He's going to end up with a Ruth Davidson problem. He's not going to be able to save the Scottish Tories because Johnson insists on shitting in his cornflakes every morning, but he's going to struggle to get back into Westminster politics even if he does as good a job as he can in the circumstances.
That depends, if Douglas Ross leads Unionists to a majority at Holyrood next year and Sturgeon loses her majority he will be the greatest Scottish Tory leader in history and worthy of a knighthood if not more.
Of course part of that would be winning the Moray seat at Holyrood held by the SNP but which he holds at Westminster
Hillary Clinton has more chance of being the President.
Voteshares at Westminster 2019 compared to Holyrood constituency vote in 2016
2019 2016
SNP 45% SNP 46.5% SCons 25% SCons 22% SLab 18.6% SLab 22.6% SLD 9.5% SLDs 7.8%
So based on the Scottish general election results last year there should be a small swing from the SNP and SLab to the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish LDs at Holyrood next year
This struck me as interesting - "LPF and governance" - not "Fish" - and from reports the UK has been unclear on "LPF and governance" beyond "trust us" - which is brave under the circumstances....
I think the rest of the EU have told the French to shut up about Fish, so we will get our way on that, probably with a transition.
The mystery is why the UK government has not been able to come forward with a State Aid regime and governance mechanism. "Trust us" has demonstrably failed, and for good reason.
Because we don't need one. It's an egregious demand from EU.
You don't need one?
I thought you were aspiring to remain a member of the WTO. Do you not need a state aid regime that can be reconciled with the obligations that come with WTO membership? Rules on state aid are a significant part of these membership obligations, are they not?
He's going to end up with a Ruth Davidson problem. He's not going to be able to save the Scottish Tories because Johnson insists on shitting in his cornflakes every morning, but he's going to struggle to get back into Westminster politics even if he does as good a job as he can in the circumstances.
That depends, if Douglas Ross leads Unionists to a majority at Holyrood next year and Sturgeon loses her majority he will be the greatest Scottish Tory leader in history and worthy of a knighthood if not more.
Of course part of that would be winning the Moray seat at Holyrood held by the SNP but which he holds at Westminster
Hillary Clinton has more chance of being the President.
Voteshares at Westminster 2019 compared to Holyrood constituency vote in 2016
2019 2016
SNP 45% SNP 46.5% SCons 25% SCons 22% SLab 18.6% SLab 22.6% SLD 9.5% SLDs 7.8%
So based on the Scottish general election results last year there should be a small swing from the SNP and SLab to the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish LDs at Holyrood next year
This struck me as interesting - "LPF and governance" - not "Fish" - and from reports the UK has been unclear on "LPF and governance" beyond "trust us" - which is brave under the circumstances....
I think the rest of the EU have told the French to shut up about Fish, so we will get our way on that, probably with a transition.
The mystery is why the UK government has not been able to come forward with a State Aid regime and governance mechanism. "Trust us" has demonstrably failed, and for good reason.
Because we don't need one. It's an egregious demand from EU.
You don't need one?
I thought you were aspiring to remain a member of the WTO. Do you not need a state aid regime that can be reconciled with the obligations that come with WTO membership? Rules on state aid are a significant part of these membership obligations, are they not?
You don't need a formalised regime to do that, just observe the rules. The same is true for any trade treaty. There doesn't need to be a regime.
Thanks for feedback. Yes I agree with you, Peter - 100 minimum is fair value sell.
So 78 is not there. It's not close enough.
There's a tug to close and trouser since I'm in at 28 for unit £30 but it wouldn't be right. Can't do it.
We stick. ☺
Market is 78 - 86.
Why don`t you close 25% of the bet at 85 and 25% more at 95 and let the rest run?
Then you can`t beat yourself up too much whatever happens.
The current market is at 82 (mid way between 78 and 86) so closing at 78 would mean you are paying an additional 4 points to the bookies. I know you know this already, I`m explaining why I dislike closing out and think it`s more optimal to let bets run to the final makeup. Bookies love punters to close out because they get paid again.
The university outbreaks leave me wondering whether the Risk Segmentation advocates had it backwards. Not, lock up your old but lock up your young, as PT suggests.
In hindsight perhaps we could have thrown a ring round and effectively campus-ised even city based universities: healthy - come along; young & shielding - here is our remote offer; home based - we have an accommodation deal this year only if you want, lecturing - let the early courses be done by the younger, healthier academics and structure remote/onsite accordingly, and isolate those guys after work; similarly student only bars/Tesco Metros staffed accordingly. With lots and lots of advanced thought and planning it is a segmentation strategy that might have had some degree of success.
Daughter's fresher friends are in lockdown or self-isolating all over the shop - Edinburgh, Sheffield, Manchester, Birmingham and latest reports being Warwick, Bristol and Durham. Oxbridge of course only now starting term (tho Brookes was early on) too. It just seems to be 'working out' that all these young folk will be getting it whilst away from their older relatives... The fact anyone is surprised this is happening is hard to understand.
Students in halls or uni flats will be a population with which we can finally determine the Herd Immunity number surely? By end of October everyone who is going to get it will have had it. Let's get the ONS testing antibodies and so on.
He's going to end up with a Ruth Davidson problem. He's not going to be able to save the Scottish Tories because Johnson insists on shitting in his cornflakes every morning, but he's going to struggle to get back into Westminster politics even if he does as good a job as he can in the circumstances.
That depends, if Douglas Ross leads Unionists to a majority at Holyrood next year and Sturgeon loses her majority he will be the greatest Scottish Tory leader in history and worthy of a knighthood if not more.
Of course part of that would be winning the Moray seat at Holyrood held by the SNP but which he holds at Westminster
For a second there i thought you meant an SCON majority not merely a unionist one!
My mate got in a fight with a footy mascot once. He jumped the advertising board and they started battering each other. I wasn`t there but I hear that it was hilarious. It made the papers. Don`t know what my mate was annoyed about.
No, it's not really. The government will push a national vaccination scheme for everyone over the age of 18. Not vaccinating 18-50 year olds will have a huge economic cost because it will take years for this cohort to acquire herd immunity and for life to resume as normal. A vaccine is a shortcut to a resumption of non distanced life, why buy 120m doses of we're only going to use half of them (two doses per person).
Quite rightly care workers and the vulnerable will get the vaccine first, as they should, then we will get back to normal.
Healthy young adults will eventually get the vaccine but we'd already be back to normal by the time they do.
No with the way the government has been fear mongering about the virus we won't return to normal until the vaccine programme has been completed. People are afraid of their own shadows at the moment.
I don't agree. Many young people are scared of infecting their loved ones - "don't kill your grandparents".
As far as I'm concerned once the vulnerable have been vaccinated I'm eager to get back to normal. I don't care about myself, I just don't want my grandparents to get it.
The problem is that even if only 25% of people are afraid of their own shadows then the economy will not return to anything like normal. A national vaccination programme and a study for vaccines in kids is the only way to resolve this. We can't run an economy without everyone participating in full.
I think you're being overly pessimistic. Once we've vaccinated the vulnerable deaths could drop to zero at which point it ceases to be a major news story. A lot of young people already want to get back to normal, give it another six months plus their grandparents have been vaccinated and you're not going to stop them getting back to normal whether you want to or not.
Deaths could drop to zero, like an honest die could come up 6 fifty times in a row. The people actually developing vaccines would bite your arm off for 50% efficacy.
76% have confidence in Merkel, 64% have confidence in Macron and 48% have confidence in Johnson but only 23% have confidence in Putin, 19% have confidence in Xi and 16% have confidence in Trump to do the right thing in world affairs amongst the nations surveyed
The university outbreaks leave me wondering whether the Risk Segmentation advocates had it backwards. Not, lock up your old but lock up your young, as PT suggests.
In hindsight perhaps we could have thrown a ring round and effectively campus-ised even city based universities: healthy - come along; young & shielding - here is our remote offer; home based - we have an accommodation deal this year only if you want, lecturing - let the early courses be done by the younger, healthier academics and structure remote/onsite accordingly, and isolate those guys after work; similarly student only bars/Tesco Metros staffed accordingly. With lots and lots of advanced thought and planning it is a segmentation strategy that might have had some degree of success.
Daughter's fresher friends are in lockdown or self-isolating all over the shop - Edinburgh, Sheffield, Manchester, Birmingham and latest reports being Warwick, Bristol and Durham. Oxbridge of course only now starting term (tho Brookes was early on) too. It just seems to be 'working out' that all these young folk will be getting it whilst away from their older relatives... The fact anyone is surprised this is happening is hard to understand.
Students in halls or uni flats will be a population with which we can finally determine the Herd Immunity number surely? By end of October everyone who is going to get it will have had it. Let's get the ONS testing antibodies and so on.
He's going to end up with a Ruth Davidson problem. He's not going to be able to save the Scottish Tories because Johnson insists on shitting in his cornflakes every morning, but he's going to struggle to get back into Westminster politics even if he does as good a job as he can in the circumstances.
That depends, if Douglas Ross leads Unionists to a majority at Holyrood next year and Sturgeon loses her majority he will be the greatest Scottish Tory leader in history and worthy of a knighthood if not more.
Of course part of that would be winning the Moray seat at Holyrood held by the SNP but which he holds at Westminster
Hillary Clinton has more chance of being the President.
Voteshares at Westminster 2019 compared to Holyrood constituency vote in 2016
2019 2016
SNP 45% SNP 46.5% SCons 25% SCons 22% SLab 18.6% SLab 22.6% SLD 9.5% SLDs 7.8%
So based on the Scottish general election results last year there should be a small swing from the SNP and SLab to the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish LDs at Holyrood next year
Oranges and lemons there.
The SNP and Greens currently have 69 MSPs with 65 needed for a Holyrood majority, so it only needs a small swing to Unionists to get that Unionist majority
The policy of rolling out a scarce resource (vaccine) to those in most need (the eldery and infirm) seems like the right one to me.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't make sense to me, I'd want the elderly and infirm to benefit from herd immunity.
Wouldn't we get there anyway, if younger fitter people are encouraged to mix freely?
More slowly and with a lot of economic damage in the process. We're storing up a lot of long term issues at the moment with unemployment, problems that will have a large longer term cost than a few old people dying a few months early, to put it bluntly.
Fair enough. Perhaps they could allow those under 50 to apply, being clear that it's first-come-first-served, which would at least reduce some of the political risk ("we have been clear from the start that healthy under-50s are not a priority group for the treatment").
There's a large minority (Of all ages) that don't fancy having the vaccine, and certainly don't want to be 'early' in the vaccine queue. That's their right - but means people that wish to get the vaccine asap will have a few less in the queue.
Thanks for feedback. Yes I agree with you, Peter - 100 minimum is fair value sell.
So 78 is not there. It's not close enough.
There's a tug to close and trouser since I'm in at 28 for unit £30 but it wouldn't be right. Can't do it.
We stick. ☺
Market is 78 - 86.
Why don`t you close 25% of the bet at 85 and 25% more at 95 and let the rest run?
Then you can`t beat yourself up too much whatever happens.
The current market is at 82 (mid way between 78 and 86) so closing at 78 would mean you are paying an additional 4 points to the bookies. I know you know this already, I`m explaining why I dislike closing out and think it`s more optimal to let bets run to the final makeup. Bookies love punters to close out because they get paid again.
Yes I think that's sound advice. Don't forget a punter's stomach is his friend - if it starts to feel queasy you are in too deep and it's wise to throttle back if you can. Stocky suggests a good way of doing it.
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
Well, what is the overall number of under 20s who have been infected? What is the number of other people who have been infected by those u20s? What is the number of people among these who then went on to infect other people? What is the number of people among these who have suffered significant health damage? What is the number of people among these who have suffered the ultimate health damage?
And, most importantly, which of these numbers is the most relevant when assessing the public health risk?
Not this again.
For clarity EVERYONE KNOWS THE RISK OF CONTAGION.
I am simply saying that the prioritisation of the vaccine and indeed Phillip's idea of benign containment is not without support from the data.
The university outbreaks leave me wondering whether the Risk Segmentation advocates had it backwards. Not, lock up your old but lock up your young, as PT suggests.
In hindsight perhaps we could have thrown a ring round and effectively campus-ised even city based universities: healthy - come along; young & shielding - here is our remote offer; home based - we have an accommodation deal this year only if you want, lecturing - let the early courses be done by the younger, healthier academics and structure remote/onsite accordingly, and isolate those guys after work; similarly student only bars/Tesco Metros staffed accordingly. With lots and lots of advanced thought and planning it is a segmentation strategy that might have had some degree of success.
In London?
Especially in London!
However the people of London have been quite good since lockdown.
No, it's not really. The government will push a national vaccination scheme for everyone over the age of 18. Not vaccinating 18-50 year olds will have a huge economic cost because it will take years for this cohort to acquire herd immunity and for life to resume as normal. A vaccine is a shortcut to a resumption of non distanced life, why buy 120m doses of we're only going to use half of them (two doses per person).
Quite rightly care workers and the vulnerable will get the vaccine first, as they should, then we will get back to normal.
Healthy young adults will eventually get the vaccine but we'd already be back to normal by the time they do.
No with the way the government has been fear mongering about the virus we won't return to normal until the vaccine programme has been completed. People are afraid of their own shadows at the moment.
I don't agree. Many young people are scared of infecting their loved ones - "don't kill your grandparents".
As far as I'm concerned once the vulnerable have been vaccinated I'm eager to get back to normal. I don't care about myself, I just don't want my grandparents to get it.
Is "back to normal" for you even more time as a keyboard warrior on PB or less? 😂😂😂
Less, much less. I'm stuck at home at the minute. I can't be alone in spending more time online this year.
I must be the only PBer who thinks he'll be a good Potus.
I do too. The last thing the US needs is a showboating populist fringe President of either flavour. Nor an outsider to "shake things up". Biden will appoint serious, qualified people to the important positions. And he knows how the system works. And he won't go out of his way to sow divisions. He'll probably only do one term, and he may not succeed, but he won't hurt.
No, it's not really. The government will push a national vaccination scheme for everyone over the age of 18. Not vaccinating 18-50 year olds will have a huge economic cost because it will take years for this cohort to acquire herd immunity and for life to resume as normal. A vaccine is a shortcut to a resumption of non distanced life, why buy 120m doses of we're only going to use half of them (two doses per person).
Quite rightly care workers and the vulnerable will get the vaccine first, as they should, then we will get back to normal.
Healthy young adults will eventually get the vaccine but we'd already be back to normal by the time they do.
No with the way the government has been fear mongering about the virus we won't return to normal until the vaccine programme has been completed. People are afraid of their own shadows at the moment.
I don't agree. Many young people are scared of infecting their loved ones - "don't kill your grandparents".
As far as I'm concerned once the vulnerable have been vaccinated I'm eager to get back to normal. I don't care about myself, I just don't want my grandparents to get it.
The problem is that even if only 25% of people are afraid of their own shadows then the economy will not return to anything like normal. A national vaccination programme and a study for vaccines in kids is the only way to resolve this. We can't run an economy without everyone participating in full.
I think you're being overly pessimistic. Once we've vaccinated the vulnerable deaths could drop to zero at which point it ceases to be a major news story. A lot of young people already want to get back to normal, give it another six months plus their grandparents have been vaccinated and you're not going to stop them getting back to normal whether you want to or not.
Deaths could drop to zero, like an honest die could come up 6 fifty times in a row. The people actually developing vaccines would bite your arm off for 50% efficacy.
No, it's not really. The government will push a national vaccination scheme for everyone over the age of 18. Not vaccinating 18-50 year olds will have a huge economic cost because it will take years for this cohort to acquire herd immunity and for life to resume as normal. A vaccine is a shortcut to a resumption of non distanced life, why buy 120m doses of we're only going to use half of them (two doses per person).
Quite rightly care workers and the vulnerable will get the vaccine first, as they should, then we will get back to normal.
Healthy young adults will eventually get the vaccine but we'd already be back to normal by the time they do.
No with the way the government has been fear mongering about the virus we won't return to normal until the vaccine programme has been completed. People are afraid of their own shadows at the moment.
I don't agree. Many young people are scared of infecting their loved ones - "don't kill your grandparents".
As far as I'm concerned once the vulnerable have been vaccinated I'm eager to get back to normal. I don't care about myself, I just don't want my grandparents to get it.
The problem is that even if only 25% of people are afraid of their own shadows then the economy will not return to anything like normal. A national vaccination programme and a study for vaccines in kids is the only way to resolve this. We can't run an economy without everyone participating in full.
I think you're being overly pessimistic. Once we've vaccinated the vulnerable deaths could drop to zero at which point it ceases to be a major news story. A lot of young people already want to get back to normal, give it another six months plus their grandparents have been vaccinated and you're not going to stop them getting back to normal whether you want to or not.
Deaths could drop to zero, like an honest die could come up 6 fifty times in a row. The people actually developing vaccines would bite your arm off for 50% efficacy.
Rasmussen the go to pollster for Trump fans shows a further drop today down to -9 .
Given they’ve often shown the absolute best approval figures for Trump and have in the past shown positive ratings for him whilst the others have been in the -10 range suggests his approval is cratering .
So its play your card right time....high or lower than 15k today?
Back in 2003 I was in the audience for HIGNFY when Bruce Forsyth was the guest presenter and one one of the rounds was based on Iraq's most wanted deck of cards
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
Sky Q any good? We've never bothered to upgrade but I understand it's the same price as Sky+ HD now.
Johnson speech thoughts?
Sky Q is great. If its the same price then I'd say its a no-brainer to implement it.
Plus we have our Netflix and Disney+ and YouTube accounts integrated with Sky Q. The box works really well with all of these as well as Sky's own programming. Very user friendly, even my four year old can load Disney+ or YouTube to put on her favourite programming using the speech functionality in the remote.
I must be the only PBer who thinks he'll be a good Potus.
I do too. The last thing the US needs is a showboating populist fringe President of either flavour. Nor an outsider to "shake things up". Biden will appoint serious, qualified people to the important positions. And he knows how the system works. And he won't go out of his way to sow divisions. He'll probably only do one term, and he may not succeed, but he won't hurt.
There comes a point where you crave quiet, unassuming competence. May even happen here one day.
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
Yeah - I have two noisy klaxons going on - don't bet against Trump and don't back Biden.
I'm pretty neutral betting-wise as to the outcome, although massively all-red overall having opposed Biden all the way down.
I guess it boils down to me seeing him as an impossibly bad leader of the free world. Worse than Trump, and I hate Trump (admittedly I have warmed to him a little)
When my father was on the roids while undergoing cancer treatment, he ran from his village to the next (a trip of several miles) and was found in the pub talking a million miles an hour at anybody who would listen.
Perhaps we will see Trump doing laps of the White House lawn in his pants?
No, it's not really. The government will push a national vaccination scheme for everyone over the age of 18. Not vaccinating 18-50 year olds will have a huge economic cost because it will take years for this cohort to acquire herd immunity and for life to resume as normal. A vaccine is a shortcut to a resumption of non distanced life, why buy 120m doses of we're only going to use half of them (two doses per person).
Quite rightly care workers and the vulnerable will get the vaccine first, as they should, then we will get back to normal.
Healthy young adults will eventually get the vaccine but we'd already be back to normal by the time they do.
No with the way the government has been fear mongering about the virus we won't return to normal until the vaccine programme has been completed. People are afraid of their own shadows at the moment.
I don't agree. Many young people are scared of infecting their loved ones - "don't kill your grandparents".
As far as I'm concerned once the vulnerable have been vaccinated I'm eager to get back to normal. I don't care about myself, I just don't want my grandparents to get it.
The problem is that even if only 25% of people are afraid of their own shadows then the economy will not return to anything like normal. A national vaccination programme and a study for vaccines in kids is the only way to resolve this. We can't run an economy without everyone participating in full.
I think you're being overly pessimistic. Once we've vaccinated the vulnerable deaths could drop to zero at which point it ceases to be a major news story. A lot of young people already want to get back to normal, give it another six months plus their grandparents have been vaccinated and you're not going to stop them getting back to normal whether you want to or not.
Deaths could drop to zero, like an honest die could come up 6 fifty times in a row. The people actually developing vaccines would bite your arm off for 50% efficacy.
It doesn't need to be 100% efficacy though.
To reduce deaths to zero?
Indeed. Without a vaccine with R reduced they came close to zero during the summer. With a vaccine even at 50% efficacy R should be low and it should be minimal to zero most of the time.
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
It is precisely because he is neither dazzling nor exciting. Sleepy Joe is his main attraction.
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
All institutions end up prioritising the institution over other considerations. I doubt anyone will be surprised Church's are no different. Heck, they likely used to be a lot worse given the power they wielded for centuries.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
Oh there you are. Just pondering your well-reasoned argument in favour of Boris staying on. It all made sense.
Except...the man always was patently unfit to be PM as is universally accepted. As was indeed TMay. Neither was just "bad", and each had a trait which would mean that they would at some time be found out and deposed one way or another. Or leave.
These things have a habit of not working in 24-hr rolling news time but in politics time which can be months and months as it was with May. When she became PM plenty called her a dead woman walking and so it proved. It's the same with Boris imo. He is not fit to be PM, as many fundamental character and political flaws and hence it is a matter of time before he goes.
Is the reason I have backed him to be out by Sep '21.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliament?
Vatican city?
1. The Vatican doesn't have a parliament 2. It is, however, ruled by an elected monarch - who happens to be a member of the clergy, but is still far from unelected.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
Oh there you are. Just pondering your well-reasoned argument in favour of Boris staying on. It all made sense.
Except...the man always was patently unfit to be PM as is universally accepted. As was indeed TMay. Neither was just "bad", and each had a trait which would mean that they would at some time be found out and deposed one way or another. Or leave.
These things have a habit of not working in 24-hr rolling news time but in politics time which can be months and months as it was with May. When she became PM plenty called her a dead woman walking and so it proved. It's the same with Boris imo. He is not fit to be PM, as many fundamental character and political flaws and hence it is a matter of time before he goes.
Is the reason I have backed him to be out by Sep '21.
May was much, much worse than Johnson and had a much, much worse election result - and even she survived for years. Even IDS survived for years.
Very, very unlikely Johnson will be gone next year. I doubt Boris will go before 2023 at the earliest.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliament?
Vatican city?
That's not a proper Parliament, plus it's not a real country either.
But it is another 'country' that puts the reputation of the Church ahead the victims of sexual abuse, so stellar company for the UK to keep.
Are there things that rank above sexual abuse in the priorities?
It seems odd that it should be top.
See what Cardinal Law did in Boston (and other Cardinals did elsewhere) and it is practically mandatory to put the reputation of the Church before all else.
I must be the only PBer who thinks he'll be a good Potus.
I tend to agree with you. Especially over the last few weeks, I've been very impressed with Biden. He's been very dignified and has struck the right tone. I'm not sure that he'll achieve anything very concrete in legislation terms (presidents are limited in that respect anyway), but I think he might just be the right person to calm down the increasingly unpleasant polarisation of US politics - in a way which Hillary Clinton, or Elizabeth Warren, or even Kamala Harris, wouldn't have been able to do. Biden does have a long record of cross-party cooperation, and will be able to represent America as a whole quite well, I hope.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliament?
Vatican city?
That's not a proper Parliament, plus it's not a real country either.
But it is another 'country' that puts the reputation of the Church ahead the victims of sexual abuse, so stellar company for the UK to keep.
Are there things that rank above sexual abuse in the priorities?
It seems odd that it should be top.
See what Cardinal Law did in Boston (and other Cardinals did elsewhere) and it is practically mandatory to put the reputation of the Church before all else.
He's going to end up with a Ruth Davidson problem. He's not going to be able to save the Scottish Tories because Johnson insists on shitting in his cornflakes every morning, but he's going to struggle to get back into Westminster politics even if he does as good a job as he can in the circumstances.
That depends, if Douglas Ross leads Unionists to a majority at Holyrood next year and Sturgeon loses her majority he will be the greatest Scottish Tory leader in history and worthy of a knighthood if not more.
Of course part of that would be winning the Moray seat at Holyrood held by the SNP but which he holds at Westminster
For a second there i thought you meant an SCON majority not merely a unionist one!
And of course during the election, SLab and SLD will not count as unionists.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliament?
Vatican city?
That's not a proper Parliament, plus it's not a real country either.
But it is another 'country' that puts the reputation of the Church ahead the victims of sexual abuse, so stellar company for the UK to keep.
Are there things that rank above sexual abuse in the priorities?
It seems odd that it should be top.
See what Cardinal Law did in Boston (and other Cardinals did elsewhere) and it is practically mandatory to put the reputation of the Church before all else.
I find it hard to believe someone can become Cardinal without also being a ruthless politician. Sure, some might be great benevolent figures as well, but you don't get selected for a position of significant power and influence without fighting hard to get noticed, surely?
The problem with the Biden EC market is that the hat above 300 it starts getting very lumpy.
On Universal Swing based on national average Biden is on 345 ECs. The next step up after that is Texas. So 383 ECs. Similarly going down it could be Florida and down 29 votes to 316. Knock of Georgia and NC as well and you are below 300 for a plausible map even with a massive Biden popular vote win.
Re: the wealth tax discussions this morning - I note that no-one suggested a tax on gambling winnings!
A tax on other people - I'm in!
A £10 tax on every pineapple pizza bought/sold/eaten.
If pineapple on pizza is that good people will pay tax willingly.
A 50p surcharge for every time someone who doesn't eat pineapple on pizza mentions the stuff. Like a national swear jar to which you could pay for a new hospital all by yourself.
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
I don't think anyone thinks he is dazzling or the second Obama. Just not being Donald Trump is good enough.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliament?
Vatican city?
That's not a proper Parliament, plus it's not a real country either.
But it is another 'country' that puts the reputation of the Church ahead the victims of sexual abuse, so stellar company for the UK to keep.
Are there things that rank above sexual abuse in the priorities?
It seems odd that it should be top.
See what Cardinal Law did in Boston (and other Cardinals did elsewhere) and it is practically mandatory to put the reputation of the Church before all else.
I find it hard to believe someone can become Cardinal without also being a ruthless politician. Sure, some might be great benevolent figures as well, but you don't get selected for a position of significant power and influence without fighting hard to get noticed, surely?
I loved learning about the Borgia Popes, and some of the chicanery regarding election of Popes is always fun, particularly the Antipopes.
Comments
Biden EC supremacy -
Thanks for feedback. Yes I agree with you, Peter - 100 minimum is fair value sell.
So 78 is not there. It's not close enough.
There's a tug to close and trouser since I'm in at 28 for unit £30 but it wouldn't be right. Can't do it.
We stick. ☺
2019 2016
SNP 45% SNP 46.5%
SCons 25% SCons 22%
SLab 18.6% SLab 22.6%
SLD 9.5% SLDs 7.8%
So based on the Scottish general election results last year there should be a small swing from the SNP and SLab to the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish LDs at Holyrood next year
I thought you were aspiring to remain a member of the WTO. Do you not need a state aid regime that can be reconciled with the obligations that come with WTO membership?
Rules on state aid are a significant part of these membership obligations, are they not?
Over 60% of people thought he was reckless. That is going to translate into Trump voters saying they won't vote for Trump in an opinion poll.
But come election day they will tick the Trump box.
Why don`t you close 25% of the bet at 85 and 25% more at 95 and let the rest run?
Then you can`t beat yourself up too much whatever happens.
The current market is at 82 (mid way between 78 and 86) so closing at 78 would mean you are paying an additional 4 points to the bookies. I know you know this already, I`m explaining why I dislike closing out and think it`s more optimal to let bets run to the final makeup. Bookies love punters to close out because they get paid again.
https://twitter.com/MesutOzil1088/status/1313486087181021190?s=20
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/09/15/us-image-plummets-internationally-as-most-say-country-has-handled-coronavirus-badly/pg_2020-09-15_u-s-image_0-05/
https://twitter.com/IGSquawk/status/1313469794801287169?s=20
I must be the only PBer who thinks he'll be a good Potus.
Johnson speech thoughts?
For clarity EVERYONE KNOWS THE RISK OF CONTAGION.
I am simply saying that the prioritisation of the vaccine and indeed Phillip's idea of benign containment is not without support from the data.
However the people of London have been quite good since lockdown.
Thanks once again for psoting the new polls. You are quicker than RCP. How do you do it?
Only PA would be even moderately disappointing for team Biden. It really is beginning to look like JB is the next POTUS.
Biden will appoint serious, qualified people to the important positions. And he knows how the system works. And he won't go out of his way to sow divisions.
He'll probably only do one term, and he may not succeed, but he won't hurt.
Glad I stay away.
Rasmussen the go to pollster for Trump fans shows a further drop today down to -9 .
Given they’ve often shown the absolute best approval figures for Trump and have in the past shown positive ratings for him whilst the others have been in the -10 range suggests his approval is cratering .
If people feel they've nothing to lose, there's no reason to compromise.
'Play your Iraqi cards right.'
I just got a similar vibe there.
https://youtu.be/7hx4gdlfamo
C of E bishops should lose responsibility for safeguarding children, says inquiry
Damning report says church protected its reputation above its ‘explicit moral purpose’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/06/c-of-e-bishops-should-lose-responsibility-for-safeguarding-children-says-inquiry
Plus we have our Netflix and Disney+ and YouTube accounts integrated with Sky Q. The box works really well with all of these as well as Sky's own programming. Very user friendly, even my four year old can load Disney+ or YouTube to put on her favourite programming using the speech functionality in the remote.
I'm pretty neutral betting-wise as to the outcome, although massively all-red overall having opposed Biden all the way down.
I guess it boils down to me seeing him as an impossibly bad leader of the free world. Worse than Trump, and I hate Trump (admittedly I have warmed to him a little)
Perhaps we will see Trump doing laps of the White House lawn in his pants?
Sleepy Joe is his main attraction.
I'm not myself in the business of mind reading, so I'll just say that I think he'll be absolutely fine.
But it is another 'country' that puts the reputation of the Church ahead the victims of sexual abuse, so stellar company for the UK to keep.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
Except...the man always was patently unfit to be PM as is universally accepted. As was indeed TMay. Neither was just "bad", and each had a trait which would mean that they would at some time be found out and deposed one way or another. Or leave.
These things have a habit of not working in 24-hr rolling news time but in politics time which can be months and months as it was with May. When she became PM plenty called her a dead woman walking and so it proved. It's the same with Boris imo. He is not fit to be PM, as many fundamental character and political flaws and hence it is a matter of time before he goes.
Is the reason I have backed him to be out by Sep '21.
It seems odd that it should be top.
2. It is, however, ruled by an elected monarch - who happens to be a member of the clergy, but is still far from unelected.
Very, very unlikely Johnson will be gone next year. I doubt Boris will go before 2023 at the earliest.
If pineapple on pizza is that good people will pay tax willingly.
On Universal Swing based on national average Biden is on 345 ECs. The next step up after that is Texas. So 383 ECs. Similarly going down it could be Florida and down 29 votes to 316. Knock of Georgia and NC as well and you are below 300 for a plausible map even with a massive Biden popular vote win.