Howdy, Stranger!

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

This week’s most important polling analysis on the White House race – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 20 in General
This week’s most important polling analysis on the White House race – politicalbetting.com

One thing to note, just for calibrating expectations for Nov, is that the 2016 error made the race go from a predicted ~300 EVs for Clinton on average to 232 in reality. Here, the same error puts Biden at 260. That gives you a rough idea of the implied average EC projection. pic.twitter.com/JwsEkC5UTX

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731
    Worrying for Biden.
  • SecondHorseBattery
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,555
    edited September 20
    ydoethur said:

    Philip, do you think climate change is real?

    Of course!

    I think it is a problem that was created by our technologies and it is a problem we should solve with science and technology too.

    It is not a problem created by the eating of meat which humanity has done since we evolved from other mammals that also ate meat..
    So you don't think our production of meat contributes to climate change
    Not significantly, no. I think it can be dealt with sustainably with with other technological developments.

    Eliminating other emissions via things like research into clean transport, clean electricity generation, offsetting technologies are the solution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    Going back to relatively small scale rotation farming is the solution. As I said before, cows do not naturally produce inordinate amounts of methane - it would be absurd to imagine they would.
    The ghost of Thomas Malthus probably nodded his head in agreement there.
    I'm not in favour of starving the masses if that's your implication. Actually, mineralising the soil produces massively bountiful (and more nourishing) crops, without the need for nitrogen fertilisers. Anyone interested in this topic (and all PB's health conscious bods) should read this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Want-Real-Food-Lovers/dp/1845292677


  • Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
  • edited September 20
    The individual State Polls in the States often have sample sizes of 300-400 with a large margin of error. That might not matter with your California's or your Idaho's but for the swing states where the election is won and lost I'd be happier seeing sample sizes of 1000 or more. They need a Lord Ashcroft.

    I'd assume the two campaigns have private polling doing just this, but the US system is so crazy I don't know.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849

    ydoethur said:

    Philip, do you think climate change is real?

    Of course!

    I think it is a problem that was created by our technologies and it is a problem we should solve with science and technology too.

    It is not a problem created by the eating of meat which humanity has done since we evolved from other mammals that also ate meat..
    So you don't think our production of meat contributes to climate change
    Not significantly, no. I think it can be dealt with sustainably with with other technological developments.

    Eliminating other emissions via things like research into clean transport, clean electricity generation, offsetting technologies are the solution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    Going back to relatively small scale rotation farming is the solution. As I said before, cows do not naturally produce inordinate amounts of methane - it would be absurd to imagine they would.
    The ghost of Thomas Malthus probably nodded his head in agreement there.
    I'm not in favour of starving the masses if that's your implication. Actually, mineralising the soil produces massively bountiful (and more nourishing) crops, without the need for nitrogen fertilisers. Anyone interested in this topic (and all PB's health conscious bods) should read this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Want-Real-Food-Lovers/dp/1845292677
    I never thought you were. Nor was he. He just pointed out that was the way unchecked population growth would lead on the agricultural system you outlined.

    I was just gently pointing out there was a small problem in your argument.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 2,214
    Reasonably accurate opinion polls are a safeguard against election-stealing, so it's a concern that our confidence in the opinion polls is so low.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,615
    edited September 20
    Using 538 polling averages by state I calculate that if the polls are correct, Biden wins 333 ECs.

    If the polls are overstating his position then it depends on by how much:
    By ECs
    0% 333
    1% 333
    2% 318
    3% 289
    4% 289
    5% 258 (Biden loses Ariz and Penn)

    I reckon Biden will get 289. The Economist is on 334 i.e. that the polls are correct.


  • Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    What could possibly be wrong with family?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,555

    I though the humanising element was the fact he said he missed bacon sandwiches and chicken curry, seemed relatable to me.

    I couldn't give a toss if you're a vegetarian or not, odd the right believe in personal liberty only when it's something they agree with.

    I have no qualms with him being a vegetarian. It is the "for the planet" bit I object to.

    People starting to say that we should all become vegetarians "for the planet" can f**k right off. If you don't want to eat bacon then fine, I couldn't care less. If he'd said he is a vegetarian but its a personal choice and he doesn't expect others to be then I would not object, but instead he banged on about it being good for the planet.

    People not eating meat I don't care about, but if you start to suggest that I shouldn't then that's where I have a problem.
    Did he say you should become a vegetarian, or did he explain why he did? Those are two different things.
    I am a vegetarian for similar reasons to Starmer and will happily explain my reasoning if asked. Equally I will never tell other people how to live their life, and in fact buy meat and fish and cook it for my kids every week.
    I applaud the principles behind Starmer's (and I presume your) decision to give up meat, but I'm afraid in terms of his perception that a vegetarian diet is healthier, he's flat out wrong. And in terms of his perception that it's better for the planet, he ain't particularly right either - at best he's being far too simplistic.

    One of the worst things about his statement and many others by vegetarians is that they are sometimes 'tempted' by meat - what on earth do they think that 'temptation' is, if not their body asking them for something it needs? Looked at dispassionately, it is a willful abandonment of common sense.
    Since I am not an elite athlete I think a balanced vegetarian diet is more than healthy enough for me. I am certain that my diet is more healthy than that of most non-vegetarians in this country as unlike most people you see these days I am not a fat knacker. It is undeniable that intensive meat production is bad for the environment. Although to be honest that was not my motivation for becoming vegetarian, it just seemed wrong to me to kill another living thing just to eat it.
    I agree - a nourishing vegetarian diet is possible, and is undoubtedly healthier than a crap diet with meat. I also commend you for not wanting to harm sentient creatures.

    The way I look at it, I don't believe that any sacrifice in our own health should be required in order to respect the welfare of other creatures. There is a virtuous cycle that we're part of - it involves eating other animals, but also ensuring that during their lives they are well-nourished and healthy.

    Most minerals and vitamins aren't digestible by humans in their raw form. Plants translate them into a more absorbable form. Animals eat the plants and translate them into an even more absorbable form. We eat the animals (and some plants obviously - but often the plants require specific preparation to make their nutrients more bioavailable). If the animal is undernourished, the meat is undernourished. So animal welfare flat out makes selfish sense. But avoiding meat completely does not.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 11,039



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    Says the lady with two flags in her twitter handle...
    But shows the rot in Labour will take a lot of rooting out
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    Says the lady with two flags in her twitter handle...
    I’d be glad to see her remove one of them. Don’t know why she moved to Wales, there were plenty of deranged racist conspiracy theorists there already, more were not required.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,555
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Philip, do you think climate change is real?

    Of course!

    I think it is a problem that was created by our technologies and it is a problem we should solve with science and technology too.

    It is not a problem created by the eating of meat which humanity has done since we evolved from other mammals that also ate meat..
    So you don't think our production of meat contributes to climate change
    Not significantly, no. I think it can be dealt with sustainably with with other technological developments.

    Eliminating other emissions via things like research into clean transport, clean electricity generation, offsetting technologies are the solution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    Going back to relatively small scale rotation farming is the solution. As I said before, cows do not naturally produce inordinate amounts of methane - it would be absurd to imagine they would.
    The ghost of Thomas Malthus probably nodded his head in agreement there.
    I'm not in favour of starving the masses if that's your implication. Actually, mineralising the soil produces massively bountiful (and more nourishing) crops, without the need for nitrogen fertilisers. Anyone interested in this topic (and all PB's health conscious bods) should read this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Want-Real-Food-Lovers/dp/1845292677
    I never thought you were. Nor was he. He just pointed out that was the way unchecked population growth would lead on the agricultural system you outlined.

    I was just gently pointing out there was a small problem in your argument.
    I don't agree that the style of factory farming that's leading to issues (in human health, environmental etc.) is an inevitable result of population growth. It's the result of very big corporations wanting to make very big profits. I don't have an issue with the profit motive at all, but if the consumer becomes informed and turns away from eating (highly profitable) slop, then the profit motive will be focused on providing excellent, nourishing food. When that becomes the aim, everything else just slots into place.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    From the wing of the Labour Party that despises Starmer far more than Johnson.
  • tlg86 said:



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    It took me a moment to realize that forces meant armed forces. I was thinking Newton's laws of motion were going to become a key component of Labour policy.
    They'd have to grasp basic mathematics first I'd have thought.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,555
    tlg86 said:



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    It took me a moment to realize that forces meant armed forces. I was thinking Newton's laws of motion were going to become a key component of Labour policy.
    In that picture, Starmer is aiming for Newtons law of gravitas.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Philip, do you think climate change is real?

    Of course!

    I think it is a problem that was created by our technologies and it is a problem we should solve with science and technology too.

    It is not a problem created by the eating of meat which humanity has done since we evolved from other mammals that also ate meat..
    So you don't think our production of meat contributes to climate change
    Not significantly, no. I think it can be dealt with sustainably with with other technological developments.

    Eliminating other emissions via things like research into clean transport, clean electricity generation, offsetting technologies are the solution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    Going back to relatively small scale rotation farming is the solution. As I said before, cows do not naturally produce inordinate amounts of methane - it would be absurd to imagine they would.
    The ghost of Thomas Malthus probably nodded his head in agreement there.
    I'm not in favour of starving the masses if that's your implication. Actually, mineralising the soil produces massively bountiful (and more nourishing) crops, without the need for nitrogen fertilisers. Anyone interested in this topic (and all PB's health conscious bods) should read this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Want-Real-Food-Lovers/dp/1845292677
    I never thought you were. Nor was he. He just pointed out that was the way unchecked population growth would lead on the agricultural system you outlined.

    I was just gently pointing out there was a small problem in your argument.
    I don't agree that the style of factory farming that's leading to issues (in human health, environmental etc.) is an inevitable result of population growth. It's the result of very big corporations wanting to make very big profits. I don't have an issue with the profit motive at all, but if the consumer becomes informed and turns away from eating (highly profitable) slop, then the profit motive will be focused on providing excellent, nourishing food. When that becomes the aim, everything else just slots into place.
    There is a very wide world of difference and a number of different options between ‘factory farming’ at one end and ‘small scale rotation farming’ at the other.

    I agree with you about the former, but the latter can’t come back in the way you seem to think without a huge reduction in population and a major economic shift.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849
    tlg86 said:



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    It took me a moment to realize that forces meant armed forces. I was thinking Newton's laws of motion were going to become a key component of Labour policy.
    Well, gravity hit them hard last December.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731
    Floater said:



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    Says the lady with two flags in her twitter handle...
    But shows the rot in Labour will take a lot of rooting out
    They were there in the Blair years too, one of them was called Jeremy Corbyn. The flip side of that dreadful coin is Christopher Chope in the Conservative Party.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 7,631
    Afternoon again all :)

    I've been droning on for weeks about the margin of error and sample sizes in State polls but up pops some numpty in the New York Times and suddenly it's the most insightful analysis since a brave French Marshal opined to Napoleon at Waterloo that if the Prussians showed up in the evening it might get a little awkward.

    If you are going to (and I suspect many do this to support their own personal agenda while I can understand the more astute who do it to bolster their trading position) simply re-tweet headline numbers from some dime-a-call US pollster, at least have the decency to find out the margin of error so we all know when we can stop laughing.

    If you want almost any result from a Biden landslide to a Trump landslide, the polls will give it but as a rule of thumb I'd take any poll showing either candidate ahead by five points or less to be in the TCTC category.

    I'd also take a long hard look at sampling - what is the split between registered Democrats, Republicans and Independents? What is the ethnic split, the split by income?

    Too many pollsters (Rasmussen and Trafalgar in particular) either don't reveal the details of their sampling claiming it is "representative" or hide the details behind a paywall. What do they have to hide? Who are they sampling and in what way does that produce such different results from other pollsters?

    If I sampled 1500 voters in East Ham and published it as a national opinion poll, I'd be thrown off the British Polling Council and rightly so but we don't know to what extent the methodology and sampling effectively weaponises these polls to create numbers favourable to one side or the other.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,555
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Philip, do you think climate change is real?

    Of course!

    I think it is a problem that was created by our technologies and it is a problem we should solve with science and technology too.

    It is not a problem created by the eating of meat which humanity has done since we evolved from other mammals that also ate meat..
    So you don't think our production of meat contributes to climate change
    Not significantly, no. I think it can be dealt with sustainably with with other technological developments.

    Eliminating other emissions via things like research into clean transport, clean electricity generation, offsetting technologies are the solution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    Going back to relatively small scale rotation farming is the solution. As I said before, cows do not naturally produce inordinate amounts of methane - it would be absurd to imagine they would.
    The ghost of Thomas Malthus probably nodded his head in agreement there.
    I'm not in favour of starving the masses if that's your implication. Actually, mineralising the soil produces massively bountiful (and more nourishing) crops, without the need for nitrogen fertilisers. Anyone interested in this topic (and all PB's health conscious bods) should read this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Want-Real-Food-Lovers/dp/1845292677
    I never thought you were. Nor was he. He just pointed out that was the way unchecked population growth would lead on the agricultural system you outlined.

    I was just gently pointing out there was a small problem in your argument.
    I don't agree that the style of factory farming that's leading to issues (in human health, environmental etc.) is an inevitable result of population growth. It's the result of very big corporations wanting to make very big profits. I don't have an issue with the profit motive at all, but if the consumer becomes informed and turns away from eating (highly profitable) slop, then the profit motive will be focused on providing excellent, nourishing food. When that becomes the aim, everything else just slots into place.
    There is a very wide world of difference and a number of different options between ‘factory farming’ at one end and ‘small scale rotation farming’ at the other.

    I agree with you about the former, but the latter can’t come back in the way you seem to think without a huge reduction in population and a major economic shift.
    I said 'relatively'. My point was, that we don't need a new Steve Jobs to come up with some whizzbang solution to stop all the cows burping and create some perfect new protein bar that we should all eat - it wouldn't work anyway. All the things we need to do, we've already done.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    We are testing more than anyone in Europe and a commentator on BBC has just said that across Europe testing capacity is overwhelmed and even Germany is rationing tests

    But do not let that inconvenient fact interfere with our desire to paint the UK in a bad light
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    We are testing more than anyone in Europe and a commentator on BBC has just said that across Europe testing capacity is overwhelmed and even Germany is rationing tests

    But do not let that inconvenient fact interfere with our desire to paint the UK in a bad light
    Oh so you're pro-Johnson again? Let me know when your next flip-flop arrives
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    We are testing more than anyone in Europe and a commentator on BBC has just said that across Europe testing capacity is overwhelmed and even Germany is rationing tests

    But do not let that inconvenient fact interfere with our desire to paint the UK in a bad light
    Oh so you're pro-Johnson again? Let me know when your next flip-flop arrives
    Even someone who is anti-Johnson should be able to recognise facts and reality.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,634

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    I'm sure Dido must be to blame for this catastrophic success. Or something.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20
    He also recommends going into lockdown after Christmas rather than take drastic action too soon.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194
    Alistair said:
    Does Biden expect that Trump and the Republican Senate won’t already have the new Justice in place before the election?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 36,708
    edited September 20

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    We are testing more than anyone in Europe and a commentator on BBC has just said that across Europe testing capacity is overwhelmed and even Germany is rationing tests

    But do not let that inconvenient fact interfere with our desire to paint the UK in a bad light
    Oh so you're pro-Johnson again? Let me know when your next flip-flop arrives
    You do come out with some silly comments and of course avoid the message

    Because I state an opinion does not mean that I still think Boris is fit for purpose which he is not.

    And I want this government to succeed on covid and brexit, remember I am a conservative
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    We are testing more than anyone in Europe and a commentator on BBC has just said that across Europe testing capacity is overwhelmed and even Germany is rationing tests

    But do not let that inconvenient fact interfere with our desire to paint the UK in a bad light
    I like the fact that a idiot was apparently unable to push buttons on the dashboard - so was the helpless victim of whatever the first option the dashboard presents.

    The Pillar 1 & 2 tests vs capacity graph has been there for months.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
  • Floater said:



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    Says the lady with two flags in her twitter handle...
    But shows the rot in Labour will take a lot of rooting out
    Kerry-Anne Mendoza is not a member of the Labour Party though, so she doesn't need rooting out.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20
    Interesting factoid from Carl Heneghan, CFR among over 75 years olds in Germany is exactly the same as here (and vs rest of Europe). They have just been much better as making sure over 75 years haven't been infected. You can reduce between 40-60% of deaths by preventing COVID spread among the oldies.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
  • "Under performance"... "WHY HAVEN'T YOU INSTALLED ANY KITCHENS DURING LOCKDOWN?"
  • Interesting factoid from Carl Heneghan, CFR among over 75 years olds in Germany is exactly the same as here (and vs rest of Europe). They have just been much better as making sure over 75 years haven't been infected. You can reduce between 40-60% of deaths by preventing COVID spread among the oldies.

    Germany decided to protect the oldies.

    The UK decided to protect the NHS.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    Both can be true at once.

    If demand for testing (measured as actual Covid prevelance) is going up 10% a day, a 35% increase gets you 3 days extra demand before the system starts collapsing again.

    That plateau in test capacity in high summer (Yay! We have enough tests!) might have been unwise.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,805
    I think the Economy will be the #1 issue for many - namely who is best placed to make sure I don't lose my home and income.

    Interesting, Trump also scores (slightly) better on the crime question. That may help him in some suburbs.

    Re the others, obviously they all add up to over 100 but my guess is there is a very strong overlap between the Covid and Healthcare in terms of voters' interests so they are pretty much the same question.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20

    twitter.com/rbrooks45/status/1307672964025012224

    To be fair, other business owners, that have donated to the Tories, have got it in the neck for doing the opposite i.e. taking advantage of the furlough scheme, with screams from the media of fat cats sponging off the tax payer to pay their staff.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731
    Crime and violence is the stand out for me. Very surprised Trump isn't way ahead.

    Anyway time to go. All the Johnson enthusiasts are out this afternoon.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,131
    Sandpit said:

    Alistair said:
    Does Biden expect that Trump and the Republican Senate won’t already have the new Justice in place before the election?
    I don't think anyone's sure but the healthcare framing is excellent politics, it channels this politics story that's going to suck in a lot of oxygen into one of their two key messages.

    If they do confirm someone before the election then they can create a lot of rage among the base and concern about their healthcare among swing voters, and reasonably argue that they'll need a Dem presidency and Senate to salvage the situation.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 18,318
    Sandpit said:

    Alistair said:
    Does Biden expect that Trump and the Republican Senate won’t already have the new Justice in place before the election?
    That's the frame for now.

    If Trump and McConnell install a judge then it morphs into "they've be rushed on a judge to steal your healthcare, vote for me to fix that"
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20

    twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1307681245388779520

    Despite all the negatives of Trump, I think he would have won with no COVID crisis. Biden is too much of an uninspiring candidate and easy to portray Harris is very left wing, coming for your money. Faced with that, I could have seen a lot of American's when it came to the crunch, quietly sticking their cross in the Trump box because the economy was doing pretty well and why risk it, without ever admitting their decision to anybody.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,131
    Yup, one of the mysterious things about the GOP approach is that they've been flailing around with all this bollocks about law and order and radical left something something and hardly touching the main things swing voters seem to like about Trump.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 18,318
    This is a no shit Sherlock statement.

    This is why the SC pick is actually a distraction for Trump. His entire focus should be the economy.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 18,318

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    It purely depends on how many tests are queued up to be done.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    Both can be true at once.

    If demand for testing (measured as actual Covid prevelance) is going up 10% a day, a 35% increase gets you 3 days extra demand before the system starts collapsing again.

    That plateau in test capacity in high summer (Yay! We have enough tests!) might have been unwise.
    Collapse would imply a reduction in tests, which is not happening.

    Now you could argue that there is insufficient capacity but you then need to be practical and discuss how you would increase that capacity.

    And that is harder to achieve than it is to posture about.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 18,318
    I think the Biden SC messaging is abouy as good as the Dems could do in the situation.

    Healthcare is hugely strong for them (as shown by 2018) and it avoids directly talking about court packing ornothet things that makes moderates nervous.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 26,845
    Alistair said:

    This is a no shit Sherlock statement.

    This is why the SC pick is actually a distraction for Trump. His entire focus should be the economy.
    This is also interesting:
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/experiment-wisconsin-might-reveal-key-defeating-trump/616367/
    It is actually possible to change minds on the economy.

    Regarding the SC, the motivations of Republican senators and Trump are very different. And Trump has a better feel for what creates applause than he does for strategy.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,805
    @rcs1000 had - as usual - a very useful overview of where we stand with the current Senate race and of the likely Republican losses and final tally. I think his overall summary is fair (although I would be a little more bullish on McNally's prospects but not much). However, I think there are two possible Republican gains being missed, namely Minnesota and Michigan.

    Re Minnesota, I know the immediate pushback will be "look at the polls" but, if you look at both sides activities, it is clear they both think Minnesota will be close this time.

    Michigan is perhaps the more interesting one. John James is running again for then Republicans. The latest poll has the Democrat incumbent Peters at +4. It is worth noting that last time the polls at this stage were showing James running 15%-20% behind Debbie Stabenow, who was arguably a stronger candidate but the final result was a 6,5% difference with James coming up strongly in the final weeks.

    The obvious pushback is Robert's point that ticket-splitting is far less common nowadays. That is true. However, there is a feature in this race that puts a spanner in the race namely that James is Black and Peters is White, and there is an inherent feeling amongst many Black Americans (especially older) that you do not go against "your people" (as my in-laws say). So I can see a situation where many Black voters may vote for Biden but, at the least, abstain when it comes to voting for Peters.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 35,061

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
    She'll probably end up as Chief Brexit Negotiator.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
    She's doing a job, whether well or not.

    Sadiq Khan, Andy Burnham and Mark Drakeford haven't even considered getting the equivalent work done.

    Now consider how much more effective Labour's message would be if they could point to something Labour had achieved at regional level.

    But they can't because they haven't.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
    She'll probably end up as Chief Brexit Negotiator.
    She couldn't be worse than Frost!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 15,684
    edited September 20
    stodge said:

    Afternoon again all :)

    I've been droning on for weeks about the margin of error and sample sizes in State polls but up pops some numpty in the New York Times and suddenly it's the most insightful analysis since a brave French Marshal opined to Napoleon at Waterloo that if the Prussians showed up in the evening it might get a little awkward.

    If you are going to (and I suspect many do this to support their own personal agenda while I can understand the more astute who do it to bolster their trading position) simply re-tweet headline numbers from some dime-a-call US pollster, at least have the decency to find out the margin of error so we all know when we can stop laughing.

    If you want almost any result from a Biden landslide to a Trump landslide, the polls will give it but as a rule of thumb I'd take any poll showing either candidate ahead by five points or less to be in the TCTC category.

    I'd also take a long hard look at sampling - what is the split between registered Democrats, Republicans and Independents? What is the ethnic split, the split by income?

    Too many pollsters (Rasmussen and Trafalgar in particular) either don't reveal the details of their sampling claiming it is "representative" or hide the details behind a paywall. What do they have to hide? Who are they sampling and in what way does that produce such different results from other pollsters?

    If I sampled 1500 voters in East Ham and published it as a national opinion poll, I'd be thrown off the British Polling Council and rightly so but we don't know to what extent the methodology and sampling effectively weaponises these polls to create numbers favourable to one side or the other.

    Good post. My take -

    Rasmussen and Trafalgar have made an assumption that there ARE lots of "shy Trumpsters" and they adjust their raw data accordingly, using sleight of hand such as "who do you think your neighbours are voting for?" type baloney. Their objective is to stand out from the crowd and cross their fingers that their core assumption - Trump will overperform in key states like last time - is correct. In which case they make themselves a big rep.

    The fact of the matter is that the comprehensive polling average (with them included) is a Biden lead of almost 7 points. The latest poll (today) is from NBC, an A rated pollster. Biden by 8. Same lead as a month ago with that pollster. Biden also has a solid lead in most of the battleground states and is within touching distance in several states which were clear wins for Trump in 2016 such as Texas, Ohio, and Georgia.

    Are the polls wrong? Yes, obviously. But it's unlikely they are all wrong and biased against Trump by several points unless their methodologies really are missing a chunk of Trump voters. And to the extent they are wrong it is just as likely they are wrong the other way. That they are understating Biden's lead. Indeed given that pollsters tend to over-correct for their latest high profile screw up, it is more likely that the error, if there is one and it's material, is in this direction.

    So, Biden leads by 7, his lead looks stable, his lead is at least as likely to be understated as overstated, there are very few undecideds, and the election is only 6 weeks away. He should be a 1/4 favourite and yet is only a shade of odds on. It's the betting opportunity of a lifetime and I have not hesitated in having the biggest spread bet of my life.

    Don't overthink it people. It's great fun to do that, but in this case don't. Commonsense and the evidence coincide, and the consequential and obvious conclusion is the right one. America has had enough of Donald Trump as their president, one term was quite sufficient, and they will be voting him out decisively on 3/11.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 79,457
    edited September 20
    As the NYT suggests if there is the same state polling error as 2016 then Trump would narrowly win, with Biden picking up Michigan and Arizona and Trump holding his other 2016 states.

    If Biden is hoping for a polling error in his favour as per 2012 then he will need to hope for black turnout as high as Obama got then with the over 90% of the black vote Obama also got then.

    It should also be noted that some pollsters are now including more non college educated whites in 2016 however the polling evidence is there has if anything been a slight swing to Biden amongst that group anyway relative to Hillary but a swing to Trump with richer voters in households earning over $100k a year, yet the latter comprise the same amount of the sample as 2016
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20
    I presume this Sleepy Joe needs drugs to function is out of the same playbook used to question Hillary's health.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
    She's doing a job, whether well or not.

    Sadiq Khan, Andy Burnham and Mark Drakeford haven't even considered getting the equivalent work done.

    Now consider how much more effective Labour's message would be if they could point to something Labour had achieved at regional level.

    But they can't because they haven't.
    I have left for a while, I am mowing the lawn.

    However with all due respect the Testing regime is essential a national enterprise run by Dido. I know this because last week people from Bristol and Weston Super Mare were being sent for tests in Abercynon. This was particularly peculiar as Abercynon is within the County Borough of Rhonnda Cynon Taff, which is in lockdown.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 79,457
    edited September 20



    Yes please! Hopefully Kerry will leave as well
    From the wing of the Labour Party that despises Starmer far more than Johnson.
    She is likely no longer in Labour, according to Yougov 5% of 2019 Labour voters are now voting Green, so she has likely switched from post Corbyn Labour to Lucas.

    As Starmer has picked up so many 2019 LDs and a few 2019 Tories that change has been missed by most
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849
    Scott_xP said:
    Bugger, two irony meters in one day.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
    She's doing a job, whether well or not.

    Sadiq Khan, Andy Burnham and Mark Drakeford haven't even considered getting the equivalent work done.

    Now consider how much more effective Labour's message would be if they could point to something Labour had achieved at regional level.

    But they can't because they haven't.
    I have left for a while, I am mowing the lawn.

    However with all due respect the Testing regime is essential a national enterprise run by Dido. I know this because last week people from Bristol and Weston Super Mare were being sent for tests in Abercynon. This was particularly peculiar as Abercynon is within the County Borough of Rhonnda Cynon Taff, which is in lockdown.
    You couldn’t expect Dido Harding to know that, it’s west of Kensington.
  • Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    I listened to Starmer on Marr saying we should by now have 500,000 tests per day

    Marr reminded him the present need with all the children with seasonal colds is one million per day

    So even with hindsight Starmer would be 500,000 daily tests behind the need

    And of course we are testing more per day than anyone in Europe
    Perhaps Starmer can point out the testing systems Sadiq Khan in London, Burnham in Greater Manchester and Drakeford in Wales have set up.

    Oh wait ...
    So Dido is doing a fantastic job! Time for a promotion.
    She's doing a job, whether well or not.

    Sadiq Khan, Andy Burnham and Mark Drakeford haven't even considered getting the equivalent work done.

    Now consider how much more effective Labour's message would be if they could point to something Labour had achieved at regional level.

    But they can't because they haven't.
    I have left for a while, I am mowing the lawn.

    However with all due respect the Testing regime is essential a national enterprise run by Dido. I know this because last week people from Bristol and Weston Super Mare were being sent for tests in Abercynon. This was particularly peculiar as Abercynon is within the County Borough of Rhonnda Cynon Taff, which is in lockdown.
    Initiative is part of leadership.

    Getting things done is part of getting on in life.

    Anyone can say that someone else is responsible while doing nothing.

    But if you want to impress the world then show the world what you can do.

    What have Sadiq Khan, Andy Burnham and Mark Drakeford shown the world they can do ?

    ... thinks back ...

    Sadiq Khan shut down some underground stations thereby increasing congestion at the others.

    Is there anything else ?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bugger, two irony meters in one day.
    I am surprised you survived the shrapnel from your exploding irony meter after that humdinger!
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,805
    kinabalu said:

    stodge said:

    Afternoon again all :)

    I've been droning on for weeks about the margin of error and sample sizes in State polls but up pops some numpty in the New York Times and suddenly it's the most insightful analysis since a brave French Marshal opined to Napoleon at Waterloo that if the Prussians showed up in the evening it might get a little awkward.

    If you are going to (and I suspect many do this to support their own personal agenda while I can understand the more astute who do it to bolster their trading position) simply re-tweet headline numbers from some dime-a-call US pollster, at least have the decency to find out the margin of error so we all know when we can stop laughing.

    If you want almost any result from a Biden landslide to a Trump landslide, the polls will give it but as a rule of thumb I'd take any poll showing either candidate ahead by five points or less to be in the TCTC category.

    I'd also take a long hard look at sampling - what is the split between registered Democrats, Republicans and Independents? What is the ethnic split, the split by income?

    Too many pollsters (Rasmussen and Trafalgar in particular) either don't reveal the details of their sampling claiming it is "representative" or hide the details behind a paywall. What do they have to hide? Who are they sampling and in what way does that produce such different results from other pollsters?

    If I sampled 1500 voters in East Ham and published it as a national opinion poll, I'd be thrown off the British Polling Council and rightly so but we don't know to what extent the methodology and sampling effectively weaponises these polls to create numbers favourable to one side or the other.

    Good post. My take -

    Rasmussen and Trafalgar have made an assumption that there ARE lots of "shy Trumpsters" and they adjust their raw data accordingly, using sleight of hand such as "who do you think your neighbours are voting for?" type baloney. Their objective is to stand out from the crowd and cross their fingers that their core assumption - Trump will overperform in key states like last time - is correct. In which case they make themselves a big rep.

    The fact of the matter is that the comprehensive polling average (with them included) is a Biden lead of almost 7 points. The latest poll (today) is from NBC, an A rated pollster. Biden by 8. Same lead as a month ago with that pollster. Biden also has a solid lead in most of the battleground states and is within touching distance in several states which were clear wins for Trump in 2016 such as Texas, Ohio, and Georgia.

    Are the polls wrong? Yes, obviously. But it's unlikely they are all wrong and biased against Trump by several points unless their methodologies really are missing a chunk of Trump voters. And to the extent they are wrong it is just as likely they are wrong the other way. That they are understating Biden's lead. Indeed given that pollsters tend to over-correct for their latest high profile screw up, it is more likely that the error, if there is one and it's material, is in this direction.

    So, Biden leads by 7, his lead looks stable, his lead is at least as likely to be understated as overstated, there are very few undecideds, and the election is only 6 weeks away. He should be a 1/4 favourite and yet is only a shade of odds on. It's the betting opportunity of a lifetime and I have not hesitated in having the biggest spread bet of my life.

    Don't overthink it people. It's great fun to do that, but in this case don't. Commonsense and the evidence coincide, and the consequential and obvious conclusion is the right one. America has had enough of Donald Trump as their president, one term was quite sufficient, and they will be voting him out decisively on 3/11.
    "Are the polls wrong? Yes, obviously. But it's unlikely they are all wrong and biased against Trump by several points unless their methodologies really are missing a chunk of Trump voters."

    The problem is you don't need all the polls to be wrong, just some of them and you can get a monumental f*ck up and lose a huge amount, especially if you are spread betting.

    So, in Florida, if Trafalgar are right, Trump will win by +2 but, if Monmouth is correct, it will be +5 to Biden. In PA, Rasmussen has a tie, NBC has +9 Biden. In MI, you can either take your +2 for Trump with Trafalgar or your +8 for Biden with EPIC.

    And this isn't taking into account states where polling is poor and a Biden win SHOULD mean they are uncompetitive but where both campaigns' actions clearly suggest they see it will be tight. Minnesota and Nevada spring to mind.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bugger, two irony meters in one day.
    I am surprised you survived the shrapnel from your exploding irony meter after that humdinger!
    It was so impressive that it actually vaporised.
  • 4422 new cases....
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,731
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bugger, two irony meters in one day.
    I am surprised you survived the shrapnel from your exploding irony meter after that humdinger!
    It was so impressive that it actually vaporised.
    One of the safer CE marked items is best for that level of top drawer irony.

    I am telling you, if it had been one of those cheap Chinese ones from AliExpress, at that frequency of irony it would have been curtains for you!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 35,436
    Scott_xP said:
    Fantasic trolling by Boris....
  • Sandpit said:

    Alistair said:
    Does Biden expect that Trump and the Republican Senate won’t already have the new Justice in place before the election?
    If he does have a new Justice in place then Biden could easily nominate 2-4 new Justices to be in place by the Spring.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849
    edited September 20

    Scott_xP said:
    Fantasic trolling by Boris....
    More like fantastic trolling by the Dean of Westminster, getting him to read it.
  • glwglw Posts: 6,771

    Scott_xP said:
    That is an absolutely massive jump in tests actually processed in recent days. Looks to me like an approximately 35% jump in processed tests in recent days, biggest jump since April.
    Impossible.

    Testing has collapsed.

    Starmer and the twatterverse say so so it must be true.
    Both can be true at once.

    If demand for testing (measured as actual Covid prevelance) is going up 10% a day, a 35% increase gets you 3 days extra demand before the system starts collapsing again.

    That plateau in test capacity in high summer (Yay! We have enough tests!) might have been unwise.
    It's not as though they have been doing nothing. The saliva test pilot projects, and the localised small scale* testing is coming along. The issue seems to have been that the lab based PCR testing isn't being scaled up fast enough, and it has had some logistical issues. It is increasing still. It's not like somebody decided we didn't need more tests.

    Doing a bit of reading up on this as far as I can see the UK is examining almost every possible option for COVID-19 testing, the biggest problem is that on the whole most of the alternatives to what we are currently doing are not clinically good enough. I'm absolutely certain that if there was a quick fix we would be rolling it out, money certainly doesn't seem to be an issue.

    * It's small scale only in terms of the tests per site, but across the country it should add tens of thousands of fast and accurate tests each day.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,849
    HYUFD said:
    Some people are literally mad. But Bernard Jenkin is madder than Mad Jack McMad, winner of this year’s Mr Madman competition.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 3,926

    4422 new cases....

    Er, that was yesterday.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,987
    MrEd said:

    kinabalu said:

    stodge said:

    Afternoon again all :)

    I've been droning on for weeks about the margin of error and sample sizes in State polls but up pops some numpty in the New York Times and suddenly it's the most insightful analysis since a brave French Marshal opined to Napoleon at Waterloo that if the Prussians showed up in the evening it might get a little awkward.

    If you are going to (and I suspect many do this to support their own personal agenda while I can understand the more astute who do it to bolster their trading position) simply re-tweet headline numbers from some dime-a-call US pollster, at least have the decency to find out the margin of error so we all know when we can stop laughing.

    If you want almost any result from a Biden landslide to a Trump landslide, the polls will give it but as a rule of thumb I'd take any poll showing either candidate ahead by five points or less to be in the TCTC category.

    I'd also take a long hard look at sampling - what is the split between registered Democrats, Republicans and Independents? What is the ethnic split, the split by income?

    Too many pollsters (Rasmussen and Trafalgar in particular) either don't reveal the details of their sampling claiming it is "representative" or hide the details behind a paywall. What do they have to hide? Who are they sampling and in what way does that produce such different results from other pollsters?

    If I sampled 1500 voters in East Ham and published it as a national opinion poll, I'd be thrown off the British Polling Council and rightly so but we don't know to what extent the methodology and sampling effectively weaponises these polls to create numbers favourable to one side or the other.

    Good post. My take -

    Rasmussen and Trafalgar have made an assumption that there ARE lots of "shy Trumpsters" and they adjust their raw data accordingly, using sleight of hand such as "who do you think your neighbours are voting for?" type baloney. Their objective is to stand out from the crowd and cross their fingers that their core assumption - Trump will overperform in key states like last time - is correct. In which case they make themselves a big rep.

    The fact of the matter is that the comprehensive polling average (with them included) is a Biden lead of almost 7 points. The latest poll (today) is from NBC, an A rated pollster. Biden by 8. Same lead as a month ago with that pollster. Biden also has a solid lead in most of the battleground states and is within touching distance in several states which were clear wins for Trump in 2016 such as Texas, Ohio, and Georgia.

    Are the polls wrong? Yes, obviously. But it's unlikely they are all wrong and biased against Trump by several points unless their methodologies really are missing a chunk of Trump voters. And to the extent they are wrong it is just as likely they are wrong the other way. That they are understating Biden's lead. Indeed given that pollsters tend to over-correct for their latest high profile screw up, it is more likely that the error, if there is one and it's material, is in this direction.

    So, Biden leads by 7, his lead looks stable, his lead is at least as likely to be understated as overstated, there are very few undecideds, and the election is only 6 weeks away. He should be a 1/4 favourite and yet is only a shade of odds on. It's the betting opportunity of a lifetime and I have not hesitated in having the biggest spread bet of my life.

    Don't overthink it people. It's great fun to do that, but in this case don't. Commonsense and the evidence coincide, and the consequential and obvious conclusion is the right one. America has had enough of Donald Trump as their president, one term was quite sufficient, and they will be voting him out decisively on 3/11.
    "Are the polls wrong? Yes, obviously. But it's unlikely they are all wrong and biased against Trump by several points unless their methodologies really are missing a chunk of Trump voters."

    The problem is you don't need all the polls to be wrong, just some of them and you can get a monumental f*ck up and lose a huge amount, especially if you are spread betting.

    So, in Florida, if Trafalgar are right, Trump will win by +2 but, if Monmouth is correct, it will be +5 to Biden. In PA, Rasmussen has a tie, NBC has +9 Biden. In MI, you can either take your +2 for Trump with Trafalgar or your +8 for Biden with EPIC.

    And this isn't taking into account states where polling is poor and a Biden win SHOULD mean they are uncompetitive but where both campaigns' actions clearly suggest they see it will be tight. Minnesota and Nevada spring to mind.

    Yes. But.

    I've used Google and dug through Wikipedia to look at the national polls ahead of each US Presidential Election going back to 1976.

    In aggregate national polls have been pretty accurate. Out of the 11 elections, 7 have seen an a polling miss of less than 1.5%. 3 of 1.5-3.0%. And then one - 2012 - where the miss was more than 3%.

    (I'm defining miss as a simple average of eve of poll predictions for the lead between the candidates.)

    Polling errors have been roughly equally distributed between the incumbent and the challenger, and between Democrat and Republican. There is, however, a tendency for polling errors to correct: in 8 out of 11 cases the polling error went in the opposite direction between elections.

    I therefore think that we have to take the national polling average pretty seriously.

    It's possible, of course, that it's four points wrong in President Trump's favour. But I think it would be wrong to regard that as more than a 20% chance. Of course, it's also possible that Trump's voter efficiency is better than in 2016, and that he sweeps the Midwest again, despite a worse relative national polling position.

    More likely is that President Trump simply gains on Joe Biden before the election.

    But. (And it's a big but.) If the national polls don't change, then President Trump is facing an uphill battle.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20
    alex_ said:

    4422 new cases....

    Er, that was yesterday.
    That is what is says on the dashboard, updated today.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

    I believe yesterday was 4322. Today is 4422
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 3,926
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    Some people are literally mad. But Bernard Jenkin is madder than Mad Jack McMad, winner of this year’s Mr Madman competition.
    Well he is known to be the inspiration for several Blackadder characters...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 35,061

    alex_ said:

    4422 new cases....

    Er, that was yesterday.
    That is what is says on the dashboard, updated today.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

    I believe yesterday was 4322. Today is 4422
    It says 3899 now.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 3,926

    alex_ said:

    4422 new cases....

    Er, that was yesterday.
    That is what is says on the dashboard, updated today.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

    I believe yesterday was 4322. Today is 4422
    It says 3899?
  • Is there a worse TV football pundit than Ashley Cole? All that comes out of his mouth is his a whole host of random words that together make no sense.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904

    4422 new cases....

    Worldometer says 3899

    Germany 362
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 9,291

    alex_ said:

    4422 new cases....

    Er, that was yesterday.
    That is what is says on the dashboard, updated today.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

    I believe yesterday was 4322. Today is 4422
    It says 3899 now.
    Perhaps Boris' homily at the Abbey has had an effect.
  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    Some people are literally mad. But Bernard Jenkin is madder than Mad Jack McMad, winner of this year’s Mr Madman competition.
    What's wrong with what Jenkin said?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,188
    edited September 20
    alex_ said:

    alex_ said:

    4422 new cases....

    Er, that was yesterday.
    That is what is says on the dashboard, updated today.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

    I believe yesterday was 4322. Today is 4422
    It says 3899?
    No, you are definitely looking at the wrong date. That is the 16th September.

    Look at Daily cases by date reported, Data tab, on this page,

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases

    19-09-2020 4,422 390,358
    18-09-2020 4,322 385,936
    17-09-2020 3,395 381,614
    16-09-2020 3,991 378,219
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 3,926
    edited September 20
    IanB2 said:

    4422 new cases....

    Worldometer says 3899

    Germany 362
    The whole things absolute nonsense, if trying to use as a basis for comparison. Everyone does it differently, is testing different numbers and counting in different ways. I'm not even sure that Germany reports a national figure - its numbers change throughout the day. Case numbers are even worse than hospitalisations or deaths, and they are misleading enough.

    Astonishing that the Government ever thought that using figures like this were a basis for judgements on international travel.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    Some people are literally mad. But Bernard Jenkin is madder than Mad Jack McMad, winner of this year’s Mr Madman competition.
    Yes, I knew him at university. He was an idiot even then. In his defence, his father was also an idiot, as well as Lord of my ward. Apparently.
This discussion has been closed.