That's a disaster. Very bad news for everyone there.
Yes, it's bad news indeed.
It’s not total lockdown
Back in Madrid, the Madrid Hostelería association regrets the "imminent" closure of the premises at 11 pm due to the new measures approved, as there were "thousands of reservations" planned for today: "We do not understand how it has been possible to proceed with such an immediate closure, with just hours, and there are thousands of reservations for tonight, which can mean more than 8 million euros just today ", says the president of the association, Juan José Blardony
It’s mainly travel restrictions and limiting night time socializing, still to be challenged in the courts.
OK, thanks. 11pm...
11pm in Madrid is like 8pm anywhere else
Make like 6pm in London - from when I was there. a lot of places were just getting started. Dead at 10pm. Everyone seemed to go home, have a kip and then go out.
Yup, all the Betfair markets are up but all unmatched money was cancelled.
Sigh.
Trump not finishing his first term is still suspended.
I believe that it is illegal to bet on someone's death? I think that Alastair Meeks did a header on this some time back.
Yes but the bet isn't on his death, merely on him not finishing his first term.
I have money on this, not because of his death, but I have taken the view that he will walk away rather than lose. Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em. He now has the perfect excuse.
Maybe the airing given to that chart by Hartley Brewer, Hodges et al, meant that it did its work in supressing R. Because actually cases were rising exponentially until last week and then stopped suddenly, in England.
Re Supreme Court - even if Barrett doesn't get Covid there could still be a delay.
eg Senate Judiciary Committee may be impacted and also full Senate. I think votes in Senate have to be in person - so all it would need would be for two or three Republican senators to get it to wipe out majority (assuming Collins and Murkowski stick to voting No).
Joe Biden £2,488.87 Donald Trump -£2,780.59 Kamala Harris £1,266.02 Hillary Clinton £2,034.02 Mike Pence £3,545.36 Michelle Obama £1,266.02 Michael Bloomberg £1,266.02
I personally still think the rule of 6 is working. Anecdotally my social circle is making it work because it's very easy to understand. 6 or less yes, 7 or more no.
Not really sure why you'd want to be green on Pence but red on Trump but I guess at the prices it is just a throwaway fiver. If it were Biden who'd succumbed, then things would be more interesting. Remember it was Bernie Sanders who came second in the primaries, not Kamala Harris. Fortunately, we should never have to worry about this.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Last month I told my girlfriend she had better make me more cups of tea else I might consider dating Cheryl Cole AND Amanda Holden as well as her. Since then she has made me one extra cup of tea per week and I haven't been in contact with either of them
Last month I told my girlfriend she had better make me more cups of tea else I might consider dating Cheryl Cole AND Amanda Holden as well as her. Since then she has made me one extra cup of tea per week and I haven't been in contact with either of them
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I personally still think the rule of 6 is working. Anecdotally my social circle is making it work because it's very easy to understand. 6 or less yes, 7 or more no.
Six of us went to the pub and one of our other mates said he was on his way down to join us. One of my dopey mates asked the barmaid if it was ok for him to sit with us or not and she went "Lalalala I didn't hear that"
Arrhh the old he is actually strong as ox, got real determination, young for his age. Remember when people were saying Boris is dead fit because he likes a bike ride and the odd game of tennis.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
Last month I told my girlfriend she had better make me more cups of tea else I might consider dating Cheryl Cole AND Amanda Holden as well as her. Since then she has made me one extra cup of tea per week and I haven't been in contact with either of them
Last month I told my girlfriend she had better make me more cups of tea else I might consider dating Cheryl Cole AND Amanda Holden as well as her. Since then she has made me one extra cup of tea per week and I haven't been in contact with either of them
I don't see why both can't be wrong. Yes i get the argument that it was just an illustration of what could happen if the virus doubled every 7 days, based on a carefully selected bit of data which showed the virus doubling over seven days - and "not a forecast" if we started taking the thing seriously. But does it stand up as a credible outcome if we didn't start taking it seriously? Given that there is little evidence of such a progression occurring anywhere in the world (or certainly during the so-called 'second wave'). And certainly not where figures weren't distorted by parallel increases in testing.
The thing is that even if such a progression was possible, there is strong reason to suspect that people's individual actoions will self limit it of their own accord. There will be a group of society (mainly centred around the younger generations, possibly with little exposure to elderly relatives or the like) who may carry on but they may rapidly run out of people to infect as they allow it to circulate amongst themselves.
But Whitty and Vallance were actually using the graph in part to agitate for tougher GOVERNMENT restrictions on people's liberties and right to choose - and in so doing agitate for measures which would severely impact on business and economic activity. And rumours are that what was implemented didn't come close to what they were asking for.
Just saying "not a forecast" is to my mind, not acceptable as a way of asking for new restrictions. As a way of encouraging the general public to obey existing restrictions/guidelines - OK - but not as a way of seeking more.
And really after 6-9 months we should have a right to expect something a bit more sophisticated from the scientists in charge and modelling the progress of the virus. As a minimum, a range of outcomes matched against a range of implemented restrictions, that will allow testing of models against reality. We should have some data to give reasonable expectations of the effect of wearing masks, or restricting household mixing, or limiting access to pubs, or opening schools or whatever.
Because ultimately there are trade offs that need to be made between combatting the virus and combatting the economic downturn, the impact on education restrictions, the effect of limited access to wider healthcare etc. And decide on an acceptable level of risk from Covid, as set against the downsides of everything else.
In recent days he certainly has added a new dimension to his 'Brexit Hard Man' self image.
Grudgingly agreed.
Baker does seem to have hidden depths, he comes across as decent guy (BLM, care homes) and not the monster of Remainer myth.
I found myself agreeing with much of what he was saying on Sophy Ridge last weekend.
There you go, there are two paragraphs I never thought I’d write.
If nothing else, that he has also now sought to cause Boris trouble in parliament demonstrates he is a committed awkward squad member and was not one of those who was playing at it and would stop once his guy got the top job.
Not if the SNP loses the by election to Labour thanks to Tory and LD tactical voting, that would be a huge boost to Unionists and a damaging blow to the Nationalists
The former Rutherglen seat was held by the Tories from 1951 until falling to Labour at a by-election in early 1964.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
Burn her at the stake
Yes it feels like that doesn`t it. What a country!
I heard the other day there was a serious suggestion at a North Devon village`s parish council meeting to paint crosses on the doors of vacant second-home houses so people would be warned to stay away from plague-ridden urbanites who had the effrontery to visit their own properties.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Wasn't there some suggestion earlier that she hasn't actually broken any laws. Or laws that were in place at the time of her actions?
Not if the SNP loses the by election to Labour thanks to Tory and LD tactical voting, that would be a huge boost to Unionists and a damaging blow to the Nationalists
Dream on!
No voter under a certain age, has ever heard of Labour in Scotland. And for everyone else their memories don't go back far enough to remember them.
Labour did gain the seat in 2017 . This has to be one of their recovery hopes in Scotland.
I don't see why both can't be wrong. Yes i get the argument that it was just an illustration of what could happen if the virus doubled every 7 days, based on a carefully selected bit of data which showed the virus doubling over seven days - and "not a forecast" if we started taking the thing seriously. But does it stand up as a credible outcome if we didn't start taking it seriously?
That, however reasonable, appears to be a different argument to the one Hodges and Brewer appear to be making though. Certainly in the selected tweets shown they appear to be angry at it as a poor forecast, rather than arguing that it was not credible enough to use illustratively.
No. (Not sure she understands what 'technically' means.)
This is a reasonably common definition of "technically", with the construct A is technically B. It means "I realise even slightly informed people know for a fact A has nothing to do with B but I will put it out there because I would like it to be so"
I personally still think the rule of 6 is working. Anecdotally my social circle is making it work because it's very easy to understand. 6 or less yes, 7 or more no.
Six of us went to the pub and one of our other mates said he was on his way down to join us. One of my dopey mates asked the barmaid if it was ok for him to sit with us or not and she went "Lalalala I didn't hear that"
What are the rules actually on sitting at a table in the pub with six people and communicating (at distance) with somebody on another table? I think this is the problem with the talk of "socialising". It would make a lot more sense if "socialising/mixing" were defined as entering somebody's personal space in a non-socially distanced way (and definitely if without a mask). So, to take an example from the other day, Gallowgate should be able to converse with as many fellow students on a one-to-one basis as he likes, as long as it is always at 2m distance (or 1m plus a mask) or whatever.
No. (Not sure she understands what 'technically' means.)
This is a reasonably common definition of "technically", with the construct A is technically B. It means "I realise even slightly informed people know for a fact A has nothing to do with B but I will put it out there because I would like it to be so"
That's more of an (incorrect) colloquialism than a definition. The latter would be: according to the facts or exact meaning of something; strictly. "technically, a nut is a single-seeded fruit"
I don't see why both can't be wrong. Yes i get the argument that it was just an illustration of what could happen if the virus doubled every 7 days, based on a carefully selected bit of data which showed the virus doubling over seven days - and "not a forecast" if we started taking the thing seriously. But does it stand up as a credible outcome if we didn't start taking it seriously?
That, however reasonable, appears to be a different argument to the one Hodges and Brewer appear to be making though. Certainly in the selected tweets shown they appear to be angry at it as a poor forecast, rather than arguing that it was not credible enough to use illustratively.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
Me too. Ferrier was thoughtless rather than ill intentioned and she seems genuinely sorry. We all have to take the consequences of our actions but we don't all get pilloried in the harsh light of the media.
I don't see why both can't be wrong. Yes i get the argument that it was just an illustration of what could happen if the virus doubled every 7 days, based on a carefully selected bit of data which showed the virus doubling over seven days - and "not a forecast" if we started taking the thing seriously. But does it stand up as a credible outcome if we didn't start taking it seriously? Given that there is little evidence of such a progression occurring anywhere in the world (or certainly during the so-called 'second wave'). And certainly not where figures weren't distorted by parallel increases in testing.
The thing is that even if such a progression was possible, there is strong reason to suspect that people's individual actoions will self limit it of their own accord. There will be a group of society (mainly centred around the younger generations, possibly with little exposure to elderly relatives or the like) who may carry on but they may rapidly run out of people to infect as they allow it to circulate amongst themselves.
But Whitty and Vallance were actually using the graph in part to agitate for tougher GOVERNMENT restrictions on people's liberties and right to choose - and in so doing agitate for measures which would severely impact on business and economic activity. And rumours are that what was implemented didn't come close to what they were asking for.
Just saying "not a forecast" is to my mind, not acceptable as a way of asking for new restrictions. As a way of encouraging the general public to obey existing restrictions/guidelines - OK - but not as a way of seeking more.
And really after 6-9 months we should have a right to expect something a bit more sophisticated from the scientists in charge and modelling the progress of the virus. As a minimum, a range of outcomes matched against a range of implemented restrictions, that will allow testing of models against reality. We should have some data to give reasonable expectations of the effect of wearing masks, or restricting household mixing, or limiting access to pubs, or opening schools or whatever.
Because ultimately there are trade offs that need to be made between combatting the virus and combatting the economic downturn, the impact on education restrictions, the effect of limited access to wider healthcare etc. And decide on an acceptable level of risk from Covid, as set against the downsides of everything else.
I don't see why both can't be wrong. Yes i get the argument that it was just an illustration of what could happen if the virus doubled every 7 days, based on a carefully selected bit of data which showed the virus doubling over seven days - and "not a forecast" if we started taking the thing seriously. But does it stand up as a credible outcome if we didn't start taking it seriously? Given that there is little evidence of such a progression occurring anywhere in the world (or certainly during the so-called 'second wave'). And certainly not where figures weren't distorted by parallel increases in testing.
The thing is that even if such a progression was possible, there is strong reason to suspect that people's individual actoions will self limit it of their own accord. There will be a group of society (mainly centred around the younger generations, possibly with little exposure to elderly relatives or the like) who may carry on but they may rapidly run out of people to infect as they allow it to circulate amongst themselves.
But Whitty and Vallance were actually using the graph in part to agitate for tougher GOVERNMENT restrictions on people's liberties and right to choose - and in so doing agitate for measures which would severely impact on business and economic activity. And rumours are that what was implemented didn't come close to what they were asking for.
Just saying "not a forecast" is to my mind, not acceptable as a way of asking for new restrictions. As a way of encouraging the general public to obey existing restrictions/guidelines - OK - but not as a way of seeking more.
And really after 6-9 months we should have a right to expect something a bit more sophisticated from the scientists in charge and modelling the progress of the virus. As a minimum, a range of outcomes matched against a range of implemented restrictions, that will allow testing of models against reality. We should have some data to give reasonable expectations of the effect of wearing masks, or restricting household mixing, or limiting access to pubs, or opening schools or whatever.
Because ultimately there are trade offs that need to be made between combatting the virus and combatting the economic downturn, the impact on education restrictions, the effect of limited access to wider healthcare etc. And decide on an acceptable level of risk from Covid, as set against the downsides of everything else.
Indeed, if it were not a forecast, what was its purpose, and was it a legitimate tool for that purpose?
I think the criticism is that, no it was never a legitimate tool to any honest, evidence-based approach and was only ever a scaremongering tactic which serves only to further undermine the credibility of the government and its official scientists.
Public messaging has gone from bad to goddamned awful. Not just in the UK, mind.
PS And I say this very mindful of the fact that decision-making must take into account the costs of not doing anything.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
Me too. Ferrier was thoughtless rather than ill intentioned and she seems genuinely sorry. We all have to take the consequences of our actions but we don't all get pilloried in the harsh light of the media.
Drunk drivers who kill people are without exception thoughtless rather than ill intentioned, and genuinely sorry after the event.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
Me too. Ferrier was thoughtless rather than ill intentioned and she seems genuinely sorry. We all have to take the consequences of our actions but we don't all get pilloried in the harsh light of the media.
Drunk drivers who kill people are without exception thoughtless rather than ill intentioned, and genuinely sorry after the event.
I realise that. There should be appropriate consequences, but they should be objective - the same for everyone in the same circumstances - and they should be fair. It is the hounding of Ms Ferrier by the media and the public that bothers me.
I don't see why both can't be wrong. Yes i get the argument that it was just an illustration of what could happen if the virus doubled every 7 days, based on a carefully selected bit of data which showed the virus doubling over seven days - and "not a forecast" if we started taking the thing seriously. But does it stand up as a credible outcome if we didn't start taking it seriously? Given that there is little evidence of such a progression occurring anywhere in the world (or certainly during the so-called 'second wave'). And certainly not where figures weren't distorted by parallel increases in testing.
The thing is that even if such a progression was possible, there is strong reason to suspect that people's individual actoions will self limit it of their own accord. There will be a group of society (mainly centred around the younger generations, possibly with little exposure to elderly relatives or the like) who may carry on but they may rapidly run out of people to infect as they allow it to circulate amongst themselves.
But Whitty and Vallance were actually using the graph in part to agitate for tougher GOVERNMENT restrictions on people's liberties and right to choose - and in so doing agitate for measures which would severely impact on business and economic activity. And rumours are that what was implemented didn't come close to what they were asking for.
Just saying "not a forecast" is to my mind, not acceptable as a way of asking for new restrictions. As a way of encouraging the general public to obey existing restrictions/guidelines - OK - but not as a way of seeking more.
And really after 6-9 months we should have a right to expect something a bit more sophisticated from the scientists in charge and modelling the progress of the virus. As a minimum, a range of outcomes matched against a range of implemented restrictions, that will allow testing of models against reality. We should have some data to give reasonable expectations of the effect of wearing masks, or restricting household mixing, or limiting access to pubs, or opening schools or whatever.
Because ultimately there are trade offs that need to be made between combatting the virus and combatting the economic downturn, the impact on education restrictions, the effect of limited access to wider healthcare etc. And decide on an acceptable level of risk from Covid, as set against the downsides of everything else.
Indeed, if it were not a forecast, what was its purpose, and was it a legitimate tool for that purpose?
I think the criticism is that, no it was never a legitimate tool to any honest, evidence-based approach and was only ever a scaremongering tactic which serves only to further undermine the credibility of the government and its official scientists.
Public messaging has gone from bad to goddamned awful. Not just in the UK, mind.
PS And I say this very mindful of the fact that decision-making must take into account the costs of not doing anything.
Yeah, and they cannot be proved wrong because if the outcome is less than their non-forecast it's because of the tightened policy, while if the outcome approaches or exceeds their non-forecast it shows how right they were whatever. As @Isam has been saying.
I'm not sure if HYFUD has beaten me to it but Biden's lead has been cut with IBD / TIPP to 2.7% from 5.6% amongst likely voters with a poll that was conducted AFTER the Presidential debate....
I'm not sure if HYFUD has beaten me to it but Biden's lead has been cut with IBD / TIPP to 2.7% from 5.6% amongst likely voters with a poll that was conducted AFTER the Presidential debate....
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
Me too. Ferrier was thoughtless rather than ill intentioned and she seems genuinely sorry. We all have to take the consequences of our actions but we don't all get pilloried in the harsh light of the media.
Drunk drivers who kill people are without exception thoughtless rather than ill intentioned, and genuinely sorry after the event.
I realise that. There should be appropriate consequences, but they should be objective - the same for everyone in the same circumstances - and they should be fair. It is the hounding of Ms Ferrier by the media and the public that bothers me.
She comes across as unintelligent & she certainly deserves to be fined.
I guess she set off on her journey pretty sure her test was going to come back negative. And then she panicked when she got the result.
She was stupid & thoughtless. But, Margaret Ferrier does not deserve to be a human sacrifice.
I actually find it unpleasantly creepy that Nicola Sturgeon keeps on calling Margaret Ferrier her friend.
Like EMF, if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.
It must be a very scary experience being Nicola Sturgeon's friend .... I guess, as Alex S & others have found out.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
That, the reporting day deaths graph and no time cut off for deaths have led me to believe that our top scientists are a bit data illiterate or are purposefully presenting a worse scenario, their hypothetical graph could also be either category.
More I think about it. This is Trump' s out if he wants it. Retire the undefeated Champion. And live out his days tweeting what Sleepy Joe ought to do from a "medical facility" overseas. And attempt to provoke a Civil War on the Dems watch.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
That, the reporting day deaths graph and no time cut off for deaths have led me to believe that our top scientists are a bit data illiterate or are purposefully presenting a worse scenario, their hypothetical graph could also be either category.
The day of announcement of death charts had to be a deliberate decision as all the conplete datasets were being made available in the same place / at same time. Just like now with the testing.
I personally still think the rule of 6 is working. Anecdotally my social circle is making it work because it's very easy to understand. 6 or less yes, 7 or more no.
I take it Jeremy Corbyn is not in your social circle then.
That, the reporting day deaths graph and no time cut off for deaths have led me to believe that our top scientists are a bit data illiterate or are purposefully presenting a worse scenario, their hypothetical graph could also be either category.
The day of announcement of death charts had to be a deliberate decision as all the conplete datasets were being made available in the same place / at same time. Just like now with the testing.
I actually sent a long and very ranty email uo PHE way back about this and set up a series of meetings about what they could be doing better to present the data, this is when the old dashboard was still the only data source and the Excel files were the way to get event date data and even that was only hospitals.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Has QAnon released some crazy conspiracy yet? Perhapd how the deep state deliberately infected Trump with COVID to stop him winning the election?
There was something about all this is cover for Trump to go off the radar for a few days to make the final move on Clinton's secret cabal of baby eaters.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Arrhh the old he is actually strong as ox, got real determination, young for his age. Remember when people were saying Boris is dead fit because he likes a bike ride and the odd game of tennis.
Idiots, millions of them, all over the bloody place.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Be quite funny if GOP vote suppression tactics end up costing them.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
I am sensing he is the new plato.
Ok, look I am quite happy to go back and sit in the shadows, and not comment. That's fine. But this is a betting website. There were plenty of people on here - and I think you were one of them - ramping up how we should all go on Biden after that debate because Trump was now toast. We now have the first poll after the debate that shows he has cut Biden's lead. For the sake of your bank balance alone, don't you think you should consider evidence that maybe goes against your views.
For someone who appears to proclaim himself such a liberal, you seem an awfully narrow minded individual.
@MaxPB I don’t see how you think the “rule of 6” is working, when the areas with the most infections have had to deploy “the rule of 0” in order to get the infection “under control”?
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
Indeed.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Trump’s flaws alone won’t bring skeptical Black voters out to vote for Biden
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
I have no problem with opposing views on this site, however implausible.
All the evidence I see is that Trump is too short in the betting, and I think there is an underestimate of the possibility of a Biden landslide.
I reckon Trump won't break 200 EV, and possibly substantially less.
I'm not sure if HYFUD has beaten me to it but Biden's lead has been cut with IBD / TIPP to 2.7% from 5.6% amongst likely voters with a poll that was conducted AFTER the Presidential debate....
"'How vile and evil to get joy from the suffering of others:' GMB viewers slam Dominic West for telling Kate Garraway he 'jumped for joy' over Trump's Covid diagnosis despite her husband Derek battling the disease"
I'm not sure if HYFUD has beaten me to it but Biden's lead has been cut with IBD / TIPP to 2.7% from 5.6% amongst likely voters with a poll that was conducted AFTER the Presidential debate....
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
Indeed.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Trump’s flaws alone won’t bring skeptical Black voters out to vote for Biden
That article nails it. Things like crime are a major issue for the Black community because they are the ones that tend to get impacted the most. Look at the recent murder rates in cities such as Chicago and Philly, they have gone through the roof.
Biden is offering nothing to these voters, just a whole load of platitudes about BLM and systemic racism. It's like seeing your wages cut 10% and someone saying isn't it great GDP has risen 5%. All his talk means nothing to them on a day to day level.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
I am sensing he is the new plato.
Ok, look I am quite happy to go back and sit in the shadows, and not comment. That's fine. But this is a betting website. There were plenty of people on here - and I think you were one of them - ramping up how we should all go on Biden after that debate because Trump was now toast. We now have the first poll after the debate that shows he has cut Biden's lead. For the sake of your bank balance alone, don't you think you should consider evidence that maybe goes against your views.
For someone who appears to proclaim himself such a liberal, you seem an awfully narrow minded individual.
Also, the point about Plato was that she predicted a Trump win this time four years ago. I hope nobody is the new her.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
I have no problem with opposing views on this site, however implausible.
All the evidence I see is that Trump is too short in the betting, and I think there is an underestimate of the possibility of a Biden landslide.
I reckon Trump won't break 200 EV, and possibly substantially less.
And that is fair enough. I can see an argument for that. There are a lot of people who hate his guts. I have said it before but I will repeat it, I have not bet yet because I have no idea how this will go and I can see a scenario where there is a sudden move to one candidate or another. But I can also see a scenario where - if IBD is in the right ballpark - states like NV, MN and maybe even VA come into play
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
Indeed.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Trump’s flaws alone won’t bring skeptical Black voters out to vote for Biden
That article nails it. Things like crime are a major issue for the Black community because they are the ones that tend to get impacted the most. Look at the recent murder rates in cities such as Chicago and Philly, they have gone through the roof.
Biden is offering nothing to these voters, just a whole load of platitudes about BLM and systemic racism. It's like seeing your wages cut 10% and someone saying isn't it great GDP has risen 5%. All his talk means nothing to them on a day to day level.
Trump offers them nothing PLUS a validation of white supremacists.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
Actually not because they not view him as racist. Their view is that the Democrats have treated the Black vote as cannon fodder for too long and are quite happy to keep Black people poor and impoverished to ensure that they keep their votes. When you look at places like Baltimore and Detroit, you can see their point. Also, there is a growing view that they do not want to be treated as victims.
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
Indeed.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Trump’s flaws alone won’t bring skeptical Black voters out to vote for Biden
That article nails it. Things like crime are a major issue for the Black community because they are the ones that tend to get impacted the most. Look at the recent murder rates in cities such as Chicago and Philly, they have gone through the roof.
Biden is offering nothing to these voters, just a whole load of platitudes about BLM and systemic racism. It's like seeing your wages cut 10% and someone saying isn't it great GDP has risen 5%. All his talk means nothing to them on a day to day level.
Trump offers them nothing PLUS a validation of white supremacists.
I'd take the vanilla nothing.
To many of the Black voters considering Trump, the Democrats are not offering them a vanilla nothing, their view is they are offering them a continued world of rundown cities, rampant crime and broken families. Now, we may not think that sitting over there and having the luxury of being able to spend time on a political betting website but, having spent many a hour, in a fair few of the run-down LA neighbourhoods, I wouldn't wish that life on my worst enemy.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
I am sensing he is the new plato.
Ok, look I am quite happy to go back and sit in the shadows, and not comment. That's fine. But this is a betting website. There were plenty of people on here - and I think you were one of them - ramping up how we should all go on Biden after that debate because Trump was now toast. We now have the first poll after the debate that shows he has cut Biden's lead. For the sake of your bank balance alone, don't you think you should consider evidence that maybe goes against your views.
For someone who appears to proclaim himself such a liberal, you seem an awfully narrow minded individual.
Please keep commenting, and ignore the Lefty morons.
She should resign immediately, very soon someone from the house will test positive, and then someone from the train will test positive, and she will be blamed, regardless if she was the cause. Someone may well die, and she will be blamed. Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
Gosh, poor woman, I hope not. No-one should be blamed for passing on a virus without intent.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
Me too. Ferrier was thoughtless rather than ill intentioned and she seems genuinely sorry. We all have to take the consequences of our actions but we don't all get pilloried in the harsh light of the media.
Drunk drivers who kill people are without exception thoughtless rather than ill intentioned, and genuinely sorry after the event.
I realise that. There should be appropriate consequences, but they should be objective - the same for everyone in the same circumstances - and they should be fair. It is the hounding of Ms Ferrier by the media and the public that bothers me.
She comes across as unintelligent & she certainly deserves to be fined.
I guess she set off on her journey pretty sure her test was going to come back negative. And then she panicked when she got the result.
She was stupid & thoughtless. But, Margaret Ferrier does not deserve to be a human sacrifice.
I actually find it unpleasantly creepy that Nicola Sturgeon keeps on calling Margaret Ferrier her friend.
Like EMF, if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.
It must be a very scary experience being Nicola Sturgeon's friend .... I guess, as Alex S & others have found out.
Ferrier's behaviour is not just thoughtless; getting on to a train knowing you have Covid is like getting behind the wheel of a car when you know you are drunk. She had alternatives, however inconvenient. All MP's have London accommodation. I do think she has been selfishly culpable and I'm glad that the leader of her political party is clearly and publicly advising her to resign as an MP. Compare and contrast to Johnson and Cummings.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
It is worth remembering, though, that if
- Black turnout is up 30% and - Trump doubles his share of the black vote to 18%
Then Biden's absolute lead (in terms of number of votes) actually increases.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
I am sensing he is the new plato.
Ok, look I am quite happy to go back and sit in the shadows, and not comment. That's fine. But this is a betting website. There were plenty of people on here - and I think you were one of them - ramping up how we should all go on Biden after that debate because Trump was now toast. We now have the first poll after the debate that shows he has cut Biden's lead. For the sake of your bank balance alone, don't you think you should consider evidence that maybe goes against your views.
For someone who appears to proclaim himself such a liberal, you seem an awfully narrow minded individual.
Also, the point about Plato was that she predicted a Trump win this time four years ago. I hope nobody is the new her.
She didn't. ISTR She thought Hilary would probably win. She wanted Trump to win and thought his chances were being seriously underplayed. So maybe similar to Mr Ed who seems to fulfil the same role. As he said he hasn't bet yet.
Comments
https://twitter.com/DeAnna4Congress/status/1312065805148979202
mind you I'm glad this guy isn't my Doctor
https://twitter.com/drdavidsamadi/status/1312067213105471499
https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1312066770547757057
I have money on this, not because of his death, but I have taken the view that he will walk away rather than lose. Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em. He now has the perfect excuse.
eg Senate Judiciary Committee may be impacted and also full Senate. I think votes in Senate have to be in person - so all it would need would be for two or three Republican senators to get it to wipe out majority (assuming Collins and Murkowski stick to voting No).
Joe Biden
£2,488.87
Donald Trump
-£2,780.59
Kamala Harris
£1,266.02
Hillary Clinton
£2,034.02
Mike Pence
£3,545.36
Michelle Obama
£1,266.02
Michael Bloomberg
£1,266.02
https://twitter.com/DeAnna4Congress/status/1312073105565716488
(Not sure she understands what 'technically' means.)
https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president
Police throw the book at her maximum fine.
I feel terribly sorry for her.
For Cheryl and Amanda.
Baker does seem to have hidden depths, he comes across as decent guy (BLM, care homes) and not the monster of Remainer myth.
I found myself agreeing with much of what he was saying on Sophy Ridge last weekend.
There you go, there are two paragraphs I never thought I’d write.
(Note guy who shakes his hand, and then scratches his nose.)
https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1312061668663361537
The thing is that even if such a progression was possible, there is strong reason to suspect that people's individual actoions will self limit it of their own accord. There will be a group of society (mainly centred around the younger generations, possibly with little exposure to elderly relatives or the like) who may carry on but they may rapidly run out of people to infect as they allow it to circulate amongst themselves.
But Whitty and Vallance were actually using the graph in part to agitate for tougher GOVERNMENT restrictions on people's liberties and right to choose - and in so doing agitate for measures which would severely impact on business and economic activity. And rumours are that what was implemented didn't come close to what they were asking for.
Just saying "not a forecast" is to my mind, not acceptable as a way of asking for new restrictions. As a way of encouraging the general public to obey existing restrictions/guidelines - OK - but not as a way of seeking more.
And really after 6-9 months we should have a right to expect something a bit more sophisticated from the scientists in charge and modelling the progress of the virus. As a minimum, a range of outcomes matched against a range of implemented restrictions, that will allow testing of models against reality. We should have some data to give reasonable expectations of the effect of wearing masks, or restricting household mixing, or limiting access to pubs, or opening schools or whatever.
Because ultimately there are trade offs that need to be made between combatting the virus and combatting the economic downturn, the impact on education restrictions, the effect of limited access to wider healthcare etc. And decide on an acceptable level of risk from Covid, as set against the downsides of everything else.
I heard the other day there was a serious suggestion at a North Devon village`s parish council meeting to paint crosses on the doors of vacant second-home houses so people would be warned to stay away from plague-ridden urbanites who had the effrontery to visit their own properties.
Lots of hugging going on:
https://twitter.com/mattmfm/status/1312060939101929475
The latter would be:
according to the facts or exact meaning of something; strictly.
"technically, a nut is a single-seeded fruit"
I think the criticism is that, no it was never a legitimate tool to any honest, evidence-based approach and was only ever a scaremongering tactic which serves only to further undermine the credibility of the government and its official scientists.
Public messaging has gone from bad to goddamned awful. Not just in the UK, mind.
PS And I say this very mindful of the fact that decision-making must take into account the costs of not doing anything.
https://twitter.com/RP131/status/1312047036741677058?s=19
As @Isam has been saying.
https://www.investors.com/news/joe-biden-lead-over-donald-trump-narrows-after-presidential-debate-ibd-tipp-poll/
I guess she set off on her journey pretty sure her test was going to come back negative. And then she panicked when she got the result.
She was stupid & thoughtless. But, Margaret Ferrier does not deserve to be a human sacrifice.
I actually find it unpleasantly creepy that Nicola Sturgeon keeps on calling Margaret Ferrier her friend.
Like EMF, if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.
It must be a very scary experience being Nicola Sturgeon's friend .... I guess, as Alex S & others have found out.
White voters 53% Trump - 42% Biden (54% - 39%)
Hispanic voters 36.5% Trump - 60% Biden (28% - 66%)
Black voters 15% Trump - 76% Biden
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
Retire the undefeated Champion. And live out his days tweeting what Sleepy Joe ought to do from a "medical facility" overseas.
And attempt to provoke a Civil War on the Dems watch.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
I know it goes against the consensus on this site but - from a betting perspective at least - you should be aware of it because it's a growing factor
For someone who appears to proclaim himself such a liberal, you seem an awfully narrow minded individual.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Trump’s flaws alone won’t bring skeptical Black voters out to vote for Biden
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/earl-ofari-hutchinson-trump-s-flaws-alone-won-t-bring-skeptical-black-voters-out-to-vote-for-biden/ar-BB19w7vy
All the evidence I see is that Trump is too short in the betting, and I think there is an underestimate of the possibility of a Biden landslide.
I reckon Trump won't break 200 EV, and possibly substantially less.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/ibdtipp-poll-nails-it-again/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8797681/GMB-viewers-slam-Dominic-West-jumping-joy-Trumps-coronavirus.html
Biden is offering nothing to these voters, just a whole load of platitudes about BLM and systemic racism. It's like seeing your wages cut 10% and someone saying isn't it great GDP has risen 5%. All his talk means nothing to them on a day to day level.
I'd take the vanilla nothing.
- Black turnout is up 30%
and
- Trump doubles his share of the black vote to 18%
Then Biden's absolute lead (in terms of number of votes) actually increases.
91 - 9 = an 82 vote lead
107 - 23 = an 84 vote lead
So maybe similar to Mr Ed who seems to fulfil the same role. As he said he hasn't bet yet.