politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Opinium finds a net 13% drop in two weeks in government’s “Cor

kle4 said:

bigjohnowls said:

I have been to Cineworld twice since they reopened.

Friday afternoon. 4 members of staff visible, all concessions except pick and mix open. No bookings at all except me. I was only customer in foyer and only one in the screening. When i came out one of staff told me 5 films that afternoon 4 customers in total.

This afternoon There were 3 advance bookings according to their booking screen. Nobody except me in the foyer which i sat in for 10 mins None of the other 2 who booked for unhinged turned up attended.

Have now been twice, not seen another customer perhaps its me that is "unhinged"

Oh and why on earth are Cineworld not participants in help out to eat out? Are they eligible?

RIP Cineworld.

Tomorrow our bubble has a table for 4 at our local HOTO Restaurant. We are 50/50 about cancelling tonight to give them chance to re sell the table. Or will it be empty like the Cinema?

My local Odeon hasn't reopened yet, but I'd be worried - it was pretty empty a lot of the time anyway, despite the town being desperate for a cinema for 25 years.

Our local Odeon was refurbished late last year and now has seats so wide that you actually are socially isolated when sat down.

And it hasn't opened yet which is annoying as Odeon was showing amongst other films the Empire Strikes back which I rather enjoy.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Perhaps Prince Andrew sees a precedent.

https://twitter.com/tackettdc/status/1290325853260349441

Maybe America will take him. 👀

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MarqueeMark said:

TOPPING said:

felix said:

contrarian said:

felix said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Correct - although ironically they got it right with Spain - the infection growth in many of the costas is quite rapid now. I am no longer convinced the authorities have got a handle on it.

Spanish deaths per day are still under 10 though, right? and have been for some time

The deaths are much better - improved treatments perhaps but mainly a much younger age profile for contagion so far. I worry that this could easily change as the numbers of cases grow. Also - the Spanish data is estimated to have undercounted deaths by around 20,000 overall so I would not be too trusting of the figures. I'm afraid the decision to go for a big tourist season at the last minute was, albeit understandable, a mistake. The Spanish nighlife is driving the figures on the costas now. My own tiny little tourist town has 25 new cases this w/e with more to follow. This was the first time the cumulative total had gone above 6 or 7!

Surely if everyone then doesn't go and hug their grandparents the "much younger age profile" will mean that cases are simply not that much a problem?

The problem is in those multi-generational households who don't hug - just share the same air.

I think if people are aware of the risks then can we not leave it up to them? Do we know the number of such households in general?

Again, the issue is when they go an do their shift in Tesco and end up infecting half of their colleagues. People can get it if they choose to, but they will end up infecting a lot of people who haven't made that choice and the result will be a second 3-5 week national lockdown.

I'm not a big nanny state type of person, however, in this instance the individual doesn't know best and the state does, even this one.

That I suppose, as we all said right from the start, from before the start, that testing holds the key to the maintenance and survival of our economic health.

Yes, I'm very interested to see what this new 90 minute test is all about. It could end be the difference with returning to mostly normal life for a vast majority of people and this half life until the vaccine comes. Even then, I think track and trace is a hugely important part of this and our track and trace system is rubbish, incedental meetings between strangers aren't tracked and people who break the rules are unwilling to share who else broke the rules with them to tracers so there is a gap in the testing regime.

Remember that with prevalence still below 20%, a test will have to be both very sensitive and very specific to have a high predictive value for individual results.

I have not seen the data on sensitivity and specificity for this 90 minute test. Has anyone got a link to that data?

TimT said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MarqueeMark said:

TOPPING said:

felix said:

contrarian said:

felix said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Correct - although ironically they got it right with Spain - the infection growth in many of the costas is quite rapid now. I am no longer convinced the authorities have got a handle on it.

Spanish deaths per day are still under 10 though, right? and have been for some time

The deaths are much better - improved treatments perhaps but mainly a much younger age profile for contagion so far. I worry that this could easily change as the numbers of cases grow. Also - the Spanish data is estimated to have undercounted deaths by around 20,000 overall so I would not be too trusting of the figures. I'm afraid the decision to go for a big tourist season at the last minute was, albeit understandable, a mistake. The Spanish nighlife is driving the figures on the costas now. My own tiny little tourist town has 25 new cases this w/e with more to follow. This was the first time the cumulative total had gone above 6 or 7!

Surely if everyone then doesn't go and hug their grandparents the "much younger age profile" will mean that cases are simply not that much a problem?

The problem is in those multi-generational households who don't hug - just share the same air.

I think if people are aware of the risks then can we not leave it up to them? Do we know the number of such households in general?

Again, the issue is when they go an do their shift in Tesco and end up infecting half of their colleagues. People can get it if they choose to, but they will end up infecting a lot of people who haven't made that choice and the result will be a second 3-5 week national lockdown.

I'm not a big nanny state type of person, however, in this instance the individual doesn't know best and the state does, even this one.

That I suppose, as we all said right from the start, from before the start, that testing holds the key to the maintenance and survival of our economic health.

Yes, I'm very interested to see what this new 90 minute test is all about. It could end be the difference with returning to mostly normal life for a vast majority of people and this half life until the vaccine comes. Even then, I think track and trace is a hugely important part of this and our track and trace system is rubbish, incedental meetings between strangers aren't tracked and people who break the rules are unwilling to share who else broke the rules with them to tracers so there is a gap in the testing regime.

Remember that with prevalence still below 20%, a test will have to be both very sensitive and very specific to have a high predictive value for individual results.

I have not seen the data on sensitivity and specificity for this 90 minute test. Has anyone got a link to that data?

No, I haven't been able to find any details on it yet, the government has just said it exists and will be rolled out.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Meanwhile, utter lunacy part 92: I think we should cut the government some slack for the difficulty of dealing with Covid-19, but there is absolutely no reason to cut them any slack for deliberate economic vandalism:

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1290319702095519745

Especially as we hold all the cards in these negotiations.

contrarian said:

I don't see how we square RCS's circle.

Even vaccines don;t prevent all deaths, old and vulnerable people still pass away in winter from flu and will from COVID.

We;re doomed to repeat this cycle until the economy collapses to such an extent that granny never gets to die of COVID, because she dies of undiagnosed cancer ten years earlier, or some other disease the health service of that country can no longer afford to treat because private sector revenues have evaporated.

A vaccine cuts R dramatically, because people are much less infectious.

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

I think none of them really have a clue what is happening

What the linked report is doing, is trying to arrive at -



via other data.

MaxPB said:

TimT said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MarqueeMark said:

TOPPING said:

felix said:

contrarian said:

felix said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Correct - although ironically they got it right with Spain - the infection growth in many of the costas is quite rapid now. I am no longer convinced the authorities have got a handle on it.

Spanish deaths per day are still under 10 though, right? and have been for some time

The deaths are much better - improved treatments perhaps but mainly a much younger age profile for contagion so far. I worry that this could easily change as the numbers of cases grow. Also - the Spanish data is estimated to have undercounted deaths by around 20,000 overall so I would not be too trusting of the figures. I'm afraid the decision to go for a big tourist season at the last minute was, albeit understandable, a mistake. The Spanish nighlife is driving the figures on the costas now. My own tiny little tourist town has 25 new cases this w/e with more to follow. This was the first time the cumulative total had gone above 6 or 7!

Surely if everyone then doesn't go and hug their grandparents the "much younger age profile" will mean that cases are simply not that much a problem?

The problem is in those multi-generational households who don't hug - just share the same air.

I think if people are aware of the risks then can we not leave it up to them? Do we know the number of such households in general?

Again, the issue is when they go an do their shift in Tesco and end up infecting half of their colleagues. People can get it if they choose to, but they will end up infecting a lot of people who haven't made that choice and the result will be a second 3-5 week national lockdown.

I'm not a big nanny state type of person, however, in this instance the individual doesn't know best and the state does, even this one.

That I suppose, as we all said right from the start, from before the start, that testing holds the key to the maintenance and survival of our economic health.

Yes, I'm very interested to see what this new 90 minute test is all about. It could end be the difference with returning to mostly normal life for a vast majority of people and this half life until the vaccine comes. Even then, I think track and trace is a hugely important part of this and our track and trace system is rubbish, incedental meetings between strangers aren't tracked and people who break the rules are unwilling to share who else broke the rules with them to tracers so there is a gap in the testing regime.

Remember that with prevalence still below 20%, a test will have to be both very sensitive and very specific to have a high predictive value for individual results.

I have not seen the data on sensitivity and specificity for this 90 minute test. Has anyone got a link to that data?

No, I haven't been able to find any details on it yet, the government has just said it exists and will be rolled out.

This was discussed on the Today programme (R4) this morning by Sir John Bell, Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford. You can find it here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000ldd2 from 1h13m45s (lasts ~ 7 mins).

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

On how to distribute a vaccine it should be given to economically productive middle aged people first and then the economically productive young with the second batch. Ensuring those who are most likely to get and therefore spread it will minimise the chances of another mass outbreak. I'd suggest that older people should be close to last in line as they will benefit from herd immunity and there will be less chance of side effects becoming severe.

I'm sure if the government pursue this strategy reams of paper and petabytes of internet traffic will be dedicated to how callous the approach is and how the government are abandoning vulnerable people but with a limited supply the economy takes priority.

It should go to people in roles where the come into contact with lots of other people first.

Which I think will end up being a similar timeline to what I have outlined. I fear the government will be browbeaten into a "compassionate" method of distribution which favours unproductive older people meaning the productive young are still stuck with social distancing until next year.

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

I think none of them really have a clue what is happening

To a large extent it's all educated guesses, but I do find the notion that cases aren't rising to be plausible, despite the panic flapping about the hotspots. The Plague stubbornly refuses to go away, to be sure, but in the large majority of England and Wales and almost everywhere in Scotland and Northern Ireland it's down to background levels. The blanket testing in the panic zones probably is just picking up asymptomatic cases that are going undetected elsewhere.

Of course, as has already been discussed at considerable length, nobody can say with any great certainty whether or not either Winter conditions or opening the schools will screw everything up...

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

On how to distribute a vaccine it should be given to economically productive middle aged people first and then the economically productive young with the second batch. Ensuring those who are most likely to get and therefore spread it will minimise the chances of another mass outbreak. I'd suggest that older people should be close to last in line as they will benefit from herd immunity and there will be less chance of side effects becoming severe.

I'm sure if the government pursue this strategy reams of paper and petabytes of internet traffic will be dedicated to how callous the approach is and how the government are abandoning vulnerable people but with a limited supply the economy takes priority.

It should go to people in roles where the come into contact with lots of other people first.

Which I think will end up being a similar timeline to what I have outlined. I fear the government will be browbeaten into a "compassionate" method of distribution which favours unproductive older people meaning the productive young are still stuck with social distancing until next year.

As an unproductive older person I agree broadly with RCS, but as I said earlier, the focus should be on bringing the global epidemic under control, which also means that countries with inadequate health systems should be supported with vaccine availability because otherwise they remain a threat to the whole world.

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290319583392538624?s=20

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290299332034322432?s=20

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

I'm losing confidence in them, I must admit. Clearly not alone in this.

I never had confidence in them, however I equally don't think anyone else would have done much better.

Hunt?

RCS1000 outlines the problem better than I would.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Basically by the time you know you need to do something it's too late which means you need to hit things early which means you will need to hit them often which will eventually cause resentment.

It's a difficult thing to manage no question about that. But if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years. Instead we have Boris Johnson.

So it's a case of what might have been and when contemplating this disastrous combination of Covid pandemic and PM "Boris" that's the word that tends to spring to my mind - Hunt.

We might also still not have got Brexit done and still not have a Tory majority

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

I'm losing confidence in them, I must admit. Clearly not alone in this.

I never had confidence in them, however I equally don't think anyone else would have done much better.

Hunt?

RCS1000 outlines the problem better than I would.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Basically by the time you know you need to do something it's too late which means you need to hit things early which means you will need to hit them often which will eventually cause resentment.

It's a difficult thing to manage no question about that. But if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years. Instead we have Boris Johnson.

So it's a case of what might have been and when contemplating this disastrous combination of Covid pandemic and PM "Boris" that's the word that tends to spring to my mind - Hunt.

We might also still not have got Brexit done and still not have a Tory majority

You still haven’t got Brexit done.

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

I'm losing confidence in them, I must admit. Clearly not alone in this.

I never had confidence in them, however I equally don't think anyone else would have done much better.

Hunt?

RCS1000 outlines the problem better than I would.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Basically by the time you know you need to do something it's too late which means you need to hit things early which means you will need to hit them often which will eventually cause resentment.

It's a difficult thing to manage no question about that. But if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years. Instead we have Boris Johnson.

So it's a case of what might have been and when contemplating this disastrous combination of Covid pandemic and PM "Boris" that's the word that tends to spring to my mind - Hunt.

We might also still not have got Brexit done and still not have a Tory majority

You still haven’t got Brexit done.

Brexit was done in January when we left the EU, what Brexit ultimately looks like is not the same thing as getting it done in the first place

Richard_Nabavi said:

Meanwhile, utter lunacy part 92: I think we should cut the government some slack for the difficulty of dealing with Covid-19, but there is absolutely no reason to cut them any slack for deliberate economic vandalism:

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1290319702095519745

Of course, in the mad mad mad mad mad world of Brexit this sort of thing will be portrayed as the desired outcome all along - only by suffering will we be assured that we're truly free.

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

I'm losing confidence in them, I must admit. Clearly not alone in this.

I never had confidence in them, however I equally don't think anyone else would have done much better.

Hunt?

RCS1000 outlines the problem better than I would.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Basically by the time you know you need to do something it's too late which means you need to hit things early which means you will need to hit them often which will eventually cause resentment.

It's a difficult thing to manage no question about that. But if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years. Instead we have Boris Johnson.

So it's a case of what might have been and when contemplating this disastrous combination of Covid pandemic and PM "Boris" that's the word that tends to spring to my mind - Hunt.

We might also still not have got Brexit done and still not have a Tory majority

Yes. So would there have been any downsides at all from the national interest viewpoint?

Hard to think of any.

Yes. No Tory majority would be against the national interest. Which is why by millions the public voted to have one.

Black_Rook said:

Theuniondivvie said:

bigjohnowls said:

I have been to Cineworld twice since they reopened.

Friday afternoon. 4 members of staff visible, all concessions except pick and mix open. No bookings at all except me. I was only customer in foyer and only one in the screening. When i came out one of staff told me 5 films that afternoon 4 customers in total.

This afternoon There were 3 advance bookings according to their booking screen. Nobody except me in the foyer which i sat in for 10 mins None of the other 2 who booked for unhinged turned up attended.

Have now been twice, not seen another customer perhaps its me that is "unhinged"

Oh and why on earth are Cineworld not participants in help out to eat out? Are they eligible?

RIP Cineworld.

Tomorrow our bubble has a table for 4 at our local HOTO Restaurant. We are 50/50 about cancelling tonight to give them chance to re sell the table. Or will it be empty like the Cinema?

This seems to me to be the fly in the ointment of the 'face nappies & lockdown Nazis are destroying our economy' argument. Where's the evidence that huge numbers of folk (aside from the hormonal yoot) are desperate to be out there consuming and spending?

Based on admittedly limited experience (three visits so far, spread across two venues, plus anecdata from work colleagues) the eateries around here seem to be doing reasonably well. But then again this is a low Plague area and has been from day one.

I daresay there's a fair bit of variation from area to area.

I went for my first pint in the wild (Glasgow) for 4 months on Friday (leave details, book table in advance for beer garden). It was busy-ish but not like a normal Friday. Haven't had to queue for a supermarket for a few weeks though they seem more relaxed about numbers of customers at one time since the advent of mask wearing.

Otoh Aberdeen seems to have lurched into social overdrive with unfortunate results.

https://twitter.com/StephenFlynnSNP/status/1290219575456325633?s=20

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

I'm losing confidence in them, I must admit. Clearly not alone in this.

I never had confidence in them, however I equally don't think anyone else would have done much better.

Hunt?

RCS1000 outlines the problem better than I would.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Basically by the time you know you need to do something it's too late which means you need to hit things early which means you will need to hit them often which will eventually cause resentment.

It's a difficult thing to manage no question about that. But if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years. Instead we have Boris Johnson.

So it's a case of what might have been and when contemplating this disastrous combination of Covid pandemic and PM "Boris" that's the word that tends to spring to my mind - Hunt.

We might also still not have got Brexit done and still not have a Tory majority

Yes. So would there have been any downsides at all from the national interest viewpoint?

Hard to think of any.

Yes. No Tory majority would be against the national interest. Which is why by millions the public voted to have one.

In FPTP?

Pull the other plonker.

IanB2 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

We all saw the moment it fell apart for Boris, on television.

Sent on air to explain the government’s new five stage virus alert warning system - its creation itself a recognition of the need to inject some clarity and strategy into the government’s policy responses - he waffled about (famously lampooned on Twitter by Matt Lucas) and then vaguely said we were starting off somewhere around three and a half. Instantly destroying the value there might have been in codifying the policy responses into five discrete levels.

It was never meant to be five discrete levels. The idea we would need to do 20% of unwind at once is ludicrous.

kinabalu said:

if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years.

During which time as Health Secretary his personal attempt to curtail the NHS segment of the Olympics Opening Ceremony was only seen off when Danny Boyle threatened to resign as director and take all the volunteers with him.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

Looking bad for SNP again , only 58 out of 59 , failure.

malcolmg said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

Looking bad for SNP again , only 58 out of 59 , failure.

Especially if you are being given the wrong map!

Carnyx said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

Is that map right? The one I get when clicking through to the Flavible website is different - all of Scotland is SNP except for Red Morningside (prop: Murray, I.) THis is consistent with the figures (not map) in the tweet.

Looks like the existing map to me

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

eek said:

kinabalu said:

I'm losing confidence in them, I must admit. Clearly not alone in this.

I never had confidence in them, however I equally don't think anyone else would have done much better.

Hunt?

RCS1000 outlines the problem better than I would.

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It's not so much that the easing is too fast or too slow, but that it is too jerky and badly explained.

The other problem is one that is all too often missed, both on here and in the wider world:

There's usually a ten to fourteen day gap between infection and diagnosis.

Add to this the fact that people are most infectious before they show symptoms, and you have a recipe for decision making (and judging) that happens with eyes fixed firmly on the rear view mirror.

Basically by the time you know you need to do something it's too late which means you need to hit things early which means you will need to hit them often which will eventually cause resentment.

It's a difficult thing to manage no question about that. But if the Tory leadership run off had gone differently we could have had a PM with the perfect profile for this. An unflappable and diligent guy who was Health Secretary for 7 years. Instead we have Boris Johnson.

So it's a case of what might have been and when contemplating this disastrous combination of Covid pandemic and PM "Boris" that's the word that tends to spring to my mind - Hunt.

We might also still not have got Brexit done and still not have a Tory majority

You still haven’t got Brexit done.

Brexit was done in January when we left the EU, what Brexit ultimately looks like is not the same thing as getting it done in the first place

The body politic was injected with venomous toxins through the incompetence and malice of you and your party.

The body is not dead yet. We have to see what it really means for the unemployed oif Hartlepool, the inshore fishermen of Scotland, and the bankers of the City of London.

Do you know?

No, you don't, and nobody des. So please don't give us such platitudes.

HY without his platitudes and fake polls would be like SeanT without his drink.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

So Tories largest party and almost certainly with a majority of English seats but Starmer becomes PM with SNP and Plaid and Green support or SNP and LDs support

HYUFD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

So Tories largest party and almost certainly with a majority of English seats but Starmer becomes PM with SNP and Plaid and Green support or SNP and LDs support

But there won't be an election on old boundaries.....

13 cases linked to a pub in Aberdeen.

19 cases linked to a pub in Stone.

And yet I can do a pub crawl round town but am banned from sitting in a relative's garden.

Perhaps if I buy a sandwich from Pret on the way then it will be OK?

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290319583392538624?s=20

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290299332034322432?s=20

Hmmn

Was the Democracy Institute's poll mentioned on here? the Speccie is going big on it.

Doesn;t fit the narrative I guess!

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

Who would have thought that Coleslaw's departure would have been so detrimental to the Tories' support?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Perhaps Prince Andrew sees a precedent.

https://twitter.com/tackettdc/status/1290325853260349441

My word, now there's a man whose reputation has declined swiftly.

https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1290324760690397188

contrarian said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290319583392538624?s=20

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290299332034322432?s=20

Hmmn

Was the Democracy Institute's poll mentioned on here? the Speccie is going big on it.

Doesn;t fit the narrative I guess!

It doesn't.

It might be correct, of course, and it might not.

The problem is that there are literally no details - other than a link to a Sunday Express story - about the DI poll. (See https://democracyinstitute.org/)

And it's very hard for poll watchers to take a poll about which we know nothing (no crosstabs, no detail on who was surveyed or from where), from a firm with no polling history (that I know of) and which doesn't even show up in 538's pollster rankings.

So, we could all go with "lots of pollsters which give us lots of detail and have history are wrong, and this firm we've never heard of, with no crosstabs, is correct." But I suspect that is not a strategy that leads to positive returns.

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

But that's always been the case.

The question is whether the ratio of actual number infected to known about number infected increasing or decreasing.

Carnyx said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

So if the Lib Dems continue to collapse, what does that look like?

And if the SNP do that well, then Labour even more than the Tories should become a purely English national party?

The people of Wales say hello

rcs1000 said:

contrarian said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290319583392538624?s=20

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1290299332034322432?s=20

Hmmn

Was the Democracy Institute's poll mentioned on here? the Speccie is going big on it.

Doesn;t fit the narrative I guess!

It doesn't.

It might be correct, of course, and it might not.

The problem is that there are literally no details - other than a link to a Sunday Express story - about the DI poll. (See https://democracyinstitute.org/)

And it's very hard for poll watchers to take a poll about which we know nothing (no crosstabs, no detail on who was surveyed or from where), from a firm with no polling history (that I know of) and which doesn't even show up in 538's pollster rankings.

So, we could all go with "lots of pollsters which give us lots of detail and have history are wrong, and this firm we've never heard of, with no crosstabs, is correct." But I suspect that is not a strategy that leads to positive returns.

My word! It's come to some pass when you're questioning the Sunday Express!

What next? Suspicions about the the Harrow News, or the Dorking Times?

Went to get my haircut today. There are 3 barbers in my town. The one I usually use was closed (it always is on Mondays). The "yoof" barber had one customer, so took a chance on the third.
Totally empty. Had cut. Not a single other customer while I was there. A total of 2 people having haircuts at 2 pm in the afternoon in a town of 10000. Probably double that with surrounding villages.
Said they had been very busy first couple of weeks (pent up demand), but dead since.
No one is going to weddings, parties, dating, out on the pull, school etc., so no pressing need to have it cut.
Not sure how long they can justify the total of 6 full time barbers across the 3 sites.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1290276072328634370

What a swing

Its less than what EdM had at the equivalent time.

Remember EdM ?

PB had an acronym about him.

dixiedean said:

Went to get my haircut today. There are 3 barbers in my town. The one I usually use was closed (it always is on Mondays). The "yoof" barber had one customer, so took a chance on the third.
Totally empty. Had cut. Not a single other customer while I was there. A total of 2 people having haircuts at 2 pm in the afternoon in a town of 10000. Probably double that with surrounding villages.
Said they had been very busy first couple of weeks (pent up demand), but dead since.
No one is going to weddings, parties, dating, out on the pull, school etc., so no pressing need to have it cut.
Not sure how long they can justify the total of 6 full time barbers across the 3 sites.

I'm not sure how many barbers survive in any case given the way their numbers seem to have increased in the last decade.

Maybe its a young person's thing.

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

But that's always been the case.

The question is whether the ratio of actual number infected to known about number infected increasing or decreasing.

I would be staggered if we don't see a four-fold increase in reported cases over the next two weeks in the UK.

A prediction to remember.

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

But that's always been the case.

The question is whether the ratio of actual number infected to known about number infected increasing or decreasing.

I would be staggered if we don't see a four-fold increase in reported cases over the next two weeks in the UK.

A prediction to remember.

Don't forget we've had lots of people coming back from Spain, and very few of them will have socially distanced there.

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

But that's always been the case.

The question is whether the ratio of actual number infected to known about number infected increasing or decreasing.

I would be staggered if we don't see a four-fold increase in reported cases over the next two weeks in the UK.

The pubs have been open for a month, so if people getting pissed and breathing over each other were going to cause a tsunami wave of cases (as opposed to isolated instances where groups have behaved like knobs or got very unlucky) then one has to assume that this would've started by now.

That leaves, as the source for this fresh explosion, the holidaymakers. Were there enough of them out in Spain, were there enough cases abroad in the places where most of them were visiting for a sufficiently large number to become infected, and have they then been insufficiently compliant with the demand to quarantine on top of that, for this to trigger off a major new burst of community transmission? You may be right, but colour me sceptical.

Foxy said:

CarlottaVance said:

Compare & contrast who the UK would be willing to help with who would be willing to help the UK...

https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1290328646545215490?s=20

Well, Brexit does mean Brexit! The countries that the EU members are willing to help remain in the Union. Isn't that what Unions are for, mutual support?

Your fellow Brits don't agree with you.

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

But that's always been the case.

The question is whether the ratio of actual number infected to known about number infected increasing or decreasing.

I would be staggered if we don't see a four-fold increase in reported cases over the next two weeks in the UK.

A prediction to remember.

Don't forget we've had lots of people coming back from Spain, and very few of them will have socially distanced there.

Well, if you are ultimately proven correct then I think the British population can wave bye-bye to overseas holidays for the rest of the year at least. Quite how the Government survives the pressure to shut the international travel industry back down again under such dire circumstances, I don't know.

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

bigjohnowls said:

Malmesbury said:

England case numbers -

Are todays number of new cases the highest since June?

Well, the number for the 29th by specimen date - 925 is similar to mid June.

The headline number is reporting date and is generally not worth bothering with.

Do you think there is a trend?

If so is it down, flat or rising?

Cases are rising.

Using the headline number is for Piers Morgan.

Cases in England are not rising, at least not if this explanation from a reputable source is to be believed (extract edited slightly for sense without the accompanying graphs):

On first glance it looks like the number of cases in Pillar 2 is trending up and Pillar 1 is trending down... However, what happens if you adjust for any change in testing over time? On the 1st of July – the seven day moving average of testing was 41,109 for Pillar 1 and 43,161 in Pillar 2. By the 31st July, the Pillar 1 seven day average for testing had increased to 49,543 (a 20% increase,) while the Pillar 2 had risen by much more – by 82% to 78,522 tests... When you adjust for the number of tests done and then standardise to per 100,000 tests, Pillar 1 is seen to be still trending down, but Pillar 2 is now flatlining. The increase in the number of cases detected, therefore, could be due to the increase in testing in Pillar 2.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The numbers we see today are - of course - from people who got infected two weeks ago. Given (a) people coming back from holiday in Spain, and (b) less social distancing, it would be very surprising if the actual number of people with CV19 was significantly higher than current positive tests suggest.

But that's always been the case.

The question is whether the ratio of actual number infected to known about number infected increasing or decreasing.

I would be staggered if we don't see a four-fold increase in reported cases over the next two weeks in the UK.

A prediction to remember.

Don't forget we've had lots of people coming back from Spain, and very few of them will have socially distanced there.

They'll certainly come back with a dose of something.