£70 million seems like small change for a considerable chunk of England, against £12 billion for a poorly functioning TTI system and God knows what on Brexit damage etc.
I suspect there are many white suburban women who support Biden but who dare not tell their Trump supporting husbands. Some may not dare to tell pollsters either. It's secret between them and the ballot box.
I think there are probably more shy Biden voters than shy Trump voters.
Why are they "shy" with online polls though? Do they think yougov are going to call up their husband and say, you wont believe this but your wife is a closet Trump/Biden fan?
I think most won't be shy but some will be. It's the psychology of possessing a dangerous secret.
The concept makes me laugh. Trump voters I have met tend to be anything but shy. In fact they usually harangue you at every opportunity, poking their stubby fingers into your chest while they bellow at you from six inches "...and anything thing, bud!"
The ones I have seen who are Shy Trump are in professional jobs who don't admit it because it would be social (and possibly career) suicide. They will happily admit that they will lie to Biden supporters about voting for Biden - it's not worth the hassle.
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
Well, you can ask, but surely someone of your intelligence isn't expecting a vaguely coherent answer?
Fair enough. I guess I'm just so exasperated with the poor quality of governance that we're being subjected to. We have a chancellor who is counting coppers, a PM who is literally fucking clueless, a transport secretary who seems to want to import new cases from overseas, a health secretary that doesn't understand that resolving self isolation adherence is the key to getting virus levels down.
All of them need to be sacked IMO, even Rishi who has fought hard for less restrictions but then not bothered to help the businesses and individuals who are caught in the tier 2 and tier 3 restrictions. We're talking about low hundreds of millions for a level of support that keeps these people in business and the jobs available for the spring.
I would disagree with one minor point in that post.
Her name's 'Carrie,' not 'clueless.'
Carrie doesn't play the violin so I'm not sure that's true.
Now I'm puzzled. Are you saying that anyone who doesn't play the violin is clueless? Because if so that would include me.
More a comment about the PM and violinists.
Well, that's a story that's passed me by. Sounds quite raunchy though. Which one of Jennifer, Petronella and the three he doesn't admit to were you referring to?
I think we may have to be careful what we say here for Mike's sake, but searching Twitter may provide some interesting suggestions which may or may not be well informed.
£70 million seems like small change for a considerable chunk of England, against £12 billion for a poorly functioning TTI system and God knows what on Brexit damage etc.
It's a nothing amount of money. If anything it should be double that and the businesses should be supported properly, not just kept on minimal life support.
I suspect there are many white suburban women who support Biden but who dare not tell their Trump supporting husbands. Some may not dare to tell pollsters either. It's secret between them and the ballot box.
I think there are probably more shy Biden voters than shy Trump voters.
Definitely more shy Bidens. If a Trumpster fesses up in polite company they get a rollicking. If a lefty Joe supporter starts dissing their orange hued hero in front of a few of the "base" he or she runs the risk of far worse. Easy to imagine them being shot with a rifle or powerful handgun. You do the math. No, everything points to the polls being wrong the other way this time. Surge of people power. Silent majority about to speak. I quite like the 2.2 on Biden getting over 75m votes.
Let's be honest, we are all guessing here, myself included. We will see on November 3rd and beyond
Think of the psychology of the Biden supporting wife and Trump supporting husband (of which the polls suggest there are millions of such couples). Which is likely to be shy? Make an educated guess. But you are right. We will see on November 3rd and beyond.
£22m. £8 per head. GM not happy. Crucially Tory MP for Bury South has sounded off against HMG. Ball with Boris it seems. Expect decision in...
Compared to the billions spent through COVID and what would be required if a national lockdown were put in place these really are relatively small sums.
Just pay the full amount and get on with it.
You just got up? 🤣🤣
No. Been busy. Do you need to be rude and personal every time, stop being a stalker.
You will be pleased to know that I reserve all my rudeness for you darling, with the certainty that when I am here you will always be on with your absurd and uninformed far right views. If you were never rude to others I would feel bad about it, but you know it ain't the case.
From your posting style and personality you exhibit on here I think that if it wasn't Brexit you were very angry about it would be something else.
I've met your type in Conservative Clubs before - everyone edges away to the other end of the bar when they see them arrive.
I think you may be looking in the looking glass. I am sad about Brexit, not angry. I leave the angriness to plonkers like you who try to tell others how they should identify - remember your crass angry post the other day; the one where you called someone a "twat" because they said they had a European identity, which you pathetically said "triggered" you? Take the massive great beam out of your own eye you silly swivel-eyed pompous excuse for a "Conservative". You and the people like you that have brought your prejudiced small minded Little England views to the fore in the Conservative Party have reduced it to the low pond water from which you come. You are not a Conservative; you are the angry English Nat equivalent of Malcolmg, and that is no compliment.
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
I'd better keep quiet about the details but I have relatives who arrived from North America a while back and were supposed to quarantine but I strongly suspect they happily trolled around London visiting all the usual tourist spots. They were certaainly not subjected to any kind of checking.
Similarly friend from Indonesia visited the UK "How was quarantine?" He laughed.
Enjoyed the thread header, RB. Thank you. I know they are not easy to write and you expose yourself to flack so all thanks are well-deserved, and that goes for other thread-writers too.
It's always interesting to hear contrarian views but your man rather undermines his own case when he speaks of Trump having a 10% chance. As a number of posters have pointed out, that's about the same ballpark as the major models around, such as 538 and The Economist.
There has been less comment on his shy-Trumper remark, despite the fact he seems to be well off the pace here too. The topic has been much analysed since the polling 'failure' of 2016. I have read two very good articles on it. One was by a highly rated polling firm (Emerson, or maybe Monmouth?) and the other was the Kennedy report into how the pollsters performed generally. Both are worth a read but they're long. The executive summary is:
* Shy-Trumpers do exist. They are mostly to be found in higher income groups, especially amongst segments of the population which are generally thought to be strongly Democrat. (Think middle to upper range executives in big firms in Democrat-voting States.)
* The number is not great - possibly enough to be noticeable at district level but unlikely to be enough to turn a whole State, especially as they have to be netted off against....
* Shy Biden voters: these are the STs mirror image. (Think construction site workers who consider it unwise to let their peers know they think Trump is a schmuck.)
The reports also looked at the related question of under-weighting of low education voters in the samples. This was probably the biggest contributor to the 'fail'. Most decent polling organisations have adjusted for this now, which is not to say that another unforeseen probem may arise, or that it won't cut the other way this time and overestimate Trump's vote. Nobody knows. When you are dealing with humans, anything can happen (which I kind of like and find reassuring.)
Your man is no doubt an excellent historian and I envy you having the opportunity to listen to him, but his knowledge of polls and polling seems to be a little on the thin side. I'd certainly back a number of PB posters against him. In fact, I kind of have.
That is indeed a very good, if rather long, piece.
Definitely worth a read. Makes many of the points that are in Krastev & Holmes, although they see the shift in foreign policy coming as Bush was replaced by Obama, with Trump taking Obama’s disengagement toward its logical conclusion. Trump as symptom of his times is a powerful argument.
Meanwhile with the election, the greater parallel is surely UK 2019, with people poring over the polls looking for any sign that the previous election might be about to repeat itself, when objectively it has been clear all along that it won’t.
Noone is denying (Well aside from GOP internals apparently) that North Carolina may well be close
Unlike many states, it had a very good early tally last time round
The final early split was
Dem 1308011 GOP 1004341 Una 824738
3.14 million votes in.
So far the tallies are
Dem 708355 GOP 379640 Una 433498
With 1.52 million votes in.
For me, the interesting this is the age differences rather than the party splits - Under 40s massively under voting compared to their share of the voting population. Will they come out in the next few weeks or Nov 3rd and, if they don't, surely a plus for Trump?
Here is a good example of why Trump is going to be hammered. The biggest mistake I made in 2019 was not watching inside Labour. If you want to know how things are going, look deep inside the party, watch and listen.
Anybody who claims well we should be more like the Asian countries, do they think people in the UK would accept this?
If explained clearly from the outset, that it was the best possible path not only to saving lives but to saving your jobs (look at China) ... then yes.
But Johnson never had any grip on the facts, dithered, issued conflicting and contradictory twaddle, never censured his svengali ... must I go on?
There is, of course, an alternative or complimentary route to 'Asia's' approach and it was New Zealand's. Seal the borders and then you can live free. You just can't travel abroad and no one can come in. 14 day mandatory quarantine. I have friends on South Island who haven't had to wear a mask in months and don't have to think about the virus.
I disagree OGA, those restrictive measures would never have flown in the UK. We simply don't roll like that.
I don't know. I was surprised at how well the stay home instruction was followed. And I think that, since this would be a measure directed at a small minority, there would be a lot of people in favour of it. Think of the reaction to people like Ferrier, who did apologise.
£70 million seems like small change for a considerable chunk of England, against £12 billion for a poorly functioning TTI system and God knows what on Brexit damage etc.
It's fractions of roundings - this seems uncharacteristically tone deaf from Rishi.
Noone is denying (Well aside from GOP internals apparently) that North Carolina may well be close
Unlike many states, it had a very good early tally last time round
The final early split was
Dem 1308011 GOP 1004341 Una 824738
3.14 million votes in.
So far the tallies are
Dem 708355 GOP 379640 Una 433498
With 1.52 million votes in.
For me, the interesting this is the age differences rather than the party splits - Under 40s massively under voting compared to their share of the voting population. Will they come out in the next few weeks or Nov 3rd and, if they don't, surely a plus for Trump?
I think I am right in saying that some of the most pro-Biden polls have quite large implied 'youth boom' assumptions.
Don't loads of rich New Yorkers already just claim they actually live in Florida for tax purposes? e.g.
Investigators for the department began an inquiry into Jeter’s filings about a year ago. Officials had contended that Jeter, one of the highest-paid players in baseball, filed nonresident income tax returns to New York between 2001 and 2003, claiming his off-season home in Tampa, Fla., as his primary residence. Florida has no state income tax.
What is HMG seeking to achieve with these negotiations?
The best explanations I can come up with are that they are a distraction from something else, or that they believe a non-partisan approach is now impossible, and only the maximum amount of chaos and division will give them a chance of escaping some of the blame.
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
I'd better keep quiet about the details but I have relatives who arrived from North America a while back and were supposed to quarantine but I strongly suspect they happily trolled around London visiting all the usual tourist spots. They were certaainly not subjected to any kind of checking.
Similarly friend from Indonesia visited the UK "How was quarantine?" He laughed.
Indeed. Shapps and other ministers seem to be living in some fairytale world where everyone obeys the rules. It's patently obvious that incoming quarantine adherence is probably around 1-2% of arrivals, the system isn't functioning at all and it needs to be scrapped, Shapps is endangering the whole country with his idiocy. It's maddening.
"Sexual wellbeing products also saw temporarily reduced demand, due to reduced social interactions, although, where markets have started to open up, there have already been good signs ofrecovery. Early indications from Australia and South Africa, during their winter, also suggests that social distancing will result in a weaker cold and flu season this year – the effects of which are beginning to be seen in demand for some over-the-counter (OTC) medications in our larger markets. "
Enjoyed the thread header, RB. Thank you. I know they are not easy to write and you expose yourself to flack so all thanks are well-deserved, and that goes for other thread-writers too.
It's always interesting to hear contrarian views but your man rather undermines his own case when he speaks of Trump having a 10% chance. As a number of posters have pointed out, that's about the same ballpark as the major models around, such as 538 and The Economist.
There has been less comment on his shy-Trumper remark, despite the fact he seems to be well off the pace here too. The topic has been much analysed since the polling 'failure' of 2016. I have read two very good articles on it. One was by a highly rated polling firm (Emerson, or maybe Monmouth?) and the other was the Kennedy report into how the pollsters performed generally. Both are worth a read but they're long. The executive summary is:
* Shy-Trumpers do exist. They are mostly to be found in higher income groups, especially amongst segments of the population which are generally thought to be strongly Democrat. (Think middle to upper range executives in big firms in Democrat-voting States.)
* The number is not great - possibly enough to be noticeable at district level but unlikely to be enough to turn a whole State, especially as they have to be netted off against....
* Shy Biden voters: these are the STs mirror image. (Think construction site workers who consider it unwise to let their peers know they think Trump is a schmuck.)
The reports also looked at the related question of under-weighting of low education voters in the samples. This was probably the biggest contributor to the 'fail'. Most decent polling organisations have adjusted for this now, which is not to say that another unforeseen probem may arise, or that it won't cut the other way this time and overestimate Trump's vote. Nobody knows. When you are dealing with humans, anything can happen (which I kind of like and find reassuring.)
Your man is no doubt an excellent historian and I envy you having the opportunity to listen to him, but his knowledge of polls and polling seems to be a little on the thin side. I'd certainly back a number of PB posters against him. In fact, I kind of have.
If there's any flak flying please aim it at Niall Ferguson. I am merely the messenger
Oh there you are!
Good header! And I don't really care about US politics.
Do you specifically not care about US politics or is it more that you only care about British politics?
I don't really spend enough time on it to have informed views (who is ahead in Iowa...what is happening in Michigan...which pollster was right about Texas...).
I am interested in who wins the presidency but beyond that I don't really want to see the sausage being made.
Some good news amid all the gloom. Former shareholder buys up the assets of bankrupt regional airline FlyBe, hoping to relaunch UK domestic services in the coming months.
Good. Liked Flybe. flying with them out of Southampton Airport was always a good experience.
Other good news this morning: £80 covid tests at Heathrow now available (R4).
I used to fly out of Southampton too, I used to live in Salisbury and had a contract in Manchester. It was fantastic to arrive 20 mins before your flight and walk straight through onto the plane.
Rapid tests at Heathrow are a good breakthrough, the plan there is to set up something of an air corridor between London and the USA, with lots of testing to avoid quarantines.
Flybe Exeter to Dublin/Belfast/Edinburgh was fantastic. But I understand this is effectively a bid for the slots at proper airports, sadly.
I used to love small planes and small airports - Exeter to Edinburgh was definitely another good one, alongside anything from London City. The whole experience was miles better than flying short haul out of a bug airport, having to turn up hours early and face huge queues everywhere. Damn @MaxPB for having had the opportunity to fly the now-cancelled BA001 flight from LCY to New York. I never quite managed to find a customer to get me on it.
Sadly small planes are going nowhere near LHR until they build another runway, the slots are just too valuable now - despite the events of this year.
Small planes are back flying to Heathrow we have a MME to Heathrow flight (it was the late morning flight to Aberdeen but it seems taking people to Heathrow for midday is more profitable for Eastern).
Among the smallest of the small, Carlisle Airport, briefly running scheduled flights to two destinations (Southend and Belfast IIRC) after decades of trying to get up and running is defunct for now, closed by the virus. Perhaps anyone who has travelled on it should get a medal.
Carlisle flight schedule is structured around the locations of the Haughey family houses
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
Well, you can ask, but surely someone of your intelligence isn't expecting a vaguely coherent answer?
Fair enough. I guess I'm just so exasperated with the poor quality of governance that we're being subjected to. We have a chancellor who is counting coppers, a PM who is literally fucking clueless, a transport secretary who seems to want to import new cases from overseas, a health secretary that doesn't understand that resolving self isolation adherence is the key to getting virus levels down.
All of them need to be sacked IMO, even Rishi who has fought hard for less restrictions but then not bothered to help the businesses and individuals who are caught in the tier 2 and tier 3 restrictions. We're talking about low hundreds of millions for a level of support that keeps these people in business and the jobs available for the spring.
I would disagree with one minor point in that post.
Her name's 'Carrie,' not 'clueless.'
Carrie doesn't play the violin so I'm not sure that's true.
Now I'm puzzled. Are you saying that anyone who doesn't play the violin is clueless? Because if so that would include me.
More a comment about the PM and violinists.
Well, that's a story that's passed me by. Sounds quite raunchy though. Which one of Jennifer, Petronella and the three he doesn't admit to were you referring to?
I think we may have to be careful what we say here for Mike's sake, but searching Twitter may provide some interesting suggestions which may or may not be well informed.
OK, thanks. That's interesting.
I hope these fiddlers know what they're doing. This story clearly comes with strings attached.
Anybody who claims well we should be more like the Asian countries, do they think people in the UK would accept this?
If explained clearly from the outset, that it was the best possible path not only to saving lives but to saving your jobs (look at China) ... then yes.
But Johnson never had any grip on the facts, dithered, issued conflicting and contradictory twaddle, never censured his svengali ... must I go on?
There is, of course, an alternative or complimentary route to 'Asia's' approach and it was New Zealand's. Seal the borders and then you can live free. You just can't travel abroad and no one can come in. 14 day mandatory quarantine. I have friends on South Island who haven't had to wear a mask in months and don't have to think about the virus.
I disagree OGA, those restrictive measures would never have flown in the UK. We simply don't roll like that.
I don't know. I was surprised at how well the stay home instruction was followed. And I think that, since this would be a measure directed at a small minority, there would be a lot of people in favour of it. Think of the reaction to people like Ferrier, who did apologise.
Well one idea I posited some time ago was to let the lower risk groups and those who don't interact with higher risk groups resume their activities more or less as normal while shielding those at high risk.
And then for those contacted by track and trace, enforce the 14-day quarantine very brutally - thousands of pounds fine right off, threat of prison, perhaps.
£22m. £8 per head. GM not happy. Crucially Tory MP for Bury South has sounded off against HMG. Ball with Boris it seems. Expect decision in...
Compared to the billions spent through COVID and what would be required if a national lockdown were put in place these really are relatively small sums.
Just pay the full amount and get on with it.
You just got up? 🤣🤣
No. Been busy. Do you need to be rude and personal every time, stop being a stalker.
You will be pleased to know that I reserve all my rudeness for you darling, with the certainty that when I am here you will always be on with your absurd and uninformed far right views. If you were never rude to others I would feel bad about it, but you know it ain't the case.
From your posting style and personality you exhibit on here I think that if it wasn't Brexit you were very angry about it would be something else.
I've met your type in Conservative Clubs before - everyone edges away to the other end of the bar when they see them arrive.
I think you may be looking in the looking glass. I am sad about Brexit, not angry. I leave the angriness to plonkers like you who try to tell others how they should identify - remember your crass angry post the other day; the one where you called someone a "twat" because they said they had a European identity, which you pathetically said "triggered" you? Take the massive great beam out of your own eye you silly swivel-eyed pompous excuse for a "Conservative". You and the people like you that have brought your prejudiced small minded Little England views to the fore in the Conservative Party have reduced it to the low pond water from which you come. You are not a Conservative; you are the angry English Nat equivalent of Malcolmg, and that is no compliment.
Yep, I've got you spot on.
Like I would in real life: I'll simply ignore you.
Whether Trump manages to stagger over the line I think Covid is generally going to be terrible news for incumbents and the 2020's will see a big shift to the left generally (of course there will be a few places that buck this trend)
Bye bye Boris and Tories in 2024 lol!
Boris is investing heavily in a vaccine. When the Covid survivors rub their bleary eyes in the dawn of 2022, they will thank the Johnson for deliverance.
No, they'll thank the scientists. Particularly as the Oxford vaccine technology was in the works long before Johnson got anywhere near No.10. Though he deserves some credit for realising/being persuaded that it needed fast and substantial funding.
£70 million seems like small change for a considerable chunk of England, against £12 billion for a poorly functioning TTI system and God knows what on Brexit damage etc.
It's fractions of roundings - this seems uncharacteristically tone deaf from Rishi.
They're quibbling over maybe £10 per head, that has to cover a lot of different headings?
To all those derisive of the "Shy Trump" theory, 10 minutes on this site saying you would vote for Trump would soon give you plenty of reasons why someone may not say they want to vote for Trump.
Haha, yes that's fair...
Then again, a poll of this site would have Biden about 95% ahead.
I think this site is a lot less pro-Biden than other comparable sites.
Although I am also not making a prediction for the election, I bet somehow those who get it wrong won't get the kind of abuse I get though
I’ve not been on the site much recently
But on almost every thread I’ve seen you complain about being abused
And never, y’know, actually abused
(You can add 1 to the abuse tally for that if it makes you feel better)
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
I'd better keep quiet about the details but I have relatives who arrived from North America a while back and were supposed to quarantine but I strongly suspect they happily trolled around London visiting all the usual tourist spots. They were certaainly not subjected to any kind of checking.
Similarly friend from Indonesia visited the UK "How was quarantine?" He laughed.
Indeed. Shapps and other ministers seem to be living in some fairytale world where everyone obeys the rules. It's patently obvious that incoming quarantine adherence is probably around 1-2% of arrivals, the system isn't functioning at all and it needs to be scrapped, Shapps is endangering the whole country with his idiocy. It's maddening.
I don`t think that`s right. They don`t assume that everyone will obey the rules. Rather, they are banking on the fact that they won`t.
Their aim is that compliance is sufficient to keep prevalence down to a degree until a vaccine is introduced, without bankrupting the country - and recognising that we live in a liberal democracy not a collectivist state. So, at the same time, they want it to appear that they are strong and doing stuff without coming over as drachonian: appear to be authoritarian, but lightly enforce the rules (if at all).
Edit: airport testing would be good I agree. Needs to be costed though.
Morning everyone. I'm not sure that the statement History repeats itself twice is always true, and anyway that this is 1948 all over again applies here. Trump has his enthusiasts but he also has a lot of disenchanted one-time supporters, and his in the middle of a 'war' which many perceive him as losing. Truman was still the guy who ended WWII, and, as Mr RB points out, who had the Berlin Airlift going, which was supposed to have failed within a few days.
Can I also put in a small thought on Ms Cyclefree's piece yesterday. Last May we were told that Cummings trip North would soon be forgotten; it's quite noticeable that it hasn't been, and 'them and us' seems to be alive and kicking.
It always amazes me how much credit Truman gets for Gen Marshall’s work.
Morning everyone. I'm not sure that the statement History repeats itself twice is always true, and anyway that this is 1948 all over again applies here. Trump has his enthusiasts but he also has a lot of disenchanted one-time supporters, and his in the middle of a 'war' which many perceive him as losing. Truman was still the guy who ended WWII, and, as Mr RB points out, who had the Berlin Airlift going, which was supposed to have failed within a few days.
Can I also put in a small thought on Ms Cyclefree's piece yesterday. Last May we were told that Cummings trip North would soon be forgotten; it's quite noticeable that it hasn't been, and 'them and us' seems to be alive and kicking.
It always amazes me how much credit Truman gets for Gen Marshall’s work.
I guess he was a lucky president
Well, he did appoint him. And Hoover, for the matter of that.
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
I'd better keep quiet about the details but I have relatives who arrived from North America a while back and were supposed to quarantine but I strongly suspect they happily trolled around London visiting all the usual tourist spots. They were certaainly not subjected to any kind of checking.
Similarly friend from Indonesia visited the UK "How was quarantine?" He laughed.
Indeed. Shapps and other ministers seem to be living in some fairytale world where everyone obeys the rules. It's patently obvious that incoming quarantine adherence is probably around 1-2% of arrivals, the system isn't functioning at all and it needs to be scrapped, Shapps is endangering the whole country with his idiocy. It's maddening.
I don`t think that`s right. They don`t assume that everyone will obey the rules. Rather, they are banking on the fact that they won`t.
Their aim is that compliance is sufficient to keep prevalence down to a degree until a vaccine is introduced, without bankrupting the country - and recognising that we live in a liberal democracy not a collectivist state. So, at the same time, they want it to appear that they are strong and doing stuff without coming over as drachonian: appear to be authoritarian, but lightly enforce the rules (if at all).
Edit: airport testing would be good I agree. Needs to be costed though.
I suspect they do think that, but they are wrong in my view. Rules should be the minimum necessary but if they are necessary they should be enforced. It takes leadership and dialogue to get people's compliance.
I wish we had paid more attention to Bolivia 2020 - seems to have been a stunningly unexpected result. Proving it is a year for left wing landslides, one hopes.
Corbyn certainly noticed, though the Bolivian result was partly a reaction against the police and military pressure that forced former leftwing President Morales into exile after last year's indecisive election, the newly elected President Luis Arce is a Morales ally and he will therefore now likely return from exile. https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1317508179077586946?s=20
Do you at least acknowledge that this election was won fair and square even if you don't like the result?
I am not Bolivian I have no direct interest in the election, if the Bolivian authorities say it is free and fair then it is free and fair
Mugabe also used to say his elections were free and fair. Did you take his word for it too?
To all those derisive of the "Shy Trump" theory, 10 minutes on this site saying you would vote for Trump would soon give you plenty of reasons why someone may not say they want to vote for Trump.
Haha, yes that's fair...
Then again, a poll of this site would have Biden about 95% ahead.
I think this site is a lot less pro-Biden than other comparable sites.
Although I am also not making a prediction for the election, I bet somehow those who get it wrong won't get the kind of abuse I get though
I’ve not been on the site much recently
But on almost every thread I’ve seen you complain about being abused
And never, y’know, actually abused
(You can add 1 to the abuse tally for that if it makes you feel better)
Can someone go and find that massive c*** Grant Shapps and ask him why if Heathrow has been able to implement pre-departure testing for flights out of London why the UK government doesn't insist on all arriving flights aren't subject to the same terms. No negative test, no boarding.
Well, you can ask, but surely someone of your intelligence isn't expecting a vaguely coherent answer?
Fair enough. I guess I'm just so exasperated with the poor quality of governance that we're being subjected to. We have a chancellor who is counting coppers, a PM who is literally fucking clueless, a transport secretary who seems to want to import new cases from overseas, a health secretary that doesn't understand that resolving self isolation adherence is the key to getting virus levels down.
All of them need to be sacked IMO, even Rishi who has fought hard for less restrictions but then not bothered to help the businesses and individuals who are caught in the tier 2 and tier 3 restrictions. We're talking about low hundreds of millions for a level of support that keeps these people in business and the jobs available for the spring.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
Noone is denying (Well aside from GOP internals apparently) that North Carolina may well be close
Unlike many states, it had a very good early tally last time round
The final early split was
Dem 1308011 GOP 1004341 Una 824738
3.14 million votes in.
So far the tallies are
Dem 708355 GOP 379640 Una 433498
With 1.52 million votes in.
For me, the interesting this is the age differences rather than the party splits - Under 40s massively under voting compared to their share of the voting population. Will they come out in the next few weeks or Nov 3rd and, if they don't, surely a plus for Trump?
I think I am right in saying that some of the most pro-Biden polls have quite large implied 'youth boom' assumptions.
I wish we had paid more attention to Bolivia 2020 - seems to have been a stunningly unexpected result. Proving it is a year for left wing landslides, one hopes.
Corbyn certainly noticed, though the Bolivian result was partly a reaction against the police and military pressure that forced former leftwing President Morales into exile after last year's indecisive election, the newly elected President Luis Arce is a Morales ally and he will therefore now likely return from exile. https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1317508179077586946?s=20
Do you at least acknowledge that this election was won fair and square even if you don't like the result?
I am not Bolivian I have no direct interest in the election, if the Bolivian authorities say it is free and fair then it is free and fair
Mugabe also used to say his elections were free and fair. Did you take his word for it too?
Jezza and his mates of course used to go to Venezuela as "independent" election observers to make sure those were free and fair as well.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
If we were about to run out of money the furlough scheme would be brought to a complete end, testing would be scaled down to hospital admissions, etc.
I'm not surprised that they'll use any lie in an attempt to get their way, but I don't understand why this particular thing is so important to get their way on.
Big thank you to Hyufd for reporting the latest polls. He really is much prompter (and more accurate!) than RCP, which has degenerated sadly over the years.
These are the best polls for Biden for a little while. It was starting to look like Trump was effecting a mini-rally - back ahead in Ohio and Georgia, closing the gap in Pennsylvania etc. The figures from Rhesus Monkey will be reassuring for the Biden team, although they would prefer a more authoritative pollster. 538 grades them D- , which is not suggesting they are anything other than proper pollsters, but they do tend to adopt the old Kalashnikow method - 'spray and pray'.
538 is the best for polls. More comprehensive and more up to date than RCP
Is there a spot where all the latest polls appear on 538? I've looked before but never found one.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
Because they know it's going to be months. And probably encompass all but the most rural. Ps GM is rumoured to be asking for what Lancashire got. £75m for GM, Lancs £42m. Which is roughly equivalent per capita.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
Its ideological and power based. Local govt = bad in the eyes of the govt. Something that needs to be controlled from the centre and would always waste any money it is given.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
Indeed. Every £ spent locally on Covid mitigation is a pound less for Dido, Capita consultants, "Smart Borders" consultants, real estate owners in Kent and satellite companies with dodgy business models.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
If we were about to run out of money the furlough scheme would be brought to a complete end, testing would be scaled down to hospital admissions, etc.
I'm not surprised that they'll use any lie in an attempt to get their way, but I don't understand why this particular thing is so important to get their way on.
If there needs to be more QE there should be more QE. Deal with the aftermath once the pandemic has passed.
Big thank you to Hyufd for reporting the latest polls. He really is much prompter (and more accurate!) than RCP, which has degenerated sadly over the years.
These are the best polls for Biden for a little while. It was starting to look like Trump was effecting a mini-rally - back ahead in Ohio and Georgia, closing the gap in Pennsylvania etc. The figures from Rhesus Monkey will be reassuring for the Biden team, although they would prefer a more authoritative pollster. 538 grades them D- , which is not suggesting they are anything other than proper pollsters, but they do tend to adopt the old Kalashnikow method - 'spray and pray'.
538 is the best for polls. More comprehensive and more up to date than RCP
Is there a spot where all the latest polls appear on 538? I've looked before but never found one.
One for @Charles, what do you know about UCB? Sounds like good news on the face of it.
"An industry insider tells Guido the firm, ‘UCB’, embarked on a downsizing initiative in which they attempted to shut down their UK operations entirely and shift everything to Belgium, only for the highly-skilled workforce to refuse to move. In the end they gave up, and so the pharmacologists have announced £1 billion of new investment on a 47-acre British campus
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
Because they know it's going to be months. And probably encompass all but the most rural. Ps GM is rumoured to be asking for what Lancashire got. £75m for GM, Lancs £42m. Which is roughly equivalent per capita.
If the government can't afford it then UK doesn't do the lockdowns. If Hancock and co believe this is the point we have reached then we must shield the vulnerable and the rest apply reasonable social distancing and get on with life.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
Problem for the government is that this ship sailed as soon as they started negotiations with Liverpool. The bitter row over Manchester is mostly because they offered considerably less per head than they did to Liverpool.
I think the whole thing is madness (I'm a lockdown sceptic), but as practical politics they would have done far better to have come up with an amount of cash per head for tier 3 areas on a take it or leave it basis as part of the tier system than to start negotiations with a succession of local mayors in turn, each of whom will always want at least what the last bloke got.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
There is a more or less universal unwillingness to put a figure on how much is too much when it comes to the subject of the amount we will be asking our grandchildren to lend us for us to spend right now and for them to pay back after our day.
3 trillion? 4 trillion?.....
Remembering that we never even started paying back what we borrowed to cover the crisis of 2008 it seems to me this is a central question.
I suspect there are many white suburban women who support Biden but who dare not tell their Trump supporting husbands. Some may not dare to tell pollsters either. It's secret between them and the ballot box.
I think there are probably more shy Biden voters than shy Trump voters.
Why are they "shy" with online polls though? Do they think yougov are going to call up their husband and say, you wont believe this but your wife is a closet Trump/Biden fan?
I think most won't be shy but some will be. It's the psychology of possessing a dangerous secret.
It's crap. There's no shy Trump vote out there. There's no 1948 redux. The polls are, if anything, underestimating the Biden share.
Landslide.
I agree. I'm suggesting there is a shy Biden vote (suburban wives of strident Trump husbands) - not a shy Trump vote.
Or previous shy, college educated, white men...
The claim below is not backed by published evidence, but Tim Alberta is a pretty sound journalist, so I don't think he's making it up.
Twice in the past week, I’ve been given reliable polling from the ground in battleground states that suggests something that was once unthinkable: Trump is losing college-educated white men for the first time in his presidency. The margins aren’t huge, but they are consistent with a trend line that dates to 2018, when Republicans carried this demographic by just 4 points. What the numbers suggest—in both private and public polling—is that Biden is no longer just walloping Trump among white women in the suburbs, he’s pulling ahead with white men there, as well....
Enjoyed the thread header, RB. Thank you. I know they are not easy to write and you expose yourself to flack so all thanks are well-deserved, and that goes for other thread-writers too.
It's always interesting to hear contrarian views but your man rather undermines his own case when he speaks of Trump having a 10% chance. As a number of posters have pointed out, that's about the same ballpark as the major models around, such as 538 and The Economist.
There has been less comment on his shy-Trumper remark, despite the fact he seems to be well off the pace here too. The topic has been much analysed since the polling 'failure' of 2016. I have read two very good articles on it. One was by a highly rated polling firm (Emerson, or maybe Monmouth?) and the other was the Kennedy report into how the pollsters performed generally. Both are worth a read but they're long. The executive summary is:
* Shy-Trumpers do exist. They are mostly to be found in higher income groups, especially amongst segments of the population which are generally thought to be strongly Democrat. (Think middle to upper range executives in big firms in Democrat-voting States.)
* The number is not great - possibly enough to be noticeable at district level but unlikely to be enough to turn a whole State, especially as they have to be netted off against....
* Shy Biden voters: these are the STs mirror image. (Think construction site workers who consider it unwise to let their peers know they think Trump is a schmuck.)
The reports also looked at the related question of under-weighting of low education voters in the samples. This was probably the biggest contributor to the 'fail'. Most decent polling organisations have adjusted for this now, which is not to say that another unforeseen probem may arise, or that it won't cut the other way this time and overestimate Trump's vote. Nobody knows. When you are dealing with humans, anything can happen (which I kind of like and find reassuring.)
Your man is no doubt an excellent historian and I envy you having the opportunity to listen to him, but his knowledge of polls and polling seems to be a little on the thin side. I'd certainly back a number of PB posters against him. In fact, I kind of have.
If there's any flak flying please aim it at Niall Ferguson. I am merely the messenger
Oh there you are!
Good header! And I don't really care about US politics.
Do you specifically not care about US politics or is it more that you only care about British politics?
I don't really spend enough time on it to have informed views (who is ahead in Iowa...what is happening in Michigan...which pollster was right about Texas...).
I am interested in who wins the presidency but beyond that I don't really want to see the sausage being made.
Fair enough. Greatest show on earth for me. Especially this one.
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
Problem for the government is that this ship sailed as soon as they started negotiations with Liverpool. The bitter row over Manchester is mostly because they offered considerably less per head than they did to Liverpool.
I think the whole thing is madness (I'm a lockdown sceptic), but as practical politics they would have done far better to have come up with an amount of cash per head for tier 3 areas on a take it or leave it basis as part of the tier system than to start negotiations with a succession of local mayors in turn, each of whom will always want at least what the last bloke got.
What would the money actually be for? Financial support for the unemployed, those furloughed and businesses ordered closed is already run from central government, not locally.
Big thank you to Hyufd for reporting the latest polls. He really is much prompter (and more accurate!) than RCP, which has degenerated sadly over the years.
These are the best polls for Biden for a little while. It was starting to look like Trump was effecting a mini-rally - back ahead in Ohio and Georgia, closing the gap in Pennsylvania etc. The figures from Rhesus Monkey will be reassuring for the Biden team, although they would prefer a more authoritative pollster. 538 grades them D- , which is not suggesting they are anything other than proper pollsters, but they do tend to adopt the old Kalashnikow method - 'spray and pray'.
538 is the best for polls. More comprehensive and more up to date than RCP
Is there a spot where all the latest polls appear on 538? I've looked before but never found one.
I think the Famous Mr Ed is right about one thing; the Biden campaign has run out of steam and is just trying to get to election day without a massive fuck up. The other factor is that Trump doesn't give a fuck about convention, rules, the law, truth or anything else except getting as high as fuck. I am starting to think Trump will do it. I will have an anal prolapse from laughing if he does.
I suspect there are many white suburban women who support Biden but who dare not tell their Trump supporting husbands. Some may not dare to tell pollsters either. It's secret between them and the ballot box.
I think there are probably more shy Biden voters than shy Trump voters.
Why are they "shy" with online polls though? Do they think yougov are going to call up their husband and say, you wont believe this but your wife is a closet Trump/Biden fan?
I think most won't be shy but some will be. It's the psychology of possessing a dangerous secret.
The concept makes me laugh. Trump voters I have met tend to be anything but shy. In fact they usually harangue you at every opportunity, poking their stubby fingers into your chest while they bellow at you from six inches "...and anything thing, bud!"
The ones I have seen who are Shy Trump are in professional jobs who don't admit it because it would be social (and possibly career) suicide. They will happily admit that they will lie to Biden supporters about voting for Biden - it's not worth the hassle.
Doesn't follow that the also lie to pollsters. There are a few posters on here who you tell are embarrassed about wanting Trump to win but I suspect would be truthful in a poll
Morning everyone. I'm not sure that the statement History repeats itself twice is always true, and anyway that this is 1948 all over again applies here. Trump has his enthusiasts but he also has a lot of disenchanted one-time supporters, and his in the middle of a 'war' which many perceive him as losing. Truman was still the guy who ended WWII, and, as Mr RB points out, who had the Berlin Airlift going, which was supposed to have failed within a few days.
Can I also put in a small thought on Ms Cyclefree's piece yesterday. Last May we were told that Cummings trip North would soon be forgotten; it's quite noticeable that it hasn't been, and 'them and us' seems to be alive and kicking.
It always amazes me how much credit Truman gets for Gen Marshall’s work.
I guess he was a lucky president
Well, he did appoint him. And Hoover, for the matter of that.
Noone is denying (Well aside from GOP internals apparently) that North Carolina may well be close
Unlike many states, it had a very good early tally last time round
The final early split was
Dem 1308011 GOP 1004341 Una 824738
3.14 million votes in.
So far the tallies are
Dem 708355 GOP 379640 Una 433498
With 1.52 million votes in.
For me, the interesting this is the age differences rather than the party splits - Under 40s massively under voting compared to their share of the voting population. Will they come out in the next few weeks or Nov 3rd and, if they don't, surely a plus for Trump?
I think I am right in saying that some of the most pro-Biden polls have quite large implied 'youth boom' assumptions.
Not happening??
As far as I have read the main drivers of Biden's polling v Clinton in 2016 are suburban white women and seniors. Could you provide a link to the "youth boom" data please.
I wish we had paid more attention to Bolivia 2020 - seems to have been a stunningly unexpected result. Proving it is a year for left wing landslides, one hopes.
Corbyn certainly noticed, though the Bolivian result was partly a reaction against the police and military pressure that forced former leftwing President Morales into exile after last year's indecisive election, the newly elected President Luis Arce is a Morales ally and he will therefore now likely return from exile. https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1317508179077586946?s=20
Do you at least acknowledge that this election was won fair and square even if you don't like the result?
I am not Bolivian I have no direct interest in the election, if the Bolivian authorities say it is free and fair then it is free and fair
Mugabe also used to say his elections were free and fair. Did you take his word for it too?
The facts aren't remotely similar. It's his opponents who are saying it's fair - and the 'authorities' were not on the winner's side.
Enjoyed the thread header, RB. Thank you. I know they are not easy to write and you expose yourself to flack so all thanks are well-deserved, and that goes for other thread-writers too.
It's always interesting to hear contrarian views but your man rather undermines his own case when he speaks of Trump having a 10% chance. As a number of posters have pointed out, that's about the same ballpark as the major models around, such as 538 and The Economist.
There has been less comment on his shy-Trumper remark, despite the fact he seems to be well off the pace here too. The topic has been much analysed since the polling 'failure' of 2016. I have read two very good articles on it. One was by a highly rated polling firm (Emerson, or maybe Monmouth?) and the other was the Kennedy report into how the pollsters performed generally. Both are worth a read but they're long. The executive summary is:
* Shy-Trumpers do exist. They are mostly to be found in higher income groups, especially amongst segments of the population which are generally thought to be strongly Democrat. (Think middle to upper range executives in big firms in Democrat-voting States.)
* The number is not great - possibly enough to be noticeable at district level but unlikely to be enough to turn a whole State, especially as they have to be netted off against....
* Shy Biden voters: these are the STs mirror image. (Think construction site workers who consider it unwise to let their peers know they think Trump is a schmuck.)
The reports also looked at the related question of under-weighting of low education voters in the samples. This was probably the biggest contributor to the 'fail'. Most decent polling organisations have adjusted for this now, which is not to say that another unforeseen probem may arise, or that it won't cut the other way this time and overestimate Trump's vote. Nobody knows. When you are dealing with humans, anything can happen (which I kind of like and find reassuring.)
Your man is no doubt an excellent historian and I envy you having the opportunity to listen to him, but his knowledge of polls and polling seems to be a little on the thin side. I'd certainly back a number of PB posters against him. In fact, I kind of have.
If there's any flak flying please aim it at Niall Ferguson. I am merely the messenger
Oh there you are!
Good header! And I don't really care about US politics.
Do you specifically not care about US politics or is it more that you only care about British politics?
I don't really spend enough time on it to have informed views (who is ahead in Iowa...what is happening in Michigan...which pollster was right about Texas...).
I am interested in who wins the presidency but beyond that I don't really want to see the sausage being made.
Fair enough. Greatest show on earth for me. Especially this one.
That's because you were brought up on Columbo and Kojak.
Noone is denying (Well aside from GOP internals apparently) that North Carolina may well be close
Unlike many states, it had a very good early tally last time round
The final early split was
Dem 1308011 GOP 1004341 Una 824738
3.14 million votes in.
So far the tallies are
Dem 708355 GOP 379640 Una 433498
With 1.52 million votes in.
For me, the interesting this is the age differences rather than the party splits - Under 40s massively under voting compared to their share of the voting population. Will they come out in the next few weeks or Nov 3rd and, if they don't, surely a plus for Trump?
I think I am right in saying that some of the most pro-Biden polls have quite large implied 'youth boom' assumptions.
Not happening??
As far as I have read the main drivers of Biden's polling v Clinton in 2016 are suburban white women and seniors. Could you provide a link to the "youth boom" data please.
Indeed hence Trump's rather pathetic "women why don't you like me, please like me" remarks.
Big thank you to Hyufd for reporting the latest polls. He really is much prompter (and more accurate!) than RCP, which has degenerated sadly over the years.
These are the best polls for Biden for a little while. It was starting to look like Trump was effecting a mini-rally - back ahead in Ohio and Georgia, closing the gap in Pennsylvania etc. The figures from Rhesus Monkey will be reassuring for the Biden team, although they would prefer a more authoritative pollster. 538 grades them D- , which is not suggesting they are anything other than proper pollsters, but they do tend to adopt the old Kalashnikow method - 'spray and pray'.
538 is the best for polls. More comprehensive and more up to date than RCP
Is there a spot where all the latest polls appear on 538? I've looked before but never found one.
Go to the 538 home page. Look at the interactive bits down the right hand side.
Second down is the "Latest Presidential Poll Average" interactive. Within that click on "National poll" then once you ate in that screen click on the "LATEST POLLS" at the top. Should get you all the latest state and national polling
I think the Famous Mr Ed is right about one thing; the Biden campaign has run out of steam and is just trying to get to election day without a massive fuck up. The other factor is that Trump doesn't give a fuck about convention, rules, the law, truth or anything else except getting as high as fuck. I am starting to think Trump will do it. I will have an anal prolapse from laughing if he does.
I just applied for my Veterans Railcard. When I am on an LNER train as it runs parallel to the M1 am I going to see you, head down on a GPZ900R by the side of and racing the train?
It doesn't make sense to me. The cost of the pandemic is in the billions not millions. The cost of a national firebreak would be billions not millions.
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
The whole point is that it looks like more and more areas are going to be put into Tier 3. This is the baseline negotiation. Every region will want what Manchester gets. And the govt is now saying it can't afford it. For some reason, whether you agree or disagree.
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
There is a more or less universal unwillingness to put a figure on how much is too much when it comes to the subject of the amount we will be asking our grandchildren to lend us for us to spend right now and for them to pay back after our day.
3 trillion? 4 trillion?.....
Remembering that we never even started paying back what we borrowed to cover the crisis of 2008 it seems to me this is a central question.
Who is representing our grandchildren's interest?
A years GDP would be fine imo. In the long run similar to taking a gap year personal finance wise.
Biden tax rate is good, we need to up our tax rates significantly as well
We used to have tax rates like that in the 1970s and 1980s, then Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson cut the top rate of tax from 60% to 40% in just one budget.
Labour MPs went apeshit, but it increased the tax take.
I suspect there are many white suburban women who support Biden but who dare not tell their Trump supporting husbands. Some may not dare to tell pollsters either. It's secret between them and the ballot box.
I think there are probably more shy Biden voters than shy Trump voters.
Why are they "shy" with online polls though? Do they think yougov are going to call up their husband and say, you wont believe this but your wife is a closet Trump/Biden fan?
I think most won't be shy but some will be. It's the psychology of possessing a dangerous secret.
It's crap. There's no shy Trump vote out there. There's no 1948 redux. The polls are, if anything, underestimating the Biden share.
Landslide.
I agree. I'm suggesting there is a shy Biden vote (suburban wives of strident Trump husbands) - not a shy Trump vote.
Or previous shy, college educated, white men...
The claim below is not backed by published evidence, but Tim Alberta is a pretty sound journalist, so I don't think he's making it up.
Twice in the past week, I’ve been given reliable polling from the ground in battleground states that suggests something that was once unthinkable: Trump is losing college-educated white men for the first time in his presidency. The margins aren’t huge, but they are consistent with a trend line that dates to 2018, when Republicans carried this demographic by just 4 points. What the numbers suggest—in both private and public polling—is that Biden is no longer just walloping Trump among white women in the suburbs, he’s pulling ahead with white men there, as well....
Perhaps those Biden voting wives are more persuasive than thought!
One of the most interesting insights I've read into the US election came from Andrew Sullivan last week.
Basically, you could be forgiven for thinking the traffic is all one way. But it isn't. Basically a lot of older white voters are turning to Biden out of fear of control of the virus whilst some Latinos and African-Americans are turning to Trump - the former because they don't like Woke condescension and the latter because poor black voters know what "defunding the police" in their neighbourhoods would really mean.
Defunding the police isn't Biden policy, is there polling evidence that black voters think it is?
I think it's the fear that that sort of sentiment comes with the broader Democratic ticket and could trickle down to affect them at local level.
That seems like a very strained explanation for Trump's support holding up among black people, when there are non-strained explanations like voters rating Trump on the economy.
Why wouldn't that be a factor? Security drives voting behaviour as much as money does - which is really just another form of security:
"Notably, young Black voters don’t seem to feel as negatively about Trump as older Black Americans do. For instance, an early-July African American Research Collaborative poll of battleground states found that 35 percent of 18-to-29-year-old Black adults agreed that although they didn’t always like Trump’s policies, they liked his strong demeanor and defiance of the establishment. Conversely, just 10 percent of those 60 and older said the same."
The claim you mentioned isn't part of what you quoted. It's a hobby-horse of conservative pundits, that completely failed to shift the polls when they said it would. And we're talking about a policy the candidate doesn't have. So I think it needs some kind of evidence, otherwise the default assumption should be that it's a conservative pundit on his hobby-horse again.
Andrew Sullivan isn't a conservative pundit.
Andrew Sullivan backed McCain in the primaries and George W Bush in the general election in 2000 but shifted to Kerry in 2004 and has backed the Democrats ever since, he is basically a John McCain Republican
Yes, that's fair enough. EiT doesn't like conservatives and is very dismissive of their arguments and opinions.
It's a huge blind spot of his.
It can't be that since you're telling me that the pundit I'm criticising, author of The Conservative Soul, *isn't* a conservative.
Jordan Pickford and David Coote deserve to fired into the North Sea, David Coote makes Dido Harding look competent, as for Jordan Pickford, Everton should be punished for Pickford's disgusting assault on Virgil Van Dijk, the only fitting punishment is to force Everton to pick Pickford for every match this season.
Biden tax rate is good, we need to up our tax rates significantly as well
We used to have tax rates like that in the 1970s and 1980s, then Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson cut the top rate of tax from 60% to 40% in just one budget.
Labour MPs went apeshit, but it increased the tax take.
Higher taxes don't work.
the more complex a tax system is there more loopholes there are to avoid paying it.
You maximise tax take by ensuring its simple to collect, hard to avoid and reasonable enough that there is little point trying to escape it.
Betfair question: Does anyone know how to get the book percentage back on BF`s site? It used to be there, but not now. It IS on the BF App on my phone but NOT on PC.
Biden tax rate is good, we need to up our tax rates significantly as well
We used to have tax rates like that in the 1970s and 1980s, then Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson cut the top rate of tax from 60% to 40% in just one budget.
Labour MPs went apeshit, but it increased the tax take.
Higher taxes don't work.
the more complex a tax system is there more loopholes there are to avoid paying it.
You maximise tax take by ensuring its simple to collect, hard to avoid and reasonable enough that there is little point trying to escape it.
And by ensuring people believe it is worth it to earn more. If they don't they'll either scan the system or not bother.
Biden tax rate is good, we need to up our tax rates significantly as well
We used to have tax rates like that in the 1970s and 1980s, then Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson cut the top rate of tax from 60% to 40% in just one budget.
Labour MPs went apeshit, but it increased the tax take.
Higher taxes don't work.
Though our top rate of tax has never been as low as 40% since you need to combine all taxes (which is what that chart shows) so include National Insurance etc too.
One for @Charles, what do you know about UCB? Sounds like good news on the face of it.
"An industry insider tells Guido the firm, ‘UCB’, embarked on a downsizing initiative in which they attempted to shut down their UK operations entirely and shift everything to Belgium, only for the highly-skilled workforce to refuse to move. In the end they gave up, and so the pharmacologists have announced £1 billion of new investment on a 47-acre British campus
Biden tax rate is good, we need to up our tax rates significantly as well
We used to have tax rates like that in the 1970s and 1980s, then Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson cut the top rate of tax from 60% to 40% in just one budget.
Labour MPs went apeshit, but it increased the tax take.
Higher taxes don't work.
Perhaps you can explain why that is without invoking the Laffer curve which you have ridiculed.
Comments
"How was quarantine?"
He laughed.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CGiai3nHu9f/?utm_source=ig_embed
Meanwhile with the election, the greater parallel is surely UK 2019, with people poring over the polls looking for any sign that the previous election might be about to repeat itself, when objectively it has been clear all along that it won’t.
Not happening??
Investigators for the department began an inquiry into Jeter’s filings about a year ago. Officials had contended that Jeter, one of the highest-paid players in baseball, filed nonresident income tax returns to New York between 2001 and 2003, claiming his off-season home in Tampa, Fla., as his primary residence. Florida has no state income tax.
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/06/nyregion/06jeter.html
The best explanations I can come up with are that they are a distraction from something else, or that they believe a non-partisan approach is now impossible, and only the maximum amount of chaos and division will give them a chance of escaping some of the blame.
Is there a less cynical explanation?
"Sexual wellbeing products also saw temporarily reduced demand, due to reduced social
interactions, although, where markets have started to open up, there have already been good signs ofrecovery. Early indications from Australia and South Africa, during their winter, also suggests that social distancing will result in a weaker cold and flu season this year – the effects of which are
beginning to be seen in demand for some over-the-counter (OTC) medications in our larger markets. "
I am interested in who wins the presidency but beyond that I don't really want to see the sausage being made.
I hope these fiddlers know what they're doing. This story clearly comes with strings attached.
I'll take a bow...
And then for those contacted by track and trace, enforce the 14-day quarantine very brutally - thousands of pounds fine right off, threat of prison, perhaps.
Like I would in real life: I'll simply ignore you.
Those tax rates are approaching Scandinavian levels.
Particularly as the Oxford vaccine technology was in the works long before Johnson got anywhere near No.10.
Though he deserves some credit for realising/being persuaded that it needed fast and substantial funding.
But on almost every thread I’ve seen you complain about being abused
And never, y’know, actually abused
(You can add 1 to the abuse tally for that if it makes you feel better)
Their aim is that compliance is sufficient to keep prevalence down to a degree until a vaccine is introduced, without bankrupting the country - and recognising that we live in a liberal democracy not a collectivist state. So, at the same time, they want it to appear that they are strong and doing stuff without coming over as drachonian: appear to be authoritarian, but lightly enforce the rules (if at all).
Edit: airport testing would be good I agree. Needs to be costed though.
I guess he was a lucky president
Having a localised lockdown, even if it costs tens of millions more, is considerably cheaper.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/20/boris-johnson-manchester-tier-3-lockdown-brexit-news-latest/
Exactly as @contrarian has been saying for months.
I'm not surprised that they'll use any lie in an attempt to get their way, but I don't understand why this particular thing is so important to get their way on.
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=ae5354fc-0990-42a9-b026-aedbe8295931
Ps GM is rumoured to be asking for what Lancashire got. £75m for GM, Lancs £42m.
Which is roughly equivalent per capita.
https://twitter.com/ShaunLintern/status/1318517316200632323
I can't find a link from the election prediction page to the all polls page, though there's one in the other direction.
"An industry insider tells Guido the firm, ‘UCB’, embarked on a downsizing initiative in which they attempted to shut down their UK operations entirely and shift everything to Belgium, only for the highly-skilled workforce to refuse to move. In the end they gave up, and so the pharmacologists have announced £1 billion of new investment on a 47-acre British campus
https://order-order.com/2020/10/20/belgian-life-science-giants-billion-pound-boost-despitebrexit/
I think the whole thing is madness (I'm a lockdown sceptic), but as practical politics they would have done far better to have come up with an amount of cash per head for tier 3 areas on a take it or leave it basis as part of the tier system than to start negotiations with a succession of local mayors in turn, each of whom will always want at least what the last bloke got.
3 trillion? 4 trillion?.....
Remembering that we never even started paying back what we borrowed to cover the crisis of 2008 it seems to me this is a central question.
Who is representing our grandchildren's interest?
Or previous shy, college educated, white men...
The claim below is not backed by published evidence, but Tim Alberta is a pretty sound journalist, so I don't think he's making it up.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/20/alberta-two-weeks-2020-election-feelings-430238
...The problem for Trump? That holdout of college-educated white men is breaking—and not in his direction.
Twice in the past week, I’ve been given reliable polling from the ground in battleground states that suggests something that was once unthinkable: Trump is losing college-educated white men for the first time in his presidency. The margins aren’t huge, but they are consistent with a trend line that dates to 2018, when Republicans carried this demographic by just 4 points. What the numbers suggest—in both private and public polling—is that Biden is no longer just walloping Trump among white women in the suburbs, he’s pulling ahead with white men there, as well....
Biden 50% (+1)
Trump 41% (-)
Changes from 26th September. Rated "A+" on 538.
538 can be oddly difficult to navigate at times.
It's his opponents who are saying it's fair - and the 'authorities' were not on the winner's side.
The Sweeney and the Professionals for me.
Our peak tax rates are already higher than that. If those rates are good we should be having tax cuts.
Make your mind up.
Second down is the "Latest Presidential Poll Average" interactive. Within that click on "National poll" then once you ate in that screen click on the "LATEST POLLS" at the top. Should get you all the latest state and national polling
Labour MPs went apeshit, but it increased the tax take.
Higher taxes don't work.
https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president
Jordan Pickford and David Coote deserve to fired into the North Sea, David Coote makes Dido Harding look competent, as for Jordan Pickford, Everton should be punished for Pickford's disgusting assault on Virgil Van Dijk, the only fitting punishment is to force Everton to pick Pickford for every match this season.
You maximise tax take by ensuring its simple to collect, hard to avoid and reasonable enough that there is little point trying to escape it.
https://www.ucb.com/stories-media/Press-Releases/article/UCB-FURTHER-INVESTS-IN-UK-OPERATIONS-WITH-AGREEMENT-TO-ACQUIRE-A-NEW-LEADING-EDGE-CAMPUS
But it's a bit odd that they announced a billion pound UK investment program two years ago:
Drugmaker UCB backs Brexit Britain with 1 billion pound investment
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-pharmaceuticals/drugmaker-ucb-backs-brexit-britain-with-1-billion-pound-investment-idUKKBN1O4007
So it's not entirely unlikely that Guido is talking bollocks about the insider.