Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From a 4.9% betting chance to 75% one in just nine days – Bide

2456789

Comments

  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,472
    nichomar said:

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    Average age of cruise passenger is around 46 apparently as discussed yesterday but not all cruises are like the Diamond P which attracts an older market.
    But that's an average of your Caribbean party/family type cruise, where most people will be younger, and your typical Med or Baltic/fjord cruise where much older.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,245
    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    They don’t seem to strip out the difference between serious and critical do they, which are actually a different criteria. Critical patients in China had odds of 50-50 or a bit worse. I don’t think the data is there for Singapore, to determine if the critical cases are the same people as always of if there has been churn. But I would be surprised if Diamond Princess has another 18 deaths. Celebrate the positives when they’re there gang.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited March 2020



    Abrams rising star might shine a whole lot brighter if the Pres keels over during the next four years (and not even dies - 25th Amendment territory).

    I'd be quite chipper about my prospects if I were picked as Biden's VP.....

    Ha, fair point. Though there's a big risk being tied to the presidency of a senile old coot if things go downhill.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,472

    Amazingly Clinton is now in to 40/1

    That’s absolutely barmy.

    A decrepit Biden is going to be the Democrat candidate. That is also absolutely barmy.
    He appears to be promising cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s and diabetes.

    https://twitter.com/mooncult/status/1235063098928590848?s=21
    He'll promise you anything if you give him a cup of tea and a biscuit....
    then be disappointed when he doesn't get one of those savoury scone things dipped in salty gravy
  • Options
    ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,902

    Are there any super delegates this primary season?

    2nd ballot onwards only.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Quincel said:

    I wonder what the 538 forecast will say when they unfreeze it? They had Biden at 31% to win a majority before and he exceeded their model fairly clearly, so I reckon a 50-60% chance of a majority for him which firms up to more if national polling begins to give him clear leads.

    I would say 80% chance he gets a majority now. With only 2 viable candidates now and the 15% rule the landing strip for not getting an overall majority is actually much smaller than people assume.
  • Options
    Chameleon said:

    Are there any super delegates this primary season?

    2nd ballot onwards only.
    Thanks.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912
    Chameleon said:

    Germany's figures have about a day of lag between states reporting and the Robert Koch institute doing so. Up to 300 now.

    The official Robert Koch Intstitute's web page has 240 cases in Germany. I'm not doubting your claim but when there is such rapid changes, it is only natural that there is a lag of a few hours in reporting.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,245

    moonshine said:

    Worth getting tested to see if you have the antibodies? If you do, it might be of help foro the authorities in tracking down where you came into contact with it.
    It’s crossed my mind. When I looked at the detailed data yesterday for the first time it does seem as well that several days before we showed symptoms, I spent an afternoon in a fairly obscure part of the island that had an unusually high amount of infections that week. Tube station, a few shops, even an office building that had an employee as a known case a couple of days prior. Not too sure what else I was supposed to do though, between us we had no less than 5 contacts with the healthcare industry during the period we were sick. At least we were very diligent with the self isolation, which involved more Peppa Pig than anyone pre lobotomy should have to endure.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    moonshine said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    They don’t seem to strip out the difference between serious and critical do they, which are actually a different criteria. Critical patients in China had odds of 50-50 or a bit worse. I don’t think the data is there for Singapore, to determine if the critical cases are the same people as always of if there has been churn. But I would be surprised if Diamond Princess has another 18 deaths. Celebrate the positives when they’re there gang.
    There were reports earlier this morning that the virus had mutated to two different forms. One being far more infectious and dangerous than the other. Research out of China I think.
  • Options
    I predict this will lead to riots if this happens worldwide.

    Apple will temporarily close one of its retail stores in Italy as the government grapples with the spread of COVID-19 in the country, which has experienced the worst outbreak of coronavirus in Europe so far.

    https://www.macrumors.com/2020/03/04/apple-close-retail-stores-italy-covid-19/
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Pulpstar said:

    NYTimes Est delegates

    Joseph R. Biden Jr.
    670

    Bernie Sanders
    589

    Michael R. Bloomberg
    104

    Elizabeth Warren
    97

    Where is Warren getting her delegates from ?

    Counties, especially in California?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,827

    Amazingly Clinton is now in to 40/1

    That’s absolutely barmy.

    A decrepit Biden is going to be the Democrat candidate. That is also absolutely barmy.
    He appears to be promising cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s and diabetes.

    https://twitter.com/mooncult/status/1235063098928590848?s=21
    Not without precedence. Obama promised a cure for cancer in his State of the Union which was itself what Sam Seaborne wanted Jed Bartlett to do in the West Wing.
    Nixon, too.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Pulpstar said:

    NYTimes Est delegates

    Joseph R. Biden Jr.
    670

    Bernie Sanders
    589

    Michael R. Bloomberg
    104

    Elizabeth Warren
    97

    Where is Warren getting her delegates from ?

    15% rule. She's beaten 15% in 4 states, plus if you fail to get 15% but get more than 15% in a district then you still get delegates for that district. She's on 12-14% in a few states including California so there would be quite a few districts where she's over 15% and thus getting delegates.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Sandpit said:

    Quincel said:

    Sandpit said:

    So, who’ll admit to getting that 21 or 22 on Biden on 24th Feb?

    If only all my bets were this good!


    Ooh, well done you! :)

    He’s 1.31 now.
    I got Joe @ 17 on the 24th for a stake of *checks notes* £3.50 .
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912

    Buttigieg for Veep?

    What demographic does he add? If he would win blue collar votes in the Midwest it may help, but that's not his base.

    Biden's ideal pick would probably be a Latino woman. But absent any realistic chance of that he could go for Beto.
    Same question: what does Beto add? My guess is when the veep pick is announced there will be a race to google the representative for the Great State of Wazoo. Bonus smart-arse points for those who remember which law exam that state featured in.
    Spoiler: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/conlaw3.obama.1996.fall.pdf
    Hey, as I said the Dems don't have much to work with.

    Beto has much more history working on the Latino vote, and could take charge of that push. Although in many ways he's a moderate, he's not totally hated by the Left. Also someone from outside the North/Northeast.

    VP picks are rarely people who could overshadow the president.

    The alternatives seem to bring less.

    Biden has Black support so why pick Abrams? Besides she's trumpeted as a rising star, VP is not the ideal position to advance from.

    Biden eats the Butt/Klob vote so no need for them.

    Warren? Olive branch to the Left maybe, but she's ambitious and would not be controllable.
    Abrams rising star might shine a whole lot brighter if the Pres keels over during the next four years (and not even dies - 25th Amendment territory).

    I'd be quite chipper about my prospects if I were picked as Biden's VP.....
    If Trump fails to be re-elected he will be only the second first-term incumbent from his party seeking election to fail since the started of the 20th century. Trump, his general awfulness and coronavirus certainly make that possible - just as the Iran Hostage Crisis arguably made it possible for the only example Carter to lose.

    So if the Democrats win this time (big if!) I'd make them very heavy odds on to win in 2024 and I can't see Biden running again in 2024 even if he makes it that far. So his Veep should be odds on favourite for next President from the day after Biden is elected if he is.
    Are you counting Gerald Ford as a 0-th Term Republican?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002

    Pulpstar said:

    NYTimes Est delegates

    Joseph R. Biden Jr.
    670

    Bernie Sanders
    589

    Michael R. Bloomberg
    104

    Elizabeth Warren
    97

    Where is Warren getting her delegates from ?

    15% rule. She's beaten 15% in 4 states, plus if you fail to get 15% but get more than 15% in a district then you still get delegates for that district. She's on 12-14% in a few states including California so there would be quite a few districts where she's over 15% and thus getting delegates.
    I think she'll be lower than 97 when California finishes counting. So we'll know by June.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,361
    Monkeys said:

    Biden won't beat Trump. Very few people who have held cabinet positions go on the be president, it IS only ex-VP'sn but they either did something special in office, or ran against a VP. Biden is a dafty and his son already caused one president to be impeached.

    I genuinely can't see how he loses. My one caveat - and it is a big one - is his condition. There will be gaffes. Fine, it's priced in, but not if they are of a nature and frequency that lead people to go, "You know that? This guy is not up to it. It's sad. I'd like to vote for him but I don't think I can."

    Has he "gone over" in other words? Not because he is 77 years old. It happens to different people at different ages. Has it happened with Joe? If it has, the Dems might be about to make a monumental blunder. On balance, I think it's going to be OK.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eristdoof said:

    Buttigieg for Veep?

    What demographic does he add? If he would win blue collar votes in the Midwest it may help, but that's not his base.

    Biden's ideal pick would probably be a Latino woman. But absent any realistic chance of that he could go for Beto.
    Same question: what does Beto add? My guess is when the veep pick is announced there will be a race to google the representative for the Great State of Wazoo. Bonus smart-arse points for those who remember which law exam that state featured in.
    Spoiler: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/conlaw3.obama.1996.fall.pdf
    Hey, as I said the Dems don't have much to work with.

    Beto has much more history working on the Latino vote, and could take charge of that push. Although in many ways he's a moderate, he's not totally hated by the Left. Also someone from outside the North/Northeast.

    VP picks are rarely people who could overshadow the president.

    The alternatives seem to bring less.

    Biden has Black support so why pick Abrams? Besides she's trumpeted as a rising star, VP is not the ideal position to advance from.

    Biden eats the Butt/Klob vote so no need for them.

    Warren? Olive branch to the Left maybe, but she's ambitious and would not be controllable.
    Abrams rising star might shine a whole lot brighter if the Pres keels over during the next four years (and not even dies - 25th Amendment territory).

    I'd be quite chipper about my prospects if I were picked as Biden's VP.....
    If Trump fails to be re-elected he will be only the second first-term incumbent from his party seeking election to fail since the started of the 20th century. Trump, his general awfulness and coronavirus certainly make that possible - just as the Iran Hostage Crisis arguably made it possible for the only example Carter to lose.

    So if the Democrats win this time (big if!) I'd make them very heavy odds on to win in 2024 and I can't see Biden running again in 2024 even if he makes it that far. So his Veep should be odds on favourite for next President from the day after Biden is elected if he is.
    Are you counting Gerald Ford as a 0-th Term Republican?
    No, second term.

    First term for Republicans in that go was winning the 1968 election. Re-election was in 1972. Thus when Ford took over it was already the second term for the GOP being in office.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2020

    Monkeys said:

    kinabalu said:

    Disappointed it's not going to be Bernie. Biden will doubtless beat Trump - which let's face it is the main thing - but IMO Bernie would have done so too. President Sanders could have been iconic and the necessary game-changer for a country so wealthy and powerful yet with such deeply offensive levels of poverty and inequality. Change is coming - but not quite yet.

    That said, Biden is OK. And compared to the individual he will replace he is the Second Coming. So, yes, I'm totally behind him now. Whatever it takes, including the right medication. C'mon Joe!

    Biden won't beat Trump. .
    Coronavirus is the game-changer here, otherwise I'd agree.

    And, no, Sanders wouldn't win. He would be utterly pulverised in the US election. For Americans he's 1000x worse than Corbyn. Not because of terrorist sympathies or anti-semitism but the worst 'S' crime of them all. Socialist.
    Here's how the coronavirus changes the game: anybody would beat Trump. It could be Biden; or if Biden pulls out for health or scandal reasons, it could be Bloomberg or Sanders. There is no incumbency bias in an epidemic-ravaged wasteland. Trump will have to make a BIIIG promise - if not a technical promise the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of which can be objectively verified or argued about by politicians, then still a biiig and resounding promise that everyone remembers because the monarch came into everybody's vision at what then seemed the country's greatest moment of trouble and he declared they could rely on him to save them. And things then got worse beyond most of their wildest imaginations. Bye bye monarch. Trump is absolute toast. I won't be surprised if he doesn't run, storms out of office in a tantrum, kooks out completely and gets Article 25ed, gets successfully impeached, or watches his ratings fall so far that even he gets the message. CROWDS ARE FICKLE.
    I generally agree that Coronavirus is the big wild card. If it gets really bad Sanders' obsessive focus on health could perform just as well as Biden's "Southern" appeal in that situation, if not better.

    However, we still have no idea if the outbreak is going to get that serious, and in more normal circumstances both candidates would be easily beaten by Trump, I think, with Sanders in the more usual case the slightly more vulnerable of the two with his "socialist" problem.
  • Options
    Kevin_McCandlessKevin_McCandless Posts: 392
    edited March 2020

    Amazingly Clinton is now in to 40/1

    That’s absolutely barmy.

    A decrepit Biden is going to be the Democrat candidate. That is also absolutely barmy.
    He appears to be promising cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s and diabetes.

    https://twitter.com/mooncult/status/1235063098928590848?s=21
    Not without precedence. Obama promised a cure for cancer in his State of the Union which was itself what Sam Seaborne wanted Jed Bartlett to do in the West Wing.
    Which comes back nicely around. The writers cured Bartlett of his MS in the seventh season when they got tired of dealing with it.

    Stay up all night, deal with stressful nuke meltdowns, nope... not a problem anymore.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Nigelb said:

    Amazingly Clinton is now in to 40/1

    That’s absolutely barmy.

    A decrepit Biden is going to be the Democrat candidate. That is also absolutely barmy.
    He appears to be promising cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s and diabetes.

    https://twitter.com/mooncult/status/1235063098928590848?s=21
    Not without precedence. Obama promised a cure for cancer in his State of the Union which was itself what Sam Seaborne wanted Jed Bartlett to do in the West Wing.
    Nixon, too.
    I did not know that, thank you.

    Probably got a bit overshadowed.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    You may be surprised to learn that the majority of passengers are likely to be in their 60's and the average age is 46.7 years

    On our last cruise to Canada and the US I was amazed how many were retirees from the NHS and public sector
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,084
    nichomar said:

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    Average age of cruise passenger is around 46 apparently as discussed yesterday but not all cruises are like the Diamond P which attracts an older market.
    I am amazed it is that low, mostly you see old codgers.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912

    eristdoof said:

    Buttigieg for Veep?

    What demographic does he add? If he would win blue collar votes in the Midwest it may help, but that's not his base.

    Biden's ideal pick would probably be a Latino woman. But absent any realistic chance of that he could go for Beto.
    Same question: what does Beto add? My guess is when the veep pick is announced there will be a race to google the representative for the Great State of Wazoo. Bonus smart-arse points for those who remember which law exam that state featured in.
    Spoiler: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/conlaw3.obama.1996.fall.pdf
    Hey, as I said the Dems don't have much to work with.

    Beto has much more history working on the Latino vote, and could take charge of that push. Although in many ways he's a moderate, he's not totally hated by the Left. Also someone from outside the North/Northeast.

    VP picks are rarely people who could overshadow the president.

    The alternatives seem to bring less.

    Biden has Black support so why pick Abrams? Besides she's trumpeted as a rising star, VP is not the ideal position to advance from.

    Biden eats the Butt/Klob vote so no need for them.

    Warren? Olive branch to the Left maybe, but she's ambitious and would not be controllable.
    Abrams rising star might shine a whole lot brighter if the Pres keels over during the next four years (and not even dies - 25th Amendment territory).

    I'd be quite chipper about my prospects if I were picked as Biden's VP.....
    If Trump fails to be re-elected he will be only the second first-term incumbent from his party seeking election to fail since the started of the 20th century. Trump, his general awfulness and coronavirus certainly make that possible - just as the Iran Hostage Crisis arguably made it possible for the only example Carter to lose.

    So if the Democrats win this time (big if!) I'd make them very heavy odds on to win in 2024 and I can't see Biden running again in 2024 even if he makes it that far. So his Veep should be odds on favourite for next President from the day after Biden is elected if he is.
    Are you counting Gerald Ford as a 0-th Term Republican?
    No, second term.

    First term for Republicans in that go was winning the 1968 election. Re-election was in 1972. Thus when Ford took over it was already the second term for the GOP being in office.
    So are you counting Bush in 1994 as a 3-rd Term Republican?
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Los casos de #coronavirus en España, actualizados a las 12h. de hoy, 4 de marzo de 2020, son:

    Andalucía 13
    Asturias 2
    Baleares 3
    Canarias 7
    Cantabria 10
    CyL 8
    CLM 7
    Cataluña 15
    C. Valenciana 19
    Extremadura 6
    Madrid 70
    Navarra 1
    País Vasco 15
    La Rioja 3

    Total: 179

  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    Buttigieg for Veep?

    What demographic does he add? If he would win blue collar votes in the Midwest it may help, but that's not his base.

    Biden's ideal pick would probably be a Latino woman. But absent any realistic chance of that he could go for Beto.
    Same question: what does Beto add? My guess is when the veep pick is announced there will be a race to google the representative for the Great State of Wazoo. Bonus smart-arse points for those who remember which law exam that state featured in.
    Spoiler: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/conlaw3.obama.1996.fall.pdf
    Hey, as I said the Dems don't have much to work with.

    Beto has much more history working on the Latino vote, and could take charge of that push. Although in many ways he's a moderate, he's not totally hated by the Left. Also someone from outside the North/Northeast.

    VP picks are rarely people who could overshadow the president.

    The alternatives seem to bring less.

    Biden has Black support so why pick Abrams? Besides she's trumpeted as a rising star, VP is not the ideal position to advance from.

    Biden eats the Butt/Klob vote so no need for them.

    Warren? Olive branch to the Left maybe, but she's ambitious and would not be controllable.
    Abrams rising star might shine a whole lot brighter if the Pres keels over during the next four years (and not even dies - 25th Amendment territory).

    I'd be quite chipper about my prospects if I were picked as Biden's VP.....
    If Trump fails to be re-elected he will be only the second first-term incumbent from his party seeking election to fail since the started of the 20th century. Trump, his general awfulness and coronavirus certainly make that possible - just as the Iran Hostage Crisis arguably made it possible for the only example Carter to lose.

    So if the Democrats win this time (big if!) I'd make them very heavy odds on to win in 2024 and I can't see Biden running again in 2024 even if he makes it that far. So his Veep should be odds on favourite for next President from the day after Biden is elected if he is.
    Are you counting Gerald Ford as a 0-th Term Republican?
    No, second term.

    First term for Republicans in that go was winning the 1968 election. Re-election was in 1972. Thus when Ford took over it was already the second term for the GOP being in office.
    So are you counting Bush in 1994 as a 3-rd Term Republican?
    Yes.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,472
    edited March 2020

    Monkeys said:

    kinabalu said:

    Disappointed it's not going to be Bernie. Biden will doubtless beat Trump - which let's face it is the main thing - but IMO Bernie would have done so too. President Sanders could have been iconic and the necessary game-changer for a country so wealthy and powerful yet with such deeply offensive levels of poverty and inequality. Change is coming - but not quite yet.

    That said, Biden is OK. And compared to the individual he will replace he is the Second Coming. So, yes, I'm totally behind him now. Whatever it takes, including the right medication. C'mon Joe!

    Biden won't beat Trump. .
    Coronavirus is the game-changer here, otherwise I'd agree.

    And, no, Sanders wouldn't win. He would be utterly pulverised in the US election. For Americans he's 1000x worse than Corbyn. Not because of terrorist sympathies or anti-semitism but the worst 'S' crime of them all. Socialist.
    ...in an epidemic-ravaged wasteland.....
    Are you Mrs Thomas, by any chance?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,146

    Monkeys said:

    kinabalu said:

    Disappointed it's not going to be Bernie. Biden will doubtless beat Trump - which let's face it is the main thing - but IMO Bernie would have done so too. President Sanders could have been iconic and the necessary game-changer for a country so wealthy and powerful yet with such deeply offensive levels of poverty and inequality. Change is coming - but not quite yet.

    That said, Biden is OK. And compared to the individual he will replace he is the Second Coming. So, yes, I'm totally behind him now. Whatever it takes, including the right medication. C'mon Joe!

    Biden won't beat Trump. .
    Coronavirus is the game-changer here, otherwise I'd agree.

    And, no, Sanders wouldn't win. He would be utterly pulverised in the US election. For Americans he's 1000x worse than Corbyn. Not because of terrorist sympathies or anti-semitism but the worst 'S' crime of them all. Socialist.
    Here's how the coronavirus changes the game: anybody would beat Trump. It could be Biden; or if Biden pulls out for health or scandal reasons, it could be Bloomberg or Sanders. There is no incumbency bias in an epidemic-ravaged wasteland. Trump will have to make a BIIIG promise - if not a technical promise the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of which can be objectively verified or argued about by politicians, then still a biiig and resounding promise that everyone remembers because the monarch came into everybody's vision at what then seemed the country's greatest moment of trouble and he declared they could rely on him to save them. And things then got worse beyond most of their wildest imaginations. Bye bye monarch. Trump is absolute toast. I won't be surprised if he doesn't run, storms out of office in a tantrum, kooks out completely and gets Article 25ed, gets successfully impeached, or watches his ratings fall so far that even he gets the message. CROWDS ARE FICKLE.
    How about this scenario: Biden becomes the nominee, and then Trump steals Bernie’s health plan and wins the election off the back of it.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,397
    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,084

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    You may be surprised to learn that the majority of passengers are likely to be in their 60's and the average age is 46.7 years

    On our last cruise to Canada and the US I was amazed how many were retirees from the NHS and public sector
    Amazed G, and they are the guys and gals with gold plated final pensions.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    malcolmg said:

    nichomar said:

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    Average age of cruise passenger is around 46 apparently as discussed yesterday but not all cruises are like the Diamond P which attracts an older market.
    I am amazed it is that low, mostly you see old codgers.
    As Ian explained the average is skewed by short Caribbean cruises out of the states which attracts young Americans (or used to!)
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,430
    When is Bloomberg going to exit?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    No shortage of bog roll in Chez Urquhart, as Mrs U went a bit mental in CostCo during what now seems the incredibly trivial talk of a cliff edge Brexit.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,397
    kinabalu said:

    Monkeys said:

    Biden won't beat Trump. Very few people who have held cabinet positions go on the be president, it IS only ex-VP'sn but they either did something special in office, or ran against a VP. Biden is a dafty and his son already caused one president to be impeached.

    I genuinely can't see how he loses. My one caveat - and it is a big one - is his condition. There will be gaffes. Fine, it's priced in, but not if they are of a nature and frequency that lead people to go, "You know that? This guy is not up to it. It's sad. I'd like to vote for him but I don't think I can."

    Has he "gone over" in other words? Not because he is 77 years old. It happens to different people at different ages. Has it happened with Joe? If it has, the Dems might be about to make a monumental blunder. On balance, I think it's going to be OK.
    It’s a worry, no question. But Trumps response to the virus should make him doomed.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    nichomar said:

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    Average age of cruise passenger is around 46 apparently as discussed yesterday but not all cruises are like the Diamond P which attracts an older market.
    I am amazed it is that low, mostly you see old codgers.
    Not on the 15 cruises I have been on. There are some of course but the majority would be in the 60-65 range
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    You may be surprised to learn that the majority of passengers are likely to be in their 60's and the average age is 46.7 years

    On our last cruise to Canada and the US I was amazed how many were retirees from the NHS and public sector
    Amazed G, and they are the guys and gals with gold plated final pensions.
    It does seem so
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited March 2020
    nichomar said:



    I am amazed it is that low, mostly you see old codgers.

    Lots of very cheap "booze cruise" out of Florida that young people do, especially in the off-season. Also, past 5-6 years, been increasingly popular to run themed cruises for a particular type of music or a set of bands. So rather than do a festival in a field, they do it on a cruise ship.
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    malcolmg said:

    nichomar said:

    malcolmg said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    moonshine said:


    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    Worldometer says 36 Diamond P cases are serious or critical. If half of those die (seems conservative) that's a CFR of 3.4%. As you say, how encouraging that looks depends on average age of patient. I don't know how true the perception is that they were all in their 80s.
    Not seen many pictures of cruise ships where more than a handful looked under 80
    Average age of cruise passenger is around 46 apparently as discussed yesterday but not all cruises are like the Diamond P which attracts an older market.
    I am amazed it is that low, mostly you see old codgers.
    Not on the 15 cruises I have been on. There are some of course but the majority would be in the 60-65 range
    In the UK cruises are for the oldies (in general). Caribbean cruises, and cruises in the Far East tend to have a much lower average age, and are a much larger market. Not sure where the 46 came from, but as a global average feels about right to me.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2020
    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    No shortage of bog roll in Chez Urquhart, as Mrs U went a bit mental in CostCo during what now seems the incredibly trivial talk of a cliff edge Brexit.

    Worst case there are tonnes of free newspapers around these days. Getting to wipe your derriere with Boris's gurning fizzog more than offsets the sub-optimal absorbency.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912

    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:



    If Trump fails to be re-elected he will be only the second first-term incumbent from his party seeking election to fail since the started of the 20th century. Trump, his general awfulness and coronavirus certainly make that possible - just as the Iran Hostage Crisis arguably made it possible for the only example Carter to lose.

    So if the Democrats win this time (big if!) I'd make them very heavy odds on to win in 2024 and I can't see Biden running again in 2024 even if he makes it that far. So his Veep should be odds on favourite for next President from the day after Biden is elected if he is.

    Are you counting Gerald Ford as a 0-th Term Republican?
    No, second term.

    First term for Republicans in that go was winning the 1968 election. Re-election was in 1972. Thus when Ford took over it was already the second term for the GOP being in office.
    So are you counting Bush in 1994 as a 3-rd Term Republican?
    Yes.
    Ah OK, thanks. This does though mean there were not many 1st term Rep/Dem
    candidates. I make it 12 cases if you include 1900 in the 20th century, of those Carter 1980 was the only one to lose.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,430
    edited March 2020

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.
    Some polls have more Warren supporters putting Biden as their second choice. Having her stay in might still be to Sanders advantage.

    I don't think he could ever win a clear head-to-head contest. He needs as wide a field as possible.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,430

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Warren has done a deal with Biden, to keep going?
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Maybe the Democrats should organise primaries for the primaries, to avoid such a splits in the future.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    PROTOCOL ALERT/QUESTION

    Govt advice is to sneeze/cough into your elbow. So where does that leave elbow bumping instead of shaking hands?

    TIA
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    Coronavirus is likely to be spreading undetected in the UK already, with health officials on the brink of moving into the phase of “delaying” rather than trying to “contain” transmission, the chief medical officer has said.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/04/coronavirus-epidemic-in-uk-is-likely-says-chief-medical-officer
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,207
    Just watching Laura Trott on the politics programme on BBC. I think I've seen it said that she has the potential to be an awkward MP, but she is very much on message today with regards to Patel and Brexit.
  • Options
    ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,902
    TOPPING said:

    PROTOCOL ALERT/QUESTION

    Govt advice is to sneeze/cough into your elbow. So where does that leave elbow bumping instead of shaking hands?

    TIA

    Don't lick your elbow.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Joe Biden
    15 £45.00£630.00
    Ref: 196016565278
    Matched: 18:34 23-Feb-20

    Joe Biden
    16.5 £10.00£155.00
    Ref: 195920450934
    Matched: 07:03 23-Feb-20
    Joe Biden
    16.5 £20.00£310.00
    Ref: 195919359519
    Matched: 06:42 23-Feb-20

    23rd February seems to have been the day I decided to back Biden at longest odds.

    His Nevada result was a good one but one only the real wonks and nerds could probably notice amongst the Sanders cacophony.
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    eristdoof said:

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Maybe the Democrats should organise primaries for the primaries, to avoid such a splits in the future.
    Joking aside, it would make a lot sense imho to have the 15% viability threshold also act as an an AV threshold and reallocate votes of candidates below that.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Chameleon said:

    TOPPING said:

    PROTOCOL ALERT/QUESTION

    Govt advice is to sneeze/cough into your elbow. So where does that leave elbow bumping instead of shaking hands?

    TIA

    Don't lick your elbow.
    What if you don’t know the difference between.......
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,553
    DavidL said:

    kinabalu said:

    Monkeys said:

    Biden won't beat Trump. Very few people who have held cabinet positions go on the be president, it IS only ex-VP'sn but they either did something special in office, or ran against a VP. Biden is a dafty and his son already caused one president to be impeached.

    I genuinely can't see how he loses. My one caveat - and it is a big one - is his condition. There will be gaffes. Fine, it's priced in, but not if they are of a nature and frequency that lead people to go, "You know that? This guy is not up to it. It's sad. I'd like to vote for him but I don't think I can."

    Has he "gone over" in other words? Not because he is 77 years old. It happens to different people at different ages. Has it happened with Joe? If it has, the Dems might be about to make a monumental blunder. On balance, I think it's going to be OK.
    It’s a worry, no question. But Trumps response to the virus should make him doomed.
    Trump's response to the virus won't be much of a factor because he can blame the anti-interventionist Pence who is formally in charge, and the "hoax" tweet is susceptible of innocent interpretation (tbh I'm not sure what Trump was on about but he seemed to be using "hoax" to mean something else entirely). The vague sense that the virus comes from abroad will help him.

    Biden's brainfades will be highlighted and will hurt him and the fact that Trump is all over the shop will make no difference. Life's not fair and nor is politics.

  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2020

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.
    Some polls have more Warren supporters putting Biden as their second choice. Having her stay in might still be to Sanders advantage.

    I don't think he could ever win a clear head-to-head contest. He needs as wide a field as possible.
    Warren is certainly complicated because she attracts a range of voters, but she does have a clear left-feminist appeal in amongst that too, I think, which would be inclined to head to Sanders over Biden.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912
    TOPPING said:

    PROTOCOL ALERT/QUESTION

    Govt advice is to sneeze/cough into your elbow. So where does that leave elbow bumping instead of shaking hands?

    TIA

    You cough into the inside of your elbow and bump with the outside. After an elbow bump don't try to wipe your nose on the outside of your elbow, 'cos it's not possible.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:



    If Trump fails to be re-elected he will be only the second first-term incumbent from his party seeking election to fail since the started of the 20th century. Trump, his general awfulness and coronavirus certainly make that possible - just as the Iran Hostage Crisis arguably made it possible for the only example Carter to lose.

    So if the Democrats win this time (big if!) I'd make them very heavy odds on to win in 2024 and I can't see Biden running again in 2024 even if he makes it that far. So his Veep should be odds on favourite for next President from the day after Biden is elected if he is.

    Are you counting Gerald Ford as a 0-th Term Republican?
    No, second term.

    First term for Republicans in that go was winning the 1968 election. Re-election was in 1972. Thus when Ford took over it was already the second term for the GOP being in office.
    So are you counting Bush in 1994 as a 3-rd Term Republican?
    Yes.
    Ah OK, thanks. This does though mean there were not many 1st term Rep/Dem
    candidates. I make it 12 cases if you include 1900 in the 20th century, of those Carter 1980 was the only one to lose.
    That's what I make it. 12 with Carter the only loss, which means an over 90% win rate by first timers.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,430
    moonshine said:


    Seems to me that the government’s advice since Monday has vindicated Eadric. Sure, they were a bit more sober but the underlying message was the same. Containment is nearing an end, a very big proportion of the population will end up catching the virus until herd immunity kicks in and on the best available data, this will cause a pretty unthinkable amount of critical care cases and deaths.

    Interesting that the Singapore govt also gave a more negative message to its public today, telling them that the small handful of daily cases “may not be normal” and to expect a potentially significant increase, because they cannot close the country to foreign travellers indefinitely.

    Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to UN is talking in terms of “victory”...

    The glimmer as I see it is that the mortality rate may be far lower and infection rate higher than they are supposing. The more I read of the symptoms, the more convinced I am that my family and I might have had it here in Sing. But none of us were tested because apart from my son who recovered quickly, we didn’t have a fever and hadn’t been to China. We were instead told to self isolate and I had to keep going back every 2-3 days for a progress check, since my symptoms were worst.

    I now read that the newest data indicate that fever is only prevalent in 85% of cases. And potentially fewer, if having a fever has been a typical hurdle to meet before being tested. Yet I had pretty much every other symptom of mild infection. Chest pain, awful breathlessness, fatigue, persistent shallow cough, initial sore throat etc... But I’ll probably never know now.

    The data from the Diamond Princess should give some encouragement too. A ship of old people and still only 6 deaths out of 705 cases. Sure, lots of cases remain unresolved but this is not at the 8-10% end of the spectrum one might expect given the probable demographics.

    If you combine two contradictory possibilities you come up with garbage.

    So it may be true that there is a lot of undetected community transmission because the infection is mild in a large number of people. And therefore containment fails and most of us catch it.

    However, if that's true, then the CFR <<< 3.4% which is the figure calculated on the assumption that there aren't lots of undetected mild cases.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Bloomberg and Warren's votes and delegates may well end up being a wash. That should mean Biden beats Sanders H2H.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    eristdoof said:

    TOPPING said:

    PROTOCOL ALERT/QUESTION

    Govt advice is to sneeze/cough into your elbow. So where does that leave elbow bumping instead of shaking hands?

    TIA

    You cough into the inside of your elbow and bump with the outside. After an elbow bump don't try to wipe your nose on the outside of your elbow, 'cos it's not possible.
    Frankly once coughed into I think the entire elbow should become a no-go zone. Inside/outside pah!
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eristdoof said:

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Maybe the Democrats should organise primaries for the primaries, to avoid such a splits in the future.
    They do: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina serve that purpose.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    State viability for Bloomberg is going to be very close in TX.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,361
    DavidL said:

    It’s a worry, no question. But Trumps response to the virus should make him doomed.

    Yes, a crisis like this one is likely to expose him quite brutally. His skills, such as they are, are not suited to handling a deep and complex domestic health situation. And of course there is the hit to the economy and the stock market. Recession and the Dow below 20,000 is not the backdrop he would have chosen for an election year. Still, if and when he does lose he can console himself with one thing. He'll be a one term President, but not really - because those 4 years felt to everybody like 8.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Indeed. Its worth looking at results like Massachusetts, not only did Biden win unexpectedly (and with a healthy 7% margin over Sanders who was meant to win) but 3.9% of the vote went to Buttigieg/Klobuchar. It seems safe to say almost all of that will now go to Biden regardless of what Bloomber does which would have given Biden a double-digit lead in a state Sanders was predicted to win.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    When I switched off the coverage last night, the talk was the Sanders again wasn't getting out the young vote in greater numbers i.e. no sign of any sort of Youth Quake.

    Was that proved to be correct?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,068

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Warren has done a deal with Biden, to keep going?
    VP?
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,912

    eristdoof said:

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Maybe the Democrats should organise primaries for the primaries, to avoid such a splits in the future.
    They do: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina serve that purpose.
    By this definition the voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are excluded in voting in the "full primaries".
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Maybe the Democrats should organise primaries for the primaries, to avoid such a splits in the future.
    They do: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina serve that purpose.
    By this definition the voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are excluded in voting in the "full primaries".
    But they choose to get pride of place in the primary of primaries.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited March 2020

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Yes but that's a bit like Tyson Fury fighting current day Prince Nazeem and being shocked he got knocked out.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,430

    When I switched off the coverage last night, the talk was the Sanders again wasn't getting out the young vote in greater numbers i.e. no sign of any sort of Youth Quake.

    Was that proved to be correct?
    I believe so.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,788

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Agree - but Labour clearly want to make "Part Time Prime Minister" to stick - and if they succeed will do damage.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    When I switched off the coverage last night, the talk was the Sanders again wasn't getting out the young vote in greater numbers i.e. no sign of any sort of Youth Quake.

    Was that proved to be correct?
    I believe so.
    Sort of. It actually showed the higher the turnout, the better Biden [not Sanders] did actually I believe.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,553

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Has he? I'm not sure Boris repeating his manifesto in answer to every question counts as a KO.

    What is significant is that the Conservative Whips maintain the suppression of barracking that has despoiled PMQs for the past four decades, so well done Boris!
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,727
    kinabalu said:

    Monkeys said:

    Biden won't beat Trump. Very few people who have held cabinet positions go on the be president, it IS only ex-VP'sn but they either did something special in office, or ran against a VP. Biden is a dafty and his son already caused one president to be impeached.

    I genuinely can't see how he loses. My one caveat - and it is a big one - is his condition. There will be gaffes. Fine, it's priced in, but not if they are of a nature and frequency that lead people to go, "You know that? This guy is not up to it. It's sad. I'd like to vote for him but I don't think I can."

    Has he "gone over" in other words? Not because he is 77 years old. It happens to different people at different ages. Has it happened with Joe? If it has, the Dems might be about to make a monumental blunder. On balance, I think it's going to be OK.
    tmust be remembered that Trump isn't particularly famous for making sense.
    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trumps-rambling-90-second-speech-stuns-english-speaking-world_uk_57ab37d7e4b08ab70dc0f646
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,788
    edited March 2020
    Good heavens! A constructive question from Blackford - on protecting income for those who self isolate. Much better than Corbyn who spent half his questions on Patel.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Has he? I'm not sure Boris repeating his manifesto in answer to every question counts as a KO.

    What is significant is that the Conservative Whips maintain the suppression of barracking that has despoiled PMQs for the past four decades, so well done Boris!
    I was referring to Corbyn asking about bullying, Johnson replied, Corbyn went back to bullying and Johnson passionately replied [along the lines of] "I will take no lessons from the party opposite about bullying when many of their female MPs were so badly bullied that they left the party and the Shadow Chancellor hasn't apologised for calling for an MP of my party to be lynched!"
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited March 2020

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Agree - but Labour clearly want to make "Part Time Prime Minister" to stick - and if they succeed will do damage.
    They tried that with Cameron and bashed Blair over all his holidays. But if things appear well organized, it doesn't stick.

    All this why isn't Boris having a COBRA meeting stuff, then it is revealed they have had them for 6+ weeks and it does seem like they have thought this through as best they can under the circumstances.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,430

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Warren has done a deal with Biden, to keep going?
    VP?
    She has a plan for that.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,324

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Yes but that's a bit like Tyson Fury fighting current day Prince Nazeem and being shocked he got knocked out.
    Perhaps more like the current Prince Nazeem knocking out the current Richard Dunn.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    eristdoof said:

    eristdoof said:

    DavidL said:

    The victory last night seriously understated the extent of the swing because of the amount of the early voting which favoured Sanders and included a fair number of votes for Buttigieg. Next round Sanders is going to be thrashed.

    Warren exiting very quickly must surely be one of his last hopes, and I don't see any sign of her doing that so far.

    Again and again the message of not splitting your votes is incredibly important - the centrist democrats have learnt that this time, but the left-of-centre democrats have failed to, just like the Remainer-dominated parties here in Britain last year, compared to the Brexit-inspired ones.
    Maybe the Democrats should organise primaries for the primaries, to avoid such a splits in the future.
    They do: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina serve that purpose.
    By this definition the voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are excluded in voting in the "full primaries".
    Iowa is just an exercise in indulgence for minor candidates tbh.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    DavidL said:

    It’s a worry, no question. But Trumps response to the virus should make him doomed.

    Yes, a crisis like this one is likely to expose him quite brutally. His skills, such as they are, are not suited to handling a deep and complex domestic health situation. And of course there is the hit to the economy and the stock market. Recession and the Dow below 20,000 is not the backdrop he would have chosen for an election year. Still, if and when he does lose he can console himself with one thing. He'll be a one term President, but not really - because those 4 years felt to everybody like 8.
    An infinite number of things have been about to doom Trump. And well, here he is.

    Or.... the virus from China gives him perfect cover for the economy. Everything was going great until they screwed things up. And are we going to switch leaders in the middle of a crisis.

    Take away Perot and the parallels here are with Bush-Clinton in 1992. But Biden is nothing like Bill.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,553
    Boris speaks Cornish (or the question was planted).
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Joe Biden gets his wife and his sister mixed up. Any wonder he did so well in the deep south ?
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,324

    Boris speaks Cornish (or the question was planted).

    When Boris does something that looks spontaneous, be assured it's been meticulously rehearsed.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2020
    kinabalu said:

    Monkeys said:

    Biden won't beat Trump. Very few people who have held cabinet positions go on the be president, it IS only ex-VP'sn but they either did something special in office, or ran against a VP. Biden is a dafty and his son already caused one president to be impeached.

    I genuinely can't see how he loses. My one caveat - and it is a big one - is his condition. There will be gaffes. Fine, it's priced in, but not if they are of a nature and frequency that lead people to go, "You know that? This guy is not up to it. It's sad. I'd like to vote for him but I don't think I can."

    Has he "gone over" in other words? Not because he is 77 years old. It happens to different people at different ages. Has it happened with Joe? If it has, the Dems might be about to make a monumental blunder. On balance, I think it's going to be OK.
    I'd love to see Trump beaten by whoever, but I wish I could share your optimism.

    Unless the virus is a national crisis trumping all else, to coin a phrase, the Democrats may probably be hit by a triple whammy of disillusionment among the Sanders base and so probably lower turnout overall, a lack of active enthusiasm and base support / organisation for Biden compared to Trump, and Trump's more agile victories in the debates.
  • Options
    MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 755
    kinabalu said:

    Monkeys said:

    Biden won't beat Trump. Very few people who have held cabinet positions go on the be president, it IS only ex-VP'sn but they either did something special in office, or ran against a VP. Biden is a dafty and his son already caused one president to be impeached.

    I genuinely can't see how he loses. My one caveat - and it is a big one - is his condition. There will be gaffes. Fine, it's priced in, but not if they are of a nature and frequency that lead people to go, "You know that? This guy is not up to it. It's sad. I'd like to vote for him but I don't think I can."

    Has he "gone over" in other words? Not because he is 77 years old. It happens to different people at different ages. Has it happened with Joe? If it has, the Dems might be about to make a monumental blunder. On balance, I think it's going to be OK.
    I just think a VP-President line needs some big successes as VP - effectively doing the job of the president eg Bush Sr, and a small attack vector OR be running against an incumbent VP who wasn't a great success and was overshadowed by their predecessor (Humphrey.)

    Biden is mad, his son's a crook, and he wasn't in any way a special VP.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,788

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Has he? I'm not sure Boris repeating his manifesto in answer to every question counts as a KO.

    What is significant is that the Conservative Whips maintain the suppression of barracking that has despoiled PMQs for the past four decades, so well done Boris!
    I was referring to Corbyn asking about bullying, Johnson replied, Corbyn went back to bullying and Johnson passionately replied [along the lines of] "I will take no lessons from the party opposite about bullying when many of their female MPs were so badly bullied that they left the party and the Shadow Chancellor hasn't apologised for calling for an MP of my party to be lynched!"
    That was inept - one question would have been adequate - given the other issues facing the country - and all the other Labour MPs asking the same question are getting Labour antisemitism thrown back in their face.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,827
    I see the orange excrescence is back to calling her by her name, now he's not going to be running against her.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,369
    Worth noting that in the Republican primaries where Weld is competing, he's getting 10% of the vote against Trump. Not a huge amount, but showing some residual unease among GOP voters with the Great Leader.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    edited March 2020
    Ah Ms Greer.

    Rarely has such a disgruntled person had so many cracking jobs.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    Trump may be a fourth-rate President, but he is truly a nonpareil troll...
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Boris just KO'd Corbyn in PMQ's. If this was a boxing fight the towel would have been thrown in already.

    Has he? I'm not sure Boris repeating his manifesto in answer to every question counts as a KO.

    What is significant is that the Conservative Whips maintain the suppression of barracking that has despoiled PMQs for the past four decades, so well done Boris!
    I was referring to Corbyn asking about bullying, Johnson replied, Corbyn went back to bullying and Johnson passionately replied [along the lines of] "I will take no lessons from the party opposite about bullying when many of their female MPs were so badly bullied that they left the party and the Shadow Chancellor hasn't apologised for calling for an MP of my party to be lynched!"
    That was inept - one question would have been adequate - given the other issues facing the country - and all the other Labour MPs asking the same question are getting Labour antisemitism thrown back in their face.
    Labour should hang their heads in shame when it comes to the topic of bullying.
This discussion has been closed.