The virus is growing in England, spreading across the country and from young to older people. The new interventions are effective however in limiting the rate of increase:
R being assessed at 0.7-1.5, with a probable value of 1.1 is interesting news, indeed.
A range of 0.7 to 1.5 suggests they haven't really got a clue.
I don't want to get at you personally, but while we are talking about numeric illiteracy amongst journalists, this comment is typical. We need to bear in mind the audience for those journalists isn't necessarily able to absorb these subtleties.
Sorry, I was rude. I apologise. If a journalist wants to discuss a calculated R figure they can state it as:
"Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" and no-one knows what they are talking about
"Range between 0.7 and 1.5 with 1.1 being the most likely point". People think they don't have a clue.
Explain what "Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" means when people aren't really interested and it distracts from the thrust of the article.
"1.1" spurious precision
Don't give a figure because it's too complicated. The story misses an important bit of information.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
The virus is growing in England, spreading across the country and from young to older people. The new interventions are effective however in limiting the rate of increase:
R being assessed at 0.7-1.5, with a probable value of 1.1 is interesting news, indeed.
A range of 0.7 to 1.5 suggests they haven't really got a clue.
I don't want to get at you personally, but while we are talking about numeric illiteracy amongst journalists, this comment is typical. We need to bear in mind the audience for those journalists isn't necessarily able to absorb these subtleties.
Sorry, I was rude. I apologise. If a journalist wants to discuss a calculated R figure they can state it as:
"Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" and no-one knows what they are talking about
"Range between 0.7 and 1.5 with 1.1 being the most likely point". People think they don't have a clue.
Explain what "Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" means when people aren't really interested and it distracts from the thrust of the article.
"1.1" spurious precision
Don't give a figure because it's too complicated. The story misses an important bit of information.
How about "The most likely value is 1.1, with a 2-in-3 chance of it being somewhere between 0.7 and 1.5"?
But 2016 did happen. And the models were wrong. On November 8, 2016 (Election Day), the 538 model gave Trump a 28.4% chance of winning.
so It's just an astonishing feat of obtuseness. How can you not learn?
1) October, 2016: See the models showing a 25% probability, write articles as if this means "basically impossible" 2) November, 2016: Say the models were wrong and declare data journalism dead 1) October, 2020: See the models showing a 25% probability, write articles as if this means "basically impossible"
Is it a related contingencies thing? Trump is behind in quite a number of swing states that he needs to win: surely he can't recover his position in all of them? Trump can still win this and it really wouldn't take much of a swing from the current position for the dominoes to fall his way. A model that doesn't recognise that is defective, plain and simple.
We can only hope that the swing is the other way and this turns into the hammering that he so richly deserves.
IDK, the dude is literally staring at a prediction saying there's a 25% chance. If he ever rolled a dice and got a 6 he must have been like "hmm, this dice seems to be broken, the laws of probability said that wouldn't happen".
It may simply be a classical liberal arts innumeracy, lets face it we have been drowning in this on the vast majority of MSM reports on the virus in this country.
To say that inane and innumerate journalists have been a huge problem this year, would be something of an understatement.
The point David makes is a good one. As someone with a maths background it is something that has bugged me for years. Particularly reporting stuff without providing the context.
I always get frustrated with the medias obsession with speed, rather than relative velocity between the relevant objects. It always crops up when reporting objects in orbit docking. The best example was the probe landing on a comet and the velocity given was (presumably) relative to the earth, an absolutely pointless figure and if relative to the comet was going to make one hell of a dent and a lot of debris.
My favorite however was how much wasps eat. Now as the figure given was not per colony/garden/kilometre squared one can only presume it was per wasp (clearly it wasn't, but context?). As the figure was I think 25 kg I never want to meet that wasp.
Almost any report on space is rubbish in terms of factual information conveyed correctly
I work in IT and have a keen interest in aviation, two reasonably technical subjects. Without fail, any MSM report on either subject will be riddled with basic errors, often the same errors repeated over and over again, as if there weren’t hundreds of subject matter experts shouting at them every time they get it wrong.
The pandemic has seen an explosion of the same phenomenon, it’s as if the journalists don’t want to learn anything about epidemiology or statistics, and the media companies certainly don’t seem to want scientifically qualified journalists anywhere near the story - they’re all dumb and happy continuing their talking points and 24h media fluff as people are dying.
Sometimes they go as far as to give the impression they’d like to see more people dying or made redundant, if it means they get more clicks on their story, or gives them ammunition to attack the government.
I forget who said it, but he pointed out that on technical subjects where the reader is knowledgeable, any news article is generally wrong.
The crazy bit is that you then read the next article, on a different subject, and believe what you read..
As to space - nasaspaceflight.com
If only people would take your second sentence to heart!
One field in which I am pretty knowledgeable is fusion power, given that my PhD was on tokamaks and plasma physics. I can assure you that most of what you read in the media about fusion is incorrect, or at least has the wrong end of the stick. And the vast majority of projects claiming to be revolutionary sources of fusion power are little more than scams.
Do you think we'll ever have economic and sustainable fusion power?
Also do you think we need it?
Given the increasingly cheap and almost infinite potential of wind power, combined with improving energy storage technologies, I don't see a reason why we'd even need fusion now if we can get our energy from wind and storage, topped up perhaps with alternatives like tidal.
I feel like you're overestimating our energy storage technology at present, at least on a macro level.
I don't think energy storage technology at present is that great but it is improving continuously and incrementally. Our storage potential in a decade will be much better than today - and a decade after that even better still. Since fusion is always a couple of decades away supposedly, storage needs to be taken seriously as an alternative I think.
Energy storage is near a tipping point. At the moment most of the wind energy can be accommodated onto energy grids by dialling down and up the thermal capacity, so the economics isn't there for large-scale storage.
But as we keep adding wind capacity the economic opportunity for storage increases and one of the competing technologies may well become better than batteries and win itself a lot of business.
If only I could predict which one!
The biggest problem in the batteries vs large scale storage is the planning aspect. Build a tidal pond - you'll spend 20 years in planning.
Parking shipping containers full of batteries on an industrial site - that might well not even require planning. Let alone the smaller units already being deployed next to car chargers. The lorry chargers that Tesla are bringing out for their trucks have serious storage capacity, IIRC.
I strongly suspect that battery storage will creep up on us, being built out on the basis of storage for car/lorry charging, with the operators doing deals with the power companies to buy their power at the cheapest rates.... before you know it, storage capacity of x% of the national grid.
I am clearly unusual in thinking journalists in general do a skilled job reasonably well.
Yes I think you are. It's OK as long as they stick to journalism. When they have delusions that they are capable of running the country, like Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, then things really go tits up.
Are most journalists really claiming they are running the country and do readers believe that they are?
Obviously you get bad journalists as well as good ones, but as a class I think they do a not particularly easy job* reasonably well.
* ie a job that you and I might think, we can do better than that.
Edit. I didn't address the point of your post. The issue isn't Johnson and Gove's journalism, although I think the Telegraph wasted its money on the former. It's what they do in government that's the problem.
The problem is that, like much of business or politics, specialist knowledge is looked down upon. Generalists re supposed to get the big jobs, not dirty handed oiks who know what a logarithm is.
So a political reporter can do ok - because he/she might well know about politics.
But a space reporter will either not know about space, or be edited to drivel by editors who don't know or care.
The exceptions to this are news organisations that employ specialist reporters, and don't mangle the pieces before publication.
Surely the problem is that scientists, engineers and mathematicians rarely write well for a general audience. There are exceptions, but writing well and concisely is not an easy skill to acquire.
That is only partly true. People like Brian Cox, who can continue professor level research and be a good quality TV/Radio celebrity, are very rare. There are a whole host of great scientists who are regularly interviewed eg. on the Infinite Monkey Cage who would make good journalists. The problem is that most would have to comprimise their research in order to become proper journalists. The decision time for a young scientst interested in journalism is usually well before they would be at the peak of their research career.
The journalists could always try getting an expert to read their piece before publication. Plenty of people out there could point out the obvious errors etc.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
That week of self doubt followed by an in the end reasonably comfortable victory may have been one of the most significant contributors to the downfall of the pro EU cause. A life time of self confidence temporarily pierced by a moment of fear, yet still Dave won through: a double helping of complacency to reward myself please.
Do you know, this makes me realise that one thing I had never thought about is the potential impact on LABOUR of a Yes win in 2014, given its importance in fronting the anti-indy coalition. It still thought of Scotland as its birthright (before the 2015 election kicked them in the teeth), and relied on those Scots . Would the party leader and LOTO have had to resign too, alongside Mr Cameron? And Mr Darling for fronting it all?
Johann resigned just over a month after the ref, and Al and Gordy weren't going to stand as mps again anyway, so i guess it amounted to the same thing.
Douglas Ross's wife is a police officer and might, presumably, find herself having to enforce the measures in this preposterous bill. Possible explains the hard line being taken by her husband.
I am clearly unusual in thinking journalists in general do a skilled job reasonably well.
Yes I think you are. It's OK as long as they stick to journalism. When they have delusions that they are capable of running the country, like Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, then things really go tits up.
Are most journalists really claiming they are running the country and do readers believe that they are?
Obviously you get bad journalists as well as good ones, but as a class I think they do a not particularly easy job* reasonably well.
* ie a job that you and I might think, we can do better than that.
Edit. I didn't address the point of your post. The issue isn't Johnson and Gove's journalism, although I think the Telegraph wasted its money on the former. It's what they do in government that's the problem.
The problem is that, like much of business or politics, specialist knowledge is looked down upon. Generalists re supposed to get the big jobs, not dirty handed oiks who know what a logarithm is.
So a political reporter can do ok - because he/she might well know about politics.
But a space reporter will either not know about space, or be edited to drivel by editors who don't know or care.
The exceptions to this are news organisations that employ specialist reporters, and don't mangle the pieces before publication.
Surely the problem is that scientists, engineers and mathematicians rarely write well for a general audience. There are exceptions, but writing well and concisely is not an easy skill to acquire.
That is only partly true. People like Brian Cox, who can continue professor level research and be a good quality TV/Radio celebrity, are very rare. There are a whole host of great scientists who are regularly interviewed eg. on the Infinite Monkey Cage who would make good journalists. The problem is that most would have to comprimise their research in order to become proper journalists. The decision time for a young scientst interested in journalism is usually well before they would be at the peak of their research career.
I'm not sure that Brian Cox's research is really at the top level now, but the rest I agree with.
I was "talent spotted" (if I may be so egotistical) at a media training event when I was a young scientist. After thinking about it seriously, I chose not to pursue those opportunities, because it's not my vocation.
I am clearly unusual in thinking journalists in general do a skilled job reasonably well.
Yes I think you are. It's OK as long as they stick to journalism. When they have delusions that they are capable of running the country, like Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, then things really go tits up.
Are most journalists really claiming they are running the country and do readers believe that they are?
Obviously you get bad journalists as well as good ones, but as a class I think they do a not particularly easy job* reasonably well.
* ie a job that you and I might think, we can do better than that.
Edit. I didn't address the point of your post. The issue isn't Johnson and Gove's journalism, although I think the Telegraph wasted its money on the former. It's what they do in government that's the problem.
The problem is that, like much of business or politics, specialist knowledge is looked down upon. Generalists re supposed to get the big jobs, not dirty handed oiks who know what a logarithm is.
So a political reporter can do ok - because he/she might well know about politics.
But a space reporter will either not know about space, or be edited to drivel by editors who don't know or care.
The exceptions to this are news organisations that employ specialist reporters, and don't mangle the pieces before publication.
Surely the problem is that scientists, engineers and mathematicians rarely write well for a general audience. There are exceptions, but writing well and concisely is not an easy skill to acquire.
That is only partly true. People like Brian Cox, who can continue professor level research and be a good quality TV/Radio celebrity, are very rare. There are a whole host of great scientists who are regularly interviewed eg. on the Infinite Monkey Cage who would make good journalists. The problem is that most would have to comprimise their research in order to become proper journalists. The decision time for a young scientst interested in journalism is usually well before they would be at the peak of their research career.
Just as everyone is an expert on health or education because they once were ill and once went to school, people who can read believe that they can write. Actually it takes a lot of thought, and practice to write concisely, as anyone who has written a PB header can testify. All of mine have been twice as long as I intended.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The virus is growing in England, spreading across the country and from young to older people. The new interventions are effective however in limiting the rate of increase:
R being assessed at 0.7-1.5, with a probable value of 1.1 is interesting news, indeed.
A range of 0.7 to 1.5 suggests they haven't really got a clue.
I don't want to get at you personally, but while we are talking about numeric illiteracy amongst journalists, this comment is typical. We need to bear in mind the audience for those journalists isn't necessarily able to absorb these subtleties.
Sorry, I was rude. I apologise. If a journalist wants to discuss a calculated R figure they can state it as:
"Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" and no-one knows what they are talking about
"Range between 0.7 and 1.5 with 1.1 being the most likely point". People think they don't have a clue.
Explain what "Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" means when people aren't really interested and it distracts from the thrust of the article.
"1.1" spurious precision
Don't give a figure because it's too complicated. The story misses an important bit of information.
How about "The most likely value is 1.1, with a 2-in-3 chance of it being somewhere between 0.7 and 1.5"?
I would say a compound of No 2 and No 3: gives an impression you don't have a clue, people aren't really interested in the explanation, are concerned whether 1/3 chance of it NOT being between 0.7 and 1.5 is bad or OK* and it distracts from the thrust of the article, which is that the epidemic is growing but more slowly than it was before and than it would do if the interventions weren't in place.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The virus is growing in England, spreading across the country and from young to older people. The new interventions are effective however in limiting the rate of increase:
R being assessed at 0.7-1.5, with a probable value of 1.1 is interesting news, indeed.
A range of 0.7 to 1.5 suggests they haven't really got a clue.
I don't want to get at you personally, but while we are talking about numeric illiteracy amongst journalists, this comment is typical. We need to bear in mind the audience for those journalists isn't necessarily able to absorb these subtleties.
Sorry, I was rude. I apologise. If a journalist wants to discuss a calculated R figure they can state it as:
"Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" and no-one knows what they are talking about
"Range between 0.7 and 1.5 with 1.1 being the most likely point". People think they don't have a clue.
Explain what "Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" means when people aren't really interested and it distracts from the thrust of the article.
"1.1" spurious precision
Don't give a figure because it's too complicated. The story misses an important bit of information.
How about "The most likely value is 1.1, with a 2-in-3 chance of it being somewhere between 0.7 and 1.5"?
The big problem is that the measure can only be certain in retrospect. In that way it is as useful and as subject to MoE as a political poll.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
Not many terraced poor quality houses, not many sweat shops, lovely garden living, pub gardens etc etc etc
The virus is growing in England, spreading across the country and from young to older people. The new interventions are effective however in limiting the rate of increase:
R being assessed at 0.7-1.5, with a probable value of 1.1 is interesting news, indeed.
A range of 0.7 to 1.5 suggests they haven't really got a clue.
I don't want to get at you personally, but while we are talking about numeric illiteracy amongst journalists, this comment is typical. We need to bear in mind the audience for those journalists isn't necessarily able to absorb these subtleties.
Sorry, I was rude. I apologise. If a journalist wants to discuss a calculated R figure they can state it as:
"Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" and no-one knows what they are talking about
"Range between 0.7 and 1.5 with 1.1 being the most likely point". People think they don't have a clue.
Explain what "Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" means when people aren't really interested and it distracts from the thrust of the article.
"1.1" spurious precision
Don't give a figure because it's too complicated. The story misses an important bit of information.
How about "The most likely value is 1.1, with a 2-in-3 chance of it being somewhere between 0.7 and 1.5"?
Very good - neat summation, in non-technical terms.
I am clearly unusual in thinking journalists in general do a skilled job reasonably well.
Yes I think you are. It's OK as long as they stick to journalism. When they have delusions that they are capable of running the country, like Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, then things really go tits up.
Are most journalists really claiming they are running the country and do readers believe that they are?
Obviously you get bad journalists as well as good ones, but as a class I think they do a not particularly easy job* reasonably well.
* ie a job that you and I might think, we can do better than that.
Edit. I didn't address the point of your post. The issue isn't Johnson and Gove's journalism, although I think the Telegraph wasted its money on the former. It's what they do in government that's the problem.
The problem is that, like much of business or politics, specialist knowledge is looked down upon. Generalists re supposed to get the big jobs, not dirty handed oiks who know what a logarithm is.
So a political reporter can do ok - because he/she might well know about politics.
But a space reporter will either not know about space, or be edited to drivel by editors who don't know or care.
The exceptions to this are news organisations that employ specialist reporters, and don't mangle the pieces before publication.
Surely the problem is that scientists, engineers and mathematicians rarely write well for a general audience. There are exceptions, but writing well and concisely is not an easy skill to acquire.
That is only partly true. People like Brian Cox, who can continue professor level research and be a good quality TV/Radio celebrity, are very rare. There are a whole host of great scientists who are regularly interviewed eg. on the Infinite Monkey Cage who would make good journalists. The problem is that most would have to comprimise their research in order to become proper journalists. The decision time for a young scientst interested in journalism is usually well before they would be at the peak of their research career.
I'm not sure that Brian Cox's research is really at the top level now, but the rest I agree with.
I was "talent spotted" (if I may be so egotistical) at a media training event when I was a young scientist. After thinking about it seriously, I chose not to pursue those opportunities, because it's not my vocation.
--AS
Its fun to search Brian Cox's publication record. As I recall - thousands of papers. However - big caveat - they are all from CERN with huge numbers of authors, most of whom will never have had a direct involvement in the work.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Bullying requires an audience. Biden will not be taking part in televised debates with Putin.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Well yes. I grew up 100 metres from the Wigan Bolton boundary. Pubs are shut in Bolton open in Wigan. Guess what?
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The Liverpool/Warrington restrictions are much stiffer than the Greater Manchester ones.
I hadn't realised the epidemic was worse in Warrington than Greater Manchester.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The tendency to go round all the neighbours houses at the drop of a hat often daily is the only cultural difference I can think of. It may prove to be a significant one.
The virus is growing in England, spreading across the country and from young to older people. The new interventions are effective however in limiting the rate of increase:
R being assessed at 0.7-1.5, with a probable value of 1.1 is interesting news, indeed.
A range of 0.7 to 1.5 suggests they haven't really got a clue.
I don't want to get at you personally, but while we are talking about numeric illiteracy amongst journalists, this comment is typical. We need to bear in mind the audience for those journalists isn't necessarily able to absorb these subtleties.
Sorry, I was rude. I apologise. If a journalist wants to discuss a calculated R figure they can state it as:
"Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" and no-one knows what they are talking about
"Range between 0.7 and 1.5 with 1.1 being the most likely point". People think they don't have a clue.
Explain what "Binomial distribution between 0.7 and 1.5, centred on 1.1" means when people aren't really interested and it distracts from the thrust of the article.
"1.1" spurious precision
Don't give a figure because it's too complicated. The story misses an important bit of information.
How about "The most likely value is 1.1, with a 2-in-3 chance of it being somewhere between 0.7 and 1.5"?
The big problem is that the measure can only be certain in retrospect. In that way it is as useful and as subject to MoE as a political poll.
Well yeah, predicting it has been very challenging. The whole discussion is about what the rate was in the past week or so.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping?
He did stand up to him - he told him to shut up and called him the worst president ever - he just didn't do anything that requires more than a few seconds of uninterrupted speaking.
His own moves to try and rush it, and the general antivaccine air there mean the FDA seem to have pushed back to being ultra ultra cautious ( More so than our authorities) precisely because of the massively political turn the vaccine development has taken in a way that fortunately hasn't happened here.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping?
He did stand up to him - he told him to shut up and called him the worst president ever - he just didn't do anything that requires more than a few seconds of uninterrupted speaking.
I`m wondering whether Biden should flatly refuse to do the remaining two debates with the rude, bullying, ignorant oaf.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Well yes. I grew up 100 metres from the Wigan Bolton boundary. Pubs are shut in Bolton open in Wigan. Guess what?
They've realised this is fucking stupid and Bolton is now the same as Wigan?
Thats a great article. Once again, The Atlantic covers the virus very well and without sensation. The bit on the importance of backward tracing is particularly worth a read.
Not only is backward tracing effective in disease suppression, it can usefully inform policy at to what restrictions are likely to work.
That is an utterly superb article, which itself needs to be superspread.
It is. It is mind changing. It has certainly changed my mind on how the virus is spreading and strategies for containing it.
It re-enforces my determination to avoid crowded indoor places including pubs and restaurants. I've got my skiing gear including long-johns ready for outdoor dining and drinking during the winter including Xmas lunch around a firepit.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping?
He did stand up to him - he told him to shut up and called him the worst president ever - he just didn't do anything that requires more than a few seconds of uninterrupted speaking.
I`m wondering whether Biden should flatly refuse to do the remaining two debates with the rude, bullying, ignorant oaf.
This has been widely discussed. The consensus seems to be that whilst he could justify it, there's a risk of appearing timid and in any case Biden has shown he has little to fear from Trump now.
On balance the Biden Team would probably reckon the balance of advantages remains with going ahead.
Btw, I see Sporting Index have shifted their ECV spreads on Biden up again:
Biden: 300/306 Trump: 232/238
The punters seem to have made their decision on the debate outcome.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Well yes. I grew up 100 metres from the Wigan Bolton boundary. Pubs are shut in Bolton open in Wigan. Guess what?
They've realised this is fucking stupid and Bolton is now the same as Wigan?
Again don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good enough. There has to be a boundary somewhere, where else would you put it?
Unless we go for a complete lockdown, or complete liberty, there will always be edge cases on the boundaries. If that is the choice I would choose complete liberty - would you?
Did Boris not realise the EU would call his bluff?
That image could be of him after the Port of Dover shuts because his government decided to put two fingers up at international law. Moody's and Fitch won't like it either.
"We must be mad - literally mad". "That'll show those continental types." The way this country is run almost beggars belief. No, a possible EU "blockade" of Northern Ireland (which would be an act of war) didn't necessitate the Internal Market Bill. But no, I'm wrong. The continentals are getting all excited because they know they're inferior. Have I got it right now?
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The Liverpool/Warrington restrictions are much stiffer than the Greater Manchester ones.
I hadn't realised the epidemic was worse in Warrington than Greater Manchester.
Nor had I. Which means the restrictions in GM, which have been in for a few weeks are having some effect.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The tendency to go round all the neighbours houses at the drop of a hat often daily is the only cultural difference I can think of. It may prove to be a significant one.
As someone who has split my time between North and South, here's a cultural difference I'd love to know the geographical boundary of: using the front door as your main entrance, versus using your side/back door.
Clearly not everyone in the South uses their front door as main entrance and not everyone in the North uses the side/back, but there's definitely a geographical gradient and I don't know where the main area of unfrontdooredness is bounded.
I am clearly unusual in thinking journalists in general do a skilled job reasonably well.
Yes I think you are. It's OK as long as they stick to journalism. When they have delusions that they are capable of running the country, like Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, then things really go tits up.
Are most journalists really claiming they are running the country and do readers believe that they are?
Obviously you get bad journalists as well as good ones, but as a class I think they do a not particularly easy job* reasonably well.
* ie a job that you and I might think, we can do better than that.
Edit. I didn't address the point of your post. The issue isn't Johnson and Gove's journalism, although I think the Telegraph wasted its money on the former. It's what they do in government that's the problem.
The problem is that, like much of business or politics, specialist knowledge is looked down upon. Generalists re supposed to get the big jobs, not dirty handed oiks who know what a logarithm is.
So a political reporter can do ok - because he/she might well know about politics.
But a space reporter will either not know about space, or be edited to drivel by editors who don't know or care.
The exceptions to this are news organisations that employ specialist reporters, and don't mangle the pieces before publication.
Surely the problem is that scientists, engineers and mathematicians rarely write well for a general audience. There are exceptions, but writing well and concisely is not an easy skill to acquire.
That is only partly true. People like Brian Cox, who can continue professor level research and be a good quality TV/Radio celebrity, are very rare. There are a whole host of great scientists who are regularly interviewed eg. on the Infinite Monkey Cage who would make good journalists. The problem is that most would have to comprimise their research in order to become proper journalists. The decision time for a young scientst interested in journalism is usually well before they would be at the peak of their research career.
I assume Brian Cox is simply so valuable to Manchester University that they can afford to support him with an army of ambitious and capable research assistants, freeing him up to do the public engagement work. But there just isn't room in the market for a lot of Brian Coxes. It's quite nice for universities to have their academics published in The Times or appear on Infinite Monkey Cage in terms of building a reputation for the insitution, but it's comparing Lionel Messi with a non-league journeyman. Universities want their academics to tick the "public engagement" box, and it forms part of grant applications, but the emphasis is very much on publication in high impact factor academic journals (i.e. essentially the journals taken seriously in academia with lots of citations).
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton. With a few short breaks you can then get on via Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and then you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The tendency to go round all the neighbours houses at the drop of a hat often daily is the only cultural difference I can think of. It may prove to be a significant one.
As someone who has split my time between North and South, here's a cultural difference I'd love to know the geographical boundary of: using the front door as your main entrance, versus using your side/back door.
Clearly not everyone in the South uses their front door as main entrance and not everyone in the North uses the side/back, but there's definitely a geographical gradient and I don't know where the main area of unfrontdooredness is bounded.
Presumably it is related to where people worked, with Northerners more likely to come home from mining or manufacturing work dirty and not wanting to mess up the front room, which would be kept for best. It's also related to the type of housing. When my in laws lived in a terraced house in Sheffield they used the back door, but now they live in a semi in Leeds (which is further North) they use the front.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton. With a few short breaks you can then get on via Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and then you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There will always be edge cases.
Stockton, Boro and Redcar are contiguous. Not the same into Darlington.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The tendency to go round all the neighbours houses at the drop of a hat often daily is the only cultural difference I can think of. It may prove to be a significant one.
As someone who has split my time between North and South, here's a cultural difference I'd love to know the geographical boundary of: using the front door as your main entrance, versus using your side/back door.
Clearly not everyone in the South uses their front door as main entrance and not everyone in the North uses the side/back, but there's definitely a geographical gradient and I don't know where the main area of unfrontdooredness is bounded.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping?
He did stand up to him - he told him to shut up and called him the worst president ever - he just didn't do anything that requires more than a few seconds of uninterrupted speaking.
Well that didn't come across to a fair number in that focus group because they thought he was overwhelmed.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
In the Northwest there is no gap between the cities and towns I mentioned in a few places. You can literally get from Liverpool to Manchester or Bolton or Wigan without any gap at all. I've done it before. So should we treat them as one unit or accept that there will be edge cases somewhere?
One rule I thought I understood, but perhaps not is that within your "six" in a pub there isn't a need for social distancing, and that the distancing should be between groups of six ?
However I heard on the radio the other day that the '1 metre plus' pub rule was actually within the groups of six ?
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
They just love their masks up North.
That may be true but the difference in cases is remarkable
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Absolutely and I can imagine a fair few will be saying what a disgraceful performance it was. The question is how many will then vote for him at the ballot box.
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
One rule I thought I understood, but perhaps not is that within your "six" in a pub there isn't a need for social distancing, and that the distancing should be between groups of six ?
However I heard on the radio the other day that the '1 metre plus' pub rule was actually within the groups of six ?
Which is it ?
Journalists muddying the waters again? It's the former.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Bullying requires an audience. Biden will not be taking part in televised debates with Putin.
But Biden will be playing to an audience. If you were Putin, and you were thinking of moving into the Ukraine or elsewhere post-a Biden win, was there anything in Biden's performance that would say "wow, I'm scared of Biden"? Doubtful.
Did Boris not realise the EU would call his bluff?
That image could be of him after the Port of Dover shuts because his government decided to put two fingers up at international law. Moody's and Fitch won't like it either.
"We must be mad - literally mad". "That'll show those continental types." The way this country is run almost beggars belief. No, a possible EU "blockade" of Northern Ireland (which would be an act of war) didn't necessitate the Internal Market Bill. But no, I'm wrong. The continentals are getting all excited because they know they're inferior. Have I got it right now?
To be honest it is just daft at this moment when a deal is on the horizon
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Indeed. Despite having a combined authority and a Tory Mayor the local Tory MPs have fought like ferrets to break up HouchenWorld having expended so much energy creating it.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Precisely.
According to Guido's website Hartlepool is going into these restrictions because the numbers in Hartlepool are awful, but Boro is going into these restrictions because the local Council has asked for these restrictions to apply to Boro.
So the Stockton side of the Boro authority may not actually be that bad anyway and this is precautionary to apply to them already perhaps?
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Bullying requires an audience. Biden will not be taking part in televised debates with Putin.
But Biden will be playing to an audience. If you were Putin, and you were thinking of moving into the Ukraine or elsewhere post-a Biden win, was there anything in Biden's performance that would say "wow, I'm scared of Biden"? Doubtful.
Did Boris not realise the EU would call his bluff?
That image could be of him after the Port of Dover shuts because his government decided to put two fingers up at international law. Moody's and Fitch won't like it either.
"We must be mad - literally mad". "That'll show those continental types." The way this country is run almost beggars belief. No, a possible EU "blockade" of Northern Ireland (which would be an act of war) didn't necessitate the Internal Market Bill. But no, I'm wrong. The continentals are getting all excited because they know they're inferior. Have I got it right now?
Welcome Button (I think).
It evident from the period for compliance that the EU intends the infraction proceedings as a fall back, in case discussions with the UK fail. I do not think that is quite calling anyone's bluff, which would have course involved no negotiations until the point was resolved.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Precisely.
According to Guido's website Hartlepool is going into these restrictions because the numbers in Hartlepool are awful, but Boro is going into these restrictions because the local Council has asked for these restrictions to apply to Boro.
So the Stockton side of the Boro authority may not actually be that bad anyway and this is precautionary to apply to them already perhaps?
The numbers shown on here every day show that Stockton is more pox-ridden than Boro
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Indeed. Despite having a combined authority and a Tory Mayor the local Tory MPs have fought like ferrets to break up HouchenWorld having expended so much energy creating it.
I suspect said Tory MPs and mayors had no say in the matter.
As I expected, the EU are keeping their cool on the UK's infringement of the Withdrawal Agreement, but making it clear that's not acceptable. Of course from their point of view there is no hurry; the clock is ticking down to Boris' brain-dead self-imposed hard deadline, and the legal process for dealing with the infringement naturally takes a long time. They don't even need to string it out artificially, just follow the normal procedures and timescales. Despite what Boris and Cummings seem to want, they won't walk out of the talks in a huff, just express regret at the way that the UK is damaging itself, and keeping the door open for a deal now or later, whenever the UK has come to its senses and rectified its breaches of the Withdrawal Agreement.
If, in the worst case, we fall over the end of the transition without a deal, they will simply let the economic sanctions Boris will have imposed on the UK take their course. Eventually, having gone through the longish procedure of taking the UK to the ECJ and possible arbitration, they'll still have the option of imposing penalties, most notably against the City and on the vital issue of data-sharing.
Why on earth the UK government is voluntarily getting itself and us into this mess is the most baffling puzzle in the entire post-war history of the UK. They look literally insane.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Precisely.
According to Guido's website Hartlepool is going into these restrictions because the numbers in Hartlepool are awful, but Boro is going into these restrictions because the local Council has asked for these restrictions to apply to Boro.
So the Stockton side of the Boro authority may not actually be that bad anyway and this is precautionary to apply to them already perhaps?
The numbers shown on here every day show that Stockton is more pox-ridden than Boro
But the Boro authority have requested these restrictions and the Stockton authority have not. Maybe write to your Council's leader or Mayor and ask why that is?
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Indeed. Despite having a combined authority and a Tory Mayor the local Tory MPs have fought like ferrets to break up HouchenWorld having expended so much energy creating it.
I suspect said Tory MPs and mayors had no say in the matter.
Philip has just told me the Boro inclusion is because its Mayor has demanded it. I'm sure he's right.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Biden did stand up to him and is getting stick for not being presidential. Biden told Trump to shut up, that he was a clown, the worst president ever. He continued to speak when Trump was trying to interrupt him.
What Biden didn't do was behave like Trump or go over and punch him, even though he clearly was tempted to. Xi or Putin don't behave like Trump.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Indeed. Despite having a combined authority and a Tory Mayor the local Tory MPs have fought like ferrets to break up HouchenWorld having expended so much energy creating it.
I suspect said Tory MPs and mayors had no say in the matter.
Philip has just told me the Boro inclusion is because its Mayor has demanded it. I'm sure he's right.
I mean more where the boundaries are drawn and how they are applied to local authority areas.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Absolutely and I can imagine a fair few will be saying what a disgraceful performance it was. The question is how many will then vote for him at the ballot box.
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
Clinton would never have got this sort of reception in a small city! (It has less than 8.5k people) like Latrobe Pennsylvania. Biden is following the Obama playbook that won him the demographically improbable state of Iowa.
Merseyside and Warrington now part of the NE restrictions. Hartlepool and Middlesborough too.
Hopefully the restrictions will work and not need to be there long.
Boro and Stockton are a long way apart. Here in Stockton we definitely won't be seeing Boro refugees from its lockdown coming across to enjoy our bars and steal our women.
Seriously - Boro and not Stockton makes no sense. Hence my sarcastic YES! reaction. We are clean, they are dirty. Or something.
There will always be a boundary somewhere. It doesn't have to "make sense" because whatever boundary is chosen wouldn't "make sense".
Why Liverpool and Warrington but not Wigan or Greater Manchester?
You can drive from Liverpool through Widnes, Warrington, into Leigh and on into Manchester without ever leaving residential roads.
This is true. But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere. Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
The line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously an invisible line that means sod all on the ground is the obvious line.
Where else would you draw it?
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
Where would I have drawn it? Boro and Stockton. Otherwise its like trying to lockdown Newcastle but not Gateshead, Manchester and not Salford.
So since you would have locked down Stockton, would you then have to lockdown Darlington?
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton, Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and they you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There wil always be edge cases.
Stockton and Boro merge into one another in a few places - there is a distinct gap between Darlington and Stockton (thankfully).
Presumably all of this is done on local authority boundaries in order to simplify things.
Indeed. Despite having a combined authority and a Tory Mayor the local Tory MPs have fought like ferrets to break up HouchenWorld having expended so much energy creating it.
I suspect said Tory MPs and mayors had no say in the matter.
Philip has just told me the Boro inclusion is because its Mayor has demanded it. I'm sure he's right.
I mean more where the boundaries are drawn and how they are applied to local authority areas.
Yes I agree, I suspect it will be a binary case of apply the restrictions or don't - not apply it to this patch or the authority but not that patch.
I am clearly unusual in thinking journalists in general do a skilled job reasonably well.
Yes I think you are. It's OK as long as they stick to journalism. When they have delusions that they are capable of running the country, like Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, then things really go tits up.
Are most journalists really claiming they are running the country and do readers believe that they are?
Obviously you get bad journalists as well as good ones, but as a class I think they do a not particularly easy job* reasonably well.
* ie a job that you and I might think, we can do better than that.
Edit. I didn't address the point of your post. The issue isn't Johnson and Gove's journalism, although I think the Telegraph wasted its money on the former. It's what they do in government that's the problem.
The problem is that, like much of business or politics, specialist knowledge is looked down upon. Generalists re supposed to get the big jobs, not dirty handed oiks who know what a logarithm is.
So a political reporter can do ok - because he/she might well know about politics.
But a space reporter will either not know about space, or be edited to drivel by editors who don't know or care.
The exceptions to this are news organisations that employ specialist reporters, and don't mangle the pieces before publication.
Surely the problem is that scientists, engineers and mathematicians rarely write well for a general audience. There are exceptions, but writing well and concisely is not an easy skill to acquire.
That is only partly true. People like Brian Cox, who can continue professor level research and be a good quality TV/Radio celebrity, are very rare. There are a whole host of great scientists who are regularly interviewed eg. on the Infinite Monkey Cage who would make good journalists. The problem is that most would have to comprimise their research in order to become proper journalists. The decision time for a young scientst interested in journalism is usually well before they would be at the peak of their research career.
I assume Brian Cox is simply so valuable to Manchester University that they can afford to support him with an army of ambitious and capable research assistants, freeing him up to do the public engagement work. But there just isn't room in the market for a lot of Brian Coxes. It's quite nice for universities to have their academics published in The Times or appear on Infinite Monkey Cage in terms of building a reputation for the insitution, but it's comparing Lionel Messi with a non-league journeyman. Universities want their academics to tick the "public engagement" box, and it forms part of grant applications, but the emphasis is very much on publication in high impact factor academic journals (i.e. essentially the journals taken seriously in academia with lots of citations).
Jim Al-Khalili would be a good candidate. He's absolutely great at condensing difficult to understand concepts such as quantum physics into something the layman could conceptualise.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Absolutely and I can imagine a fair few will be saying what a disgraceful performance it was. The question is how many will then vote for him at the ballot box.
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
Clinton would never have got this sort of reception in a small city! (It has less than 8.5k people) like Latrobe Pennsylvania. Biden is following the Obama playbook that won him the demographically improbable state of Iowa.
I'll be very shocked if the boy from Scranton doesn't win Pennsylvania - and it will be hard to see Trump retaining the Oval Office if he loses PA.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Bullying requires an audience. Biden will not be taking part in televised debates with Putin.
But Biden will be playing to an audience. If you were Putin, and you were thinking of moving into the Ukraine or elsewhere post-a Biden win, was there anything in Biden's performance that would say "wow, I'm scared of Biden"? Doubtful.
The global power of the Commander in Chief of the US military is vested in the office, not the man.
o/t, I see the Staggers has a special issue tomorrow on the 'Twilight of the Union'. An interesting piece out already:
"A worrying proportion of Conservative movers and shakers I have come across since the December election victory seem to me false friends of the Union. They have scant sympathy for devolution, or any properly unionist appreciation for our decentralised union-state. They fail to see that Scottish unionism is not the antithesis of nationalism, but rather its unacknowledged twin. Historically, a negotiated Anglo-Scottish Union was the most realistic means of checking the imperial arrogance of the larger power on this island and thus preserving intact many of the key attributes of Scottish nationhood. Scottish unionism is a very different beast from British nationalism. Or at least it was.
Something worryingly similar is afoot in Wales. ..."
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Absolutely and I can imagine a fair few will be saying what a disgraceful performance it was. The question is how many will then vote for him at the ballot box.
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
Clinton would never have got this sort of reception in a small city! (It has less than 8.5k people) like Latrobe Pennsylvania. Biden is following the Obama playbook that won him the demographically improbable state of Iowa.
I'll be very shocked if the boy from Scranton doesn't win Pennsylvania - and it will be hard to see Trump retaining the Oval Office if he loses PA.
Matches the polling I think, Biden doing better with white seniors in middle America. When polling and anecdata align...
Thats a great article. Once again, The Atlantic covers the virus very well and without sensation. The bit on the importance of backward tracing is particularly worth a read.
Not only is backward tracing effective in disease suppression, it can usefully inform policy at to what restrictions are likely to work.
That is an utterly superb article, which itself needs to be superspread.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Bullying requires an audience. Biden will not be taking part in televised debates with Putin.
But Biden will be playing to an audience. If you were Putin, and you were thinking of moving into the Ukraine or elsewhere post-a Biden win, was there anything in Biden's performance that would say "wow, I'm scared of Biden"? Doubtful.
Given how Trump has been so demonstrably servile towards Putin that's an argument that's offensive on the basis that you must think we're all idiots.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Absolutely and I can imagine a fair few will be saying what a disgraceful performance it was. The question is how many will then vote for him at the ballot box.
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
Clinton would never have got this sort of reception in a small city! (It has less than 8.5k people) like Latrobe Pennsylvania. Biden is following the Obama playbook that won him the demographically improbable state of Iowa.
I'll be very shocked if the boy from Scranton doesn't win Pennsylvania - and it will be hard to see Trump retaining the Oval Office if he loses PA.
Yes, PA looks safe and the other swing States that Trump would need to win to get to 270 without PA are showing no sign of moving his way. I think the Presidency is almost a wrap now and attention will swing to the Senate and just how big a Biden victory we are going to see.
Mike's thread-piece point is a good one. The debate will have done a good job of firing up the opposition. Democrats have every reason to turn out, not just for a win but a big one.
They're wrestling with the fundamental problem - which is, of course, that the flow of boat people won't stop but that the bulk of the electorate in general, and the Tory-supporting electorate in particular, doesn't want them - and thrashing around desperately for a solution.
I can only assume either that the French are sufficiently determined to be rid of the problem themselves that they're invulnerable to bribery; or that the bribes that the UK Government have offered them have been deemed insufficient; or that the Government has been too daft to offer the French Government cash and/or other sweeteners in the first place.
Leaving aside the moral considerations, I'm not sure of the practicalities of effectively capturing the boat people and sticking them all back on larger boats - but prison hulks do at least have the benefit of not having to transport those aboard many thousands of miles to a remote volcanic rock in the South Atlantic.
The fundamental problem is that they have implied for years that Brexit will magicaĺly stop the flow. It is, and always was utter bollocks.
I don't recall Boris or anyone similar saying that.
Farage did but he is a twunt and should be ignored.
As I expected, the EU are keeping their cool on the UK's infringement of the Withdrawal Agreement, but making it clear that's not acceptable. Of course from their point of view there is no hurry; the clock is ticking down to Boris' brain-dead self-imposed hard deadline, and the legal process for dealing with the infringement naturally takes a long time. They don't even need to string it out artificially, just follow the normal procedures and timescales. Despite what Boris and Cummings seem to want, they won't walk out of the talks in a huff, just express regret at the way that the UK is damaging itself, and keeping the door open for a deal now or later, whenever the UK has come to its senses.
If, in the worst case, we fall over the end of the transition without a deal, they will simply let the economic sanctions Boris will have imposed on the UK take their course. Eventually, having gone through the longish procedure of taking the UK to the ECJ and possible arbitration, they'll still have the option of imposing penalties, most notably against the City and on the vital issue of data-sharing.
Why on earth the UK government is voluntarily getting itself and us into this mess is the most baffling puzzle in the entire post-war history of the UK. They look literally insane.
Agreed. The EU have played a blinder. As for the British government - Boris is many things but I wouldn't say he's particularly confrontational; if anything he prefers to shmooze. It has to be Cummings who's driving this. Perhaps he really is the megalomaniac of legend.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
Bullying requires an audience. Biden will not be taking part in televised debates with Putin.
But Biden will be playing to an audience. If you were Putin, and you were thinking of moving into the Ukraine or elsewhere post-a Biden win, was there anything in Biden's performance that would say "wow, I'm scared of Biden"? Doubtful.
The global power of the Commander in Chief of the US military is vested in the office, not the man.
MrEd's arguing from a soiled position anyhow. Trump has not been a bulwark against Russian action, he's a shell politician. The stars and stripes is his flag of convenience but he's an individualist to the core and would sell Americas interests if it meant a new hotel in Moscow.
Rather difficult to imagine any contemporary poet writing something like this to commemorate Election Day, November 2020. This rather fine poem is by Walt Whitman, on the Cleveland/Blaine contest.
Election Day, November, 1884 If I should need to name, O Western World, your powerfulest scene and show, 'Twould not be you, Niagara—nor you, ye limitless prairies—nor your huge rifts of canyons, Colorado, Nor you, Yosemite—nor Yellowstone, with all its spasmic geyser-loops ascending to the skies, appearing and disappearing, Nor Oregon's white cones—nor Huron's belt of mighty lakes—nor Mississippi's stream: —This seething hemisphere's humanity, as now, I'd name—the still small voice vibrating—America's choosing day, (The heart of it not in the chosen—the act itself the main, the quadriennial choosing,) The stretch of North and South arous'd—sea-board and inland—Texas to Maine—the Prairie States—Vermont, Virginia, California, The final ballot-shower from East to West—the paradox and conflict, The countless snow-flakes falling—(a swordless conflict, Yet more than all Rome's wars of old, or modern Napoleon's:) the peaceful choice of all, Or good or ill humanity—welcoming the darker odds, the dross: —Foams and ferments the wine? it serves to purify—while the heart pants, life glows: These stormy gusts and winds waft precious ships, Swell'd Washington's, Jefferson's, Lincoln's sails.
They're wrestling with the fundamental problem - which is, of course, that the flow of boat people won't stop but that the bulk of the electorate in general, and the Tory-supporting electorate in particular, doesn't want them - and thrashing around desperately for a solution.
I can only assume either that the French are sufficiently determined to be rid of the problem themselves that they're invulnerable to bribery; or that the bribes that the UK Government have offered them have been deemed insufficient; or that the Government has been too daft to offer the French Government cash and/or other sweeteners in the first place.
Leaving aside the moral considerations, I'm not sure of the practicalities of effectively capturing the boat people and sticking them all back on larger boats - but prison hulks do at least have the benefit of not having to transport those aboard many thousands of miles to a remote volcanic rock in the South Atlantic.
The fundamental problem is that they have implied for years that Brexit will magicaĺly stop the flow. It is, and always was utter bollocks.
I don't recall Boris or anyone similar saying that.
Farage did but he is a twunt and should be ignored.
Did you even watch that video or Boris speaking? He's not saying that we should stop the flow of immigration, he's saying it is scandalous that politicians (like Cameron and then Home Secretary May) keep pledging to bring immigration down to tens of thousands without any controls to actually do so.
Boris has quite rightly ended that scandal. He has dropped Cameron and May's tens of thousands pledge. Good.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The tendency to go round all the neighbours houses at the drop of a hat often daily is the only cultural difference I can think of. It may prove to be a significant one.
As someone who has split my time between North and South, here's a cultural difference I'd love to know the geographical boundary of: using the front door as your main entrance, versus using your side/back door.
Clearly not everyone in the South uses their front door as main entrance and not everyone in the North uses the side/back, but there's definitely a geographical gradient and I don't know where the main area of unfrontdooredness is bounded.
People use their front doors? Weird.
When I lived around the East Midlands, it (or at least my area of it) seemed to be fully-signed up part of Frontdooristan. I'm not sure quite how far North you have to go before that kind of weirdness stops.
I go back to DavidL's point previously - Trump is a jerk and a bully but, if Biden can't stand up to him, what chance has he got if he becomes President and has to deal with Putin and Xi Jinping? If I was those two looking at the debate, I would be praying for a Biden win, the man would be easy to deal with. Here were some of the comments of the focus group:
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
The angry racist who ballooned the deficit isn't popular in the suburbs.
Absolutely and I can imagine a fair few will be saying what a disgraceful performance it was. The question is how many will then vote for him at the ballot box.
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
Clinton would never have got this sort of reception in a small city! (It has less than 8.5k people) like Latrobe Pennsylvania. Biden is following the Obama playbook that won him the demographically improbable state of Iowa.
I'll be very shocked if the boy from Scranton doesn't win Pennsylvania - and it will be hard to see Trump retaining the Oval Office if he loses PA.
Yes, PA looks safe and the other swing States that Trump would need to win to get to 270 without PA are showing no sign of moving his way. I think the Presidency is almost a wrap now and attention will swing to the Senate and just how big a Biden victory we are going to see.
Mike's thread-piece point is a good one. The debate will have done a good job of firing up the opposition. Democrats have every reason to turn out, not just for a win but a big one.
Good news from the Imperial study, R down to 1.1 already which is what the daily data was already showing. With more time the rule of 6 will bed in further and bring that down.
I wouldn't be so sure about the rule of 6 bedding in further. It's just as likely that people get bored with it and stop bothering, especially if they hear that the virus is under control. There's something of a negative feedback effect at work: as infections stabilise, people become complacent; as infections rise, they become more worried and observant.
Has there been a study as to why large areas of the South of England are not having a second wave at all? Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North? I cannot work it out.
The tendency to go round all the neighbours houses at the drop of a hat often daily is the only cultural difference I can think of. It may prove to be a significant one.
As someone who has split my time between North and South, here's a cultural difference I'd love to know the geographical boundary of: using the front door as your main entrance, versus using your side/back door.
Clearly not everyone in the South uses their front door as main entrance and not everyone in the North uses the side/back, but there's definitely a geographical gradient and I don't know where the main area of unfrontdooredness is bounded.
People use their front doors? Weird.
When I lived around the East Midlands, it (or at least my area of it) seemed to be fully-signed up part of Frontdooristan. I'm not sure quite how far North you have to go before that kind of weirdness stops.
Weird, I'm from the South and used my side door all the time. Front door was for post only!
Comments
Parking shipping containers full of batteries on an industrial site - that might well not even require planning. Let alone the smaller units already being deployed next to car chargers. The lorry chargers that Tesla are bringing out for their trucks have serious storage capacity, IIRC.
I strongly suspect that battery storage will creep up on us, being built out on the basis of storage for car/lorry charging, with the operators doing deals with the power companies to buy their power at the cheapest rates.... before you know it, storage capacity of x% of the national grid.
Looks like the virus is a fighter not a quitter.
I was "talent spotted" (if I may be so egotistical) at a media training event when I was a young scientist. After thinking about it seriously, I chose not to pursue those opportunities, because it's not my vocation.
--AS
But Greater Manchester is already in restrictions. As you say the border has to be somewhere.
Doubtless Culcheth/Golborne Lowton and Billinge have seen similar issues that @RochdalePioneers alludes to.
* EDIT I am mucking this up too.
Do people in the South behave different to people in the Midlands and the North?
I cannot work it out.
PA Voter 1: "It seemed like Trump was steamrolling him and bullying him. I felt so bad for Biden that Trump was treating him that way. Joe didn’t get a fair shot, we didn’t get to hear what he thinks about things. I feel like Joe has more to say and we just didn’t hear it.”
PA Voter 3: “I felt last night was a drinking game. It was terrible, I’ll be honest I was gonna go to bed early last night. It was captivating in that it felt more like gladiator pit than political debate. I was praying that Biden was going to come in and slam dunk, and I was really disappointed.”
FL Voter: “It was difficult to watch and finish. I was relieved when it was over, I was very disappointed in both of them. I don’t know if I can support either of those candidates, I lost respect for both of them. "
WI Voter: “I agree with the rest, Trump was the bully. I think maybe Biden should’ve been more prepared on how to deal with that, because that was to be expected.”
AZ Voter: “Disappointing and sad is what I left with. I felt bad for Biden and I felt bad for the mediator, because of the complete disrespect. I agree that we weren’t able to get a full idea of Biden. I was hoping I was going to come away with more, I’m leaning more [toward Biden] because Trump is disrespectful and embarrassing, but I’m looking forward to the other two debates.”
I hadn't realised the epidemic was worse in Warrington than Greater Manchester.
I am sure Tories will support this action in which case why don't they support the rule of law when it applies to their own side?
It may prove to be a significant one.
And have you ever heard of the Swiss Cheese model of risk assessment? The idea of precautions isn't for them to be perfect and flawless and allow nothing through, the idea is that is you have multiple precautions, even if they're flawed, then those precautions will help unless the flaws happen to line up perfectly to let something through.
Boundaries like Culcheth or Stockton are going to exist no matter where you draw the line, it is an inevitable flaw, but the precautions should still help even if they're not perfect.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/09/22/fda-covid-vaccine-approval-standard/
His own moves to try and rush it, and the general antivaccine air there mean the FDA seem to have pushed back to being ultra ultra cautious ( More so than our authorities) precisely because of the massively political turn the vaccine development has taken in a way that fortunately hasn't happened here.
West Yorks restrictions unchanged, so folk can still mingle in boozers, should they so wish.
https://twitter.com/NazShahBfd/status/1311594305627336704?s=20
It re-enforces my determination to avoid crowded indoor places including pubs and restaurants. I've got my skiing gear including long-johns ready for outdoor dining and drinking during the winter including Xmas lunch around a firepit.
On balance the Biden Team would probably reckon the balance of advantages remains with going ahead.
Btw, I see Sporting Index have shifted their ECV spreads on Biden up again:
Biden: 300/306
Trump: 232/238
The punters seem to have made their decision on the debate outcome.
Unless we go for a complete lockdown, or complete liberty, there will always be edge cases on the boundaries. If that is the choice I would choose complete liberty - would you?
That image could be of him after the Port of Dover shuts because his government decided to put two fingers up at international law. Moody's and Fitch won't like it either.
"We must be mad - literally mad". "That'll show those continental types." The way this country is run almost beggars belief. No, a possible EU "blockade" of Northern Ireland (which would be an act of war) didn't necessitate the Internal Market Bill. But no, I'm wrong. The continentals are getting all excited because they know they're inferior. Have I got it right now?
Clearly not everyone in the South uses their front door as main entrance and not everyone in the North uses the side/back, but there's definitely a geographical gradient and I don't know where the main area of unfrontdooredness is bounded.
Again you can drive contiguously without a break from Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington or Saint Helens, then on from Manchester to Bolton. With a few short breaks you can then get on via Horwich, Chorley, Bamber Bridge and then you're at Preston. Does that mean that if you're going to lockdown Liverpool you need to lockdown Preston and the whole rest of the North West too?
There will always be edge cases.
Weird.
However I heard on the radio the other day that the '1 metre plus' pub rule was actually within the groups of six ?
Which is it ?
It also looks as though - at least based on that - one of the casualties could be turnout
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19/restaurants-offering-takeaway-or-delivery
According to Guido's website Hartlepool is going into these restrictions because the numbers in Hartlepool are awful, but Boro is going into these restrictions because the local Council has asked for these restrictions to apply to Boro.
So the Stockton side of the Boro authority may not actually be that bad anyway and this is precautionary to apply to them already perhaps?
It evident from the period for compliance that the EU intends the infraction proceedings as a fall back, in case discussions with the UK fail. I do not think that is quite calling anyone's bluff, which would have course involved no negotiations until the point was resolved.
If, in the worst case, we fall over the end of the transition without a deal, they will simply let the economic sanctions Boris will have imposed on the UK take their course. Eventually, having gone through the longish procedure of taking the UK to the ECJ and possible arbitration, they'll still have the option of imposing penalties, most notably against the City and on the vital issue of data-sharing.
Why on earth the UK government is voluntarily getting itself and us into this mess is the most baffling puzzle in the entire post-war history of the UK. They look literally insane.
Biden told Trump to shut up, that he was a clown, the worst president ever. He continued to speak when Trump was trying to interrupt him.
What Biden didn't do was behave like Trump or go over and punch him, even though he clearly was tempted to. Xi or Putin don't behave like Trump.
Here's an interesting bit of anecdata :
https://twitter.com/katieglueck/status/1311427321010716672
Clinton would never have got this sort of reception in a small city! (It has less than 8.5k people) like Latrobe Pennsylvania. Biden is following the Obama playbook that won him the demographically improbable state of Iowa.
"A worrying proportion of Conservative movers and shakers I have come across since the December election victory seem to me false friends of the Union. They have scant sympathy for devolution, or any properly unionist appreciation for our decentralised union-state. They fail to see that Scottish unionism is not the antithesis of nationalism, but rather its unacknowledged twin. Historically, a negotiated Anglo-Scottish Union was the most realistic means of checking the imperial arrogance of the larger power on this island and thus preserving intact many of the key attributes of Scottish nationhood. Scottish unionism is a very different beast from British nationalism. Or at least it was.
Something worryingly similar is afoot in Wales. ..."
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/09/twilight-union (not sure if paywalled - I can't tell as I have a sub)
But it's rarely been mentioned in the media, who are basically running six months behind the science on this one...
Mike's thread-piece point is a good one. The debate will have done a good job of firing up the opposition. Democrats have every reason to turn out, not just for a win but a big one.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/31/eu-referendum-boris-and-gove-pledge-tough-new-immigration-system/
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/05/04/why-britain-voted-to-leave-and-what-boris-johnson-had-to-do-with-it/
She was the the Obama Battleground states director. She was also John Edwards Iowa state co-ordinator in 2008 and Edwards got 2nd place behind Obama.
She replaced Greg Schultz who, amazingly enough, was Obama's Ohio director in 2012.
Literally my only worry I have about Biden's staff is they may be a little too focused on the Mid-west.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1311607718067736583
This rather fine poem is by Walt Whitman, on the Cleveland/Blaine contest.
Election Day, November, 1884
If I should need to name, O Western World, your powerfulest scene and show,
'Twould not be you, Niagara—nor you, ye limitless prairies—nor your huge rifts of canyons, Colorado,
Nor you, Yosemite—nor Yellowstone, with all its spasmic geyser-loops ascending to the skies, appearing and disappearing,
Nor Oregon's white cones—nor Huron's belt of mighty lakes—nor Mississippi's stream:
—This seething hemisphere's humanity, as now, I'd name—the still small voice vibrating—America's choosing day,
(The heart of it not in the chosen—the act itself the main, the quadriennial choosing,)
The stretch of North and South arous'd—sea-board and inland—Texas to Maine—the Prairie States—Vermont, Virginia, California,
The final ballot-shower from East to West—the paradox and conflict,
The countless snow-flakes falling—(a swordless conflict,
Yet more than all Rome's wars of old, or modern Napoleon's:) the peaceful choice of all,
Or good or ill humanity—welcoming the darker odds, the dross:
—Foams and ferments the wine? it serves to purify—while the heart pants, life glows:
These stormy gusts and winds waft precious ships,
Swell'd Washington's, Jefferson's, Lincoln's sails.
Boris has quite rightly ended that scandal. He has dropped Cameron and May's tens of thousands pledge. Good.