Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
You do have an example of this from the 2016 Brexit referendum.
In the days before Jo Cox's murder, Leave was winning in a good number of the polls. In the days after, the polling momentum swung and most polls showed Remain in the lead.
In hindsight, that wasn't an actual change in opinion but it seemed a few people didn't like their names being associated with what was seen as a repulsive cause (and which many in the public eye criticised vehemently).
There is a rather large difference, though. People were voting for Brexit, not the murderer. In Trump's case the repulsive thing is the candidate himself.
Also you've got headlines temporarily making Remain voters maybe keener to answer pollsters and Leave voters less keen. With Trump maybe there was a similar temporary effect when the headlines were about Trump catching coronavirus, but that is gone. People might not want their names associated with Trump, but this is more a permanent thing and I'm not sure why it would be any more true in 2020 than in 2016, when "shy Trump voters" don't seem to have played much part in the polling being out.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
Mission accomplished. Time to fire him from a giant cannon into the heart of the sun and replace him with someone vaguely competent.
They agree a brexit deal and we get a vaccine, then perfect time to claim he has never managed to fully recover from COVID, wants to spend more time with his new son and shuffle off to write books.
I thought he needed to make money?
Book deal, newspaper column, back on the after dinner speaking circuit, telly presenting...be raking it in. Every PM is able to make millions from over paid speaking engagements alone.
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
You do have an example of this from the 2016 Brexit referendum.
In the days before Jo Cox's murder, Leave was winning in a good number of the polls. In the days after, the polling momentum swung and most polls showed Remain in the lead.
In hindsight, that wasn't an actual change in opinion but it seemed a few people didn't like their names being associated with what was seen as a repulsive cause (and which many in the public eye criticised vehemently).
Opinium actually swung towards Leave after Cox's murder.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
Most polls have Biden 7-8 points ahead nationally, so they are
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
You do have an example of this from the 2016 Brexit referendum.
In the days before Jo Cox's murder, Leave was winning in a good number of the polls. In the days after, the polling momentum swung and most polls showed Remain in the lead.
In hindsight, that wasn't an actual change in opinion but it seemed a few people didn't like their names being associated with what was seen as a repulsive cause (and which many in the public eye criticised vehemently).
Opinium actually swung towards Leave after Cox's murder.
Don't let a pesky fact get in the way of a good narrative though.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
Governing. Party management. Delegating. Campaigning.
Mission accomplished. Time to fire him from a giant cannon into the heart of the sun and replace him with someone vaguely competent.
They agree a brexit deal and we get a vaccine, then perfect time to claim he has never managed to fully recover from COVID, wants to spend more time with his new son and shuffle off to write books.
I thought he needed to make money?
Book deal, newspaper column, back on the after dinner speaking circuit, telly presenting...be raking it in. Every PM is able to make millions from over paid speaking engagements alone.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Given all that has gone on, i doubt it will be that hard to convince him, as after 24/7 covid and brexit for over a year, it isn't going to let up as the world economy will be in the toilet and require loads of tough decisions and the big carrot is making some decent money again.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
I don't think he'll want to be remembered only for COVID so he'll want another year or two before stepping down even if he's not facing another election.
If he's not facing another election then he could stand down in 2023 and a new leader could go to the polls in 2024 still fresh.
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
You do have an example of this from the 2016 Brexit referendum.
In the days before Jo Cox's murder, Leave was winning in a good number of the polls. In the days after, the polling momentum swung and most polls showed Remain in the lead.
In hindsight, that wasn't an actual change in opinion but it seemed a few people didn't like their names being associated with what was seen as a repulsive cause (and which many in the public eye criticised vehemently).
There is a rather large difference, though. People were voting for Brexit, not the murderer. In Trump's case the repulsive thing is the candidate himself.
Also you've got headlines temporarily making Remain voters maybe keener to answer pollsters and Leave voters less keen. With Trump maybe there was a similar temporary effect when the headlines were about Trump catching coronavirus, but that is gone. People might not want their names associated with Trump, but this is more a permanent thing and I'm not sure why it would be any more true in 2020 than in 2016, when "shy Trump voters" don't seem to have played much part in the polling being out.
If you look at the biggest polling misses from 2016 - Ohio and Iowa - it's pretty hard to see why that would be a 'shy Trump' effect rather than a simple polling miss. And if you eliminate those two, the polls weren't all that far out anyway.
A big uncertainty for me is the apparently huge amount of additional Registered Voters this election. How many are there? What % increase on last time? How come? How do they split on party lines? Is it all legit?
It seems likely that the vast majority of Registered Voters will vote so if the numbers have truly gone up as much as is suggested then 160 million + votes does seem to be likely.
Those who didn’t vote in 2016 and those who chose third party candidates then are breaking heavily for Biden . The Reps have narrowed the gap in voter registration in the swing states but this could be previous non affiliated who supported Trump in 2016.
In terms of independents Biden is currently winning those although in the current polarization it’s hard to believe there’s really any true independent voters out there.
nico. When you say the Republicans have narrowed the gap in voter registration in the swing states, do you mean there are proportionately more Republicans than Democrats registered to vote in the swing states in 2020 compared with 2016? If so, that could be hugely significant and could explain why Trump’s price is holding up in the betting.
Would it? The newly-registered Republicans were presumably already Trump voters.
To vote you have to be registered. A record turnout is expected this year so people are registering who didn’t previously register/vote. If the number of registered Republican voters has increased more than the number of registered Democrat voters in the swing states, ( I don’t know if this is the case but nico suggests it is) then that is surely a good sign for the Republicans chances in the swing states - and therefore in the election?
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
I am a natural pessimist. I have little doubt that by this time tomorrow I will once again disappointed, but I am struggling to see, even with shy Trumpsters, where Trump gets enough EC votes to continue the rollercoaster ride.
Trump's window of opportunity appears to be as small as his hands.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
They should be using the trial to test out ideas on that, rather than hoping for the best.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
Yes, I saw that too. I just don't get the point of citywide testing unless there are actual isolation measures also put in place. It's such a waste of time. Our testing regime has just turned into a very expensive monitoring system given that hardly anyone isolates after testing positive and there is apparently no capacity to give overnight tests to people asked to isolate by contact tracing teams.
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
Yes, I saw that too. I just don't get the point of citywide testing unless there are actual isolation measures also put in place. It's such a waste of time. Our testing regime has just turned into a very expensive monitoring system given that hardly anyone isolates after testing positive and there is apparently no capacity to give overnight tests to people asked to isolate by contact tracing teams.
The Slovakian countrywide test - which, given the unreliable testing used - must have thrown up a lot of false positives among the 1% or so found to be positive. They are relying on compulsory quarantine for all the positives plus all those who refused to be tested. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
I can't see that. If you aren't put off by his venality you would vote for him with pride. This isn't the UK. I can see as many arguments for being a shy non Trumper as being for him depending on where you live.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Given all that has gone on, i doubt it will be that hard to convince him, as after 24/7 covid and brexit for over a year, it isn't going to let up as the world economy will be in the toilet and require loads of tough decisions and the big carrot is making some decent money again.
Everyone takes for granted the world economy will be in the toilet but I'm not convinced.
Globally the Spanish Flu was followed by the Roaring Twenties. Of course the UK didn't because we stuck to the gold standard but we aren't anymore.
There has been more innovation this year than there would be in many years normally, with necessity being the mother of invention.
Post COVID it wouldn't surprise me if the world economy has a boom as the innovation of this year combined with excitement to get back to normal combines to see record growth.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
The question is *why* people are not isolating.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
Yes, I saw that too. I just don't get the point of citywide testing unless there are actual isolation measures also put in place. It's such a waste of time. Our testing regime has just turned into a very expensive monitoring system given that hardly anyone isolates after testing positive and there is apparently no capacity to give overnight tests to people asked to isolate by contact tracing teams.
Its like banging you head against a brick wall....big obvious steps to cut covid not taken, farting around closing golf courses, check.
Like i pointed out last night with Jezza going on holiday from a Tier 2 location....rules say don't travel about unless necessary and definitely not to a lower tier...unless you want to go on holiday and then its fine.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I've been thinking about this in relation to quarantine after a foreign holiday.
The people most likely to do so are the people least likely to take a foreign holiday as they would have to quarantine afterwards.
And people who will ignore one guideline on quarantine are likely to be the people most likely to ignore guidelines on social distancing etc.
So the people most likely to go on a foreign holiday are those most likely to get infected, ignore quarantine afterwards and spread infection.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
Governing. Party management. Delegating. Campaigning.
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
I'd have 5000 reasons to vote for him if he is on the ballot paper.
Despite the header, this thread is shaping up to be concerned mainly with domestic affairs - not too surprising really since there's something of a vacuum Stateside until we start to receive some hard information as folk head for the polls. Just time to ask whether PBers have any late tips, resulting from voting trends or whatever which may have been overlooked.
Biden having dementia is not a problem - he has a capable VP who can take the post. Trump has Pence - a man who seemingly cannot manage to deal with the female half of the population unless his wife is there to tell him what to do.
If they are going to have a female VP over there, I would rather they had one who stood on the ticket like Harris than one who stood in the shadows like Mrs Pence.
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
Because they've over-compensated for 2016, and the polling errors are therefore going the other way. I could be talking bollocks, of course.
Mission accomplished. Time to fire him from a giant cannon into the heart of the sun and replace him with someone vaguely competent.
They agree a brexit deal and we get a vaccine, then perfect time to claim he has never managed to fully recover from COVID, wants to spend more time with his new son and shuffle off to write books.
I thought he needed to make money?
Book deal, newspaper column, back on the after dinner speaking circuit, telly presenting...be raking it in. Every PM is able to make millions from over paid speaking engagements alone.
I was being sarcastic about his writing ability!
If Boris needs a plot for his next novel, how about a squillionaire Cabinet Minister and leadership hopeful setting up a publishing company to give the PM a £25 million advance to ease his retirement. There's at least two who could find it down the back of the sofa.
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
The definitive study after 2016 found that the theory of Shy Trump supporters wasn't a factor in the polling error. I appreciate that the theory has been ressurrected for 2020 in spades, but then there aren't a lot of other straws for Trump supporters to grasp in support of their case that there must be systematic polling errors. Once again they're ignoring the science, as with Covid. Meanwhile, the polling companies have looked at the evidence, adjusted for their 2016 mistakes, and moved on.
American Association for Public Opinion Research "This paper presents the committee’s analysis of the performance of preelection polls in 2016, how that performance compares to polling in prior elections, and the extent to which performance varied by poll design. In addition, the committee examined several theories as to why many polls, particularly in the Upper Midwest, underestimated support for Trump. The explanations for which the most evidence exists are a late swing in vote preference toward Trump and a pervasive failure to adjust for overrepresentation of college graduates (who favored Clinton). In addition, there is clear evidence that voter turnout changed from 2012 to 2016 in ways that favored Trump, though there is only mixed evidence that misspecified likely voter models were a major cause of the systematic polling error. Finally, there is little evidence that socially desirable (Shy Trump) responding was an important contributor to poll error."
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
Yes, I saw that too. I just don't get the point of citywide testing unless there are actual isolation measures also put in place. It's such a waste of time. Our testing regime has just turned into a very expensive monitoring system given that hardly anyone isolates after testing positive and there is apparently no capacity to give overnight tests to people asked to isolate by contact tracing teams.
The Slovakian countrywide test - which, given the unreliable testing used - must have thrown up a lot of false positives among the 1% or so found to be positive. They are relying on compulsory quarantine for all the positives plus all those who refused to be tested. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.
"Must have" ? The scientists interviewed this morning said that the UK had identified six separate rapid antigen tests with a false positive rate of around one in a thousand.
Even if it were ten times that number (which is unlikely), it's massively less disruptive to isolate 1% of the population for a couple of weeks than lock down the entire country. For a month. And if you compensate and assist those locked down, even less so.
And the effect in suppressing the virus would be far larger.
And it should be pointed out that the only reason there are two less Trump votes in Dixville Notch is the Trump voters left the town. Everyone else who voted Trump in 2016 voted Trump again in 2020.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
Yes, I saw that too. I just don't get the point of citywide testing unless there are actual isolation measures also put in place. It's such a waste of time. Our testing regime has just turned into a very expensive monitoring system given that hardly anyone isolates after testing positive and there is apparently no capacity to give overnight tests to people asked to isolate by contact tracing teams.
The Slovakian countrywide test - which, given the unreliable testing used - must have thrown up a lot of false positives among the 1% or so found to be positive. They are relying on compulsory quarantine for all the positives plus all those who refused to be tested. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.
The number of positives overall was something like 40k I think. They probably have capacity to just retest all of those people on PCR if needed?
Anyway, given the alternative is making everyone isolate, wrongful isolation of 1% doesn't seem that bad tbh. And ordering millions of tests is still cheaper than a nationwide lockdown!
The government prefers data which is three weeks old.
TBF it's not actual data on positive cases, but an estimate based on observed past correlation with the symptoms users are reporting in live time. That said, he's done pretty well so far.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
The question is *why* people are not isolating.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
The top reasons in no particular order:
Unable to take two weeks off unpaid Fear of getting sacked Don't believe they are actually sick Unable to get essential items delivered Wanting to socialise with friends/family because it's just a cough
None of those problems are insurmountable with small legislative changes, better isolation incentives and proper checks on people who are given isolation orders either by GPS, daily checks or government run quarantine.
And I wonder what the confidence level is on that claim?
As I read it, being above the "average" is a 50% chance at any random time, so unless he has a distribution profile showing something else, it's not very reliable .
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Would Hunt be able to make the final two this time? The final MP round in 2019 was Johnson 160, Hunt 77, Gove 75. The party in Parliament has swung quite a bit in the Brexit-populist direction since then.
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
Yes, I saw that too. I just don't get the point of citywide testing unless there are actual isolation measures also put in place. It's such a waste of time. Our testing regime has just turned into a very expensive monitoring system given that hardly anyone isolates after testing positive and there is apparently no capacity to give overnight tests to people asked to isolate by contact tracing teams.
The Slovakian countrywide test - which, given the unreliable testing used - must have thrown up a lot of false positives among the 1% or so found to be positive. They are relying on compulsory quarantine for all the positives plus all those who refused to be tested. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.
The number of positives overall was something like 40k I think. They probably have capacity to just retest all of those people on PCR if needed?
Anyway, given the alternative is making everyone isolate, wrongful isolation of 1% doesn't seem that bad tbh. And ordering millions of tests is still cheaper than a nationwide lockdown!
I agree. If we knew that everyone out and about had just tested negative, think how reassuring that would be. But it hangs on making the quarantine stick, particularly for those that ducked the test.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
The question is *why* people are not isolating.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
RCP final forecast with no tossups Biden 319 Trump 219.
Biden leads by only 0.9% on average in Arizona though, 1.8% in Florida and 2.6% in Pennsylvania and if Trump won those 3 states he would win the EC 279 to 259 for Biden.
And I wonder what the confidence level is on that claim?
As I read it, being above the "average" is a 50% chance at any random time, so unless he has a distribution profile showing something else, it's not very reliable .
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
May was a poor PM, Boris is poorer and a great deal more dangerous.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
Governing. Party management. Delegating. Campaigning.
One from four then, the rest he’s shit at.
Even if he's shit (I disagree) she was worse at all.
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Would Hunt be able to make the final two this time? The final MP round in 2019 was Johnson 160, Hunt 77, Gove 75. The party in Parliament has swung quite a bit in the Brexit-populist direction since then.
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
Rishi feels a bit like John Major in 1990 -rather bland and a safe pair of hands....the Conservative party may be just looking for that but I have a feeling they wont.
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
You do have an example of this from the 2016 Brexit referendum.
In the days before Jo Cox's murder, Leave was winning in a good number of the polls. In the days after, the polling momentum swung and most polls showed Remain in the lead.
In hindsight, that wasn't an actual change in opinion but it seemed a few people didn't like their names being associated with what was seen as a repulsive cause (and which many in the public eye criticised vehemently).
Because most of us find Trump repulsive, there is a tendency to assume others will too and that people will not therefore vote for him.we don’t understand why many love him. Nor do we understand that many will vote for him despite disliking him personally.
He has cleverly turned one of the criticisms made of him - that he does not follow conventions - into a strength by telling voters that he is there to serve them (unlike the conventional politicians). Regardless of whether it is true, it is an attractive message. And it may well work.
It worked last time but it's stale now.
Plus he's losing due to simple maths. He has no room to lose voters last time but he has lost some. So for every voter he lost he needed to gain a new one. Where is he gaining new ones from?
He does have some new sources of voters: 1) Partisan conservatives who opposed Trump last time because he's not a conservative, but were won over by his consistent pwning of libs. 2) Libertarians who like his opposition to lockdowns, and/or are less motivated by the Libertarian candidate who seems less impactful than the last one 3) Similarly, Jill-Stein-voting tankies 4) Low-education white non-voters. He got lots of these in 2016, but there are more where they came from, and 4 years of doing the same thing he did for the few months of the 2016 campaign may have won them over. They've been making quite a big effort to find and register these voters. 5) Minority voters, especially black voters, who think he's good with the economy, and don't believe the bad things the media tell them after he got elected and nothing bad happened to them. This rides a general long-term trend of racial disalignment.
None of these make up *huge* voting blocks but cumulatively they could be quite significant.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
May was a poor PM, Boris is poorer and a great deal more dangerous.
I agree with your first statement but couldn't disagree more with the rest.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
The question is *why* people are not isolating.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
Because they won’t get caught
Slovakia, I *believe* is enforcing it by:
- *employers* get it in the neck if they haven't checked their employees "all clear" certificates. - Police can ask to see your certificate - if you don't have one, you get hauled in...
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Given all that has gone on, i doubt it will be that hard to convince him, as after 24/7 covid and brexit for over a year, it isn't going to let up as the world economy will be in the toilet and require loads of tough decisions and the big carrot is making some decent money again.
Everyone takes for granted the world economy will be in the toilet but I'm not convinced.
Globally the Spanish Flu was followed by the Roaring Twenties. Of course the UK didn't because we stuck to the gold standard but we aren't anymore.
There has been more innovation this year than there would be in many years normally, with necessity being the mother of invention.
Post COVID it wouldn't surprise me if the world economy has a boom as the innovation of this year combined with excitement to get back to normal combines to see record growth.
Globally that is probably true. But just as in the twenties (and thirties), there will be winners and losers.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
May was a poor PM, Boris is poorer and a great deal more dangerous.
I agree with your first statement but couldn't disagree more with the rest.
You can argue with the middle bit, but the end isn't really contestable - despite May's many failings she had the right, even somewhat old fashioned, values for public service. You only have to look at what motivates the clown to see how dangerous this could be.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
The question is *why* people are not isolating.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
Despite the header, this thread is shaping up to be concerned mainly with domestic affairs - not too surprising really since there's something of a vacuum Stateside until we start to receive some hard information as folk head for the polls. Just time to ask whether PBers have any late tips, resulting from voting trends or whatever which may have been overlooked.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Given all that has gone on, i doubt it will be that hard to convince him, as after 24/7 covid and brexit for over a year, it isn't going to let up as the world economy will be in the toilet and require loads of tough decisions and the big carrot is making some decent money again.
Everyone takes for granted the world economy will be in the toilet but I'm not convinced.
Globally the Spanish Flu was followed by the Roaring Twenties. Of course the UK didn't because we stuck to the gold standard but we aren't anymore.
There has been more innovation this year than there would be in many years normally, with necessity being the mother of invention.
Post COVID it wouldn't surprise me if the world economy has a boom as the innovation of this year combined with excitement to get back to normal combines to see record growth.
Globally that is probably true. But just as in the twenties (and thirties), there will be winners and losers.
Winners...china, south Korea.....they were already winning, now turbo charged.
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
The question is *why* people are not isolating.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
Because they won’t get caught
That too is not an insurmountable problem.
If the report of the Slovakian system is correct - using employers to enforce it, in effect, would be a powerful mechanism.
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Would Hunt be able to make the final two this time? The final MP round in 2019 was Johnson 160, Hunt 77, Gove 75. The party in Parliament has swung quite a bit in the Brexit-populist direction since then.
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
No, most likely much of his support would go to Sunak this time while the Boris support would split between Sunak, Raab, Patel and maybe an anti lockdown candidate like Brady or Walker and I doubt many of the new Red Wall MPs would go for Hunt either
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Given all that has gone on, i doubt it will be that hard to convince him, as after 24/7 covid and brexit for over a year, it isn't going to let up as the world economy will be in the toilet and require loads of tough decisions and the big carrot is making some decent money again.
Everyone takes for granted the world economy will be in the toilet but I'm not convinced.
Globally the Spanish Flu was followed by the Roaring Twenties. Of course the UK didn't because we stuck to the gold standard but we aren't anymore.
There has been more innovation this year than there would be in many years normally, with necessity being the mother of invention.
Post COVID it wouldn't surprise me if the world economy has a boom as the innovation of this year combined with excitement to get back to normal combines to see record growth.
Globally that is probably true. But just as in the twenties (and thirties), there will be winners and losers.
There always are when we have a period of creative destruction. It's still on aggregate the right thing to do in the long run, the alternative leads to sclerotic stagnation. We should try and help the losers adjust and not prevent it from happening at all.
And JFK won that election not Nixon in one of the closest elections in US history which could be an omen
I am not sure JFK is a good example. As I recall Joe Kennedy's connections, stole the election for JFK.
If there is any stealing to be done this time it will be by Trump.
Surely that would make the comparison even more apt if Trump is the Kennedy equivalent this time and Biden like Nixon an establishment Vice President or former Vice President (albeit Trump is the incumbent this time)
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Would Hunt be able to make the final two this time? The final MP round in 2019 was Johnson 160, Hunt 77, Gove 75. The party in Parliament has swung quite a bit in the Brexit-populist direction since then.
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
No, most likely much of his support would go to Sunak this time while the Boris support would split between Sunak, Raab, Patel and maybe an anti lockdown candidate like Brady or Walker and I doubt many of the new Red Wall MPs would go for Hunt either
It is Gove (or Gove-Cummings to give him his full title) you need to look out for. The rise of Rishi might have helped Boris by staying Gove's hand.
I think I know who is the good lord's preferred successor..
'GOING FOR BROKE THE RISE OF RISHI SUNAK By Michael Ashcroft
It is the tale of a super-bright and hard-grafting son of immigrant parents who marries an Indian heiress and makes a fortune of his own..
..As health workers battled to save lives, it was down to Sunak to save livelihoods. This is the story of how he tore up the rulebook and went for broke.'
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
If there is one thing the Tories are good at it is replacing leaders when they have outlived their usefulness.
They don´t seem to be very good at it at the moment.
He still is useful...they can pin brexit deal and covid response on him.
And midterm elections next May.
And he's still miles better than May.
At what?
May was a poor PM, Boris is poorer and a great deal more dangerous.
I agree with your first statement but couldn't disagree more with the rest.
You can argue with the middle bit, but the end isn't really contestable - despite May's many failings she had the right, even somewhat old fashioned, values for public service. You only have to look at what motivates the clown to see how dangerous this could be.
I do disagree. I don't respect her values she was far too authoritarian for my taste. People talk about her values like they were good but I don't respect the values of someone who sends vans into minority areas saying GO HOME. That is Trumpian values not mine. I also don't respect someone who as party leader used the word Libertarian as a derogative.
Boris's values are much more in keeping with mine and I'm glad we don't have an authoritarian in Downing Street right now. During a crisis like this entrusting authoritarian powers as has been done with someone who would rather not have or use them is far less dangerous than entrusting them with someone who was always eager to be more authoritaian than they could get away with normally.
In re Texas - in 2016 the RCP polling average had him winning by 12 - in the end that overstated him by 3. The current average has him ahead by less than 2.
That being said, by the same token RCP has Biden ahead by exactly the same margin as the 2016 RCP average overstated Clinton.
I’m not a fan of Trump, but surely Brexit Britain needs Brexit loving Trump back in and Brexit hating Democrats in minority for that trade deal that gives us growth, saves our jobs, saves our our homes, saves our way of life?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley, there’s jobs in fracking but no jobs in saving the planet?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley if we tolerate the removal of Trump, our own children will be next?
Logically Biden was always the better fit there . Hillary Clinton was seen as to use that now often used term . Metropolitan elite , out of touch with the Dems original base .
Of all the candidates on offer during the primaries it’s hard to find anyone else that would have had a better chance of taking back those states .
Biden has run a good campaign and stayed on the same message throughout , few gaffes and I’m not sure how much more he could have done .
Pointed to that this morning. I've little doubt that Max will share my dismay at the apparent complete lack of plans to do anything to improve the rate of those found infected actually isolating. The boffins interviewed on the radio this morning were all saying they 'hoped' that people would isolate. The reality is that maybe a third of those testing positive will actually do so, unless incentives and practical help to do so are much improved.
I rather think that this is the trial to get good data on this. The data heard of so far (via a friend working on the academic side), is the compliance is low, not just because of work etc, but people not being prepared to actually do the isolation.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Positive and negative incentives are both required. Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
They should be using the trial to test out ideas on that, rather than hoping for the best.
So we've actually modelled isolation rates and it's effect on the R. Our current 20% isolation was used as a base and the assumption is that 60% of people who test positive are symptomatic and 40% are asymptomatic. An isolation rate of:
30% makes no difference 40% makes no difference 50% R drops by 0.05 60% R drops by 0.1 70% R drops by 0.25 80% R drops by 0.4 90% R drops by 0.6 100% R drops by 0.9
These are modelled rates assuming the same contact tracing and testing based on symptomatic people asking for tests and a low hit rate for contact tracing.
These are numbers for England where there is good and reliable data quality, but I don't see why it would be different elsewhere and of course in parts where the R is significantly higher than 1 the drop would be larger, these numbers are modelled around an England R of 1.2 which was derived from the hospital admission figures.
Obviously the numbers are based on a model written by non-experts in epidemiology, though I'm a chemistry graduate, one of our number is a physics graduate, another is a maths graduate and we had input from a few other people too. We are all, however, fairly well versed in modern modelling methods.
I'd be very surprised if the government hasn't done a similar anlysis and my bet is that they've seen the numbers and realised that the major gains in R are only made at 70%+ isolation rates which I bet all do the scientists have said is impossible to achieve so they just don't bother.
I’m not a fan of Trump, but surely Brexit Britain needs Brexit loving Trump back in and Brexit hating Democrats in minority for that trade deal that gives us growth, saves our jobs, saves our our homes, saves our way of life?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley, there’s jobs in fracking but no jobs in saving the planet?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley if we tolerate the removal of Trump, our own children will be next?
Fun.
In all seriousness outside of total mavericks like, well, Trump, I don't think individual leaders can massively impact relations between nations, and Biden is no maverick.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
That would require the Tories to effectively admit that they made massive mistake in electing Johnson. Now obviously everyone can see they made a mistake, but do political types like admitting mistakes?
Political types will do what's needed to save their seats and careers and work out the mental gymnastics later.
Agreed. But it could prove exceedingly difficult to remove Boris unless of course he decides he's had enough and actually chooses to go voluntarily, citing ill-health or whatever. After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
Given all that has gone on, i doubt it will be that hard to convince him, as after 24/7 covid and brexit for over a year, it isn't going to let up as the world economy will be in the toilet and require loads of tough decisions and the big carrot is making some decent money again.
Everyone takes for granted the world economy will be in the toilet but I'm not convinced.
Globally the Spanish Flu was followed by the Roaring Twenties. Of course the UK didn't because we stuck to the gold standard but we aren't anymore.
There has been more innovation this year than there would be in many years normally, with necessity being the mother of invention.
Post COVID it wouldn't surprise me if the world economy has a boom as the innovation of this year combined with excitement to get back to normal combines to see record growth.
Globally that is probably true. But just as in the twenties (and thirties), there will be winners and losers.
There always are when we have a period of creative destruction. It's still on aggregate the right thing to do in the long run, the alternative leads to sclerotic stagnation. We should try and help the losers adjust and not prevent it from happening at all.
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Would Hunt be able to make the final two this time? The final MP round in 2019 was Johnson 160, Hunt 77, Gove 75. The party in Parliament has swung quite a bit in the Brexit-populist direction since then.
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
Rishi feels a bit like John Major in 1990 -rather bland and a safe pair of hands....the Conservative party may be just looking for that but I have a feeling they wont.
Andrew Rosindell is on record saying it's NEVER too early to start wearing a poppy. Leadership material.
Republican candidate in Massachussetts Senate race clearly looking to win over Biden voters at the presidential election and get them to vote for him over Markey for the Senate
I’m not a fan of Trump, but surely Brexit Britain needs Brexit loving Trump back in and Brexit hating Democrats in minority for that trade deal that gives us growth, saves our jobs, saves our our homes, saves our way of life?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley, there’s jobs in fracking but no jobs in saving the planet?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley if we tolerate the removal of Trump, our own children will be next?
Fun.
In all seriousness outside of total mavericks like, well, Trump, I don't think individual leaders can massively impact relations between nations, and Biden is no maverick.
I’m not a fan of Trump, but surely Brexit Britain needs Brexit loving Trump back in and Brexit hating Democrats in minority for that trade deal that gives us growth, saves our jobs, saves our our homes, saves our way of life?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley, there’s jobs in fracking but no jobs in saving the planet?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley if we tolerate the removal of Trump, our own children will be next?
Why would a trade deal do that, the UK would get the worst deal, we trade with them now why change things. There are plenty of jobs in saving the planet.
One of the great skills in opposition is to work out what the government is going to do, and then call for it first. And you don’t have to get out of bed very early to get ahead of this government. Simply making a cup of coffee in your dressing gown gives you a strategic advantage.
Johnson was on his feet for two and a quarter hours, and almost none of the Tory MPs who asked him questions offered wholehearted support to their leader.
The prime minister made little effort to take on the critics behind him. This may have been an effort to be conciliatory, but it left the impression that he felt more at the mercy of events than their master. “It is only 28 days,” he said at one point.
A prime minister with a majority of 80 is disappearing before our eyes, unable to defend his appointees, his decisions or his policies, despised by his own side and opposition alike. It is all so terribly difficult, being in government. If only someone had warned him.
Once Brexit is secured, Biden is elected and a vaccine is imminent then Boris has outlived his usefulness. The data is now starting to show him to be a liability with his GE2019 voters too.
Then ditching him becomes the logical thing to do with the next big challenge - IndyRef2 - where him going may help save the Union.
I'm thinking someone moderate who can build bridges with the US and EU, who's largely untainted by Brexit, who can govern competently for the whole Union, who understands health and who will not scare the horses.
I'm thinking Hunt.
Hunt has zero chance, if Boris goes the membership will vote for Rishi Sunak
Would Hunt be able to make the final two this time? The final MP round in 2019 was Johnson 160, Hunt 77, Gove 75. The party in Parliament has swung quite a bit in the Brexit-populist direction since then.
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
Rishi feels a bit like John Major in 1990 -rather bland and a safe pair of hands....the Conservative party may be just looking for that but I have a feeling they wont.
Andrew Rosindell is on record saying it's NEVER too early to start wearing a poppy. Leadership material.
Isn’t it in Debretts it can’t be before November? Any popping wearing before November is wrong?
Contrary to popular wisdom, this time round the silent majority is against Trump. The pollsters haven't quite spotted the extent of this (and nor have the gamblers). There's no great love for Biden, but people are fearful of another 4 years of Trump, and fearful of Covid. Apart from the Trumpsters, most Americans now think he's mad and dangerous and it's time for him to go.
Not saying you're wrong, but if it's there why don't you think the pollsters can see it?
I wonder whether there aren’t in reality a lot of shy Trump voters.
You do have an example of this from the 2016 Brexit referendum.
In the days before Jo Cox's murder, Leave was winning in a good number of the polls. In the days after, the polling momentum swung and most polls showed Remain in the lead.
In hindsight, that wasn't an actual change in opinion but it seemed a few people didn't like their names being associated with what was seen as a repulsive cause (and which many in the public eye criticised vehemently).
Because most of us find Trump repulsive, there is a tendency to assume others will too and that people will not therefore vote for him. We don’t understand why many love him. Nor do we understand that many will vote for him despite disliking him personally.
He has cleverly turned one of the criticisms made of him - that he does not follow conventions - into a strength by telling voters that he is there to serve them (unlike the conventional politicians). Regardless of whether it is true, it is an attractive message. And it may well work.
The day’s started going wrong for Biden so quickly, according to this report on the Bellend Gazette site 🙀
18 goats have flipped their vote in Erewhon County North Carolina, from Democrat to Trump. Bleated to the local paper they are uncomfortable with immigration from Jamaica into the town.
I suppose the take out for a betting site today, NOT TO consume all anecdotal stuff with a side of rice?
Comments
After all, the last 9 months can't exactly have been much fun for him.
You may recall a poster here who, on being presented with Max's 500-a-week-plus-room-service-in-a-decent-hotel plan, said he wouldn't do it. Because he preferred to be at home....
The Slovakian one, apparently includes a certificate that you have a negative. Complete with serious issues (legal) if you are found out and about without such a certificate...
Now we know the denizens of Downing Street have proven unable to ask questions about covid predictions, sorry 'scenarios', but will Hunt.
After all it is his job to ask those questions.
Will he step up or go missing ?
Party management.
Delegating.
Campaigning.
If he's not facing another election then he could stand down in 2023 and a new leader could go to the polls in 2024 still fresh.
And if you eliminate those two, the polls weren't all that far out anyway.
Trump's window of opportunity appears to be as small as his hands.
Any effective program would make a massive difference, though.
They should be using the trial to test out ideas on that, rather than hoping for the best.
https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/1323303020357165056?s=20
Globally the Spanish Flu was followed by the Roaring Twenties. Of course the UK didn't because we stuck to the gold standard but we aren't anymore.
There has been more innovation this year than there would be in many years normally, with necessity being the mother of invention.
Post COVID it wouldn't surprise me if the world economy has a boom as the innovation of this year combined with excitement to get back to normal combines to see record growth.
Given the selfishness I see around me, I can take a guess.
Like i pointed out last night with Jezza going on holiday from a Tier 2 location....rules say don't travel about unless necessary and definitely not to a lower tier...unless you want to go on holiday and then its fine.
The people most likely to do so are the people least likely to take a foreign holiday as they would have to quarantine afterwards.
And people who will ignore one guideline on quarantine are likely to be the people most likely to ignore guidelines on social distancing etc.
So the people most likely to go on a foreign holiday are those most likely to get infected, ignore quarantine afterwards and spread infection.
If they are going to have a female VP over there, I would rather they had one who stood on the ticket like Harris than one who stood in the shadows like Mrs Pence.
https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/1323565067674230785?s=20
The government prefers data which is three weeks old.
American Association for Public Opinion Research
"This paper presents the committee’s analysis of the performance of preelection polls in 2016, how that performance compares to polling in prior elections, and the extent to which performance varied by poll design. In addition, the committee examined several theories as to why many polls, particularly in the Upper Midwest, underestimated support for Trump. The explanations for which the most evidence exists are a late swing in vote preference toward Trump and a pervasive failure to adjust for overrepresentation of college graduates (who favored Clinton). In addition, there is clear evidence that voter turnout changed from 2012 to 2016 in ways that favored Trump, though there is only mixed evidence that misspecified likely voter models were a major cause of the systematic polling error. Finally, there is little evidence that socially desirable (Shy Trump) responding was an important contributor to poll error."
https://academic.oup.com/poq/article/82/1/1/4837043
The signs are there for those willing to read them.
The scientists interviewed this morning said that the UK had identified six separate rapid antigen tests with a false positive rate of around one in a thousand.
Even if it were ten times that number (which is unlikely), it's massively less disruptive to isolate 1% of the population for a couple of weeks than lock down the entire country. For a month.
And if you compensate and assist those locked down, even less so.
And the effect in suppressing the virus would be far larger.
They probably have capacity to just retest all of those people on PCR if needed?
Anyway, given the alternative is making everyone isolate, wrongful isolation of 1% doesn't seem that bad tbh.
And ordering millions of tests is still cheaper than a nationwide lockdown!
If Sanders fans who didn't vote for Clinton do vote for Biden that could give him the less than 1% he needs that Clinton lost by.
Again if Biden is up over Clinton then he has won unless Trump goes up too and there's no evidence of that.
Unable to take two weeks off unpaid
Fear of getting sacked
Don't believe they are actually sick
Unable to get essential items delivered
Wanting to socialise with friends/family because it's just a cough
None of those problems are insurmountable with small legislative changes, better isolation incentives and proper checks on people who are given isolation orders either by GPS, daily checks or government run quarantine.
As I read it, being above the "average" is a 50% chance at any random time, so unless he has a distribution profile showing something else, it's not very reliable
I guess it comes down to the vibes when (if?) Johnson goes. Can the cabinet successfully use Johnson as a scapegoat, or will they be discredited as well?
If there is any stealing to be done this time it will be by Trump.
Hard data is the hospital admissions data -
and the certain knowledge, that if you change things *now*, that will remain on the same trajectory for a couple of weeks...
Biden leads by only 0.9% on average in Arizona though, 1.8% in Florida and 2.6% in Pennsylvania and if Trump won those 3 states he would win the EC 279 to 259 for Biden.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/2020_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1323541583539642369?s=20
1) Partisan conservatives who opposed Trump last time because he's not a conservative, but were won over by his consistent pwning of libs.
2) Libertarians who like his opposition to lockdowns, and/or are less motivated by the Libertarian candidate who seems less impactful than the last one
3) Similarly, Jill-Stein-voting tankies
4) Low-education white non-voters. He got lots of these in 2016, but there are more where they came from, and 4 years of doing the same thing he did for the few months of the 2016 campaign may have won them over. They've been making quite a big effort to find and register these voters.
5) Minority voters, especially black voters, who think he's good with the economy, and don't believe the bad things the media tell them after he got elected and nothing bad happened to them. This rides a general long-term trend of racial disalignment.
None of these make up *huge* voting blocks but cumulatively they could be quite significant.
- *employers* get it in the neck if they haven't checked their employees "all clear" certificates.
- Police can ask to see your certificate - if you don't have one, you get hauled in...
But just as in the twenties (and thirties), there will be winners and losers.
Edit: beaten to it I see!
I posted some ideas last night.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54788613
'GOING FOR BROKE
THE RISE OF RISHI SUNAK
By Michael Ashcroft
It is the tale of a super-bright and hard-grafting son of immigrant parents who marries an Indian heiress and makes a fortune of his own..
..As health workers battled to save lives, it was down to Sunak to save livelihoods. This is the story of how he tore up the rulebook and went for broke.'
Boris's values are much more in keeping with mine and I'm glad we don't have an authoritarian in Downing Street right now. During a crisis like this entrusting authoritarian powers as has been done with someone who would rather not have or use them is far less dangerous than entrusting them with someone who was always eager to be more authoritaian than they could get away with normally.
That being said, by the same token RCP has Biden ahead by exactly the same margin as the 2016 RCP average overstated Clinton.
Swings and roundabouts.
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley, there’s jobs in fracking but no jobs in saving the planet?
I’m not a fan of Trump, but Shirley if we tolerate the removal of Trump, our own children will be next?
Logically Biden was always the better fit there . Hillary Clinton was seen as to use that now often used term . Metropolitan elite , out of touch with the Dems original base .
Of all the candidates on offer during the primaries it’s hard to find anyone else that would have had a better chance of taking back those states .
Biden has run a good campaign and stayed on the same message throughout , few gaffes and I’m not sure how much more he could have done .
In an ideal World they would all go with him, but in 2020 we can't be that lucky.
30% makes no difference
40% makes no difference
50% R drops by 0.05
60% R drops by 0.1
70% R drops by 0.25
80% R drops by 0.4
90% R drops by 0.6
100% R drops by 0.9
These are modelled rates assuming the same contact tracing and testing based on symptomatic people asking for tests and a low hit rate for contact tracing.
These are numbers for England where there is good and reliable data quality, but I don't see why it would be different elsewhere and of course in parts where the R is significantly higher than 1 the drop would be larger, these numbers are modelled around an England R of 1.2 which was derived from the hospital admission figures.
Obviously the numbers are based on a model written by non-experts in epidemiology, though I'm a chemistry graduate, one of our number is a physics graduate, another is a maths graduate and we had input from a few other people too. We are all, however, fairly well versed in modern modelling methods.
I'd be very surprised if the government hasn't done a similar anlysis and my bet is that they've seen the numbers and realised that the major gains in R are only made at 70%+ isolation rates which I bet all do the scientists have said is impossible to achieve so they just don't bother.
In all seriousness outside of total mavericks like, well, Trump, I don't think individual leaders can massively impact relations between nations, and Biden is no maverick.
https://twitter.com/KOCforSenate/status/1323437238282194945?s=20
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1323565844643958784?s=20
18 goats have flipped their vote in Erewhon County North Carolina, from Democrat to Trump. Bleated to the local paper they are uncomfortable with immigration from Jamaica into the town.
I suppose the take out for a betting site today, NOT TO consume all anecdotal stuff with a side of rice?