Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » WH2020: The betting markets move against there being a brokere

SystemSystem Posts: 12,636
edited March 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » WH2020: The betting markets move against there being a brokered convention

This is a market that so far we have not featured on PB – will a candidate get a majority of the pledged delegates? This is the market definition:

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    edited March 2020
    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,290
    Thirdish.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,290
    edited March 2020
    FPT:
    MarqueeMark said:

    Sandpit said:

    MattW said:

    Henrietta2 said:

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1235398017106223106?s=21

    Will he say anything that makes it more rather than less likely that he wins a second term? He may be falling into a big hole. Will his shtick even last until the Republican convention in late August? He'll be blaming Hillary Clinton or George Soros next, or perhaps the whole of the UN, or China, or NATO. I'm biased. I'd like to hear from a soft Trumper.

    Interesting how he says "false" rather than "fake". He sounds like he's trying to grow up or at least give the impression.
    Can't help with the soft trumper, I'm afraid.

    It depends on the chosen denominator.

    Depending on how it is used or reported, it could be a false - if you mean inaccurate - number. Because it is based on detected cases, and the vast majority of cases will not be detected. I think we can rely on our hysterical media and broadcasters to exaggerate by taking the worst possible scenario quoted (ie upper bound) and making it a headline, and various to attack the Govt on the basis of assuming that is fact.

    Consider that China has had 80k cases and 3000 deaths out of a population of 1.4 billion. Which - really and assuming reliable stats etc - is not that many.

    On that basis the number of deaths in the UK will be a small fraction of annual deaths from flu.
    3000 deaths, that’s a whole “9/11”.
    We have a whole "9/11" of road deaths.

    Each and every day.

    The world accepts that as the price of mobility.
    As I said - a small number in the scheme of things.

    China has 250k road deaths a year, so it is about 30 hours of road deaths.

    ie Not a lot.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    If Biden and Sanders split the remaining delegates in then neither has enough to win on the first round I think.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Always lay the brokered convention. Every single time there's people saying there'll be one. Every single time the also rans drop out and voters coalesce ultimately between one of two and choose a victor.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    edited March 2020
    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    If Biden and Sanders split the remaining delegates in then neither has enough to win on the first round I think.
    But they are not going to split them equally. Health scares/total incoherence permitting Biden is going to win far more, possibly 2/3. As we saw last time out Sanders has his adherents who will hang in there with him but there are fewer than there were in 2016 and he has the Warren problem too.

    Like poor Buttigieg in Iowa the utter chaos in California risks taking the momentum out of Bernie's biggest win and preventing him from having a popular vote lead until it is too late. Yet another State whose voting is not fit for purpose.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    If Biden and Sanders split the remaining delegates in then neither has enough to win on the first round I think.
    But they are not going to split them equally. Health scares/total incoherence permitting Biden is going to win far more, possibly 2/3. As we saw last time out Sanders has his adherents who will hang in there with him but there are fewer than there were in 2016 and he has the Warren problem too.

    Like poor Buttigieg in Iowa the utter chaos in California risks taking the momentum out of Bernie's biggest win and preventing him from having a popular vote lead until it is too late. Yet another State whose voting is not fit for purpose.
    California's slow count allowed me to dig out of a hole in 2016 as Hilary to win the popular vote was absurdly long after election night.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    If Biden and Sanders split the remaining delegates in then neither has enough to win on the first round I think.
    But they are not going to split them equally. Health scares/total incoherence permitting Biden is going to win far more, possibly 2/3. As we saw last time out Sanders has his adherents who will hang in there with him but there are fewer than there were in 2016 and he has the Warren problem too.

    Like poor Buttigieg in Iowa the utter chaos in California risks taking the momentum out of Bernie's biggest win and preventing him from having a popular vote lead until it is too late. Yet another State whose voting is not fit for purpose.
    California's slow count allowed me to dig out of a hole in 2016 as Hilary to win the popular vote was absurdly long after election night.
    Ok not fit for most purposes!
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,758
    edited March 2020
    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    On these numbers I make the non-Joenie-Binders delegate total 144. Biden's lead over Sanders is 105. So even if Warren doesn't get any more, Biden needs to beat Sanders by a little bit in the remaining contests to make 50%, or Sanders needs quite a substantial lead to do the same.
    https://www.electionprojection.com/democratic-delegate-tracker/

    On current trends Biden should make that comfortably and you can pretty much forget about Bernie doing it, but as OGH says Biden has some potential for screwing it up somehow.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,502
    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    Reagan managed in similar circumstances; IIRC there were similar worries over him even in 1980, but of course he had Nancy beside him.
    I don't think Biden has a similar figure, has he?
    And in Carter he had a decent, principled, opponent; Trump will, as we know, fight dirty.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,328
    He had form for being a bad loser

    https://twitter.com/ericdier/status/1106119092925353985?s=21
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,928
    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    In fairness, he always did give the impression of being quite goofy. I’m not sure we can definitively say he’s deteriorating.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    edmundintokyo said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    On these numbers I make the non-Joenie-Binders delegate total 144. Biden's lead over Sanders is 105. So even if Warren doesn't get any more, Biden needs to beat Sanders by a little bit in the remaining contests to make 50%, or Sanders needs quite a substantial lead to do the same.
    https://www.electionprojection.com/democratic-delegate-tracker/

    On current trends Biden should make that comfortably and you can pretty much forget about Bernie doing it, but as OGH says Biden has some potential for screwing it up somehow.
    By dying?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,758
    edited March 2020
    OldKingCole said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    Reagan managed in similar circumstances; IIRC there were similar worries over him even in 1980, but of course he had Nancy beside him.

    I don't think Biden has a similar figure, has he?
    Joe has Jill!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35xGeTjTZNU
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,579
    Logarithmic scales are definitely levelling off. Hopefully that’s not just due to under-reporting in China and Iran.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,083
    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eb9O_adhiA
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,764
    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    If Biden and Sanders split the remaining delegates in then neither has enough to win on the first round I think.
    But they are not going to split them equally. Health scares/total incoherence permitting Biden is going to win far more, possibly 2/3. As we saw last time out Sanders has his adherents who will hang in there with him but there are fewer than there were in 2016 and he has the Warren problem too.

    Like poor Buttigieg in Iowa the utter chaos in California risks taking the momentum out of Bernie's biggest win and preventing him from having a popular vote lead until it is too late. Yet another State whose voting is not fit for purpose.
    California's slow count allowed me to dig out of a hole in 2016 as Hilary to win the popular vote was absurdly long after election night.
    Likewise. Had I been bolder (and not tied up so much cash on losing trump bets) I could have actually come out ahead. I suspect this time the market will be wise to the likelihood of Trump EC win and PV loss.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    Sandpit said:

    Logarithmic scales are definitely levelling off. Hopefully that’s not just due to under-reporting in China and Iran.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

    But what we are seeing, I think, is that the actions taken in China in particular have put us in the longer curve of those 2 cities that were used to explain the upside of containment so we are likely to stay at this level for some time. There is also a risk that as China becomes a minor player the curves of other countries will dominate and potentially change the shape again. Yes, USA, I mean you.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 6,031
    What is the reason why there is almost no news coming out of Iran? There are foreign correspondents on the ground normally aren't there? Why are we having to rely on difficult to verify tweet videos?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,579
    On topic, I’ve been pointing out for weeks that the Betfair Dem Nom market has been very under-round, it got to 87% at one point, based on the back prices of layable candidates.

    Biden now being 1.19 has finally made the market exceed 100%.

    Still six layable candidates though, there’s 40 to lay Hillary Clinton if 2.5% return in 4 months is better than your bank account pays.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    In fairness, he always did give the impression of being quite goofy. I’m not sure we can definitively say he’s deteriorating.
    It is difficult to be objective without proper testing but when you see videos of him about 8 years ago when he was VP he seemed much sharper than he is today.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,959
    logical_song said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eb9O_adhiA
    certainly
    but he's not yet at the point of shagging his sister by mistake
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,579
    moonshine said:

    What is the reason why there is almost no news coming out of Iran? There are foreign correspondents on the ground normally aren't there? Why are we having to rely on difficult to verify tweet videos?

    Because law and order has basically broken down in Iran. Everyone who can leave has done, and is spreading the virus all around the Gulf states.

    All schools and universities in UAE to close for a month, from next week, after one pupil in an Indian school tested positive.
    https://www.thenational.ae/uae/education/coronavirus-uae-schools-to-close-for-a-month-1.987668
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,380
    This is a pretty good article on the state of the contest, worth reading in full:

    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/04/sanders-trump-altitude-121523
    ... Specifically, while Sanders is a movement politician, the socialist who has never formally become a Democrat is clearly also creating a countermovement within the party. The number of late-deciding voters, as reflected in exit surveys, suggests that many Democrats desperately want to reconvene the 2018 midterm coalition to defeat Trump and fear Sanders is not the right person to do that. The countermovement, based on latest evidence, is larger than the movement itself.

    This is also the peril for Trump, the greatest movement politician of the past couple generations. Typically, movements compensate for smaller raw numbers with the greater passion of adherents. In this case, though, it’s likely he has inspired equal or greater passion among the opposition...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,380
    Alanbrooke said:

    logical_song said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eb9O_adhiA
    certainly
    but he's not yet at the point of shagging his sister by mistake
    He has closer relatives for that....
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    edited March 2020
    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,077
    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,380
    OldKingCole said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    Reagan managed in similar circumstances; IIRC there were similar worries over him even in 1980, but of course he had Nancy beside him.
    I don't think Biden has a similar figure, has he?
    And in Carter he had a decent, principled, opponent; Trump will, as we know, fight dirty.
    After four years of Trump, though, I’m not convinced even his enthusiastic supporters believe a word he says now.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Alanbrooke said:

    logical_song said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eb9O_adhiA
    certainly
    but he's not yet at the point of shagging his sister by mistake

    By mistake may be doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,380
    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    Which suggests the testing backlog explanation has some credibility.
    But we’ll need to see a few more weeks’ results to be absolutely sure.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,077
    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    I would have thought very likely there is a significant reduction in flu if the worst coronavirus predictions happen. Partly as it targets a similar demographic but mostly through less contact, mobility and improved hygiene standards/washing hands.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,164
    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    You know I just love to say I told you (not you in particular) so. Pity no one would take the bet.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,667
    alex_ said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    On these numbers I make the non-Joenie-Binders delegate total 144. Biden's lead over Sanders is 105. So even if Warren doesn't get any more, Biden needs to beat Sanders by a little bit in the remaining contests to make 50%, or Sanders needs quite a substantial lead to do the same.
    https://www.electionprojection.com/democratic-delegate-tracker/

    On current trends Biden should make that comfortably and you can pretty much forget about Bernie doing it, but as OGH says Biden has some potential for screwing it up somehow.
    By dying?
    Biden doesn't have to die. Just appear out of it so that the 25th Amendment would apply.

    Presuming he was sufficiently with it to even pick his running mate.

    So Biden gets to the Convention with the majority of delegates. But the narrative in the media by then is that despite/because he has been hidden away from public view, he has gone gaga. Trump has a 10% lead and is storming back to the White House.

    Meanwhile, Hillary is saying "let me at him....."

    Pop quiz: what do you do, Democrats?

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,502
    MarqueeMark said:

    alex_ said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    On these numbers I make the non-Joenie-Binders delegate total 144. Biden's lead over Sanders is 105. So even if Warren doesn't get any more, Biden needs to beat Sanders by a little bit in the remaining contests to make 50%, or Sanders needs quite a substantial lead to do the same.
    https://www.electionprojection.com/democratic-delegate-tracker/

    On current trends Biden should make that comfortably and you can pretty much forget about Bernie doing it, but as OGH says Biden has some potential for screwing it up somehow.
    By dying?
    Biden doesn't have to die. Just appear out of it so that the 25th Amendment would apply.

    Presuming he was sufficiently with it to even pick his running mate.

    So Biden gets to the Convention with the majority of delegates. But the narrative in the media by then is that despite/because he has been hidden away from public view, he has gone gaga. Trump has a 10% lead and is storming back to the White House.

    Meanwhile, Hillary is saying "let me at him....."

    Pop quiz: what do you do, Democrats?

    Pick Warren.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,992
    Sandpit said:

    On topic, I’ve been pointing out for weeks that the Betfair Dem Nom market has been very under-round, it got to 87% at one point, based on the back prices of layable candidates.

    Biden now being 1.19 has finally made the market exceed 100%.

    Still six layable candidates though, there’s 40 to lay Hillary Clinton if 2.5% return in 4 months is better than your bank account pays.

    Clinton now at 24/34 lol
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    This years combined COVID/Flu death total will almost certainly be below that IMHO.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,089
    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    As I said yesterday. Count data is particularly lumpy, you can not say that 500 yesterday and 145 today is a slowing down. You need several days before even the earliest inferences can be made.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 10,533
    edited March 2020
    Nigelb said:

    This is a pretty good article on the state of the contest, worth reading in full:

    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/04/sanders-trump-altitude-121523
    ... Specifically, while Sanders is a movement politician, the socialist who has never formally become a Democrat is clearly also creating a countermovement within the party. The number of late-deciding voters, as reflected in exit surveys, suggests that many Democrats desperately want to reconvene the 2018 midterm coalition to defeat Trump and fear Sanders is not the right person to do that. The countermovement, based on latest evidence, is larger than the movement itself.

    This is also the peril for Trump, the greatest movement politician of the past couple generations. Typically, movements compensate for smaller raw numbers with the greater passion of adherents. In this case, though, it’s likely he has inspired equal or greater passion among the opposition...

    I'm somewhat wary of this line if thinking. Very many people predicted, with extreme confidence, that such a counter-movement would carry Clinton to the Presidency in 2016, whatever people thought of her, and yet this turnout didn't materialise. The Trump base were more motivated than the expected fighters for decency, the disapproving, outraged and offended by Trump.

    If Biden presents as a weak but avuncular figure, and particularly if he doesn't seem on the ball, that may simply repeat. Sanders could either lose by as much or more, if he doesn't change the socialist self-definition of his campaign, or, with the wildcard element of the virus and if he subtly changed his campaign, possibly beat him.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,758
    MarqueeMark said:


    Biden doesn't have to die. Just appear out of it so that the 25th Amendment would apply.

    Presuming he was sufficiently with it to even pick his running mate.

    So Biden gets to the Convention with the majority of delegates. But the narrative in the media by then is that despite/because he has been hidden away from public view, he has gone gaga. Trump has a 10% lead and is storming back to the White House.

    Meanwhile, Hillary is saying "let me at him....."

    Pop quiz: what do you do, Democrats?

    Path of least resistance is to run his VP pick.

    I can't think of any possible reason why you'd pick the only person in the US with a record of losing a presidential election to a Reality TV personality.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    eristdoof said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    As I said yesterday. Count data is particularly lumpy, you can not say that 500 yesterday and 145 today is a slowing down. You need several days before even the earliest inferences can be made.
    I know that.
    Just offering a gentle counter-meme to the panic brigade.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,077
    Philip_Thompson said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    This years combined COVID/Flu death total will almost certainly be below that IMHO.
    Am I right in remembering it wasnt a significant media story back then? From memory at the time people would have been far more scared by AIDS than flu.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,579
    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    On topic, I’ve been pointing out for weeks that the Betfair Dem Nom market has been very under-round, it got to 87% at one point, based on the back prices of layable candidates.

    Biden now being 1.19 has finally made the market exceed 100%.

    Still six layable candidates though, there’s 40 to lay Hillary Clinton if 2.5% return in 4 months is better than your bank account pays.

    Clinton now at 24/34 lol
    I’m only playing the Dem Nom market for small money (less than £100 invested), but the money piling into the two First Ladies makes no sense at all.

    I’ve been laying every contender, as the market was 15% under-round at one point
  • Martin_KinsellaMartin_Kinsella Posts: 444
    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    The problem is the lack of spaces to cope with the demand.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,992
    Sandpit said:


    I’ve been laying every contender, as the market was 15% under-round at one point

    Shouldn't that mean backing every contender ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,667
    edmundintokyo said:

    MarqueeMark said:


    Biden doesn't have to die. Just appear out of it so that the 25th Amendment would apply.

    Presuming he was sufficiently with it to even pick his running mate.

    So Biden gets to the Convention with the majority of delegates. But the narrative in the media by then is that despite/because he has been hidden away from public view, he has gone gaga. Trump has a 10% lead and is storming back to the White House.

    Meanwhile, Hillary is saying "let me at him....."

    Pop quiz: what do you do, Democrats?

    Path of least resistance is to run his VP pick.

    I can't think of any possible reason why you'd pick the only person in the US with a record of losing a presidential election to a Reality TV personality.
    I don't recall seeing any 2020 polling match ups of Clinton v Trump. Agreed, even with Trump in the White House I don't get a huge sense of buyer's remorse. But if she were to run an intensive media campaign from now, crucifying Trump for his response to Covid-19.... I'd like to see the polling!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited March 2020
    Gardenwalker said:

    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.

    If you exclude Trump since he won I'd say worst since Bob Dole.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 6,031
    Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    What is the reason why there is almost no news coming out of Iran? There are foreign correspondents on the ground normally aren't there? Why are we having to rely on difficult to verify tweet videos?

    Because law and order has basically broken down in Iran. Everyone who can leave has done, and is spreading the virus all around the Gulf states.

    All schools and universities in UAE to close for a month, from next week, after one pupil in an Indian school tested positive.
    https://www.thenational.ae/uae/education/coronavirus-uae-schools-to-close-for-a-month-1.987668
    Thanks. So why then are we not seeing as the major story that law and order has broken down in Iran, meaning that foreign correspondents had to seek refuge in UAE or elsewhere? In of itself that is one of the biggest news stories of the last decade.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,665
    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    noneoftheabove said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    This years combined COVID/Flu death total will almost certainly be below that IMHO.
    Am I right in remembering it wasnt a significant media story back then? From memory at the time people would have been far more scared by AIDS than flu.
    Before my memory sorry.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,667
    OldKingCole said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    alex_ said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely as the choice becomes binary (Warren notwithstanding) the prospects of a brokered convention are wiped out?

    And is that a first?

    On these numbers I make the non-Joenie-Binders delegate total 144. Biden's lead over Sanders is 105. So even if Warren doesn't get any more, Biden needs to beat Sanders by a little bit in the remaining contests to make 50%, or Sanders needs quite a substantial lead to do the same.
    https://www.electionprojection.com/democratic-delegate-tracker/

    On current trends Biden should make that comfortably and you can pretty much forget about Bernie doing it, but as OGH says Biden has some potential for screwing it up somehow.
    By dying?
    Biden doesn't have to die. Just appear out of it so that the 25th Amendment would apply.

    Presuming he was sufficiently with it to even pick his running mate.

    So Biden gets to the Convention with the majority of delegates. But the narrative in the media by then is that despite/because he has been hidden away from public view, he has gone gaga. Trump has a 10% lead and is storming back to the White House.

    Meanwhile, Hillary is saying "let me at him....."

    Pop quiz: what do you do, Democrats?

    Pick Warren.
    So a brokered Convention....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,665
    eristdoof said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    As I said yesterday. Count data is particularly lumpy, you can not say that 500 yesterday and 145 today is a slowing down. You need several days before even the earliest inferences can be made.
    ROK has an 8 hour turnaround of results, so I think the figures are pretty accurate. I certainly hope so.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,579
    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:


    I’ve been laying every contender, as the market was 15% under-round at one point

    Shouldn't that mean backing every contender ?
    LOL yes, I need more coffee.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Alanbrooke said:

    logical_song said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eb9O_adhiA
    certainly
    but he's not yet at the point of shagging his sister by mistake
    His daughter...maybe... but by mistake?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    eristdoof said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    As I said yesterday. Count data is particularly lumpy, you can not say that 500 yesterday and 145 today is a slowing down. You need several days before even the earliest inferences can be made.
    Really, shouldn’t people be looking at the death counts as a more reliable indicator?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Johnson, then—and U.S. President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel—will be judged in hindsight for decisions taken without that privilege. Did he overreact or underreact? the public will ask. Did he calm a volatile situation or induce panic? Did he show leadership or reveal a lack of it? Is he up to the job? Faced with trying to ensure public confidence in his leadership, Johnson’s first reaction was to turn to experts. Those experts immediately threw the ball back to him.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/coronavirus-covid19-politics-crisis-boris-johnson-britain/607456/
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    My own feeling is that Biden looks like he is suffering from senile dementia.

    And experience with one of my own relatives is that decay is not steady or linear, but there can be very substantial drops in cognitive ability over timescales of a year. The descent can be rapid, sometimes very rapid.

    It is quite possible that Biden may not be a viable candidate, or even a viable human being, quite quickly.

    Given that the Dems have had 4 years to sort a single, impressive, capable candidate to barn-storm to victory over Trump, this is an impressive fuck-up.

    I understand Trump is clinically insane, but somehow I don't feel sorry for Trump.

    I feel sorry for Biden. It just seems cruel to put him through this.

    I think his medical condition will be ruthlessly & publicly exposed in the Presidential fight by someone who will have no scruples.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    That’s a key question.

    Intuitively I think there is a huge overlap in the vulnerable patient groups

    I suspect that COVID-19 deaths are not 100% incremental

    Has anyone seen an aggregate analysis?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    YBarddCwsc said:


    My own feeling is that Biden looks like he is suffering from senile dementia.

    And experience with one of my own relatives is that decay is not steady or linear, but there can be very substantial drops in cognitive ability over timescales of a year. The descent can be rapid, sometimes very rapid.

    It is quite possible that Biden may not be a viable candidate, or even a viable human being, quite quickly.

    Given that the Dems have had 4 years to sort a single, impressive, capable candidate to barn-storm to victory over Trump, this is an impressive fuck-up.

    I understand Trump is clinically insane, but somehow I don't feel sorry for Trump.

    I feel sorry for Biden. It just seems cruel to put him through this.

    I think his medical condition will be ruthlessly & publicly exposed in the Presidential fight by someone who will have no scruples.

    Before the convention would be handy, from a betting perspective. And save him the misery.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Foxy said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
    So any thought on my question above re COVID vs flu, and whether the presumed difference goes beyond the lack of a vaccine?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,667
    edited March 2020
    One thing I have noticed about the elderly is that when they do start to deteriorate, that process can be startling in its rapidity. I don't think anyone can dispute that Biden has deteriorated. Give him another 6 months, when he is starting the final two months of his campaign, and that deterioration may have become painfully obvious to all - especially to the Trump campaign team. They are going to be gently vicious.

    Sanders on the other hand still seems sharp as a tack.

    EDIT: I see YBarddCwsc has made essentially the same post while I was typing mine!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,579
    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    What is the reason why there is almost no news coming out of Iran? There are foreign correspondents on the ground normally aren't there? Why are we having to rely on difficult to verify tweet videos?

    Because law and order has basically broken down in Iran. Everyone who can leave has done, and is spreading the virus all around the Gulf states.

    All schools and universities in UAE to close for a month, from next week, after one pupil in an Indian school tested positive.
    https://www.thenational.ae/uae/education/coronavirus-uae-schools-to-close-for-a-month-1.987668
    Thanks. So why then are we not seeing as the major story that law and order has broken down in Iran, meaning that foreign correspondents had to seek refuge in UAE or elsewhere? In of itself that is one of the biggest news stories of the last decade.
    A very good question. There’s been no flights from Iran to UAE for over a week now, one assumes that those escaping are doing so over land and then not being totally honest with authorities as to where they’ve been.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Foxy said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
    Classic if you manage a potential crisis well as was the y2k issue people claim it was fake news, when it doesn’t everyone looks for a scapegoat.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    MarqueeMark said:

    One thing I have noticed about the elderly is that when they do start to deteriorate, that process can be startling in its rapidity. I don't think anyone can dispute that Biden has deteriorated. Give him another 6 months, when he is starting the final two months of his campaign, and that deterioration may have become painfully obvious to all - especially to the Trump campaign team. They are going to be gently vicious.

    Sanders on the other hand still seems sharp as a tack.

    He had a heart attack six months ago
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,089
    OldKingCole said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    Reagan managed in similar circumstances; IIRC there were similar worries over him even in 1980, but of course he had Nancy beside him.
    I don't think Biden has a similar figure, has he?
    And in Carter he had a decent, principled, opponent; Trump will, as we know, fight dirty.
    I don't remember any "issues" with Reagan's health in 1980. The only thing was that, at 69 he was a bit older than most politicians for the time.

    I think there were a few accusations that he was losing it in 1984, but the USA was economically near the top of the economic sine-wave and he had a very good marketing team for his campaign. By around 1986 it was clear that he was starting to lose a few marbles, and people started to worry if he could complete his second term.

  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 10,533
    edited March 2020
    Mysticrose said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    One thing I have noticed about the elderly is that when they do start to deteriorate, that process can be startling in its rapidity. I don't think anyone can dispute that Biden has deteriorated. Give him another 6 months, when he is starting the final two months of his campaign, and that deterioration may have become painfully obvious to all - especially to the Trump campaign team. They are going to be gently vicious.

    Sanders on the other hand still seems sharp as a tack.

    He had a heart attack six months ago
    A physical risk like that is clearer to the electorate than a mental one, though - if someone is physically incapacitated and incapable, it usually becomes obvious quickly and they are excluded from the job. It would then move to the VP. Mental decay is more worrying and pernicious over a long period, and, in such a powerful day-to-day job, potentially much more damaging.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited March 2020
    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    The death rate for this is around 3.4% compared to flu's 0.1%.

    So 35x more deadly if you catch it.

  • northernpowerhouse2northernpowerhouse2 Posts: 190
    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    We are only a few dozen deaths away from mass panic. The smarter people bought their stuff a couple of weeks ago ( I bought a few things, but thought the alcohol sanitiser seemed a bit excessive),, it’s filtered through to the higher information people now, hence the run on anti bacterial soaps etc. Which will of course have no impact other than a good hand scrub. You need 60% plus alcohol wash or just use soap and after when you can.

    It’s starting to creep into the low information population who zone out of most politics and current affairs.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,568
    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ? The Guardian are reporting 322 not 145.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Foxy said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
    You say that but it is also possible (and I say possible) that the problem with China/ROK is that they let it get way out of control before they took the extreme measures that they did. And had they started at a different point it would not have been necessary. I’m not sure it necessarily correct to take lessons from the worst affected countries that their approach has been good. If anything they should be examined to see what could be improved.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,009
    Foss said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ? The Guardian are reporting 322 not 145.
    Depends when you start counting. The Guardian is starting from an earlier time.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.

    If you exclude Trump since he won I'd say worst since Bob Dole.
    Michael Dukakis wasn't too great.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,380
    edited March 2020
    Gardenwalker said:

    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.

    On the contrary, there are several young cardinals who will enthusiastically vote for the old pope...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,667
    YBarddCwsc said:


    I think his medical condition will be ruthlessly & publicly exposed in the Presidential fight by someone who will have no scruples.

    You can just imagine Trump:

    "You know, I like Joe. Nice guy. He's been a great public servant for America. But he's lost it. (Doing the spinning finger, indicating Joe's lost his marbles.) He's so far gone, he can't even rememebr how crooked he was. We have to keep reminding him...."
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,665
    alex_ said:

    Foxy said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
    So any thought on my question above re COVID vs flu, and whether the presumed difference goes beyond the lack of a vaccine?
    Some years the virologists don't bet on the right horse with Flu vaccine and it is not against the prevalent strain, so we know what the background risk is. COVID19 seems an order of magnitude worse.

    Additionally flu is relatively shorter duration and it is often secondary bacterial pneumonia that is the terminal event. Clinical COVID19 is quite prolonged, which has it's own resource implications.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,089
    alex_ said:

    Foxy said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
    So any thought on my question above re COVID vs flu, and whether the presumed difference goes beyond the lack of a vaccine?
    I would be surprised if there is a widespread flu vaccination programme for the elderly in China. So Mr Wi who died of flu last year was not "at risk" for the COVID-19 outbreak this year.

    If there is any foundation in your theory, then the rate of serious symptoms/death will be higher in the UK and Germany, as Mr Bull and Herr Meister did not get flu last year due to vaccination/herd immunity and so survived to be "at risk" of COVID-19 this year.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,009
    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    This is a report on flu in the US this year that wasn't reported very widely, although perhaps it should have been.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/flu-deaths-usa-cdc-children-record-a9352011.html
  • northernpowerhouse2northernpowerhouse2 Posts: 190
    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    Because it was largely people who were weakened or/and elderly. Flu hastened a death. But that death was coming soon and probably by whatever infected them.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,665
    alex_ said:

    Foxy said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Bad news for panic merchants, South Korea’s new reported cases just 145 today.

    Was 400/500 a day, earlier this week.

    ROK and China show that the way to control this is to stamp on it hard with lockdowns, quarantine and mass testing.

    If we are efficient at this then we may well miss the lesson. With "only" hundreds of deaths, people will say "what was that fuss about?"

    If we are inefficient we well get the lesson delivered fairly brutally that "this is not just flu".
    You say that but it is also possible (and I say possible) that the problem with China/ROK is that they let it get way out of control before they took the extreme measures that they did. And had they started at a different point it would not have been necessary. I’m not sure it necessarily correct to take lessons from the worst affected countries that their approach has been good. If anything they should be examined to see what could be improved.
    I think we are not yet at the point that lockdowns are appropriate, either nationally or locally, but that is a decision that needs reviewing daily.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    I stopped taking the tube last week.
    I note it is now hard to buy bulk dry goods from Ocado.
    My nanny is insisting on a hand sanitiser regime for visitors.
    I have mentally cancelled the ski trip.

    Such are the privations recorded in my journal of the plague year.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,959
    SouthamObserver said:

    Alanbrooke said:

    logical_song said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I share the concerns about Biden. He's clearly suffering the early stages of senility and is driving himself very hard. So far his various confused moments have been swept over but as the front runner he will face a harsher spotlight.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eb9O_adhiA
    certainly
    but he's not yet at the point of shagging his sister by mistake

    By mistake may be doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

    it's a PB tradition

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    northernpowerhouse2 said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    Because it was largely people who were weakened or/and elderly. Flu hastened a death. But that death was coming soon and probably by whatever infected them.
    It seems to me that UK dying “with the flu” figures can average fifty a day, whereas dying “of the flu” can be around five a day. It’s the same point made by that Italian doctor who concluded that 14 of the first 17 Italian Corona deaths were really “with the flu”.

    I expect this distinction will be lost amid the media scrum as the crisis develops.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,959
    Gardenwalker said:

    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.

    I'll see your Mondale and raise you Mitt Romney
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,665
    Biden is not a great candidate, and I share the doubts about his mental fragility (though Trump's coherence has deteriorated a lot over the decade too).

    Sanders is however a worse candidate. Quite independent of his own health issues and self proclaimed socialism, I don't think Bernie has ever demonstrated much political skill at getting anything done. He is an effective rabble rouser, but little more. No way could Bernie get his plans through Congress and Senate.

    Biden needs a younger, fitter running mate, and that would frighten Trump more. Step forward Amy...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,009
    edited March 2020
    northernpowerhouse2 said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    Because it was largely people who were weakened or/and elderly. Flu hastened a death. But that death was coming soon and probably by whatever infected them.
    But that's no different to the people who are most likely to die from coronavirus. Elderly people with pre-existing conditions.

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/which-groups-are-most-at-risk-from-the-coronavirus/
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    Mysticrose said:

    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    The death rate for this is around 3.4% compared to flu's 0.1%.

    So 35x more deadly if you catch it.

    Those are hooky figures, though. It is too early to say.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    R Wrong Daily blathering on R4 - won’t answer a straight question.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    Alanbrooke said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.

    I'll see your Mondale and raise you Mitt Romney
    Mitt was not shit.
    It’s just that anyone was gonna look rubbish against Obama.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    IanB2 said:

    Mysticrose said:

    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    The death rate for this is around 3.4% compared to flu's 0.1%.

    So 35x more deadly if you catch it.

    Those are hooky figures, though. It is too early to say.
    I think “wrong” is the word you’re looking for.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    CarlottaVance said:

    IanB2 said:

    Mysticrose said:

    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    The death rate for this is around 3.4% compared to flu's 0.1%.

    So 35x more deadly if you catch it.

    Those are hooky figures, though. It is too early to say.
    I think “wrong” is the word you’re looking for.
    I don’t buy these figures from WHO.
    Why are deaths in S Korea, Singapore etc so low?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,380
    You're welcome....

    https://twitter.com/IsabelOtt/status/1235371618165235713
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    CarlottaVance said:

    IanB2 said:

    Mysticrose said:

    IanB2 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.

    Presumably we’ll get the flu deaths as usual, the COVID-19 ones are extra. That’s the problem (I assume): this is on top of all the regular stuff, it’s fast-moving and we just don’t know enough about it.

    My guess is that as soon as Brits are dying daily, it will be plastered all over the pages even at levels still in the same ballpark as normal flu.
    The death rate for this is around 3.4% compared to flu's 0.1%.

    So 35x more deadly if you catch it.

    Those are hooky figures, though. It is too early to say.
    I think “wrong” is the word you’re looking for.
    The two errors being:

    - not including asymptomatic and very mild cases, because nobody knows who or where they are
    - including data from places like the US where ill people are being refused tests and tests only done on people who look like they will die within the hour
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,665
    Andy_JS said:

    northernpowerhouse2 said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    A question on COVID-19 vs “normal” flu (which most people self misdiagnose).

    How much of the difference is likely related to one factor (vaccination of high percentage of at risk groups)? And how much is down to COVID-19 being (presumably) more dangerous for other reasons? Eg. Higher propensity to spread, higher (normalised ie. imagining their was no vaccine for flu) mortality?

    No idea. But the winter before last, flu deaths in the UK were running at five every day. I must have been on holiday because I don’t remember the wall to wall media coverage.
    In 1989 apparently 26,000 people died of flu in the UK. I cant it even recall it being in the news that year? I can clearly recall Hillsborough, Gorbachev, high inflation, Guildford four, Marchioness so think I was paying attention.
    Because it was largely people who were weakened or/and elderly. Flu hastened a death. But that death was coming soon and probably by whatever infected them.
    But that's no different to the people who are most likely to die from coronavirus. Elderly people with pre-existing conditions.

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/which-groups-are-most-at-risk-from-the-coronavirus/
    As a fifty something male with hypertension, I stand around a 2% chance of dying of COVID19 if I get it. That is a lot higher than background risk.

    I dislike too the implication that seventy and eighty somethings with either diabetes or cardiovascular disease are on their last legs anyway. These are our parents and grandparents, our friends and family. They are contributing in a major way to our society and cultural life. I value them and want them to lead healthy and fulfilling lives.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,629
    Gardenwalker said:

    Alanbrooke said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    There are no pro-Biden voters.
    There are only anti-Sanders, anti-Bloomberg voters etc.

    He is a genuinely shit candidate, the worst from a major party since Mondale.

    I'll see your Mondale and raise you Mitt Romney
    Mitt was not shit.
    It’s just that anyone was gonna look rubbish against Obama.
    The trouble with the way politics has gone is that people who looked shit at the time look half decent viewed against the standard of those that followed.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,445
    Nigelb said:

    You're welcome....

    https://twitter.com/IsabelOtt/status/1235371618165235713

    Covid-19
    Aw c’mon, quarantine!
    You came in on a plane
    From Wuhan, it’s insane.

    You in that dress,
    Eating bat soup I guess
    Verge on dirty,
    Oh Covid-19!

    (Fiddle break)
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025