions of people.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
Twitter is a gold mine of scariness on this subject
eg There's an epidemiologist who reckons the actual resolved case mortality ratio, ie the cases which have finalised one way or the other (cure or death) is 14%, not 1-2%.
He's surely wrong? But it is impossible to tell, through the fog of lies and censorship draped over China
The 14% figure sounds about right, but the survivors figure has a long lag on it which makes the death rate seem artificially high while there are so many ‘live’ cases.
The statisticians in Japan and Singapore have a much better handle on these things (including not having politicians trying to interfere in their work), we’ll get more meaningful numbers from those countries in the coming days and weeks.
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But juste Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I just saw a convincing YouTube vid by a statistician which claims that the early spread of Coronavirus in Japan exactly matches the early spread in Wuhan.
Which suggests the Olympics are doomed.
That’s rather worrying, to put it mildly. It almost certainly means we’re looking at an uncontainable global pandemic. Other countries can’t use the draconian tactics used by China for containment and quarantine of millions of people.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
Twitter is a gold mine of scariness on this subject
eg There's an epidemiologist who reckons the actual resolved case mortality ratio, ie the cases which have finalised one way or the other (cure or death) is 14%, not 1-2%.
He's surely wrong? But it is impossible to tell, through the fog of lies and censorship draped over China
As far as I'm aware Coronavirus still hasn't killed anyone who wasn't either Chinese or was in China at the time. (There have been one or two people outside one of those categories but not the other).
Anyone speculated that it might be a genetic weapon yet?
Not anyone serious. All the major players this side of the pond are arguing strongly that the evidence points to a naturally arising zoonotic disease.
Frankly, no-one understands pathogenicity enough to design it in an organism - directed evolution is the closest we'd come to creating something effective in the lab.
As for a genetic weapon, again, the concept lies in the realms of science fiction and, less firmly, science theory, but not science fact.
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
Yes but one supported by the other would have a chance to win. They are cutting each other's throats and fishing in very similar pools.
It’s the tragedy of the commons, or the tragedy of the democratic nomination, if you will.
Right now, neither of them have any good reason to quit: both could still plausibly become nominee.
Buttigieg: because he’s come a narrow second (twice) and is fresh, moderate, well-rounded and charismatic and would be a great contrast to Trump. He could end up as the compromise candidate.
Klobuchar: because she’s smart, effective and experienced, markedly exceeded expectations in New Hampshire and could appeal to both wings of the Democratic Party as a compromise candidate.
Until one or the other’s funding dries up, or they get decisively battered in the polls, neither will quit.
Personally, I don’t think that’ll be until the other side of Super Tuesday - at least.
If we really have a situation where there are four or five plausible players in place for Super Tuesday, and Sanders continues to do well (i.e. 25-30%), but not incredibly well (i.e. breaking 30% nationally), then I don't see how we get a candidate with 50% of the delegates come the Convention.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
Sure. The Hong Kong piece does read like a bit of hopeful whistling in the dark, but I can't blame Hong Kongers for that.
I guess the scary thing about CoronaV is how little we know, and how the predictions vary so wildly, so you get a Harvard Professor actively EXPECTING a huge global pandemic, and then you've got Trump saying the virus will be "killed by summer heat" (and he could be right!)
As you've noted before, the place to watch is Japan, over the next few weeks. If they can't contain it then I see no reason why it won't go everywhere (with a fatality rate we cannot yet determine).
They are certainly taking it seriously, cancelling imperial events and so on. The Olympics must be in peril, if it continues.
They cancelled the Tokyo marathon today. If this continues for another couple of months the Olympics are gone.
Yes. So sad. But juste Japanese economy, too. Dangerous times....
It’s a massive call to make, hope the organisers have got good insurance in place.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I just saw a convincing YouTube vid by a statistician which claims that the early spread of Coronavirus in Japan exactly matches the early spread in Wuhan.
Which suggests the Olympics are doomed.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
Twitter is a gold mine of scariness on this subject
eg There's an epidemiologist who reckons the actual resolved case mortality ratio, ie the cases which have finalised one way or the other (cure or death) is 14%, not 1-2%.
He's surely wrong? But it is impossible to tell, through the fog of lies and censorship draped over China
Same ball park as Spanish flu (10-20%)
3-6% of the world's population died in the Spanish flu pandemic. In current terms, that's of the order of half a billion people.
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
Zoonotic outbreaks, and ALL the indications are that this is what this is, most frequently make the species jump to humans where people are in close contact with animals of the reservoir specie(s) or are handling them, such as butchers in bush meat markets.
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
If we really have a situation where there are four or five plausible players in place for Super Tuesday, and Sanders continues to do well (i.e. 25-30%), but not incredibly well (i.e. breaking 30% nationally), then I don't see how we get a candidate with 50% of the delegates come the Convention.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
Warren likely will drop out after Super Tuesday
Absent an extraordinary performance, I think that's right.
However, if she were to drop out after Nevada and to endorse Sanders, then I think that might be the fillip Sanders needs to get to 50% of delegates. If she holds on for Super Tuesday, then I think he struggles to get there.
(1) It does work for humans but it happens voluntarily (e.g. intelligent attractive people tend to marry each other creating intelligent attractive people) - this is one of the things that makes “social mobility” hard, and there’s not much you can do about it. In Western societies it’s broadly stable as most intelligent attractive people have 2.1 children.
(2) We’ve decided (rightly in my view) that whilst we could breed out some unhelpful genes and disabilities from humans selectively the ethics are utterly appalling and we’d far rather live with them and have a free society instead.
(3) A modern healthcare and welfare system largely makes both (1) and (2) feasible in delivering stable societies as we can support those who don’t have as strong an ability to succeed, as well as those who are disabled.
If it all totally broke down we wouldn’t be a million miles away from other species: the weak, ill and disabled would die, strong males would be naturally selected through fighting over land, resources and women, and strong women through survival (or not) through childbirth.
I'm sorry but in my opinion, whilst no doubt a widely held view, this is broadly nonsense, and dangerous nonsense.
Physical beauty - plentiful shiny hair, well developed facial bone structure in which teeth have plenty of space to hang evenly, healthy skin etc., is the hallmark of good health, and good health is the hallmark of good nutrition. Yes, it can be intra-generational to an extent, because the health the parents possess obviously becomes the building material of the next generation. But the nutrition the mother is passing on to the baby in the womb, in nursing, and the nutrition during childhood are added effects. This is obvious when you think about it. It is a strange belief in evolution that argues that there is a quotient of disease-vulnerable ugly troglodytes amongst us who have somehow performed every bit as well in natural selection as the healthy and beautiful ones.
All of us have evolved (or been created if you prefer) perfectly for our environment. It is up to us then to discover what we need to do for ourselves and for the next generation to enjoy great health, and all its side-benefits.
Zoonotic outbreaks, and ALL the indications are that this is what this is, most frequently make the species jump to humans where people are in close contact with animals of the reservoir specie(s) or are handling them, such as butchers in bush meat markets.
If we really have a situation where there are four or five plausible players in place for Super Tuesday, and Sanders continues to do well (i.e. 25-30%), but not incredibly well (i.e. breaking 30% nationally), then I don't see how we get a candidate with 50% of the delegates come the Convention.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
Warren likely will drop out after Super Tuesday
Absent an extraordinary performance, I think that's right.
However, if she were to drop out after Nevada and to endorse Sanders, then I think that might be the fillip Sanders needs to get to 50% of delegates. If she holds on for Super Tuesday, then I think he struggles to get there.
Provided Sanders wins New York, California and Texas on Super Tuesday he should do it if Warren then drops out with Michigan, Illinois, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania etc still to come
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
Yes, (and I was on the CBW desk at the FCO when the Sverdlovsk cluster of anthrax in a closed access military town in the deepest part of the former USSR was quickly reported despite the Russians' most strenuous efforts to keep it secret).
But, if you don't accept that answer, why would this strain of virus be in the lab and a vaccine being prepped if there had yet been no disease cases? There are millions of viruses, and many thousands that could make the species jump. No-one is out there randomly collecting wild type animal coronaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
It's one for you to ponder at leisure.
OK I've pondered it and I'll say not only do I want that, but we already have it. Everyone already does their own atomised things.
I don't know who Monty Don is and have never watched a program with Tess Daly in it as far as I know. Last time I watched Huw Edwards routinely was over a decade ago and while I do watch Andrew Neil I'm in a tiny minority for that.
However we can still communicate. Your idea we won't or don't communicate is fallacious. We don't require the BBC to do so, we're doing so right now without the BBC from our own niche interest and others do the same thing.
As for newsworthy "watercooler moments" - they don't come from Huw Edwards anymore. Heck if anything remotely "watercooler worthy" happens my phone usually gives me a pop up notification to let me know almost immediately whether its something I'm normally interested in or not.
This past week we've had 2-3 watercooler moments I can think of, two 'news' and one light entertainment. The two 'news' ones being Schofield and Flack. I think very, very few people if any will have found out about either from Huw Edwards. As for what I'd call the light entertainment watercooler moment, that would be the finale of The Masked Singer, which was on ITV.
You can't turn back time to the era when we all watched the same thing at the same time. It doesn't exist anymore.
Zoonotic outbreaks, and ALL the indications are that this is what this is, most frequently make the species jump to humans where people are in close contact with animals of the reservoir specie(s) or are handling them, such as butchers in bush meat markets.
And scientists in animal laboratories.
Less likely as they will be wearing PPE and taking precautions. And there are far fewer such laboratorians than butchers and they handle far fewer animals than do butcher. But in principle yes.
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results. If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.
That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...
What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?
In my day - admittedly decades back now - that used to be the case at Durham. If you put it first choice and were heading for good grades, you got in. Put Oxbridge first and Durham second or third, and they were a lot less keen. I guess it’s understandable that a uni with a good reputation like Durham was reluctant to end up stuffed with Oxbridge rejects like Exeter, but still.
That sort of behaviour is why universities are no longer told which other ones you have applied for: the days of picking five in order of preference went out with paper applications.
Eugenics is foolish. Research into genetics today reveals that your 'code' is not engraved in stone - it can change during your life. Therefore it is pointless to try and find a set of what we think are perfect traits and replicate them. It is nutrition that matters - nutrition is the real key to health, not some silly blueprint.
It doesn't surprise me that Dawkins believes in it either, the man is a prize fool.
Hang on.
We know selective breeding works for other animals - the entire bloodstock industry would not exist without it. So why would you assume that it doesn't work for humans?
It works to accentuate certain of their characteristics. It doesn't work to make them healthier - often the opposite is true of selectively bred animals.
Animals experience hybrid vigour. Why not just encourage humans to inter-marry with other races and in general travel more widely and marry people from other countries?
It's been happening more and more. Also all couples should be allowed selective abortions because I think one in ~16 of us carry unpleasant genetic diseases that will shorten our life or reduce its quality (just one small example is retinitis pigmentosa which makes you almost blind by middle age).
Oh, what's that you say ... there was a vote in 2016 against freedom of movement ...?
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
Fuck knows.
All we know for sure is that China is going to incredible lengths to silence anyone who tries to talk openly about Covid
Do you trust any news which comes from there, right now?
No, but you are now admitting that there is no evidence for the theory, just an inability to believe the official story. So we are back to conspiracy theories.
Eugenics is foolish. Research into genetics today reveals that your 'code' is not engraved in stone - it can change during your life. Therefore it is pointless to try and find a set of what we think are perfect traits and replicate them. It is nutrition that matters - nutrition is the real key to health, not some silly blueprint.
It doesn't surprise me that Dawkins believes in it either, the man is a prize fool.
Hang on.
We know selective breeding works for other animals - the entire bloodstock industry would not exist without it. So why would you assume that it doesn't work for humans?
It works to accentuate certain of their characteristics. It doesn't work to make them healthier - often the opposite is true of selectively bred animals.
Animals experience hybrid vigour. Why not just encourage humans to inter-marry with other races and in general travel more widely and marry people from other countries?
It's been happening more and more. Also all couples should be allowed selective abortions because I think one in ~16 of us carry unpleasant genetic diseases that will shorten our life or reduce its quality (just one small example is retinitis pigmentosa which makes you almost blind by middle age).
Oh, what's that you say ... there was a vote in 2016 against freedom of movement ...?
Selective abortions only within the time limit of any other abortion
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
It's one for you to ponder at leisure.
If I might ask, what employment do you draw the conclusion that the BBC provides “water cooler moments”? In my experience, if that was ever the case it’s long gone.
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
It's one for you to ponder at leisure.
If I might ask, what employment do you draw the conclusion that the BBC provides “water cooler moments”? In my experience, if that was ever the case it’s long gone.
It will end up far lower, as the data is only capturing confirmed cases, which tends to exclude all the asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic cases. And the knowledge of how to treat patients, including those with co-morbidities, improves with each week. We can expect supportive medical care as it improves further to help an increasing ratio of those seriously sick to pull through.
I can't help feeling that if Buttigieg and Klobuchar don't come to an understanding soon it will be too late for both of them.
If the polling of the Nevada caucus is as poor as it’s been elsewhere then I’d expect Buttigieg and Klobuchar to pip Biden and Warren to second and third place respectively.
.
It’s the tragedy of the commons, or the tragedy of the democratic nomination, if you will.
Until one or the other’s funding dries up, or they get decisively battered in the polls, neither will quit.
Personally, I don’t think that’ll be until the other side of Super Tuesday - at least.
If we really have a situation where there are four or five plausible players in place for Super Tuesday, and Sanders continues to do well (i.e. 25-30%), but not incredibly well (i.e. breaking 30% nationally), then I don't see how we get a candidate with 50% of the delegates come the Convention.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
Sanders may do better than that,
Because of the 15% rule, if in a Primary only 2 people get over 15% then the top one of those will get over 50% of the Delegats,
For the purpose of this we are not just talking about the 50 states, but also the Congregational districts, some delegates are being allocated depending on the results in each Congregational district, (and the 7 territory's have there own primary's as well)
I'm not saying sanders will win, but its at least conceivable but if all of the remaining candadits stay in, at least till supper Tuesday. Then its possible to imagine that in a good proportion, only 2 people get over 15% and BS gets the most.
how this all adds up I don't know, but i would love to get my head around what happens to delegates for candadits who drop out before the convention.
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
Yes, (and I was on the CBW desk at the FCO when the Sverdlovsk cluster of anthrax in a closed access military town in the deepest part of the former USSR was quickly reported despite the Russians' most strenuous efforts to keep it secret).
But, if you don't accept that answer, why would this strain of virus be in the lab and a vaccine being prepped if there had yet been no disease cases? There are millions of viruses, and many thousands that could make the species jump. No-one is out there randomly collecting wild type animal coronaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
Scientists study stuff because that's what they do, irrespective of immediate utility. The theory doesn't require that they were trying to develop a vaccine.
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
Yes, (and I was on the CBW desk at the FCO when the Sverdlovsk cluster of anthrax in a closed access military town in the deepest part of the former USSR was quickly reported despite the Russians' most strenuous efforts to keep it secret).
But, if you don't accept that answer, why would this strain of virus be in the lab and a vaccine being prepped if there had yet been no disease cases? There are millions of viruses, and many thousands that could make the species jump. No-one is out there randomly collecting wild type animal coronaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
This is mainly why I like PB. Smart, better-informed people like you who educate me. Thankyou. Your reasoning seems valid and the lab theory somewhat less so.
That said, I still think coronavirus is potentially fucking scary. The fact we are even discussing the cancellation of the Olympics is a measure of that.
You are absolutely right, it is scary. I went to Nigeria to train healthcare people during the Ebola outbreak. From a personal perspective, while the disease may not be as nasty as Ebola, the prospects of catching it are considerably higher than they were for Ebola.
I have a buddy in Hong Kong doing training for Reuters staff. My wife (not that it was an option) would not have let me go.
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
It's one for you to ponder at leisure.
If I might ask, what employment do you draw the conclusion that the BBC provides “water cooler moments”? In my experience, if that was ever the case it’s long gone.
Bodyguard, Night Manager, Dracula
Fair enough although I’ve never come across anyone discussing them. So perhaps we don’t all have something in common with them, per the assertion. The Night Manger book could do with a better editor, mind you.
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
Yes, (and I was on the CBW desk at the FCO when the Sverdlovsk cluster of anthrax in a closed access military town in the deepest part of the former USSR was quickly reported despite the Russians' most strenuous efforts to keep it secret).
But, if you don't accept that answer, why would this strain of virus be in the lab and a vaccine being prepped if there had yet been no disease cases? There are millions of viruses, and many thousands that could make the species jump. No-one is out there randomly collecting wild type animal coronaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
Scientists study stuff because that's what they do, irrespective of immediate utility. The theory doesn't require that they were trying to develop a vaccine.
Still doesn't meet Occam's razor, and there is currently absolutely no evidence to support that theory. Is it possible? Yes. Is it the most reasonable or likely explanation? No.
It will end up far lower, as the data is only capturing confirmed cases, which tends to exclude all the asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic cases. And the knowledge of how to treat patients, including those with co-morbidities, improves with each week. We can expect supportive medical care as it improves further to help an increasing ratio of those seriously sick to pull through.
Until and unless it hits India, or Africa, and stays this contagious, and then the death rate could rocket?
Still only 3 cases in India, and no deaths touch wood.
It will end up far lower, as the data is only capturing confirmed cases, which tends to exclude all the asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic cases. And the knowledge of how to treat patients, including those with co-morbidities, improves with each week. We can expect supportive medical care as it improves further to help an increasing ratio of those seriously sick to pull through.
Until and unless it hits India, or Africa, and stays this contagious, and then the death rate could rocket?
If at that stage we are still relying solely on supportive health care (treating the symptoms, not attacking the virus), then it is possible that poorer access to good healthcare might indeed result in higher morbidity in those low resource settings.
But there is a huge effort going on right now both on treatments (finding which antivirals are most effective) and on a vaccine. We are just 7 weeks into the outbreak, and there are already standard diagnostic tests widely available across the US, being validated in each State's public health labs. Things are moving by the hour, not the day.
It will end up far lower, as the data is only capturing confirmed cases, which tends to exclude all the asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic cases. And the knowledge of how to treat patients, including those with co-morbidities, improves with each week. We can expect supportive medical care as it improves further to help an increasing ratio of those seriously sick to pull through.
Until and unless it hits India, or Africa, and stays this contagious, and then the death rate could rocket?
Still only 3 cases in India, and no deaths touch wood.
I keep wondering why you’ve been banned. That avatar is really confusing.
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
It's one for you to ponder at leisure.
If I might ask, what employment do you draw the conclusion that the BBC provides “water cooler moments”? In my experience, if that was ever the case it’s long gone.
I would say most people still get their news/"watercooler" moments from the BBC. OK so it comes from the website, but no BBC no website. The fact that the licence fee isn't directly linked to the website isn't necessarily important. Most people still have TVs so coverage is universal enough that it doesn't necessarily matter that there isn't a direct link between the two.
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
Yes, (and Ironaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
This is mainly why I like PB. Smart, better-informed people like you who educate me. Thankyou. Your reasoning seems valid and the lab theory somewhat less so.
That said, I still think coronavirus is potentially fucking scary. The fact we are even discussing the cancellation of the Olympics is a measure of that.
You are absolutely right, it is scary. I went to Nigeria to train healthcare people during the Ebola outbreak. From a personal perspective, while the disease may not be as nasty as Ebola, the prospects of catching it are considerably higher than they were for Ebola.
I have a buddy in Hong Kong doing training for Reuters staff. My wife (not that it was an option) would not have let me go.
No way I would go to East Asia right now. Why take the risk? If you come back with an innocent sniffle, you are in quarantine for 14 days. I've already experienced much of that.
This is gonna hammer tourism (along with many other industries)
Personal anecdote: my wife is massively into astrology (I know, I know). About 3 months ago she said "something terrible is about to damage the world".
It's all about Saturn v Pluto or God knows? I don't believe in astrology. Yet her words haunt me.
Humans are hard wired to expect disaster. Because the humans that anticipated disaster are the ones that escaped, and propagated their genes. Disaster turns us on. This means that, most of the time, we anticipate disaster.... which never happens,
But, every so often, the much-feared black swan arrives.
Yep, the negativity bias is indeed hardwired. And rightly so. Our hunter gatherer ancestors suffered far more by being eaten by a lion than they gained by winning that extra meat from a more dangerous hunt.
The current assumptions are: (1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases. (2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic. (3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did. (4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious. (5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
Agreed. This may all disappear. Inshallah. But to address your points..
1. This implies that all countries will have to do what China is doing. Massive and oppressive quarantine. Will they be able, or willing?
2. Yes. But it could also be optimistic, we still don't even know the incubation period. It was thought to be 14 days. Now some say it could be a month.
3. Let's hope so
4. I read an estimate that a vaccine is 18 months away. Too long
5. Who knows?
ALSO, is the death toll accurate? Look at this video. I have no idea if it is "true". It purports to show the streets of Wuhan, with bodies in bags just lying on the pavement. If it IS real it is horrifying. And even if it isn't, there are enough scary videos out there to make anyone quail. They can't all be fake.
Fair enough comment. But I meant "water cooler" more figuratively, the type of things you watch and then use, for example, to have something to say to a multi-generational table at a wedding, or to break the ice with a tradesman. These things are likely to be sourced from the BBC.
Because of the 15% rule, if in a Primary only 2 people get over 15% then the top one of those will get over 50% of the Delegats,
For the purpose of this we are not just talking about the 50 states, but also the Congregational districts, some delegates are being allocated depending on the results in each Congregational district, (and the 7 territory's have there own primary's as well)
I'm not saying sanders will win, but its at least conceivable but if all of the remaining candadits stay in, at least till supper Tuesday. Then its possible to imagine that in a good proportion, only 2 people get over 15% and BS gets the most.
how this all adds up I don't know, but i would love to get my head around what happens to delegates for candadits who drop out before the convention.
I completely agree with that. It's why someone polling at 25% can easily end up with 3x the delegate numbers of someone polling 15%, because the 15% guy is going to miss out on delegates in a bunch of Congressional Districts.
That being said... Sanders is still sub 30% nationwide. And his support is quite concentrated with the young and the urban. That means that if he's on 25% nationwide he might come dangerously close to the 15% threshold in some areas.
It's actually kinda crazy with the Dems right now, because the presence of Steyer and Bloomberg means there are potentially seven viable candidates in some Districts (B-B-B-B-W-S-S). That could (theoretically if not actually) mean that no-one reached the 15% threshold!
Fair enough comment. But I meant "water cooler" more figuratively, the type of things you watch and then use, for example, to have something to say to a multi-generational table at a wedding, or to break the ice with a tradesman. These things are likely to be sourced from the BBC.
Is there anything - except sport - that pretty much everyone watches live on TV any more?
It will end up far lower, as the data is only capturing confirmed cases, which tends to exclude all the asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic cases. And the knowledge of how to treat patients, including those with co-morbidities, improves with each week. We can expect supportive medical care as it improves further to help an increasing ratio of those seriously sick to pull through.
Until and unless it hits India, or Africa, and stays this contagious, and then the death rate could rocket?
Still only 3 cases in India, and no deaths touch wood.
I keep wondering why you’ve been banned. That avatar is really confusing.
In case you haven't got your glasses on, the message reads:
Who is taking it seriously? No-one I know who does this for a living - on either the epidemiology or the security side of the house.
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
No, the serious theory is not that it was man made, it's that some medical lab in Wuhan was testing vaccines for animal viruses (sensible, after SARS and MERS and Olly MURS) and there was an accidental transmission from bat to human.
Is that any crazier than the theory it was bat soup or pangolin stew?
Where is the epidemiological cluster that leads back only to the lab and those working in it or living near it?
If there were such a cluster would you expect anyone outside China to know about it?
Yes, (and Ironaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
This is mainly why I like PB. Smart, better-informed people like you who educate me. Thankyou. Your reasoning seems valid and the lab theory somewhat less so.
That said, I still think coronavirus is potentially fucking scary. The fact we are even discussing the cancellation of the Olympics is a measure of that.
You are absolutely right, it is scary. I went to Nigeria to train healthcare people during the Ebola outbreak. From a personal perspective, while the disease may not be as nasty as Ebola, the prospects of catching it are considerably higher than they were for Ebola.
I have a buddy in Hong Kong doing training for Reuters staff. My wife (not that it was an option) would not have let me go.
No way I would go to East Asia right now. Why take the risk? If you come back with an innocent sniffle, you are in quarantine for 14 days. I've already experienced much of that.
This is gonna hammer tourism (along with many other industries)
Personal anecdote: my wife is massively into astrology (I know, I know). About 3 months ago she said "something terrible is about to damage the world".
It's all about Saturn v Pluto or God knows? I don't believe in astrology. Yet her words haunt me.
Humans are hard wired to expect disaster. Because the humans that anticipated disaster are the ones that escaped, and propagated their genes. Disaster turns us on. This means that, most of the time, we anticipate disaster.... which never happens,
But, every so often, the much-feared black swan arrives.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBe0VCso0qs
The pivotal event (and arguably the cause of Brexit and so much else) was the global financial crash which happened after Blair left office. It's hard to imagine how it would have played differently with Blair at No.10 and Brown at No.11.
By 2010 Blair would have been PM for 13 years and it's hard not to think a degree of voter fatigue would have set in. Would he have done worse than Brown? Probably not but perhaps not so well and I can't imagine Nick Clegg wanting to prop up another five years of a Blair-led Labour party so Blair would have gone and we'd have had the Coalition.
Brown would probably have led Labour after 2010 but would he have prevented a Cameron majority in 2015? That's one to discuss.
Well, the second half of the prediction is looking good...
‘So in 13 years in government, Labour lost around twice as many votes as Corbyn managed to lose in two while in opposition to Boris Johnson?’
(Of course, this isn’t entirely fair. For 75% of that time he was in opposition to Theresa May.)
If so, I could be converted.
And my undergraduate engineering degree required very little research - you could call that a ‘glorified A-level’ if you want.
The staff are on the whole ex-judges, ex-barristers, and ex-solicitors, rather than academics. I appreciate that.
Right now, neither of them have any good reason to quit: both could still plausibly become nominee.
Buttigieg: because he’s come a narrow second (twice) and is fresh, moderate, well-rounded and charismatic and would be a great contrast to Trump. He could end up as the compromise candidate.
Klobuchar: because she’s smart, effective and experienced, markedly exceeded expectations in New Hampshire and could appeal to both wings of the Democratic Party as a compromise candidate.
Until one or the other’s funding dries up, or they get decisively battered in the polls, neither will quit.
Personally, I don’t think that’ll be until the other side of Super Tuesday - at least.
Of those, Sanders looks highly likely to get at least 30% of the delegates. But at the same time, he looks unlikely to get 50% of them.
Biden is
Holy crap, Steyer to win Nevada
Had he stayed he’d have carried the can for the Great Recession and the Lisbon Treaty as well as Iraq War.
If (by some miracle) he’d stood for a fourth term with Labour support then the SNP might have swiped a few more seats in Scotland, and he retained a few more southern marginals, but I don’t think the result would have been that much different.
OK, we'll stop the 'dueling banjos' on theme tunes now. But let me leave you with a question -
No BBC. No more Tess Daly or Huw Edwards. No more water cooler moments from the likes of Andrew Neil and Monty Don. Everyone instead staring glassily at YouTube and Netflix, all doing their own atomized thing, barely able to communicate with each other because they have so little in common.
Is this the sort of society you want for your kids and grandkids?
Don't rush to answer. This merits more than an immediate bash bash bash of the keyboard and more of that tired old "Why should I pay for something I don't use?" shtick.
It's one for you to ponder at leisure.
I guess we’ll know in the next few days if Japan is about to become totally overwhelmed with Coronavirus, in which case it’s probably worth taking the decision early to postpone the Games by 12 months.
I'm also super sceptical of any poll that has Warren + Sanders at just 20%.
That being said... if this poll is vaguely right, then this primary could be anyone's. There's just six points between Steyer and Sanders. And just three between second placed Klobuchar and Sanders.
40% of the delegates will have been awarded in two and a bit weeks time.
Sanders will almost certainly lead by a long way. But he's also likely to have no more than 35-40% of the delegates (and that's assuming that the moderate track remains crowded). He'd therefore need to get 60% of the remaining 60% of delegates to get a majority. Which is possible, but difficult.
And it would be effectively impossible for anyone else to get a majority.
The only way out of this is for either Warren to drop out and endorse Sanders (unifying the Left), or one or two of Biden-Buttigieg-Baemy-Bloomberg to quit the race (unifying the Moderate track).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgg4PmLXMKQ
Nevada has not repeated the N.Hampshire law that reduced turnout of those under 30 by half.
Also Nevada probably won't be able to finish counting before S.Carolina or ever.
I think most international sporting events and other large gatherings are going to get cancelled for the next few months at least, until this virus can be brought under control.
Who do you see dropping out by then, particularly given the unpredictability of the polling?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/london/articles/Londons-Olympic-legacy-the-results-are-in/
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/27538433/market?marketId=1.161392765
Buttigeig 1.2 and Sanders 5.
Are the Iowa Democrats ever going to announce an official result, or is this going to be a void market?
* This being the idea it is manmade and escaped from the Wuhan lab
(2) We’ve decided (rightly in my view) that whilst we could breed out some unhelpful genes and disabilities from humans selectively the ethics are utterly appalling and we’d far rather live with them and have a free society instead.
(3) A modern healthcare and welfare system largely makes both (1) and (2) feasible in delivering stable societies as we can support those who don’t have as strong an ability to succeed, as well as those who are disabled.
If it all totally broke down we wouldn’t be a million miles away from other species: the weak, ill and disabled would die, strong males would be naturally selected through fighting over land, resources and women, and strong women through survival (or not) through childbirth.
The statisticians in Japan and Singapore have a much better handle on these things (including not having politicians trying to interfere in their work), we’ll get more meaningful numbers from those countries in the coming days and weeks.
Frankly, no-one understands pathogenicity enough to design it in an organism - directed evolution is the closest we'd come to creating something effective in the lab.
As for a genetic weapon, again, the concept lies in the realms of science fiction and, less firmly, science theory, but not science fact.
However, if she were to drop out after Nevada and to endorse Sanders, then I think that might be the fillip Sanders needs to get to 50% of delegates. If she holds on for Super Tuesday, then I think he struggles to get there.
Physical beauty - plentiful shiny hair, well developed facial bone structure in which teeth have plenty of space to hang evenly, healthy skin etc., is the hallmark of good health, and good health is the hallmark of good nutrition. Yes, it can be intra-generational to an extent, because the health the parents possess obviously becomes the building material of the next generation. But the nutrition the mother is passing on to the baby in the womb, in nursing, and the nutrition during childhood are added effects. This is obvious when you think about it. It is a strange belief in evolution that argues that there is a quotient of disease-vulnerable ugly troglodytes amongst us who have somehow performed every bit as well in natural selection as the healthy and beautiful ones.
All of us have evolved (or been created if you prefer) perfectly for our environment. It is up to us then to discover what we need to do for ourselves and for the next generation to enjoy great health, and all its side-benefits.
But, if you don't accept that answer, why would this strain of virus be in the lab and a vaccine being prepped if there had yet been no disease cases? There are millions of viruses, and many thousands that could make the species jump. No-one is out there randomly collecting wild type animal coronaviruses AND then starting vaccine production before there is evidence that it has made the species jump.
#lovethebeeb
I don't know who Monty Don is and have never watched a program with Tess Daly in it as far as I know. Last time I watched Huw Edwards routinely was over a decade ago and while I do watch Andrew Neil I'm in a tiny minority for that.
However we can still communicate. Your idea we won't or don't communicate is fallacious. We don't require the BBC to do so, we're doing so right now without the BBC from our own niche interest and others do the same thing.
As for newsworthy "watercooler moments" - they don't come from Huw Edwards anymore. Heck if anything remotely "watercooler worthy" happens my phone usually gives me a pop up notification to let me know almost immediately whether its something I'm normally interested in or not.
This past week we've had 2-3 watercooler moments I can think of, two 'news' and one light entertainment. The two 'news' ones being Schofield and Flack. I think very, very few people if any will have found out about either from Huw Edwards. As for what I'd call the light entertainment watercooler moment, that would be the finale of The Masked Singer, which was on ITV.
You can't turn back time to the era when we all watched the same thing at the same time. It doesn't exist anymore.
It's been happening more and more. Also all couples should be allowed selective abortions because I think one in ~16 of us carry unpleasant genetic diseases that will shorten our life or reduce its quality (just one small example is retinitis pigmentosa which makes you almost blind by middle age).
Oh, what's that you say ... there was a vote in 2016 against freedom of movement ...?
Because of the 15% rule, if in a Primary only 2 people get over 15% then the top one of those will get over 50% of the Delegats,
For the purpose of this we are not just talking about the 50 states, but also the Congregational districts, some delegates are being allocated depending on the results in each Congregational district, (and the 7 territory's have there own primary's as well)
I'm not saying sanders will win, but its at least conceivable but if all of the remaining candadits stay in, at least till supper Tuesday. Then its possible to imagine that in a good proportion, only 2 people get over 15% and BS gets the most.
how this all adds up I don't know, but i would love to get my head around what happens to delegates for candadits who drop out before the convention.
I have a buddy in Hong Kong doing training for Reuters staff. My wife (not that it was an option) would not have let me go.
But there is a huge effort going on right now both on treatments (finding which antivirals are most effective) and on a vaccine. We are just 7 weeks into the outbreak, and there are already standard diagnostic tests widely available across the US, being validated in each State's public health labs. Things are moving by the hour, not the day.
You got SARS, coming out of your skin
OK read that. Very eloquent but you misunderstand me on one very key point. We will no doubt return to this.
@matt
Fair enough comment. But I meant "water cooler" more figuratively, the type of things you watch and then use, for example, to have something to say to a multi-generational table at a wedding, or to break the ice with a tradesman. These things are likely to be sourced from the BBC.
That being said... Sanders is still sub 30% nationwide. And his support is quite concentrated with the young and the urban. That means that if he's on 25% nationwide he might come dangerously close to the 15% threshold in some areas.
It's actually kinda crazy with the Dems right now, because the presence of Steyer and Bloomberg means there are potentially seven viable candidates in some Districts (B-B-B-B-W-S-S). That could (theoretically if not actually) mean that no-one reached the 15% threshold!
"KEEP CALMER
and
VOTE STARMER"