politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Klobuchar sees big move to her in the WH2020 Dem VP betting

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Klobuchar sees big move to her in the WH2020 Dem VP betting

By far the most active political betting market at the moment is on who will be the Democratic nomination for VP – a job, given Biden’s age, could be a huge stepping stone to becoming President.

Read the full story here

edmundintokyo

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

edmundintokyo

Just to contradict my previous post, an interesting argument that it might be Kamala on r/neoliberal:
https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/gni8t5/using_wikipedia_edits_to_predict_the_vp_pick/

The story is that Hillary's pick of Tim Kaine was foreshadowed by an avalanche of Wikipedia edits.

There's a similar storm of edits all done by a particular incredibly dedicated user, who works tirelessly to rewrite Kamala's page in flattering ways. This user has hardly any history of contributing anything else to Wikipedia, except that previously he was really into fixing up the article on Joe Biden.

DecrepiterJohnL

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Nigelb

From The Hill:
Biden’s decision on a running mate is still likely weeks away. The former vice president told donors at a virtual fundraiser late last month that he expects the vetting process to be completed by July and that a final decision will be made shortly after that....

DecrepiterJohnL

edmundintokyo said:

Just to contradict my previous post, an interesting argument that it might be Kamala on r/neoliberal:
https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/gni8t5/using_wikipedia_edits_to_predict_the_vp_pick/

The story is that Hillary's pick of Tim Kaine was foreshadowed by an avalanche of Wikipedia edits.

There's a similar storm of edits all done by a particular incredibly dedicated user, who works tirelessly to rewrite Kamala's page in flattering ways. This user has hardly any history of contributing anything else to Wikipedia, except that previously he was really into fixing up the article on Joe Biden.

So Hillary Clinton is still in the running?

DecrepiterJohnL

Joe Biden said last night vetting had not started but his team was contacting a list of candidates to see if they are interested.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-22/biden-says-he-doesn-t-yet-know-who-he-ll-pick-as-running-mate

Bloomberg adds others quoted in the betting:
Others believed to be in contention are California Senator Kamala Harris, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. And earlier Thursday, Florida Representative Val Demings said she was on Biden’s “short list.”

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham said she has been asked for references, and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer told NBC’s “Today Show” on Tuesday that she’d had opening conversations with the campaign about joining the ticket.

DecrepiterJohnL

Nigelb said:

From The Hill:
Biden’s decision on a running mate is still likely weeks away. The former vice president told donors at a virtual fundraiser late last month that he expects the vetting process to be completed by July and that a final decision will be made shortly after that....

So adding the two stories together, we should count Wikipedia edits in June or July, or "summer" for short.

Nigelb

This is very good news; the ‘reinfection’ accounts almost certainly aren’t reinfection.

https://twitter.com/tmprowell/status/1263647206432702465

DecrepiterJohnL

OT why did we start calling masks "face masks"?

noneoftheabove

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

How big a burden is it for a VP candidate to run instead of the candidate? Id say if its just cause Biden is gaffe prone/senile (take your choice) its pretty big, especially against Trump who will say she couldnt even beat a gaffe prone/senile sleepy Joe and stole it away from Sanders. I think that will cut through with a couple of % which is all he needs.

If something more serious happened to Biden the dynamics might be different, Trump would probably play the same lines but the public might have more sympathy.

tlg86

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1263717317504106498

Fysics_Teacher

DecrepiterJohnL said:

OT why did we start calling masks "face masks"?

To distinguish them from the sort of mask that Zorro wears, one that covers the top half of your face perhaps?

DavidL

DecrepiterJohnL said:

OT why did we start calling masks "face masks"?

Hmm... Are they not different things? A mask generally covers the eyes to conceal identity, however notionally. A face mask covers the mouth and nose, normally leaving the eyes and identity clear.

OldKingCole

DavidL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

OT why did we start calling masks "face masks"?

Hmm... Are they not different things? A mask generally covers the eyes to conceal identity, however notionally. A face mask covers the mouth and nose, normally leaving the eyes and identity clear.

A 'death mask' covers the whole face though. TBH I don't think you'll ever get the English-speaking world to change to 'mouth mask'

And Good Morning everyone! Not as bright and sunny here today, although that may well be a yet!

edmundintokyo

OT research shows masks are a little bit helpful in stopping you getting the rona, and very helpful in stopping you spreading it. [*]
https://fightcovid19.hku.hk/hku-hamster-research-shows-masks-effective-in-preventing-covid-19-transmission/

[*] If you're a hamster

noneoftheabove

edmundintokyo said:

OT research shows masks are a little bit helpful in stopping you getting the rona, and very helpful in stopping you spreading it. [*]
https://fightcovid19.hku.hk/hku-hamster-research-shows-masks-effective-in-preventing-covid-19-transmission/

[*] If you're a hamster

Apparently (for humans) it is bad to be behind a mask wearer as there is a strong backwards jet produced.

So on the tube, behind the non mask wearer and infront of the mask wearer is prime real estate.

IanB2

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

edmundintokyo

noneoftheabove said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

How big a burden is it for a VP candidate to run instead of the candidate? Id say if its just cause Biden is gaffe prone/senile (take your choice) its pretty big, especially against Trump who will say she couldnt even beat a gaffe prone/senile sleepy Joe and stole it away from Sanders. I think that will cut through with a couple of % which is all he needs.

If something more serious happened to Biden the dynamics might be different, Trump would probably play the same lines but the public might have more sympathy.

I think it's almost unthinkable that he loses the nomination over gaffes, or even a scandal unless it's unbelievably bad. The issue is just health. So the situation depends when it happens:
1) Before the VP pick: (Biden-dominated) delegates pick a heavy hitter, VP choice probably not relevant
2) After the VP pick but before the convention: (Biden-dominated) delegates probably pick the VP
3) After the convention but before the election: Probably the VP, Biden's name may still be on ballot papers
4) After the election but before the inauguration: In theory electors could pick someone else but they almost definitely pick the VP
5) After the inauguration: Definitely the VP

noneoftheabove

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

The cabinet really arent very bright. Man who had covid19, and wasnt far from death from it, has become more cautious, especially around covid 19 shocker!

noneoftheabove

edmundintokyo said:

noneoftheabove said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

How big a burden is it for a VP candidate to run instead of the candidate? Id say if its just cause Biden is gaffe prone/senile (take your choice) its pretty big, especially against Trump who will say she couldnt even beat a gaffe prone/senile sleepy Joe and stole it away from Sanders. I think that will cut through with a couple of % which is all he needs.

If something more serious happened to Biden the dynamics might be different, Trump would probably play the same lines but the public might have more sympathy.

I think it's almost unthinkable that he loses the nomination over gaffes, or even a scandal unless it's unbelievably bad. The issue is just health. So the situation depends when it happens:
1) Before the VP pick: (Biden-dominated) delegates pick a heavy hitter, VP choice probably not relevant
2) After the VP pick but before the convention: (Biden-dominated) delegates probably pick the VP
3) After the convention but before the election: Probably the VP, Biden's name may still be on ballot papers
4) After the election but before the inauguration: In theory electors could pick someone else but they almost definitely pick the VP
5) After the inauguration: Definitely the VP

If its just health I am struggling to see the value in 4/1 vs 250/1

Isnt that equivalent to a 4% chance of a very serious health issues in a few months assuming they are 50/50 to win the contest.

CorrectHorseBattery

Nigel Phillips from Perranporth asks...

Nigel, a design manager from Perranporth, said he voted Conservative last time because of the previous Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn. He’s asked why people like him should vote for Labour now.

Keir Starmer: “We have to be the party of opportunity and recognise that people want to get on and have a decent holiday and their tax is being used efficiently. We’ve been good on the solidarity bit but not the opportunity bit.

“We need to emphasise that the Labour Party isn’t against opportunity and that tax is used on things are necessary and efficient.”

Keir did a Q&A last night: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/labour-leader-keir-starmer-faces-4154272

I think he gets what Labour needs to do.

Philip_Thompson

noneoftheabove said:

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

The cabinet really arent very bright. Man who had covid19, and wasnt far from death from it, has become more cautious, especially around covid 19 shocker!

Indeed he knows better than most how serious this is.

Plus the more we eliminate this virus now while R is below 1, the more life can resume to normal rapidly.

I think businesses that have survived this lockdown to the point of being viable still can more easily survive another couple of weeks restrictions before they get back to normal, than they will be able to cope with a second lockdown.

Worst case scenario is a second peak over winter during the winter flu season. We need this virus as gone from the country as possible BEFORE everyone starts coughing and spluttering seasonally this winter.

So drive it low now during what's left of Spring, then enjoy summer and get back to normal without a resurgence.

Philip_Thompson

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Nigel Phillips from Perranporth asks...

Nigel, a design manager from Perranporth, said he voted Conservative last time because of the previous Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn. He’s asked why people like him should vote for Labour now.

Keir Starmer: “We have to be the party of opportunity and recognise that people want to get on and have a decent holiday and their tax is being used efficiently. We’ve been good on the solidarity bit but not the opportunity bit.

“We need to emphasise that the Labour Party isn’t against opportunity and that tax is used on things are necessary and efficient.”

Keir did a Q&A last night: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/labour-leader-keir-starmer-faces-4154272

I think he gets what Labour needs to do.

I hope for the sake of the nation if he gets in that he means that.

We will see if Labour are prepared to make hard choices, say "no" to some things or just view splashing the cash as the answer to every problem like last time.

Scott_xP

Philip_Thompson said:

We will see if Labour are prepared to make hard choices, say "no" to some things or just view splashing the cash as the answer to every problem like last time.

Like BoZo is doing

Scott_xP

NerysHughes

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

Did everyone not say that he had realeased lockdown too quickly last time? Scotland and Wales still have not removed any restrictions to the original lockdown.

StuartDickson

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

I think the main problem with English politics is not actually the three crap parties, but Whitehall. Good luck sorting that mess out.

DecrepiterJohnL

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

Philip_Thompson

Scott_xP said:

Philip_Thompson said:

We will see if Labour are prepared to make hard choices, say "no" to some things or just view splashing the cash as the answer to every problem like last time.

Like BoZo is doing

If he was splashing the cash at every problem there'd have been no reason to u turn over the NHS surcharge.

U turning when there's major public demand or spending when there's major need to do so isn't the same as preemptively jumping on every bandwagon before it even reaches you.

Philip_Thompson

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

CarlottaVance

https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1263731791829127168?s=21

guybrush

StuartDickson said:

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

I think the main problem with English politics is not actually the three crap parties, but Whitehall. Good luck sorting that mess out.

I must admit, the line being parroted by the Telegraph and their fellow travellers is really starting to wind me up. The transparent agenda, personality based stories over serious analysis. Add to that a parting blow against the Civil Service, for good measure.

Maybe the Germans, Danes, Itallians are at different stages of the pandemic. Maybe they have different mitigation measures in place? Jeez.

algarkirk

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1263731791829127168?s=21

They don't really get it. It is essential to the system that there is multi agency confusion, otherwise they would not be able to blame each other while truth gets mislaid in mystifying complexity. This is such standard practice that they probably don't know they are doing it and that it is obvious to onlookers.

Scott_xP

https://twitter.com/steveswannBBC/status/1263734385536307202

Nigelb

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1263731791829127168?s=21

That comment was in the context of testing, and the attempts of his lab to help. He said that had government included independent labs at the outset, we could have had much more capacity much earlier (and might not have had to abandon track and trace).

Also, "Is there a strategy ? Maybe there is, but I don't know what it is.".

Brandon Lewis, asked to comment immediately after, was utterly pathetic.

Scott_xP

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1263734494340800512

algarkirk

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/steveswannBBC/status/1263734385536307202

I am trying to think of a case where 'very clear' in this sort of context does not mean 'very muddled'. At the moment I can't.

algarkirk

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1263734494340800512

Vital to the system that the answer is complex and confusing.

SandyRentool

Morning all.

Aren't we due an update on R today?

I'm going for 0.7 to 1.0

Philip_Thompson

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/steveswannBBC/status/1263734385536307202

Here's a strange idea. How about waiting for the announcement?

Benpointer

SandyRentool said:

Morning all.

Aren't we due an update on R today?

I'm going for 0.7 to 1.0

I'm going for between Q and S.

Charles

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Nigel Phillips from Perranporth asks...

Nigel, a design manager from Perranporth, said he voted Conservative last time because of the previous Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn. He’s asked why people like him should vote for Labour now.

Keir Starmer: “We have to be the party of opportunity and recognise that people want to get on and have a decent holiday and their tax is being used efficiently. We’ve been good on the solidarity bit but not the opportunity bit.

“We need to emphasise that the Labour Party isn’t against opportunity and that tax is used on things are necessary and efficient.”

Keir did a Q&A last night: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/labour-leader-keir-starmer-faces-4154272

I think he gets what Labour needs to do.

What they need to SAY

Let’s see the policies first

Benpointer

O/T

Apologies for posting this link to the Oxford Dictionary of Family Names again but for anyone interested in ancestry / family history this fascinating resource is currently free online, until Monday apparently.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199677764.001.0001/acref-9780199677764

CarlottaVance

Nigelb said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1263731791829127168?s=21

That comment was in the context of testing, and the attempts of his lab to help. He said that had government included independent labs at the outset, we could have had much more capacity much earlier (and might not have had to abandon track and trace).

Also, "Is there a strategy ? Maybe there is, but I don't know what it is.".

Brandon Lewis, asked to comment immediately after, was utterly pathetic.

Agree - I think the fault lies with PHE (and their Scottish, Welsh and NI equivalents) going for a centralised “command and control” testing model which was slow to get started (but has, eventually, in England at least, been capable of substantial ramping up.

One thing the post pandemic inquiry will have to ponder is the wisdom of that decision - which may not yet be clear.

The responsibility for that lies with the respective U.K., Scotland, Wales (in particular) and NI governments.

Scott_xP

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Charles

NerysHughes said:

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

Did everyone not say that he had realeased lockdown too quickly last time? Scotland and Wales still have not removed any restrictions to the original lockdown.

Regardless of what he does the media will attack him.

Benpointer

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/steveswannBBC/status/1263734385536307202

Here's a strange idea. How about waiting for the announcement?

How about politicians not trailing their speeches before they make them?

AlastairMeeks

noneoftheabove said:

IanB2 said:

Italians are back in their piazzas, Germans in their car-making factories and Danes in their schools – with none seeing a resurgence of the virus. All this raises the stakes for Britain. Hunkering down while others are exporting risks deepening the economic damage, with UK firms losing ground to rivals. But the Prime Minister, who arrived in office with boldness that struck his rivals as borderline craziness, is now more cautious than almost any of his fellow ministers. It’s something that baffles many of them.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/will-pm-explain-public-inquiry-left-lockdown-late/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590093506

The fear, amongst some, is that the Whitehall machine is still on panic stations: too fixated with the first wave of Covid to notice the knock-on effects.

The cabinet really arent very bright. Man who had covid19, and wasnt far from death from it, has become more cautious, especially around covid 19 shocker!

Prime Minister whose self-image is built around being adored doesn't want to make unpopular decisions shocker.

Benpointer

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

edmundintokyo

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

Based on the theory of efficient markets, I would say that for reasons that are not yet clear to us, the answer must somehow be Hillary Clinton.

AlastairMeeks

On topic, who leaked this? The answer to that question would hint at any value.

I'm green on Amy Klobuchar and more likely to lay her at current prices than back her.

AlastairMeeks

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.

Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.

Martin_Kinsella

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?

Scott_xP

Martin_Kinsella said:

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

There is a built in ignore function.

It requires you, the reader, to see the name of the poster, and then ignore the post.

Sadly it does require some level of skill to operate...

AlastairMeeks

Martin_Kinsella said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?

That's a substantive news story.

And please post more (this applies to lurkers and other mostly-lurkers too). The site is at its best when it has a wide range of views.

rkrkrk

Martin_Kinsella said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?

I actually find it quite helpful. It breaks up the text to have these tweets embedded, and as I'm not on Twitter it's useful to have a curated snapshot of politics related stuff -> particularly when people publish polls I think.

another_richard

algarkirk said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1263731791829127168?s=21

They don't really get it. It is essential to the system that there is multi agency confusion, otherwise they would not be able to blame each other while truth gets mislaid in mystifying complexity. This is such standard practice that they probably don't know they are doing it and that it is obvious to onlookers.

Its how the alphabet soup operates.

DecrepiterJohnL

AlastairMeeks said:

On topic, who leaked this? The answer to that question would hint at any value.

I'm green on Amy Klobuchar and more likely to lay her at current prices than back her.

Leaked might be the wrong word. See my 6.47 am BST post where any number of candidates have acknowledged preliminary approaches.

another_richard

Benpointer said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.

By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.

kinabalu

Interesting update on Hydroxychloroquine -

President Donald Trump - who is taking it - is now testing not merely negative for the virus but VERY negative. He's testing as negative as it is humanly possible to test.

One in the eye for the skeptics there.

another_richard

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Nigel Phillips from Perranporth asks...

Nigel, a design manager from Perranporth, said he voted Conservative last time because of the previous Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn. He’s asked why people like him should vote for Labour now.

Keir Starmer: “We have to be the party of opportunity and recognise that people want to get on and have a decent holiday and their tax is being used efficiently. We’ve been good on the solidarity bit but not the opportunity bit.

“We need to emphasise that the Labour Party isn’t against opportunity and that tax is used on things are necessary and efficient.”

Keir did a Q&A last night: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/labour-leader-keir-starmer-faces-4154272

I think he gets what Labour needs to do.

If Starmer thinks Labour have been 'good on the solidarity bit' then he's got a lot to learn.

Selebian

Benpointer said:

SandyRentool said:

Morning all.

Aren't we due an update on R today?

I'm going for 0.7 to 1.0

I'm going for between Q and S.

4.0 only came out a month ago, I'd be surprised if there's another update quite so soon.

(very niche joke, though probably some on here will get it)

bigjohnowls

kinabalu said:

Interesting update on Hydroxychloroquine -

President Donald Trump - who is taking it - is now testing not merely negative for the virus but VERY negative. He's testing as negative as it is humanly possible to test.

One in the eye for the skeptics there.

Does it make you orange though?

Perhaps bleach would cure that.

Malmesbury

AlastairMeeks said:

On topic, who leaked this? The answer to that question would hint at any value.

I'm green on Amy Klobuchar and more likely to lay her at current prices than back her.

I think that you will find that Biden is vetting all the possible candidates. I can't see anything more than that in any vaguely reputable story. I believe that there are background (off the record briefing) stories that he will chose the VP slot in a June or July.

Beibheirli_C

rkrkrk said:

Martin_Kinsella said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?

I actually find it quite helpful. It breaks up the text to have these tweets embedded, and as I'm not on Twitter it's useful to have a curated snapshot of politics related stuff -> particularly when people publish polls I think.

Never mind Twitter! Bl**dy forriners comin' here an' nickin' our jobs and ignorin quarantine. It's a bl**dy disgrace!!!!!!!!!

bigjohnowls

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

Malmesbury

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.

By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.

One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.

Philip_Thompson

AlastairMeeks said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.

Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.

In which case backing the two candidates seems like the clever bet.

If you win you win. If you lose its voided.

isam

AlastairMeeks said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.

Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.

I wonder if Bookies should be able to use a Rule 4 if one of the contenders passed away, same as if a horse withdraws from a race.

rottenborough

Anyone know what's the position with MOTs? I thought they had been deferred until later in the year, but just had a text from my garage saying mine is due next month.

Beibheirli_C

Benpointer said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

And how are they going to do that with thousands of bookings already cancelled and travel firms in mothballs? Not to mention the airline industry with all its aircraft laid up and crews out of currency on flight time?

Take a steamer, old boy? Port Out, Starboard Home?

rottenborough

Malmesbury said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.

By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.

One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.

Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.

At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.

Mexicanpete

bigjohnowls said:

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

Hasn't everyone except Johnson and Hancock already dismissed the testing reporting as something of a bad taste farce?

Philip_Thompson

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Sounds reasonable to me.

I'm not a farmer or food picker but it's my understanding that food pickers who come in tend to live and operate in rural communities, distanced from the cities etc where transmission is a bigger issue.

Plus it's my understanding that the virus doesn't live on food for long so not going to be passed on through the food chain.

Whereas people coming in to work in the community in a town or city is much more of a threat.

IanB2

rottenborough said:

Anyone know what's the position with MOTs? I thought they had been deferred until later in the year, but just had a text from my garage saying mine is due next month.

MOTs due after the end of March have been extended by six months, with the owners continuing to be responsible for maintaining roadworthiness

IanB2

bigjohnowls said:

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

As I was saying yesterday. And counting failed, rejected and repeat tests, as well as the up to 30,000 daily being done for medical research purposes rather than on 'live' patients

Norm

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

I don't think there was a real choice on that. Many of these pickers live in mobile homes on farms and the idea of them sitting around for a fortnight wouldn't wash

OldKingCole

kinabalu said:

Interesting update on Hydroxychloroquine -

President Donald Trump - who is taking it - is now testing not merely negative for the virus but VERY negative. He's testing as negative as it is humanly possible to test.

One in the eye for the skeptics there.

Below Absolute Zero?

Malmesbury

rottenborough said:

Malmesbury said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.

By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.

One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.

Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.

At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.

One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.

Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.

rottenborough

Norm said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

I don't think there was a real choice on that. Many of these pickers live in mobile homes on farms and the idea of them sitting around for a fortnight wouldn't wash

Let's hope they wash.

Philip_Thompson

IanB2 said:

bigjohnowls said:

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

As I was saying yesterday. And counting failed, rejected and repeat tests, as well as the up to 30,000 daily being done for medical research purposes rather than on 'live' patients

Why wouldn't you count medical research purpose tests? It's part of the response too, an important part.

If there's not many live patients to test (and availability is there for everyone who wants it now it's not being restricted) then what else should be done? Ignore medical research?

TOPPING

Martin_Kinsella said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?

Excellent. You can go back to lurking then if that's your contribution.

For those of us trying to keep one or two plates spinning I find Scott's twitter links hugely helpful plus, as I noted yesterday, he was pointing us to the likely govt u-turn on NHS exemptions while everyone was occupied elsewhere, and receiving flak for doing so.

On a practical level, like many I suspect, PB is just about my main source for news and often if I am just coming to the site (as just now), I scroll down quickly and stop at the twitter pastings because I know that will update me instantly.

So get yourself back to lurking and leave people to post what they want to post. Doesn't stop you from being able to ignore those posts.

TOPPING

isam said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.

Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.

I wonder if Bookies should be able to use a Rule 4 if one of the contenders passed away, same as if a horse withdraws from a race.

I'm sure, for better or for worse, if punters are laying an 80-yr old (!) to take office then somewhere in their calculations is the possibility that they might not make it to the election.

Not many 20-yr old geldings in 5f sprints...

LostPassword

IanB2 said:

rottenborough said:

Anyone know what's the position with MOTs? I thought they had been deferred until later in the year, but just had a text from my garage saying mine is due next month.

MOTs due after the end of March have been extended by six months, with the owners continuing to be responsible for maintaining roadworthiness

You can only activate the deferral within, I think, three days of the expiry date, if you need the extended MOT for insurance, etc.

The gov.uk page on this seemed admirably clear, though I don't have a link to hand.

Pulpstar

I think fruit pickers should have a modified quarantine, with essentially their farm being the 14 day quarantine area.

rottenborough

LostPassword said:

IanB2 said:

rottenborough said:

Anyone know what's the position with MOTs? I thought they had been deferred until later in the year, but just had a text from my garage saying mine is due next month.

MOTs due after the end of March have been extended by six months, with the owners continuing to be responsible for maintaining roadworthiness

You can only activate the deferral within, I think, three days of the expiry date, if you need the extended MOT for insurance, etc.

The gov.uk page on this seemed admirably clear, though I don't have a link to hand.

Thanks.

algarkirk

AlastairMeeks said:

Martin_Kinsella said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.

Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.

I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?

That's a substantive news story.

And please post more (this applies to lurkers and other mostly-lurkers too). The site is at its best when it has a wide range of views.

Agree. And the links are often the best bit, drawing attention to interesting stuff out of the Niagara of dross.

Foxy

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.

There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.

By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.

Have you considered that it might be different families wanting to fly abroad from those not wanting the schools to go back?

Charles

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

If you’re so worried, Scott either pick it yourself or don’t eat

isam

TOPPING said:

isam said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.

Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.

I wonder if Bookies should be able to use a Rule 4 if one of the contenders passed away, same as if a horse withdraws from a race.

I'm sure, for better or for worse, if punters are laying an 80-yr old (!) to take office then somewhere in their calculations is the possibility that they might not make it to the election.

Not many 20-yr old geldings in 5f sprints...

I meant Bookies. The exchange seemed to set a precedent by suspending the market when Boris went into Intensive Care, I wonder if they'd have voided the market if he had passed away

Carnyx

Benpointer said:

O/T

Apologies for posting this link to the Oxford Dictionary of Family Names again but for anyone interested in ancestry / family history this fascinating resource is currently free online, until Monday apparently.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199677764.001.0001/acref-9780199677764

Thanks! Alas the (very unusual) surname of a relative isn't in there - though a ?variant is ...

If we are on freebies and family history, The National Archives are offering free downloads of scans on their site (you need to check the details, and it won't cover new scans, but for instance I have been downloading lots of early C19 wills for research, and my granddad's Great War medal card).

TOPPING

isam said:

TOPPING said:

isam said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.

Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.

peter_from_putney said:

***** Betting Post *****

Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS.
DYOR.

Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.

Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.

So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.

This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.

The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.

Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?

In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.

Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.

I wonder if Bookies should be able to use a Rule 4 if one of the contenders passed away, same as if a horse withdraws from a race.

I'm sure, for better or for worse, if punters are laying an 80-yr old (!) to take office then somewhere in their calculations is the possibility that they might not make it to the election.

Not many 20-yr old geldings in 5f sprints...

I meant Bookies. The exchange seemed to set a precedent by suspending the market when Boris went into Intensive Care, I wonder if they'd have voided the market if he had passed away

Ah yes good point. Yes probably they would have, on the grounds of decency plus incidentally saving themselves a few quid.

Charles

bigjohnowls said:

kinabalu said:

Interesting update on Hydroxychloroquine -

President Donald Trump - who is taking it - is now testing not merely negative for the virus but VERY negative. He's testing as negative as it is humanly possible to test.

One in the eye for the skeptics there.

Does it make you orange though?

Perhaps bleach would cure that.

Trump the new Agent Orange. Poisons everything he touches?

TGOHF666

bigjohnowls said:

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.

Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.

Only the most churlish would complain about this.

Charles

bigjohnowls said:

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

They are two tests.

That’s just a fact.

There’s always been a disconnect between number of test / number of individuals (see also repeat tests)

isam

"I was living in a world of make believe
When my best friend wrote and told me
That there may be a job in the city..."

Alistair

kinabalu said:

Interesting update on Hydroxychloroquine -

President Donald Trump - who is taking it - is now testing not merely negative for the virus but VERY negative. He's testing as negative as it is humanly possible to test.

One in the eye for the skeptics there.

He's testing very positively negative.

Beibheirli_C

TGOHF666 said:

bigjohnowls said:

I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.

The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.

Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.

Only the most churlish would complain about this.

Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?

You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.

To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.

Fysics_Teacher

A bit of good news: according to Gridwatch wind and solar power are currently (excuse the pun) supplying more than 50% of our electrical power.

Beibheirli_C

Charles said:

Scott_xP said:

Quarantine, apart from people touching your food...

twitter.com/thetimes/status/1263739910139318272

If you’re so worried, Scott either pick it yourself or don’t eat

I heat my food up before eating. That kills most bugs

Perhaps I should nuke it from orbit? It is the only way to be sure.....