FPT - Re Wayne County deadlocked on certifying vote:
What happens next?
Apparently it goes up one level to the State Board of Canvassers and they do it.
Which has four member, yes? Two GoP, two Dems. Chairman is Dem, so presumably has casting vote. Gets through, no?
Right result in the end but if the officials don't accept the votes of the public then they don't believe in Democracy. That's quite bad.
No, according to the Guardian blog they have to vote 3-1 to decide it:
Republicans blocked Michigan’s largest county from certifying the results of the 3 November election on Tuesday, an alarming development that leaves wiggle room for Donald Trump in a state he lost by around 146,000 votes.
The four-member board of canvassers in Wayne County, which includes Detroit, deadlocked along partisan lines on Tuesday over certifying the election results. Joe Biden carried the county by nearly 323,000 votes. The decision essentially leaves certification up to the Michigan state board of canvassers, according to the Washington Post. The board is split along partisan lines and must approve election results with at least a 3-1 vote, according to Bridge Michigan.
And then it winds up in court in front of a judge who is peeved at having to sort out the bleeding obvious because some adults are acting like 3 year olds.
Even if they swing Michigan to Trump, he still loses the election
Ok, so there's a good chance the State Board confirms the vote anyway, but if it doesn't it goes to a judge. That judge cannot however decide what the election result should be. I wouldn't think that's within his remit. All he can do is send it back to the Canvassers and say 'You sort it out - with a rerun of the election if need be.'
The worst that is going to happen is that the Michigan ECV's are effectively void, which as you indicate won't cause the result of the election to be overturned.
I suppose the judge could perhaps say the Canvassers were not acting in good faith?
All suggests delay rather than an overturning of the Presidential election. Dammit, Biden won by 6m votes! Are they asking for civil unrest?
Why would the Republicans just pull this stunt in Michigan?
Do the same thing in a couple of other key States and bingo Trump wins.
Now hopefully the Courts would intervene to stop it but who knows? This is the USA - anything goes.
Meanwhile everyone seems to be remarkably complacent about the whole thing.
How much chance Trump has I don't know but I wouldn't dream of risking my life savings backing Biden at 1.05.
I'm too lazy to do the arith but Trump has to pull the stunt in quite a number of States because failure to certify the result does not automatically hand the ECVs to him. I don't think the situation has arisen before but I would imagine the best Trump could hope for would be a voiding of the results. If the Canvassers or the Courts tried to award the ECVs to Trump and as a result he remained in office I really do think there would be civil unrest.
I come back to my considered view that this is all a game of stalling. There must be very high stakes involved for so many people to put so much at risk.
One shudders to think what Machiavellian schemes may be unfolding.
Trump doesn't need the ECVs to be awarded to him.
All he needs is to stop Biden getting 270.
The result should be 306-232. If 37 Biden ECVs get voided then it's 269-232 - in that situation Biden does not win - it goes to the House of Representatives.
Stopping states from certifying electors is not going to win it for Trump: he has to use legal shenanigans to flip enough states that Biden won; simply suppressing them won’t be enough. The Twelfth Amendment states that the winner of the Electoral Vote must “be [by] a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed” so if Trump was to somehow get Michigan’s process stalled so that its 16 electors cannot be appointed by December 14th, then Biden’s target reduces from to 270 to 263, and so on. Basically, for this trick to work, Trump would need to pull it off not just in Michigan but all of Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin too.
OK, thanks for that.
But Trump could still do it by just flipping (probably) three states if he could get State legislatures to appoint Trump electors.
Though there would then still be the possibility of the Governors of those States appointing Biden electors and then Congress having to choose between competing electors.
If that happened I think as another poster suggested the saving grace for Biden would likely be a small number of Republican Senators including Romney and Collins.
FPT - Re Wayne County deadlocked on certifying vote:
What happens next?
Apparently it goes up one level to the State Board of Canvassers and they do it.
Which has four member, yes? Two GoP, two Dems. Chairman is Dem, so presumably has casting vote. Gets through, no?
Right result in the end but if the officials don't accept the votes of the public then they don't believe in Democracy. That's quite bad.
No, according to the Guardian blog they have to vote 3-1 to decide it:
Republicans blocked Michigan’s largest county from certifying the results of the 3 November election on Tuesday, an alarming development that leaves wiggle room for Donald Trump in a state he lost by around 146,000 votes.
The four-member board of canvassers in Wayne County, which includes Detroit, deadlocked along partisan lines on Tuesday over certifying the election results. Joe Biden carried the county by nearly 323,000 votes. The decision essentially leaves certification up to the Michigan state board of canvassers, according to the Washington Post. The board is split along partisan lines and must approve election results with at least a 3-1 vote, according to Bridge Michigan.
And then it winds up in court in front of a judge who is peeved at having to sort out the bleeding obvious because some adults are acting like 3 year olds.
Even if they swing Michigan to Trump, he still loses the election
Ok, so there's a good chance the State Board confirms the vote anyway, but if it doesn't it goes to a judge. That judge cannot however decide what the election result should be. I wouldn't think that's within his remit. All he can do is send it back to the Canvassers and say 'You sort it out - with a rerun of the election if need be.'
The worst that is going to happen is that the Michigan ECV's are effectively void, which as you indicate won't cause the result of the election to be overturned.
I suppose the judge could perhaps say the Canvassers were not acting in good faith?
All suggests delay rather than an overturning of the Presidential election. Dammit, Biden won by 6m votes! Are they asking for civil unrest?
Why would the Republicans just pull this stunt in Michigan?
Do the same thing in a couple of other key States and bingo Trump wins.
Now hopefully the Courts would intervene to stop it but who knows? This is the USA - anything goes.
Meanwhile everyone seems to be remarkably complacent about the whole thing.
How much chance Trump has I don't know but I wouldn't dream of risking my life savings backing Biden at 1.05.
I'm too lazy to do the arith but Trump has to pull the stunt in quite a number of States because failure to certify the result does not automatically hand the ECVs to him. I don't think the situation has arisen before but I would imagine the best Trump could hope for would be a voiding of the results. If the Canvassers or the Courts tried to award the ECVs to Trump and as a result he remained in office I really do think there would be civil unrest.
I come back to my considered view that this is all a game of stalling. There must be very high stakes involved for so many people to put so much at risk.
One shudders to think what Machiavellian schemes may be unfolding.
Trump doesn't need the ECVs to be awarded to him.
All he needs is to stop Biden getting 270.
The result should be 306-232. If 37 Biden ECVs get voided then it's 269-232 - in that situation Biden does not win - it goes to the House of Representatives.
Stopping states from certifying electors is not going to win it for Trump: he has to use legal shenanigans to flip enough states that Biden won; simply suppressing them won’t be enough. The Twelfth Amendment states that the winner of the Electoral Vote must “be [by] a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed” so if Trump was to somehow get Michigan’s process stalled so that its 16 electors cannot be appointed by December 14th, then Biden’s target reduces from to 270 to 263, and so on. Basically, for this trick to work, Trump would need to pull it off not just in Michigan but all of Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin too.
OK, thanks for that.
But Trump could still do it by just flipping (probably) three states if he could get State legislatures to appoint Trump electors.
Though there would then still be the possibility of the Governors of those States appointing Biden electors and then Congress having to choose between competing electors.
If that happened I think as another poster suggested the saving grace for Biden would likely be a small number of Republican Senators including Romney and Collins.
In most cases it seems like the state courts would tell their legislatures to stop dicking around.
What on Earth are the decision-makers thinking, to let Corbyn back after three weeks with a weasel-worded apology? Does SKS not want to win the next election?
What on Earth are the decision-makers thinking, to let Corbyn back after three weeks with a weasel-worded apology? Does SKS not want to win the next election?
He's not the decision-maker. The leader doesn't unilaterally decide who's a racist, they have to follow a procedure, and they have a procedure left over from before.
IIUC they'll then create a new procedure as a result of the EHRC recommendations, so if Corbyn plays silly buggers I'll imagine he'll get thrown out again.
Not healthy that an election loser has the power to lash out like this.
Can't Twitter trust the reader to judge whether or not a statement might be disputed? I tend to assume that any statement on Twitter is disputed anyway.
I looked on Wikipedia earlier trying to find a shittier coup d'état attempt than this one and I came up short, but I guess some of them are too shitty to make the history books.
Not healthy that an election loser has the power to lash out like this.
Can't Twitter trust the reader to judge whether or not a statement might be disputed? I tend to assume that any statement on Twitter is disputed anyway.
Mostly, yes. The place they really need this stuff is Facebook and YouTube.
Not healthy that an election loser has the power to lash out like this.
Can't Twitter trust the reader to judge whether or not a statement might be disputed? I tend to assume that any statement on Twitter is disputed anyway.
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
F1: Ladbrokes special on Hulkenberg driving full time for Red Bull next year. Not backing it, but the odds are only 2.15, which makes it seem a credible possibility. Which is interesting.
This is very interesting. It’s a very small, but very detailed study, which seems to indicate that young children can develop a strong immune response to the Covid virus without ever showing detectable infection (the entire family were repeatedly swabbed for PCR testing).
Immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in three children of parents with symptomatic COVID-19 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19545-8 Here, we describe clinical features, virology, longitudinal cellular, and cytokine immune profile, SARS-CoV-2-specific serology and salivary antibody responses in a family of two parents with PCR-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and their three children, who tested repeatedly SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative. Cellular immune profiles and cytokine responses of all children are similar to their parents at all timepoints. All family members have salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies detected, predominantly IgA, that coincide with symptom resolution in 3 of 4 symptomatic members. Plasma from both parents and one child have IgG antibody against the S1 protein and virus-neutralizing activity detected. Using a systems serology approach, we demonstrate higher levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody features of these family members compared to healthy controls. These data indicate that children can mount an immune response to SARS-CoV-2 without virological confirmation of infection, raising the possibility that immunity in children can prevent the establishment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Relying on routine virological and serological testing may not identify exposed children, with implications for epidemiological and clinical studies across the life-span.
Not even the main story on BBC Breakfast. I reckon this has played out well for SKS. He got the good headlines looking tough, but ultimately it's out of his hands and now he avoids having to face down the unions and the left. Obviously there's no danger of any of the non-racists in the Labour PLP kicking off.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
A key thing to remember about @DecrepiterJohnL stats is that schools vary in size and shape. Secondaries look to be bearing the brunt of this stage of the pandemic, but secondaries are actually a minority of schools - just 12% of the total, compared to 60% for primaries - so the data would actually suggest that it’s getting worse in primary schools as well.
Also remember any primary (average size, under 300 pupils) sending 30 children home is in deep, deep shit on its attendance. For a secondary, that’s barely noticeable.
But most secondaries will be sending home more than 30 children. Round here, all the schools I know of it’s in the hundreds.
But again - it’s staff going off that’s the killer. If the current trajectory isn’t at least stabilised, I can’t see how schools stay open beyond the week after next.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Labour were very much encouraging creative thinking back in April:
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
Baseless nonsense. Why would so-called rising "false positives" be followed by rising deaths?
Of course the testing method used in Liverpool shows lower rates. It's taken by people out and about -- therefore not isolating with symptoms -- and it's a less sensitive test.
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
JFC!
We know due to data from August and September that the rise in cases isn't false positives. We know this because when there was a MASSSIVE spike in testing coinciding with the start of school there was no MASSIVE spike in cases.
If false positives are the reason for rising cases then we should have see a spike in positive cases to match the increased testing when school started. We didn't. So it isn't.
Ha. I think this is a pretty good illustration of the numeracy of Toby Young, and why his website should be disregarded.
--AS
That's the mystery though. Why are there some people who can be so wrong, so many times, and yet don't have their credibility destroyed, but are still listened to, over and over again?
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
JFC!
We know due to data from August and September that the rise in cases isn't false positives. We know this because when there was a MASSSIVE spike in testing coinciding with the start of school there was no MASSIVE spike in cases.
If false positives are the reason for rising cases then we should have see a spike in positive cases to match the increased testing when school started. We didn't. So it isn't.
That's it. End of message.
PCR is too sensitive, it picks up bits of viral RNA in people no longer infectious. But that rate is probably fairly constant so the recent increase in cases is real.
Not even the main story on BBC Breakfast. I reckon this has played out well for SKS. He got the good headlines looking tough, but ultimately it's out of his hands and now he avoids having to face down the unions and the left. Obviously there's no danger of any of the non-racists in the Labour PLP kicking off.
Exactly, and that is why the lead is wrong. Politically, KS got what he needed from the episode. Expelling someone simply for commenting on the previous allegations wouldn’t have been sound and, given Corbyn’s devotion to Labour, would have gone through every appeal stage and probably ended in the courts, and then lost. Which would have been a terrible story all round.
As it is, Corbyn knows he is on a last warning. If he engages in primary antisemitism (which he didn’t, this time) he knows he is out. Job done.
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
Ha. I think this is a pretty good illustration of the numeracy of Toby Young, and why his website should be disregarded.
--AS
That's the mystery though. Why are there some people who can be so wrong, so many times, and yet don't have their credibility destroyed, but are still listened to, over and over again?
If it wasn't for people highlighting what he says for the purposes of mockery how many would even know?
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
JFC!
We know due to data from August and September that the rise in cases isn't false positives. We know this because when there was a MASSSIVE spike in testing coinciding with the start of school there was no MASSIVE spike in cases.
If false positives are the reason for rising cases then we should have see a spike in positive cases to match the increased testing when school started. We didn't. So it isn't.
That's it. End of message.
PCR is too sensitive, it picks up bits of viral RNA in people no longer infectious. But that rate is probably fairly constant so the recent increase in cases is real.
Yeadon suspects that procedures are becoming less careful as testing is scaled up, up ... and up ... and that accuracy may have declined compared to summer, let alone spring. He said that he'd like to see hospital patients with a positive COVID PCR test given the new test ASAP.
Ha. I think this is a pretty good illustration of the numeracy of Toby Young, and why his website should be disregarded.
--AS
That's the mystery though. Why are there some people who can be so wrong, so many times, and yet don't have their credibility destroyed, but are still listened to, over and over again?
That's certainly something to think about. I think it's a combination of charisma, a reassuring certainty (real-life uncertainty provokes anxiety in many), and simply telling a story that some people want to believe. It's understandable why many people would want to believe that lockdown definitely does not work or is absolutely not necessary. Although some blame lies with the gullible for failing to think critically, we shouldn't be too judgemental: many people fall into such traps.
I see it as similar to the working of a cult. Indeed someone (I think it was Tristan Harris) has called the internet a cult factory. I'd like to think that I'd have compassion for, say, a relative who fell into a cult, and would try to deprogram them slowly. For a stranger on the internet I must admit that I cannot summon the energy to engage, but sometimes can be bothered to argue against the propaganda.
Ha. I think this is a pretty good illustration of the numeracy of Toby Young, and why his website should be disregarded.
--AS
Also note his supporters go along with the belief that most were about to kick the bucket in a few weeks anyway by comparing to average life expectancy. More or Less needs to be made compulsory for everyone.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Compare the cost of hand sanitiser now compared to April. Its about a fifth of the price. PPE in April was like gold, it was always going to be expensive. At least the Government have now created local supply chains for the majority of it and there doesn't seem to be any shortages in hospitals.
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
The cult - including major unions like Unite - haven't gone quiet since Jezbollah stepped down so they're unlikely to do so now He has been Cleared of All Wrongdoing. Nor will the media want to ignore such a marvellous and long-legged story.
Bringing the Party into Disrepute. That's what they needed to deploy against Corbyn and his acolytes. Force the cult to deny that an EHRC investigation and guilty findings bring the party into disrepute. That egregious GDPR breeches bring the party into disrepute. That libel against former staffers and a journalist whistleblowing against you brings the party into disrepute. And then boot ALL of them out.
Instead we have this. They have been vilified. Solidified. Vindicated. And they will draw strength from the experience. Its a disgrace.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
You're mistaken here David. The fatality rate for the whole population cannot be known until everyone has been exposed to the disease. Young's tweet is not 'badly phrased', it just plain wrong.
Black Death was of course a whole different order of catastrophe but the estimated 30-60% fatality rate is based on it's effect across the whole population.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
There was a time when people were literally dying for want of PPE. Of course the government cut corners to get all that they could. Of course some of what they bought turned out to be crap. Of course they contacted businesses that they knew who they thought could help immediately. Of course some of those businesses might have profiteered from that. So what? People were dying FFS.
Had tens of thousands of doctors and nurses gone without PPE because the government had "stuck to the rules" of procurement, I'm sure people prefer that than "corners being cut". 🙄
If Starmer isn’t careful he could end up with a Labour version of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Muslim Labour have a survey which says they feel as discriminated as Jewish people do by Labour. Jezza’s gang will latch on to this sooner or later. Some MPs already have. So he probably has no choice but to try and keep a broad church that doubles up as a mosque and synagogue else risk losing inner city seats
Which is the fundamental problem with sectionalism vs a melting pot approach
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
Another reason why KS has got the ideal result. In which scenario is Corbyn likely to create the most bother and get the most attention - as a Labour backbencher with a dagger hanging over his head, or as an Independent MP sitting right behind them and free to say and do whatever he likes?
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
...
Not create a separate fast track lane for friends of ministers, perhaps ?
It's entirely understandable that all this was done in an extreme rush, and mistakes were inevitable - but it's hard to see that as anything other than either stupidity or corruption, particularly when those friends of ministers don't seem (to be extremely generous) to have been unusually proficient compared to anyone else in delivering usable product.
Not even the main story on BBC Breakfast. I reckon this has played out well for SKS. He got the good headlines looking tough, but ultimately it's out of his hands and now he avoids having to face down the unions and the left. Obviously there's no danger of any of the non-racists in the Labour PLP kicking off.
Exactly, and that is why the lead is wrong. Politically, KS got what he needed from the episode. Expelling someone simply for commenting on the previous allegations wouldn’t have been sound and, given Corbyn’s devotion to Labour, would have gone through every appeal stage and probably ended in the courts, and then lost. Which would have been a terrible story all round.
As it is, Corbyn knows he is on a last warning. If he engages in primary antisemitism (which he didn’t, this time) he knows he is out. Job done.
Yes I think that's right. Politically all this has to do is show Starmer is on the right side and is doing everything within his power. That's the only takeaway from this.
Corbyn is yesterday's man. That the party has allowed him to crawl back in as a nonentity wont bother anyone other than those with a personal animus. Keeping Starmer's name in the news for doing the right thing is never a negative when most people's attention is elsewhere.
FPT - Re Wayne County deadlocked on certifying vote:
What happens next?
Apparently it goes up one level to the State Board of Canvassers and they do it.
Thanks.
But what if they are Republican and block it?
Ditto all the other key states - what if their Boards of Canvassers also block certification?
I don't pretend to know what chance Trump has but I fear that if Republicans put up every possible barrier at every single stage of the process then it's entirely possible that Biden may still have a big fight on his hands.
Then it will wind up in a court where a judge will say "Biden is is 200,000 votes ahead of Trump, what is the issue here?" and if the "facts" are anything like every case so far, then the plantiffs will be lucky to escape either contempt proceedings or a charge of wasting the Court's time.
One of the reasons many lawyers are not acting for Trump is because anyone filing a motion must certify that they have investigated it, it is not frivolous and has merit. If the judge decides that it is vexatious then the lawyer presenting it may be suspended or have their licence withdrawn.
If you were a senior lawyer, would take that risk for Trump?
Thanks again!
However if results simply aren't certified, Trump / Republicans wouldn't be the plaintiff in any Court action - they can just sit on their hands.
Presumably it would be Biden (or someone else?) having to launch Court action to try to get results certified.
Would a judge always insist that some result was certified? Or might they just say "No certified result for County X so zero votes recorded for County X" - resulting in Trump winning the State.
I know Trump needs more than Michigan - but who is to say the same procedure isn't also followed in other States to produce Trump wins.
Let’s put the wrongness of such a series of actions to the side for a moment. Say that Trump does achieve this.
How the hell do European governments react? I suspect they go with the result of the electoral college (assuming there isn’t a civil war... but may be that’s why Trump is bring the boys home from Iraq and Afghanistan 😱👿)
There was a time when people were literally dying for want of PPE. Of course the government cut corners to get all that they could. Of course some of what they bought turned out to be crap. Of course they contacted businesses that they knew who they thought could help immediately. Of course some of those businesses might have profiteered from that. So what? People were dying FFS.
I cannot imagine how many hundred retweets we would have had from Scott if "People are dying because this Government cannot procure PPE". But they did, so the hypocritical bastards were robbed of making political point-scoring off that route.
We have spent in excess of £200 billion on Covid. Yet people want to say we shouldn't have paid those going crazy market rates, where we were literally competing against the rest of the world? The rounding error on the rounding error of Covid. Procure it, money no object was an entirely satisfactory outcome as far as I'm concerned. Some middlemen made some money? If you don't like that, go live on another planet. "French safe as our cheapskate Government won't pay going rates to save our NHS workers" would have been a REALLY juicy retweet, eh Scott?
Ha. I think this is a pretty good illustration of the numeracy of Toby Young, and why his website should be disregarded.
--AS
That's the mystery though. Why are there some people who can be so wrong, so many times, and yet don't have their credibility destroyed, but are still listened to, over and over again?
Because their audience, ministers included, are equally stupid ?
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
A variant MERS epidemic with that disease's fatality rate of 20-30%, is certainly possible. We grumble about lockdown, but the public health response to that spreading widely would have been something else - the full army checkpoint in your village treatment wherever it arose even in an isolated case.
FPT - Re Wayne County deadlocked on certifying vote:
What happens next?
Apparently it goes up one level to the State Board of Canvassers and they do it.
Thanks.
But what if they are Republican and block it?
Ditto all the other key states - what if their Boards of Canvassers also block certification?
I don't pretend to know what chance Trump has but I fear that if Republicans put up every possible barrier at every single stage of the process then it's entirely possible that Biden may still have a big fight on his hands.
Surely there are Democrats on Boards of Canvassers in other states who could retaliate in kind?
The States are effectively different countries so it is none of their concern. Even if it they did try that, it would be playground squabbles kind of stuff and just plain daft - the sort of thing you would read in a cheap, trashy, airport novel.....
It does sound like the plot of a Jeffrey Archer novel now that you mention it!
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
You're mistaken here David. The fatality rate for the whole population cannot be known until everyone has been exposed to the disease. Young's tweet is not 'badly phrased', it just plain wrong.
Black Death was of course a whole different order of catastrophe but the estimated 30-60% fatality rate is based on it's effect across the whole population.
That's why I phrased it in the present tense. I would expect us to exceed 0.1% within a few months, possibly even 0.2% ultimately. I am not defending Toby, the man's an idiot. I was making a rather different point about the scale of the disaster we are facing. The number of deaths under 65 remain very small, the preponderance of death is over 80 and yet we have wreaked our economy, our young peoples' education and so many businesses. However resilient society was in the Middle Ages ours has proven remarkably vulnerable to what is in fact a very modest ripple in the normal death rate.
Politicians feel a desperate need to be seen to do something. Nicola was a particularly poor example yesterday. After 3 weeks when the infection rate in Glasgow exceeded 300 in 100k she took severe action after a week when it had been below because the death rate (lagging of course) was climbing.
I understand the pressures but just maybe this hyperactivity is not in fact the answer?
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
...
Not create a separate fast track lane for friends of ministers, perhaps ?
It's entirely understandable that all this was done in an extreme rush, and mistakes were inevitable - but it's hard to see that as anything other than either stupidity or corruption, particularly when those friends of ministers don't seem (to be extremely generous) to have been unusually proficient compared to anyone else in delivering usable product.
Have you forgotten already the Labour Party pushing a list of suppliers they said the Government should be speaking to?
What is wrong with Ministers doing the same?
If there is a cronic shortage and a company that could supply millions of items manages to speak to a Minister and say "we have millions of what you need available" then should the Minister sit on that and ignore it?
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
Covid-19 fatality rate in New Zealand is 0.0001%
Covid-19 fatality rate in the United Kingdom is 0.1%
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
Another reason why KS has got the ideal result. In which scenario is Corbyn likely to create the most bother and get the most attention - as a Labour backbencher with a dagger hanging over his head, or as an Independent MP sitting right behind them and free to say and do whatever he likes?
His authority has been compromised in his own party, he is now the frontman for a left wing executive.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
Society is pretty resilient.
Their society was, although the century after was pretty chaotic. Barbara Tuchman's book about it was great read about 20 years ago. Not sure if its still in print. I don't think our much more integrated, far more urban society would prove anything like as resilient.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Yes, but these contracts were still being handed out without proper scrutiny well after the initial crisis passed. This is from the National Audit Office:
FPT - Re Wayne County deadlocked on certifying vote:
What happens next?
Apparently it goes up one level to the State Board of Canvassers and they do it.
Which has four member, yes? Two GoP, two Dems. Chairman is Dem, so presumably has casting vote. Gets through, no?
Right result in the end but if the officials don't accept the votes of the public then they don't believe in Democracy. That's quite bad.
No, according to the Guardian blog they have to vote 3-1 to decide it:
Republicans blocked Michigan’s largest county from certifying the results of the 3 November election on Tuesday, an alarming development that leaves wiggle room for Donald Trump in a state he lost by around 146,000 votes.
The four-member board of canvassers in Wayne County, which includes Detroit, deadlocked along partisan lines on Tuesday over certifying the election results. Joe Biden carried the county by nearly 323,000 votes. The decision essentially leaves certification up to the Michigan state board of canvassers, according to the Washington Post. The board is split along partisan lines and must approve election results with at least a 3-1 vote, according to Bridge Michigan.
And then it winds up in court in front of a judge who is peeved at having to sort out the bleeding obvious because some adults are acting like 3 year olds.
Even if they swing Michigan to Trump, he still loses the election
Ok, so there's a good chance the State Board confirms the vote anyway, but if it doesn't it goes to a judge. That judge cannot however decide what the election result should be. I wouldn't think that's within his remit. All he can do is send it back to the Canvassers and say 'You sort it out - with a rerun of the election if need be.'
The worst that is going to happen is that the Michigan ECV's are effectively void, which as you indicate won't cause the result of the election to be overturned.
I suppose the judge could perhaps say the Canvassers were not acting in good faith?
All suggests delay rather than an overturning of the Presidential election. Dammit, Biden won by 6m votes! Are they asking for civil unrest?
Why would the Republicans just pull this stunt in Michigan?
Do the same thing in a couple of other key States and bingo Trump wins.
Now hopefully the Courts would intervene to stop it but who knows? This is the USA - anything goes.
Meanwhile everyone seems to be remarkably complacent about the whole thing.
How much chance Trump has I don't know but I wouldn't dream of risking my life savings backing Biden at 1.05.
I'm too lazy to do the arith but Trump has to pull the stunt in quite a number of States because failure to certify the result does not automatically hand the ECVs to him. I don't think the situation has arisen before but I would imagine the best Trump could hope for would be a voiding of the results. If the Canvassers or the Courts tried to award the ECVs to Trump and as a result he remained in office I really do think there would be civil unrest.
I come back to my considered view that this is all a game of stalling. There must be very high stakes involved for so many people to put so much at risk.
One shudders to think what Machiavellian schemes may be unfolding.
Doesn’t he “just” have to get Biden from 306(?) to under 270 though?
Decertifying Michigan & Pennsylvania would take him to 270 on the nose...
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Compare the cost of hand sanitiser now compared to April. Its about a fifth of the price. PPE in April was like gold, it was always going to be expensive. At least the Government have now created local supply chains for the majority of it and there doesn't seem to be any shortages in hospitals.
Indeed. The first box of face masks I bought back in March were £30 for 50, now they’re less than £2 for 50.
Who knew that supply and demand works very clearly during an emergency, and that throwing procurement rules out of the window is a positive, rather than a negative thing to do at the time.
FPT - Re Wayne County deadlocked on certifying vote:
What happens next?
Apparently it goes up one level to the State Board of Canvassers and they do it.
Which has four member, yes? Two GoP, two Dems. Chairman is Dem, so presumably has casting vote. Gets through, no?
Right result in the end but if the officials don't accept the votes of the public then they don't believe in Democracy. That's quite bad.
No, according to the Guardian blog they have to vote 3-1 to decide it:
Republicans blocked Michigan’s largest county from certifying the results of the 3 November election on Tuesday, an alarming development that leaves wiggle room for Donald Trump in a state he lost by around 146,000 votes.
The four-member board of canvassers in Wayne County, which includes Detroit, deadlocked along partisan lines on Tuesday over certifying the election results. Joe Biden carried the county by nearly 323,000 votes. The decision essentially leaves certification up to the Michigan state board of canvassers, according to the Washington Post. The board is split along partisan lines and must approve election results with at least a 3-1 vote, according to Bridge Michigan.
And then it winds up in court in front of a judge who is peeved at having to sort out the bleeding obvious because some adults are acting like 3 year olds.
Even if they swing Michigan to Trump, he still loses the election
Ok, so there's a good chance the State Board confirms the vote anyway, but if it doesn't it goes to a judge. That judge cannot however decide what the election result should be. I wouldn't think that's within his remit. All he can do is send it back to the Canvassers and say 'You sort it out - with a rerun of the election if need be.'
The worst that is going to happen is that the Michigan ECV's are effectively void, which as you indicate won't cause the result of the election to be overturned.
I suppose the judge could perhaps say the Canvassers were not acting in good faith?
All suggests delay rather than an overturning of the Presidential election. Dammit, Biden won by 6m votes! Are they asking for civil unrest?
Why would the Republicans just pull this stunt in Michigan?
Do the same thing in a couple of other key States and bingo Trump wins.
Now hopefully the Courts would intervene to stop it but who knows? This is the USA - anything goes.
Meanwhile everyone seems to be remarkably complacent about the whole thing.
How much chance Trump has I don't know but I wouldn't dream of risking my life savings backing Biden at 1.05.
I'm too lazy to do the arith but Trump has to pull the stunt in quite a number of States because failure to certify the result does not automatically hand the ECVs to him. I don't think the situation has arisen before but I would imagine the best Trump could hope for would be a voiding of the results. If the Canvassers or the Courts tried to award the ECVs to Trump and as a result he remained in office I really do think there would be civil unrest.
I come back to my considered view that this is all a game of stalling. There must be very high stakes involved for so many people to put so much at risk.
One shudders to think what Machiavellian schemes may be unfolding.
Trump doesn't need the ECVs to be awarded to him.
All he needs is to stop Biden getting 270.
The result should be 306-232. If 37 Biden ECVs get voided then it's 269-232 - in that situation Biden does not win - it goes to the House of Representatives.
The House? That has a Dem majority.
But I think by that time it would be getting pretty frisky on the streets.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
You're mistaken here David. The fatality rate for the whole population cannot be known until everyone has been exposed to the disease. Young's tweet is not 'badly phrased', it just plain wrong.
Black Death was of course a whole different order of catastrophe but the estimated 30-60% fatality rate is based on it's effect across the whole population.
That's why I phrased it in the present tense. I would expect us to exceed 0.1% within a few months, possibly even 0.2% ultimately. I am not defending Toby, the man's an idiot. I was making a rather different point about the scale of the disaster we are facing. The number of deaths under 65 remain very small, the preponderance of death is over 80 and yet we have wreaked our economy, our young peoples' education and so many businesses. However resilient society was in the Middle Ages ours has proven remarkably vulnerable to what is in fact a very modest ripple in the normal death rate.
Politicians feel a desperate need to be seen to do something. Nicola was a particularly poor example yesterday. After 3 weeks when the infection rate in Glasgow exceeded 300 in 100k she took severe action after a week when it had been below because the death rate (lagging of course) was climbing.
I understand the pressures but just maybe this hyperactivity is not in fact the answer?
What is the alternative? Letting it rip would put the NHS out of commission for everything including C19 unless you flat out refused to treat anyone with it. I’m not sure of the proportion, but I expect the IFR of about 1% is only possible with best treatment: there are a lot more sick people who would die without it.
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Yes, but these contracts were still being handed out without proper scrutiny well after the initial crisis passed. This is from the National Audit Office:
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
Ha. I think this is a pretty good illustration of the numeracy of Toby Young, and why his website should be disregarded.
--AS
That's the mystery though. Why are there some people who can be so wrong, so many times, and yet don't have their credibility destroyed, but are still listened to, over and over again?
That's certainly something to think about. I think it's a combination of charisma, a reassuring certainty (real-life uncertainty provokes anxiety in many), and simply telling a story that some people want to believe. It's understandable why many people would want to believe that lockdown definitely does not work or is absolutely not necessary. Although some blame lies with the gullible for failing to think critically, we shouldn't be too judgemental: many people fall into such traps.
I see it as similar to the working of a cult. Indeed someone (I think it was Tristan Harris) has called the internet a cult factory. I'd like to think that I'd have compassion for, say, a relative who fell into a cult, and would try to deprogram them slowly. For a stranger on the internet I must admit that I cannot summon the energy to engage, but sometimes can be bothered to argue against the propaganda.
--AS
To be content, I think it's important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Yes, but these contracts were still being handed out without proper scrutiny well after the initial crisis passed. This is from the National Audit Office:
There’s no dates or timelines mentioned in that whole article, except for a contract given to a social media company who started work in March but didn’t get their contract signed until May.
I just don’t think it’s particularly unreasonable that, when faced with a war or pandemic, the usual processes go out of the window to be replaced with the government asking if anyone knows anyone who can get this stuff?
If Starmer isn’t careful he could end up with a Labour version of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Muslim Labour have a survey which says they feel as discriminated as Jewish people do by Labour. Jezza’s gang will latch on to this sooner or later. Some MPs already have. So he probably has no choice but to try and keep a broad church that doubles up as a mosque and synagogue else risk losing inner city seats
Which is the fundamental problem with sectionalism vs a melting pot approach
The Muslim 'section' provides Labour with a much larger number of votes and while overwhelmingly moderate on most issues is less so wrt Israel and even Judaism. The conundrum remains.
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
My hospital now has 235 confirmed Covid inpatients, 25 fresh admissions yesterday and a similar number on intensive care. People are dying there every day, and they are not false positives being knocked down by buses while being ventilated.
By all means argue against lockdowns on economic grounds or libertarian ones, indeed I have sympathies for those arguments, but denying the reality of an ongoing pandemic is just crazy.
I think the current government list of key workers will determine who gets the vaccine first.
Emergency workers. Critical systems workers. NHS Staff. Care home staff. Supermarket staff. Anyone who works for a bank.
The latter one was a brilliant decision by the government.
Teachers notably absent from that list.
You've been usurped by bank workers, fairly I'd say. Sorry.
I don’t need sex. My bank fucks me every day.
But it would be bizarre to have bankers, who can work over the phone, placed ahead of teachers, who are being forced more or less at gunpoint to work in ideal transmission situations without any meaningful protection, in the queue for the vaccine.
The logic is that the country can cope, short term, with the schools being closed, it cannot cope if the financial services sector has to close for anything more than a few days.
Well, we look set to find out about how we can manage without schools in roughly another fortnight the way things are going.
There's still plenty of schooling going on in Tier 3, which I guess Staffs (isn't it?) would be approaching if that was still in place.
If lockdown is working - and from Tier 3 and Devolved Nations results, there's no reason to suppose it isn't, infection rates should turn downwards mostly everywhere towards the end of this week and into next week.
A fat lot of fine bloody use an overall fall will be if it continues rampaging through schools so we don’t have enough staff to open. Which is what is happening, regardless of what the losers and lowlifes in Whitehall may think.
Tell us, is it true positives or false positives 'rampaging' through schools?
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
JFC!
We know due to data from August and September that the rise in cases isn't false positives. We know this because when there was a MASSSIVE spike in testing coinciding with the start of school there was no MASSIVE spike in cases.
If false positives are the reason for rising cases then we should have see a spike in positive cases to match the increased testing when school started. We didn't. So it isn't.
That's it. End of message.
PCR is too sensitive, it picks up bits of viral RNA in people no longer infectious. But that rate is probably fairly constant so the recent increase in cases is real.
Yeadon suspects that procedures are becoming less careful as testing is scaled up, up ... and up ... and that accuracy may have declined compared to summer, let alone spring. He said that he'd like to see hospital patients with a positive COVID PCR test given the new test ASAP.
I pointed this out weeks ago. It is to my mind inconceivable that given the scale up and the intense pressures, lab procedures are 100% as pure as they were before ramp up. It's not how human systems work.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
...
Not create a separate fast track lane for friends of ministers, perhaps ?
It's entirely understandable that all this was done in an extreme rush, and mistakes were inevitable - but it's hard to see that as anything other than either stupidity or corruption, particularly when those friends of ministers don't seem (to be extremely generous) to have been unusually proficient compared to anyone else in delivering usable product.
Have you forgotten already the Labour Party pushing a list of suppliers they said the Government should be speaking to?
What is wrong with Ministers doing the same?
If there is a cronic shortage and a company that could supply millions of items manages to speak to a Minister and say "we have millions of what you need available" then should the Minister sit on that and ignore it?
The clue is in the phrase 'separate fast track lane for friends of ministers'.
They should, of course, have been exploring all avenues. What is at issue is the preference given to those no more qualified than anyone else (and in several cases clearly not qualified at all), simply because of relationships with ministers.
In an emergency, money is not necessarily going to be well spent. That is no excuse for doing so corruptly.
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
Another reason why KS has got the ideal result. In which scenario is Corbyn likely to create the most bother and get the most attention - as a Labour backbencher with a dagger hanging over his head, or as an Independent MP sitting right behind them and free to say and do whatever he likes?
His authority has been compromised in his own party, he is now the frontman for a left wing executive.
Sir Keir Sockpuppet
He has been made to look ineffectual by his own party. This is why, in my opinion, the ECHR were completely wrong to focus on interference from the leadership in the disciplinary procedures. It treated political parties as if they are public bodies but they are not. They are voluntary associations which elect leaders who should lead. And that leadership includes determining what is and is not acceptable within the party. Corbyn was completely wrong and morally abhorrent about what was acceptable but his intervention was not the problem, he was.
I looked on Wikipedia earlier trying to find a shittier coup d'état attempt than this one and I came up short, but I guess some of them are too shitty to make the history books.
How about Mad Mike and the Seychelles Affair? IIRC the coup was uncovered when one of the soldiers accidentally stood in the “something to declare line” at customs and the customs officer found he was carrying a bag full of automatic weapons
Our estimates for IFR are in the basis of a certain level of hospital treatment. Given the numbers of people hospitalised, and of those the numbers who require intensive care treatment, I suspect that the IFR for Covid-19 in a medieval society would have been above 5%.
That also means that's the IFR we face if we let hospital capacity become overwhelmed.
I find the argument that we have overreacted to Covid, because we've successfully prevented it from killing the 3 million who would have died in the worst-case scenario a bit illogical.
Have New Zealand overreacted more because they've been more successful in stopping the virus? But then they have crowds at sports stadiums so they have less death and less impact on society.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
You're mistaken here David. The fatality rate for the whole population cannot be known until everyone has been exposed to the disease. Young's tweet is not 'badly phrased', it just plain wrong.
Black Death was of course a whole different order of catastrophe but the estimated 30-60% fatality rate is based on it's effect across the whole population.
That's why I phrased it in the present tense. I would expect us to exceed 0.1% within a few months, possibly even 0.2% ultimately. I am not defending Toby, the man's an idiot. I was making a rather different point about the scale of the disaster we are facing. The number of deaths under 65 remain very small, the preponderance of death is over 80 and yet we have wreaked our economy, our young peoples' education and so many businesses. However resilient society was in the Middle Ages ours has proven remarkably vulnerable to what is in fact a very modest ripple in the normal death rate.
Politicians feel a desperate need to be seen to do something. Nicola was a particularly poor example yesterday. After 3 weeks when the infection rate in Glasgow exceeded 300 in 100k she took severe action after a week when it had been below because the death rate (lagging of course) was climbing.
I understand the pressures but just maybe this hyperactivity is not in fact the answer?
What is the alternative? Letting it rip would put the NHS out of commission for everything including C19 unless you flat out refused to treat anyone with it. I’m not sure of the proportion, but I expect the IFR of about 1% is only possible with best treatment: there are a lot more sick people who would die without it.
There's not an easy answer. Maybe the Nightingale hospitals were the right approach after all.
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
What has he got on them?
Fanatical primary voters.
Fairy nuff. But here's another theory.
Early in his Presidency he visits Vladimir Putin. He speaks to him alone, no officials present, just Vlad's translator. Vlad asks him what he needs. Trump says he needs some dirt on his critics in the Republican Party so he can keep them in line. Vlad offers him the services of the KGB and access to the files they keep on all prominent politicians. Donald says 'that'll do nicely'. What does Vlad want in return?
- Sow divisions in American society - Damage trust in American democracy - Reduce American influence/security in Middle East - Kneecap NATO
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Yes, but these contracts were still being handed out without proper scrutiny well after the initial crisis passed. This is from the National Audit Office:
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the "canary in the mine" here saying very vocally that you were very, very worried about running out of PPE?
Have you got any such concerns about running out of PPE now?
I suspect you're both right. Yes, a number of people made a quick, dirty and very large profit out of supplying PPE in the early days, and I've no doubt people in high places contacted their friends 'to see if they could help'. Panic stations; that's what people do!
However if, when the initial panic had subsided due diligence was still not being performed, then that's an entirely different matter. And if some of those contacted took the money and ran, i.e supplied nothing, or what they did supply was unusable, the Government should try to get least some of the money back.
He's... he's failed to divide one number by another.
It's certainly not well phrased but the fatality rate for the whole population remains well under 0.1%. Maybe he doesn't know what IFR means?
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
Society is pretty resilient.
Their society was, although the century after was pretty chaotic. Barbara Tuchman's book about it was great read about 20 years ago. Not sure if its still in print. I don't think our much more integrated, far more urban society would prove anything like as resilient.
Is there not an element of simple survival of the fittest here. Mortality rates pre 1900 were generally pretty high especially for the poor. However, those fortunate enough to survive 5 years beyond childbirth could often live to ripe old age - presumably their genes and natural defences which beat a multitide of infectious and other diseases earlier on continued to help them.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Yes, but these contracts were still being handed out without proper scrutiny well after the initial crisis passed. This is from the National Audit Office:
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the "canary in the mine" here saying very vocally that you were very, very worried about running out of PPE?
Have you got any such concerns about running out of PPE now?
Things were certainly very tight in April. Our procurements team were sometimes driving all night in their own vehicles to get enough PPE for the morning shifts. At the moment supplies seem OK. We have several days supply in our stockroom.
So, yes in April desperate measures were needed. That doesn't mean that the profiteering of the well connected should be ignored after the event, and it is certainly possible to have more normal procurement now.
If Starmer isn’t careful he could end up with a Labour version of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Muslim Labour have a survey which says they feel as discriminated as Jewish people do by Labour. Jezza’s gang will latch on to this sooner or later. Some MPs already have. So he probably has no choice but to try and keep a broad church that doubles up as a mosque and synagogue else risk losing inner city seats
Which is the fundamental problem with sectionalism vs a melting pot approach
The Muslim 'section' provides Labour with a much larger number of votes and while overwhelmingly moderate on most issues is less so wrt Israel and even Judaism. The conundrum remains.
Who would have thought that defining groups of people by race and religion, then setting them up as competing victim groups, would lead to the most extreme views coming to the forefront?
To paraphrase Bill Maher from last week, Martin Luther King said we should be blind to colour and treat everyone the same, but these people want to see colour always and everywhere.
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
What has he got on them?
In the case of Senators, who are relatively insulated from political pressure (though Graham, of course, was up for election this year), it's hard to say. But otherwise, it's pretty evident that they were firstly shellshocked by his original victory, and then intimidated by the repeated demonstrations of his ability to appeal to the Republican selectorate to get rid of dissidents by way of primaries.
Of course such ability was greatly exaggerated, especially had there been an early and concerted effort to stand up to him, but evidently, most Republican politicians have a streak of the craven, and there was no such concerted effort.
This Corbyn thing. The EHRC said that the leader should stay out of the way of disciplinary cases to avoid political interference. The reality here is that the panel investigating him is itself the political interference. How is an impartial assessment to be made when the chair of the investigating panel is a Corbynite who has already pledged fealty to Him? Read her piece just before the NEC election which cites "the relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn": https://labouroutlook.org/2020/11/11/rebuilding-to-win-yasmine-dar-ann-henderson-labour-nec-members-grassrootsvoice/
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
I think it depends what happens next. If media goes back to the old days of basically ignoring Corbyn et al, I think Starmer and Labour will be fine. If, however, they make noises against Starmer and his policies (when we hear them, that is), then it could be difficult.
Another reason why KS has got the ideal result. In which scenario is Corbyn likely to create the most bother and get the most attention - as a Labour backbencher with a dagger hanging over his head, or as an Independent MP sitting right behind them and free to say and do whatever he likes?
His authority has been compromised in his own party, he is now the frontman for a left wing executive.
Sir Keir Sockpuppet
He has been made to look ineffectual by his own party. This is why, in my opinion, the ECHR were completely wrong to focus on interference from the leadership in the disciplinary procedures. It treated political parties as if they are public bodies but they are not. They are voluntary associations which elect leaders who should lead. And that leadership includes determining what is and is not acceptable within the party. Corbyn was completely wrong and morally abhorrent about what was acceptable but his intervention was not the problem, he was.
Yes, when this was all going on, I was of the view that the moderates should have left the party en masse. As you say, there is no God given right for the Labour Party to be an non-racist party.
This is going to be a controversial view I’m sure, but what the hell were government supposed to do at the start of a pandemic with a thousand people a day dying? Hold the usual six-month procurement process, or find anyone and everyone they knew who could get hold of PPE?
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
Yes, but these contracts were still being handed out without proper scrutiny well after the initial crisis passed. This is from the National Audit Office:
Hypocrisy come easy when you’ve has as much practice as Graham.
Genuine question - why do we think so many Republicans are afraid of Trump?
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
What has he got on them?
Fanatical primary voters.
Fairy nuff. But here's another theory.
Early in his Presidency he visits Vladimir Putin. He speaks to him alone, no officials present, just Vlad's translator. Vlad asks him what he needs. Trump says he needs some dirt on his critics in the Republican Party so he can keep them in line. Vlad offers him the services of the KGB and access to the files they keep on all prominent politicians. Donald says 'that'll do nicely'. What does Vlad want in return?
- Sow divisions in American society - Damage trust in American democracy - Reduce American influence/security in Middle East - Kneecap NATO
A deal is done.
Fanciful?
Extremely fanciful. Like we say about Trump's fantasies - please provide some evidence!
The Republican Party were already mostly a bunch of anti-democratic gangsters before Trump came along. They can't attack him now because it would a) hurt their own careers b) split the party and lose at least the Georgia runoffs and control of the senate.
Comments
But Trump could still do it by just flipping (probably) three states if he could get State legislatures to appoint Trump electors.
Though there would then still be the possibility of the Governors of those States appointing Biden electors and then Congress having to choose between competing electors.
If that happened I think as another poster suggested the saving grace for Biden would likely be a small number of Republican Senators including Romney and Collins.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/17/politics/michigan-detroit-election-results/index.html
Coup averted!
IIUC they'll then create a new procedure as a result of the EHRC recommendations, so if Corbyn plays silly buggers I'll imagine he'll get thrown out again.
Looks like he has a good chance of making 80m. Still a lot to come from New York - Biden currently has 3.8m vs 4.6m for Hilary in 2016.
Current count:
Biden 79,087k (50.9%)
Trump 73,373k (47.3%)
https://edition.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president
F1: Ladbrokes special on Hulkenberg driving full time for Red Bull next year. Not backing it, but the odds are only 2.15, which makes it seem a credible possibility. Which is interesting.
It’s a very small, but very detailed study, which seems to indicate that young children can develop a strong immune response to the Covid virus without ever showing detectable infection (the entire family were repeatedly swabbed for PCR testing).
Immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in three children of parents with symptomatic COVID-19
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19545-8
Here, we describe clinical features, virology, longitudinal cellular, and cytokine immune profile, SARS-CoV-2-specific serology and salivary antibody responses in a family of two parents with PCR-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and their three children, who tested repeatedly SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative. Cellular immune profiles and cytokine responses of all children are similar to their parents at all timepoints. All family members have salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies detected, predominantly IgA, that coincide with symptom resolution in 3 of 4 symptomatic members. Plasma from both parents and one child have IgG antibody against the S1 protein and virus-neutralizing activity detected. Using a systems serology approach, we demonstrate higher levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody features of these family members compared to healthy controls. These data indicate that children can mount an immune response to SARS-CoV-2 without virological confirmation of infection, raising the possibility that immunity in children can prevent the establishment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Relying on routine virological and serological testing may not identify exposed children, with implications for epidemiological and clinical studies across the life-span.
Yes, those who were paid for things not delivered should be asked to account for the money, by a court if necessary, but I find it incredibly difficult to criticise those involved in the race for procurement at the time. Everyone in the world was trying to get their hands on gowns, masks and gloves, and by some accounts the UK came very close to running out in hospitals - would the same people complaining today have also been complaining in that situation as well?
https://twitter.com/nancykaffer/status/1328836317137022976?s=19
Also remember any primary (average size, under 300 pupils) sending 30 children home is in deep, deep shit on its attendance. For a secondary, that’s barely noticeable.
But most secondaries will be sending home more than 30 children. Round here, all the schools I know of it’s in the hundreds.
But again - it’s staff going off that’s the killer. If the current trajectory isn’t at least stabilised, I can’t see how schools stay open beyond the week after next.
https://order-order.com/2020/05/04/reeves-del-boy-ppe-suppliers-not-contact-government/
This has turned into an epidemic of bad science with the trusted figures being mostly those from the ONS, KCL, CEBM or other institutions unconnected to the government.
From 6 weeks ago
https://lockdownsceptics.org/lies-damned-lies-and-health-statistics-the-deadly-danger-of-false-positives/
The different testing method now being used in Liverpool reportedly shows a much lower rate of infection. Yeadon said he suspects accidental contamination of some PCR samples.
Funny if it were a TV comedy, 'Carry on Corona'; not so funny when peoples' livelihoods are being destroyed ... I'm talking about for instance the 10% of businesses that closed in late spring, never to reopen and people who are dying in care homes because they haven't seen their loved ones for 3-6 months.
Of course the testing method used in Liverpool shows lower rates. It's taken by people out and about -- therefore not isolating with symptoms -- and it's a less sensitive test.
--AS
--AS
How can anyone read the EHRC report, remember the outrages of the Corbyn era and then see the smiling twat apparently victorious and absolved and then think that the party has changed?
I said on the day the report was published that Starmer was spineless. Being forced to suspend Him having decided not to do so is not leadership, it is weakness. Allowing Him to be cleared of wrongdoing and lauded back into the party as a returning messiah is a disaster.
Labour has to be Tough on Corbyn, Tough on the Causes of Corbyn. It isn't acceptable to have the deposed leader sat with a significant support group clearly holding the whip hand over the party. You can't change direction and make amends whilst the people who did the damage sit on board doing more damage. Sorry Labour, but this is a massive own goal.
We know due to data from August and September that the rise in cases isn't false positives. We know this because when there was a MASSSIVE spike in testing coinciding with the start of school there was no MASSIVE spike in cases.
If false positives are the reason for rising cases then we should have see a spike in positive cases to match the increased testing when school started. We didn't. So it isn't.
That's it. End of message.
As it is, Corbyn knows he is on a last warning. If he engages in primary antisemitism (which he didn’t, this time) he knows he is out. Job done.
It does bring to mind, however, that the fatality rate for the whole population for the black death was somewhere between 50 and 60%, that is between 500 and 600 times greater. An agrarian, largely rural society but I find it astonishing that anything like society actually survived that.
I see it as similar to the working of a cult. Indeed someone (I think it was Tristan Harris) has called the internet a cult factory. I'd like to think that I'd have compassion for, say, a relative who fell into a cult, and would try to deprogram them slowly. For a stranger on the internet I must admit that I cannot summon the energy to engage, but sometimes can be bothered to argue against the propaganda.
--AS
Bringing the Party into Disrepute. That's what they needed to deploy against Corbyn and his acolytes. Force the cult to deny that an EHRC investigation and guilty findings bring the party into disrepute. That egregious GDPR breeches bring the party into disrepute. That libel against former staffers and a journalist whistleblowing against you brings the party into disrepute. And then boot ALL of them out.
Instead we have this. They have been vilified. Solidified. Vindicated. And they will draw strength from the experience. Its a disgrace.
Black Death was of course a whole different order of catastrophe but the estimated 30-60% fatality rate is based on it's effect across the whole population.
Especially for @DavidL [given his Dundonian location, if anyone wonders].
It's entirely understandable that all this was done in an extreme rush, and mistakes were inevitable - but it's hard to see that as anything other than either stupidity or corruption, particularly when those friends of ministers don't seem (to be extremely generous) to have been unusually proficient compared to anyone else in delivering usable product.
Corbyn is yesterday's man. That the party has allowed him to crawl back in as a nonentity wont bother anyone other than those with a personal animus. Keeping Starmer's name in the news for doing the right thing is never a negative when most people's attention is elsewhere.
How the hell do European governments react? I suspect they go with the result of the electoral college (assuming there isn’t a civil war... but may be that’s why Trump is bring the boys home from Iraq and Afghanistan 😱👿)
We have spent in excess of £200 billion on Covid. Yet people want to say we shouldn't have paid those going crazy market rates, where we were literally competing against the rest of the world? The rounding error on the rounding error of Covid. Procure it, money no object was an entirely satisfactory outcome as far as I'm concerned. Some middlemen made some money? If you don't like that, go live on another planet. "French safe as our cheapskate Government won't pay going rates to save our NHS workers" would have been a REALLY juicy retweet, eh Scott?
😂
Politicians feel a desperate need to be seen to do something. Nicola was a particularly poor example yesterday. After 3 weeks when the infection rate in Glasgow exceeded 300 in 100k she took severe action after a week when it had been below because the death rate (lagging of course) was climbing.
I understand the pressures but just maybe this hyperactivity is not in fact the answer?
What is wrong with Ministers doing the same?
If there is a cronic shortage and a company that could supply millions of items manages to speak to a Minister and say "we have millions of what you need available" then should the Minister sit on that and ignore it?
Covid-19 fatality rate in the United Kingdom is 0.1%
Sir Keir Sockpuppet
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/18/ppe-suppliers-with-political-ties-given-high-priority-status-report-reveals
Decertifying Michigan & Pennsylvania would take him to 270 on the nose...
Who knew that supply and demand works very clearly during an emergency, and that throwing procurement rules out of the window is a positive, rather than a negative thing to do at the time.
You see it not only in their craven submission to outrageous conduct, such as the sacking of Krebs, but in their body language when with him. The photos look like parodies of meetings of top-ranking Korean officials with Kim Jong-un.
What has he got on them?
Have you got any such concerns about running out of PPE now?
I just don’t think it’s particularly unreasonable that, when faced with a war or pandemic, the usual processes go out of the window to be replaced with the government asking if anyone knows anyone who can get this stuff?
By all means argue against lockdowns on economic grounds or libertarian ones, indeed I have sympathies for those arguments, but denying the reality of an ongoing pandemic is just crazy.
They should, of course, have been exploring all avenues. What is at issue is the preference given to those no more qualified than anyone else (and in several cases clearly not qualified at all), simply because of relationships with ministers.
In an emergency, money is not necessarily going to be well spent. That is no excuse for doing so corruptly.
That also means that's the IFR we face if we let hospital capacity become overwhelmed.
I find the argument that we have overreacted to Covid, because we've successfully prevented it from killing the 3 million who would have died in the worst-case scenario a bit illogical.
Have New Zealand overreacted more because they've been more successful in stopping the virus? But then they have crowds at sports stadiums so they have less death and less impact on society.
Early in his Presidency he visits Vladimir Putin. He speaks to him alone, no officials present, just Vlad's translator. Vlad asks him what he needs. Trump says he needs some dirt on his critics in the Republican Party so he can keep them in line. Vlad offers him the services of the KGB and access to the files they keep on all prominent politicians. Donald says 'that'll do nicely'. What does Vlad want in return?
- Sow divisions in American society
- Damage trust in American democracy
- Reduce American influence/security in Middle East
- Kneecap NATO
A deal is done.
Fanciful?
However if, when the initial panic had subsided due diligence was still not being performed, then that's an entirely different matter.
And if some of those contacted took the money and ran, i.e supplied nothing, or what they did supply was unusable, the Government should try to get least some of the money back.
So, yes in April desperate measures were needed. That doesn't mean that the profiteering of the well connected should be ignored after the event, and it is certainly possible to have more normal procurement now.
To paraphrase Bill Maher from last week, Martin Luther King said we should be blind to colour and treat everyone the same, but these people want to see colour always and everywhere.
But otherwise, it's pretty evident that they were firstly shellshocked by his original victory, and then intimidated by the repeated demonstrations of his ability to appeal to the Republican selectorate to get rid of dissidents by way of primaries.
Of course such ability was greatly exaggerated, especially had there been an early and concerted effort to stand up to him, but evidently, most Republican politicians have a streak of the craven, and there was no such concerted effort.
The Republican Party were already mostly a bunch of anti-democratic gangsters before Trump came along. They can't attack him now because it would a) hurt their own careers b) split the party and lose at least the Georgia runoffs and control of the senate.