The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Far too little data to draw that conclusion. And even if the number of cases stays constant that’s still not sustainable.
It's been slowing down in both percentage and absolute terms for a couple of weeks. It shows around 55k new cases per day being added to the funnel, at an IFR of 1% that's a peak of 550 deaths per day which starts to fall as cases fall. Not the 4k that we got told yesterday.
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
Haven't even begun to have been discussed, except as an incessant, gurning chorus, week in week out.
...the indy argument will - and has - descended into using the same arguments that got us to brexit. Absolutely no difference.
No, there is a huge difference - many of the key pro-No arguments in 2014 have been discredited. Notably "Voting No is the only way to stay in Europe". You'd be surprised how much energy has gone on PB to claim that the No campaign argued the complete opposite.
..and the argument "vote yes" to join the EU is a long term project, with all the pain with potentially pegging a currency to sterling and attemping to join a union that relies on cross-border movement on an island as small as this one. If indy advocates were upfront and honest i.e. yes, there'll be medium term pain then I'll accept that. Otherwise all you're doing is pretending everything will be fine - exactly like Brexiters.
I think that's to some extent implicit in the general view that getting out of the Brexit mess will be painful anyway, in or out of the UK, and the way in which Scottish politics on indy went into freeze till the Brexit situation played out - actually I'm surprised the freeze has thawed somewhat already and the pro-indy vote has gone up (i.e. "if there were a referendum today" - not the same of course as SNP plus Green voting for Holyrood).
The last 3-5 days are incomplete. This doesn't not mean anything other than that the last 3-5 days are incomplete. Anyone using this data to draw any other conclusion about the last 3-5 days will be
1) locked down with Piers Morgan, Piers Corbyn and an insane lawyer in his wife's kimono. In a 1 bed flat. For 3 years 2) Fed only on pineapple pizza 3) Only allowed to access ConservativeHome during their lockdown
After seeing that Nevada poll from Emerson I thought I'd check Jon Ralston's EV blog on Nevada as he has a good local reputation and is often quite restrained on good Dem numbers. HIs latest update on the blog based on the early voting figures and his Dem 'firewall' make me much more confident about that state than the Emerson poll. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/the-early-voting-blog-3
The last 3-5 days are incomplete. This doesn't not mean anything other than that the last 3-5 days are incomplete. Anyone using this data to draw any other conclusion about the last 3-5 days will be
1) locked down with Piers Morgan, Piers Corbyn and an insane lawyer in his wife's kimono. In a 1 bed flat. For 3 years 2) Fed only on pineapple pizza 3) Only allowed to access ConservativeHome during their lockdown
If the case data turns out to be accurate to the ONS data then the government is going to have to go into spin overdrive to try and credit the drop to the lockdown.
It looks increasingly like the R has dropped below 1 in Scotland, London, NI, NE, NW and most other parts of the country except Wales. If the ONS confirms it then Nicola is in a stunningly strong position come Friday to reject a lockdown and watch cases drop and get furlough and other business support money.
Boris has let the scientists use big numbers to scare him into an unnecessary lockdown and we're all going to pay for it. The scientists will feel none of the consequences of their awful models, they won't even be sacked and will end up being honoured. It's absolutely galling how rubbish the politicians are across all parties.
23,254 new cases today.
Ferguson's prediction in March: Sweden without lockdown 85,000 deaths
Actual outcome in October: Sweden without lockdown 5,900 deaths.
How could a competent government hire someone who couldn't predict foot and mouth, BSE *or* swine flu?
Ah, I must have missed all those gatherings of over 50 people, unrestricted international travel and unlimited care home vists the Swedes were allowed.
If the case data turns out to be accurate to the ONS data then the government is going to have to go into spin overdrive to try and credit the drop to the lockdown.
It looks increasingly like the R has dropped below 1 in Scotland, London, NI, NE, NW and most other parts of the country except Wales. If the ONS confirms it then Nicola is in a stunningly strong position come Friday to reject a lockdown and watch cases drop and get furlough and other business support money.
Boris has let the scientists use big numbers to scare him into an unnecessary lockdown and we're all going to pay for it. The scientists will feel none of the consequences of their awful models, they won't even be sacked and will end up being honoured. It's absolutely galling how rubbish the politicians are across all parties.
23,254 new cases today.
Ferguson's prediction in March: Sweden without lockdown 85,000 deaths
Actual outcome in October: Sweden without lockdown 5,900 deaths.
How could a competent government hire someone who couldn't predict foot and mouth, BSE *or* swine flu?
Without mitigation ≠ without lockdown.
Isn't that the issue though, no one is saying we should throw open nightclubs and have 60k people in stadiums again. We're not talking about getting rid of mitigation, yet we're still being presented data from a model which doesn't take into account existing mitigation strategies.
All countries have had mitigation strategies yet not all have had house arrest or curfews. Spare a thought for the people of Argentina. A 200 day lockdown and still ... 684 deaths per million.
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
I am sadly resigned, as I fear the practical issues will no longer sway enough people from what they emotionally want, and not enough feel positive about the UK to change that.
I desperately hope I am wrong.
I suspect in the long run the most likely way to avoid Scottish independence is for someone (SKS?) to offer a referendum on the basis that it is only on the ratification of an actual agreement, so that there could be genuine discussion of the pros and cons and a process with grown ups in the room about what is involved. One can imagine SKS saying that he has learned from Brexit how not to do a referendum. The SNP would struggle to disagree and keep a straight face. And Unionists might enjoy the sight of the SNP trying to wriggle away from having to have an actual set of concrete proposals to vote on.
You're confusing the SNP in 2014 with the Tories and the BXP three years later. Not least becausde independence is at least a clear end state, in complete contrast to the changes in Brexit goals since 2017.
I have this thick document, nay book, on my bookshelf published by the Scottish Government in advance of indyref which comprises an "actual set of concrete proposals"
That wasn't an agreement. It said zilch concrete even about the desired relationship with rUK, let alone any agreed one. There wasn't an agreed one to say anything about. What would the rights be of Scottish and rUK citizens in the other territory, for example? State health treatment? Permanent residence? Voting rights? Dual citizenship? Those come to mind immediately as among the grown-up questions. (Nor famously did it say what currency Scotland would use.) It was thick though.
And for obvious reasons, before any talks between possibly-to-become rUK and Scotgov it would have to be known (yes or no) whether an iScotland would belong to the EU or not.
In short, wanting isn't getting. Grownups know that.
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
Haven't even begun to have been discussed, except as an incessant, gurning chorus, week in week out.
...the indy argument will - and has - descended into using the same arguments that got us to brexit. Absolutely no difference.
Those were the arguments used in indy ref 1 before Brexit. If that's all you've got this time..
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
I am sadly resigned, as I fear the practical issues will no longer sway enough people from what they emotionally want, and not enough feel positive about the UK to change that.
I desperately hope I am wrong.
I suspect in the long run the most likely way to avoid Scottish independence is for someone (SKS?) to offer a referendum on the basis that it is only on the ratification of an actual agreement, so that there could be genuine discussion of the pros and cons and a process with grown ups in the room about what is involved. One can imagine SKS saying that he has learned from Brexit how not to do a referendum. The SNP would struggle to disagree and keep a straight face. And Unionists might enjoy the sight of the SNP trying to wriggle away from having to have an actual set of concrete proposals to vote on.
You're confusing the SNP in 2014 with the Tories and the BXP three years later. Not least becausde independence is at least a clear end state, in complete contrast to the changes in Brexit goals since 2017.
I have this thick document, nay book, on my bookshelf published by the Scottish Government in advance of indyref which comprises an "actual set of concrete proposals"
Interesting though I'm not sure which bit of my thoughts you are contesting. 'Independence is a clear end state' is sadly not quite correct. It's like saying that 'Out of the EU is a clear end state'. Nice but false. For example England and Wales out of the EU may be very interested in the FOM relationship with an independent Scotland in the EU, and vice versa.
After seeing that Nevada poll from Emerson I thought I'd check Jon Ralston's EV blog on Nevada as he has a good local reputation and is often quite restrained on good Dem numbers. HIs latest update on the blog based on the early voting figures and his Dem 'firewall' make me much more confident about that state than the Emerson poll. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/the-early-voting-blog-3
I'm just waiting for the October voter registration numbers but for me Nevada is a squeaker unless there has been a dramatic shift in reg numbers.
Trump got a fantastic Registered GOP to vote ratio in 2016 in Nevada
As I just mentioned, Emerson has been fairly tough on Biden in this cycle so I think these two scores are fairly neutral in the general scheme of things.
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
I am sadly resigned, as I fear the practical issues will no longer sway enough people from what they emotionally want, and not enough feel positive about the UK to change that.
I desperately hope I am wrong.
I suspect in the long run the most likely way to avoid Scottish independence is for someone (SKS?) to offer a referendum on the basis that it is only on the ratification of an actual agreement, so that there could be genuine discussion of the pros and cons and a process with grown ups in the room about what is involved. One can imagine SKS saying that he has learned from Brexit how not to do a referendum. The SNP would struggle to disagree and keep a straight face. And Unionists might enjoy the sight of the SNP trying to wriggle away from having to have an actual set of concrete proposals to vote on.
You're confusing the SNP in 2014 with the Tories and the BXP three years later. Not least becausde independence is at least a clear end state, in complete contrast to the changes in Brexit goals since 2017.
I have this thick document, nay book, on my bookshelf published by the Scottish Government in advance of indyref which comprises an "actual set of concrete proposals"
That wasn't an agreement. It said zilch concrete even about the desired relationship with rUK, let alone any agreed one. There wasn't an agreed one to say anything about. What would the rights be of Scottish and rUK citizens in the other territory, for example? State health treatment? Permanent residence? Voting rights? Dual citizenship? Those come to mind immediately as among the grown-up questions. (Nor famously did it say what currency Scotland would use.) It was thick though.
At least they set out their aspirations. The Brexiters have changed from almost BINO to hard exit over the last three years. And don't forget that the combination of what happens with Brexit deal, plus the possibility of early entry into the EU, would at once give an answer on a lot of those issues.
The UK Gmt, in 2012-14, was completely unwilling to offer any suggestions or negotiations other than a blank refusal for anything other than the status quo.
SKS is not Mr Cameron, of course, but the other point, thinking back to an earlier suggestion on the thread, is to ask, would he have a majority? Having an agreement on which to hold a referendum on is only resolved if both sides are willing. SKS would find his SLAB members urging him - or at least other Labour MPs - to boycott any such negotiations as a slightly less unsubtle version of Mr Johnson's current refusal. I'm actually not sure that the Tories wouldn't move in Parliament to make any such negotiations illegal in the hope of getting enough Labour rebels to add to the Ulster Unionists and such of the LDs as have given up their liberalism and democracy.
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Far too little data to draw that conclusion. And even if the number of cases stays constant that’s still not sustainable.
It's been slowing down in both percentage and absolute terms for a couple of weeks. It shows around 55k new cases per day being added to the funnel, at an IFR of 1% that's a peak of 550 deaths per day which starts to fall as cases fall. Not the 4k that we got told yesterday.
The government's presentation was a pack of lies.
The problem is apparently conflicting data
1) we have the case data. a) Capacity 480,961 actual usage 347,626 (latest number) - so 130K to spare b) No recent reports about test capacity issues. c) Stabilising case numbers per day - maybe
d) Leading to R coming towards 1
On the other had we have
2) a) REACT/ONS surveying and showing data such as this:
b) Hospital admissions are not slowing down, as of 3-5 days ago
One possible answer is that the cases are slowing but the virus is rotating into the older, more vulnerable parts of the community.
The move into the older age groups has been sen in various surveys - I will need to dig out the data on that.
What other ideas do we have to reconcile the data?
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
Haven't even begun to have been discussed, except as an incessant, gurning chorus, week in week out.
...the indy argument will - and has - descended into using the same arguments that got us to brexit. Absolutely no difference.
Those were the arguments used in indy ref 1 before Brexit. If that's all you've got this time..
They'll be serious issues that independence advocates will need to address.
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Far too little data to draw that conclusion. And even if the number of cases stays constant that’s still not sustainable.
It's been slowing down in both percentage and absolute terms for a couple of weeks. It shows around 55k new cases per day being added to the funnel, at an IFR of 1% that's a peak of 550 deaths per day which starts to fall as cases fall. Not the 4k that we got told yesterday.
The government's presentation was a pack of lies.
The problem is apparently conflicting data
1) we have the case data. a) Capacity 480,961 actual usage 347,626 (latest number) - so 130K to spare b) No recent reports about test capacity issues. c) Stabilising case numbers per day - maybe
d) Leading to R coming towards 1
On the other had we have
2) a) REACT/ONS surveying and showing data such as this:
b) Hospital admissions are not slowing down, as of 3-5 days ago
One possible answer is that the cases are slowing but the virus is rotating into the older, more vulnerable parts of the community.
The move into the older age groups has been sen in various surveys - I will need to dig out the data on that.
What other ideas do we have to reconcile the data?
Admissions may be lagged on cases to some extent. I believe that the course of the illness can be onset, followed by several days before a serious decline. It may be that tests are early, and then people go downhill. I am also still interested in the positivity data, particularly the wired weekly cycle.
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
I am sadly resigned, as I fear the practical issues will no longer sway enough people from what they emotionally want, and not enough feel positive about the UK to change that.
I desperately hope I am wrong.
I suspect in the long run the most likely way to avoid Scottish independence is for someone (SKS?) to offer a referendum on the basis that it is only on the ratification of an actual agreement, so that there could be genuine discussion of the pros and cons and a process with grown ups in the room about what is involved. One can imagine SKS saying that he has learned from Brexit how not to do a referendum. The SNP would struggle to disagree and keep a straight face. And Unionists might enjoy the sight of the SNP trying to wriggle away from having to have an actual set of concrete proposals to vote on.
You're confusing the SNP in 2014 with the Tories and the BXP three years later. Not least becausde independence is at least a clear end state, in complete contrast to the changes in Brexit goals since 2017.
I have this thick document, nay book, on my bookshelf published by the Scottish Government in advance of indyref which comprises an "actual set of concrete proposals"
Interesting though I'm not sure which bit of my thoughts you are contesting. 'Independence is a clear end state' is sadly not quite correct. It's like saying that 'Out of the EU is a clear end state'. Nice but false. For example England and Wales out of the EU may be very interested in the FOM relationship with an independent Scotland in the EU, and vice versa.
Fair enough - though there is still a difference between becoming independent plus the details, important as they are, and Brexit which in a sense is nothijng more than a lot of details.
"Anna (not her real name) – who describes herself as “Jewish, until recently in a semi-detached way” – has lived in Corbyn’s constituency for decades and is wary of speaking out because of how her Corbyn-supporting neighbours will react."
From the Observer today. Labour have a long way to go
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Do you think fewer young adults and more elderly individuals getting the virus is a good or bad thing?
Any look at case numbers without considering age profile of those cases is useless.
After seeing that Nevada poll from Emerson I thought I'd check Jon Ralston's EV blog on Nevada as he has a good local reputation and is often quite restrained on good Dem numbers. HIs latest update on the blog based on the early voting figures and his Dem 'firewall' make me much more confident about that state than the Emerson poll. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/the-early-voting-blog-3
I'm just waiting for the October voter registration numbers but for me Nevada is a squeaker unless there has been a dramatic shift in reg numbers.
Trump got a fantastic Registered GOP to vote ratio in 2016 in Nevada
Could Ralston be wrong then? He's pretty well respected for his local knowledge and by nature tries to keep the message downplayed to avoid complacency, but his latest blog and figures seem to show Trump has very little space to get back the votes he's down even if the rurals (his traditionally strong area) turn out at 90% or more. What am I missing?
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Do you think fewer young adults and more elderly individuals getting the virus is a good or bad thing?
Any look at case numbers without considering age profile of those cases is useless.
As I just mentioned, Emerson has been fairly tough on Biden in this cycle so I think these two scores are fairly neutral in the general scheme of things.
Emerson last polled NV exactly a year ago - it was 49/51.
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Far too little data to draw that conclusion. And even if the number of cases stays constant that’s still not sustainable.
It's been slowing down in both percentage and absolute terms for a couple of weeks. It shows around 55k new cases per day being added to the funnel, at an IFR of 1% that's a peak of 550 deaths per day which starts to fall as cases fall. Not the 4k that we got told yesterday.
The government's presentation was a pack of lies.
The problem is apparently conflicting data
1) we have the case data. a) Capacity 480,961 actual usage 347,626 (latest number) - so 130K to spare b) No recent reports about test capacity issues. c) Stabilising case numbers per day - maybe
d) Leading to R coming towards 1
On the other had we have
2) a) REACT/ONS surveying and showing data such as this:
b) Hospital admissions are not slowing down, as of 3-5 days ago
One possible answer is that the cases are slowing but the virus is rotating into the older, more vulnerable parts of the community.
The move into the older age groups has been sen in various surveys - I will need to dig out the data on that.
What other ideas do we have to reconcile the data?
So does this mean that though cases are slowing, and R may well be dropping, that because hospital admissions etc are growing as fast or faster (as you say perhaps because of the age/nature of the patients) and its based on that why this lockdown has been brought in? Less young getting it, less cases, but those most at risk are being affected more?
Excellent thread by TSE. It's not just that I agree with it, which is irrelevant, it's that it sticks to the facts which are staring us in the face. There's another raft of fantastic polls out today for Biden, with occasional outliers to be expected. Some (HYUFD) will latch onto those latter exclusively but that's not objective. Objectively Biden is going to win and win big. And the Senate is extremely likely to flip.
My analysis? When I say 'win big' I think we are talking upward of 330 EV's. I think it's quite possible looking at these polls that Biden is going over 350.
As the New York Times specifies, no presidential candidate from either side has gone into the last day of a US election with such a commanding polling lead since Obama in 2008.
Objectively Hillary Clinton was going to win and win big in 2016 too, 538 had her on over 300 EC votes in its final forecast but it was the outliers that were right, certainly at the swing state level
As I just mentioned, Emerson has been fairly tough on Biden in this cycle so I think these two scores are fairly neutral in the general scheme of things.
Emerson last polled NV exactly a year ago - it was 49/51.
Excellent thread by TSE. It's not just that I agree with it, which is irrelevant, it's that it sticks to the facts which are staring us in the face. There's another raft of fantastic polls out today for Biden, with occasional outliers to be expected. Some (HYUFD) will latch onto those latter exclusively but that's not objective. Objectively Biden is going to win and win big. And the Senate is extremely likely to flip.
My analysis? When I say 'win big' I think we are talking upward of 330 EV's. I think it's quite possible looking at these polls that Biden is going over 350.
As the New York Times specifies, no presidential candidate from either side has gone into the last day of a US election with such a commanding polling lead since Obama in 2008.
Objectively Hillary Clinton was going to win and win big in 2016 too, 538 had her on over 300 EC votes in its final forecast but it was the outliers that were right, certainly at the swing state level
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
No indyref2 can happen without the approval of Westminster as Westminster is sovereign under our constitution, as long as there is a Tory majority at Westminster there will be no indyref2, 2014 was once in a generation
Perhaps you've already said, but the debagging of Corbyn has to be a theme by which you'll be teased.
Pre-Corbyn you were really rather sensible. My hunch is that you're adjusting, and whatever you think or say you'll have great regard in my book, but, what's it to be!?
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
No indyref2 can happen without the approval of Westminster as Westminster is sovereign under our constitution, as long as there is a Tory majority at Westminster there will be no indyref2, 2014 was once in a generation
Yeah the best way to save the union is to ignore the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Good plan Batman.
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Far too little data to draw that conclusion. And even if the number of cases stays constant that’s still not sustainable.
It's been slowing down in both percentage and absolute terms for a couple of weeks. It shows around 55k new cases per day being added to the funnel, at an IFR of 1% that's a peak of 550 deaths per day which starts to fall as cases fall. Not the 4k that we got told yesterday.
The government's presentation was a pack of lies.
The problem is apparently conflicting data
1) we have the case data. a) Capacity 480,961 actual usage 347,626 (latest number) - so 130K to spare b) No recent reports about test capacity issues. c) Stabilising case numbers per day - maybe
d) Leading to R coming towards 1
On the other had we have
2) a) REACT/ONS surveying and showing data such as this:
b) Hospital admissions are not slowing down, as of 3-5 days ago
One possible answer is that the cases are slowing but the virus is rotating into the older, more vulnerable parts of the community.
The move into the older age groups has been sen in various surveys - I will need to dig out the data on that.
What other ideas do we have to reconcile the data?
So does this mean that though cases are slowing, and R may well be dropping, that because hospital admissions etc are growing as fast or faster (as you say perhaps because of the age/nature of the patients) and its based on that why this lockdown has been brought in? Less young getting it, less cases, but those most at risk are being affected more?
I believe that the focus is on hospital cases. Which look like this
Which should make anyone gulp.
The question is why data is diverging - The ONS and REACT are saying cases are surging. The community testing is stabilising (ish)
vs
The age profile is now this
I don't have the answer. I would like one, but I am not a professional. I know enough on this to ask questions, relatively non-stupidly*, but I am no authority.
All I can say is that the hospital graph does not inspire Joy Joy feelings**
*Relative to Prof. Peston DipShit (Hons). **Watch Demolition Man. I recommend the burgers....
If the case data turns out to be accurate to the ONS data then the government is going to have to go into spin overdrive to try and credit the drop to the lockdown.
It looks increasingly like the R has dropped below 1 in Scotland, London, NI, NE, NW and most other parts of the country except Wales. If the ONS confirms it then Nicola is in a stunningly strong position come Friday to reject a lockdown and watch cases drop and get furlough and other business support money.
Boris has let the scientists use big numbers to scare him into an unnecessary lockdown and we're all going to pay for it. The scientists will feel none of the consequences of their awful models, they won't even be sacked and will end up being honoured. It's absolutely galling how rubbish the politicians are across all parties.
23,254 new cases today.
Ferguson's prediction in March: Sweden without lockdown 85,000 deaths
Actual outcome in October: Sweden without lockdown 5,900 deaths.
How could a competent government hire someone who couldn't predict foot and mouth, BSE *or* swine flu?
I think you're mischaracterising both Ferguson and the Swedish response.
Sweden's strategy was more sensible than ours, and they avoided the most serious of restrictions, but their life also changed quite significantly. The major difference is that the Swedish government avoided instructions, and instead went with recommendations.
You were recommended to work from home (something like three quarters of Swedes did that), large events were cancelled, restaurants and bars became table service only, older children and University went for on-line learning. And the government there is now recommending no social household mixing - i.e. something that looks remarkably like lockdown.
We, I suspect, have a slightly higher baseline "R" than Sweden as our cities are more dense, and fewer people live on their own.
Betting post: BF 6 Trump to win Nevada looks too big. 9/4 typically with regular bookies.
That's rather a good bet on Trump outperforming the polls. I could certainly see Trump losing the rustbelt but gaining Nevada as a consolation. (That said... Ralston's analysis has typically been excellent...)
Tommy Robinson arrested at Speaker's Corner for suspected breaching coronavirus rules. Handcuffed and bundled into a van.
So what?
Singling someone out for arrest for doing the same as everyone else isn't a problem if you don't like them?
Maybe he was doing something particularly egregious, or inciting others in a leadership capacity. I don't know> Certainly I'll hold off on the outrage until that is known.
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
Tommy Robinson arrested at Speaker's Corner for suspected breaching coronavirus rules. Handcuffed and bundled into a van.
So what?
Singling someone out for arrest for doing the same as everyone else isn't a problem if you don't like them?
That happens all the time.
Anyway, whats the defence? "Yes officer I did commit the offence you arrested me for, but as you didn't arrest that other person then I get to be released"?
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
I can see a vote happening, if they cannot hold out after the SNP win a stonking majority, but while it need not play out exactly like Brexit (it could be worse!) and article 50 is not a thing, years of wrangling seems likely so I'd assume they'd need at least one more UK GE.
Too many on this site are resigned to indyref and the SNP narrative. Things look bleak now- but that things can change quickly during a pandemic. Plus practilities of independence haven't even begun to have been discussed (not least a huge amount of debt, currency issues, hard border..etc)
Haven't even begun to have been discussed, except as an incessant, gurning chorus, week in week out.
...the indy argument will - and has - descended into using the same arguments that got us to brexit. Absolutely no difference.
Those were the arguments used in indy ref 1 before Brexit. If that's all you've got this time..
In case you’ve forgotten, they won last time.
And there are still no clear answers on what currency you would use after Sindy.
However, the EU question has been resolved, albeit not quite the way expected. Nobody can now argue Scotland would be a member of the EU on independence (not that it ever would have been, but that’s another story).
Betting post: BF 6 Trump to win Nevada looks too big. 9/4 typically with regular bookies.
That's rather a good bet on Trump outperforming the polls. I could certainly see Trump losing the rustbelt but gaining Nevada as a consolation. (That said... Ralston's analysis has typically been excellent...)
Yeah, it’s arguably an interesting back door saver on my Trump if that happens. But I’m not tempted currently.
Tommy Robinson arrested at Speaker's Corner for suspected breaching coronavirus rules. Handcuffed and bundled into a van.
So what?
Singling someone out for arrest for doing the same as everyone else isn't a problem if you don't like them?
That happens all the time.
Anyway, whats the defence? "Yes officer I did commit the offence you arrested me for, but as you didn't arrest that other person then I get to be released"?
I imagine it'll be something like "the muslims made me do it".
Excellent thread by TSE. It's not just that I agree with it, which is irrelevant, it's that it sticks to the facts which are staring us in the face. There's another raft of fantastic polls out today for Biden, with occasional outliers to be expected. Some (HYUFD) will latch onto those latter exclusively but that's not objective. Objectively Biden is going to win and win big. And the Senate is extremely likely to flip.
My analysis? When I say 'win big' I think we are talking upward of 330 EV's. I think it's quite possible looking at these polls that Biden is going over 350.
As the New York Times specifies, no presidential candidate from either side has gone into the last day of a US election with such a commanding polling lead since Obama in 2008.
Objectively Hillary Clinton was going to win and win big in 2016 too, 538 had her on over 300 EC votes in its final forecast but it was the outliers that were right, certainly at the swing state level
You still don't understand probabilities I see.
If you give Trump a 1% probability of victory you can still say you said Trump could win, it is back covering that is all if your headline forecast is wrong
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
I cannot understand the obsession with Christmas. I’d take a crisp, sunny November with lovely country pubs over an unlocked Christmas any day. I mean, Christmas is massively overrated. Who cares?
Excellent thread by TSE. It's not just that I agree with it, which is irrelevant, it's that it sticks to the facts which are staring us in the face. There's another raft of fantastic polls out today for Biden, with occasional outliers to be expected. Some (HYUFD) will latch onto those latter exclusively but that's not objective. Objectively Biden is going to win and win big. And the Senate is extremely likely to flip.
My analysis? When I say 'win big' I think we are talking upward of 330 EV's. I think it's quite possible looking at these polls that Biden is going over 350.
As the New York Times specifies, no presidential candidate from either side has gone into the last day of a US election with such a commanding polling lead since Obama in 2008.
Objectively Hillary Clinton was going to win and win big in 2016 too, 538 had her on over 300 EC votes in its final forecast but it was the outliers that were right, certainly at the swing state level
You still don't understand probabilities I see.
If you give Trump a 1% probability of victory you can still say you said Trump could win, it is back covering that is all if your headline forecast is wrong
Well that's exactly what you're doing. You're predicting Trump will win but also think that Biden has a good chance. Back covering?
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
So 95% of people consider Christmas to be a secular celebration. Pretty much what I thought.
Some of us don't even approve of Christmas as a matter of principle. Sometimes religious principle. Maybe HYUFD doesn't think traditional Presbyterians are Christians. And what about the ones who do it on a different day? Do they count?
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
No indyref2 can happen without the approval of Westminster as Westminster is sovereign under our constitution, as long as there is a Tory majority at Westminster there will be no indyref2, 2014 was once in a generation
Yeah the best way to save the union is to ignore the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Good plan Batman.
The wishes of the Scottish electorate in 2014 were to reject independence in a once in a generation referendum. End of conversation. The Spanish even banned 1 referendum on independence in Catalonia under their constitution
"White House plots possible second-term Cabinet purge
A second-term Trump administration is considering expelling Cabinet members who have crossed the president, refused to mount investigations he has demanded or contradicted him on coronavirus."
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
No indyref2 can happen without the approval of Westminster as Westminster is sovereign under our constitution, as long as there is a Tory majority at Westminster there will be no indyref2, 2014 was once in a generation
Yeah the best way to save the union is to ignore the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Good plan Batman.
The wishes of the Scottish electorate in 2014 were to reject independence in a once in a generation referendum. End of conversation. The Spanish even banned 1 referendum on independence in Catalonia under their constitution
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
So 95% of people consider Christmas to be a secular celebration. Pretty much what I thought.
No, you said 99% of the UK population and of course globally it is much higher than that as most of the global population is far more religious than the UK, especially in Christian nations in Latin America and Africa and in the USA
Any indyref2 doesn't need to even attempt to address any of the issues before the referendum itself, and any promises made during it can ultimately turn out to be mere aspirations. The EU referendum set the template for that...
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
So 95% of people consider Christmas to be a secular celebration. Pretty much what I thought.
No, you said 99% of the UK population and of course globally it is much higher than that as most of the global population is far more religious than the UK, especially in Christian nations in Latin America and Africa and in the USA
Wasn't me. But I couldn't give a stuff what they think in Latin America and Africa anyway. That's not here.
I'm Jewish anyway, at least by birth, and I treat Christmas as a secular celebration of capitalism and alcohol. Huzzah.
Excellent thread by TSE. It's not just that I agree with it, which is irrelevant, it's that it sticks to the facts which are staring us in the face. There's another raft of fantastic polls out today for Biden, with occasional outliers to be expected. Some (HYUFD) will latch onto those latter exclusively but that's not objective. Objectively Biden is going to win and win big. And the Senate is extremely likely to flip.
My analysis? When I say 'win big' I think we are talking upward of 330 EV's. I think it's quite possible looking at these polls that Biden is going over 350.
As the New York Times specifies, no presidential candidate from either side has gone into the last day of a US election with such a commanding polling lead since Obama in 2008.
Objectively Hillary Clinton was going to win and win big in 2016 too, 538 had her on over 300 EC votes in its final forecast but it was the outliers that were right, certainly at the swing state level
You still don't understand probabilities I see.
If you give Trump a 1% probability of victory you can still say you said Trump could win, it is back covering that is all if your headline forecast is wrong
Well that's exactly what you're doing. You're predicting Trump will win but also think that Biden has a good chance. Back covering?
I have said Biden will definitely win the popular vote, I have said Trump has a chance of winning the EC again, yes it is back covering slightly and I admit that but I am not saying either the 'objective' poll average guarantees a Biden win before polling day and then after saying I always said their was a chance of a Trump win too if he is re elected as some on here are doing.
After seeing that Nevada poll from Emerson I thought I'd check Jon Ralston's EV blog on Nevada as he has a good local reputation and is often quite restrained on good Dem numbers. HIs latest update on the blog based on the early voting figures and his Dem 'firewall' make me much more confident about that state than the Emerson poll. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/the-early-voting-blog-3
I'm just waiting for the October voter registration numbers but for me Nevada is a squeaker unless there has been a dramatic shift in reg numbers.
Trump got a fantastic Registered GOP to vote ratio in 2016 in Nevada
Could Ralston be wrong then? He's pretty well respected for his local knowledge and by nature tries to keep the message downplayed to avoid complacency, but his latest blog and figures seem to show Trump has very little space to get back the votes he's down even if the rurals (his traditionally strong area) turn out at 90% or more. What am I missing?
Oh, I trust Ralston. My call will almost certainly be for the Dems but it could well be in the 2% lead kind of range.
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
So 95% of people consider Christmas to be a secular celebration. Pretty much what I thought.
No, you said 99% of the UK population and of course globally it is much higher than that as most of the global population is far more religious than the UK, especially in Christian nations in Latin America and Africa and in the USA
The US is a Christian nation? Brazil is a Chrsitian nation? They are secular. They don't put the head of state in charge of the official church. (And you are equating England with the UK. Naughty.)
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
Excellent thread by TSE. It's not just that I agree with it, which is irrelevant, it's that it sticks to the facts which are staring us in the face. There's another raft of fantastic polls out today for Biden, with occasional outliers to be expected. Some (HYUFD) will latch onto those latter exclusively but that's not objective. Objectively Biden is going to win and win big. And the Senate is extremely likely to flip.
My analysis? When I say 'win big' I think we are talking upward of 330 EV's. I think it's quite possible looking at these polls that Biden is going over 350.
As the New York Times specifies, no presidential candidate from either side has gone into the last day of a US election with such a commanding polling lead since Obama in 2008.
Objectively Hillary Clinton was going to win and win big in 2016 too, 538 had her on over 300 EC votes in its final forecast but it was the outliers that were right, certainly at the swing state level
You still don't understand probabilities I see.
If you give Trump a 1% probability of victory you can still say you said Trump could win, it is back covering that is all if your headline forecast is wrong
Well that's exactly what you're doing. You're predicting Trump will win but also think that Biden has a good chance. Back covering?
I have said Biden will definitely win the popular vote, I have said Trump has a chance of winning the EC again, yes it is back covering slightly and I admit that but I am not saying either the 'objective' poll average guarantees a Biden win before polling day and then after say I always said their was a chance of a Trump win too as some on here are doing.
That's a lot of words to say: "Yes, I'm also back covering".
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
You can't compare the figures between Texas, Georgia, and Arizona etc with those of Pennsylvania, Michigan etc because the first group have "early voting" and the latter do not.
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
So 95% of people consider Christmas to be a secular celebration. Pretty much what I thought.
No, you said 99% of the UK population and of course globally it is much higher than that as most of the global population is far more religious than the UK, especially in Christian nations in Latin America and Africa and in the USA
Wasn't me. But I couldn't give a stuff what they think in Latin America and Africa anyway. That's not here.
I'm Jewish anyway, at least by birth, and I treat Christmas as a secular celebration of capitalism and alcohol. Huzzah.
Hmm - I'm almost old enough to remember when ti was a normal working day in Scotland. Now that was a real celebration of Calvinism and the work ethic and capitalism. The whisky (or, in my graddad the kirk elder's house, the Crabbie's ginger wine, was saved for Hogmanay.
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
Turnout of RV no, registration bad. Only 43.4% of voting age population voted in 2016 in TX, but that was 82.1% of RV. This year, there are an additional 5.2m RV in TX. That explains a lot, as most of those will be Dems.
Edit, RV in TX has increased from 11,724,000 in 2016 to 16,955,519 this year
Risky though with Trump in Pennsylvania and Michigan and North Carolina tomorrow
Although I do feel there are very few undecideds left in the state and if there are they are unlikely to be the ones at his rallies, clearly Trumps multi rally visits to PA show he knows how important this state is to his chances. Of those 3 rust belt states, PA seems to be the closest and one he has most chance if any in. As I expect him to win FL again , for me he has to win PA, even if in theory there are other harder paths for him. So the fact he's spending half his time there in the closing days doesn't surprise me. As for Biden going to Iowa, it does puzzle me a bit, you would assume his team know the best places for him to go at this late stage
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
Apparently there are an extra 1.8 millon voters registered to vote in Texas since 2016 which partly explains it, in 2016 3/4 of Texans voted early so it seems they have a well above average early voting tendency even pre Covid anyway so perhaps there early voting will be less Democrat leaning than most US states given Trump still won Texas by 9% last time plenty of Republicans must have voted early too
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
You can't compare the figures between Texas, Georgia, and Arizona etc with those of Pennsylvania, Michigan etc because the first group have "early voting" and the latter do not.
Really? A google suggests the latter do have early voting.
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
You can't compare the figures between Texas, Georgia, and Arizona etc with those of Pennsylvania, Michigan etc because the first group have "early voting" and the latter do not.
Really? A google suggests the latter do have early voting.
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
Turnout of RV no, registration bad. Only 43.4% of voting age population voted in 2016 in TX, but that was 82.1% of RV. This year, there are an additional 5.2m RV in TX. That explains a lot, as most of those will be Dems.
Edit, RV in TX has increased from 11,724,000 in 2016 to 16,955,519 this year
Blimey. That is quite the increase. Thanks for the detailed info.
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
You can't compare the figures between Texas, Georgia, and Arizona etc with those of Pennsylvania, Michigan etc because the first group have "early voting" and the latter do not.
Really? A google suggests the latter do have early voting.
Reassuring how quickly (2002) someone's principles can take a dive when offered a week in the South of France and a pile of tax free money to drive a well know motor car
What worries most is that it does seem that whatever governments do or don't do has little bearing on what is happening. The only conclusion seems to be that the public are not complying in sufficient numbers to stop the spread. I also suspect that the percentages of the miscreants is probably low but that is all it takes! Profoundly depressing.
Early modeling during the initial Wuhan outbreak (from Imperial IIRC) showed that as little as 10% non-compliance would effectively invalidate suppression (although it would still flatten the curve).
A link to the that study we be useful - I could use it to beat some idiots I know round the head...
"Yes, I know we need a lockdown. But I deserve to have 30 people round for Christmas. and I deserve a holiday in the Sun....." etc etc...
I am not sure I have it. I did an interview with a Chinese TV programme back in late January, and the interviewer threw it at me mid-interview.
I was aware at a moderate level, that the who compliance thing is vital. 10% defection rate brining the whole thing down is another order, though....
What is curious is the response of people to cancelling Christmas - 99% are non-religious, so postponing the whole thing to when it's over seems reasonable.
I've semi-jestingly suggested to the family that we will barbecue a turkey on a beach somewhere when this is all over - a-two-for-one. The joke seems to be taking on a serious form.....
You cannot postpone Christmas, the religious ceremonies will remain even if online, if people want to postpone the lunch and present opening that is up to them.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
So 95% of people consider Christmas to be a secular celebration. Pretty much what I thought.
No, you said 99% of the UK population and of course globally it is much higher than that as most of the global population is far more religious than the UK, especially in Christian nations in Latin America and Africa and in the USA
The US is a Christian nation? Brazil is a Chrsitian nation? They are secular. They don't put the head of state in charge of the official church. (And you are equating England with the UK. Naughty.)
65% of Americans are Christian, (43% Protestant, 20% Catholic) 87% of Brazilians are Christian (65% Catholic and 22% Protestant).
The fact the Queen is Head of the Church of England just makes it the established church in England, it does not make us a majority Christian nation
Good news for Biden in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina and Texas, better news for Trump in Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as we know most Republicans will vote on the day, early voters are expected to be mainly Democrats
That TX figure makes no rational sense to me.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
You can't compare the figures between Texas, Georgia, and Arizona etc with those of Pennsylvania, Michigan etc because the first group have "early voting" and the latter do not.
Really? A google suggests the latter do have early voting.
The reference to the next UKGE might contain an internal error.
There may not be another UK GE. It looks distinctly possible that the Scottish nationalists are going to win their legal argument to hold Indy Ref 2. That might happen before the next UK GE, although the timing is tight.
No indyref2 can happen without the approval of Westminster as Westminster is sovereign under our constitution, as long as there is a Tory majority at Westminster there will be no indyref2, 2014 was once in a generation
Yeah the best way to save the union is to ignore the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Good plan Batman.
The wishes of the Scottish electorate in 2014 were to reject independence in a once in a generation referendum. End of conversation. The Spanish even banned 1 referendum on independence in Catalonia under their constitution
In that case why are you so worried about a Yes majority at Holyrood next May (and hilariously hoping for a Unionist tactical alliance)?
The ZOE app data looks like case growth has basically slowed to a crawl nationally too. If this starts to fall before the end of next week then it will be very clear that this lockdown isn't necessary and we're going to be destroying jobs for nothing.
Do you think fewer young adults and more elderly individuals getting the virus is a good or bad thing?
Any look at case numbers without considering age profile of those cases is useless.
Show me the evidence for that assertion please.
The last few charts I remember show that the infection rate in the over 60s has levelled off and started falling, without the need for lockdown but it continues to rise among 25-59 year olds who are a very low risk category.
Additionally, falling cases in the young is undoubtedly a good thing as they have a higher associated R than older people due to more social contact and worse adherence to isolation.
Finally, if old people are at risk then make them stay home, protect the NHS etc... It would minimise cross general infection to a large degree.
Not sure why creating one which nearly won, ie it still lost, makes them such sages. Low ambition, these Corbynistas.
That they "nearly won" in 2017, and would have won if not for treacherous Centrists, is quite a persistent myth amongst a few of my Corbynite friends.
It is bollocks of course, as in 2017 Labour were 63 seats short of even a nominal majority, and 75 short of a working majority.
But probably only 12 seats from preventing a Tory minority government continuing in office with DUP support.
But way, way short of forming a Socialist government. Corbyn would have needed support from err...Centrist parties. If he couldn't get support from Centrist Labour, how could he have got it from Centrists in other parties?
So no Corbyn government, indeed almost certainly a further election in 2017, with May being replaced in the meantime.
Comments
I know what you mean. That album freezes me in time to the loved-up, anything-is-possible, forever-young 1990s. It’s too bittersweet these days.
The government's presentation was a pack of lies.
The last 3-5 days are incomplete. This doesn't not mean anything other than that the last 3-5 days are incomplete. Anyone using this data to draw any other conclusion about the last 3-5 days will be
1) locked down with Piers Morgan, Piers Corbyn and an insane lawyer in his wife's kimono. In a 1 bed flat. For 3 years
2) Fed only on pineapple pizza
3) Only allowed to access ConservativeHome during their lockdown
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/the-early-voting-blog-3
The last 3-5 days are incomplete. This doesn't not mean anything other than that the last 3-5 days are incomplete. Anyone using this data to draw any other conclusion about the last 3-5 days will be
1) locked down with Piers Morgan, Piers Corbyn and an insane lawyer in his wife's kimono. In a 1 bed flat. For 3 years
2) Fed only on pineapple pizza
3) Only allowed to access ConservativeHome during their lockdown
https://twitter.com/BarDisciple/status/1322918541633425413?s=20
Spare a thought for the people of Argentina. A 200 day lockdown and still ... 684 deaths per million.
Trump got a fantastic Registered GOP to vote ratio in 2016 in Nevada
Great music, thanks for posting it.
The UK Gmt, in 2012-14, was completely unwilling to offer any suggestions or negotiations other than a blank refusal for anything other than the status quo.
SKS is not Mr Cameron, of course, but the other point, thinking back to an earlier suggestion on the thread, is to ask, would he have a majority? Having an agreement on which to hold a referendum on is only resolved if both sides are willing. SKS would find his SLAB members urging him - or at least other Labour MPs - to boycott any such negotiations as a slightly less unsubtle version of Mr Johnson's current refusal. I'm actually not sure that the Tories wouldn't move in Parliament to make any such negotiations illegal in the hope of getting enough Labour rebels to add to the Ulster Unionists and such of the LDs as have given up their liberalism and democracy.
1) we have the case data.
a) Capacity 480,961 actual usage 347,626 (latest number) - so 130K to spare
b) No recent reports about test capacity issues.
c) Stabilising case numbers per day - maybe
d) Leading to R coming towards 1
On the other had we have
2)
a) REACT/ONS surveying and showing data such as this:
b) Hospital admissions are not slowing down, as of 3-5 days ago
One possible answer is that the cases are slowing but the virus is rotating into the older, more vulnerable parts of the community.
The move into the older age groups has been sen in various surveys - I will need to dig out the data on that.
What other ideas do we have to reconcile the data?
https://twitter.com/GregRubini/status/1322643360071487493?s=20
So no comparison really.
From the Observer today. Labour have a long way to go
Any look at case numbers without considering age profile of those cases is useless.
Can we please not post images? It makes the site inaccessible on Apple devices. Emerson last polled NV exactly a year ago - it was 49/51.
So FWIW this poll is
Biden 49 (=)
Trump 47 (-4)
Last poll was in August and was 53/47
So this poll is
Biden 48 (-5)
Trump 46 (-1)
Perhaps you've already said, but the debagging of Corbyn has to be a theme by which you'll be teased.
Pre-Corbyn you were really rather sensible. My hunch is that you're adjusting, and whatever you think or say you'll have great regard in my book, but, what's it to be!?
From 09:00 on Tuesday 27 October 2020 until the start of 2020 US Presidential Election (scheduled for 22:00 on Tuesday 3 November 2020 (the top-price period), we have a ‘top-price guarantee’ on 2020 Presidential Election Winner market on Joe Biden.
T&Cs at
https://promotions.williamhill.com/en-gb/offer/top-price-guarantee-on-joe-biden-2020-us-presidential-election-winner-market
Which should make anyone gulp.
The question is why data is diverging - The ONS and REACT are saying cases are surging. The community testing is stabilising (ish)
vs
The age profile is now this
I don't have the answer. I would like one, but I am not a professional. I know enough on this to ask questions, relatively non-stupidly*, but I am no authority.
All I can say is that the hospital graph does not inspire Joy Joy feelings**
*Relative to Prof. Peston DipShit (Hons).
**Watch Demolition Man. I recommend the burgers....
Sweden's strategy was more sensible than ours, and they avoided the most serious of restrictions, but their life also changed quite significantly. The major difference is that the Swedish government avoided instructions, and instead went with recommendations.
You were recommended to work from home (something like three quarters of Swedes did that), large events were cancelled, restaurants and bars became table service only, older children and University went for on-line learning. And the government there is now recommending no social household mixing - i.e. something that looks remarkably like lockdown.
We, I suspect, have a slightly higher baseline "R" than Sweden as our cities are more dense, and fewer people live on their own.
Given over 2.4 million attend a Christmas church service in the UK that is closer to 5% of the population than 1%, even in a relatively secular nation as we now are
https://www.statista.com/statistics/947972/christmas-church-attendance-in-england/
https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033
And there are still no clear answers on what currency you would use after Sindy.
However, the EU question has been resolved, albeit not quite the way expected. Nobody can now argue Scotland would be a member of the EU on independence (not that it ever would have been, but that’s another story).
That letter, backing the SNP, and doing Trump's bidding are the tip of the iceberg.
A second-term Trump administration is considering expelling Cabinet members who have crossed the president, refused to mount investigations he has demanded or contradicted him on coronavirus."
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/01/trump-second-term-cabinet-433739
I'm Jewish anyway, at least by birth, and I treat Christmas as a secular celebration of capitalism and alcohol. Huzzah.
Was turnout particularly bad last time?
Looking at those figures, if I were a Democrat analyst I would be getting Biden to the rust belt for every single hour of the next two days....
Edit, RV in TX has increased from 11,724,000 in 2016 to 16,955,519 this year
As I expect him to win FL again , for me he has to win PA, even if in theory there are other harder paths for him. So the fact he's spending half his time there in the closing days doesn't surprise me. As for Biden going to Iowa, it does puzzle me a bit, you would assume his team know the best places for him to go at this late stage
https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2020/texas-early-voting-numbers/
When we actually won an election was in 2005, let's get back to actually winning please.
The fact the Queen is Head of the Church of England just makes it the established church in England, it does not make us a majority Christian nation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States#:~:text=In 2019, Christians represent 65,the population, followed by Hinduism,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Brazil#:~:text=In the 2010 census 64.63,Mormons, and minorities of Buddhists,
The last few charts I remember show that the infection rate in the over 60s has levelled off and started falling, without the need for lockdown but it continues to rise among 25-59 year olds who are a very low risk category.
Additionally, falling cases in the young is undoubtedly a good thing as they have a higher associated R than older people due to more social contact and worse adherence to isolation.
Finally, if old people are at risk then make them stay home, protect the NHS etc... It would minimise cross general infection to a large degree.
So no Corbyn government, indeed almost certainly a further election in 2017, with May being replaced in the meantime.
This Government put Dido Harding into place. They are responsible.