What I took from it was that our current policies are scientifically illiterate and foolish. As I put it this morning before reading the piece we are using a sledgehammer rather than a scalpel. Instead of grinding us all down with the policies Alastair descibes so well in his header we should be focused on what works. And what works is backtracing cases of infection to find their super spreader source and isolating that. The fact that most people who get the virus don't manage to infect more than 1 other person and many don't even manage that, means that these superspreader outbreaks are the key to controlling the virus. SK, Japan and others have policies directed at the actual risk. We continue to pretend that every carrier is such a risk and plan accordingly. It's nonsense and its damaging both economically and socially.
"World beating"
Countries that have ignored super-spreading have risked getting the worst of both worlds: burdensome restrictions that fail to achieve substantial mitigation. The U.K.’s recent decision to limit outdoor gatherings to six people while allowing pubs and bars to remain open is just one of many such examples.”
In fairness to the government they are following the scientific advice. Its just that that advice is crap. We still see pictures in Scotland (no doubt England does too) showing each person with the virus spreading it to 2 or 3 others who then multiply in turn explaining that if one of these only isolated the chain is broken. The problem with this approach is that it seems to bear no relation to reality. Many of those infected infect no one. A few can infect dozens or even hundreds. It is a completely different risk model and it requires a different response.
They haven't let go of their "flu pandemic" thinking - and have been remarkably reluctant to learn from others, what with us being so super smart. The Japanese advised against crowds in closed spaces in close contact. Sounds like a "Pub" to me.....
That rolling average, on the second graph at least, is obviously wrong...
--AS
It's a plot of the average of the preceding 7 days. It would be better if it were displaced back by 3 days to show the average of the surrounding 7 days so as to match the underlying data.
A preview of him claiming to have won the election bigly in the face of results that say the opposite.
I was thinking that.
I think the vote itself is barely relevant, it's what happens afterwards that will decide who is President. At the moment the chances of Trump conceding look to be almost nil, I expect him to claim victory immediately and to accuse the Democrats of fraud on a clearly impossible scale. The question then is who will side with Trump, and what will they do. I expect it to make the hanging chads look like small beer.
I suspect the Republican state legislatures where they can will ignore the results where they can and award their electoral college votes to Trump no matter what.
If voting matches the current polls, even if all the states* where Biden is currently ahead by less than 5% (using 538's polling average) ignore the vote and declare for Trump, Biden would still scrape home, I think.
(*Ohio, N Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Arizona)
Edit: Georgia is actually level at the moment according to 538.
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
Can someone explain to me why these Northern leaders are telling their electorate to ignore the new measures
I really do not understand it
Which northern leaders?
Middlesborough mayor has declared he will ignore them as they are recommended live on Sky
I understand Hartlepool as well plus Liverpool not happy
BBC article says:
In Middlesbrough, the mayor Andy Preston said: "We defy the government and we do not accept these measures." But he later said he would obey the law and urged others to do so.
Clearly had a talking to.
Similar stuff in Spain - local government not liking lockdowns...
As someone commented earlier - google search on European countries in alphabetical order to find out what is really happening in Europe....
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
"Structural racism" sounds like hyperbole to me. It's a bit like "defund the police" or the "Tories are fascists".
Apartheid-era South Africa, the old "White Australia" policy and the Jim Crow South was structural racism. We don't have that today. In fact, I'd say most organisations try desperately to be as inclusive as they can.
I think what people mean by this is that some racially prejudice still persists in 25-30% of the population, and that's not disappearing fast enough.
Fair enough. But I really worry about some of the solutions advocated by those who want to fight it, who seem to think the solution is trashing British history, and weaponising racial difference - like "white privilege" and "white fragility" - as a tool of anti-racism. I think we can overcook the problem too - black and white intermarriage rates in the UK have been good for some time now, and opposition to interracial marriage today is almost non-existent - so let's keep it in proportion and not undo all the good work.
The answer, as I've said before, is quite boring: it's to get all races to talk, mix and socialise more and keep working at it - including getting more ethnic minority role models - so we all see we can all take the same paths and we eventually become blind to everything except each other's characters.
Incredibly misleading graph as it creates a false equivalence between 13 March and 6 September as arbitrary day zeroes.
Nobody is denying that there are fewer people dying now than in the Spring. IF that is because the virus has changed, or because treatments have improved enormously, then fine - that's an interesting argument for a more relaxed approach. But if it's because the actual number of cases was much higher then (testing few people at that time) or because the age profile has changed for the moment as it rips through universities and so on, then it's less relevant.
Similar stuff in Spain - local government not liking lockdowns...
As someone commented earlier - google search on European countries in alphabetical order to find out what is really happening in Europe....
I wonder if it's because local government officials are likely to face the electorate sooner than central government and are worried about getting the blame?
A preview of him claiming to have won the election bigly in the face of results that say the opposite.
Trump finds himself very very friendless when Fox calls Michigan half an hour in.
Indeed. Trump will find himself very alone if/when he loses.
Just like his British counterpart Jeremy Corbyn, he will end up a laughing stock that even his own former allies said they had nothing to do with and the party would be under new leadership rapidly. There will be a dying band of hardcore loyalists claiming to have won the argument, but they'll be laughed at even by his parties own side.
The Republicans could find themselves in more of a pickle than Labour did.
Even in the 2019 election, there were plenty of Labour people running on a "nothing to do with Jez" ticket. Even someone like Starmer was clearly doing some of his campaign with his fingers crossed. As a result, the "Under new management" messaging has been broadly accepted, and Conservative attempts to make "you supported Corbyn" an attack line haven't really worked.
For various reasons (being in power, the role of right wing shouty media), the Republicans have been much more Trumpified. It's much harder to point to a resistance, or a party in exile, who can take over after a Trump defeat. One might say the same of a post-Johnson Conservative party, as well.
Trump is a symptom of changes to the Republicans that have occurred over many years: Gingrich, Dubya, Tea Party, Birthers, now QAnon.
Corbyn was a reaction to the other 2015 leadership contenders all initially stating that Labour had no choice but to accept austerity. There was nothing more deep-rooted behind it. There were attempts to create popular anti-austerity campaigns during 2010-15 that sunk without a trace.
I sense much challenging of the stultifying left liberal consensus that somehow and rather magically dominates despite a Tory landslide govt and a heavily right wing press coming our way here.
Right wing press?
With Channel 4, Sky and the BBC all on the left (C4 extremely so, the rest more marginally).
Press. They are skewed heavily to the right. You are talking TV stations. Ch4 is left, no question. Sky and the Beeb are only left if one is viewing from the extreme right. So, ok, assuming it's you doing the viewing (and I hope you have a licence) your comment is sincere and subjectively truthful. Albeit objectively speaking, bollocks.
How is the press right?
TV and radio objectively makes up an overwhelming majority of the press. Name one 'objectively speaking' right-wing TV station that compares to Channel 4, even if you (for some bizarre reason) think BBC and Sky are impartial (perhaps they are coming from your PoV but that should say it all).
And that's without dignifying ITV with Piers Morgan and Robert Peston as being part of the "press".
"The press" is the printed media. The clue is in the title.
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
Or maybe keeping it largely out of care homes reduces the death rate as this thing is very good at killing 80+ year olds who are frail.
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
So that's how it is forever? We can't risk what we used to call normal life "just in case"?
Curious from Malmesbury's data why Warrington has been chosen and not Manchester? I didn't think the epidemic was worse in Warrington than Manchester and Malmesbury's data seems to say that again.
Andy Burnham probably told the government to F off.
Possibly: 100+ students isolated bumping Manchester's (already high) figures higher - cf how Northampton was treated.. R value worry in Warrington (will check Malmesburys numbers) Travel to work proximity from Liverpool / Halton &c
I sense much challenging of the stultifying left liberal consensus that somehow and rather magically dominates despite a Tory landslide govt and a heavily right wing press coming our way here.
Right wing press?
With Channel 4, Sky and the BBC all on the left (C4 extremely so, the rest more marginally).
Press. They are skewed heavily to the right. You are talking TV stations. Ch4 is left, no question. Sky and the Beeb are only left if one is viewing from the extreme right. So, ok, assuming it's you doing the viewing (and I hope you have a licence) your comment is sincere and subjectively truthful. Albeit objectively speaking, bollocks.
How is the press right?
TV and radio objectively makes up an overwhelming majority of the press. Name one 'objectively speaking' right-wing TV station that compares to Channel 4, even if you (for some bizarre reason) think BBC and Sky are impartial (perhaps they are coming from your PoV but that should say it all).
And that's without dignifying ITV with Piers Morgan and Robert Peston as being part of the "press".
"The press" is the printed media. The clue is in the title.
Curious from Malmesbury's data why Warrington has been chosen and not Manchester? I didn't think the epidemic was worse in Warrington than Manchester and Malmesbury's data seems to say that again.
Andy Burnham probably told the government to F off.
Possibly: 100+ students isolated bumping Manchester's (already high) figures higher - cf how Northampton was treated.. R value worry in Warrington (will check Malmesburys numbers) Travel to work proximity from Liverpool / Halton &c
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
So that's how it is forever? We can't risk what we used to call normal life "just in case"?
Wait until someone on SAGE suggests all this could work for the annual flu season as well.
"Structural racism" sounds like hyperbole to me. It's a bit like "defund the police" or the "Tories are fascists".
Apartheid-era South Africa, the old "White Australia" policy and the Jim Crow South was structural racism. We don't have that today. In fact, I'd say most organisations try desperately to be as inclusive as they can.
I think what people mean by this is that some racially prejudice still persists in 25-30% of the population, and that's not disappearing fast enough.
Fair enough. But I really worry about some of the solutions advocated by those who want to fight it, who seem to think the solution is trashing British history, and weaponising racial difference - like "white privilege" and "white fragility" - as a tool of anti-racism. I think we can overcook the problem too - black and white intermarriage rates in the UK have been good for some time now, and opposition to interracial marriage today is almost non-existent - so let's keep it in proportion and not undo all the good work.
The answer, as I've said before, is quite boring: it's to get all races to talk, mix and socialise more and keep working at it - including getting more ethnic minority role models - so we all see we can all take the same paths and we eventually become blind to everything except each other's characters.
I broadly agree but you should also consider 'unconcious bias' which we all have - especially those of us brought up in less enlightened times. We may consciously abhor the casual prejudice that was common in the 60s, and 70s but subconsciously it still affects us a little bit. Best way to address that is to be aware of it.
Curious from Malmesbury's data why Warrington has been chosen and not Manchester? I didn't think the epidemic was worse in Warrington than Manchester and Malmesbury's data seems to say that again.
Andy Burnham probably told the government to F off.
Possibly: 100+ students isolated bumping Manchester's (already high) figures higher - cf how Northampton was treated.. R value worry in Warrington (will check Malmesburys numbers) Travel to work proximity from Liverpool / Halton &c
Warrington is contiguous with both Liverpool and Manchester (with other towns like Widnes which I'm assuming is probably locked down too now along the route) so a lot of people do indeed commute to both cities in normal times.
But the data doesn't seem to explain it. I'm guessing Warrington's getting included as an extension of Liverpool?
I sense much challenging of the stultifying left liberal consensus that somehow and rather magically dominates despite a Tory landslide govt and a heavily right wing press coming our way here.
Right wing press?
With Channel 4, Sky and the BBC all on the left (C4 extremely so, the rest more marginally).
Press. They are skewed heavily to the right. You are talking TV stations. Ch4 is left, no question. Sky and the Beeb are only left if one is viewing from the extreme right. So, ok, assuming it's you doing the viewing (and I hope you have a licence) your comment is sincere and subjectively truthful. Albeit objectively speaking, bollocks.
How is the press right?
TV and radio objectively makes up an overwhelming majority of the press. Name one 'objectively speaking' right-wing TV station that compares to Channel 4, even if you (for some bizarre reason) think BBC and Sky are impartial (perhaps they are coming from your PoV but that should say it all).
And that's without dignifying ITV with Piers Morgan and Robert Peston as being part of the "press".
"The press" is the printed media. The clue is in the title.
I sense much challenging of the stultifying left liberal consensus that somehow and rather magically dominates despite a Tory landslide govt and a heavily right wing press coming our way here.
Right wing press?
With Channel 4, Sky and the BBC all on the left (C4 extremely so, the rest more marginally).
Press. They are skewed heavily to the right. You are talking TV stations. Ch4 is left, no question. Sky and the Beeb are only left if one is viewing from the extreme right. So, ok, assuming it's you doing the viewing (and I hope you have a licence) your comment is sincere and subjectively truthful. Albeit objectively speaking, bollocks.
How is the press right?
TV and radio objectively makes up an overwhelming majority of the press. Name one 'objectively speaking' right-wing TV station that compares to Channel 4, even if you (for some bizarre reason) think BBC and Sky are impartial (perhaps they are coming from your PoV but that should say it all).
And that's without dignifying ITV with Piers Morgan and Robert Peston as being part of the "press".
"Structural racism" sounds like hyperbole to me. It's a bit like "defund the police" or the "Tories are fascists".
Apartheid-era South Africa, the old "White Australia" policy and the Jim Crow South was structural racism. We don't have that today. In fact, I'd say most organisations try desperately to be as inclusive as they can.
I think what people mean by this is that some racially prejudice still persists in 25-30% of the population, and that's not disappearing fast enough.
Fair enough. But I really worry about some of the solutions advocated by those who want to fight it, who seem to think the solution is trashing British history, and weaponising racial difference - like "white privilege" and "white fragility" - as a tool of anti-racism. I think we can overcook the problem too - black and white intermarriage rates in the UK have been good for some time now, and opposition to interracial marriage today is almost non-existent - so let's keep it in proportion and not undo all the good work.
The answer, as I've said before, is quite boring: it's to get all races to talk, mix and socialise more and keep working at it - including getting more ethnic minority role models - so we all see we can all take the same paths and we eventually become blind to everything except each other's characters.
I broadly agree but you should also consider 'unconcious bias' which we all have - especially those of us brought up in less enlightened times. We may consciously abhor the casual prejudice that was common in the 60s, and 70s but subconsciously it still affects us a little bit. Best way to address that is to be aware of it.
On that one the only one I am aware of is the Irish.
They were the butt of all jokes until fairly recently, usually typecast as simple and stupid - "Paddy" jokes. There's a whole Fawlty Towers episode based around it.
A preview of him claiming to have won the election bigly in the face of results that say the opposite.
Trump finds himself very very friendless when Fox calls Michigan half an hour in.
Indeed. Trump will find himself very alone if/when he loses.
Just like his British counterpart Jeremy Corbyn, he will end up a laughing stock that even his own former allies said they had nothing to do with and the party would be under new leadership rapidly. There will be a dying band of hardcore loyalists claiming to have won the argument, but they'll be laughed at even by his parties own side.
The Republicans could find themselves in more of a pickle than Labour did.
Even in the 2019 election, there were plenty of Labour people running on a "nothing to do with Jez" ticket. Even someone like Starmer was clearly doing some of his campaign with his fingers crossed. As a result, the "Under new management" messaging has been broadly accepted, and Conservative attempts to make "you supported Corbyn" an attack line haven't really worked.
For various reasons (being in power, the role of right wing shouty media), the Republicans have been much more Trumpified. It's much harder to point to a resistance, or a party in exile, who can take over after a Trump defeat. One might say the same of a post-Johnson Conservative party, as well.
Not entirely true, 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney voted to impeach Trump and Cindy McCain, widow of the 2008 GOP nominee has endorsed Biden.
I don't remember any former Labour leaders or their wives actually endorsing the Tories in 2019 or 2017 even if they hated Corbyn?
It should also be pointed out that while Starmer is more moderate than Corbyn ideologically he is closer to Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown than he is to Tony Blair
"Structural racism" sounds like hyperbole to me. It's a bit like "defund the police" or the "Tories are fascists".
Apartheid-era South Africa, the old "White Australia" policy and the Jim Crow South was structural racism. We don't have that today. In fact, I'd say most organisations try desperately to be as inclusive as they can.
I think what people mean by this is that some racially prejudice still persists in 25-30% of the population, and that's not disappearing fast enough.
Fair enough. But I really worry about some of the solutions advocated by those who want to fight it, who seem to think the solution is trashing British history, and weaponising racial difference - like "white privilege" and "white fragility" - as a tool of anti-racism. I think we can overcook the problem too - black and white intermarriage rates in the UK have been good for some time now, and opposition to interracial marriage today is almost non-existent - so let's keep it in proportion and not undo all the good work.
The answer, as I've said before, is quite boring: it's to get all races to talk, mix and socialise more and keep working at it - including getting more ethnic minority role models - so we all see we can all take the same paths and we eventually become blind to everything except each other's characters.
I broadly agree but you should also consider 'unconcious bias' which we all have - especially those of us brought up in less enlightened times. We may consciously abhor the casual prejudice that was common in the 60s, and 70s but subconsciously it still affects us a little bit. Best way to address that is to be aware of it.
On that one the only one I am aware of is the Irish.
They were the butt of all jokes until fairly recently, usually typecast as simple and stupid - "Paddy" jokes. There's a whole Fawlty Towers episode based around it.
No wonder they got pissed off.
I've also heard black people talk about how it's seen as charming when white kids run around happily in a bank queue but when black kids do it they're viewed with a bit more hostility and menace.
That's actually useful as it helps you see something from another person's point of view. What isn't useful is putting people through unconscious bias test to "expose" their bias, prejudice or privilege.
This is why I think talking and exchanging experiences is so important and why critical race theory isn't.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
In Scotland we keep being told "stick with it". Undoubtedly lives are being saved. But the worry is very much that the process of saving lives has become so all-encompassing that everything else is rendered totally unimportant, that no-one else is to have an existence in the meantime. To question this strategy is to be marked as a denier, a person on the fringe, a loony.
I think people will tolerate for the winter, providing Christmas is not totally cancelled, even if it is disrupted somewhat. I think by spring people will be done with it and governments will need a new strategy.
"Structural racism" sounds like hyperbole to me. It's a bit like "defund the police" or the "Tories are fascists".
Apartheid-era South Africa, the old "White Australia" policy and the Jim Crow South was structural racism. We don't have that today. In fact, I'd say most organisations try desperately to be as inclusive as they can.
I think what people mean by this is that some racially prejudice still persists in 25-30% of the population, and that's not disappearing fast enough.
Fair enough. But I really worry about some of the solutions advocated by those who want to fight it, who seem to think the solution is trashing British history, and weaponising racial difference - like "white privilege" and "white fragility" - as a tool of anti-racism. I think we can overcook the problem too - black and white intermarriage rates in the UK have been good for some time now, and opposition to interracial marriage today is almost non-existent - so let's keep it in proportion and not undo all the good work.
The answer, as I've said before, is quite boring: it's to get all races to talk, mix and socialise more and keep working at it - including getting more ethnic minority role models - so we all see we can all take the same paths and we eventually become blind to everything except each other's characters.
I broadly agree but you should also consider 'unconcious bias' which we all have - especially those of us brought up in less enlightened times. We may consciously abhor the casual prejudice that was common in the 60s, and 70s but subconsciously it still affects us a little bit. Best way to address that is to be aware of it.
On that one the only one I am aware of is the Irish.
They were the butt of all jokes until fairly recently, usually typecast as simple and stupid - "Paddy" jokes. There's a whole Fawlty Towers episode based around it.
No wonder they got pissed off.
I've also heard black people talk about how it's seen as charming when white kids run around happily in a bank queue but when black kids do it they're viewed with a bit more hostility and menace.
That's actually useful as it helps you see something from another person's point of view. What isn't useful is putting people through unconscious bias test to "expose" their bias, prejudice or privilege.
This is why I think talking and exchanging experiences is so important and why critical race theory isn't.
A good discussion on critical race theory in a US context, where they’re much further down that rabbit hole than the UK, thankfully.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
So that's how it is forever? We can't risk what we used to call normal life "just in case"?
That`s about the sum of it, Isam. I`m with you but we are still swimming against the tide. Risk aversion and precautionary principle is coming from the right and the left on this (but mainly the left) and the government is cacking itself through fear of being criticised. We mourn the weakening of our liberties and our economy, but I`m afraid too many people either do not share our concerns or are too ignorant to understand them.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Shouldn't we be trying to identify the superspreaders*? If they could be identified, then asking them to self-quarantine would enable the rest to revert to the way things used to be. Of course the superspreaders shouldn't be treated like lepers, just taken out of circulation in the nicest possible way - perhaps in The Savoy on public subsidy so that they might feel they have won a prize.
* as per the Tufekci article in The Atlantic referred to earlier.
It seems likely that people are very infectious for a day or two, but not much either side. As such it is not likely that there is a type of person who will be a super spreader, rather an unlucky combination of someone being very infectious on the same day as the choir outing on the minibus, or the naughty wedding with 200 people.
This is spot on: it's the combination of person at their most infectious and activity where lots of people are crammed together (public transport, nightclubs, choirs, karaoke bars).
And 15 minute antigen tests (that require no laboratory or specialist staff) are exceptionally good at identifying *exactly* those people.
If we combine rapid antigen testing, with some moderate restrictions over the most high risk activities, we can get on top of this, with very few restrictions on everyday life.
The thing is they are not "exceptionally good" at identifying those people - which is one reason why our government hasn't already spent a lot of money on deploying them.
What they are is good enough to pick up a large proportion of those people - which in cluster events is all that you need - in the same way that a positive result from a pooled test already tells you most of what you need to know before you retest to identify which particular individuals are infected.
The failure of our administration to grasp this simple idea is the biggest reason we don't already have the testing system we need. That, and the failure to acknowledge the the least useful test is the one you don't conduct at all.
Remember the Chinese antigen tests which we ridiculed massively (and quite reasonably) at the beginning of the year for their dismal lack of accuracy ? Even they could have had some utility in the right circumstances - and playing around with that might have taught us a lot more about how to deal with testing uncertainties.
I think some of this attitude comes from SAGE. I've seen reports from it, or its subcommittees, that seem to approach it from the point of view of a medic: if it isn't reliable, we can't use it at all. I think public health experts are so used to thinking in these terms (which are quite sensible when you're doing screening for some kind of cancer where unnecessary treatment is a tangible harm) that they aren't thinking like a statistician and reducing risk.
As it happens my expertise is precisely on what you can and cannot detect and how to pool weak detectors to reduce risk (in certain settings) but the various calls for participation that went from government to academics did not seek input from my community. I think that was a loss.
--AS
Sounds like a missed opportunity.
It could also explain why some lesser developed countries have been surprisingly successful in controlling the disease - they have far more experience with operating public health systems with constrained resources, and don't get hung up on unreachable perfection.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
Yes, they're a C-rated pollster with a distinct pro-Dem leaning, as that rather squiffy debate evaluation suggests. Still, it's a big lead and a movement in favor of the challenger. Not quite what the Donald would want.
Sporting Index is continuing to mark up the challenger. The ECV spread is now:
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
So that's how it is forever? We can't risk what we used to call normal life "just in case"?
That`s about the sum of it, Isam. I`m with you but we are still swimming against the tide. Risk aversion and precautionary principle is coming from the right and the left on this (but mainly the left) and the government is cacking itself through fear of being criticised. We mourn the weakening of our liberties and our economy, but I`m afraid too many people either do not share our concerns or are too ignorant to understand them.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
A Biden landslide would also make it more likely Boris would go in a year or two to be replaced by Sunak and No Deal would be less likely, now the internal markets bill has passed the Commons a Biden administration would refuse a UK US FTA making an EU trade deal more necessary to protect the post Covid economy and reduce the need to amend the WA, even if it involved conceding on state aid
A preview of him claiming to have won the election bigly in the face of results that say the opposite.
Trump finds himself very very friendless when Fox calls Michigan half an hour in.
Indeed. Trump will find himself very alone if/when he loses.
Just like his British counterpart Jeremy Corbyn, he will end up a laughing stock that even his own former allies said they had nothing to do with and the party would be under new leadership rapidly. There will be a dying band of hardcore loyalists claiming to have won the argument, but they'll be laughed at even by his parties own side.
The Republicans could find themselves in more of a pickle than Labour did.
Even in the 2019 election, there were plenty of Labour people running on a "nothing to do with Jez" ticket. Even someone like Starmer was clearly doing some of his campaign with his fingers crossed. As a result, the "Under new management" messaging has been broadly accepted, and Conservative attempts to make "you supported Corbyn" an attack line haven't really worked.
For various reasons (being in power, the role of right wing shouty media), the Republicans have been much more Trumpified. It's much harder to point to a resistance, or a party in exile, who can take over after a Trump defeat. One might say the same of a post-Johnson Conservative party, as well.
Other than those who have become outcasts, the party has capitulated almost entirely to Trump - the extreme personification being Lindsey Graham and his progression from never-Trumper to lickspittle.
An endless death by attrition of our businesses is, to coin a phrase, simply an unviable strategy. Italy has, after an appalling start - and, perhaps, because of it - done well at balancing safety and the economy. Why can’t we learn from them?
Because the Italians are not world-beating. The UK is.
(Cue the National Anthem and pictures of crowds waving Union Flags)
Or it could be that we just have a bunch of talentless jerks in charge who listen to few and fail to understand those that they do listen to.
Or maybe they just do not give a f***? With all the unaccountability going on, I wonder how many are feathering their nests and packing their bank accounts?
Whatever the reason, it is not good for UK plc and the average person in the street.
Italy just happens to have the yellow jersey today. Do this: get an alphabetical list of EU countries and google news search it systematically. Lockdowns, states of emergency, protests, riots, useless govts and furious opps. We are mediocre, not even exceptionally useless. Also, politician nest-feathering is a brave battle ground to pick in an Italy vs ROW comparison.
In truth how 'well' a country has done is a multi-factorial affair. Italy experienced a very focussed initial outbreak, with much of the country not really affected. This is oddly similar now to the UK situation - where I sit in Wiltshire the pandemic, at the moment, is happening to other people. In the UK we seeded many outbreaks at the start, and experienced a widespread outbreak. Some love to blame the government as they hate the Tories, or Boris, but its unlikely that any government would have done much better at the start.
Total rubbish. The incompetence of this government has exacerbated the pandemic, and one very much can, and should, compare our lamentable performance with other countries. That incompetence starts like a rotting fish head at the top, and spreads through the government, largely through Johnson's preference for only appointing lackies and lightweights that don't question his scant regard for detail and total lack of leadership skills. I don't "hate" Boris, as you cringingly refer to him, but I do believe he is hopelessly out of his depth, and he is not PM material, even in normal times.
So what explains the Scottish situation, or the Welsh? I agree with you about the Prime Minister (better?) - he is not suited for the job, and I heartily wish he was replaced. The government followed the scientific advice, the same advice would have been given to a Labour Government (under Corbyn? Perhaps with his brother as Chief Scientific Advisor?) and the outcome the same. This government has made many mistakes, and at the moment the lack of clarity with the rules in different regions is a classic example of this. I still believe that the initial seeding on the country, as shown by the genetic analysis of the infections, set us on a course which was nigh on impossible to avoid with the knowledge we had at the time.
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
I said 'similarly amiable but no intellectual' so no, I am saying he and Biden are similar in personality but neither intellectuals
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
I think it depends if a comma is understood to be before or after the phrase "but no intellectual".
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
I said 'similarly amiable but no intellectual' so no, I am saying he and Biden are similar in personality but neither intellectuals
Ok. I read it as 'Biden is similarly amiable [to Reagan] but [unlike Reagan] no intellectual' .
A Biden landslide would also make it more likely Boris would go in a year or two to be replaced by Sunak and No Deal would be less likely, now the internal markets bill has passed the Commons a Biden administration would refuse a UK US FTA making an EU trade deal more necessary to protect the post Covid economy and reduce the need to amend the WA, even if it involved conceding on state aid
To protect the economy, what other concessions will you and Johnson accept? Serious question.
A Biden landslide would also make it more likely Boris would go in a year or two to be replaced by Sunak and No Deal would be less likely, now the internal markets bill has passed the Commons a Biden administration would refuse a UK US FTA making an EU trade deal more necessary to protect the post Covid economy and reduce the need to amend the WA, even if it involved conceding on state aid
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
I think it depends if a comma is understood to be before or after the phrase "but no intellectual".
You should not put a comma before but unless it is connecting 2 independent clauses which was not the case here
Over the next few weeks there’s going to be a big increase in early voting in person and by mail so these will start becoming more important in the polling as that starts to include more actual votes .
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
I think it depends if a comma is understood to be before or after the phrase "but no intellectual".
You should not put a comma before but unless it is connecting 2 independent clauses which was not the case here
It should have been a comma instead of a but: "Similarly amiable, no intellectual but with the common touch."
A Biden landslide would also make it more likely Boris would go in a year or two to be replaced by Sunak and No Deal would be less likely, now the internal markets bill has passed the Commons a Biden administration would refuse a UK US FTA making an EU trade deal more necessary to protect the post Covid economy and reduce the need to amend the WA, even if it involved conceding on state aid
To protect the economy, what other concessions will you and Johnson accept? Serious question.
The winning Tory manifesto promised to leave the EEA and CU and regain control of our fishing waters so that has to be delivered (and some EU members are pushing Barnier to compromise on fishing) but a deal can be done with some concessions on state aid
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
If true it would be the biggest landslide in a US presidential election since Reagan beat Mondale 59% to 41% in 1984
I can’t see Biden winning by anything like that 13 point lead . I’d expect things to be much closer . I think that poll might be an outlier and best to wait for some of the bigger names to report .
We will see, if it is correct though Biden could end up like a Democratic Reagan, though even older than Reagan was when he took office. Similarly amiable but no intellectual with the common touch.
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
Wait - are you saying Reagan was an intellectual??
I think it depends if a comma is understood to be before or after the phrase "but no intellectual".
You should not put a comma before but unless it is connecting 2 independent clauses which was not the case here
It should have been a comma instead of a but: "Similarly amiable, no intellectual but with the common touch."
Not if the but leads onto a further description of the characteristics of both
Shouldn't we be trying to identify the superspreaders*? If they could be identified, then asking them to self-quarantine would enable the rest to revert to the way things used to be. Of course the superspreaders shouldn't be treated like lepers, just taken out of circulation in the nicest possible way - perhaps in The Savoy on public subsidy so that they might feel they have won a prize.
* as per the Tufekci article in The Atlantic referred to earlier.
It seems likely that people are very infectious for a day or two, but not much either side. As such it is not likely that there is a type of person who will be a super spreader, rather an unlucky combination of someone being very infectious on the same day as the choir outing on the minibus, or the naughty wedding with 200 people.
This is spot on: it's the combination of person at their most infectious and activity where lots of people are crammed together (public transport, nightclubs, choirs, karaoke bars).
And 15 minute antigen tests (that require no laboratory or specialist staff) are exceptionally good at identifying *exactly* those people.
If we combine rapid antigen testing, with some moderate restrictions over the most high risk activities, we can get on top of this, with very few restrictions on everyday life.
The thing is they are not "exceptionally good" at identifying those people - which is one reason why our government hasn't already spent a lot of money on deploying them.
What they are is good enough to pick up a large proportion of those people - which in cluster events is all that you need - in the same way that a positive result from a pooled test already tells you most of what you need to know before you retest to identify which particular individuals are infected.
The failure of our administration to grasp this simple idea is the biggest reason we don't already have the testing system we need. That, and the failure to acknowledge the the least useful test is the one you don't conduct at all.
Remember the Chinese antigen tests which we ridiculed massively (and quite reasonably) at the beginning of the year for their dismal lack of accuracy ? Even they could have had some utility in the right circumstances - and playing around with that might have taught us a lot more about how to deal with testing uncertainties.
I think some of this attitude comes from SAGE. I've seen reports from it, or its subcommittees, that seem to approach it from the point of view of a medic: if it isn't reliable, we can't use it at all. I think public health experts are so used to thinking in these terms (which are quite sensible when you're doing screening for some kind of cancer where unnecessary treatment is a tangible harm) that they aren't thinking like a statistician and reducing risk.
As it happens my expertise is precisely on what you can and cannot detect and how to pool weak detectors to reduce risk (in certain settings) but the various calls for participation that went from government to academics did not seek input from my community. I think that was a loss.
--AS
On the contrary, Public Health doctors are not frontline clinical staff, and very comfortable with tests that are less accurate, then clarified by a more specific test. For example mammography refers 10 women for every true diagnosis. It is hospital clinicians who desire greater accuracy.
Btw: Inpatient cases are stable in Leicester at 34, compared to 33 last week and 31 the week before. Up from 8 at the end of August, but half what they were at the end of May.
A shot in the dark, I know, but there is an outside possibility that it has something to do with the screens, masks, social distancing, etc. that are now part of our everyday lives, but weren't in March.
So that's how it is forever? We can't risk what we used to call normal life "just in case"?
That`s about the sum of it, Isam. I`m with you but we are still swimming against the tide. Risk aversion and precautionary principle is coming from the right and the left on this (but mainly the left) and the government is cacking itself through fear of being criticised. We mourn the weakening of our liberties and our economy, but I`m afraid too many people either do not share our concerns or are too ignorant to understand them.
Don't blame the Left, the Tories have an 80 seat majority and are in charge. If they wanted to do something different they can.
The idea that these restrictions are life ending seems strange to me.
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
? Businesses going bust, public finances buggered, children`s economic futures in peril, children`s social lives gone, lost freedom to travel, even when you manage travel some jerks look at you like you`re a piece of shit on their shoe, almost all shopping online, coffee shops gone (or crap now due to precautions), same with restaurants, old folk in care homes dying without seeing loved ones for months, cultural aspects e.g. theatre dead, students demonised for doing what students do, some people live for going to the footy on Saturdays - gone, freedom to worship gone ... can`t be bothered to go on, and on.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
We have seen a second spike in cases. Will we see a second spike in deaths? Has any country yet had a second spike in deaths? And yes I understand it isn't just about deaths.
Unbelievable arrogance from that SNP MP. By acting so selfishly, she he has potentially passed the infection on to a number of people and will have caused distress to many more. If she had any sense of honour she would resign. The SNP should clearly suspend her. What are the chances?
The idea that these restrictions are life ending seems strange to me.
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
? Businesses going bust, public finances buggered, children`s economic futures in peril, children`s social lives gone, lost freedom to travel, even when you manage travel some jerks look at you like you`re a piece of shit on their shoe, almost all shopping online, coffee shops gone (or crap now due to precautions), same with restaurants, old folk in care homes dying without seeing loved ones for months, cultural aspects e.g. theatre dead, students demonised for doing what students do, some people live for going to the footy on Saturdays - gone, freedom to worship gone ... can`t be bothered to go on, and on.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
Are you satirising or illustrating his point? Coffee shops gone - oh, the humanity!
ITV commenting on Margaret Ferrier SNP MP said it was shocking and extraordinary that she traveled to Westminster with symptoms and then unbelievable travelled back to Scotland on the train having had a positive test
They said there will be serious repercussions in Parliament and the SNP tonight
And to be fair, this is worse than Cummings idiotic escapade
We have seen a second spike in cases. Will we see a second spike in deaths? Has any country yet had a second spike in deaths? And yes I understand it isn't just about deaths.
Unbelievable arrogance from that SNP MP. By acting so selfishly, she he has potentially passed the infection on to a number of people and will have caused distress to many more. If she had any sense of honour she would resign. The SNP should clearly suspend her. What are the chances?
They have no choice.
She has put all mps and staff in the HOC at risk and all those on her train journey
First poll out that includes sampling that covers the debate and the day after by CNBC/Change Research . I think the pollster might have a Dem lean but still the figures show an increase in 4 points in Biden’s lead compared to their last poll.
Biden 54 Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53 Trump 29
Yes, they're a C-rated pollster with a distinct pro-Dem leaning, as that rather squiffy debate evaluation suggests. Still, it's a big lead and a movement in favor of the challenger. Not quite what the Donald would want.
Sporting Index is continuing to mark up the challenger. The ECV spread is now:
The idea that these restrictions are life ending seems strange to me.
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
? Businesses going bust, public finances buggered, children`s economic futures in peril, children`s social lives gone, lost freedom to travel, even when you manage travel some jerks look at you like you`re a piece of shit on their shoe, almost all shopping online, coffee shops gone (or crap now due to precautions), same with restaurants, old folk in care homes dying without seeing loved ones for months, cultural aspects e.g. theatre dead, students demonised for doing what students do, some people live for going to the footy on Saturdays - gone, freedom to worship gone ... can`t be bothered to go on, and on.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
No, I was saying that we aren't in the situation of DIY war crimes. COVID wardens are a bit of joke. Ronda Campesina were something else....
Try living in a country where the poor dream of unemployment under 30%. Where the electricity is sometimes on. Where being politically involved means which way you point your gun....
Unbelievable arrogance from that SNP MP. By acting so selfishly, she he has potentially passed the infection on to a number of people and will have caused distress to many more. If she had any sense of honour she would resign. The SNP should clearly suspend her. What are the chances?
They have no choice.
She has put all mps and staff in the HOC at risk and all those on her train journey
The idea that these restrictions are life ending seems strange to me.
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
? Businesses going bust, public finances buggered, children`s economic futures in peril, children`s social lives gone, lost freedom to travel, even when you manage travel some jerks look at you like you`re a piece of shit on their shoe, almost all shopping online, coffee shops gone (or crap now due to precautions), same with restaurants, old folk in care homes dying without seeing loved ones for months, cultural aspects e.g. theatre dead, students demonised for doing what students do, some people live for going to the footy on Saturdays - gone, freedom to worship gone ... can`t be bothered to go on, and on.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
Are you satirising or illustrating his point? Coffee shops gone - oh, the humanity!
ITV commenting on Margaret Ferrier SNP MP said it was shocking and extraordinary that she traveled to Westminster with symptoms and then unbelievable travelled back to Scotland on the train having had a positive test
They said there will be serious repercussions in Parliament and the SNP tonight
And to be fair, this is worse than Cummings idiotic escapade
Like Cummings this is volume turned up to eleven serious.
Nippy has to do to Ferrier what she did to Calderwood.
The idea that these restrictions are life ending seems strange to me.
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
? Businesses going bust, public finances buggered, children`s economic futures in peril, children`s social lives gone, lost freedom to travel, even when you manage travel some jerks look at you like you`re a piece of shit on their shoe, almost all shopping online, coffee shops gone (or crap now due to precautions), same with restaurants, old folk in care homes dying without seeing loved ones for months, cultural aspects e.g. theatre dead, students demonised for doing what students do, some people live for going to the footy on Saturdays - gone, freedom to worship gone ... can`t be bothered to go on, and on.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
Are you satirising or illustrating his point? Coffee shops gone - oh, the humanity!
Wonderful beasts. I kayaked over a couple once in shallow water in the Keys. They are massive - a flick of a tail would have flipped my kayak over.
ITV commenting on Margaret Ferrier SNP MP said it was shocking and extraordinary that she traveled to Westminster with symptoms and then unbelievable travelled back to Scotland on the train having had a positive test
They said there will be serious repercussions in Parliament and the SNP tonight
And to be fair, this is worse than Cummings idiotic escapade
It is 100 times worse than Cummings. He was just in a car with his family. But still the Cummings story was the biggest news event of the past 20 years eclipsing the Irag War, 9/11 etc etc
The idea that these restrictions are life ending seems strange to me.
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
? Businesses going bust, public finances buggered, children`s economic futures in peril, children`s social lives gone, lost freedom to travel, even when you manage travel some jerks look at you like you`re a piece of shit on their shoe, almost all shopping online, coffee shops gone (or crap now due to precautions), same with restaurants, old folk in care homes dying without seeing loved ones for months, cultural aspects e.g. theatre dead, students demonised for doing what students do, some people live for going to the footy on Saturdays - gone, freedom to worship gone ... can`t be bothered to go on, and on.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
Are you satirising or illustrating his point? Coffee shops gone - oh, the humanity!
Wonderful beasts. I kayaked over a couple once in shallow water in the Keys. They are massive - a flick of a tail would have flipped my kayak over.
Comments
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1311699286661398528?s=20
(*Ohio, N Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Arizona)
Edit: Georgia is actually level at the moment according to 538.
We can surely all agree we don't want to be in the same situation either? Except maybe contrarian.
Similar stuff in Spain - local government not liking lockdowns...
As someone commented earlier - google search on European countries in alphabetical order to find out what is really happening in Europe....
Apartheid-era South Africa, the old "White Australia" policy and the Jim Crow South was structural racism. We don't have that today. In fact, I'd say most organisations try desperately to be as inclusive as they can.
I think what people mean by this is that some racially prejudice still persists in 25-30% of the population, and that's not disappearing fast enough.
Fair enough. But I really worry about some of the solutions advocated by those who want to fight it, who seem to think the solution is trashing British history, and weaponising racial difference - like "white privilege" and "white fragility" - as a tool of anti-racism. I think we can overcook the problem too - black and white intermarriage rates in the UK have been good for some time now, and opposition to interracial marriage today is almost non-existent - so let's keep it in proportion and not undo all the good work.
The answer, as I've said before, is quite boring: it's to get all races to talk, mix and socialise more and keep working at it - including getting more ethnic minority role models - so we all see we can all take the same paths and we eventually become blind to everything except each other's characters.
Nobody is denying that there are fewer people dying now than in the Spring. IF that is because the virus has changed, or because treatments have improved enormously, then fine - that's an interesting argument for a more relaxed approach. But if it's because the actual number of cases was much higher then (testing few people at that time) or because the age profile has changed for the moment as it rips through universities and so on, then it's less relevant.
Corbyn was a reaction to the other 2015 leadership contenders all initially stating that Labour had no choice but to accept austerity. There was nothing more deep-rooted behind it. There were attempts to create popular anti-austerity campaigns during 2010-15 that sunk without a trace.
Press + broadcasters = media.
100+ students isolated bumping Manchester's (already high) figures higher - cf how Northampton was treated..
R value worry in Warrington (will check Malmesburys numbers)
Travel to work proximity from Liverpool / Halton &c
But the data doesn't seem to explain it. I'm guessing Warrington's getting included as an extension of Liverpool?
But I accept my formula should be: Press + broadcasters + online news sites = media.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom
A right-wing dominated list there, both as regards titles and circulation. This is why we often speak of our "right wing press".
But there are exceptions thank goodness - the Guardian and the Mirror.
They were the butt of all jokes until fairly recently, usually typecast as simple and stupid - "Paddy" jokes. There's a whole Fawlty Towers episode based around it.
No wonder they got pissed off.
I don't remember any former Labour leaders or their wives actually endorsing the Tories in 2019 or 2017 even if they hated Corbyn?
It should also be pointed out that while Starmer is more moderate than Corbyn ideologically he is closer to Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown than he is to Tony Blair
That's actually useful as it helps you see something from another person's point of view. What isn't useful is putting people through unconscious bias test to "expose" their bias, prejudice or privilege.
This is why I think talking and exchanging experiences is so important and why critical race theory isn't.
Biden 54
Trump 41
In terms of who won the debate .
Biden 53
Trump 29
This is from NBC
In Scotland we keep being told "stick with it". Undoubtedly lives are being saved. But the worry is very much that the process of saving lives has become so all-encompassing that everything else is rendered totally unimportant, that no-one else is to have an existence in the meantime. To question this strategy is to be marked as a denier, a person on the fringe, a loony.
I think people will tolerate for the winter, providing Christmas is not totally cancelled, even if it is disrupted somewhat. I think by spring people will be done with it and governments will need a new strategy.
and some interesting stuff from Gallup.
Check out the predictions of who the respondents think will win. 25% of the dems polled think Trump will win! lol
https://twitter.com/MargaretFerrier/status/1311709993243152387
https://youtube.com/watch?v=fbCmbLsW0r8
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1311685130499444737
It took the Democrats 12 years to return to the White House after Carter's landslide defeat to Reagan in 1980, Carter was the last President who lost after only 1 term of his party in the White House. If Trump is trounced by that big a margin the GOP would be equally likely to be out of the White House for a generation
It could also explain why some lesser developed countries have been surprisingly successful in controlling the disease - they have far more experience with operating public health systems with constrained resources, and don't get hung up on unreachable perfection.
Sporting Index is continuing to mark up the challenger. The ECV spread is now:
Biden: 305/311
Trump: 227/233
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/rutherglen-mp-calls-dominic-cummings-22084664
Perhaps Dom might offer his advice to Ms Ferrier.
https://twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1311702194979209216
Perhaps it is perspective - I have relatives who lived in a country, where the loony Maoists were a lethal problem.
And in the end, the only way to deal with the problem was to form private armies and massacre them yourself.
Compared to that, not being able to get roaring drunk at the pub and limit your social contacts a bit for a year seems quite mild really.
Feels kinda futile to be arguing against giving up on stopping the virus when an MP does something like that.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1311718543235440641
This coincides with the new restrictions for Conwy starting at 6.00pm
Btw: Inpatient cases are stable in Leicester at 34, compared to 33 last week and 31 the week before. Up from 8 at the end of August, but half what they were at the end of May.
Quite mild really. As you say, at least we`re not being murdered by Maoists. Gotta look on the bright side.
7.15 Ms Ferrier in Hansard - speaking on Covid 19. No mention of that wee test result.
Good of her to sign EDM calling for Dominic Cummings to resign.
They said there will be serious repercussions in Parliament and the SNP tonight
And to be fair, this is worse than Cummings idiotic escapade
She has put all mps and staff in the HOC at risk and all those on her train journey
Try living in a country where the poor dream of unemployment under 30%. Where the electricity is sometimes on. Where being politically involved means which way you point your gun....
https://twitter.com/BBCHelenCatt/status/1311717192132685827
Nippy has to do to Ferrier what she did to Calderwood.