Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

How the polls moved since last week’s first debate and Trump contracting COVID-19 – politicalbetting

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited October 7 in General
How the polls moved since last week’s first debate and Trump contracting COVID-19 – politicalbetting.com

WH2020 Trump vs. Biden – latest trend chart of polling average from RCPhttps://t.co/C0fbCWD3oB pic.twitter.com/aMCOTeGvk9

Read the full story here

«13456711

Comments

  • DAlexanderDAlexander Posts: 581
    First
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679
    HYUFD said:
    I would bloody well hope so given how many more deaths they've had.
  • My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,066

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Not just that, the 10pm curfew will be going and nightclubs opening....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    (FPT)
    Four years ago today, Wikileaks first published the leaked Clinton emails.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 2,929

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Not just that, the 10pm curfew will be going and nightclubs opening....
    Greene King cut 800 jobs today and closed 25 sites permanently. IF it goes on like this, well...I guess you can probably add two zeros to those job losses.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,106
    edited October 7

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,106

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
  • My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Not just that, the 10pm curfew will be going and nightclubs opening....
    Heh.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,066

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Not just that, the 10pm curfew will be going and nightclubs opening....
    Greene King cut 800 jobs today and closed 25 sites permanently. IF it goes on like this, well...I guess you can probably add two zeros to those job losses.

    It seems the realistic timetable for return to normal is now Christmas 2021, huge numbers of businesses will have gone to the wall (or required massive government bail-outs) by then.
  • I wonder if they will be closing hotels and the restaurants inside them?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,407

    rkrkrk said:

    *Betting post* - My tip yesterday of Biden 58-61% of vote at 20/1 has now come in to 13.5. That's borderline value I'd guess.

    Strangely though Biden at >61% of vote has gone out to 41/1. I've nibbled again.

    It's a longshot for sure, but it's not inconceivable if Trump supporters don't turnout, or postal voting makes it much easier for Dems to motivate their voters to send ballots in.

    Have to say this feels like wishful thinking more than objective betting.

    The CNN poll yesterday is the only one that was within a whisker of 58% for Biden (albeit some include "don't know" as a category so slightly understate both candidates, "Mr Don't Know" not appearing on the ballot).

    The race has been very stable for a long period, and there is no doubt that Trump is well liked by a group numbering at or not far short of 40% of the population (and inspires genuine enthusiasm amongst many of those).

    I can see a double digit win for Biden as a serious possibility (although not probable). But a 20%+ win? I'd need much longer odds than 40-1.
    FPT: 538 reckon ~10% chance of Biden getting > 57% of vote if I am interpreting their vote % chart correctly.

    I agree the race has been stable, but I think because of the unusual nature of this race, there is a higher than normal chance of polling being off. So there's value at the margins.

    Except there isn't value on Trump because he is weirdly over-rated as others have covered.
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
    Did Brady really have the numbers? He could barely muster a dozen last night as opposed to the 80 he was briefing beforehand.
  • Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    Four years ago today, Wikileaks first published the leaked Clinton emails.

    The day after pussygate wasn't it?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    edited October 7

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Are they closing that boozer because the lass in the leopard print jacket is smoking indoors?

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,639
    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,106

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
    Did Brady really have the numbers? He could barely muster a dozen last night as opposed to the 80 he was briefing beforehand.
    Why bother voting against the government when Labour are going to abstain? It's not worth the hassle. If the rebels had Labour support the government would be shit scared as they are on the 10pm closing time where the rebels do have Labour support.
  • MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 2,929

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
    Did Brady really have the numbers? He could barely muster a dozen last night as opposed to the 80 he was briefing beforehand.
    A Brady ally say there was no point dying in a ditch in a battle they were always going to lose. These guys have careers.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 2,372
    edited October 7
    That is a picture of an incredibly stable race, with both candidates moving in their own narrow corridor of support.

    For all the drama of 2020 - the COVID crisis, the economic crisis, the Democratic primaries, Trump's illness etc - perhaps it's all noise. I increasingly feel that perhaps we'll look back in a couple of years time and say, "actually, almost everyone had decided pretty firmly by the end of his first year in office whether or not they could stomach eight years of Trump, and everything after that was just irrelevant passing the time until judgment day.
  • dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    If you let it rip then people will impose their own de facto lockdown because they don't want to get it.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,106
    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    Then present the evidence to parliament and the public first. The ONS study shows that pubs and restaurants are a very small source of transmission, schools and universities are the major source right now, which is a known issue and one that we have to live with. The government are putting a million people out of work to reduce transmission by 3%.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 85,321
    edited October 7

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
    Did Brady really have the numbers? He could barely muster a dozen last night as opposed to the 80 he was briefing beforehand.
    A Brady ally say there was no point dying in a ditch in a battle they were always going to lose. These guys have careers.
    On Sir Graham Brady as we say in Yorkshire

    'He's all fart and no follow through.'
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Are they closing that boozer because the lass in the leopard print jacket is smoking indoors?

    Many are wearing coats, I suspect it is outside.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,639

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    If you let it rip then people will impose their own de facto lockdown because they don't want to get it.
    Indeed. Which I have seen some evidence of with my own eyes. The problem is the folk who don't and won't.
    I am not saying let rip. Merely saying the status quo is the worst of all worlds.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 12,167

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    As long as you discount all of the clusters centred on pubs.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,639
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    Then present the evidence to parliament and the public first. The ONS study shows that pubs and restaurants are a very small source of transmission, schools and universities are the major source right now, which is a known issue and one that we have to live with. The government are putting a million people out of work to reduce transmission by 3%.
    Well indeed.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    If you let it rip then people will impose their own de facto lockdown because they don't want to get it.
    Indeed. Which I have seen some evidence of with my own eyes. The problem is the folk who don't and won't.
    I am not saying let rip. Merely saying the status quo is the worst of all worlds.
    We saw it in March when people stayed at home as much as possible before the formal lockdown (something which I pointed out on here when talking about how empty Manchester City Centre was, as was Piccadilly station and the trains therein.)

    I saw something similar the weekend before last in Birmingham.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 77,818
    edited October 7
    In comparisons between the 2018 midterms turnout and the 2020 presidential election be wary though.

    In 2018 the Democrats got 60,572,245 votes, that was only 5 million less than the 65,853,514 votes Hillary got in the 2016 presidential election so there was huge Democrat turnout in 2018 to protest against Trump.

    The Republicans however had much bigger problems getting their voters out in 2018 with Trump not on the ballot. Only 50,861,970 voted Republican in 2018, a huge 12 million less than the 62,984,828 votes Trump got in 2016.

    So in short expect Trump's vote in November to be significantly higher than the Republicans got in 2018 but the Biden vote to be much closer to the Democratic vote in 2018.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections
  • On topic, we accuse the pollsters of often fighting the last election, I wonder if punters are doing the same?

    If the polls were reversed, you need one of those space telescopes to find Joe Biden's chances of winning.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    That is a picture of an incredibly stable race, with both candidates moving in their own narrow corridor of support.

    For all the drama of 2020 - the COVID crisis, the economic crisis, the Democratic primaries, Trump's illness etc - perhaps it's all noise. I increasingly feel that perhaps we'll look back in a couple of years time and say, "actually, almost everyone had decided pretty firmly by the end of his first year in office whether or not they could stomach eight years of Trump, and everything after that was just irrelevant passing the time until judgment day.

    There's probably half a million americans in 3 States who on November 9th 2016 regretted having not voted.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    Most of the people who will stay away from pubs "because they don't want to get it" would be the same people who never or rarely visit pubs anyway, to my best guess.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 12,167

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,066
    edited October 7
    I notice a number of universities are now publishing their own daily data on covid cases, broken down by students and staff. Obviously it is one thing for the young lepers to get it, but passing on to the teaching staff is a different issue entirely e.g. seems like some transmission to staff at Manchester Uni

    https://www.manchester.ac.uk/coronavirus/cases/
  • DAlexanderDAlexander Posts: 581

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    This is news to me. Why wouldn't it spread in pubs like everywhere else?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,098
    Replying to @Nigelb from last thread.

    No re gun owners - back in August it was reported that 40% of those who bought a gun in 2020 were new gun owners, or nearly 5 million Americans

    https://www.nssf.org/first-time-gun-buyers-grow-to-nearly-5-million-in-2020/
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,639
    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,066
    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    TBH, I think there is a fair bit of argument even over that one. If cases were already falling before the lockdown etc.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 6,867
    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    Then present the evidence to parliament and the public first. The ONS study shows that pubs and restaurants are a very small source of transmission, schools and universities are the major source right now, which is a known issue and one that we have to live with. The government are putting a million people out of work to reduce transmission by 3%.
    Well indeed.
    3% of all transmissions - or transmissions whose cause is known, do you know, please? There is a big difference, as it is much easier to trace home transmission than pub transmission.
  • DAlexanderDAlexander Posts: 581

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    I imagine that people on average spend less than 3% of their time in pubs, making it an above average place to catch the virus.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,066
    edited October 7
    As Belgium’s federal government moves to tighten restrictions at the national level – introducing an 23:00 closing time for bars – the regional government of Brussels has taken steps to ensure its local measures are tighter still.

    From tomorrow morning all cafes and bars in the capital city and its surrounding region are being instructed to shut down for a month.

    Drinking alcohol outdoors will also be banned.

    The local rules come on top of new national rules, which limit the size of individual social bubbles to four people
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,639

    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    TBH, I think there is a fair bit of argument even over that one. If cases were already falling before the lockdown etc.
    Well what we have certainly ain't working in the North of England.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    Most of the people who will stay away from pubs "because they don't want to get it" would be the same people who never or rarely visit pubs anyway, to my best guess.

    That's not true. In Berlin I know quite a lot of people who used to go to bars/restaurants at least once a week, who have not been to a pub since March because of fears about catching and spreading Corona. This is despite the pubs re-opening earlier in Berlin than in the UK, and the Covid Problem has been less than in the UK. It is also not just old people, the age range of people coming to mind ranges from 25 to 70.
  • dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    That's because they're all scared of Foxy.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,066
    edited October 7
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    TBH, I think there is a fair bit of argument even over that one. If cases were already falling before the lockdown etc.
    Well what we have certainly ain't working in the North of England.
    We are such a small country, that I have never thought these local lockdowns were a good idea. We know the likes of TSE would commute from Yorkshire to Lancashire on a daily basis and true all around London, even as far out as places like Bristol and Bath people used to regularly travel to / from London.

    Sure that has been curtailed as more people work from home, but the UK really is a small place and so trying to "isolate" the virus in one town just isn't going to work in the way it might in rural America where one big town is 100s of miles from the next and people are generally a lot less mobile.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 2,929

    As Belgium’s federal government moves to tighten restrictions at the national level – introducing an 23:00 closing time for bars – the regional government of Brussels has taken steps to ensure its local measures are tighter still.

    From tomorrow morning all cafes and bars in the capital city and its surrounding region are being instructed to shut down for a month.

    Drinking alcohol outdoors will also be banned.

    The local rules come on top of new national rules, which limit the size of individual social bubbles to four people

    Didn't Belgium have one of the most draconian lockdowns? Much praised on here. It seems to me there's mounting evidence its only a delaying tactic.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,471
    The Trump Awakes

    He's woken up


  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,639
    Carnyx said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    Then present the evidence to parliament and the public first. The ONS study shows that pubs and restaurants are a very small source of transmission, schools and universities are the major source right now, which is a known issue and one that we have to live with. The government are putting a million people out of work to reduce transmission by 3%.
    Well indeed.
    3% of all transmissions - or transmissions whose cause is known, do you know, please? There is a big difference, as it is much easier to trace home transmission than pub transmission.
    Sorry I have no idea. It wasn't my figure. My well indeed was more about presenting the evidence openly to the public and Parliament.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 344

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    And yet they are doing exactly this in Brussels...
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 6,867
    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    Then present the evidence to parliament and the public first. The ONS study shows that pubs and restaurants are a very small source of transmission, schools and universities are the major source right now, which is a known issue and one that we have to live with. The government are putting a million people out of work to reduce transmission by 3%.
    Well indeed.
    3% of all transmissions - or transmissions whose cause is known, do you know, please? There is a big difference, as it is much easier to trace home transmission than pub transmission.
    Sorry I have no idea. It wasn't my figure. My well indeed was more about presenting the evidence openly to the public and Parliament.
    Thank you.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    On topic, we accuse the pollsters of often fighting the last election, I wonder if punters are doing the same?

    If the polls were reversed, you need one of those space telescopes to find Joe Biden's chances of winning.

    Some punters, yes definately. They forget that Trump got lucky last time by winning a 30% chance, and fear that he will get lucky again with a 18% chance.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,380

    Most of the people who will stay away from pubs "because they don't want to get it" would be the same people who never or rarely visit pubs anyway, to my best guess.

    Not in my circle who ate out regularly and would pop into the pub once a week or so, I’d say pub and restaurant going is down in the 95% region. Purely down to the virus.
  • DAlexanderDAlexander Posts: 581
    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    Also most of the people catching it in schools and universities are at lower risk. The local pubs here are all full of the over 60s who drink and smoke a lot.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,543
    Surely now Trump has personally triumphed over the virus and pronounced it far less lethal than flu, people will recognise that he's been right all along and award him a second term?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
    I agree with you here.
    Starmer displayed an unnecessary excess of caution. If he has genuine differences of policy with government, forcing (or at the very least trying to force) Parliamentary scrutiny rather than giving government carte blanche for months at a time out to be a no brainer.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 34,502
    Barnesian said:

    The Trump Awakes

    He's woken up


    The come down after the steroid high?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    They came for the barmaids...

    (2.9 million people employed in hospitality – fourth biggest industry sector in the UK).
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    This is news to me. Why wouldn't it spread in pubs like everywhere else?
    I'm sceptical that someone called "londonpubman" will be objective when it comes to the probability of COV2 spreading in pubs.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    They came for the barmaids...

    (2.9 million people employed in hospitality – fourth biggest industry sector in the UK).
    When schools close, a lot more than 2.9 million have to stop working.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,321
    538 have put the new Maryland poll up as Trump +29.

    I thought for a moment I'd gone mad.

    I haven't - it should be Biden +29.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    TBH, I think there is a fair bit of argument even over that one. If cases were already falling before the lockdown etc.
    Well what we have certainly ain't working in the North of England.
    I'm not convinced of that.

    A lot of the cases seem to be centred upon students and the return of universities spreading the virus like Freshers Flu, so that needs to be taken into account and not overreacted to.

    Especially in Halls of Residences, or crammed blocks of student flats, putting hundreds of people from across the country to live together on top of each other is inevitably going to lead to transmission. But Freshers Flu burns out after a couple of weeks normally as everyone catches and gets over the viruses they catch from their new friends they now live with.

    This is where exponential growth isn't appropriate. The hundred people who now live with each other in a block of flats or a Halls aren't suddenly going to be exponentially living with a different hundred each the week after.

    Its entirely possible that local lockdowns are keeping a lid on infections, except for the spread within student communities.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    This is news to me. Why wouldn't it spread in pubs like everywhere else?
    I'm sceptical that someone called "londonpubman" will be objective when it comes to the probability of COV2 spreading in pubs.
    I'm equally sceptical that many PBers will be objective, given that several of them admit they rarely visit pubs and know nobody who works in one.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,380

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    How so? Whatever one's opinion, it is now patently clear that the local restrictions are not working to achieve their stated aim.
    The only choices therefore are tighten them or let rip.
    If you let it rip then people will impose their own de facto lockdown because they don't want to get it.
    Yup. Lots of students round here. We’re avoiding them and any likelihood of where they go like the literal plague, despite not being particularly high risk at all.

    Effectively I and Mrs Owl have put ourselves back in much stricter lockdown than even the local restrictions demand. Quick nip out to the supermarket and lots of outdoor walks is about it.

    Now we are extremely fortunate to be in a position where we have space, can work from home and both are working for seemingly secure organisations at present but essentially we’ve shut the door and the world can bugger off for a few months.

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 12,167
    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    Where they closed the pubs.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    Four years ago today, Wikileaks first published the leaked Clinton emails.

    The day after pussygate wasn't it?
    Or the same day.

    The only new meme going around for now is this one.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659

    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    Where they closed the pubs.
    To be clear, are you advocating the mass closure of pubs in the north of England?
  • My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Its increasingly out of control up here. Another lockdown is inevitable - everyone seems to be talking about it. I'd rather have the government do a controlled shutdown with some financial support so that we only lose 10% of the jobs rather than an uncontrolled consumer led boycott caused by the "go to the pub don't go to the pub" instructions from Shagger which leads to us losing 30% of the jobs.

    People circulating around each other is spreading the pox. The only way to squash the thing again is stop people circulating. My friends up in geordieland report from relatives that "the RVI is 2 weeks away from shutting itself down as the ICU will be overcapacity". Remember, stay home to save the NHS? Time to park the rule of 6 and replace it with stay home.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 2,372
    edited October 7

    On topic, we accuse the pollsters of often fighting the last election, I wonder if punters are doing the same?

    If the polls were reversed, you need one of those space telescopes to find Joe Biden's chances of winning.

    Definitely true that people overestimate the predictiveness of the last result and underestimate the one(s) before.

    I've mentioned before that, in 2012, Obama did better in the election than in the final poll averages, and the Electoral College very slightly favoured the Democrat (i.e. a UNS sufficient to win Romney the popular vote would not quite have got him over the line to grab the Presidency).

    Now clearly Trump wasn't on the ballot in 2012 and the more recent election has more weight as evidence - but the fact 2012 had a completely different pattern shouldn't simply be ignored as it so often is.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    They came for the barmaids...

    (2.9 million people employed in hospitality – fourth biggest industry sector in the UK).
    When schools close, a lot more than 2.9 million have to stop working.
    I advocate keeping both sectors open.

    You are the one seemingly arguing for closure of a sector that provides three million people with their livelihood (disregarding the huge supply chain).
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 391

    I notice a number of universities are now publishing their own daily data on covid cases, broken down by students and staff. Obviously it is one thing for the young lepers to get it, but passing on to the teaching staff is a different issue entirely e.g. seems like some transmission to staff at Manchester Uni

    https://www.manchester.ac.uk/coronavirus/cases/

    With the high prevalence in the area, we can't say for sure it is being passed from student to staff though. With the precautions in place at my uni, such as yesterday with a 2m spacing, face shields, low occupancy etc, I feel pretty confident doing my in person teaching. I would feel less happy in some of the busier supermarkets.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 587

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    TBH, I think there is a fair bit of argument even over that one. If cases were already falling before the lockdown etc.
    Well what we have certainly ain't working in the North of England.
    I'm not convinced of that.

    A lot of the cases seem to be centred upon students and the return of universities spreading the virus like Freshers Flu, so that needs to be taken into account and not overreacted to.

    Especially in Halls of Residences, or crammed blocks of student flats, putting hundreds of people from across the country to live together on top of each other is inevitably going to lead to transmission. But Freshers Flu burns out after a couple of weeks normally as everyone catches and gets over the viruses they catch from their new friends they now live with.

    This is where exponential growth isn't appropriate. The hundred people who now live with each other in a block of flats or a Halls aren't suddenly going to be exponentially living with a different hundred each the week after.

    Its entirely possible that local lockdowns are keeping a lid on infections, except for the spread within student communities.
    But most students don't live in student communities, and that's the problem. It's mainly first years in halls of residence or student flat communities. The rest are scattered around big cities, living in rented accommodation within local communities. Several of these areas are student dominated, but the students live cheek by jowl with families and people of all ages. This rented accommodation is also often within the more deprived areas of our cities, which adds another vulnerability.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 3,126

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Regarding universities, the decision to allow students to return to campuses ranks right up there with some of the worst decisions taken during the epidemic. Yes to try and rescue the situation I would look to a managed shutdown now of halls of residences for those with a home to return to, subject to testing immediately prior to return. Teaching to continue online, practical work postponed until 2021.

    Regarding schools, no, simply because of the huge constraint that places on most parents' ability to work other than from home.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 1,753
    Scottish government planning to close pubs, indoor spaces, restaurants with booze "indefinitely" in much of the central Belt

    https://order-order.com/2020/10/07/exclusive-snp-planning-sober-october-semi-lockdown-plan/

    I can see widespread disobedience and possible civil resistance. A sunny spring lockdown was tolerable, once. An indefinite autumn and winter lockdown will send people mad. Fuck this insanity.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,643

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    And are all these businesses going to be supported / compensated?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,643
    Thanks to all on the previous thread for your answers re the US Presidential polls.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    HYUFD said:

    In comparisons between the 2018 midterms turnout and the 2020 presidential election be wary though.

    In 2018 the Democrats got 60,572,245 votes, that was only 5 million less than the 65,853,514 votes Hillary got in the 2016 presidential election so there was huge Democrat turnout in 2018 to protest against Trump.

    The Republicans however had much bigger problems getting their voters out in 2018 with Trump not on the ballot. Only 50,861,970 voted Republican in 2018, a huge 12 million less than the 62,984,828 votes Trump got in 2016.

    So in short expect Trump's vote in November to be significantly higher than the Republicans got in 2018 but the Biden vote to be much closer to the Democratic vote in 2018.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections

    There was recording breaking turnout in the Midterms you say?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    Four years ago today, Wikileaks first published the leaked Clinton emails.

    The day after pussygate wasn't it?
    Or the same day.

    The only new meme going around for now is this one.
    That's remarkably well sung for an internet spoof.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100

    On topic, we accuse the pollsters of often fighting the last election, I wonder if punters are doing the same?

    If the polls were reversed, you need one of those space telescopes to find Joe Biden's chances of winning.

    As I have endlessly droned on about. Trump on 50% in the polls with Biden limping along at 43%, what Price would Trump be? 1.05?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 391

    Auckland: All restrictions lifted

    Bishop Auckland: Pub shut-down imminent

    Jacinda 1 Bozo 0

    Classic false equivalence.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790
    edited October 7

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    They came for the barmaids...
    I've held back for 5 minutes, but ****-it, I'm going to bite here.

    I am offended that you have used a poem to describe how not speaking out leads to genocide as a response to my comment.

    For a start my comment had absolutely nothing to do with not speaking out.

    Secondly, I also want pubs and restaurants to be open. I want schools and universities to be open. We should be able have a proper discussion about the risks and costs of these heavy actions, without being implicitly accused of being a bigot against those in the hospitality trade.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DougSeal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Starmer - can the PM set out the scientific evidence for the 10pm curfew?
    Shagger - yes, its because you voted for it. Stop undermining the country

    Ultimately Boris is right, Labour voted through the non-oversight package and then let the government renew the same one and abstained on it. Starmer had the opportunity to force concessions but he flunked it and now oversight and votes are at the gift of the government who will never allow a vote on measures they know they will lose, see the withdrawal of the 10pm closing time debate/vote.

    Starmer is turning out to be a rubbish politician.
    Hang on - that wasn't the question. Starmer asked for scientific evidence and the evidence given by Shagger is that Labour supported it. Is this true of everything? Does Labour support = scientific evidence? If so I think we should know.
    And yet when given the chance Labour abstained on the measure that would have forced the government to give scientific evidence to the House. Starmer is another empty suit with empty words coming out of his mouth.
    And thats party political. Out there in the real world people are getting sick and losing their jobs. Do we not ask any questions about why because SKS is a bit wooden?
    No it isn't. Starmer could have spoken to Brady who had the numbers and forced the government to come to the table with a revised bill that guaranteed debates and votes on all measures. He made the choice not to and now we're all having to live with it. Labour gave the government the ability to not give a shit about evidence and are now making policy to suit them, even if it's a dog's breakfast.

    In the real world those people needed Starmer to stand up to the government when it counted, he's doing so now to get a soundbite on the news, to look like he's doing something about it knowing full well he passed up an opportunity to actually do something about it.

    We know Boris is shite, no one is disputing that. We know the government has completely fucked up basically any kind of public health policy in regards to virus containment. Yet when it came down to it Labour didn't even bother voting against the bill which allowed the government to continue exactly as it had done for the previous six months. They just accepted the promise of votes from the same group of people happy to break the law.

    As I said, Starmer is an empty vessel with empty words. Our political class has let the nation down time and again, and Starmer has proved he's part of it.
    Did Brady really have the numbers? He could barely muster a dozen last night as opposed to the 80 he was briefing beforehand.
    Why bother voting against the government when Labour are going to abstain?
    Principle?

    And it demonstrates to the opposition the likelihood of actually winning a vote next time, by showing their strength.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    Four years ago today, Wikileaks first published the leaked Clinton emails.

    The day after pussygate wasn't it?
    Or the same day.

    The only new meme going around for now is this one.
    That's remarkably well sung for an internet spoof.
    YouTube has a lot of great amateur singers they could use.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901

    Most of the people who will stay away from pubs "because they don't want to get it" would be the same people who never or rarely visit pubs anyway, to my best guess.

    You've found me out :D
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    Four years ago today, Wikileaks first published the leaked Clinton emails.

    Ironically one of the reasons I got over confident on Clinton.

    I read every single crank article that got posted on here about the e-mails and every time it was absolutely nothing. Including flat out fabrications and lies about what the e-mails said.

    As a result I became immune to the siren of these disinformation merchants and failed to appreciate what affect they might be having in aggregate.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    Getting off this tiresome lockdown debate for a second, a couple of interesting state polls just out.

    Trumpton tied in TX and behind by a point in IO.

    President: general election Texas
    OCT 3-6, 2020
    B/C
    Civiqs
    895 LV Biden
    48%
    48%
    Trump EVEN

    President: general election Iowa
    OCT 3-6, 2020
    B/C
    Civiqs
    756 LV Biden
    48%
    47%
    Trump Biden +1
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The only local lockdown which has had any success is in Leicester.

    TBH, I think there is a fair bit of argument even over that one. If cases were already falling before the lockdown etc.
    Well what we have certainly ain't working in the North of England.
    I'm not convinced of that.

    A lot of the cases seem to be centred upon students and the return of universities spreading the virus like Freshers Flu, so that needs to be taken into account and not overreacted to.

    Especially in Halls of Residences, or crammed blocks of student flats, putting hundreds of people from across the country to live together on top of each other is inevitably going to lead to transmission. But Freshers Flu burns out after a couple of weeks normally as everyone catches and gets over the viruses they catch from their new friends they now live with.

    This is where exponential growth isn't appropriate. The hundred people who now live with each other in a block of flats or a Halls aren't suddenly going to be exponentially living with a different hundred each the week after.

    Its entirely possible that local lockdowns are keeping a lid on infections, except for the spread within student communities.
    But most students don't live in student communities, and that's the problem. It's mainly first years in halls of residence or student flat communities. The rest are scattered around big cities, living in rented accommodation within local communities. Several of these areas are student dominated, but the students live cheek by jowl with families and people of all ages. This rented accommodation is also often within the more deprived areas of our cities, which adds another vulnerability.
    The biggest breakouts amongst students are the ones in the student communities though. Is there much evidence that people who don't live in student communities are disproportionately infected too?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 25,007

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    This is news to me. Why wouldn't it spread in pubs like everywhere else?
    I'm sceptical that someone called "londonpubman" will be objective when it comes to the probability of COV2 spreading in pubs.
    I'm equally sceptical that many PBers will be objective, given that several of them admit they rarely visit pubs and know nobody who works in one.
    Plus they would have been bemoaning the closure of their local.

    https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/why-are-all-the-pubs-closing-ask-people-who-never-go-to-the-pub-200903051623
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    *Betting post* - My tip yesterday of Biden 58-61% of vote at 20/1 has now come in to 13.5. That's borderline value I'd guess.

    Strangely though Biden at >61% of vote has gone out to 41/1. I've nibbled again.

    It's a longshot for sure, but it's not inconceivable if Trump supporters don't turnout, or postal voting makes it much easier for Dems to motivate their voters to send ballots in.

    Have to say this feels like wishful thinking more than objective betting.

    The CNN poll yesterday is the only one that was within a whisker of 58% for Biden (albeit some include "don't know" as a category so slightly understate both candidates, "Mr Don't Know" not appearing on the ballot).

    The race has been very stable for a long period, and there is no doubt that Trump is well liked by a group numbering at or not far short of 40% of the population (and inspires genuine enthusiasm amongst many of those).

    I can see a double digit win for Biden as a serious possibility (although not probable). But a 20%+ win? I'd need much longer odds than 40-1.
    FPT: 538 reckon ~10% chance of Biden getting > 57% of vote if I am interpreting their vote % chart correctly.

    I agree the race has been stable, but I think because of the unusual nature of this race, there is a higher than normal chance of polling being off. So there's value at the margins.

    Except there isn't value on Trump because he is weirdly over-rated as others have covered.
    You just need to assume the polls are understating Biden by a couple of points due to overcomp for 2016 and/or a further collapse of Trump support as he gets more and more desperate and implodes (see latest antics). Then you get the BIG landslide (as opposed to the landslide). I can see this happening (although I'm not predicting it, I'm predicting the vanilla landslide) and so I like your bet at those big odds. Will not be doing it myself, but only because my main open bet is EC supremacy at 28 which covers it.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 4,659
    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    They came for the barmaids...
    I've held back for 5 minutes, but ****-it, I'm going to bite here.

    I am offended that you have used a poem to describe how not speaking out leads to genocide as a response to my comment.

    For a start my comment had absolutely nothing to do with not speaking out.

    Secondly, I also want pubs and restaurants to be open. I want schools and universities to be open. We should be able have a proper discussion about the risks and costs of these heavy actions, without being implicitly accused of being a bigot against those in the hospitality trade.
    I'm not accusing you of bigotry. I didn't mean to imply it and you are probably right that I shouldn't have used that poem.

    Apologies.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    This is news to me. Why wouldn't it spread in pubs like everywhere else?
    I'm sceptical that someone called "londonpubman" will be objective when it comes to the probability of COV2 spreading in pubs.
    I'm equally sceptical that many PBers will be objective, given that several of them admit they rarely visit pubs and know nobody who works in one.
    Please don't include me in that: I go to the pub twice a week and know lots of people who work in pubs.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 25,007

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Its increasingly out of control up here. Another lockdown is inevitable - everyone seems to be talking about it. I'd rather have the government do a controlled shutdown with some financial support so that we only lose 10% of the jobs rather than an uncontrolled consumer led boycott caused by the "go to the pub don't go to the pub" instructions from Shagger which leads to us losing 30% of the jobs.

    People circulating around each other is spreading the pox. The only way to squash the thing again is stop people circulating. My friends up in geordieland report from relatives that "the RVI is 2 weeks away from shutting itself down as the ICU will be overcapacity". Remember, stay home to save the NHS? Time to park the rule of 6 and replace it with stay home.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 3,126
    Cyclefree said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    And are all these businesses going to be supported / compensated?
    Yes, that's the issue. Back in the Spring, hospitality businesses had a year's rate relief, plus a grant, plus furlough costs for staff at no cost to the business. This was supposed to be enough to bail out businesses for an epidemic that the Government hoped it would be on top of by the late Summer only.

    Now some pubs have already been required to close in the NE in the second wave local lockdowns, and are doing so with no further grants and under a furlough scheme to which they are now partially paying for and which is due to end altogether by the end of October. If this becomes the general pattern, the absence of targeted support is going to lead to widespread business closures.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679
    LadyG said:

    Scottish government planning to close pubs, indoor spaces, restaurants with booze "indefinitely" in much of the central Belt

    https://order-order.com/2020/10/07/exclusive-snp-planning-sober-october-semi-lockdown-plan/

    I can see widespread disobedience and possible civil resistance. A sunny spring lockdown was tolerable, once. An indefinite autumn and winter lockdown will send people mad. Fuck this insanity.

    a second lock down won't be as effective as it requires consent and there'll be less of it. Still a majority consent, easy, but effectiveness will be lower with even a little less compliance.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790

    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    MaxPB said:

    My word.



    Given that it is Peston I guess it isn't going to happen?
    Absolutely mental.
    Total lunacy if the government does that

    The evidence appears to be that spread in pubs and restaurants is relatively low
    Only 3% of infections if I recall correctly – of course, the authoritarians in the government like it because it makes them look strong and anti-fun.
    Amazingly it is easier to track and trace the 5 family and friends who visit your home than the 100 strangers you mingle with down the pub.
    So are you advocating their closure then?

    Would you also close schools and universities, where transmission rates are far higher?

    Schools and Universities being open are much more important than pubs being open.
    They came for the barmaids...
    I've held back for 5 minutes, but ****-it, I'm going to bite here.

    I am offended that you have used a poem to describe how not speaking out leads to genocide as a response to my comment.

    For a start my comment had absolutely nothing to do with not speaking out.

    Secondly, I also want pubs and restaurants to be open. I want schools and universities to be open. We should be able have a proper discussion about the risks and costs of these heavy actions, without being implicitly accused of being a bigot against those in the hospitality trade.
    I'm not accusing you of bigotry. I didn't mean to imply it and you are probably right that I shouldn't have used that poem.

    Apologies.
    Thank you. Apology accepted.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,055
    Mr. Rentool, I wouldn't contend the PM is a better leader than New Zealand's, but it's also rather unreasonable to compare an isolated and low population density country with one that is neither of those things.

    France, Germany, Spain, and Italy are more reasonable nations for comparison.
Sign In or Register to comment.