Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What Brits are most looking forward to once the pandemic is ov

13

Comments

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    Andrew said:

    Kinda disappointingly low tbh. We have basically identical excess mortality to Spain (and Belgium/Italy/NL), so we're probably all rather similar - barring drastic differences in % of the elderly it infected.

    twitter.com/_MiguelHernan/status/1260625031119409156

    Witty said 10% in London, 4% of the population have had with via the sampling / antibody testing government have done. It should rise a bit as takes time for antibody to form, but it is much lower than they hoped.

    I think we can safely said the iceberg theory has melted away.

    Swedish Witty says Stockholm has 25% and Sweden 20% vs Denmark that is 1-2%. I find it hard to believe it is that high, but I am not an expert.

    I find the low UK numbers very depressing. We have all had a lot of deaths and locked down, while neither building any sort of community immunity nor successfully suppressed it.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102
    Watching tonights ITV news and seeing people angling, playing golf, meeting in the park on one to one with social distancing and how pleased they were, and sellers being able to market their homes with a valuer doing his first valuation since lockdown, was better PR for HMG than the technical PMQ argument
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Cos he only needs to be slightly less bad than Hilary. She very nearly won.
    And I'm not Trump has improved greatly as a slogan since 2016.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    edited May 2020
    At which point will the government actually be able to gives businesses the incentives they need to drive growth forward?

    You know things like light touch regulation, a state that isn't intrusive, the chance to make some money that won;t be taken to feed a giant black hole of debt, a confident consumer, low taxes, a bonfire of red tape, a mobile upbeat well educated pool of labour, incentives to employ people - that sort of stuff.

    I just can;t think of when. And that's why I think these forecasts of a strong bounceback are wrong.

    In truth the numbers have only ever gone one way throughout lockdown - much worse than anybody expected.

    And so will the numbers on 'bounceback'
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,005
    Scott_xP said:

    I’ve got to admit, saying that the Government guidance says something in the 57th paragraph out of 61 that is untrue and therefore the people to whom the advice is directed should know to completely disregard the entire guidance and substitute in something completely different instead without any further guidance... that feels a lot more like trying to invoke a technicality to me.

    https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1260631351629361153
    It does seem, especially when you’ve actually read the guidance in question, that the defence is:

    “Well, you’re saying we were giving bad and inaccurate advice? But while the advice said exactly what you’re saying it did and was dangerously wrong at many points throughout the guidance, if you read this paragraph right towards the end, why, it’s so wrong that it’s obvious that people should have known to disregard all the guidance in the official Government guidance, so it’s not our fault, and you’re being dodgy by saying it is”

    I mean, seriously - I had to read it twice to catch that paragraph right towards the end... and miles away from the bit that Starmer quoted, and let’s be sensible here: people using the guidance are always going to go straight to the bit that covers what they’re after.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    dixiedean said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Cos he only needs to be slightly less bad than Hilary. She very nearly won.
    And I'm not Trump has improved greatly as a slogan since 2016.
    I think that may well prove to be a phoney assumption.

    It's certainly a lazy one. There's all sorts of things that could go wrong with it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    "Not Trump" as a strategy reminds me of Ed Miliband's 35% strategy in 2015.

    Remind me: how did that turn out?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    stodge said:


    At the end of all this, more so than any typical recession, there are going to be winners and losers. A lot of people who are still in work will find that their quality of life will have improved no end, and many of them will find themselves with more disposable income into the bargain. At least until the tax rises bite...

    We'll also end up with an awful lot more people long-term unemployed or labouring for a pittance in really shit conditions, for whom the ordeal will just carry on.

    I've worked at home 2-3 days a week since the 1990s. This is different and I won't say the social aspect of work isn't missed despite all the digital cuppas and virtual watercooler chats.

    It's different for Mrs Stodge who has rarely worked at home but she has adapted - we human beings are really good at that, remember? - and enjoys the lie-in and doesn't miss a crowded tube.

    I've said before adversity breeds opportunity and capitalism can be brutally Darwinist in seeing off the weak and providing new ground for new business ideas. 44% of employed adults working at home is a lot and even if it settles at 30% once life returns to something nearer normal it will be a change.

    It's quite likely I will never go back to the office because there won't be one - we'll hire meeting space as we need it to entertain clients but virtual meetings seem fine.

    My personal hope is the ludicrous formality of dress codes in some businesses and companies will be swept away. I'm not suggesting Rupert Bear jimjams for work but do we really need suits and ties to be "professional"? Not any more.

    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I really like my suits and ties.

    I bought some lovely new ones from Turnbull & Asser in January.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Andrew said:

    Kinda disappointingly low tbh. We have basically identical excess mortality to Spain (and Belgium/Italy/NL), so we're probably all rather similar - barring drastic differences in % of the elderly it infected.

    twitter.com/_MiguelHernan/status/1260625031119409156

    Witty said 10% in London, 4% of the population have had with via the sampling / antibody testing government have done. It should rise a bit as takes time for antibody to form, but it is much lower than they hoped.

    I think we can safely said the iceberg theory has melted away.

    Swedish Witty says Stockholm has 25% and Sweden 20% vs Denmark that is 1-2%. I find it hard to believe it is that high, but I am not an expert.

    I find the low UK numbers very depressing. We have all had a lot of deaths and locked down, while neither building any sort of community immunity nor successfully suppressed it.
    Are you now saying lockdown was not a success, and may even have been counterproductive?

  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 757
    "Not being Trump" is a terrible strategy as if Biden looks anything like as half as risky as Trump, there's 8 years of risk attached to him, as opposed to Trump's four years of risk. There's incumbency bias for a reason ffs.
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 757
    On topic: We have a functioning government AND a functioning opposition! The nation is spoilt.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898

    <
    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..

    If I were an American floating voter, I think I'd be looking at what the Trump and Biden policy programmes were for 2020-24. I agree Biden has to be more than "not Trump" but Trump also has to lay out some kind of policy vision beyond MAGA and he'll be questionned (and rightly so) on Coronavirus and the extent to which some of his other policy commitments have been met.

    Trump has die-hard loyalists but perhaps not as many as last time while Biden needs to get those Democrats and independents who wouldn't vote for Clinton in 2016 to come out and support him rather than stay at home.

    The mood of 2016 in both Britain and the USA has gone - there's a new zeitgeist in town.

  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,354

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    I think the argument runs 'He's a twat, but he's our kind of twat.'

    Difficult to counter that one.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225

    "Not Trump" as a strategy reminds me of Ed Miliband's 35% strategy in 2015.

    Remind me: how did that turn out?

    Turned out he wasn’t running against a complete lunatic.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    Pace posts about polling from others, Trump seems to have lost the haters (eg those who hated Hillary & Trump in 2016 broke for Trump). I can see all sorts of problems with Biden as a candidate but I'd find it difficult to hate him.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    Biden's problem is he will be painted as the establishment. Running against the swamp-cleaner-in-chief.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250
    Omnium said:

    Andy_JS said:

    If the government wants to raise a lot of money, why not slap a huge wealth tax on all the tyrants and their hangers-on who use the London property market as a way to stash their ill-gotten gains?

    Wealth taxes and London prices aren't quite aligned. Allegedly I'm rich, but it really,really doesn't feel that way.
    Isn't that what they all say?

    Doesn't minimum wage in UK roughly equal top 10% in the world?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898


    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I really like my suits and ties.

    I bought some lovely new ones from Turnbull & Asser in January.

    I've nothing against a good suit - my point is I've discovered that being informally attired when the clients are equally informally attired helps get business done, issues settled and decisions made.

    It's my experience people are adapting (that word again) to home working and actually enjoying some aspects including not having to put on a "uniform".

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    The reason to vote against Trump is because you believe in the primacy of the US Constitution. You believe in the separation of powers. You believe that the power of the President should be limited by the courts and by Congress.

    You recognise that, over time, it is limited and constitutional government that has delivered prosperity, freedom and security to the people, and that cult of personality and unrestrained executive power does not.

    Biden was pretty shit as a Senator. He was a nobody as VP. He's suffering from the early stages of dementia.

    But at least he will not dismantle the very things that has made the US great over the past two centuries.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533



    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I really like my suits and ties.

    I bought some lovely new ones from Turnbull & Asser in January.

    I think it shoulkd be up to the individual, as part of the image they want to present. I generally wear a suit and tie partly because I might need to meet a dignitary or do a TV interview or meet some ar zero notice but also a bit because it fits my elder statesman role at work. I have a dynamic senior colleague who dresses as if heading for a building site, and it suits his roll up our sleeves and get cracking iage. Insisting on suits or not suits seems to me n unnecessary orgnisational rule.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    Monkeys said:

    "Not being Trump" is a terrible strategy as if Biden looks anything like as half as risky as Trump, there's 8 years of risk attached to him, as opposed to Trump's four years of risk. There's incumbency bias for a reason ffs.

    'Not being Bush' did not work for Kerry, 'Not being Obama' did not work for Romney either.

    To beat an incumbent President you also need people to vote for you e.g. Reagan and Bill Clinton
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898

    At which point will the government actually be able to gives businesses the incentives they need to drive growth forward?

    You know things like light touch regulation, a state that isn't intrusive, the chance to make some money that won;t be taken to feed a giant black hole of debt, a confident consumer, low taxes, a bonfire of red tape, a mobile upbeat well educated pool of labour, incentives to employ people - that sort of stuff.

    I just can;t think of when. And that's why I think these forecasts of a strong bounceback are wrong.

    In truth the numbers have only ever gone one way throughout lockdown - much worse than anybody expected.

    And so will the numbers on 'bounceback'

    The Conservative Party has been in Government for the past 10 years in case you hadn't noticed. They've been promising most of your wish-list for the past 10 years.

    Why do you think they haven't delivered?

    When you figure that out you'll be a lot further forward.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    Biden's problem is he will be painted as the establishment. Running against the swamp-cleaner-in-chief.
    I see Trump has won a couple of congressional run-offs, were these expected? I think one was. Wonder how they match up to the recent polls
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.

    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    Biden's problem is he will be painted as the establishment. Running against the swamp-cleaner-in-chief.
    The culture wars guarantee Trump very solid share.

    I had an experience at work last week that tempted me to vote for Trump. Of course, if anyone asks, I always say how disgusted I am by him.

    Then.. I relish the secret ballot box. Trump is value. Trump is box office. And he annoys (deliciously) so many people who annoy me. Absolutely perfectly.

    If everything is going to be shit anyway (and you lack confidence in anyone) why not??
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217
    stodge said:

    <
    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..

    If I were an American floating voter, I think I'd be looking at what the Trump and Biden policy programmes were for 2020-24. I agree Biden has to be more than "not Trump" but Trump also has to lay out some kind of policy vision beyond MAGA and he'll be questionned (and rightly so) on Coronavirus and the extent to which some of his other policy commitments have been met.

    Trump has die-hard loyalists but perhaps not as many as last time while Biden needs to get those Democrats and independents who wouldn't vote for Clinton in 2016 to come out and support him rather than stay at home.

    The mood of 2016 in both Britain and the USA has gone - there's a new zeitgeist in town.

    Trump has the support of 96% of registered Republicans. The problem is that in Reagan's time that was 45% of voters, and it's now 29%.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    OMG

    Ecuador-like scenes in Mexico (which I pointed to a few days ago, as a potential nightmare)

    It is now a nightmare

    "There is currently a three-day backlog for cremation at every public crematorium in the city and crematorium workers in recent days have indicated that more burials will have to take place because burning capacity is overwhelmed.

    "Black smoke billows out over cemeteries as the ovens are cremating on an industrial level in the city but the bodies don't stop coming.

    In fact, the ovens simply cannot cope and there are regular reports of breakdowns only adding to the backlog."

    "The upward curve of death looks set to rocket, the health service can't cope and social distancing, let alone lockdown, is largely being ignored in Mexico City.

    Short of a vaccine or a miracle, the effect on this society and this city could be utterly catastrophic"

    https://news.sky.com/story/mexico-city-underreporting-covid-19-deaths-sky-news-analysis-finds-11987235

    Brazil and Mexico going full herd immunity....
    I fear the covid crisis is actually taking a turn for the WORSE. That is to say, as it now spreads into the Third World (look at India, slowly but surely picking up) we could see the Rona's ultimate ferocity, and we might see the really apocalyptic numbers come true
    Except we aren't as percentage wise so few in the 3rd world are over 70 let alone over 80 they can brush off corona in a way the West cannot
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    2016 Oscar winner Moonlight on Film4 at 9pm
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Angela Merkel threatened Russia with consequences yesterday on Wednesday as she accused Vladimir Putin’s intelligence services of hacking her emails.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/13/merkel-cites-hard-evidence-target-russian-hacking/
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489



    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I really like my suits and ties.

    I bought some lovely new ones from Turnbull & Asser in January.

    I think it shoulkd be up to the individual, as part of the image they want to present. I generally wear a suit and tie partly because I might need to meet a dignitary or do a TV interview or meet some ar zero notice but also a bit because it fits my elder statesman role at work. I have a dynamic senior colleague who dresses as if heading for a building site, and it suits his roll up our sleeves and get cracking iage. Insisting on suits or not suits seems to me n unnecessary orgnisational rule.
    Few businesses insist on it now to be honest.

    They do insist on being smart, presentable and appropriate.

    You can usually cover that with clean trousers, a shirt and a pair of brogues.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Excellent review of Johnson's woeful shortcomings on PMQs. I guess the PM has grown fat on the indolence of facing Jezza every week. Time to get a grip.

    "Boris Johnson seems to have pushed PMQs further down his priority list than even Blair ever dared and that is starting to become a problem."

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-s-sloppy-pmqs-performance-is-becoming-a-problem
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    Andrew said:

    Kinda disappointingly low tbh. We have basically identical excess mortality to Spain (and Belgium/Italy/NL), so we're probably all rather similar - barring drastic differences in % of the elderly it infected.

    twitter.com/_MiguelHernan/status/1260625031119409156

    Witty said 10% in London, 4% of the population have had with via the sampling / antibody testing government have done. It should rise a bit as takes time for antibody to form, but it is much lower than they hoped.

    I think we can safely said the iceberg theory has melted away.

    Swedish Witty says Stockholm has 25% and Sweden 20% vs Denmark that is 1-2%. I find it hard to believe it is that high, but I am not an expert.

    I find the low UK numbers very depressing. We have all had a lot of deaths and locked down, while neither building any sort of community immunity nor successfully suppressed it.
    Are you now saying lockdown was not a success, and may even have been counterproductive?

    The main reason we locked down is because if we hadn't, every single media outlet, 'journalist', and opposition politician would have been screaming for blood and calling the government murderers every single day.

    That's why it happened. You can argue that the government should have taken both the virus and that incredible public pressure on the chin, but to be fair that's a hard thing to do, not least in our country.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Cases connected to five nightspots in the capital’s Itaewon district hit 119 on Wednesday as secondary infections sprouted in other cities – including a one-year-old child infected by his uncle 200 miles away in Busan - leading to fears of a wider outbreak.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/13/south-korea-scrambles-trace-linked-new-coronavirus-cluster/
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    Excellent review of Johnson's woeful shortcomings on PMQs. I guess the PM has grown fat on the indolence of facing Jezza every week. Time to get a grip.

    "Boris Johnson seems to have pushed PMQs further down his priority list than even Blair ever dared and that is starting to become a problem."

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-s-sloppy-pmqs-performance-is-becoming-a-problem

    I think it's fine being low on his priority list at the moment to be honest!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217
    HYUFD said:

    Monkeys said:

    "Not being Trump" is a terrible strategy as if Biden looks anything like as half as risky as Trump, there's 8 years of risk attached to him, as opposed to Trump's four years of risk. There's incumbency bias for a reason ffs.

    'Not being Bush' did not work for Kerry, 'Not being Obama' did not work for Romney either.

    To beat an incumbent President you also need people to vote for you e.g. Reagan and Bill Clinton
    While that's true, the reality is that very few people actively disapproved of most Presidents. 36.8% of voters disapproved of Reagan at this stage of his Presidency. Just 37.3% disapproved of Clinton. Way out on the "most disapproved of" list is the 46.7% who disapproved of Carter.

    Trump is doing five points worse than Carter.

    Now, I agree that's not enough in itself. But you can't ignore (well, you shouldn't ignore) his monumentally high disapproval ratings.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    The reason to vote against Trump is because you believe in the primacy of the US Constitution. You believe in the separation of powers. You believe that the power of the President should be limited by the courts and by Congress.

    You recognise that, over time, it is limited and constitutional government that has delivered prosperity, freedom and security to the people, and that cult of personality and unrestrained executive power does not.

    Biden was pretty shit as a Senator. He was a nobody as VP. He's suffering from the early stages of dementia.

    But at least he will not dismantle the very things that has made the US great over the past two centuries.
    You're assuming people will think deeply and vote rationally and logically.

    Why on earth do you think they would do that with a culture war roaring blood red in tooth and claw?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited May 2020
    HYUFD said:

    2016 Oscar winner Moonlight on Film4 at 9pm

    One of the very few occasions in which the winner of the best film was very possibly the actual best film of the year. 1944, Casablanca possibly was too, but that's about it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    TimT said:

    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The fact that NHS hospitals discharged elderly patients diagnosed with coronavirus and sent them back into care homes is an appalling scandal. As Dominic Lawson wrote in the Sunday Times, it shames the nation. Heads must roll.

    https://lockdownsceptics.org/

    Were they diagnosed with COVID-19 or suspected and not tested?
    Manslaughter by negligence or by design ?

    I'm going for negligence.
    Manslaughter "by design" sounds akin to murder.
    Hospitals here have never done exit tests iirc
    Why would they do them on people going back to care homes; get a positive result and still send them back ?!
    It's highly unlikely. They simply never tested on exit.
    I believe @Foxy posted a while back that his trust did; not sure when they started doing that though.
    The amended guidance does now require testing, I think.
    What was the date of that advice? If it occurred when there was established community spread...

    Until a couple of weeks ago, capacity issues in my Trust for testing were such that we couldn't repeat tests. This means not testing before discharge, nor repeating a negative test when clinical suspicion remained. There was also the problem that results were often taking several days, so delaying discharges.

    I suspect that we unintentionally sent positive patients home during the period when testing was restricted.

    In some Trusts even known patients were discharged to care homes, assuming they could be barrier nursed.

    To some extent this was because a larger peak of admissions expected, hence acute beds needed, and partly the culture of overcrowded wards is to discharge as soon as possible.

    The advice COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements was published on the 19th March.
    Not reviewed until the 15th April.
    That is an awfully long time between updates, given what evolved during that period.
    It’s not just that - what really annoys me is that they’ve never publicly acknowledged the error. The guidance was quietly updated - and I’ve noticed how carefully the subject has been avoided at press briefings (today’s was no exception).

    I don’t expect governments to be infallible, but it’s reasonable to ask that they recognise and learn from their mistakes.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    stodge said:


    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I really like my suits and ties.

    I bought some lovely new ones from Turnbull & Asser in January.

    I've nothing against a good suit - my point is I've discovered that being informally attired when the clients are equally informally attired helps get business done, issues settled and decisions made.

    It's my experience people are adapting (that word again) to home working and actually enjoying some aspects including not having to put on a "uniform".

    I've found a suit and tie can lend you more seriousness of purpose and authority when it's needed.

    As you say, depends on the client and situation.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    eadric said:

    Charles said:

    Do you think it is helpful to draw incorrect conclusions based on faulty data?
    The problem is HMG were happy to make these comparisons, on the same data, when it flattered their performance vis a vis other countries
    And it is right to criticise them for that
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    DavidL said:



    Not sure why you would say that. If the government does run a £400-500bn deficit this year there will be a substantial economic bounce back. Whether it will be sustainable may be another question.

    The real issue is how much of our productive economy is just going to be permanently lost. How many businesses will collapse and not open again and how many will they bring down with them? My total guess is that we will lose 8-10% of our economy. The remaining 90% may well bounce back 10% fairly quickly given that stimulus but that still leaves us short of where we were and sustainability will be an issue.

    There are different kinds of discretionary spending, aren't there? Things like meals out and haircuts are not something you'll ever catch up on - you just skipped them for a while. Something like replacinhg a leaky fridge will get done once it's practical to arrange, so the spending there has just been delayed. In general terms, the permanent damage will be in hospitality, leisure facilities; and travel: elsewhere, probably less.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Andy_JS said:

    Why is it necessary for the media to inform us there's going to be a significant recession? It's like someone telling you things are going to get wet just before a tsunami hits the beach.

    There will be a reimagining if the resort layout
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    On Trump, you can never tell when he's hit the absolute rock bottom. I thought it was when he advocated injecting bleach as a cure for the virus. But then he attempts to racially abuse one of his interrogators. What next? Will he drop his trousers and take a shit in the middle of a press conference? Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Monkeys said:

    "Not being Trump" is a terrible strategy as if Biden looks anything like as half as risky as Trump, there's 8 years of risk attached to him, as opposed to Trump's four years of risk. There's incumbency bias for a reason ffs.

    'Not being Bush' did not work for Kerry, 'Not being Obama' did not work for Romney either.

    To beat an incumbent President you also need people to vote for you e.g. Reagan and Bill Clinton
    While that's true, the reality is that very few people actively disapproved of most Presidents. 36.8% of voters disapproved of Reagan at this stage of his Presidency. Just 37.3% disapproved of Clinton. Way out on the "most disapproved of" list is the 46.7% who disapproved of Carter.

    Trump is doing five points worse than Carter.

    Now, I agree that's not enough in itself. But you can't ignore (well, you shouldn't ignore) his monumentally high disapproval ratings.
    Carter was below 40% approval, Trump is not

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260305989787680773?s=20

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260359240667090944?s=20

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260275257308516352?s=20


    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260214228880941056?s=20
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    The reason to vote against Trump is because you believe in the primacy of the US Constitution. You believe in the separation of powers. You believe that the power of the President should be limited by the courts and by Congress.

    You recognise that, over time, it is limited and constitutional government that has delivered prosperity, freedom and security to the people, and that cult of personality and unrestrained executive power does not.

    Biden was pretty shit as a Senator. He was a nobody as VP. He's suffering from the early stages of dementia.

    But at least he will not dismantle the very things that has made the US great over the past two centuries.
    You're assuming people will think deeply and vote rationally and logically.

    Why on earth do you think they would do that with a culture war roaring blood red in tooth and claw?
    I have this argument with my wife all the time. I say that - to his supporters - Donald Trump is standing up for a segment of the population that has long felt ignored. And when you think someone is on your side, you're willing to forgive them a lot.

    The problem for Republicans, though, is that demographic is nowhere near enough on its own.

    President Trump assembled a coalition of the religious right who were worried about abortion, small town America, those negatively impacted by globalisation, and capital owners who wanted low taxes. And then he added to those a large number of people who didn't like and didn't trust Hillary Clinton.

    I don't think President Trump has expanded his constituency, or at least if he has, he's not done it by much. The rust belt - even before CV-19 - was an economic laggard. And demographics make states like Arizona look ever tenuously Republican.

    This year will be very interesting, and I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that it may not be 2016 repeated.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    HYUFD said:

    2016 Oscar winner Moonlight on Film4 at 9pm

    One of the very few occasions in which the winner of the best film was very possibly the actual best film of the year. 1944, Casablanca possibly was too, but that's about it.
    I did like La La Land though
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250

    DavidL said:



    Not sure why you would say that. If the government does run a £400-500bn deficit this year there will be a substantial economic bounce back. Whether it will be sustainable may be another question.

    The real issue is how much of our productive economy is just going to be permanently lost. How many businesses will collapse and not open again and how many will they bring down with them? My total guess is that we will lose 8-10% of our economy. The remaining 90% may well bounce back 10% fairly quickly given that stimulus but that still leaves us short of where we were and sustainability will be an issue.

    There are different kinds of discretionary spending, aren't there? Things like meals out and haircuts are not something you'll ever catch up on - you just skipped them for a while. Something like replacinhg a leaky fridge will get done once it's practical to arrange, so the spending there has just been delayed. In general terms, the permanent damage will be in hospitality, leisure facilities; and travel: elsewhere, probably less.
    I think that on haircuts a lot of people will be cutting their own in future.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,354

    stodge said:


    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I really like my suits and ties.

    I bought some lovely new ones from Turnbull & Asser in January.

    I've nothing against a good suit - my point is I've discovered that being informally attired when the clients are equally informally attired helps get business done, issues settled and decisions made.

    It's my experience people are adapting (that word again) to home working and actually enjoying some aspects including not having to put on a "uniform".

    I've found a suit and tie can lend you more seriousness of purpose and authority when it's needed.

    As you say, depends on the client and situation.
    Yes, I believe in Liverpool, for example, the correct term for a gentleman in a suit is The Defendant.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Monkeys said:

    "Not being Trump" is a terrible strategy as if Biden looks anything like as half as risky as Trump, there's 8 years of risk attached to him, as opposed to Trump's four years of risk. There's incumbency bias for a reason ffs.

    'Not being Bush' did not work for Kerry, 'Not being Obama' did not work for Romney either.

    To beat an incumbent President you also need people to vote for you e.g. Reagan and Bill Clinton
    While that's true, the reality is that very few people actively disapproved of most Presidents. 36.8% of voters disapproved of Reagan at this stage of his Presidency. Just 37.3% disapproved of Clinton. Way out on the "most disapproved of" list is the 46.7% who disapproved of Carter.

    Trump is doing five points worse than Carter.

    Now, I agree that's not enough in itself. But you can't ignore (well, you shouldn't ignore) his monumentally high disapproval ratings.
    Carter was below 40% approval, Trump is not

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260305989787680773?s=20

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260359240667090944?s=20

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260275257308516352?s=20


    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1260214228880941056?s=20
    And Carter has an "a" is name and Trump does not.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Monkeys said:

    "Not being Trump" is a terrible strategy as if Biden looks anything like as half as risky as Trump, there's 8 years of risk attached to him, as opposed to Trump's four years of risk. There's incumbency bias for a reason ffs.

    'Not being Bush' did not work for Kerry, 'Not being Obama' did not work for Romney either.

    To beat an incumbent President you also need people to vote for you e.g. Reagan and Bill Clinton
    While that's true, the reality is that very few people actively disapproved of most Presidents. 36.8% of voters disapproved of Reagan at this stage of his Presidency. Just 37.3% disapproved of Clinton. Way out on the "most disapproved of" list is the 46.7% who disapproved of Carter.

    Trump is doing five points worse than Carter.

    Now, I agree that's not enough in itself. But you can't ignore (well, you shouldn't ignore) his monumentally high disapproval ratings.
    Assuming they stay there like that until polling day of course.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729

    Excellent review of Johnson's woeful shortcomings on PMQs. I guess the PM has grown fat on the indolence of facing Jezza every week. Time to get a grip.

    "Boris Johnson seems to have pushed PMQs further down his priority list than even Blair ever dared and that is starting to become a problem."

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-s-sloppy-pmqs-performance-is-becoming-a-problem

    Blahblahblahblahblah......
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    Biden's problem is he will be painted as the establishment. Running against the swamp-cleaner-in-chief.
    I see Trump has won a couple of congressional run-offs, were these expected? I think one was. Wonder how they match up to the recent polls
    One was a rock-solid seat in Wisconsin and the Republicans won that one easily. The one in CA (CA-25) is more interesting - was a solid Republican seat for years, went to the Democrats in 2018 but the Republican has a larger than expected lead in early voting. I think the expectation was there was a decent chance the Republicans would win it back but that it would have been tighter than it appears
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,878
    Looking forward to.... completing my conquest of ScotRail! Just two trains needed, westward and northward of Inverness!

    BTW, I actually left the confines of the house and driveway today for the first time in EIGHT WEEKS! It was merely a short walk to the pharmacy to get mum her meds, but it felt so WEIRD, honestly! Seeing places so familiar after so long, walking past the local shops and roads and bus stops. Really weird feeling, though :)

    @eadric would hopefully approve of me wearing gloves and a surgical mask upon entering the pharmacy. Saw that they had yellow markings on the floor indicating 2 metre gaps, and that the counter was heavily modified with a bank-style glass or perspex screen with a small window where they hand over the prescription. I went late in the evening, and there was only one other bloke already waiting or browing possibly, but comfortably over 2 metres away.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    The reason to vote against Trump is because you believe in the primacy of the US Constitution. You believe in the separation of powers. You believe that the power of the President should be limited by the courts and by Congress.

    You recognise that, over time, it is limited and constitutional government that has delivered prosperity, freedom and security to the people, and that cult of personality and unrestrained executive power does not.

    Biden was pretty shit as a Senator. He was a nobody as VP. He's suffering from the early stages of dementia.

    But at least he will not dismantle the very things that has made the US great over the past two centuries.
    You're assuming people will think deeply and vote rationally and logically.

    Why on earth do you think they would do that with a culture war roaring blood red in tooth and claw?
    I have this argument with my wife all the time. I say that - to his supporters - Donald Trump is standing up for a segment of the population that has long felt ignored. And when you think someone is on your side, you're willing to forgive them a lot.

    The problem for Republicans, though, is that demographic is nowhere near enough on its own.

    President Trump assembled a coalition of the religious right who were worried about abortion, small town America, those negatively impacted by globalisation, and capital owners who wanted low taxes. And then he added to those a large number of people who didn't like and didn't trust Hillary Clinton.

    I don't think President Trump has expanded his constituency, or at least if he has, he's not done it by much. The rust belt - even before CV-19 - was an economic laggard. And demographics make states like Arizona look ever tenuously Republican.

    This year will be very interesting, and I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that it may not be 2016 repeated.
    It pays a bit not to be distracted by the demogrtaphics argument. For example, Hispanics get lumped into a block that is then termed solidly Democrat. But there are a lot of Hispanics who consider themselves white (the Cuban exiles are one example and Latin America is a hotbed of snobbery when it comes to the amount of native American blood somebody has).
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    Pace posts about polling from others, Trump seems to have lost the haters (eg those who hated Hillary & Trump in 2016 broke for Trump). I can see all sorts of problems with Biden as a candidate but I'd find it difficult to hate him.
    Well, when you look at some of the videos floating around of Biden and his behaviour with teenage girls (and the reaction on the girls' faces), I;m not sure how many people would trust him with their daughters.....
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898



    I see Trump has won a couple of congressional run-offs, were these expected? I think one was. Wonder how they match up to the recent polls

    To put some meat on those bones, Tom Tiffany won the Special Election for Wisconsin 7th. Trump won the State by one point in 2016 but won the 7th District, a rural conservative area, by 20 points, Tiffany won last night by 14 points so make of that what you will.

    The better performance came in California where the GOP captured California 25th which includes places like Palmdale and Santa Clarita.

    Contrary to Trump's twitter nonsense, it has been traditionally a Republican District. After boundary changes (or "redistricting"), it was Republican from 1993 until the Democrat Katie Hill won in November 2018 defeating the incumbent Republican by nine points.

    Last night the Republican won by 12 points so a very good result for the GOP in a District which Clinton won by 6 points in 2016.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,317
    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,851
    FPT - The best Tory attack line on Starmar should be emphasising his background as a human rights lawyer. There's a strong feeling out there - in many ways articulated by Lord Sumption - that the human rights culture has gone too far.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,905
    Monkeys said:

    On topic: We have a functioning government AND a functioning opposition! The nation is spoilt.

    A more or less functioning opposition perhaps - I don't think they are used to it yet.

    But what makes you think we have a functioning government?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    MrEd said:

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    You see, so many posters come back with "not being Trump" is enough and then question voters sanity if they disagree.

    That's exactly my point. Trump wasn't mathematical fluke: he won for a reason.

    If I was a US floating voter I might think well, Trump is a twat but better the devil you know and if Biden can't be bothered, then..
    Biden's problem is he will be painted as the establishment. Running against the swamp-cleaner-in-chief.
    I see Trump has won a couple of congressional run-offs, were these expected? I think one was. Wonder how they match up to the recent polls
    One was a rock-solid seat in Wisconsin and the Republicans won that one easily. The one in CA (CA-25) is more interesting - was a solid Republican seat for years, went to the Democrats in 2018 but the Republican has a larger than expected lead in early voting. I think the expectation was there was a decent chance the Republicans would win it back but that it would have been tighter than it appears
    Trump should seriously look into having the entire November election by mail...

    Jennifer Medina 1:17 AM ET

    Tracking data shows a significant voting gap along generational lines. Roughly 56% of voters 65 and older returned a mail ballot. Just 19% of those younger than 35 did so.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,489
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    Oh my God, that's terrible Cyclefree.

    My deepest condolences. My thoughts are with you xx
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Very sorry to hear that @Cyclefree. Thoughts with your family and you at this difficult time.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    https://twitter.com/meghamohan/status/1260640926239797249?s=19

    Erhh they have had $100 millions of funding. I think the issue is more like bugger all people read it for the news & they haven't found a model that isn't bases on clickbait advertising.
  • How does one access the new mobile site?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    Good grief, I'm so sorry to hear that @Cyclefree - your nephew will be in my thoughts and prayers.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    Another dreadful news day for your family Cyclefree

    And my wife and I will say a prayer for your nephew, his and your family tonight

    Condolences and thoughts to you all
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,758
    I know that ministers must take ultimate responsibility but I would have thought that the advice was actually a civil service responsibility with ministers "signing off" in a forma sense. No doubt it would have been better if someone had said - "hang on the advice is now out of date, it should be changed". Was it not questioned by anyone at any level?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    Awful news. So sorry to hear it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217
    stodge said:



    I see Trump has won a couple of congressional run-offs, were these expected? I think one was. Wonder how they match up to the recent polls

    To put some meat on those bones, Tom Tiffany won the Special Election for Wisconsin 7th. Trump won the State by one point in 2016 but won the 7th District, a rural conservative area, by 20 points, Tiffany won last night by 14 points so make of that what you will.

    The better performance came in California where the GOP captured California 25th which includes places like Palmdale and Santa Clarita.

    Contrary to Trump's twitter nonsense, it has been traditionally a Republican District. After boundary changes (or "redistricting"), it was Republican from 1993 until the Democrat Katie Hill won in November 2018 defeating the incumbent Republican by nine points.

    Last night the Republican won by 12 points so a very good result for the GOP in a District which Clinton won by 6 points in 2016.

    The Republicans also benefited from a spectacularly poor decision for the Los Angeles Mayor to announce that the lockdown would likely last until the end of July.

    If you wanted to upset the average Los Angelino, that was pretty effective.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    If something has an R of 3 over a two week period and one person has it, then it'll take months before anyone notices, especially if large numbers of people have just mild symptoms.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413

    dixiedean said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Cos he only needs to be slightly less bad than Hilary. She very nearly won.
    And I'm not Trump has improved greatly as a slogan since 2016.
    I think that may well prove to be a phoney assumption.

    It's certainly a lazy one. There's all sorts of things that could go wrong with it.
    Indeed. It was a somewhat flippant comment.
    They are 2 seriously poor candidates. I struggle to think of a worse pair.
    But one of them will almost certainly barring the extraordinary have to win.
    It is 2 men running from a bear. And, as of now, Sleepy Joe is in front.
  • SockySocky Posts: 404

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    I understand one theory is that the original Wuhan flu is actually less infectuous than the London Lurgy variation?
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    It may take a while for a decent quick antibody test but when it comes I would not be surprised if the figure was over 30% of the population
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    Seems like at least we got something right:

    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1260658353069453313
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    edited May 2020
    MrEd said:

    ydoethur said:

    eadric said:

    Bleak reading if you can't face four more years of Trump.


    "The 2020 election, Kreiss predicted, will be “a big test of whether empirical reality will outweigh motivated partisan reasoning.” "

    "If the test Kreiss anticipates does determine who our next president is, and if the digital world becomes a key battleground, as it certainly will, Democrats believe Joe Biden and his campaign need to be better prepared."

    “Biden’s first virtual online chat got 5,000 people. Just one with Lara Trump gets 945,000.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/opinion/trump-digital-campaign.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    Who would want to chat with weird, demented Uncle Joe?

    Doesn't mean people won't vote for him
    The trouble is I'm not seeing much of his energy yet or his alternative vision for America.

    At the moment it seems to be "I'm not Trump." and "I'm not as bad as Hillary."

    Ok, good starts, but why does he think that's enough?
    Well, in fairness, ‘not being Trump’ should really be an absolute clincher.

    Unfortunately it does rather presuppose a majority of Americans in states amounting to 270 votes are sane.
    Pace posts about polling from others, Trump seems to have lost the haters (eg those who hated Hillary & Trump in 2016 broke for Trump). I can see all sorts of problems with Biden as a candidate but I'd find it difficult to hate him.
    Well, when you look at some of the videos floating around of Biden and his behaviour with teenage girls (and the reaction on the girls' faces), I;m not sure how many people would trust him with their daughters.....
    Not to get whatabouty, but I don't think Biden or Trump would get brownie points for trust in mentoring young women, or Brownies for that matter.

    In any case I thought the hate thing was interesting because it contains irrationality. A lot of people 'hated' Hillary for not always clear reasons, I honestly don't know how Biden rates for the hate factor in the US.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    It may take a while for a decent quick antibody test but when it comes I would not be surprised if the figure was over 30% of the population
    I believe the 10% / 4% figure is from lab based antibody testing which is accurate.

    And the home kits from Roche are now accurate and being produced in the millions. I believe the UK should start getting them in the next few weeks.
  • SockySocky Posts: 404

    I know that ministers must take ultimate responsibility but I would have thought that the advice was actually a civil service responsibility with ministers "signing off" in a forma sense. No doubt it would have been better if someone had said - "hang on the advice is now out of date, it should be changed". Was it not questioned by anyone at any level?

    Sir K might want to be careful that one of these "forensic" questions does not turn out to be a petard under the NHS.

    If there is an enquiry after all this it may turn out that the politicians are the least at fault.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    There's the thing - nobody really knows how many have or have had it.

    Perhaps as many as fifty thousand have died though there are only 230,000 cases reported. If you take the official death toll that looks a very high mortality rate and far higher than most experts have suggested.

    The ratio of unreported to reported cases remains elusive. If there are 230,000 cases yet 20 unreported cases for every case that would mean 4.6 million infected which would be a long way from any notion of herd immunity.

    If you assume the fifty thousand dead and the 20:1 unreported to reported case ratio you get a mortality figure of 1.09% which seems to echo some of the expert thinking but the 4.6 million infections will include a significant majority with very mild symptoms and the asymptomatic.

    I have no clue as to whether that is anywhere the truth - my concern is the experts don't really know either.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    stodge said:

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    There's the thing - nobody really knows how many have or have had it.

    Witty stated the other day, from the sampling they are doing it looks like ~10% in London, 4% nationwide. Now it does take time for antibody to form and so will go up a bit, but the Spanish sampling shows similar amounts re Madrid / nationwide, with similar amount of deaths.

    If this is true state of play, I find it all very depressing. We are basically screwed until we get a vaccine.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    HYUFD said:

    2016 Oscar winner Moonlight on Film4 at 9pm

    One of the very few occasions in which the winner of the best film was very possibly the actual best film of the year. 1944, Casablanca possibly was too, but that's about it.

    Just going from the 70's- there are a few contenders when the best film won IMO...this is from me decaying memory....

    1971- Godfather
    1972-French Connection
    1974- Godfather 2
    1975- Cuckoos Nest
    1986- Platoon
    1991- Unforgiven
    1993- Schindlers List
    2000- Gladiator
    2013-Birdman


  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900


    Witty stated the other day, from the sampling they are doing it looks like ~10% in London, 4% nationwide. Now it does take time for antibody to form and so will go up a bit, but the Spanish sampling shows similar amounts re Madrid / nationwide, with similar amount of deaths.

    Both also look rather similar to the much-critiqued Imperial model :-) Both Spain and UK around 5.5%ish now.

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,902
    How awful Cyclefree
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    Andrew said:


    Witty stated the other day, from the sampling they are doing it looks like ~10% in London, 4% nationwide. Now it does take time for antibody to form and so will go up a bit, but the Spanish sampling shows similar amounts re Madrid / nationwide, with similar amount of deaths.

    Both also look rather similar to the much-critiqued Imperial model :-) Both Spain and UK around 5.5%ish now.

    London might have a bit more partial immunity, it's halving time is the fastest of anywhere in the UK.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    I am slightly confused how coronavirus is this highly infectious disease, increasing evidence that it was in the UK earlier than the first reports, but bugger all of us have had it.

    It may take a while for a decent quick antibody test but when it comes I would not be surprised if the figure was over 30% of the population

    So about 20 million of the UK population has had Covid 19....
    .
    I'm glad you are not doing my tax returns comrade.....
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    The way one chap spread it so much from one night out in South Korea makes me think when it was running riot here in January and February it must have infected millions.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    Socky said:

    I know that ministers must take ultimate responsibility but I would have thought that the advice was actually a civil service responsibility with ministers "signing off" in a forma sense. No doubt it would have been better if someone had said - "hang on the advice is now out of date, it should be changed". Was it not questioned by anyone at any level?

    Sir K might want to be careful that one of these "forensic" questions does not turn out to be a petard under the NHS.

    If there is an enquiry after all this it may turn out that the politicians are the least at fault.
    Someone will have to be accountable for our shocking failures......
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 757
    Andrew said:

    Seems like at least we got something right:

    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1260658353069453313

    Is that the Guardian becoming, momentarily and unconsciously, anti-immigration in sentiment? How about that. During a pandemic!
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 757
    Socky said:

    I know that ministers must take ultimate responsibility but I would have thought that the advice was actually a civil service responsibility with ministers "signing off" in a forma sense. No doubt it would have been better if someone had said - "hang on the advice is now out of date, it should be changed". Was it not questioned by anyone at any level?

    Sir K might want to be careful that one of these "forensic" questions does not turn out to be a petard under the NHS.

    If there is an enquiry after all this it may turn out that the politicians are the least at fault.
    Jeremy Hunt, chairing the Health Select Committee that will investigate this, will make it all transparent. His intentions already are.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    Very sorry to hear that Cyclefree. Best wishes to you and your family
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,805
    stodge said:



    I see Trump has won a couple of congressional run-offs, were these expected? I think one was. Wonder how they match up to the recent polls

    To put some meat on those bones, Tom Tiffany won the Special Election for Wisconsin 7th. Trump won the State by one point in 2016 but won the 7th District, a rural conservative area, by 20 points, Tiffany won last night by 14 points so make of that what you will.

    The better performance came in California where the GOP captured California 25th which includes places like Palmdale and Santa Clarita.

    Contrary to Trump's twitter nonsense, it has been traditionally a Republican District. After boundary changes (or "redistricting"), it was Republican from 1993 until the Democrat Katie Hill won in November 2018 defeating the incumbent Republican by nine points.

    Last night the Republican won by 12 points so a very good result for the GOP in a District which Clinton won by 6 points in 2016.

    So I am no expert on this stuff. Far from it in fact but I have been following a bit and although Trump has called the California result and although it is probably correct it isn't certain. About 25% of the vote isn't in yet and won't be until Friday as there was a significant 'mail in' and these are expected to break for the Democrats (I can't remember why).

    The lead is considered big enough to be enough but nobody has declared a win or conceded other than Trump.

    There is a fear this could happen in November in close races and there are then claims of vote rigging by Trump as results are reversed in the following days by late mail in votes.

    OK so this is what I have been reading and it may all be twaddle.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    edited May 2020
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    I’m truly sorry to hear that, Cyclefree.
    That is terrible.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    Many condolences Ms. Cyclefree. What a desperate situation.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Cyclefree said:

    This is continuing to be a shitty horrible year.

    My nephew, the youngest son of my husband’s eldest brother, has died. In his early 30’s. By his own hand. He was depressed; his parents tried to help, despite having to self-isolate themselves. To no avail. They are devastated.

    How does a parent cope with this? What possible consolation can be given?

    It is the third death in as many weeks of someone close to us, two of them an indirect result of this virus.

    Please, God, no more of this.

    For those of you who do, spare a thought tonight in your prayers for him and his parents and those who loved him.

    All I long for when this is over is to see and hug my sons. It is three months since I have seen them face to face.

    Sorry to hear it. I don't pray but you & they have my thoughts.
This discussion has been closed.