Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Why this isn’t looking like 2016 redux – politicalbetting.com

1235»

Comments

  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Mortimer said:

    TimT said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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.
    Sorry, wrong numbers but still impressive.

    2016 RV = 15,101,087, 2020 =16,955,519
    2016 RV% voting = 63.74% (so very low by US standards), 2016 VAP% voting = 43.4% (also low in comparison with other states)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,884
    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    At the risk of causing @TSE severe cognitive dissonance...

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033

    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
    He did say his persona was James Bond!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,103
    edited November 2020

    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.
    Well when people start to doubt that the system is being applied fairly, it becomes easier to recruit people to extremist organisations.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:



    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    SNP, Plaid and Green would have supported him Had Labour managed 274 seats that would have given him 314 before considering what LDs might have done. Difficult to see the latter supporting the Tories.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited November 2020
    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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....
    Dems made gains in 2018 in Texas that translated into, for instance, it becoming much easier to vote in Harris County. Clinton won the cities Dallas, Houston and Austin by about 450k votes, Beto by 650k. Biden is on course to win them by a million+.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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

    https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2020/texas-early-voting-numbers/

    You are right, HYUFD, Republicans vote early in TX as well as Democrats. But if you look at the break down by county - and how those counties voted in 2016 and 2018 and the trend - the Dems have to be pretty excited about where they are standing after early voting.

    https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2020/texas-early-voting-numbers/
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,103
    edited November 2020

    https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1322861417108774913

    This Government put Dido Harding into place. They are responsible.

    Dido has much to be blamed for, but I am not sure some software developers screwing up is her fault. Bit like the shit no check coding of the testing data coming in and screwing up the Excel spreadsheet. Also wasn't the app development overseen by NHS-X, with the use of private contractors?
  • Mal557Mal557 Posts: 662
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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.
    Taking one of the lower States mentioned PA

    Party Returned Ballots Freq. Distribution Requested Ballots Return Rate
    Democrats 1,573,422 66.4 1,946,670 80.8
    Republicans 542,255 22.9 787,646 68.8
    Minor 16,787 0.7 25,524 65.8
    No Party 238,046 10.0 337,563 70.5
    TOTAL 2,370,510 100.0 3,097,403 76.5

    So Dems have returned 80% of their total req ballots, Reps just under 70%. Dem lead about 3 to 1 on those
  • Mal557Mal557 Posts: 662
    Mal557 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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.
    Taking one of the lower States mentioned PA

    Party Returned Ballots Freq. Distribution Requested Ballots Return Rate
    Democrats 1,573,422 66.4 1,946,670 80.8
    Republicans 542,255 22.9 787,646 68.8
    Minor 16,787 0.7 25,524 65.8
    No Party 238,046 10.0 337,563 70.5
    TOTAL 2,370,510 100.0 3,097,403 76.5

    So Dems have returned 80% of their total req ballots, Reps just under 70%. Dem lead about 3 to 1 on those
    apologies forgot to save the columns but the numbers are all there
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Alistair said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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....
    Dems made gains in 201i in Texas that translated into, for instance, it becoming much easier to vote in Harris County. Clinton won the cities Dallas, Houston and Austin by about 450k votes, Beto by 650k. Biden is on course to win them by a million+.
    Until they are thrown out that is...
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    It has taken until this evening's Look North for me to discover that West Yorkshire won't be entering Tier 3 tomorrow after all.

    A three day reprieve for the county's boozers.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Mal557 said:

    Mal557 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest turnout figures as a % of 2016.


    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.
    Taking one of the lower States mentioned PA

    Party Returned Ballots Freq. Distribution Requested Ballots Return Rate
    Democrats 1,573,422 66.4 1,946,670 80.8
    Republicans 542,255 22.9 787,646 68.8
    Minor 16,787 0.7 25,524 65.8
    No Party 238,046 10.0 337,563 70.5
    TOTAL 2,370,510 100.0 3,097,403 76.5

    So Dems have returned 80% of their total req ballots, Reps just under 70%. Dem lead about 3 to 1 on those
    apologies forgot to save the columns but the numbers are all there
    Ah, but you're forgetting that registered Dems all vote Republican these days - they just haven't changed their party registration ... Or something ... (after Cahaly)
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    Tommy Robinson arrested at Speaker's Corner for suspected breaching coronavirus rules. Handcuffed and bundled into a van.

    Why? Wasn't Tommy simply speaking in support of implementing suitable Covid restrictions as and when necessary but allied to a functional test & isolate system such that the virus can be kept under control as we wait for a vaccine?
  • JACK_WJACK_W Posts: 682
    CNN - Obama to Georgia tomorrow.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Evening All

    I'm trying to stay away from here as much as possible at the moment because it all makes me so very, very depressed.

    However, now that I've been proven right in my assumption that we'd end up this Autumn, and probably sooner rather than later, essentially with April plus schools and masks everywhere, I return to make a further prediction.

    The lockdown will continue, effectively, until next Summer.

    There *might* be a very brief hiatus to allow household mixing over Christmas, presumably because the Government thinks that nobody will obey its rules at that time (although they might not bother to obey them anymore regardless,) but other than that we're going to be locked up all the way until the warm weather comes around. It's inevitable. Lockdowns don't work, they just kick the can of the disease down the road. Finish one and, save for during the Summer, the start of the next is only weeks away.

    The mad scientists are now running the show (Parliament and the Government might as well dissolve themselves and save us the cost of their useless presence,) and their dodgy computer models will demand that we are all incarcerated for the duration. Indeed, under the circumstances it is probably for the best that the affected businesses simply roll over and die rather than being allowed to open for a fortnight and then being shut back down again. Trying to pretend that hospitality, tourism, leisure, the arts and non-food retail are viable when they're going to be opening and closing every five minutes until May or June (and that will all start again if the octogenarians haven't been vaccinated by September) is laughable. Keeping all the doomed employees on furlough is simply delaying the inevitable under such circumstances.

    Therefore, by May or June 2021, all of the shuttered sectors of the economy will have been more-or-less eradicated and unemployment will be running, at an educated guess, somewhere in the ballpark of eight million. At best, next year is going to be a more catastrophic version of 1931. At worst, we're talking 1348, or possibly 410. Broad scale societal collapse. Basically we've had our chips.
  • Not sure if this has been posted but it is very good

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033?s=09
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    It has taken until this evening's Look North for me to discover that West Yorkshire won't be entering Tier 3 tomorrow after all.

    A three day reprieve for the county's boozers.

    That's nowt. Our councillors spent 3 days last week arguing we didn't need to go into Tier 3. On Wednesday it was agreed. We didn't meet the threshold for Tier 3.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    At the risk of causing @TSE severe cognitive dissonance...

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033

    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
    Hate to burst bubbles and all ... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/31/viral-image/fake-sean-connery-letter-steve-jobs-spreads-wake-h/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Alistair said:

    Mal557 said:

    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
    1.2 now on Betfair.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    Evening All

    I'm trying to stay away from here as much as possible at the moment because it all makes me so very, very depressed.

    However, now that I've been proven right in my assumption that we'd end up this Autumn, and probably sooner rather than later, essentially with April plus schools and masks everywhere, I return to make a further prediction.

    The lockdown will continue, effectively, until next Summer.

    There *might* be a very brief hiatus to allow household mixing over Christmas, presumably because the Government thinks that nobody will obey its rules at that time (although they might not bother to obey them anymore regardless,) but other than that we're going to be locked up all the way until the warm weather comes around. It's inevitable. Lockdowns don't work, they just kick the can of the disease down the road. Finish one and, save for during the Summer, the start of the next is only weeks away.

    The mad scientists are now running the show (Parliament and the Government might as well dissolve themselves and save us the cost of their useless presence,) and their dodgy computer models will demand that we are all incarcerated for the duration. Indeed, under the circumstances it is probably for the best that the affected businesses simply roll over and die rather than being allowed to open for a fortnight and then being shut back down again. Trying to pretend that hospitality, tourism, leisure, the arts and non-food retail are viable when they're going to be opening and closing every five minutes until May or June (and that will all start again if the octogenarians haven't been vaccinated by September) is laughable. Keeping all the doomed employees on furlough is simply delaying the inevitable under such circumstances.

    Therefore, by May or June 2021, all of the shuttered sectors of the economy will have been more-or-less eradicated and unemployment will be running, at an educated guess, somewhere in the ballpark of eight million. At best, next year is going to be a more catastrophic version of 1931. At worst, we're talking 1348, or possibly 410. Broad scale societal collapse. Basically we've had our chips.

    Evening All

    I'm trying to stay away from here as much as possible at the moment because it all makes me so very, very depressed.

    However, now that I've been proven right in my assumption that we'd end up this Autumn, and probably sooner rather than later, essentially with April plus schools and masks everywhere, I return to make a further prediction.

    The lockdown will continue, effectively, until next Summer.

    There *might* be a very brief hiatus to allow household mixing over Christmas, presumably because the Government thinks that nobody will obey its rules at that time (although they might not bother to obey them anymore regardless,) but other than that we're going to be locked up all the way until the warm weather comes around. It's inevitable. Lockdowns don't work, they just kick the can of the disease down the road. Finish one and, save for during the Summer, the start of the next is only weeks away.

    The mad scientists are now running the show (Parliament and the Government might as well dissolve themselves and save us the cost of their useless presence,) and their dodgy computer models will demand that we are all incarcerated for the duration. Indeed, under the circumstances it is probably for the best that the affected businesses simply roll over and die rather than being allowed to open for a fortnight and then being shut back down again. Trying to pretend that hospitality, tourism, leisure, the arts and non-food retail are viable when they're going to be opening and closing every five minutes until May or June (and that will all start again if the octogenarians haven't been vaccinated by September) is laughable. Keeping all the doomed employees on furlough is simply delaying the inevitable under such circumstances.

    Therefore, by May or June 2021, all of the shuttered sectors of the economy will have been more-or-less eradicated and unemployment will be running, at an educated guess, somewhere in the ballpark of eight million. At best, next year is going to be a more catastrophic version of 1931. At worst, we're talking 1348, or possibly 410. Broad scale societal collapse. Basically we've had our chips.

    Crumbs that's bleak. Much sympathy. This too will pass.
    Trite but true.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,366

    https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1322861417108774913

    This Government put Dido Harding into place. They are responsible.

    Dido has much to be blamed for, but I am not sure some software developers screwing up is her fault. Bit like the shit no check coding of the testing data coming in and screwing up the Excel spreadsheet. Also wasn't the app development overseen by NHS-X, with the use of private contractors?
    The Excel idiocy was entirely PHE - the data was provided in CSV, as per their specification. They chose to process it using an ancient version of Excel.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,129
    Surely not, Corbyn seems like the kind of humble man who delights in evaluating his own comments and the unintended impact of his words on others, and reconsidering his ideologically based decisions.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,275
    Even Rasmussen can’t muster up a Trump lead in Florida !

    Biden 48

    Trump 47
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    kinabalu said:

    Alistair said:

    Mal557 said:

    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
    1.2 now on Betfair.
    About 300,000 additional RV in Nevada since 2016, or a 20+% increase. I would guess that would comprise more Dems than Republicans because of the hospitality industry and a continuation of Harry Reid's efforts to increase their turnout in the run up to 2016
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    TimT said:

    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    At the risk of causing @TSE severe cognitive dissonance...

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033

    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
    Hate to burst bubbles and all ... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/31/viral-image/fake-sean-connery-letter-steve-jobs-spreads-wake-h/
    Haha! It did seem odd that such a damascene conversion could have taken place in six short years!
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,775

    https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1322861417108774913

    This Government put Dido Harding into place. They are responsible.

    Dido has much to be blamed for, but I am not sure some software developers screwing up is her fault. Bit like the shit no check coding of the testing data coming in and screwing up the Excel spreadsheet. Also wasn't the app development overseen by NHS-X, with the use of private contractors?
    Her appointment needs to be investigated as do all the dodgy dealings that stuck her in the Lords.

    She seems very poor to me, and I wouldn't appoint her to run a sweet-shop.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    Not sure if this has been posted but it is very good

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033?s=09

    A letter supposedly from 1998 that looks like it was typed in the 1970s or earlier. Right...
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    dixiedean said:

    Evening All

    I'm trying to stay away from here as much as possible at the moment because it all makes me so very, very depressed.

    However, now that I've been proven right in my assumption that we'd end up this Autumn, and probably sooner rather than later, essentially with April plus schools and masks everywhere, I return to make a further prediction.

    The lockdown will continue, effectively, until next Summer.

    There *might* be a very brief hiatus to allow household mixing over Christmas, presumably because the Government thinks that nobody will obey its rules at that time (although they might not bother to obey them anymore regardless,) but other than that we're going to be locked up all the way until the warm weather comes around. It's inevitable. Lockdowns don't work, they just kick the can of the disease down the road. Finish one and, save for during the Summer, the start of the next is only weeks away.

    The mad scientists are now running the show (Parliament and the Government might as well dissolve themselves and save us the cost of their useless presence,) and their dodgy computer models will demand that we are all incarcerated for the duration. Indeed, under the circumstances it is probably for the best that the affected businesses simply roll over and die rather than being allowed to open for a fortnight and then being shut back down again. Trying to pretend that hospitality, tourism, leisure, the arts and non-food retail are viable when they're going to be opening and closing every five minutes until May or June (and that will all start again if the octogenarians haven't been vaccinated by September) is laughable. Keeping all the doomed employees on furlough is simply delaying the inevitable under such circumstances.

    Therefore, by May or June 2021, all of the shuttered sectors of the economy will have been more-or-less eradicated and unemployment will be running, at an educated guess, somewhere in the ballpark of eight million. At best, next year is going to be a more catastrophic version of 1931. At worst, we're talking 1348, or possibly 410. Broad scale societal collapse. Basically we've had our chips.

    Crumbs that's bleak. Much sympathy. This too will pass.
    Trite but true.
    Ha! Bollocks. At best we'll be dealing with the consequences of this for decades (and some of the more lunatic scientists are already suggesting that masks and social distancing will be with us literally forever.) At worst, it's the end of European civilization as currently constituted. A new Dark Age. Hundreds of years before we recover.

    The country simply can't carry the weight of children, the elderly and a very large fraction of the working age population demanding handouts all at once. The economy will implode, and once it implodes, it will take society with it. It is inevitable.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Corbyn admit he’s wrong?

    You’ll be expecting honesty from Dominic Cummings next.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    Disappointed someone beat you to Starmer's best poll ever!!
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,275
    TimT said:

    kinabalu said:

    Alistair said:

    Mal557 said:

    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
    1.2 now on Betfair.
    About 300,000 additional RV in Nevada since 2016, or a 20+% increase. I would guess that would comprise more Dems than Republicans because of the hospitality industry and a continuation of Harry Reid's efforts to increase their turnout in the run up to 2016
    Jon Ralston the go to person for Nevada thinks it’s game over for Trump there . The latest mail in update has given Biden a huge lead in Clark county which includes Las Vegas.
  • I see some articles around claiming that Biden has X votes in one county and Trump Y votes and therefore they can predict who will win the election.

    Have they actually got access to any data on this or have they just made it all up?
  • NEW THREAD AND IT IS ON AV

  • glwglw Posts: 9,908
    Omnium said:

    https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1322861417108774913

    This Government put Dido Harding into place. They are responsible.

    Dido has much to be blamed for, but I am not sure some software developers screwing up is her fault. Bit like the shit no check coding of the testing data coming in and screwing up the Excel spreadsheet. Also wasn't the app development overseen by NHS-X, with the use of private contractors?
    Her appointment needs to be investigated as do all the dodgy dealings that stuck her in the Lords.

    She seems very poor to me, and I wouldn't appoint her to run a sweet-shop.
    You may be right, but she doesn't appear to have any involvement in "the app" which AFAIK comes from NHS-X and is listed under the NHS Business Services Authority.

    Bluetooth proximity contact tracing apps have proved to be essentially useless in every country where they have been deployed. If there is any country where they are proving to be useful they are keeping it quite. Adoption and utilisation of such apps is relatively low everywhere, and the underlying technology is clearly not really up to the task. Frankly this is some silicon valley "bright idea" that gained legs that it didn't really warrant.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    And in 2010 Labour could probably have clung on with about five more seats, let both elections were and are, losses.

    When we actually won an election was in 2005, let's get back to actually winning please.
    For anyone under the age of 64 the only Labour leader they have seen win a general election in their adult lifetime is Tony Blair. Make of this what we will.
  • Well quite. Isn't the first (only?) lesson at Barrister School "never ask a question where you don't already know what the answer will be"?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,859

    dixiedean said:

    Evening All

    I'm trying to stay away from here as much as possible at the moment because it all makes me so very, very depressed.

    However, now that I've been proven right in my assumption that we'd end up this Autumn, and probably sooner rather than later, essentially with April plus schools and masks everywhere, I return to make a further prediction.

    The lockdown will continue, effectively, until next Summer.

    There *might* be a very brief hiatus to allow household mixing over Christmas, presumably because the Government thinks that nobody will obey its rules at that time (although they might not bother to obey them anymore regardless,) but other than that we're going to be locked up all the way until the warm weather comes around. It's inevitable. Lockdowns don't work, they just kick the can of the disease down the road. Finish one and, save for during the Summer, the start of the next is only weeks away.

    The mad scientists are now running the show (Parliament and the Government might as well dissolve themselves and save us the cost of their useless presence,) and their dodgy computer models will demand that we are all incarcerated for the duration. Indeed, under the circumstances it is probably for the best that the affected businesses simply roll over and die rather than being allowed to open for a fortnight and then being shut back down again. Trying to pretend that hospitality, tourism, leisure, the arts and non-food retail are viable when they're going to be opening and closing every five minutes until May or June (and that will all start again if the octogenarians haven't been vaccinated by September) is laughable. Keeping all the doomed employees on furlough is simply delaying the inevitable under such circumstances.

    Therefore, by May or June 2021, all of the shuttered sectors of the economy will have been more-or-less eradicated and unemployment will be running, at an educated guess, somewhere in the ballpark of eight million. At best, next year is going to be a more catastrophic version of 1931. At worst, we're talking 1348, or possibly 410. Broad scale societal collapse. Basically we've had our chips.

    Crumbs that's bleak. Much sympathy. This too will pass.
    Trite but true.
    Ha! Bollocks. At best we'll be dealing with the consequences of this for decades (and some of the more lunatic scientists are already suggesting that masks and social distancing will be with us literally forever.) At worst, it's the end of European civilization as currently constituted. A new Dark Age. Hundreds of years before we recover.

    The country simply can't carry the weight of children, the elderly and a very large fraction of the working age population demanding handouts all at once. The economy will implode, and once it implodes, it will take society with it. It is inevitable.
    I’ve not been slow at any point in being apprehensive about the economic consequences of Covid but this is hysterical nonsense. We are facing a fall in GDP of about 10%, slightly worse than 2008 where GDP fell about 8%.
    That hurt and brought in a decade of “austerity” whilst we rebalanced the economy but it did not bring the end of times and neither will this.
    It does we seem will have had the best part of 20 years with no net growth in Europe, something unprecedented since WW 2 and possibly a lot longer. Our default assumptions of growth and increasing wealth will be sorely hit which will no doubt have an impact on confidence.
    But we will survive and so will our society.
  • justin124 said:

    Foxy said:



    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    SNP, Plaid and Green would have supported him Had Labour managed 274 seats that would have given him 314 before considering what LDs might have done. Difficult to see the latter supporting the Tories.
    You can't say that any of the SNP, Plaid and LDs would have supported Corbyn for PM if May couldn't have formed a government. The SNP's price would have been too high and the LD's wouldn't have touched him with a bargepole. But that is only one half of the betrayal myth - the idea that Corbyn ever came close to forming a government.

    The other half of the betrayal myth is the idea that sitting Labour MPs and the party heirarchy tried deny Corbyn a majority by engineering the loss of their own seats. What we now know is that it was Corbyn doing the betraying for political motives, by trying to avoid putting any resources into obviously vulnerable seats Labour was defending (those held by MPs who opposed his leadership) and instead directing them into long shot targets (often contested by candidates of the far left). Thanks to the efforts of the General Secretary, behind Corbyn's back, such vulnerable seats did in the end get some financial help and as a result Labour managed to limit losses of seats at GE 2017 to 6, though still losing the likes of Mansfield and Stoke on Trent South. Without such defiance of Corbyn, many more Red Wall seats would have gone.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Nigelb said:

    At the risk of causing @TSE severe cognitive dissonance...

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033

    And yet, both dead now. So who gives a F about either
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    kinabalu said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    And in 2010 Labour could probably have clung on with about five more seats, let both elections were and are, losses.

    When we actually won an election was in 2005, let's get back to actually winning please.
    For anyone under the age of 64 the only Labour leader they have seen win a general election in their adult lifetime is Tony Blair. Make of this what we will.
    Doesn't Gordon count?

    I do remember Sunny Jim and Harold well, but was a year too young to vote for Jim in '79. Everyone I knew who was old enough to vote in '79 was voting for Mrs Thatch'. We were naively expectant that Roger Pincham could steal the seat for the Liberals from Peter Temple-Morris. He didn't, but 20 years later the seat went Labour (a floor crossing) so it all worked out for the best.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,717
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:



    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    SNP, Plaid and Green would have supported him Had Labour managed 274 seats that would have given him 314 before considering what LDs might have done. Difficult to see the latter supporting the Tories.
    Yes, but only PC and Green would have supported a Socialist manifesto.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    kinabalu said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    And in 2010 Labour could probably have clung on with about five more seats, let both elections were and are, losses.

    When we actually won an election was in 2005, let's get back to actually winning please.
    For anyone under the age of 64 the only Labour leader they have seen win a general election in their adult lifetime is Tony Blair. Make of this what we will.
    Doesn't Gordon count?

    I do remember Sunny Jim and Harold well, but was a year too young to vote for Jim in '79. Everyone I knew who was old enough to vote in '79 was voting for Mrs Thatch'. We were naively expectant that Roger Pincham could steal the seat for the Liberals from Peter Temple-Morris. He didn't, but 20 years later the seat went Labour (a floor crossing) so it all worked out for the best.
    He didn’t win. In fact, he got the lowest share of the vote and the third lowest number of seats of a sitting government in the age of universal suffrage.

    And no, his stewardship of the economy proved he couldn’t count.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,553

    https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1322861417108774913

    This Government put Dido Harding into place. They are responsible.

    The thought that someone finds this 'incredible' is charming. It isn't remotely incredible and is effortlessly capable of belief.

  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:



    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    SNP, Plaid and Green would have supported him Had Labour managed 274 seats that would have given him 314 before considering what LDs might have done. Difficult to see the latter supporting the Tories.
    Yes, but only PC and Green would have supported a Socialist manifesto.
    No way would Corbyn have been able to do that I totally agree - but it would have been enough to topple the Tories. Another election would have followed within 12 months.
  • justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:



    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    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.
    SNP, Plaid and Green would have supported him Had Labour managed 274 seats that would have given him 314 before considering what LDs might have done. Difficult to see the latter supporting the Tories.
    Yes, but only PC and Green would have supported a Socialist manifesto.
    No way would Corbyn have been able to do that I totally agree - but it would have been enough to topple the Tories. Another election would have followed within 12 months.
    Yes, it's possible Labour had got 275 seats and the LDs had won a couple of extra seats too even if said government had fallen apart in a year due to wrecking from people like Woodcock and Austin.

    It wouldn't have been plain sailing at all and would have still permanently destroyed some media narratives about Corbyn and couldn't have been any worse than the trajectory of what happened to Labour in 2018 and 2019 anyway.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    LadyG said:

    Nigelb said:

    At the risk of causing @TSE severe cognitive dissonance...

    https://twitter.com/JonathanTaplin/status/1322709855388332033

    And yet, both dead now. So who gives a F about either
    It's relevant because Trump claimed 2 days ago that Connery was an ally. Just another lie.
This discussion has been closed.