The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
2) Correct. 3 weeks apart. As far as I know all vaccines in Phase III are the same on this. Certainly Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AZ both do.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which started a huge Phase 3 trial (60000 participants) relatively recently, is a single-dose shot. I think it had one pause for an adverse event, but has re-started.
The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
Biden needs to hold any three of these for the Presidency. So the smallest three to "lose" GA, AZ and WI, which is 50,000 votes.
I was thinking that you have to divide the figure by two if talking about people switching from Biden to Trump. For instance if 7,500 people who voted Biden in Arizona had voted for Trump instead it would have wiped out Biden's current 15,000 majority.
Re vaccine length of effectiveness - no-one knows.
BUT
(1) There seems to be a very low level of reinfection of CV19 for people who got it for real (maybe just a dozen documented cases out of 100 million worldwide) (2) The Pfizer and the Oxford vaccines both generate greater immune responses than actually getting the disease (3) CV19 does not appear to rapidly mutate, and the vaccines target the "spike".
Together these make is seem quite unlikely that we'll need to get vaccinated every year.
I do find it truly, truly amazing that anyone would ever vote for Ted Cruz.
Cruz of course won 25% of Republican primary voters support and 11 states in the 2016 GOP primaries and was runner up to Trump, now Trump has lost his re election bid I would expect Cruz to run for the GOP nomination again in 2024
Cruz is ultra rightwing but he is also formidably intelligent, graduating cum laude from Princeton and magna cum laude from Harvard Law School where Professor Alan Dershowitz said, "Cruz was off-the-charts brilliant".
If he was that good, how come he only got a cum laude and a magna?
What's that? The American equivalent of a Desmond?
Yeah very roughly cum laude is a Douglas, magna cum laude is a Desmond to a a low Taiwan. To be really outstanding you need a summa cum laude which is roughly a high 2:1 to a Patti.
Not to mention that it takes Americans (and Scots) four years to get what the English achieve in three.
No it isn't, cum laude is awarded to those in the top 20-30% of their class, magna cum laude is awarded to those in the top 10 to 15% of their class and summa cum laude is awarded to those in the top 1 to 5% of their class (though only a few institutions still award the latter).
Given 28% of UK students now get a 1st class degree, magna cum laude is the equivalent of a reasonably high 1st class degree at least
The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
Biden needs to hold any three of these for the Presidency. So the smallest three to "lose" GA, AZ and WI, which is 50,000 votes.
I was thinking that you have to divide the figure by two if talking about people switching from Biden to Trump. For instance if 7,500 people who voted Biden in Arizona had voted for Trump instead it would have wiped out Biden's current 15,000 majority.
Do we know for how long the Pfizer vaccine confers immunity yet?
That's just one of a number of questions for which there aren't currently any answers. The euphoria over Monday's announcement seems to be such that anyone asking questions or having doubts is castigated as being in need of psychiatric help so here goes (again):
1) I've seen reports of volunteers suffering side effects from the vaccine. Should we not be told what the risks and potential side effects are or could be?
2) It's my understanding it's not one injection but two - the second 3-4 weeks after the first. Can anyone confirm?
3) Will this vaccine provide permanent immunity or will we need a "booster" shot(s) every year?
4) Understandably and rightly, there will be a phased distribution of the vaccine starting with the over-85s, carers and NHS workers. After that will come other vulnerable individuals and then (presumably) it will be made available to all older (60+) people?
5) Do people think the vaccine should be made freely available across the world? Clearly, it's going to be hard to stop corrupt Governments either a) seeking to profit from the vaccine by charging their citizens or b) providing the vaccine only for the elite or supporters and leaving large (or smaller) segments of the population defenceless against the virus?
Thanks in advance.
We could use vitamin D supplements, i.e. at ~10x the NHS dose. But a pill costing someone £3-4 per year makes no-one any decent profit. Frankly, how appalling.
So little will happen, except in small countries like Finland which have taken the problem seriously for ages. Some UK medics. know that it works well but the people at the top of the NHS hate the idea
What happens to the Georgia EC votes if the hand recount isn't finished in time? (I realise Biden still wins without Georgia).
I believe the Secretary of State must certify results by 20th November under state law, although there's time to rectify that if he fails to do so as Electoral College don't meet until 14th December. My strong assumption is Democrats would file a case to require the SoS to certify if we came to 21st and he'd not done so, and that they'd get that.
They will complete by 20th. A hand count for just one race isn't that difficult - a lot of the issues are over electronic ballots, multiple papers, verifying absentee ballots etc.
In 2004 Governor's race in Washington State, a full statewide hand recount (of over 2.8 million ballots) was requested by state Democratic Party on December 3, the counting was (almost entirely) finished by Dec 23, and the results certified by WA Secretary of State on Dec 30.
The time required varied greatly from county to county, with some small counties taking just a day or two, while big counties such as King (about one-third of all ballots cast) took longer.
All across WA the 2004 hand recount was a MAJOR logistical challenge for election administrators. Will be the same for GA this year - PLUS having to deal with COVID, which adds to the practical difficulties.
I do find it truly, truly amazing that anyone would ever vote for Ted Cruz.
Cruz of course won 25% of Republican primary voters support and 11 states in the 2016 GOP primaries and was runner up to Trump, now Trump has lost his re election bid I would expect Cruz to run for the GOP nomination again in 2024
Cruz is ultra rightwing but he is also formidably intelligent, graduating cum laude from Princeton and magna cum laude from Harvard Law School where Professor Alan Dershowitz said, "Cruz was off-the-charts brilliant".
If he was that good, how come he only got a cum laude and a magna?
Magna cum laude is the US equivalent of a 1st, there used to be a summa cum laude for the top 1 to 2% too but most institutions do not use that now
That has just been confirmed by the mcl sitting about ten feet aware from me. Intolerably smug about it too.
The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
Biden needs to hold any three of these for the Presidency. So the smallest three to "lose" GA, AZ and WI, which is 50,000 votes.
I was thinking that you have to divide the figure by two if talking about people switching from Biden to Trump. For instance if 7,500 people who voted Biden in Arizona had voted for Trump instead it would have wiped out Biden's current 15,000 majority.
Ah, gotcha.
That sounds about right.
It was the Lincoln Project wot won it?
Entirely realistic there were over 25k Republicans for Biden in those three states.
1) The safet data isn't out yet but it will be. It's being compiled. Anyone saying there are side effects is talking nonsense so far as nobody knew her who had the vaccine and who had placebo. Pfizer will get the safety data third week in November at which point it will be made public as part of the authorisation procedure. It can't be authorised until this happens, if the safety data is positive they will apply for (and get) emergency authorisation but it's waiting on that data currently.
2) Correct. 3 weeks apart. As far as I know all vaccines in Phase III are the same on this. Certainly Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AZ both do.
3) Unknown as far as I know. Talk of it possibly being an annual shot like flu vaccine.
4) Yes, in stages. There are ten priority groups in order from care home residents and staff (highest priority), over 80s and NHS frontline staff (second highest) then down through the ages down to at risk under 50s last. Not at risk under 50s are only ones not currently scheduled to get it, for us it's a case of wait and decide what happens to us later on, but all over 50s will get it.
5) Available yes. Freely is another question but yes there's major efforts to get it rolled out worldwide. The UK is very rare worldwide in having free at point of use healthcare.
Thanks, Philip.
Q1 was predicated on a report in the Mail (so it must be true) that volunteers had suffered side effects from the vaccine. It's obviously vital the vaccine is as safe as possible and cannot cause problems especially for the pregnant or those with pre-existing health conditions.
Q3 is significant because if several million people in the country need to go through this every year it will cost in terms of resources and timing.
Q4 - Agreed. It should also be made available to younger people for whom pre-existing health conditions significantly increases their susceptibility to the virus and the impact from it.
Q5 - I agree we are very fortunate. My view is it should be made available to everyone free of charge but as I've stated I have my doubts and how will it be distributed in Yemen, Somalia or other countries with internal strife?
I'm happy to have the vaccine as long as it's safe - I don't think that's an unreasonable position.
The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
It will have to be, in all seriousness. BBC correspondent John Sopel reported a few weeks back that whilst pandemic precautions were strictly adhered to in Washington DC generally, in the White House you would not even have known there was a pandemic on, so lax were the precautions.
Have I missed the comments on the Russian claim that their vaccine had 92% efficacy?
Very good news if true, as it's based on a different principle from the Pfizer one - the same principle used by the Oxford vaccine. It would be a further indication that most of the vaccines in development may be effective.
Pfizer were going to do an initial early analysis when they got to 34 cases. They decided that wasn't robust enough, so went for 64. When they checked they had 96.
The Russian data is based on 20 cases. (Though how they get 92% from 20 cases, I don't know.
1.6 people who got sick were given the vaccine and 18.4 people had the placebo clearly.
The numbers weren't just made up to sound positive, that would be Russophobia.
Comment of the day.
(The maths are actually a little more complex than that, but it's still funny.)
Do we know for how long the Pfizer vaccine confers immunity yet?
That's just one of a number of questions for which there aren't currently any answers. The euphoria over Monday's announcement seems to be such that anyone asking questions or having doubts is castigated as being in need of psychiatric help so here goes (again):
1) I've seen reports of volunteers suffering side effects from the vaccine. Should we not be told what the risks and potential side effects are or could be?
2) It's my understanding it's not one injection but two - the second 3-4 weeks after the first. Can anyone confirm?
3) Will this vaccine provide permanent immunity or will we need a "booster" shot(s) every year?
4) Understandably and rightly, there will be a phased distribution of the vaccine starting with the over-85s, carers and NHS workers. After that will come other vulnerable individuals and then (presumably) it will be made available to all older (60+) people?
5) Do people think the vaccine should be made freely available across the world? Clearly, it's going to be hard to stop corrupt Governments either a) seeking to profit from the vaccine by charging their citizens or b) providing the vaccine only for the elite or supporters and leaving large (or smaller) segments of the population defenceless against the virus?
Thanks in advance.
Not heard of significant side effects, but most vaccinations have some such as ache in the arm, possibly a transient brief fever. Pfizer is indeed 2 shots spaced out. It’s not known how long it will work, but my guess is at least a year. The roll out looks likely to be as you describe. Assuming other vaccines are effective, it will be easier to cover all the population by summer to autumn. As for roll out to the rest of the world, that’s a really difficult one for governments. No pm would want to put foreign lives ahead of uk, especially with sis one death is too many. Ultimately it should be of course.
I suspect there will be an international effort to vaccinate in other countries, partly out of altruism and partly to cut the pool from which further outbreaks would come.
I was speaking to one of my Nigerian colleagues, and while cities like Lagos present a challenge, the rural areas are a logistic nightmare because of the need to organise 2 stages and keep at -80°C.
How rapidly will Biden concede if Trump is somehow adjudged to be winning?
This could get very weird.
Biden's obviously won, everyone agrees, probably even Trump does. But Trump could still win..
My best outcome is that the whole thing is declared null and void (I'm deeply all red), and I guess there may just be the slightest sliver of a hope for that! (I wouldn't back 1000s mind)
Trump cannot win because Biden has already won. The election is over, and the winner is known.
Yes of course. Completely agree, but there is the nagging question of why you can back Biden at 1.10. And, although I've backed him in a modest stake at 1.09, I'm not tempted to bung the mortgage on at 1.10, even though I think it should be free money.
The price represents a number of people who have Trump in their head, through either love or fear, and overestimate his ability. Trump is really not very capable, but even if he were, it's already beyond him. Trump derangement syndrome is a real thing, suffered by his fans and enemies alike, but this situation is past psychology now. It doesn't matter how fervently a small number of people love or loathe him. They can pour their money into a losing bet but they can't change physics. The past is done. Thermodynamics has called it for Biden.
Opportunity cost is an important factor. A bet at 1.1 that pays out tonight is not the same as 1.1 that pays out in an unknown number of weeks. I spoke to a professional punter who backed Biden but traded out to free up funds. If you just look at the exit trade in isolation, it looks like he bet on a sure loser. Context matters, and here it is not just TDS but also alternative investments in racing, football or the stock market.
The way things stand at the moment, Biden is/was about 25,000 potential switchers clear of the winning mark, if you assume that a 269-269 tie would have led to a Trump retention of office.
Is that right?
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
2) Correct. 3 weeks apart. As far as I know all vaccines in Phase III are the same on this. Certainly Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AZ both do.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which started a huge Phase 3 trial (60000 participants) relatively recently, is a single-dose shot. I think it had one pause for an adverse event, but has re-started.
--AS
That's correct.
J&J generates, from my understanding, an extremely robust immune response, but that potentially carries with it two risks: (1) greater side effects, and (2) the body over-reacting to any infection in future.
How rapidly will Biden concede if Trump is somehow adjudged to be winning?
This could get very weird.
Biden's obviously won, everyone agrees, probably even Trump does. But Trump could still win..
My best outcome is that the whole thing is declared null and void (I'm deeply all red), and I guess there may just be the slightest sliver of a hope for that! (I wouldn't back 1000s mind)
Trump cannot win because Biden has already won. The election is over, and the winner is known.
Yes of course. Completely agree, but there is the nagging question of why you can back Biden at 1.10. And, although I've backed him in a modest stake at 1.09, I'm not tempted to bung the mortgage on at 1.10, even though I think it should be free money.
You can back Biden at 1.10 because idiots want to back Trump as they want him to win so much they are in denial of the fact he has lost.
They are literally giving their money away. It is a far right idiot tax. Free money.
Yes, they're giving money to either Biden loyalists - and that must hurt - or to rational people which must be almost as bad for them.
The Electoral College is basically Party nominees so presumably the Kansas State Republicans choose 6 delegates to the EC while the Kansas Democrats also choose 6 delegates. Once the state result is officially announced, the winning party gets to send its 6 delegates to the EC meeting in mid December and the losing party delegates stay at home (or go somewhere else).
That means presumably every State has to made its outcome official before the EC meeting in mid December but what if legal wrangling is continuing in PA, GA and AZ to name but three. Is it conceivable the individual State legislatures could exercise their power and choose their own delegates (presumably Republican) who would be empowered to ignore the actual votes cast and vote as they see fit?
That seems to me to be the Trump road to a second term. Keep the legal obstructionism going until the State legislatures get to send their own GOP nominees and if, after the event, the legal system says the Democrats did win the states, well, too bad.
Unless of course the EC cannot convene until all the results have been officially announced...
Biden at 1.04 for the popular vote is the strangest of strange prices in a long time. Even if Trump gets WI, MI, PA, AZ, GA ECVs thrown out that's still landing.
1) The safet data isn't out yet but it will be. It's being compiled. Anyone saying there are side effects is talking nonsense so far as nobody knew her who had the vaccine and who had placebo. Pfizer will get the safety data third week in November at which point it will be made public as part of the authorisation procedure. It can't be authorised until this happens, if the safety data is positive they will apply for (and get) emergency authorisation but it's waiting on that data currently.
2) Correct. 3 weeks apart. As far as I know all vaccines in Phase III are the same on this. Certainly Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AZ both do.
3) Unknown as far as I know. Talk of it possibly being an annual shot like flu vaccine.
4) Yes, in stages. There are ten priority groups in order from care home residents and staff (highest priority), over 80s and NHS frontline staff (second highest) then down through the ages down to at risk under 50s last. Not at risk under 50s are only ones not currently scheduled to get it, for us it's a case of wait and decide what happens to us later on, but all over 50s will get it.
5) Available yes. Freely is another question but yes there's major efforts to get it rolled out worldwide. The UK is very rare worldwide in having free at point of use healthcare.
Thanks, Philip.
Q1 was predicated on a report in the Mail (so it must be true) that volunteers had suffered side effects from the vaccine. It's obviously vital the vaccine is as safe as possible and cannot cause problems especially for the pregnant or those with pre-existing health conditions.
Q3 is significant because if several million people in the country need to go through this every year it will cost in terms of resources and timing.
Q4 - Agreed. It should also be made available to younger people for whom pre-existing health conditions significantly increases their susceptibility to the virus and the impact from it.
Q5 - I agree we are very fortunate. My view is it should be made available to everyone free of charge but as I've stated I have my doubts and how will it be distributed in Yemen, Somalia or other countries with internal strife?
I'm happy to have the vaccine as long as it's safe - I don't think that's an unreasonable position.
Even if there are no side effects, some will get side effects. If you see what I mean. The placebo group will have some side effects.
Do we know for how long the Pfizer vaccine confers immunity yet?
At least one year, possibly significantly longer.
How would anyone know?
Because:
(a) we know that people are not getting reinfected in large numbers from actually getting the disease (b) we know the virus, unlike influenza, is not a rapidly mutating one
The other thing that really pisses me off is that people think in terms of a step function. That's not how this works. Your immunity fades over time. So even if you vaccinated three years ago, and they recommend an annual shot, you will still have some protection relative to not having been vaccinated at all.
Biden at 1.04 for the popular vote is the strangest of strange prices in a long time. Even if Trump gets WI, MI, PA, AZ, GA ECVs thrown out that's still landing.
If I had a million quid spare that is certainly the market I'd invest in.
Evening all, I'm trying to comprehend what the Trump camp have as their game plan. Going to court against various states is nowhere near enough to overturn the big Biden leads. However, in the context of a long established and multi-faceted campaign to delegitimise the vote these doomed challenges do serve the purpose of extended the narrative. To what end?
All I can think of is this: the real election is that of the Electoral College on 14th December. Inciting the selection of rogue or better still competing slates of electors creates utter Chaos. "We told you the election was rigged, and now even the Electoral College is rigged" - that they are rigging it won't be mentioned.
Trump was demolished in the national vote and should be soundly defeated in the Electoral College. So call the national election a fraud, and with it the need for state partisans to respect the vote which if you think clearly enough about it was obviously an attack on American values.
Biden at 1.04 for the popular vote is the strangest of strange prices in a long time. Even if Trump gets WI, MI, PA, AZ, GA ECVs thrown out that's still landing.
If I had a million quid spare that is certainly the market I'd invest in.
I actually mistraded the market on the night in a fit of panic, have gone back in for 5.
Evening all, I'm trying to comprehend what the Trump camp have as their game plan. Going to court against various states is nowhere near enough to overturn the big Biden leads. However, in the context of a long established and multi-faceted campaign to delegitimise the vote these doomed challenges do serve the purpose of extended the narrative. To what end?
All I can think of is this: the real election is that of the Electoral College on 14th December. Inciting the selection of rogue or better still competing slates of electors creates utter Chaos. "We told you the election was rigged, and now even the Electoral College is rigged" - that they are rigging it won't be mentioned.
Trump was demolished in the national vote and should be soundly defeated in the Electoral College. So call the national election a fraud, and with it the need for state partisans to respect the vote which if you think clearly enough about it was obviously an attack on American values.
Enter stage left: Marinus van der Lubbe. >>> Restore Law and Order.
Evening all, I'm trying to comprehend what the Trump camp have as their game plan. Going to court against various states is nowhere near enough to overturn the big Biden leads. However, in the context of a long established and multi-faceted campaign to delegitimise the vote these doomed challenges do serve the purpose of extended the narrative. To what end?
All I can think of is this: the real election is that of the Electoral College on 14th December. Inciting the selection of rogue or better still competing slates of electors creates utter Chaos. "We told you the election was rigged, and now even the Electoral College is rigged" - that they are rigging it won't be mentioned.
Trump was demolished in the national vote and should be soundly defeated in the Electoral College. So call the national election a fraud, and with it the need for state partisans to respect the vote which if you think clearly enough about it was obviously an attack on American values.
Tony Schwarz ghost-wrote The Art of the Deal for Trump. He was interviewed by Evan Davis on Today earlier this evening. It was an enlightening piece which if you listen to it answers your question at length.
Executive Summary is that there is no plan, just a horror at the thought of losing and a determination to deny it as long as possible.
The Electoral College is basically Party nominees so presumably the Kansas State Republicans choose 6 delegates to the EC while the Kansas Democrats also choose 6 delegates. Once the state result is officially announced, the winning party gets to send its 6 delegates to the EC meeting in mid December and the losing party delegates stay at home (or go somewhere else).
That means presumably every State has to made its outcome official before the EC meeting in mid December but what if legal wrangling is continuing in PA, GA and AZ to name but three. Is it conceivable the individual State legislatures could exercise their power and choose their own delegates (presumably Republican) who would be empowered to ignore the actual votes cast and vote as they see fit?
That seems to me to be the Trump road to a second term. Keep the legal obstructionism going until the State legislatures get to send their own GOP nominees and if, after the event, the legal system says the Democrats did win the states, well, too bad.
Unless of course the EC cannot convene until all the results have been officially announced...
The Electoral College does NOT "convene" at least NOT as one body in one place at one time. The electors of each state, as certified according to state law, meet in each state capital on December 14. So state of legal play in say GA will NOT affect other states.
As for GOP legislatures short-circuiting the process by disregarding state legalities and picking electors post facto, methinks that is NOT a good bet. Rhetorical exuberance is one thing, walking the plank to appease the radical fringe is quite another.
I do find it truly, truly amazing that anyone would ever vote for Ted Cruz.
Cruz of course won 25% of Republican primary voters support and 11 states in the 2016 GOP primaries and was runner up to Trump, now Trump has lost his re election bid I would expect Cruz to run for the GOP nomination again in 2024
Cruz is ultra rightwing but he is also formidably intelligent, graduating cum laude from Princeton and magna cum laude from Harvard Law School where Professor Alan Dershowitz said, "Cruz was off-the-charts brilliant".
If he was that good, how come he only got a cum laude and a magna?
What's that? The American equivalent of a Desmond?
Yeah very roughly cum laude is a Douglas, magna cum laude is a Desmond to a a low Taiwan. To be really outstanding you need a summa cum laude which is roughly a high 2:1 to a Patti.
Not to mention that it takes Americans (and Scots) four years to get what the English achieve in three.
No it isn't, cum laude is awarded to those in the top 20-30% of their class, magna cum laude is awarded to those in the top 10 to 15% of their class and summa cum laude is awarded to those in the top 1 to 5% of their class (though only a few institutions still award the latter).
Given 28% of UK students now get a 1st class degree, magna cum laude is the equivalent of a reasonably high 1st class degree at least
That simply reflects the absurd grade inflation of recent decades.At Russell Group universities it was rare for any students on Arts courses to be awarded 1st class honours back in the 50s,60s and 70s. I well recall the astonishment in 1975 when a guy did get a 1st in History - it had not happened for ten years prior to that.
Comments
His "narrowest" leads (using rounded numbers) are:
Georgia - 15,000
Arizona - 15,000
Wisconsin - 20,000
Michigan - 50,000
Pennsylvania - 50,000
Biden needs to hold any three of these for the Presidency. So the smallest three to "lose" GA, AZ and WI, which is 50,000 votes.
https://twitter.com/JayMitchinson/status/1326597056971091968?s=20
--AS
BUT
(1) There seems to be a very low level of reinfection of CV19 for people who got it for real (maybe just a dozen documented cases out of 100 million worldwide)
(2) The Pfizer and the Oxford vaccines both generate greater immune responses than actually getting the disease
(3) CV19 does not appear to rapidly mutate, and the vaccines target the "spike".
Together these make is seem quite unlikely that we'll need to get vaccinated every year.
https://twitter.com/Ianblackford_MP/status/1326589226033401856?s=20
That sounds about right.
So little will happen, except in small countries like Finland which have taken the problem seriously for ages. Some UK medics. know that it works well but the people at the top of the NHS hate the idea
http://www.drdavidgrimes.com/2020/10/covid-19-and-vitamin-d-nice-fails-us.html
The time required varied greatly from county to county, with some small counties taking just a day or two, while big counties such as King (about one-third of all ballots cast) took longer.
All across WA the 2004 hand recount was a MAJOR logistical challenge for election administrators. Will be the same for GA this year - PLUS having to deal with COVID, which adds to the practical difficulties.
Entirely realistic there were over 25k Republicans for Biden in those three states.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54908037
I love the way Verity attitude of it won't be you, so it doesn't matter if they double, treble, quadruple it.
Q1 was predicated on a report in the Mail (so it must be true) that volunteers had suffered side effects from the vaccine. It's obviously vital the vaccine is as safe as possible and cannot cause problems especially for the pregnant or those with pre-existing health conditions.
Q3 is significant because if several million people in the country need to go through this every year it will cost in terms of resources and timing.
Q4 - Agreed. It should also be made available to younger people for whom pre-existing health conditions significantly increases their susceptibility to the virus and the impact from it.
Q5 - I agree we are very fortunate. My view is it should be made available to everyone free of charge but as I've stated I have my doubts and how will it be distributed in Yemen, Somalia or other countries with internal strife?
I'm happy to have the vaccine as long as it's safe - I don't think that's an unreasonable position.
Though I appreciate that doesn't change the analysis.
(The maths are actually a little more complex than that, but it's still funny.)
I was speaking to one of my Nigerian colleagues, and while cities like Lagos present a challenge, the rural areas are a logistic nightmare because of the need to organise 2 stages and keep at -80°C.
"most of us won't pay it" and "about £14B could be raised" is not considered contradictory.
J&J generates, from my understanding, an extremely robust immune response, but that potentially carries with it two risks: (1) greater side effects, and (2) the body over-reacting to any infection in future.
The Electoral College is basically Party nominees so presumably the Kansas State Republicans choose 6 delegates to the EC while the Kansas Democrats also choose 6 delegates. Once the state result is officially announced, the winning party gets to send its 6 delegates to the EC meeting in mid December and the losing party delegates stay at home (or go somewhere else).
That means presumably every State has to made its outcome official before the EC meeting in mid December but what if legal wrangling is continuing in PA, GA and AZ to name but three. Is it conceivable the individual State legislatures could exercise their power and choose their own delegates (presumably Republican) who would be empowered to ignore the actual votes cast and vote as they see fit?
That seems to me to be the Trump road to a second term. Keep the legal obstructionism going until the State legislatures get to send their own GOP nominees and if, after the event, the legal system says the Democrats did win the states, well, too bad.
Unless of course the EC cannot convene until all the results have been officially announced...
(a) we know that people are not getting reinfected in large numbers from actually getting the disease
(b) we know the virus, unlike influenza, is not a rapidly mutating one
The other thing that really pisses me off is that people think in terms of a step function. That's not how this works. Your immunity fades over time. So even if you vaccinated three years ago, and they recommend an annual shot, you will still have some protection relative to not having been vaccinated at all.
Jesus College threatens to punish students reporting harassment for breaking Covid rules.
The College claims “No one is entitled, without reasonable justification, to break them”.
https://thetab.com/uk/cambridge/2020/11/11/jesus-college-threatens-to-punish-students-reporting-harassment-for-breaking-covid-rules-142217
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1326491672600064002
Absolute [moderated] both of them, it really pains me Hong Kong like America, places I love, are going down the bog.
All I can think of is this: the real election is that of the Electoral College on 14th December. Inciting the selection of rogue or better still competing slates of electors creates utter Chaos. "We told you the election was rigged, and now even the Electoral College is rigged" - that they are rigging it won't be mentioned.
Trump was demolished in the national vote and should be soundly defeated in the Electoral College. So call the national election a fraud, and with it the need for state partisans to respect the vote which if you think clearly enough about it was obviously an attack on American values.
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1326596860086259712?s=19
Numbers getting dodgy all over:
>>> Restore Law and Order.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1326614135958888448?s=20
NEW THREAD
https://twitter.com/NewLondonTimes/status/1326615969482092544?s=20
Executive Summary is that there is no plan, just a horror at the thought of losing and a determination to deny it as long as possible.
As for GOP legislatures short-circuiting the process by disregarding state legalities and picking electors post facto, methinks that is NOT a good bet. Rhetorical exuberance is one thing, walking the plank to appease the radical fringe is quite another.