I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
From Politico: "Most polls show Biden winning independents, who account for about a quarter of likely voters. Generally, the party that turns out its base and wins independents carries Florida."
Most polls? So some say Trump is winning them?
If Trump is winning with independents in Florida and registered voters go with their parties (or cross vote in equal numbers) then Trump wins Florida. And by a bigger margin than he beat Hillary, I think
But like everything else its a big if. Registered voters do not always go the way of the party they register with.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
Maybe he should relax and go boil some p*ss? That usually seems to work .....
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Is he saying it isn't important?
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
Is New Orleans the only place in red in your map that would attract significant number of international tourists? The rest of the world is very disconnected to Trumpian USA.
Biden to pick up Arizona and Wisconsin and Michigan and hold the Hillary states, Trump to hold all his other 2016 states, Florida result not known for days if not weeks but Trump to scrape home in the Sunshine state thanks to winning more Cuban Americans, despite Seniors moving away from him
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Is he saying it isn't important?
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
The "truth" behind Magna Carta isn't the issue.
It'd be fine if he caveated it like you say, but he doesn't. He just sneers.
Biden to pick up Arizona and Wisconsin and Michigan and hold the Hillary states, Trump to hold all his other 2016 states, Florida result not known for days if not weeks
So if Biden does win you can say well I didnt say Trump would get more EVs....and if Trump does get more EVs you can still say, I said he'd win. Clever
I suspect it's because Trump has dodged every bullet fired at him over the past four years. Betterrs may feel that Trump will somehow again slip through when it looks as though he's nailed.
Is New Orleans the only place in red in your map that would attract significant number of international tourists? The rest of the world is very disconnected to Trumpian USA.
Dollywood is worth a visit.
Utah has spectacular national parks. Wyoming and Idaho are breathtakingly beautiful in places.
Hanen says plaintiffs have an uphill road and need to convince him that Harris County had an "evil motive" in allowing drive-through voting for Texas voters
If you like 538's model... then the states with the biggest discrepancy between the odds and 538's predictions are: FL, PA and OH (I think - some states I didn't check, someone better at coding than me could do this automatically I'm sure).
FL: 538 says 68% chance vs. betfair on 44%. PA: 538 says 87% chance vs. betfair on 65%. OH: 538 says 49% chance vs. betfair on 31%.
To my mind, that makes Florida and PA excellent value.
I have to say, and despite respecting 538 greatly, I have to say the Betfair % look closer to me for sure for FL and PA
I've been trying to work out what the best value bet is at the moment. My only position is a £10 buy of Biden ECVs at 285 which I'm very happy with. Wish I'd risked a bigger stake.
I think the best value bet is probably Biden to be President.
Biden POTUS: 538 says 90% vs betfair on 66%
The relative value in backing Biden to be POTUS doesn't look as good as backing Biden to win Florida say. But the probability of the bet landing is, of course, significantly more likely.
The thing is with a decent position already on Biden I'm reluctant to stump up a big stake at short odds to make the additional bet worth winning. But Biden to be POTUS at current odds does look huge value.
Decisions, decisions ......
stjohn - I'm with Richard Nabavi and the Hat Tipper kinabulu in backing Trump to secure >70 million votes, helped no doubt by the fine weather forecast. I'm further encouraged by Jack_W's forecast of there being a total of 160 million + votes cast. Half an hour ago Betfair's back price was 1.75 decimal, but I asked for and obtained 1.80 decimal, i.e. 4/5 less 5% commission. A likely winner in my view, although you may have to wait a few weeks for your money. In typical fashion, Betfair probably won't pay out until every last vote has been officially certified, even if the 70 million total has been comfortably exceeded.
Peter,
I think the previous highest total vote was 131 million in 2008. For Jack W to be correct in predicting 160 million + requires an increase in total votes of over 22% on the highest previous number. Now I know there has been an unprecedented amount of votes already cast. Over 90 million I think. But who wouldn't vote early given the Covid crisis? I'm far from sure that an additional 30 million votes, over and above the previous record, will be cast, counted and allowed in this election. So I'm not tempted to back Trump securing over 70 million votes as odds on.
In 2016, there were 157.6 million RV in the US (Pew Research). Given both population increases and registration drives by both major parties and the BLM movement, I'd expect that number to be up considerably. So 160M would be really high as a % of RV, but certainly possible.
What sort of difference do you think BLM will make and to which party?
I suspect it's because Trump has dodged every bullet fired at him over the past four years. Betterrs may feel that Trump will somehow again slip through when it looks as though he's nailed.
Welcome aboard. You picked a hell of a week to make a first post
Hanen says plaintiffs have an uphill road and need to convince him that Harris County had an "evil motive" in allowing drive-through voting for Texas voters
GOP win then. Making it easier for Dems to vote sounds evil to me.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
If your national story is based on a load of old bollocks then maybe you need a new national story. Anyway, he's not sneering at Magna Carter, he's pointing out the absurdities generated by people who talk about it without knowing anything about it, which seems reasonable.
If you like 538's model... then the states with the biggest discrepancy between the odds and 538's predictions are: FL, PA and OH (I think - some states I didn't check, someone better at coding than me could do this automatically I'm sure).
FL: 538 says 68% chance vs. betfair on 44%. PA: 538 says 87% chance vs. betfair on 65%. OH: 538 says 49% chance vs. betfair on 31%.
To my mind, that makes Florida and PA excellent value.
I have to say, and despite respecting 538 greatly, I have to say the Betfair % look closer to me for sure for FL and PA
I've been trying to work out what the best value bet is at the moment. My only position is a £10 buy of Biden ECVs at 285 which I'm very happy with. Wish I'd risked a bigger stake.
I think the best value bet is probably Biden to be President.
Biden POTUS: 538 says 90% vs betfair on 66%
The relative value in backing Biden to be POTUS doesn't look as good as backing Biden to win Florida say. But the probability of the bet landing is, of course, significantly more likely.
The thing is with a decent position already on Biden I'm reluctant to stump up a big stake at short odds to make the additional bet worth winning. But Biden to be POTUS at current odds does look huge value.
Decisions, decisions ......
stjohn - I'm with Richard Nabavi and the Hat Tipper kinabulu in backing Trump to secure >70 million votes, helped no doubt by the fine weather forecast. I'm further encouraged by Jack_W's forecast of there being a total of 160 million + votes cast. Half an hour ago Betfair's back price was 1.75 decimal, but I asked for and obtained 1.80 decimal, i.e. 4/5 less 5% commission. A likely winner in my view, although you may have to wait a few weeks for your money. In typical fashion, Betfair probably won't pay out until every last vote has been officially certified, even if the 70 million total has been comfortably exceeded.
Peter,
I think the previous highest total vote was 131 million in 2008. For Jack W to be correct in predicting 160 million + requires an increase in total votes of over 22% on the highest previous number. Now I know there has been an unprecedented amount of votes already cast. Over 90 million I think. But who wouldn't vote early given the Covid crisis? I'm far from sure that an additional 30 million votes, over and above the previous record, will be cast, counted and allowed in this election. So I'm not tempted to back Trump securing over 70 million votes as odds on.
In 2016, there were 157.6 million RV in the US (Pew Research). Given both population increases and registration drives by both major parties and the BLM movement, I'd expect that number to be up considerably. So 160M would be really high as a % of RV, but certainly possible.
What sort of difference do you think BLM will make and to which party?
Their approach is that nothing will change if blacks rely on either major party to change things on their behalf, and so they need to get their own representatives elected, starting at the local level, and to do that they need to get their communities to register and vote.
It is hard to see this approach succeeding at the local level without benefiting Democrats up the ticket, and particularly at the top of the ticket.
Just to make it clear again as I no people here love to bring up my record, I am not making a prediction.
I am sure whoever gets it wrong will have their record brought up constantly won't they? That would be fair, bollocks they will though
'Couldn't make a prediction in a one horse race that CHB!' You may not be able to win this game.
Ah stop horsing around
Ah well PB is at its best when there's a degree of teasing. We all post entirely seriously (no, really I do!), but we don't get it right, and many of us don't even get it right at the time.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Is he saying it isn't important?
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
The "truth" behind Magna Carta isn't the issue.
It'd be fine if he caveated it like you say, but he doesn't. He just sneers.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
If your national story is based on a load of old bollocks then maybe you need a new national story. Anyway, he's not sneering at Magna Carter, he's pointing out the absurdities generated by people who talk about it without knowing anything about it, which seems reasonable.
Its curious its fine to sneer at an environmentalist actor who takes an unnecessary flight, or a young footballer pointing out issues around child poverty, but not fine to sneer at someone spreading dangerous misinformation that is clearly bollocks and could risk anyone following the advice getting a hefty fine.
I suspect it's because Trump has dodged every bullet fired at him over the past four years. Betterrs may feel that Trump will somehow again slip through when it looks as though he's nailed.
Welcome aboard. You picked a hell of a week to make a first post
Hopefully tomorrow is Trump defenestration day!
He's not been as bad as I anticipated though. I really worry about Biden.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Just to make it clear again as I no people here love to bring up my record, I am not making a prediction.
I am sure whoever gets it wrong will have their record brought up constantly won't they? That would be fair, bollocks they will though
'Couldn't make a prediction in a one horse race that CHB!' You may not be able to win this game.
Ah stop horsing around
Ah well PB is at its best when there's a degree of teasing. We all post entirely seriously (no, really I do!), but we don't get it right, and many of us don't even get it right at the time.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
If your national story is based on a load of old bollocks then maybe you need a new national story. Anyway, he's not sneering at Magna Carter, he's pointing out the absurdities generated by people who talk about it without knowing anything about it, which seems reasonable.
Its curious its fine to sneer at an environmentalist actor who takes an unnecessary flight, or a young footballer pointing out issues around child poverty, but not fine to sneer at someone spreading dangerous misinformation that is clearly bollocks and could risk anyone following the advice getting a hefty fine.
Sneering is another of those irregular verbs that seem to crop up with remarkable regularity here.
Just to make it clear again as I no people here love to bring up my record, I am not making a prediction.
I am sure whoever gets it wrong will have their record brought up constantly won't they? That would be fair, bollocks they will though
Prediction? I would prefer Biden to win and I hope he does. Will he win? I have no idea because the American polling systems seem to be like their legal system and tax system - a mix of patchwork quilts that vary so wildly that you wonder if the USA is a country at all.
So, Biden please, but if the Marmalade Monster gets another 4 years then the best thing about the US will be the 3,000 miles of ocean between us and them.
Florida finding from Scott Rasmussen 11% of Republicans who have already voted cast their ballots for Biden... 2% Democrat crossover.
I am betting that the seniors will do for Trump in Florida this year. Many of the oldies will go for Biden because of Trump's appalling attitude to Covid. Many of these voters will, I suspect, still be actually be registered as Republicans.
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
I just want to comment on *why* we've not seen vaccine efficacy news yet, and why that's probably good news.
These massive trials are blinded. They give the vaccine to 10,000 people and a placebo to 10,000 people. This means 20,000 people have recieved either the vaccine or the placebo.
The participants are then monitored. Once a certain number (probably around 50) have gotten CV19, then the trial is unblinded for those 50. How many got the vaccine and how many the placebo.
If it's 25/25, then the vaccine is a clear failure (although it might still result in far more asymptomatic or low intensity infections, and therefore be very useful). If it's 50/0, then it's a massive success.
None of the trials has yet gotten the required number of CV19 cases. This is partly because the big trials are in the Southern hemisphere and as it warms up and people spend more time outdoors, the numbers of cases in Brazil and South Africa have come down sharply.
But it also suggests that people with the vaccine are not getting sick. The more time it takes to get to 50 cases, the more likely it is that the vaccine is working.
Florida finding from Scott Rasmussen 11% of Republicans who have already voted cast their ballots for Biden... 2% Democrat crossover.
I am betting that the seniors will do for Trump in Florida this year. Many of the oldies will go for Biden because of Trump's appalling attitude to Covid. Many of these voters will, I suspect, still be actually be registered as Republicans.
Agreed, its a very divided country and hard to move significant numbers of voters across the aisle which is why the parties have resorted to simply pushing their turnout and ignoring the middle over the last decade. Covid and the govts handling is a big enough event to have changed that - if even 3-4% of republicans switch because of it thats plenty for Biden. Those numbers suggest its going to be quite a bit more than that.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Snowflakes.
Those snowflakes had votes in the EU referendum, for example. I've never felt the need to rub people's face in the fact that I have a PhD and they left school at 18, partly because I don't think it makes me better than them.
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
Which would mean that the turnout is over 60% already, which is patently ridiculous, so 160m is obviously too low
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
Although you can register on the day in some places.
I suspect it's because Trump has dodged every bullet fired at him over the past four years. Betterrs may feel that Trump will somehow again slip through when it looks as though he's nailed.
Hanen says plaintiffs have an uphill road and need to convince him that Harris County had an "evil motive" in allowing drive-through voting for Texas voters
GOP win then. Making it easier for Dems to vote sounds evil to me.
Especially if they were then planning on actually counting them after the President has claimed victory.
Is New Orleans the only place in red in your map that would attract significant number of international tourists? The rest of the world is very disconnected to Trumpian USA.
I just want to comment on *why* we've not seen vaccine efficacy news yet, and why that's probably good news.
These massive trials are blinded. They give the vaccine to 10,000 people and a placebo to 10,000 people. This means 20,000 people have recieved either the vaccine or the placebo.
The participants are then monitored. Once a certain number (probably around 50) have gotten CV19, then the trial is unblinded for those 50. How many got the vaccine and how many the placebo.
If it's 25/25, then the vaccine is a clear failure (although it might still result in far more asymptomatic or low intensity infections, and therefore be very useful). If it's 50/0, then it's a massive success.
None of the trials has yet gotten the required number of CV19 cases. This is partly because the big trials are in the Southern hemisphere and as it warms up and people spend more time outdoors, the numbers of cases in Brazil and South Africa have come down sharply.
But it also suggests that people with the vaccine are not getting sick. The more time it takes to get to 50 cases, the more likely it is that the vaccine is working.
Plus it presumably also means that they are not seeing evidence of nasty side-effects.
Biden to pick up Arizona and Wisconsin and Michigan and hold the Hillary states, Trump to hold all his other 2016 states, Florida result not known for days if not weeks but Trump to scrape home in the Sunshine state thanks to winning more Cuban Americans, despite Seniors moving away from him
If your scenario happens, don't you think Biden would pick up either (or both) the single competitive Congressional districts in ME and NE - giving him the win by 270-268 or 271-267?
My view is that this is Biden's best backdoor route of still winning even if he loses PA.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Precisely. They set each other off, and then their fan-clubs row in behind them. If it gets high-profile then (eventually) those in the middle feel pressure to take one side or another.
It doesn't do anyone any good. We all have a responsibility for how we conduct debate.
I just want to comment on *why* we've not seen vaccine efficacy news yet, and why that's probably good news.
These massive trials are blinded. They give the vaccine to 10,000 people and a placebo to 10,000 people. This means 20,000 people have recieved either the vaccine or the placebo.
The participants are then monitored. Once a certain number (probably around 50) have gotten CV19, then the trial is unblinded for those 50. How many got the vaccine and how many the placebo.
If it's 25/25, then the vaccine is a clear failure (although it might still result in far more asymptomatic or low intensity infections, and therefore be very useful). If it's 50/0, then it's a massive success.
None of the trials has yet gotten the required number of CV19 cases. This is partly because the big trials are in the Southern hemisphere and as it warms up and people spend more time outdoors, the numbers of cases in Brazil and South Africa have come down sharply.
But it also suggests that people with the vaccine are not getting sick. The more time it takes to get to 50 cases, the more likely it is that the vaccine is working.
Given what's at stake (and I get the ethics) why not call for volunteers to take a shot of the virus and give them a million quid each for it?
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Is he saying it isn't important?
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
The "truth" behind Magna Carta isn't the issue.
It'd be fine if he caveated it like you say, but he doesn't. He just sneers.
That just fans the flames.
What is on fire here?
Political divisions over culture, identity and history.
I am a tad suspicious of todays reported case number. Not only well down, but this despite Scotland been as basically same level as have been for a while and Wales recorded the 2nd highest ever daily number of cases.
Is New Orleans the only place in red in your map that would attract significant number of international tourists? The rest of the world is very disconnected to Trumpian USA.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Is he saying it isn't important?
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
The "truth" behind Magna Carta isn't the issue.
It'd be fine if he caveated it like you say, but he doesn't. He just sneers.
That just fans the flames.
What is on fire here?
Political divisions over culture, identity and history.
People are allowed to disagree about culture, identity and history. It's healthy to debate things. It's unhealthy to catastrophise things.
I just want to comment on *why* we've not seen vaccine efficacy news yet, and why that's probably good news.
These massive trials are blinded. They give the vaccine to 10,000 people and a placebo to 10,000 people. This means 20,000 people have recieved either the vaccine or the placebo.
The participants are then monitored. Once a certain number (probably around 50) have gotten CV19, then the trial is unblinded for those 50. How many got the vaccine and how many the placebo.
If it's 25/25, then the vaccine is a clear failure (although it might still result in far more asymptomatic or low intensity infections, and therefore be very useful). If it's 50/0, then it's a massive success.
None of the trials has yet gotten the required number of CV19 cases. This is partly because the big trials are in the Southern hemisphere and as it warms up and people spend more time outdoors, the numbers of cases in Brazil and South Africa have come down sharply.
But it also suggests that people with the vaccine are not getting sick. The more time it takes to get to 50 cases, the more likely it is that the vaccine is working.
Given what's at stake (and I get the ethics) why not call for volunteers to take a shot of the virus and give them a million quid each for it?
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Snowflakes.
Those snowflakes had votes in the EU referendum, for example. I've never felt the need to rub people's face in the fact that I have a PhD and they left school at 18, partly because I don't think it makes me better than them.
This is the guy who predicted the outcome of the Corbyn NEC case in 2016 on the basis that he was a lawyer specialising in this area, and got it wrong, and deleted the tweet. As for that "not even written in English" point it would be great to present him with a chunk of the original text and get him to translate it on the fly. What a pillock.
I am a tad suspicious of todays reported case number. Not only well down, but this despite Scotland been as basically same level as have been for a while and Wales recorded the 2nd highest ever daily number of cases.
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
That is simply wrong. I have checked the RV for these states and run that number against the VEP numbers from US Elections Project. Here are the RVs as a % of VEP by state. Quite shocking in a couple of examples and a clear indicator of the success of various voter registration drives. OR, US Election Project's numbers are wrong.
Hanen says plaintiffs have an uphill road and need to convince him that Harris County had an "evil motive" in allowing drive-through voting for Texas voters
GOP win then. Making it easier for Dems to vote sounds evil to me.
Are vehicle owners in Texas more likely to be Rep or Dem?
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
That is simply wrong. I have checked the RV for these states and run that number against the VEP numbers from US Elections Project. Here are the RVs as a % of VEP by state. Quite shocking in a couple of examples and a clear indicator of the success of various voter registration drives. OR, US Election Project's numbers are wrong.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Snowflakes.
Those snowflakes had votes in the EU referendum, for example. I've never felt the need to rub people's face in the fact that I have a PhD and they left school at 18, partly because I don't think it makes me better than them.
I know that the Brexit referendum turned into a proxy vote on a load of other stuff but I don't remember anyone saying they voted out because David Allen Green laughed at them for calling it The Magna Carter.
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
That is simply wrong. I have checked the RV for these states and run that number against the VEP numbers from US Elections Project. Here are the RVs as a % of VEP by state. Quite shocking in a couple of examples and a clear indicator of the success of various voter registration drives. OR, US Election Project's numbers are wrong.
Based on this, if 80+% of RVs turn out to vote, which is about the historic norm for most states, then 0.8*0.9 =72% turnout of VEP is possible, i.e. 170M+
Unless I'm reading this wrong doesn't that mean that Biden has already passed Clinton's 2016 total without Miami!
Well, firstly early voting in Florida hasn't technically ended yet as some other counties are still voting today.
And the note about Miami and Sarasota is just today's figures, not all early voting, so it's not going to make much difference.
Yes sorry the link i took this from i should have clarified, the Miami figures for just today have not been updated, so a few counties to add todays. It ends today and those are the figures before that, apologies
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
That is simply wrong. I have checked the RV for these states and run that number against the VEP numbers from US Elections Project. Here are the RVs as a % of VEP by state. Quite shocking in a couple of examples and a clear indicator of the success of various voter registration drives. OR, US Election Project's numbers are wrong.
I think only about two-thirds of US adults are registered to vote, which would be about 160 million out of 240 million adults. So anyone predicting 160 million votes in the election is basically forecasting a 100% turnout of registered voters.
That is simply wrong. I have checked the RV for these states and run that number against the VEP numbers from US Elections Project. Here are the RVs as a % of VEP by state. Quite shocking in a couple of examples and a clear indicator of the success of various voter registration drives. OR, US Election Project's numbers are wrong.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
The Magna Carta is incredibly important and is unquestionably one of the foundation stones of individual liberty in this country. However, those who proclaim its importance while simultaneously supporting efforts to emasculate an independent judiciary, which is the only guarantor of individual liberty we have, not only deserve mockery but also deep scorn.
Why is that ping? I do remember you being hyperactive last time.
Are you planning a late splurge of bets tonight/tomorrow based on the final opinion polls, or maybe you're simply bored this time?
Evening Peter.
Like Mike, I didn’t really rate joe early on - I still don’t - although his boringness is probably an asset against trump.
In terms of betting, my main regret is not piling on biden4potus at evens a few weeks ago at the height of the Hunter Biden laptop nonsense. Those were great odds.
Do you see any standout value bets right now?
Ping - thanks for getting back. TBH I think most of the value has already gone, where some remains it tends to be in the peripheral markets such as turnout (eg Trump to secure >70 million votes at circa 1.8 with BetfairEx referred to by me and others in this thread). For those with the cajones, backing Biden on the spreads at 315 ECVs looks pretty fair value if you're one of the majority who reckon his downside is somehere around 285 ECVs, (i.e. -30) compared with an upside of say 360 ECVs (i.e. +45) or potentially even more were he to win the likes of Texas, which is seriously unlikely but by no means impossible. On the "fastest finger first" principle I'm sure there's money to be made for those smart enough to make betting decisions on the back of the very early election results and hopefully there will be some discussion on PB.com along these lines tomorrow. I'll be surprised if rcs1000, etc doesn't come up with a few ideas. You are probably aware that a zoom facility is being organised by Barnesian, although things seem to have become rather quiet on that front.
OGH will be publishing the link at midnight tomorrow.
Great bet from kinabulu, followed up this afternoon by Richard Nabavi for Trump to secure >70million votes at odds of 1.81 with BetfairEx has now shortened to 1.41. Real value like this doesn't last long once it is outed on PB.com. Thanks to the two gents concerned for highlighting it.
Elizabeth Findell @efindell · 9m “Some of the people that I voted for are actually the people trying to take away my vote and if I’m given the chance to cast a provisional ballot tomorrow, I won’t make that mistake again" -- FireFire from a Harris County voter involved in the drive-thru case
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Snowflakes.
Those snowflakes had votes in the EU referendum, for example. I've never felt the need to rub people's face in the fact that I have a PhD and they left school at 18, partly because I don't think it makes me better than them.
I know that the Brexit referendum turned into a proxy vote on a load of other stuff but I don't remember anyone saying they voted out because David Allen Green laughed at them for calling it The Magna Carter.
So try to generalise a bit. You don't think an elite tendency to laugh at thick white English proles came in to it at all?
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Is he saying it isn't important?
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
The "truth" behind Magna Carta isn't the issue.
It'd be fine if he caveated it like you say, but he doesn't. He just sneers.
That just fans the flames.
What is on fire here?
Political divisions over culture, identity and history.
People are allowed to disagree about culture, identity and history. It's healthy to debate things. It's unhealthy to catastrophise things.
I agree, and - at the same time - it's important how we do it. And even then you need *some* common unifiers we can all agree upon - or at least a menu of a common inheritance that we can all draw upon - otherwise the nation, eventually, will break-up. I'd have thought the legacy of the concept of individual liberty being documented in 1215 (even if slightly mythical at the time it was written) would be one almost all of us could get behind? After all, individual liberty is a core hallmark of our system and it helped inform both the US constitution and UNCHR. It's been hugely influential in history.
Besides which, I have a good ear for how this will be "heard" by those receiving his message: it comes across as pompous, condescending and patronising, and an attack on English history and identity, which wouldn't be the case, say, if he was debating European identity. Even if they are dickish (the ones who got it wrong) they will have a large hinterland of reasonable people who will be pissed off by it.
All of which is odd because offline DAG is actually quite reasonable, and was an original eurosceptic who used to work for Bill Cash.
Maybe it's the corrosive effect of Twitter which encourages you to play to your gallery.
I just want to comment on *why* we've not seen vaccine efficacy news yet, and why that's probably good news.
These massive trials are blinded. They give the vaccine to 10,000 people and a placebo to 10,000 people. This means 20,000 people have recieved either the vaccine or the placebo.
The participants are then monitored. Once a certain number (probably around 50) have gotten CV19, then the trial is unblinded for those 50. How many got the vaccine and how many the placebo.
If it's 25/25, then the vaccine is a clear failure (although it might still result in far more asymptomatic or low intensity infections, and therefore be very useful). If it's 50/0, then it's a massive success.
None of the trials has yet gotten the required number of CV19 cases. This is partly because the big trials are in the Southern hemisphere and as it warms up and people spend more time outdoors, the numbers of cases in Brazil and South Africa have come down sharply.
But it also suggests that people with the vaccine are not getting sick. The more time it takes to get to 50 cases, the more likely it is that the vaccine is working.
Plus it presumably also means that they are not seeing evidence of nasty side-effects.
Yes, there have been a remarkably small number of pauses: we've had the Brazilian guy who died of Covid (who'd got the placebo), the guy who was diagnosed with MS (who'd also had the placebo) and the spinal inflammation that resulted in a night in hospital (vaccine). And the reality is that the last might simply be a complete coincidence. If you give a vaccine to 20,000 people, some of them are going to get sick in the subsequent couple of months.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
The Magna Carta is incredibly important and is unquestionably one of the foundation stones of individual liberty in this country. However, those who proclaim its importance while simultaneously supporting efforts to emasculate an independent judiciary, which is the only guarantor of individual liberty we have, not only deserve mockery but also deep scorn.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
While the people he is ridiculing are indeed ridiculous, I agree with the point you're making too. He's just taking cheap shots which serve no purpose except self-gratification, and contribute to the drip-drip alienation of not-yet-ridiculous people on the other side of the cultural divide.
Snowflakes.
Those snowflakes had votes in the EU referendum, for example. I've never felt the need to rub people's face in the fact that I have a PhD and they left school at 18, partly because I don't think it makes me better than them.
I know that the Brexit referendum turned into a proxy vote on a load of other stuff but I don't remember anyone saying they voted out because David Allen Green laughed at them for calling it The Magna Carter.
(a) The people he's laughing at are probably lost causes anyway. It's more reasonable people who tick similar demographic boxes who we should be concerned about.
(b) Do you really think that well educated people pointing at laughing at people who expose their lack of education - and this is clearly an example of that - wasn't a factor in the referendum result?
Comments
But like everything else its a big if. Registered voters do not always go the way of the party they register with.
This UNionist message isn't getting through - it is more that there doesn't seem to be one. And that is after months of asking.
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics/2020-us-presidential-election/10393583/electoral-college-vote-tie-special/924.237362868
If the foundations of our nation are so weak that they cannot survive knowing the "truth" behind Magna Carta then it was never going to survive anyway.
Take Churchill, you can simultaneously believe he was a dick of the highest order when judged against today's standards but also an important national hero representing the nation's struggle against fascism.
Likewise Magna Carta can simultaneously be unimportant in reality and yet very important historically.
@Jennifer_Hiller
is a hero for getting in the courtroom
It'd be fine if he caveated it like you say, but he doesn't. He just sneers.
That just fans the flames.
https://sports.ladbrokes.com/event/politics/international/us-elections/next-us-presidential-election/224912471/all-markets
Tipped on PB by someone with legendary modesty in September.
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/09/13/ladbrokes-are-offering-66-1-on-a-269-electoral-college-tie-should-i-take-this-bet/
Hopefully tomorrow is Trump defenestration day!
Anyway, he's not sneering at Magna Carter, he's pointing out the absurdities generated by people who talk about it without knowing anything about it, which seems reasonable.
It is hard to see this approach succeeding at the local level without benefiting Democrats up the ticket, and particularly at the top of the ticket.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/number-of-registered-voters-by-state
It doesn't include D.C. but it had 478,688 registered voters in 2016.
Total would therefore be about 153.15 million.
So Trump will be declared the winner as the pandemic was complicit in the voting fraud!
This is genius
So, Biden please, but if the Marmalade Monster gets another 4 years then the best thing about the US will be the 3,000 miles of ocean between us and them.
Executives increasingly worried about disconnect between Boris Johnson and industry as coronavirus lockdown looms
https://www.ft.com/content/ae8d8986-7265-4f2b-b121-5f93124f824c?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
These massive trials are blinded. They give the vaccine to 10,000 people and a placebo to 10,000 people. This means 20,000 people have recieved either the vaccine or the placebo.
The participants are then monitored. Once a certain number (probably around 50) have gotten CV19, then the trial is unblinded for those 50. How many got the vaccine and how many the placebo.
If it's 25/25, then the vaccine is a clear failure (although it might still result in far more asymptomatic or low intensity infections, and therefore be very useful). If it's 50/0, then it's a massive success.
None of the trials has yet gotten the required number of CV19 cases. This is partly because the big trials are in the Southern hemisphere and as it warms up and people spend more time outdoors, the numbers of cases in Brazil and South Africa have come down sharply.
But it also suggests that people with the vaccine are not getting sick. The more time it takes to get to 50 cases, the more likely it is that the vaccine is working.
My view is that this is Biden's best backdoor route of still winning even if he loses PA.
It doesn't do anyone any good. We all have a responsibility for how we conduct debate.
And the note about Miami and Sarasota is just today's figures, not all early voting, so it's not going to make much difference.
It's better than bankrupting the West.
They largely have the same numbers we do. Some of them have worse numbers.
https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
Alaska 109%
Arizona 83%
Florida 90%
Georgia 95%
Iowa 95%
Michigan 103%
Nevada 92%
New Hampshire 93%
North Carolina 94%
Ohio 91%
Pennsylvania 93%
Texas 90%
Wisconsin 82%
So 211 million
Just cant find where this is actually shown
Real value like this doesn't last long once it is outed on PB.com. Thanks to the two gents concerned for highlighting it.
@efindell
·
9m
“Some of the people that I voted for are actually the people trying to take away my vote and if I’m given the chance to cast a provisional ballot tomorrow, I won’t make that mistake again"
-- FireFire from a Harris County voter involved in the drive-thru case
Besides which, I have a good ear for how this will be "heard" by those receiving his message: it comes across as pompous, condescending and patronising, and an attack on English history and identity, which wouldn't be the case, say, if he was debating European identity. Even if they are dickish (the ones who got it wrong) they will have a large hinterland of reasonable people who will be pissed off by it.
All of which is odd because offline DAG is actually quite reasonable, and was an original eurosceptic who used to work for Bill Cash.
Maybe it's the corrosive effect of Twitter which encourages you to play to your gallery.
(b) Do you really think that well educated people pointing at laughing at people who expose their lack of education - and this is clearly an example of that - wasn't a factor in the referendum result?
https://twitter.com/ianbrown/status/1323204141058035712