Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will tonight see the first poll since GE2019 with LAB ahead?

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 12 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will tonight see the first poll since GE2019 with LAB ahead?

It might see an eternity ago but in the first polls in April this year after Starmer became LAB leader two pollsters had CON leads of 26%. Since then things have fallen back sharply for the governing party and in it last survey at the end of August Opinium, has LAB and CON level pegging on 40% each.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • I predict a bigger Tory lead.

    Being rude to Bruxelles always plays well.
  • Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,723
    Third. Rate like Bozo’s shower.
  • Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,035
    edited September 12

    I predict a bigger Tory lead.

    Being rude to Bruxelles always plays well.

    If I had to guess, the EU "illegal" move probably won't shift votes (pro / anti is already factored in) in the way not being able to get little Johnny a COVID test or be able to celebrate his Birthday will.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 34,489
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,723

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    Most of Europe’s seem to have dropped today, although it being a Saturday might make a difference I guess. Meanwhile the US looks likely to overtake us on population adjusted death rates fairly soon.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,723
    I think we are well into relative degrees of failure by now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,723
    CNN: EU officials have given Johnson until the end of this month to abandon his would-be violation of international law. If he refuses, negotiations on a UK-EU trade deal to replace the transitional agreement that expires at the end of 2020 are likely to collapse, risking border chaos and food shortages, an end to the country's fragile recovery from its deepest recession on record and years of tepid growth to follow.

    What's more, intentionally breaking international law would make other countries think twice before offering the United Kingdom the free trade deals it desperately needs, damage the country's reputation as a standard bearer for the rule of law and make it a less attractive destination for startups and foreign investment.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,993
    Off topic: Could any Scottish Lawyers say how one can find out a Sheriff Court criminal judgment? I can see the case I am interested in listed in the relevant Sheriff court for next week but I cannot see where I would be able to find the judgement following the case.

    Thanks
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,642
    This article - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/ - from July 2019 has aged well I feel.

    Quite prescient even.
  • Massive crowds at the Tour de France....is there a global pandemic on?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    UK case data - specimen date, scaled to 100k population

    now includes Scotland

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    UK case data - specimen date

    now includes Scotland

    image
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230
    edited September 12
    Cyclefree said:

    This article - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/ - from July 2019 has aged well I feel.

    Quite prescient even.

    Particularly this bit... "One of the dilemmas for those thinking of voting Tory is that,...if he gets a big majority, he will be able to behave with relative freedom. That requires a level of trust in him which, given his own and his government’s behaviour when it had no majority, would not appear wise"

    Go to the top of the class :+1:
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,095
    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    Separately, some not so great state polls for Biden today - he’s only up +2 in Arizona, +3 in New Hampshire and +4 Nevada (Wisconsin a bit better). Probably too close for comfort at this stage.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    UK case summary

    image
    image
    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    UK Hospitals

    image
    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    UK deaths, day of death, 28 day cut off

    image
    image
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230
    MrEd said:

    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    It just puts back the reckoning and does not solve the problem.

    No matter how much they bluster and gabble, the problem is still there and the Rest of the World does not operate by Boris or Cummings's diktats.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,642

    Cyclefree said:

    This article - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/ - from July 2019 has aged well I feel.

    Quite prescient even.

    Particularly this bit... "One of the dilemmas for those thinking of voting Tory is that,...if he gets a big majority, he will be able to behave with relative freedom. That requires a level of trust in him which, given his own and his government’s behaviour when it had no majority, would not appear wise"

    Go to the top of the class :+1:
    There is also this, from 6 months earlier - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/21/cultivating-democracy/
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,655
    I am not sure by what mechanism Baker expects the NI blockade to take place, in the event of No Deal.

    Surely under the WA Irish Sea checks are under the remit of HMRC? albeit with EU oversight. It would be a unique sort of blockade, by our own government.
  • Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
  • Both Bury seats (North and South) were Tory gains from Labour in 2019, both by very small margins.

    I suspect even without Covid queues Labour will win them back. Not far from Manchester, so plenty of metropolitan elite voters!
  • Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 34,489

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    He's probably going to end up getting booked on Question Time and will be the next Laurence Fox.
  • Scott_xP said:
    Using Reagan for the voice overs is genius.

    Maybe Maggie can do the same vs Boris.
  • Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,041
    MrEd said:

    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    Separately, some not so great state polls for Biden today - he’s only up +2 in Arizona, +3 in New Hampshire and +4 Nevada (Wisconsin a bit better). Probably too close for comfort at this stage.

    Yet the national polls from today and yesterday, from Ipsos, YouGov and USC, range from Biden +9 to Biden +15.

    Now, it's quite possible that it is the national polls which are incorrect, and the state level polls which are correct. It's also possible that President Trump manages a staggering level of vote efficiency, losing the popular vote by five points or more and still holding on (although I fear for America in that case).

    But in 2016, the national polls were broadly correct, only overstating Clinton by 1% on average. That's a similar error level to 2008, 2004 and 2000 - only in 2012, when they understated Obama, was the error level more than about a percent.

    My view is watch Trump's share in the national polls. He needs to get the lead down to four points or less by election night, where his better vote efficiency (and possibly some understatement) gives him a good chance. Right now, that hasn't happened. Right now, Biden's share is stable and above 50%, and President Trump has not yet begun gaining ground.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 85,281
    edited September 12

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
  • So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 49,035
    edited September 12

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,927
    Foxy said:

    I am not sure by what mechanism Baker expects the NI blockade to take place, in the event of No Deal.

    Surely under the WA Irish Sea checks are under the remit of HMRC? albeit with EU oversight. It would be a unique sort of blockade, by our own government.
    Apologies for reposting - i wrote this earlier which i think is a plausible theory to where all this stuff about "threats of a blockade" have come from.


    GB-NI Food exports.

    OK, so i think i now understand what has been going on with these claims about the EU "threatening" to prevent food exports between GB and NI.

    The relevant organisations in the EU have been becoming increasingly concerned about the failure of the UK to provide the necessary details about their future Food safety regime to enable what should be routine certification of the UK as a safe country for food imports to the EU (a slightly more tricky, and possibly related bit of this might be providing assurances that the UK can't be used by 3rd party countries as a backdoor to pass uncertified produce into the single market (eg. the cholorinated chicken argument).

    These complaints were probably circulating at lower levels of Government but as they have become more urgent given the shortening deadlines, these have been escalated to the extent that Barnier has been asked to raise them within the bilateral trade talks. Bearing in mind that without such certification (which should be a formality) it will be illegal for UK to export food to the EU AT ALL.

    A possible corollary of this (although may be disputed) is that Northern Ireland (which under the WA is subject to the EU legal regime) will also be potentially legally unable to accept food imports from GB.

    When Barnier has, as requested as a result of the escalation, raised the issue of certification, the UK has thrown a wobbly and accused him of making outrageous threats to the integrity of the UK, and seeking to blackmail the UK as part of the negotiations.

    What would the response of a sane sensible UK Government be to resolve the problem? Provide the necessary information to allow the EU certification to proceed and provide certainty for EU food import businesses and UK food exporters alike.

    What has been the response of the current UK Government? Throw a wobbly about the integrity of the UK internal market and not address the far larger problem which will arise if the certification processes aren't completed in time (even though solving the large problem will remove the potential issue with Northern Ireland)

    Why has the UK Government been dragging its feet on following the sane sensible path? It can only be something to do with the US trade negotiations. I can't think of any other reason.
    How aware are UK food exporters that because the Government is dragging its feet the question of tariffs, paperwork and queues at Dover may not apply come Jan 1st? It may be that the UK may not be allowed to export food to the EU AT ALL! And if it's not sorted soon then EU food businesses supplied by the UK are going to be forced to put in place measures to source their produce from elsewhere. We could be literally weeks away for the entire EU market for UK food disappearing overnight. And once gone, will it ever come back?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    edited September 12
    Scott_xP said:
    Reagan really was a class act but our media constantly portrayed him as stupid, dangerous and ignorant at the time. Its a good illustration of how poorly we see or understand the US from here.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 85,281
    edited September 12

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    It's like Iraq v. Iran, can't they both lose be wrong.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,927

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,993

    UK case data - specimen date

    now includes Scotland

    image

    Very interesting as ever @Malmesbury, thanks.

    Do you post these anywhere as downloadable spreadsheets?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,041

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Hospital admissions are up, as are numbers in hospital.....

    image
    image

  • One thing I'll say the government have completely screwed up with this EU drama is they totally lost control of the narrative. They have allowed the narrative to be that the UK is going to break International Law without giving a clear sound bite as to why.

    I find Johnson's argument in the Telegraph a good one but it's being made five days after the story broke and behind a paywall. Even if the story was leaked to the FT, he should have come out swinging before the legislation was published saying this is why the EU has acted in bad faith so this is why we need to act this way ...

    Poorly managed the way it has happened.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    If this impasse remains in place and we adhere to the WA we would not be able to provide food to NI either. I vaguely recall something similar under the Corn laws and the potato famine...
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,625
    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    No it isn't. They want chaos. They want the populace enraged at Europe. There are huge profits to be troughed from it.
    Several won't be happy till we are on the verge of war.
    Am increasingly pessimistic this weekend. Both about this and Covid.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    This article - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/ - from July 2019 has aged well I feel.

    Quite prescient even.

    Particularly this bit... "One of the dilemmas for those thinking of voting Tory is that,...if he gets a big majority, he will be able to behave with relative freedom. That requires a level of trust in him which, given his own and his government’s behaviour when it had no majority, would not appear wise"

    Go to the top of the class :+1:
    There is also this, from 6 months earlier - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/21/cultivating-democracy/
    One gold star is enough... ;)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    Indeed. I don't think that the number of unpopulated mountains is particularly relevant or useful.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335

    UK case data - specimen date

    now includes Scotland

    image

    Very interesting as ever @Malmesbury, thanks.

    Do you post these anywhere as downloadable spreadsheets?
    PM me, if you are interested.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,074
    edited September 12

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    It's like Iraq v. Iran, can't they both lose be wrong.
    Would you like a tweet involving Haimes and Nelson together back from those heady days of 26th of March


    And the amazing follow up


    Real numbers. None of your poncy models, real numbers, real analysis.

    Just look at that trend line on the Italy tweet he fitted. Just incredible. Breathtaking work.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,927
    DavidL said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    If this impasse remains in place and we adhere to the WA we would not be able to provide food to NI either. I vaguely recall something similar under the Corn laws and the potato famine...
    David - see my other post below. The sane government response would be to expedite the providing of the necessary documentation to allow certification to proceed. The EU hasn't any interest in not providing this certification, not least because of the implications for the Republic. But the processes still need to be gone through.

    This isn't an 'impasse' caused by trade issues (or not unless it really is linked to the theoretical trade deal with America). This is caused purely and simply by the failure of the UK to do what needs to be done and provide the details of their future food safety regime. As would be required of any other country selling food into the EU market.
  • Scott_xP said:
    Using Reagan for the voice overs is genius.

    Maybe Maggie can do the same vs Boris.
    II grew up under Reagan and Clinton. With Carter and Bush as the one-term exceptions, I thought every president was fabulously telegenic.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 3,686
    edited September 12
    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
  • rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,723
    "tantalising possibility"
  • EPGEPG Posts: 3,571

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    Exactly. Those with access to such data are beginning to use average experienced population density. Unless lots of people live in the Swedish forests, they are irrelevant to the lived experience of humans under COVID-19.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,074
    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    It's almost certainly a function of the return of schools IMO.

    Because, of course, with schools back not only are colds now circulating all the children (see previous graphs in showing explosion of test of under 15 year olds) but more people can go into work and get Covid there too.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,927
    dixiedean said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    No it isn't. They want chaos. They want the populace enraged at Europe. There are huge profits to be troughed from it.
    Several won't be happy till we are on the verge of war.
    Am increasingly pessimistic this weekend. Both about this and Covid.
    Oh that's what it increasingly seems to be about for the UK Govt. I was specifically referring to the origin of the "threat" to blockade UK food exports. That should be something that can be resolved pretty easily and that it hasn't is 100% down to UK Govt intransigence.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 3,686

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    I`d like to see a "hospitalisation due to covid" rate - split by county - but have not found one.
  • alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    You seem convinced that it is the UK that is dragging it's heels on this one. Why?

    There's been numerous reports that the UK has been trying to get areas of simple agreement cleared up with the EU but the EU is not willing to sign off areas even where we agree until the disagreements are resolved.

    If the EU is refusing to sign off British food, as a weapon to try to get us to accept EU demands on state aid or fishing waters, then that's not the UK dragging its feet.
  • Alistair said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    It's like Iraq v. Iran, can't they both lose be wrong.
    Would you like a tweet involving Haimes and Nelson together back from those heady days of 26th of March


    And the amazing follow up


    Real numbers. None of your poncy models, real numbers, real analysis.

    Just look at that trend line on the Italy tweet he fitted. Just incredible. Breathtaking work.
    Looking at that I've rolled my eyes so much I can see my own optic nerves.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,993

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    I still maintain that degree of urbanisation (Sweden 88%, UK 83.9%) is a more relevant measure than overall population density.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,655

    UK case summary

    image
    image
    image

    When I pointed out a week ago that there might be a problem brewing, I was reassured that was not true by reason of our world beating Test and Trace system. I dis mention that the hubris was rather premature.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    The problem with that graphic, I think, is that it falls into the old problem for geographic data for Scotland - large areas do not equal large numbers of people....

    image
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 8,404
    edited September 12
    MrEd said:

    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    Separately, some not so great state polls for Biden today - he’s only up +2 in Arizona, +3 in New Hampshire and +4 Nevada (Wisconsin a bit better). Probably too close for comfort at this stage.

    You overlooked Minnesota +9 which is definitely a good score for Biden. So overall from his point of view three disappointing polls, one so-so and one good. Trump would be happy to see this trend continue of course but the pattern since the Conventions has been very mixed with no significant trend in State polls at all.

    In the National polls if there has been a trend it is very slightly in Biden's favor and as RCS has pointed out, the Nationals have tended to be more accurate in the past. It's certainly difficult to reconcile a 7 point gap with anything other than a pretty clear Biden win.

    The betting markets remain unmoved. I'm not surprised.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 3,686

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    The problem with that graphic, I think, is that it falls into the old problem for geographic data for Scotland - large areas do not equal large numbers of people....

    image
    Yes but it`s based on rate of infections per million of population
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    alex_ said:

    DavidL said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    If this impasse remains in place and we adhere to the WA we would not be able to provide food to NI either. I vaguely recall something similar under the Corn laws and the potato famine...
    David - see my other post below. The sane government response would be to expedite the providing of the necessary documentation to allow certification to proceed. The EU hasn't any interest in not providing this certification, not least because of the implications for the Republic. But the processes still need to be gone through.

    This isn't an 'impasse' caused by trade issues (or not unless it really is linked to the theoretical trade deal with America). This is caused purely and simply by the failure of the UK to do what needs to be done and provide the details of their future food safety regime. As would be required of any other country selling food into the EU market.
    I'm afraid your earlier post has fallen off the end of this truncated thread due to the new restrictions.

    But every food product produced by the UK is currently produced under EU regulations, is compliant with those regulations and is free to be transmitted everywhere within the SM. The idea that our food becomes "unregulated" at the end of the WA is simply absurd. Clearly, the EU is entitled to ensure that any subsequent change in our regulations does not mean that any product produced in or imported into the UK does not meet their standards and to restrict products that do not. If the EU wishes to exclude the celebrated chlorine washed chicken after we have allowed it they can of course do so. But if they choose to exclude our exports on 1st January 2021 that is their choice and their choice alone. There is no rational explanation or justification for it and trying to blame our government is just wrong. They are entirely satisfied with the certification that these products currently have. It will be identical the next day.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 3,686
    Foxy said:

    UK case summary

    image
    image
    image

    When I pointed out a week ago that there might be a problem brewing, I was reassured that was not true by reason of our world beating Test and Trace system. I dis mention that the hubris was rather premature.
    Foxy, what were your covid admission numbers this week? If I recall they had climbed from 8 to 13 last week.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,723

    One thing I'll say the government have completely screwed up with this EU drama is they totally lost control of the narrative. They have allowed the narrative to be that the UK is going to break International Law without giving a clear sound bite as to why.

    I find Johnson's argument in the Telegraph a good one but it's being made five days after the story broke and behind a paywall. Even if the story was leaked to the FT, he should have come out swinging before the legislation was published saying this is why the EU has acted in bad faith so this is why we need to act this way ...

    Poorly managed the way it has happened.

    A diamond in disguise then. Shame not to let it shine.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,041

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    Plus, average household size. Because (taking this to extremes) somewhere with everybody living in single person dwellings is going to have very different propagation to somewhere where everyone lived in five person households.
  • Alistair said:

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    It's almost certainly a function of the return of schools IMO.

    Because, of course, with schools back not only are colds now circulating all the children (see previous graphs in showing explosion of test of under 15 year olds) but more people can go into work and get Covid there too.
    Schools present a genuine dilemma. Our three saw their education suffer significantly during lock down, and they are all really happy to be back at school. On the other hand, their combined "bubble" is over 500 kids. So it is hard to see how they don't bring Covid home with them.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    The problem with that graphic, I think, is that it falls into the old problem for geographic data for Scotland - large areas do not equal large numbers of people....

    image
    Yes but it`s based on rate of infections per million of population
    Then you get this (scaled to 100k population)

    image
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,041

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    I still maintain that degree of urbanisation (Sweden 88%, UK 83.9%) is a more relevant measure than overall population density.
    If I were to put together a linear regression, best fit would probably contain the following variables:

    - density of cities
    - average household size
    - use of pubic transport
    - number of people working in face-to-face jobs

    I'm not sure urbanisation would be on there, because a really diffuse city without public transport is going to be far less affected than a concentrated one, where everyone travels about by it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,041

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    The problem with that graphic, I think, is that it falls into the old problem for geographic data for Scotland - large areas do not equal large numbers of people....

    image
    Yes but it`s based on rate of infections per million of population
    Then you get this (scaled to 100k population)

    image
    So what you're saying is that the people of Dunbartonshire are paying the price for evicting Jo Swinson?
  • One thing I'll say the government have completely screwed up with this EU drama is they totally lost control of the narrative. They have allowed the narrative to be that the UK is going to break International Law without giving a clear sound bite as to why.

    I find Johnson's argument in the Telegraph a good one but it's being made five days after the story broke and behind a paywall. Even if the story was leaked to the FT, he should have come out swinging before the legislation was published saying this is why the EU has acted in bad faith so this is why we need to act this way ...

    Poorly managed the way it has happened.

    Probably every other readership would find Boris's sorry rattlebag of excuses entirely risible. Nevertheless, I'm not convinced that this will cut through particularly with Joe Public, who will probably just see it as Boris being Boris - bit of an untrustworthy prat but we'll just have to put up.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,927

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    You seem convinced that it is the UK that is dragging it's heels on this one. Why?

    There's been numerous reports that the UK has been trying to get areas of simple agreement cleared up with the EU but the EU is not willing to sign off areas even where we agree until the disagreements are resolved.

    If the EU is refusing to sign off British food, as a weapon to try to get us to accept EU demands on state aid or fishing waters, then that's not the UK dragging its feet.
    It's no more in the EU's interests to prevent/disrupt UK food exports than it is ours. Countries like the Republic of Ireland are not about to jeopardise the security of their food supply from the UK for the sake of bartering it for other trade issues. It's not relevant to trade negotiation at all. The tariffs on the food maybe, but not the actual ability to sell.

    Deal or no deal we will need to be certified to sell food into the EU market. That is the reality of being a third party. But it can't just be put through on the nod. The UK still needs to provide the necessary details and clarifications to allow the certification to happen. And we haven't yet done that.

    Of course you are free to accept that the UK have fulfilled all their responsibilities in this area and the EU are explicitly trying to manufacture reasons why they will refuse certification as a bargaining chip. But i don't believe that for a minute. And if they did then we would obviously do the same which would obviously be damaging to them.

    So no, i favour the line of UK intransigence. And the only plausible explanation i can come up for this (beyond the malign) is that it's something to do with proposed US trade talks.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    Plus, average household size. Because (taking this to extremes) somewhere with everybody living in single person dwellings is going to have very different propagation to somewhere where everyone lived in five person households.
    It is one of the (many) curiosities of the handling of this disease that if you test positive, you are supposed to isolate in your household away from the other occupants. Id imagine this is impossible for a third to half the country because of their house/flat size.

    Other countries give places where infected people can stay without spreading it to the rest of their family. In some countries like the UAE this is mandatory. Ive not even heard the possibility being discussed in the UK despite a lot of poor overcrowded housing.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,993
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    I still maintain that degree of urbanisation (Sweden 88%, UK 83.9%) is a more relevant measure than overall population density.
    If I were to put together a linear regression, best fit would probably contain the following variables:

    - density of cities
    - average household size
    - use of pubic transport
    - number of people working in face-to-face jobs

    I'm not sure urbanisation would be on there, because a really diffuse city without public transport is going to be far less affected than a concentrated one, where everyone travels about by it.
    That's fair but not all of these are easy to measure and how do you weight them relative to one another?

    Anyway my point is that urbanisation % is more relevant than population density. I can't prove it though.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    alex_ said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    You seem convinced that it is the UK that is dragging it's heels on this one. Why?

    There's been numerous reports that the UK has been trying to get areas of simple agreement cleared up with the EU but the EU is not willing to sign off areas even where we agree until the disagreements are resolved.

    If the EU is refusing to sign off British food, as a weapon to try to get us to accept EU demands on state aid or fishing waters, then that's not the UK dragging its feet.
    It's no more in the EU's interests to prevent/disrupt UK food exports than it is ours. Countries like the Republic of Ireland are not about to jeopardise the security of their food supply from the UK for the sake of bartering it for other trade issues. It's not relevant to trade negotiation at all. The tariffs on the food maybe, but not the actual ability to sell.

    Deal or no deal we will need to be certified to sell food into the EU market. That is the reality of being a third party. But it can't just be put through on the nod. The UK still needs to provide the necessary details and clarifications to allow the certification to happen. And we haven't yet done that.

    Of course you are free to accept that the UK have fulfilled all their responsibilities in this area and the EU are explicitly trying to manufacture reasons why they will refuse certification as a bargaining chip. But i don't believe that for a minute. And if they did then we would obviously do the same which would obviously be damaging to them.

    So no, i favour the line of UK intransigence. And the only plausible explanation i can come up for this (beyond the malign) is that it's something to do with proposed US trade talks.
    What is the difference between the acceptable certification given on 31st December and the unacceptable certification on 1st January when our legislation is clear that the current regulations remain in place until it is changed? They know we meet their standards. What else could they reasonably require and if there is anything why aren't they requiring it right now?

    This is a completely artificial barrier created by the EU to cause the UK a problem. I do not say that there might not be problems in the future in the absence of a deal by which we agree to maintain their safety standards. Clearly, in the absence of agreement tariffs may well apply. But they have no basis for preventing our exports. We may have to review whether it is "safe" to allow the import of any more BMWs or Audis until we are satisfied that they now meet EU emission standards. It would be as absurd. Almost.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,993
    I missed this earlier - sound like good news.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54132066

    "Coronavirus: Oxford University to resume vaccine trial after pause"
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,723
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    Separately, some not so great state polls for Biden today - he’s only up +2 in Arizona, +3 in New Hampshire and +4 Nevada (Wisconsin a bit better). Probably too close for comfort at this stage.

    Yet the national polls from today and yesterday, from Ipsos, YouGov and USC, range from Biden +9 to Biden +15.

    Now, it's quite possible that it is the national polls which are incorrect, and the state level polls which are correct. It's also possible that President Trump manages a staggering level of vote efficiency, losing the popular vote by five points or more and still holding on (although I fear for America in that case).

    But in 2016, the national polls were broadly correct, only overstating Clinton by 1% on average. That's a similar error level to 2008, 2004 and 2000 - only in 2012, when they understated Obama, was the error level more than about a percent.

    My view is watch Trump's share in the national polls. He needs to get the lead down to four points or less by election night, where his better vote efficiency (and possibly some understatement) gives him a good chance. Right now, that hasn't happened. Right now, Biden's share is stable and above 50%, and President Trump has not yet begun gaining ground.
    I'm going with the national polls too. Ok, you can lose the EC with a 5+ pt PV lead but it would take some Weird Science and I'm prepared to discount that.

    NB: The video ad. I personally find the images of Trump surrounded by so many felons - i.e. most people he's hired - to be quite potent.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    It makes it legal (at least domestically). It certainly doesn't make it wise. But if they are seriously proposing that we would not be able to "export" food to NI...
  • Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    Reducing the BMI of the average Brit to that of the average Swede would be a good start.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 7,335
    rcs1000 said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    The problem with that graphic, I think, is that it falls into the old problem for geographic data for Scotland - large areas do not equal large numbers of people....

    image
    Yes but it`s based on rate of infections per million of population
    Then you get this (scaled to 100k population)

    image
    So what you're saying is that the people of Dunbartonshire are paying the price for evicting Jo Swinson?
    Yes - like the Men of the Mountains in the Lord of the Rings. In the hour of need their hearts failed them.....
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 2,517

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Has he accepted that there was even a first wave yet?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,974
    DavidL said:

    alex_ said:

    DavidL said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    If this impasse remains in place and we adhere to the WA we would not be able to provide food to NI either. I vaguely recall something similar under the Corn laws and the potato famine...
    David - see my other post below. The sane government response would be to expedite the providing of the necessary documentation to allow certification to proceed. The EU hasn't any interest in not providing this certification, not least because of the implications for the Republic. But the processes still need to be gone through.

    This isn't an 'impasse' caused by trade issues (or not unless it really is linked to the theoretical trade deal with America). This is caused purely and simply by the failure of the UK to do what needs to be done and provide the details of their future food safety regime. As would be required of any other country selling food into the EU market.
    I'm afraid your earlier post has fallen off the end of this truncated thread due to the new restrictions.

    But every food product produced by the UK is currently produced under EU regulations, is compliant with those regulations and is free to be transmitted everywhere within the SM. The idea that our food becomes "unregulated" at the end of the WA is simply absurd. Clearly, the EU is entitled to ensure that any subsequent change in our regulations does not mean that any product produced in or imported into the UK does not meet their standards and to restrict products that do not. If the EU wishes to exclude the celebrated chlorine washed chicken after we have allowed it they can of course do so. But if they choose to exclude our exports on 1st January 2021 that is their choice and their choice alone. There is no rational explanation or justification for it and trying to blame our government is just wrong. They are entirely satisfied with the certification that these products currently have. It will be identical the next day.
    This is part of my day job interests, so I may be able to contribute. In principle, in the absence of an agreement to recognise each others' standards, the EU is as I understand it entitled to require certification of compliance with EU regulations from January 1, as Alex says, and in the absence of such certification to refuse British food exports. As DavidL says, on January 1 our regulations will be identical, so certification should be very easy indeed. However, they cannot say "Oh well, let's not bother to certify then", because the UK reserves the right to alter its regulations to be different from the EU (for instance, in order to facilitate a US trade deal) at any time, so the procedure needs to be in place to enable it to be immediately active when and if our standards deviate.

    Given mutual trust, I'd think that a transitional agreement on mutual recognition could be reached to last until such time (if ever) that the UK decides to have different regulations from the EU. Mucking about with breaches of agreed Treaties, however, does not encourage mutual trust.
  • alex_ said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    You seem convinced that it is the UK that is dragging it's heels on this one. Why?

    There's been numerous reports that the UK has been trying to get areas of simple agreement cleared up with the EU but the EU is not willing to sign off areas even where we agree until the disagreements are resolved.

    If the EU is refusing to sign off British food, as a weapon to try to get us to accept EU demands on state aid or fishing waters, then that's not the UK dragging its feet.
    It's no more in the EU's interests to prevent/disrupt UK food exports than it is ours. Countries like the Republic of Ireland are not about to jeopardise the security of their food supply from the UK for the sake of bartering it for other trade issues. It's not relevant to trade negotiation at all. The tariffs on the food maybe, but not the actual ability to sell.

    Deal or no deal we will need to be certified to sell food into the EU market. That is the reality of being a third party. But it can't just be put through on the nod. The UK still needs to provide the necessary details and clarifications to allow the certification to happen. And we haven't yet done that.

    Of course you are free to accept that the UK have fulfilled all their responsibilities in this area and the EU are explicitly trying to manufacture reasons why they will refuse certification as a bargaining chip. But i don't believe that for a minute. And if they did then we would obviously do the same which would obviously be damaging to them.

    So no, i favour the line of UK intransigence. And the only plausible explanation i can come up for this (beyond the malign) is that it's something to do with proposed US trade talks.
    You miss the simplest possibility- that the UK government doesn't have the project management ability to recognise that the paperwork is needed and get it completed in a timely way.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    Stocky said:

    Nice graphic below. I didn`t realise Scotland is so badly affected at this point in time:

    https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

    The problem with that graphic, I think, is that it falls into the old problem for geographic data for Scotland - large areas do not equal large numbers of people....

    image
    Yes but it`s based on rate of infections per million of population
    Then you get this (scaled to 100k population)

    image
    So what you're saying is that the people of Dunbartonshire are paying the price for evicting Jo Swinson?
    Yes - like the Men of the Mountains in the Lord of the Rings. In the hour of need their hearts failed them.....
    If only were not a colony of a failed state

  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,927
    DavidL said:

    It makes it legal (at least domestically). It certainly doesn't make it wise. But if they are seriously proposing that we would not be able to "export" food to NI...
    Apart from anything else, even if this was a possibility, there is a clause in the Withdrawal Agreement which would allow the UK to act unilaterally to prevent this.
    Article 16
    Safeguards
    1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
    2. If a safeguard measure taken by the Union or the United Kingdom, as the case may be, in accordance with paragraph 1 creates an imbalance between the rights and obligations under this Protocol, the Union or the United Kingdom, as the
    case may be, may take such proportionate rebalancing measures as are strictly necessary to remedy the imbalance. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,074

    MrEd said:

    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    Separately, some not so great state polls for Biden today - he’s only up +2 in Arizona, +3 in New Hampshire and +4 Nevada (Wisconsin a bit better). Probably too close for comfort at this stage.

    You overlooked Minnesota +9 which is definitely a good score for Biden. So overall from his point of view three disappointing polls, one so-so and one good. Trump would be happy to see this trend continue of course but the pattern since the Conventions has been very mixed with no significant trend in State polls at all.

    In the National polls if there has been a trend it is very slightly in Biden's favor and as RCS has pointed out, the Nationals have tended to be more accurate in the past. It's certainly difficult to reconcile a 7 point gap with anything other than a pretty clear Biden win.

    The betting markets remain unmoved. I'm not surprised.
    Also the Arizona poll is by Gravis who's previous Arizona poll massively over sampled 2016 Trump voters. This time they have only modestly over sampled Trump voters.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 77,764
    There was nothing in the 2019 Tory manifesto about creating a hard border between NI and GB.

    The 2019 Tory manifesto did however promise to regain control over UK fishing waters and end EU sovereignty over the UK, both of which the EU have refused to agree for a trade deal.

    In that case the Tory manifesto also promised to end the implementation period in December 2020
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025

    DavidL said:

    alex_ said:

    DavidL said:

    alex_ said:

    So if the EU are threatening not to accept food imports from the UK, then if the IM Act goes through does that mean they'll bar food trade from NI to the Republic?

    PT, this is about certification of UK food full stop. If the UK don't provide the necessary information to enable this process to happen the the EU won't be barring trade from just NI to the Republic. They will be barring all UK food exports. That is just reality. It's shocking that the UK hasn't provided the necessary documentation for this month's ago.
    If this impasse remains in place and we adhere to the WA we would not be able to provide food to NI either. I vaguely recall something similar under the Corn laws and the potato famine...
    David - see my other post below. The sane government response would be to expedite the providing of the necessary documentation to allow certification to proceed. The EU hasn't any interest in not providing this certification, not least because of the implications for the Republic. But the processes still need to be gone through.

    This isn't an 'impasse' caused by trade issues (or not unless it really is linked to the theoretical trade deal with America). This is caused purely and simply by the failure of the UK to do what needs to be done and provide the details of their future food safety regime. As would be required of any other country selling food into the EU market.
    I'm afraid your earlier post has fallen off the end of this truncated thread due to the new restrictions.

    But every food product produced by the UK is currently produced under EU regulations, is compliant with those regulations and is free to be transmitted everywhere within the SM. The idea that our food becomes "unregulated" at the end of the WA is simply absurd. Clearly, the EU is entitled to ensure that any subsequent change in our regulations does not mean that any product produced in or imported into the UK does not meet their standards and to restrict products that do not. If the EU wishes to exclude the celebrated chlorine washed chicken after we have allowed it they can of course do so. But if they choose to exclude our exports on 1st January 2021 that is their choice and their choice alone. There is no rational explanation or justification for it and trying to blame our government is just wrong. They are entirely satisfied with the certification that these products currently have. It will be identical the next day.
    This is part of my day job interests, so I may be able to contribute. In principle, in the absence of an agreement to recognise each others' standards, the EU is as I understand it entitled to require certification of compliance with EU regulations from January 1, as Alex says, and in the absence of such certification to refuse British food exports. As DavidL says, on January 1 our regulations will be identical, so certification should be very easy indeed. However, they cannot say "Oh well, let's not bother to certify then", because the UK reserves the right to alter its regulations to be different from the EU (for instance, in order to facilitate a US trade deal) at any time, so the procedure needs to be in place to enable it to be immediately active when and if our standards deviate.

    Given mutual trust, I'd think that a transitional agreement on mutual recognition could be reached to last until such time (if ever) that the UK decides to have different regulations from the EU. Mucking about with breaches of agreed Treaties, however, does not encourage mutual trust.
    I agree completely. The challenge comes if and when we seek to depart from the EU regulatory regime. Which we may not, given the consequences.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230
    DavidL said:

    What is the difference between the acceptable certification given on 31st December and the unacceptable certification on 1st January when our legislation is clear that the current regulations remain in place until it is changed? They know we meet their standards. What else could they reasonably require and if there is anything why aren't they requiring it right now?

    You are missing the point. The stuff on Jan 1st will OK and so will Jan 2nd and Jan 3rd, but Jan 31st? June 17th?

    If they simply accept stuff from us and we decide to let standards slide and import US stuff then it acts as a pipeline - stuff they normally refuse gets in.

    There has to be a formal process for managing and certifying stuff. Jan 1st 2021 is not the problem.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 77,764
    edited September 12
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    I suspect the Govt will be boosted, ironically, by the row. Blaming everything on the EU tends to go down well.

    Separately, some not so great state polls for Biden today - he’s only up +2 in Arizona, +3 in New Hampshire and +4 Nevada (Wisconsin a bit better). Probably too close for comfort at this stage.

    Yet the national polls from today and yesterday, from Ipsos, YouGov and USC, range from Biden +9 to Biden +15.

    Now, it's quite possible that it is the national polls which are incorrect, and the state level polls which are correct. It's also possible that President Trump manages a staggering level of vote efficiency, losing the popular vote by five points or more and still holding on (although I fear for America in that case).

    But in 2016, the national polls were broadly correct, only overstating Clinton by 1% on average. That's a similar error level to 2008, 2004 and 2000 - only in 2012, when they understated Obama, was the error level more than about a percent.

    My view is watch Trump's share in the national polls. He needs to get the lead down to four points or less by election night, where his better vote efficiency (and possibly some understatement) gives him a good chance. Right now, that hasn't happened. Right now, Biden's share is stable and above 50%, and President Trump has not yet begun gaining ground.
    Depends which national polls you look at.

    The latest Rasmussen national poll for example from 3 days ago is Biden 48% Trump 46% ie a 2 point Biden lead unchanged from Hillary's national popular vote lead in 2016.
    https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/white_house_watch_sep09

    Rasmussen's final 2016 poll was Clinton 45% and Trump 43% so in terms of Clinton's final lead was spot on
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,723
    HYUFD said:

    There was nothing in the 2019 Tory manifesto about creating a hard border between NI and GB.

    The 2019 Tory manifesto did however promise to regain control over UK fishing waters and end EU sovereignty over the UK, both of which the EU have refused to agree for a trade deal.

    In that case the Tory manifesto also promised to end the implementation period in December 2020

    You’re just pissing in the wind with these highly selective quotes from the manifesto. Boris isn’t bound by any of it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025
    alex_ said:

    DavidL said:

    It makes it legal (at least domestically). It certainly doesn't make it wise. But if they are seriously proposing that we would not be able to "export" food to NI...
    Apart from anything else, even if this was a possibility, there is a clause in the Withdrawal Agreement which would allow the UK to act unilaterally to prevent this.
    Article 16
    Safeguards
    1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
    2. If a safeguard measure taken by the Union or the United Kingdom, as the case may be, in accordance with paragraph 1 creates an imbalance between the rights and obligations under this Protocol, the Union or the United Kingdom, as the
    case may be, may take such proportionate rebalancing measures as are strictly necessary to remedy the imbalance. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
    Which makes the row that the government has manufactured even more inexplicable really. But that sort of crap is what gives lawyers a bad name. What on earth does that mean in practice?

    Who decides what is "serious"?
    Who decides what is "strictly necessary"?
    Who determines whether the proposal will "least disturb the functioning of this Protocol?
    Who determines what are "proportionate rebalancing measures"?

    I mean, if I drafted a contract or minute of agreement as vague and woolly as that I would be putting my insurers on notice.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,723
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Another 3500 positive day. And all other indicators are on the rise,

    I'm sure Alistair Hames will post some graphs showing there's no increases/second wave.
    Fucking hell.

    He always shifts the goalposts, no wonder the terminally stupid follow his every word.
    He is the "Centrist Telephone" of COVID.
    Harsh but fair.

    I do miss Centrist Telephone's analyses and unskeweing of the polls in the run up to GE2019.
    Old Centrist is still going strong....When he isn't taking aim at YouGov for having a pro Tory bias in their polling numbers, apparently Fraser Nelson isn't a serious commentator, apparently he is just in the pocket of commercial property sector.

    The population density argument is a such a crock of shit, if used at the country level. Is "Centrist Telephone" seriously saying that if the UK invaded Iceland (or Ireland for that matter) that CV19 incidence would suddenly fall with population density?

    Now, that doesn't mean that population density doesn't play *a* role, but it's more likely at a micro level: do your cities rely on crowded metro systems? Do people live in apartment complexes with busy shared lifts? How many people live alone rather than in multi-person dwellings?
    For measuring covid relevant population density, something like avg distance to nearest house from each persons house is what we need. It would look very different to people/land mass.
    I still maintain that degree of urbanisation (Sweden 88%, UK 83.9%) is a more relevant measure than overall population density.
    If I were to put together a linear regression, best fit would probably contain the following variables:

    - density of cities
    - average household size
    - use of pubic transport
    - number of people working in face-to-face jobs

    I'm not sure urbanisation would be on there, because a really diffuse city without public transport is going to be far less affected than a concentrated one, where everyone travels about by it.
    Yet the US comes out at or near the top.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 85,281
    edited September 12
    If you're not watching the Liverpool v. Leeds match then you should be.

    Absolutely bonkers, both sides can attack but neither of them can defend.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,025

    DavidL said:

    What is the difference between the acceptable certification given on 31st December and the unacceptable certification on 1st January when our legislation is clear that the current regulations remain in place until it is changed? They know we meet their standards. What else could they reasonably require and if there is anything why aren't they requiring it right now?

    You are missing the point. The stuff on Jan 1st will OK and so will Jan 2nd and Jan 3rd, but Jan 31st? June 17th?

    If they simply accept stuff from us and we decide to let standards slide and import US stuff then it acts as a pipeline - stuff they normally refuse gets in.

    There has to be a formal process for managing and certifying stuff. Jan 1st 2021 is not the problem.
    With respect I am not. Because I acknowledge that the EU has legitimate rights to ensure that any product which has access to the SM complies with their standards. So long as our standards are their standards there is no issue. If we vary them there is an issue, at least for the products affected. But that arises if and when such a step is taken.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 85,281
    edited September 12
    Dirty Leeds are 30s on Betfair to win this match.

    Take it!
Sign In or Register to comment.