Howdy, Stranger!

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

The battle for the White House – Trump’s fight to retain the female vote – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited October 14 in General
The battle for the White House – Trump’s fight to retain the female vote – politicalbetting.com

From today's Morning Consult WH2020 poll – the demographic splits pic.twitter.com/Jbchc35CQl

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • TimTTimT Posts: 1,204
    Nice header and info, Mike
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    Trump in to 2.96 on Betfair.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,319
    TimT said:

    Nice header and info, Mike

    Thanks Tim.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 655
    Good analysis, I recall (perhaps incorrectly) the female vote had been seen as decisive for H Clinton in 2016, yet she still lost, not that I disagree - is there such as shy female Trump voters?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,805
    Another million early votes reported in just the last two hours since this thread was posted.

    Now 12.85m.

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    edited October 14
    Interesting though the polling data is, albeit not surprising, that last sentence seems to me to be key.

    So around 5% have voted already? Plus presumably that figure should now start to rise rapidly. That’s bad news for Trump that so many are voting early.

    I suppose to set against that people who vote that early are more likely to be firmly committed to one side or the other anyway. But again, this doesn’t look to be an election with many undecided voters. All other considerations aside, it’s more about personalities rather than issues - the mild, inoffensive, rather wet Biden against an orange haired lunatic - and personalities don’t change.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 1,204

    Good analysis, I recall (perhaps incorrectly) the female vote had been seen as decisive for H Clinton in 2016, yet she still lost, not that I disagree - is there such as shy female Trump voters?

    I do not think there really is this election.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,805
    edited October 14
    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (2020 early vote as a % of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671

    Good analysis, I recall (perhaps incorrectly) the female vote had been seen as decisive for H Clinton in 2016, yet she still lost, not that I disagree - is there such as shy female Trump voters?

    Presumably from the demographics many Biden favouring women have Trump voting partners, so more likely shy Democrats.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    MikeL said:

    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (% of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

    So another question is, what level of overall turnout are we expecting? Is it likely to go up or stay the same (or, of course, decline)?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    One small but growing demographic breaking for Biden/Harris:



    Anyone know the breakdown of Asian voters? (Chinese, Korean, Filipino etc in the American context).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    ydoethur said:

    MikeL said:

    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (% of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

    So another question is, what level of overall turnout are we expecting? Is it likely to go up or stay the same (or, of course, decline)?
    Recent polls on intent to vote have been the highest they’ve ever been.
    Though of course the circumstances of the election are somewhat unusual.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    edited October 14
    For if this election was going to be decided by just men he would be in a reasonably strong position.

    Are you saying that’s why the Republicans want originalists on the Supreme Court, Mike ?

    (Fine thread header, btw)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    A really useful tool for future pandemics.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    ydoethur said:

    MikeL said:

    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (% of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

    So another question is, what level of overall turnout are we expecting? Is it likely to go up or stay the same (or, of course, decline)?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,692
    On yesterday's Ben Page Ipsos MORI teaser Tweet, polling from the company last week had dissatisfaction with the government growing, Johnson’s ratings getting worse and even even Sunak‘s going down, and overall pessimism about the future of the country increasing. The only big surprise from there would be a much bigger Tory lead. So, that is what it has to be.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,692
    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    MikeL said:

    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (% of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

    So another question is, what level of overall turnout are we expecting? Is it likely to go up or stay the same (or, of course, decline)?
    So we’re potentially looking at a high turnout election with a large chunk of mail in ballots.

    However I twist those sentences, I can’t make them anything other than bad news for Trump.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 10,428
    I notice that on Twitter, Trump voters really do expect to win and rather handsomely at that. They cannot fathom any other outcome. I dread to think what the reaction will be if the polls are accurate.
  • ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    MikeL said:

    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (% of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

    So another question is, what level of overall turnout are we expecting? Is it likely to go up or stay the same (or, of course, decline)?
    So we’re potentially looking at a high turnout election with a large chunk of mail in ballots.

    However I twist those sentences, I can’t make them anything other than bad news for Trump.
    He isn't trying hard enough. People are prepared to queue for 11 hours to vote weeks ahead of time to ensure he's gone. So the White House has to up its efforts - perhaps water cannons to "cool down" the "protesters".

    People need to be shown that in the ONLY free country in the world they shouldn't be allowed to vote for the other guy.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    MikeL said:

    10 minutes since my last post and early votes reported have now gone over 13 million.

    That's 9.4% of the total number of votes cast in 2016.

    Key States (% of total 2016 vote):

    PA - 7.1%
    MI - 21.9%
    WI - 24.1%
    FL - 18.6%
    NC - 10.3%
    AZ - 3.9%

    https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

    So another question is, what level of overall turnout are we expecting? Is it likely to go up or stay the same (or, of course, decline)?
    So we’re potentially looking at a high turnout election with a large chunk of mail in ballots.

    However I twist those sentences, I can’t make them anything other than bad news for Trump.
    He isn't trying hard enough. People are prepared to queue for 11 hours to vote weeks ahead of time to ensure he's gone. So the White House has to up its efforts - perhaps water cannons to "cool down" the "protesters".

    People need to be shown that in the ONLY free country in the world they shouldn't be allowed to vote for the other guy.
    Freedom is precious - so precious it must be rationed.

    Vladimir Ulyanov.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    Pulpstar said:

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
    I think we can only induce that from registered Dems having higher turnout, we cannot be certain who they are voting for.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949

    I notice that on Twitter, Trump voters really do expect to win and rather handsomely at that. They cannot fathom any other outcome. I dread to think what the reaction will be if the polls are accurate.

    Hasn't Twitter just closed down a number of fake accounts which 'supported' Trump? Might it be those?
    In any event if he's going to win easily, why bother, as Mr Pioneers posts, to queue for 11 hours to vote. So might be counter-productive.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862

    I notice that on Twitter, Trump voters really do expect to win and rather handsomely at that. They cannot fathom any other outcome. I dread to think what the reaction will be if the polls are accurate.

    That’s why if he is to win Biden needs to win a huge landslide. So they can’t kid themselves it was anything other than an absolute shellacking from the American people.

    At the moment he looks set for the most decisive result since 1996. That would do nicely. But a Democratic version of 1984 would be even better.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 7,673


    What's the spread on how many days until BoZo does the inevitable?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
    I think we can only induce that from registered Dems having higher turnout, we cannot be certain who they are voting for.
    It’s also presumably very bad news for the GOP in general. These voters are not going to be interested in the niceties of splitting their votes for checks and balances or to convince themselves they’re “independent”.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    Coronavirus latest news: Vaccine will be only 50pc effective, warns expert

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-lockdown-three-tier-cases-deaths-covid/

    A Covid-19 vaccine is likely to be only 50 per cent effective, the chairman of the UK Vaccine Taskforce has said.

    Kate Bingham said any vaccine capable of immunising against the virus would probably be as effective as the flu vaccine.

    “The vaccines we have for flu are about 50 per cent effective,” she said.

    “We shouldn’t assume it’s going to be better than a flu vaccine, because that’s an equivalent – it’s a mutating … respiratory virus that gets in through the nose and eyes and respiratory tract.”

    Over promise, under deliver.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901
    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
    I think we can only induce that from registered Dems having higher turnout, we cannot be certain who they are voting for.
    Sure, but it's a stretch to think that Dem voters (And plenty of Una) who voted in the Dem primary are voting 3 weeks early for Trump
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    Scott_xP said:



    What's the spread on how many days until BoZo does the inevitable?
    Whether he does or not, it’s ridiculous to compare “national” measures in Northern Ireland, with national measures in England. Doing things covering the whole of Northern Ireland is like imposing regional measures in England. It’s not large enough to single out “hotspot” areas and leave low infection areas untouched.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 7,673
    alex_ said:

    Whether he does or not, it’s ridiculous to compare “national” measures in Northern Ireland, with national measures in England. Doing things covering the whole of Northern Ireland is like imposing regional measures in England. It’s not large enough to single out “hotspot” areas and leave low infection areas untouched.

    All of Northern Ireland. Scotland and Wales likely to follow suit.

  • Nigelb said:

    A really useful tool for future pandemics.


    Thanks, that was indeed interesting. A cute idea. I don't know whether it would help make policy quicker in practice, because early in a pandemic the critical parameters might be of unknown scale, but it's a nice addition to the potential measurements we could make (if sufficiently organized).

    --AS
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,815
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
    I think we can only induce that from registered Dems having higher turnout, we cannot be certain who they are voting for.
    Sure, but it's a stretch to think that Dem voters (And plenty of Una) who voted in the Dem primary are voting 3 weeks early for Trump
    There was no competitive GOP race so for example you might have joined the Dems to vote for KLOBUCHAR, then vote Trump when the rest of the party failed to see reason.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    Conversely, the levels Trump is still polling at among all men and all white people, despite everything, is shocking. What a country.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 6,964

    On yesterday's Ben Page Ipsos MORI teaser Tweet, polling from the company last week had dissatisfaction with the government growing, Johnson’s ratings getting worse and even even Sunak‘s going down, and overall pessimism about the future of the country increasing. The only big surprise from there would be a much bigger Tory lead. So, that is what it has to be.

    Anecdotally speaking people seem more worried by their economic uncertainty c.f. Covid than they were in March. So Johnson holding off a second lockdown may be generating short term upport. Although inevitably a second lockdown will come, and again three weeks too late.

    My take on this whole fiasco is whatever the short term opportunities for the Conservatives they will nonetheless take the longer term blame and hence the hit.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 29,108
    IshmaelZ said:

    Coronavirus latest news: Vaccine will be only 50pc effective, warns expert

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-lockdown-three-tier-cases-deaths-covid/

    A Covid-19 vaccine is likely to be only 50 per cent effective, the chairman of the UK Vaccine Taskforce has said.

    Kate Bingham said any vaccine capable of immunising against the virus would probably be as effective as the flu vaccine.

    “The vaccines we have for flu are about 50 per cent effective,” she said.

    “We shouldn’t assume it’s going to be better than a flu vaccine, because that’s an equivalent – it’s a mutating … respiratory virus that gets in through the nose and eyes and respiratory tract.”

    Over promise, under deliver.

    Not “will”.

    Kate was far more nuanced than that
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    Postal/early voters aren't floating voters. So the stats on them really aren't telling us anything.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    Good header Mike.
    Scott_xP said:
    JRM is a Muppet. Sorry that is offensive to Kermit.

    When the government is saying to work from home then Parliament doing so is a good example.
  • Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
    I think we can only induce that from registered Dems having higher turnout, we cannot be certain who they are voting for.
    We know, in North Carolina, which primary the people who have voted early voted in. NC uses semi closed primaries so independents can vote in either (but not both).

    This gives a huge signal as to the actual intent of the voters. Along with knowing if they have changed their party registration since 2016.

    Last I looked 90% of the independents who have voted early voted in the Dem Primary.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,817

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    Sadly, too many people see having a good time as more important than controlling a pandemic. We saw the same over the summer, with the large number of people determined to have a foreign holiday.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 1,348
    The high early voting numbers and record voting enthusiasm in that poll makes me think a comfortable Biden victory is now more likely than a close result.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Trump in to 2.96 on Betfair.

    And Sporting Index has eased Biden a point.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 29,108

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    This generation seems extraordinarily self-centred
  • ydoethur said:

    Interesting though the polling data is, albeit not surprising, that last sentence seems to me to be key.

    So around 5% have voted already? Plus presumably that figure should now start to rise rapidly. That’s bad news for Trump that so many are voting early.

    I suppose to set against that people who vote that early are more likely to be firmly committed to one side or the other anyway. But again, this doesn’t look to be an election with many undecided voters. All other considerations aside, it’s more about personalities rather than issues - the mild, inoffensive, rather wet Biden against an orange haired lunatic - and personalities don’t change.

    If I lived in a country where it can take up to eleven hours to cast a vote, I'd want to do it early.

    I'd also make bloody sure I did vote, because somebody is obviously trying to make it very difficult for me to do so.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 963
    edited October 14

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    There is also a prevalence of fatalism and gloom within the Liverpudlian mindset, which won't be helping.
  • Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,032
    Sandpit said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    Sadly, too many people see having a good time as more important than controlling a pandemic. We saw the same over the summer, with the large number of people determined to have a foreign holiday.
    It was how they behaved on holiday that was the problem not abiding by the rules of the country they visited, if they had stayed on the beach or by the pool then it would not have been aa problem.
  • TimT said:

    Good analysis, I recall (perhaps incorrectly) the female vote had been seen as decisive for H Clinton in 2016, yet she still lost, not that I disagree - is there such as shy female Trump voters?

    I do not think there really is this election.
    Malania is quite shy, but I'm not sure she's vote for Trump.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    Charles said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    This generation seems extraordinarily self-centred
    The last generation not to be are aged at least 75.
  • Seems Northern Ireland are not proposing a full lockdown circuit breaker as per the spring
  • ydoethur said:

    Interesting though the polling data is, albeit not surprising, that last sentence seems to me to be key.

    So around 5% have voted already? Plus presumably that figure should now start to rise rapidly. That’s bad news for Trump that so many are voting early.

    I suppose to set against that people who vote that early are more likely to be firmly committed to one side or the other anyway. But again, this doesn’t look to be an election with many undecided voters. All other considerations aside, it’s more about personalities rather than issues - the mild, inoffensive, rather wet Biden against an orange haired lunatic - and personalities don’t change.

    If I lived in a country where it can take up to eleven hours to cast a vote, I'd want to do it early.

    I'd also make bloody sure I did vote, because somebody is obviously trying to make it very difficult for me to do so.
    Absolutely. And its a self-fulfilling prophesy. The GOP want to stop people voting against them so are doing all these ludicrous things. Which creates 11 hour queues. If you had been planning to vote on the day but are seeing 11 hour queues now, you'd book a day off to vote early.

    Because an 11 hour queue weeks ahead of polling day equals not being allowed to vote at all on polling day. Ordinarily this would be considered a disgrace to the so called leader of the free world. Under Trump? Meh.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,100

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    edited October 14
    Gadfly said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    There is also a prevalence of fatalism and gloom within the Liverpudlian mindset, which won't be helping.
    Walking alone is an alien concept there too.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    On early turnout in the US, isn’t it just that this year people who were always going to vote are doing it earlier because of the pandemic and because they’re concerned about suppression. Extrapolating that to those who don’t normally turnout actually doing so may be a bit of a stretch.

    You can work out precisely who is voting in North Carolina. There are lots of non 2016 votes for Biden.
    I think we can only induce that from registered Dems having higher turnout, we cannot be certain who they are voting for.
    Sure, but it's a stretch to think that Dem voters (And plenty of Una) who voted in the Dem primary are voting 3 weeks early for Trump
    There was no competitive GOP race so for example you might have joined the Dems to vote for KLOBUCHAR, then vote Trump when the rest of the party failed to see reason.
    We can see who changed party registration, it is not that frothy.
  • On yesterday's Ben Page Ipsos MORI teaser Tweet, polling from the company last week had dissatisfaction with the government growing, Johnson’s ratings getting worse and even even Sunak‘s going down, and overall pessimism about the future of the country increasing. The only big surprise from there would be a much bigger Tory lead. So, that is what it has to be.

    Anecdotally speaking people seem more worried by their economic uncertainty c.f. Covid than they were in March. So Johnson holding off a second lockdown may be generating short term upport. Although inevitably a second lockdown will come, and again three weeks too late.

    My take on this whole fiasco is whatever the short term opportunities for the Conservatives they will nonetheless take the longer term blame and hence the hit.
    There's two kinds of fear. Here on Teesside people are genuinely afeared of the pox - especially those with kids in school or jobs that bring them into contact with others. They are also really worried about their livelihoods - another shutdown might be needed to prevent people close to them contracting it, but at what cost?
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 963

    Gadfly said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    There is also a prevalence of fatalism and gloom within the Liverpudlian mindset, which won't be helping.
    Walking alone is an alien concept there too.

    :)
  • Drakeford asking for Cobra meeting to discuss circuit breakers

    Detailed work on a circuit breaker and will look at it over the next week

    Seems he is hedging his bets
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    Just to be clear about the level of detail you can get in North Carolina. I can tell you the name and address of every voter who has voted so far along with their age and race and give you their party registration and what elections they voted in going back a decade or so.

    We are not talking about aggregated stats here.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 3,543
    Gadfly said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    There is also a prevalence of fatalism and gloom within the Liverpudlian mindset, which won't be helping.
    Is that you, Boris Johnson?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901

    IshmaelZ said:

    Trump in to 2.96 on Betfair.

    And Sporting Index has eased Biden a point.
    I've gone back to the well on Betdaq.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown

    "Mr Sunak and the Cabinet hawks might have won the argument to avert a national lockdown. But for how long would their victory last?"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/13/rishi-sunak-battled-scientists-gove-hancock-bid-see-circuit/
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
    What does that mean in this context? Whatever he wants to do for the country, he needs support from his party to get it through parliament.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    The NI circuit breaker is an honest one. 4 weeks and schools closed.

    The idea we can do a 2 week circuit break and keep schools open and that would solve all our problems is about as plausible as saying skipping desert once would solve obesity. A 2 week break would inflict tremendous economic damage but do absolutely nothing significant virus wise. It is the most insane worst scenario to go for, all harm no good.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    I can generate a list of everyone who voted in 2012 who didn't vote in 2016.

    It was a brutal tale of Dem attrition or Dem to GOP switching.

    My next step is to the see how many of the 2012 Dem Registered to 2016 non voters have now turned up in 2020 early voting.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 3,543
    IanB2 said:

    Conversely, the levels Trump is still polling at among all men and all white people, despite everything, is shocking. What a country.

    Plenty of people are nostalgic for the days when just being a white man put you near the top of the heap. That's what MAGA is all about.
  • Drakeford said Starmer and Reeves are talking in an English context

    Drakeford says Wales is not at the level of England
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    Sandpit said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    Sadly, too many people see having a good time as more important than controlling a pandemic. We saw the same over the summer, with the large number of people determined to have a foreign holiday.
    I’m sorry but the two are not fundamentally comparable. Going on holiday for many is about more than just “having a good time”. Most people just need a break, for their physical and mental health. It is not showing contempt for the pandemic or people dying. But it will have been the only bright spot keeping people sane. And that will, incidentally, have included thousands of people working on the frontline of the pandemic in the NHS and elsewhere.

    If people went on holiday and then spent the time exploiting lack of restrictions that might have been in place and spent the entire time packing into bars and nightspots then yes. But that is about how people behave in general, not the fact of having a holiday, foreign or otherwise. I went on holiday. Over the course of it I probably had less social contact than over an equivalent period of the last six months. All precautions were taken, and there was 2 weeks quarantine on return. That is completely different to people partying in packed streets in Liverpool or elsewhere and being in a totally uncontrolled environment. You may reject that - it’s up to you.

    I should add of course that for all the talk of “circuit breakers” that is how large numbers of people will respond. Massive party before, and massive party after. Probably with a big “protest march” in the middle. It may look good to the scientists on paper in their modelling.
    But i’ll bet their modelling is limited on how people will behave in practice.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949
    Alistair said:

    Just to be clear about the level of detail you can get in North Carolina. I can tell you the name and address of every voter who has voted so far along with their age and race and give you their party registration and what elections they voted in going back a decade or so.

    We are not talking about aggregated stats here.

    Are we talking about a secret ballot here? Really?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901
    Still a narrow lead for Democrats in Nevada returned ballots !

    https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=9054

    I expect the GOP will take the lead there shortly. Well until Clark County starts getting their ballots !
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901

    Alistair said:

    Just to be clear about the level of detail you can get in North Carolina. I can tell you the name and address of every voter who has voted so far along with their age and race and give you their party registration and what elections they voted in going back a decade or so.

    We are not talking about aggregated stats here.

    Are we talking about a secret ballot here? Really?
    It doesn't show who they voted for ;)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,106

    Charles said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    This generation seems extraordinarily self-centred

    Tell that to my 26 year-old, graduate son, who was unemployed for six months and applied for literally hundreds of jobs before finally starting one on Monday as a labourer in a recycling centre. He had also signed up for a year long course to train as a plumber and has been doing that for a month. Yesterday, after working his 7am to 4.30 pm shift, he got an email from the college saying two people in his class had tested positive for covid and he needed to self-isolate for two weeks. He phoned work this morning to tell them and now no longer has a job. Like millions of others all he’s tried to do is the right thing. Check your privilege, Charles!

    I'm so sorry to hear that mate.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,978
    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
    What does that mean in this context? Whatever he wants to do for the country, he needs support from his party to get it through parliament.
    Not necessarily. I'm not recommending a Government of National Unity, but cross-party voting on pandemic control is a sensible option.

    There are basically three factions in Parliament - lock down harder, start to relax, and tack your way through the middle. The third has been tried for some time and doesn't seemb to be working. There is a substantial Tory backbench group supporting "start to relax", but a much larger majority for "lock down harder". BJ can use it if he wants to.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    IanB2 said:

    Conversely, the levels Trump is still polling at among all men and all white people, despite everything, is shocking. What a country.

    A woman voter was interviewed on BBC news last night at a Trump rally and she said: "Trump is the best president that America has ever had".

    I mean jeez. Just plain whacko nuts.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,817
    Alistair said:

    I can generate a list of everyone who voted in 2012 who didn't vote in 2016.

    It was a brutal tale of Dem attrition or Dem to GOP switching.

    My next step is to the see how many of the 2012 Dem Registered to 2016 non voters have now turned up in 2020 early voting.

    They’re useful stats to get if it’s possible.

    It’s likely that those who voted in 2012 and not in 2016 are disaffected Democrats.
    It’s likely that those who didn’t vote in 2012 but did in 2016 are Trump supporters.

    Knowing how these particular groups vote in 2020 could be key to the result, obviously those voting early are committed voters, on one side or another.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,815
    edited October 14

    Alistair said:

    Just to be clear about the level of detail you can get in North Carolina. I can tell you the name and address of every voter who has voted so far along with their age and race and give you their party registration and what elections they voted in going back a decade or so.

    We are not talking about aggregated stats here.

    Are we talking about a secret ballot here? Really?
    This kind of shows that ballot secrecy isn't a great security trade-off. By far the easiest way to nobble a vote is by messing with who can participate in it, and you can predict which people you should prevent from voting with very high reliability by demographics and social media activity.

    We should give up on it and just make the votes public, that makes everything else about the process (making sure they can vote, making sure their vote is counted as they cast it) way easier.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    Scott_xP said:
    He’s just a glorified carny barker, isn’t he.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
    What does that mean in this context? Whatever he wants to do for the country, he needs support from his party to get it through parliament.
    Not necessarily. I'm not recommending a Government of National Unity, but cross-party voting on pandemic control is a sensible option.

    There are basically three factions in Parliament - lock down harder, start to relax, and tack your way through the middle. The third has been tried for some time and doesn't seemb to be working. There is a substantial Tory backbench group supporting "start to relax", but a much larger majority for "lock down harder". BJ can use it if he wants to.
    I would be very surprised if more than a handful of conservative mps would back a circuit breaker England wide without having seen how the tiers mitigate or otherwise the spread of covid
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 1,890

    Alistair said:

    Just to be clear about the level of detail you can get in North Carolina. I can tell you the name and address of every voter who has voted so far along with their age and race and give you their party registration and what elections they voted in going back a decade or so.

    We are not talking about aggregated stats here.

    Are we talking about a secret ballot here? Really?
    You realise that, in the UK, there is a number on the back of your ballot paper that is written against your name on the electoral register? No idea if they do that in the US.

    And, in the US, we're talking about a country where most people register a party affiliation with the state. Any tone of surprise seems a bit misplaced.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953

    Drakeford said Starmer and Reeves are talking in an English context

    Drakeford says Wales is not at the level of England

    Large chunks of England are not “at the level” of England. There is no border in place between England and Wales. There is no more or less reason to include, say, Cornwall in a “circuit breaker” policy, than there is Wales.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 4,292
    Is there data to show that Trump's decline amongst women voters is more precipitous than his decline amongst the electorate as a whole?

    He's clearly doing worse than women in 2016 but then he's doing substantially worse on the headline numbers! Also don't discount the possibility that Trump voters could be even less likely to be polling compliant than they were in 2016.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230

    Alistair said:

    Just to be clear about the level of detail you can get in North Carolina. I can tell you the name and address of every voter who has voted so far along with their age and race and give you their party registration and what elections they voted in going back a decade or so.

    We are not talking about aggregated stats here.

    Are we talking about a secret ballot here? Really?
    This kind of shows that ballot secrecy isn't a great security trade-off. By far the easiest way to nobble a vote is by messing with who can participate in it, and you can predict which people you should prevent from voting with very high reliability by demographics and social media activity.

    We should give up on it and just make the votes public, that makes everything else about the process (making sure they can vote, making sure their vote is counted as they cast it) way easier.
    You might want to look back in history and see why the ballot was made secret...
  • ydoethur said:

    Interesting though the polling data is, albeit not surprising, that last sentence seems to me to be key.

    So around 5% have voted already? Plus presumably that figure should now start to rise rapidly. That’s bad news for Trump that so many are voting early.

    I suppose to set against that people who vote that early are more likely to be firmly committed to one side or the other anyway. But again, this doesn’t look to be an election with many undecided voters. All other considerations aside, it’s more about personalities rather than issues - the mild, inoffensive, rather wet Biden against an orange haired lunatic - and personalities don’t change.

    If I lived in a country where it can take up to eleven hours to cast a vote, I'd want to do it early.

    I'd also make bloody sure I did vote, because somebody is obviously trying to make it very difficult for me to do so.
    Absolutely. And its a self-fulfilling prophesy. The GOP want to stop people voting against them so are doing all these ludicrous things. Which creates 11 hour queues. If you had been planning to vote on the day but are seeing 11 hour queues now, you'd book a day off to vote early.

    Because an 11 hour queue weeks ahead of polling day equals not being allowed to vote at all on polling day. Ordinarily this would be considered a disgrace to the so called leader of the free world. Under Trump? Meh.
    A small but clear indication of the kind of discreet voter suppression practiced in some States can be seen in the voting hours. In Kansas and Indiana the polls close at 6pm. Now who do you think that hinders?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,037
    nichomar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    Sadly, too many people see having a good time as more important than controlling a pandemic. We saw the same over the summer, with the large number of people determined to have a foreign holiday.
    It was how they behaved on holiday that was the problem not abiding by the rules of the country they visited, if they had stayed on the beach or by the pool then it would not have been aa problem.
    Not sure about that. How they behaved on holiday certainly didn't help but airports, aeroplanes, buses to and from the resorts, so many times when effective separation is not possible. It was self indulgent and foolish.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 1,890
    alex_ said:

    Drakeford said Starmer and Reeves are talking in an English context

    Drakeford says Wales is not at the level of England

    Large chunks of England are not “at the level” of England. There is no border in place between England and Wales. There is no more or less reason to include, say, Cornwall in a “circuit breaker” policy, than there is Wales.
    I think it's really important to leave some areas of the country out of "lockdown" restrictions so that we can see whether test, trace and isolate has been improved sufficiently in those areas to prevent spread.
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,982
    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
    On this I feel he will. However, it is not easy balancing the need for kids to be in school, the economy to be moving and the vulnerable to be kept safe. It would be nice if the media and others could understand and accept this.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
    What does that mean in this context? Whatever he wants to do for the country, he needs support from his party to get it through parliament.
    Not necessarily. I'm not recommending a Government of National Unity, but cross-party voting on pandemic control is a sensible option.

    There are basically three factions in Parliament - lock down harder, start to relax, and tack your way through the middle. The third has been tried for some time and doesn't seemb to be working. There is a substantial Tory backbench group supporting "start to relax", but a much larger majority for "lock down harder". BJ can use it if he wants to.
    It’s very easy for Labour to take the “lockdown harder” position because they don’t suffer the consequences of the down side. They are caveating their support for this position with the need for massive financial support for affected businesses, but they don’t have to find the money to pay for it.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 15,153
    alex_ said:

    Drakeford said Starmer and Reeves are talking in an English context

    Drakeford says Wales is not at the level of England

    Large chunks of England are not “at the level” of England. There is no border in place between England and Wales. There is no more or less reason to include, say, Cornwall in a “circuit breaker” policy, than there is Wales.
    COVID really is exposing what a strange set up we have in the UK.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    This comment piece makes a false claim about Birmingham nightinggale hospital being taken down and closed, which I think is completely untrue.

    But this was funny:


    "To be fair to Baroness Harding, the poor woman has only been given £12.6 billion to come up with a workable NHS tracking system. With that amount, you could have paid every single elderly and vulnerable person in the UK £60,000 to shield themselves in the Bahamas and used the change to recompense students for their non-existent university experience."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/yes-boris-tippingpoint-trust/

  • felixfelix Posts: 10,982

    Charles said:

    Doctors in Liverpool say those partying in the city do not care people are dying

    It is sad but seems succinct

    This generation seems extraordinarily self-centred

    Tell that to my 26 year-old, graduate son, who was unemployed for six months and applied for literally hundreds of jobs before finally starting one on Monday as a labourer in a recycling centre. He had also signed up for a year long course to train as a plumber and has been doing that for a month. Yesterday, after working his 7am to 4.30 pm shift, he got an email from the college saying two people in his class had tested positive for covid and he needed to self-isolate for two weeks. He phoned work this morning to tell them and now no longer has a job. Like millions of others all he’s tried to do is the right thing. Check your privilege, Charles!

    No doubt at all that the Covidiots are a minority in all age groups. Sadly it doesn't take too many to cause real problems.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,978

    On yesterday's Ben Page Ipsos MORI teaser Tweet, polling from the company last week had dissatisfaction with the government growing, Johnson’s ratings getting worse and even even Sunak‘s going down, and overall pessimism about the future of the country increasing. The only big surprise from there would be a much bigger Tory lead. So, that is what it has to be.

    Yes, I think so (lead of 8-10, maybe). Labour had an invisible fortnight up to yesterday so I'd expect a move in that direction. Equally I'd expect last night's coverage to produce a move to Labour. But I'm not too worried or excited either way - people aren't really thinking about political parties at the moment, and I don't think we can predict what will happen when they are.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    There may be a time when it becomes necessary but the 3 tier system must be given a chance to work before we close down our economy again.

    Furthermore, we all know that it is easy to put England/UK into lockdown but far more difficult to come out

    The other issue is Boris would struggle to get his party to back a full lockdown
    Hopefully the PM will put country before party.
    What does that mean in this context? Whatever he wants to do for the country, he needs support from his party to get it through parliament.
    Not necessarily. I'm not recommending a Government of National Unity, but cross-party voting on pandemic control is a sensible option.

    There are basically three factions in Parliament - lock down harder, start to relax, and tack your way through the middle. The third has been tried for some time and doesn't seemb to be working. There is a substantial Tory backbench group supporting "start to relax", but a much larger majority for "lock down harder". BJ can use it if he wants to.
    I would be very surprised if more than a handful of conservative mps would back a circuit breaker England wide without having seen how the tiers mitigate or otherwise the spread of covid
    The MPs will vote for whatever Cumming puts in front of them. For all their blathering about "Take back control", the first thing they did was give outrageous, unnecessary powers to an unelected official.

    @Cyclefree was polite when she called them "Hollow Men" ...
Sign In or Register to comment.