Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
Given the efficiency of large scale freezing/chilling - simple version, it is much easier to keep a big frozen space to temperature...
f the vaccine requires hard freezing (as some of them do), a truck in a carpark, feeding x lines get the jab?
If Trump wins, I think it will be more of a 'silent majority' effect that is being missed by pollsters because of sampling errors, rather than a shy voter effect.
I think this IS a silent majority election but it's the other way. The SM have had enough of a Reality TV presidency. 4 years was quite sufficient. They want some peace and quiet now. Get on with their lives without all the angst and drama that comes with Donald Trump. Hence the massive turnout and why the Biden landslide is far more probable than the narrow Trump win.
The Trumpists are hardly being silent themselves. Yesterday their "trains" of trucks and cars blocked the Tappan Zee and Whitestone bridges, which are Westchester County's principal links to the west of the Hudson and JFK airport respectively. I really have no idea what they thought they might achieve by this stunt. They're hardly going to flip NYS red, and they may just piss off enough swing voters locally that Republican chances downballot might be affected. If my Democratic state senator hangs on in what was before 2018 a fairly reliably Republican stronghold because of those idiots I'll piss myself laughing!
Some twat in a moth eaten covert coat who can't even get elected in his own country telling Yanks how to vote is pretty horrifying.
Interesting caveat he sneaked in there: you accept the democratic result provided that it's all 'fair and above board'. Is this wiggle room for when friend Donald refuses to budge?
I'm not TSE but it fucks the site loading up and it's got bugger all to do with betting.
And lots of us are fed up with endless tweets being pasted in and data tables like this which slow the site down and make it often almost unworkable.
Grump over. I'll go make a cuppa.
At least on my crappy old phone the page loads fine. It's when it gets bogged down with twitter embeds it becomes a problem. You can notice it on the laptop too, the CPU spikes when refreshing because of the tweets.
It would only take two PB’ers - one from each side of the emerging cultural divide - to stop spamming the site with frankly uninformative tweets, and it would run fine.
Agreed! And can we stop the victim blaming by the anti-Apple obsessives, arguing that it's somehow my and RobD's fault for using an iPhone!!!
True, it's most unfair of people to blame you for not being able to afford an Android phone.
OMG - we now have Apple snowflakes on the site! I didbn't even know it was a thing.
We stock all kinds of snowflakes - what kind would you like? and would you like sprinkles with that?
Nige doesn't half get around a lot...one moment in the channel, then in the us, then back in the channel, then launching a new party, before back all across the us...no wonder he is anti-lockdown.
If you like 538's model... then the states with the biggest discrepancy between the odds and 538's predictions are: FL, PA and OH (I think - some states I didn't check, someone better at coding than me could do this automatically I'm sure).
FL: 538 says 68% chance vs. betfair on 44%. PA: 538 says 87% chance vs. betfair on 65%. OH: 538 says 49% chance vs. betfair on 31%.
To my mind, that makes Florida and PA excellent value.
I have to say, and despite respecting 538 greatly, I have to say the Betfair % look closer to me for sure for FL and PA
I've been trying to work out what the best value bet is at the moment. My only position is a £10 buy of Biden ECVs at 285 which I'm very happy with. Wish I'd risked a bigger stake.
I think the best value bet is probably Biden to be President.
Biden POTUS: 538 says 90% vs betfair on 66%
The relative value in backing Biden to be POTUS doesn't look as good as backing Biden to win Florida say. But the probability of the bet landing is, of course, significantly more likely.
The thing is with a decent position already on Biden I'm reluctant to stump up a big stake at short odds to make the additional bet worth winning. But Biden to be POTUS at current odds does look huge value.
Decisions, decisions ......
stjohn - I'm with Richard Nabavi and the Hat Tipper kinabulu in backing Trump to secure >70 million votes, helped no doubt by the fine weather forecast. I'm further encouraged by Jack_W's forecast of there being a total of 160 million + votes cast. Half an hour ago Betfair's back price was 1.75 decimal, but I asked for and obtained 1.80 decimal, i.e. 4/5 less 5% commission. A likely winner in my view, although you may have to wait a few weeks for your money. In typical fashion, Betfair probably won't pay out until every last vote has been officially certified, even if the 70 million total has been comfortably exceeded.
Peter,
I think the previous highest total vote was 131 million in 2008. For Jack W to be correct in predicting 160 million + requires an increase in total votes of over 22% on the highest previous number. Now I know there has been an unprecedented amount of votes already cast. Over 90 million I think. But who wouldn't vote early given the Covid crisis? I'm far from sure that an additional 30 million votes, over and above the previous record, will be cast, counted and allowed in this election. So I'm not tempted to back Trump securing over 70 million votes as odds on.
In 2016, there were 157.6 million RV in the US (Pew Research). Given both population increases and registration drives by both major parties and the BLM movement, I'd expect that number to be up considerably. So 160M would be really high as a % of RV, but certainly possible.
I'm not TSE but it fucks the site loading up and it's got bugger all to do with betting.
And lots of us are fed up with endless tweets being pasted in and data tables like this which slow the site down and make it often almost unworkable.
Grump over. I'll go make a cuppa.
At least on my crappy old phone the page loads fine. It's when it gets bogged down with twitter embeds it becomes a problem. You can notice it on the laptop too, the CPU spikes when refreshing because of the tweets.
It would only take two PB’ers - one from each side of the emerging cultural divide - to stop spamming the site with frankly uninformative tweets, and it would run fine.
Agreed! And can we stop the victim blaming by the anti-Apple obsessives, arguing that it's somehow my and RobD's fault for using an iPhone!!!
Use a laptop for the moment, I do and if this site cannot accomodate a few tweets that is an issue for the moderators and Vanilla to resolve
Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
To be honest, even if the Phase III trials showed the vaccine killed 1:10,000 people (but was otherwise say ~90% effective) I'd take my chances.
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
Do you understand why Republicans don't trust the mail in PA now?
So Trump is allowed to cast doubt on the election by unsubstantiated claims over voter fraud and there’s sudden outrage when the AG simply says count every vote and plays them at their own game !
If you like 538's model... then the states with the biggest discrepancy between the odds and 538's predictions are: FL, PA and OH (I think - some states I didn't check, someone better at coding than me could do this automatically I'm sure).
FL: 538 says 68% chance vs. betfair on 44%. PA: 538 says 87% chance vs. betfair on 65%. OH: 538 says 49% chance vs. betfair on 31%.
To my mind, that makes Florida and PA excellent value.
I have to say, and despite respecting 538 greatly, I have to say the Betfair % look closer to me for sure for FL and PA
I've been trying to work out what the best value bet is at the moment. My only position is a £10 buy of Biden ECVs at 285 which I'm very happy with. Wish I'd risked a bigger stake.
I think the best value bet is probably Biden to be President.
Biden POTUS: 538 says 90% vs betfair on 66%
The relative value in backing Biden to be POTUS doesn't look as good as backing Biden to win Florida say. But the probability of the bet landing is, of course, significantly more likely.
The thing is with a decent position already on Biden I'm reluctant to stump up a big stake at short odds to make the additional bet worth winning. But Biden to be POTUS at current odds does look huge value.
Decisions, decisions ......
stjohn - I'm with Richard Nabavi and the Hat Tipper kinabulu in backing Trump to secure >70 million votes, helped no doubt by the fine weather forecast. I'm further encouraged by Jack_W's forecast of there being a total of 160 million + votes cast. Half an hour ago Betfair's back price was 1.75 decimal, but I asked for and obtained 1.80 decimal, i.e. 4/5 less 5% commission. A likely winner in my view, although you may have to wait a few weeks for your money. In typical fashion, Betfair probably won't pay out until every last vote has been officially certified, even if the 70 million total has been comfortably exceeded.
Peter,
I think the previous highest total vote was 131 million in 2008. For Jack W to be correct in predicting 160 million + requires an increase in total votes of over 22% on the highest previous number. Now I know there has been an unprecedented amount of votes already cast. Over 90 million I think. But who wouldn't vote early given the Covid crisis? I'm far from sure that an additional 30 million votes, over and above the previous record, will be cast, counted and allowed in this election. So I'm not tempted to back Trump securing over 70 million votes as odds on.
Caveat Emptor
USA population 2008: 300 million USA population 2020: 330 million
How many have been added by laws allowing people with a record of felonies to vote? No idea have far this has moved in the last 4 years.
Why is that ping? I do remember you being hyperactive last time.
Are you planning a late splurge of bets tonight/tomorrow based on the final opinion polls, or maybe you're simply bored this time?
Evening Peter.
Like Mike, I didn’t really rate joe early on - I still don’t - although his boringness is probably an asset against trump.
In terms of betting, my main regret is not piling on biden4potus at evens a few weeks ago at the height of the Hunter Biden laptop nonsense. Those were great odds.
Do you see any standout value bets right now?
Ping - thanks for getting back. TBH I think most of the value has already gone, where some remains it tends to be in the peripheral markets such as turnout (eg Trump to secure >70 million votes at circa 1.8 with BetfairEx referred to by me and others in this thread). For those with the cajones, backing Biden on the spreads at 315 ECVs looks pretty fair value if you're one of the majority who reckon his downside is somehere around 285 ECVs, (i.e. -30) compared with an upside of say 360 ECVs (i.e. +45) or potentially even more were he to win the likes of Texas, which is seriously unlikely but by no means impossible. On the "fastest finger first" principle I'm sure there's money to be made for those smart enough to make betting decisions on the back of the very early election results and hopefully there will be some discussion on PB.com along these lines tomorrow. I'll be surprised if rcs1000, etc doesn't come up with a few ideas. You are probably aware that a zoom facility is being organised by Barnesian, although things seem to have become rather quiet on that front.
Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
To be honest, even if the Phase III trials showed the vaccine killed 1:10,000 people (but was otherwise say ~90% effective) I'd take my chances.
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
I guess it depends on who’s killed by the vaccine. Why would anyone under 50 (?) take their chance with a vaccine when the virus is less likely to kill them?
Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
To be honest, even if the Phase III trials showed the vaccine killed 1:10,000 people (but was otherwise say ~90% effective) I'd take my chances.
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
I guess it depends on who’s killed by the vaccine. Why would anyone under 50 (?) take their chance with a vaccine when the virus is less likely to kill them?
Why would the virus be less likely to kill them?
That would be an implausibly high mortality rate from the vaccine.
I'm not TSE but it fucks the site loading up and it's got bugger all to do with betting.
And lots of us are fed up with endless tweets being pasted in and data tables like this which slow the site down and make it often almost unworkable.
Grump over. I'll go make a cuppa.
At least on my crappy old phone the page loads fine. It's when it gets bogged down with twitter embeds it becomes a problem. You can notice it on the laptop too, the CPU spikes when refreshing because of the tweets.
It would only take two PB’ers - one from each side of the emerging cultural divide - to stop spamming the site with frankly uninformative tweets, and it would run fine.
Agreed! And can we stop the victim blaming by the anti-Apple obsessives, arguing that it's somehow my and RobD's fault for using an iPhone!!!
Use a laptop for the moment, I do and if this site cannot accomodate a few tweets that is an issue for the moderators and Vanilla to resolve
Just because you are a conservative doesn’t mean you can’t show some consideration for fellow users.
The real problem is the expectation of care. The NHS can't cope with these things, and nor can the health systems of any other country. If we were pre-NHS then a load of people would die, and perhaps there would be backlogs at cemeteries. The government though could happily do little in that health wasn't their bag. Some fumigation lorries perhaps.
We already knew, but little commented on the NHS time-bomb, but CV has just brought this forward. It's just possible that government shouldn't be in the business of healthcare.
Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
To be honest, even if the Phase III trials showed the vaccine killed 1:10,000 people (but was otherwise say ~90% effective) I'd take my chances.
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
I guess it depends on who’s killed by the vaccine. Why would anyone under 50 (?) take their chance with a vaccine when the virus is less likely to kill them?
One of the three main lessons a former Secretary of Homeland Security said he would take away from his time in Washington was that anecdote trumps data.
One or two simpatico parents on the telly saying how their darling [insert name] suffered terribly and died of the COVID vaccine will be far more powerful than any number of Public Health officials wheeling out pie charts and bar charts showing how many tens of thousands of lives the vaccine has/will save.
That said, I'd be surprised if we couldn't get 60% of people to take it voluntarily which, taken with the accumulated immunity in those already infected, might well be enough.
I'm not TSE but it fucks the site loading up and it's got bugger all to do with betting.
And lots of us are fed up with endless tweets being pasted in and data tables like this which slow the site down and make it often almost unworkable.
Grump over. I'll go make a cuppa.
At least on my crappy old phone the page loads fine. It's when it gets bogged down with twitter embeds it becomes a problem. You can notice it on the laptop too, the CPU spikes when refreshing because of the tweets.
It would only take two PB’ers - one from each side of the emerging cultural divide - to stop spamming the site with frankly uninformative tweets, and it would run fine.
Agreed! And can we stop the victim blaming by the anti-Apple obsessives, arguing that it's somehow my and RobD's fault for using an iPhone!!!
Use a laptop for the moment, I do and if this site cannot accomodate a few tweets that is an issue for the moderators and Vanilla to resolve
I see more garbage is being spewed by Trafalgar . Why people keeping posting his alleged polls is beyond me .
As they were the only pollster who correctly had Trump ahead in Michigan and Pennsylvania in 2016 and do so again
They also had Trump winning Nevada by 5 in 2016. That wasn't so good.
They have Biden ahead this time in Nevada and Wisconsin and Nevada was the only state they got the winner wrong in 2016
The only state? 1 wrong out of 50, or one wrong out of a handful he claimed to have polled? The guy may call them "right" this time again, but it seems, by the ansense of evidence of any phonecalls or internet questtioning and the crosstabs, that he hasn't done much in the way of polling to get his answers.
I'm not TSE but it fucks the site loading up and it's got bugger all to do with betting.
And lots of us are fed up with endless tweets being pasted in and data tables like this which slow the site down and make it often almost unworkable.
Grump over. I'll go make a cuppa.
At least on my crappy old phone the page loads fine. It's when it gets bogged down with twitter embeds it becomes a problem. You can notice it on the laptop too, the CPU spikes when refreshing because of the tweets.
It would only take two PB’ers - one from each side of the emerging cultural divide - to stop spamming the site with frankly uninformative tweets, and it would run fine.
Agreed! And can we stop the victim blaming by the anti-Apple obsessives, arguing that it's somehow my and RobD's fault for using an iPhone!!!
Use a laptop for the moment, I do and if this site cannot accomodate a few tweets that is an issue for the moderators and Vanilla to resolve
Just because you are a conservative doesn’t mean you can’t show some consideration for fellow users.
There are plenty of tweets on here, OGH runs the site and if he bans tweets then I will comply, otherwise I will keep posting ones I think of interest.
If it is a technical issue raise it with Vanilla otherwise stop whinging, plenty of phone users can still access it it seems and if you cannot and if you are that desperate to access PB then use a laptop like me
I have been out most of the day I would be grateful if any PB ers can help
1. Is there a definitive site that tells us the total Registered to vote?
Working backwards from recent articles on CNN i suspect its about 210m can anyone confirm.
2. Texas court case re Harris County, what next?
Thanks in advance
On 1, not that I can find. Each State has its own site, and with digging around, you can find the latest numbers for that state. But, I think there is one state that has no voter registration, and others allow registration at time of voting.
On 2. "The Republican plaintiffs, however, are pursuing a similar lawsuit in federal court, hoping to get the votes thrown out by arguing that drive-thru voting violates the U.S. constitution. A hearing in that case is set for Monday morning in a Houston-based federal district court" Not heard anything yet on how the Federal case went.
PS 210m seems high - VEP is just under 240m. Most states have upwards of 80% of RV turnout, so the 210 figure would get us close to 170m vote total
22% NPA/Other doesn't really help determine who is currently ahead, does it?
Nope. It could be anything.
What we sort of know is that the repubs will swamp the dems in registered voters tomorrow with in person voting. But who knows how those registered voters actually voted?
Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
To be honest, even if the Phase III trials showed the vaccine killed 1:10,000 people (but was otherwise say ~90% effective) I'd take my chances.
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
There's some very good logical thinking expressed in the above comments and the sort of risk/reward aspects which now need to be seriously considered, especially as regards administering the vaccine to the elderly and those with a higher risk as a result of pre-existing conditions. I feel sure that the potential take-up even on the sort of higher risk factors you set out would be enormous. We've reached the point when we really do need to accelerate the introduction of the vaccine to make it available asap. I was shocked to read that those of a certain age who had recently received their annual 'flu jab, might find themselves less well protected from Covid-19 than might otherwise be the case. In my ignorance i had imagined that the 'flu jab generally beefed up one's immune system and was, therefore, if anything a positive factor ... but seemingly the reverse is the case.
In that case, why did your lot only get 55% last time, after 2 years of campaigning when the support for indy started at about 25%?
The SNP got 45% in 2011 so Yes just replicated that in 2014, 55% No was also pretty good in a 2 way referendum when you consider Remain managed to throw away a big lead before the EU referendum and actually lost it getting only 48% and Yes got 49% in the 1995 Quebec independence referendum
It is utter bollox and DROSS being allowed to pretend he can be tough will make no difference. We already know he is a lying two bit nasty weasel and as bad as his Master.
I have been out most of the day I would be grateful if any PB ers can help
1. Is there a definitive site that tells us the total Registered to vote?
Working backwards from recent articles on CNN i suspect its about 210m can anyone confirm.
2. Texas court case re Harris County, what next?
Thanks in advance
On 1, not that I can find. Each State has its own site, and with digging around, you can find the latest numbers for that state. But, I think there is one state that has no voter registration, and others allow registration at time of voting.
On 2. "The Republican plaintiffs, however, are pursuing a similar lawsuit in federal court, hoping to get the votes thrown out by arguing that drive-thru voting violates the U.S. constitution. A hearing in that case is set for Monday morning in a Houston-based federal district court" Not heard anything yet on how the Federal case went.
PS 210m seems high - VEP is just under 240m. Most states have upwards of 80% of RV turnout, so the 210 figure would get us close to 170m vote total
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Times have details of vaccine proposals as at present. I wont post the tweet as there seem to be problems. Steve Swinford's tweet feed.
Over 50s by Easter. Vaccine centres at sports hall and airports - although elderly to get via a mobile service on a bike. No plans to be mandatory May need 3 shots for the elderly as not clear that if they have a dose of flu the covid vaccine will work.
If that includes care home workers and NHS and social care, and high risk adults, that's 30 million people. At that point, even if the vaccine is only 50% effective, we will see some herd immunity effects.
An R(t) of 1.33 would become an R(t) of 0.99 An R(t) of 1.6 (the higher end of some of the R estimates we've seen with restrictions) would become 1.2 An R(0) of 3 would become 2.25
If the vaccine was 65% effective:
An R of just under 1.5 would become under 1.0 An R of 1.6 would become under 1.1 An R of 3 would become 2.
If they rolled it out further (to 45 million of us) and it was 65% effective: An R of just under 2 would become under 1 An R of 1.6 would become 0.8 An R of 3 would become 1.5.
To be honest, even if the Phase III trials showed the vaccine killed 1:10,000 people (but was otherwise say ~90% effective) I'd take my chances.
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
I guess it depends on who’s killed by the vaccine. Why would anyone under 50 (?) take their chance with a vaccine when the virus is less likely to kill them?
To avoid transmitting to their families and those they love?
Do you understand why Republicans don't trust the mail in PA now?
No.
And the faux outrage is embarrassing. Is there a point to be made about mixing judicial duties with electoral predictions? Yes. Would it better if Democrats refused to step down that path? Yes. But when that path has already been trodden into a quagmire by the people doing the complaining....
I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
From Politico: "Most polls show Biden winning independents, who account for about a quarter of likely voters. Generally, the party that turns out its base and wins independents carries Florida."
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
My favourite was the use of an illustration of a Spitfire from a Polish squadron to campaign against the nasty Europeans.
Republicans are so dishonest it's astonishing. Talk about projection.
Unacceptable comments by the attorney general though. He shouldn't be saying one of the candidates has already won the election before election day.
But that isn't what he's saying, is it? He says that the Dems will win as long as all the votes are counted properly. Now I may be wrong, but isn't it fairly normal for political partisans to assert that their side is going to win the election? It doesn't normally mean that there is some sinister plot afoot.
I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
From Politico: "Most polls show Biden winning independents, who account for about a quarter of likely voters. Generally, the party that turns out its base and wins independents carries Florida."
Thanks. That's good.
Across America as a whole the Republicans win independents but that must vary massively state by state I imagine.
I imagine it depends if they have open or closed primaries.
I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
From Politico: "Most polls show Biden winning independents, who account for about a quarter of likely voters. Generally, the party that turns out its base and wins independents carries Florida."
You can still get 1.15 Biden to win the Popular Vote. Rude not to.
Hmm, that might actually be a better bet than the EC winner one. At least if you think that vote-suppression in swing states could be a significant factor in the latter, which I admit may be paranoia).
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
Lol. You're the one bringing politics into this. Stop getting wound up over nothing for goodness sake.
If you read his tweets you'll see he mocks 'patriots' and throws in 'olde Englishe mythe making' into it as well. If you don't think that's political then that's because you already agree with him, and are therefore blind to it.
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
No party affiliation tends to mean "no party affiliation". So they could all have voted for Biden, or for Trump or anywhere in between.
I know a large proportion of NPAs are in the 4 big counties, Miami Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Hillsborough. Clinton won all 4 counties in 2016, Miami and Broward by 2 to 1. The other two only very narrowly.
I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
From Politico: "Most polls show Biden winning independents, who account for about a quarter of likely voters. Generally, the party that turns out its base and wins independents carries Florida."
Thanks. That's good.
Across America as a whole the Republicans win independents but that must vary massively state by state I imagine.
I imagine it depends if they have open or closed primaries.
Generally, I'd say that is true - Independents tends to be more fiscally conservative than Democrats, but more socially liberal than Republicans, but all else being equal more will vote Republican, but not by huge margins.
This year is not all else being equal. I think many see a genuine threat to US democracy and its institutions, and so I think in all but the reddest states you'd find them breaking Democrat this time.
I stand ready to be corrected by someone who follows that particular issue more closely than me.
Is New Orleans the only place in red in your map that would attract significant number of international tourists? The rest of the world is very disconnected to Trumpian USA.
Comments
f the vaccine requires hard freezing (as some of them do), a truck in a carpark, feeding x lines get the jab?
I hope he sticks to all the quarantining rules.
160M represents a 17.6% increase on 2016 turnout.
In 2016, there were 157.6 million RV in the US (Pew Research). Given both population increases and registration drives by both major parties and the BLM movement, I'd expect that number to be up considerably. So 160M would be really high as a % of RV, but certainly possible.
Arizona: Dem 1.81 / 1.84
Florida: GOP 1.78 / 1.82
Georgia: GOP 1.75 / 1.82
Iowa: GOP 1.4 / 1.42
Michigan: Dem 1.28 / 1.29
Minnesota: Dem 1.24 / 1.25
Nevada: Dem 1.24 / 1.25
NC: Dem 1.82 / 1.91
Ohio: GOP 1.45 / 1.46
PA: Dem 1.53 / 1.55
Texas: GOP 1.39 / 1.41
Wisconsin: Dem 1.26 / 1.27
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.170367709
If all 65 million people took it (obviously they all wouldn't) we'd have 6,500 dead but the virus gone - in other words, under a tenth of the dead we are almost certain to suffer.
Others may have a view on the psychology/regulations though - maybe a "vaccine kills" story gains credence and stops roll-out even with just a dozen or so cases?
USA population 2008: 300 million
USA population 2020: 330 million
How many have been added by laws allowing people with a record of felonies to vote? No idea have far this has moved in the last 4 years.
On the "fastest finger first" principle I'm sure there's money to be made for those smart enough to make betting decisions on the back of the very early election results and hopefully there will be some discussion on PB.com along these lines tomorrow. I'll be surprised if rcs1000, etc doesn't come up with a few ideas. You are probably aware that a zoom facility is being organised by Barnesian, although things seem to have become rather quiet on that front.
That would be an implausibly high mortality rate from the vaccine.
We already knew, but little commented on the NHS time-bomb, but CV has just brought this forward. It's just possible that government shouldn't be in the business of healthcare.
And Democrats will need a 14 point gain to take the house - https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/news/elections/2018/01/25/dont-bet-democratic-congress-2018/
I can see why he is the savvy bettors go to blogger.
One or two simpatico parents on the telly saying how their darling [insert name] suffered terribly and died of the COVID vaccine will be far more powerful than any number of Public Health officials wheeling out pie charts and bar charts showing how many tens of thousands of lives the vaccine has/will save.
That said, I'd be surprised if we couldn't get 60% of people to take it voluntarily which, taken with the accumulated immunity in those already infected, might well be enough.
🌴FLORIDA 🌴
8,923,563 votes cast
Democratic: 3,494,362 (39.2%)
Republican: 3,388,839 (38.0%)
NPA/Other: 2,040,362 (22.9%)
Dem margin 105,523
*Miami/Sarasota data coming tomorrow morning
Anyway, its not your money, and unlike others on this site, I am not recommending anybody bet the way I do or recommend any bets whatever.
1. Is there a definitive site that tells us the total Registered to vote?
Working backwards from recent articles on CNN i suspect its about 210m can anyone confirm.
2. Texas court case re Harris County, what next?
Thanks in advance
If it is a technical issue raise it with Vanilla otherwise stop whinging, plenty of phone users can still access it it seems and if you cannot and if you are that desperate to access PB then use a laptop like me
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-most-scots-would-reject-independence-after-considering-issues-2976093
I thought most Others were Republicans or does that very state by state?
Some very fun mix and match bets over on SkyBet - I always enjoy these. My selections...
Dems to win Arizona, Florida, Georgia & Texas @ 9/2
Dems to win Arizona, Florida, Georgia, North Carolonia, Ohio & Texas @ 13/2
Democrats to win Arizona, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio & Pennsylvania @ 7/2
Democrats to win Iowa, Pennsylvania, Nevada & Wisconsin @ 9/4
On 2. "The Republican plaintiffs, however, are pursuing a similar lawsuit in federal court, hoping to get the votes thrown out by arguing that drive-thru voting violates the U.S. constitution. A hearing in that case is set for Monday morning in a Houston-based federal district court" Not heard anything yet on how the Federal case went.
PS 210m seems high - VEP is just under 240m. Most states have upwards of 80% of RV turnout, so the 210 figure would get us close to 170m vote total
What we sort of know is that the repubs will swamp the dems in registered voters tomorrow with in person voting. But who knows how those registered voters actually voted?
And who knows how the NPA's voted?
right now, nobody.
11% of Republicans who have already voted cast their ballots for Biden...
2% Democrat crossover.
Voting-Eligible population: 239m (239,247,182)
I was shocked to read that those of a certain age who had recently received their annual 'flu jab, might find themselves less well protected from Covid-19 than might otherwise be the case. In my ignorance i had imagined that the 'flu jab generally beefed up one's immune system and was, therefore, if anything a positive factor ... but seemingly the reverse is the case.
Assuming all "Dems" voted Biden, which is unlikely.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/02/politics/texas-houston-republican-drive-thru-ballot/index.html
Yes, he's 'right': Magna Carta wasn't written in English, and nor is article 61 relevant or still valid, but it's this endless sneering at totems of British and English history that grates with me.
People like him want to attack the keystone events, myths and stories on which this nation is built - which is important to all nations - because he sees it as an obstacle to his politics.
http://4dwemysscaves.org/cave/index.php?ccode=dc
From Politico: "Most polls show Biden winning independents, who account for about a quarter of likely voters. Generally, the party that turns out its base and wins independents carries Florida."
Don't agree with her about Corbyn but the abuse here is awful.
Across America as a whole the Republicans win independents but that must vary massively state by state I imagine.
I imagine it depends if they have open or closed primaries.
I am sure whoever gets it wrong will have their record brought up constantly won't they? That would be fair, bollocks they will though
He's technically ''right, but that's besides the point: generations of Englishmen (and many others around the world) have taken inspiration from a handful of the principles first articulated in it to advance the cause of individual liberty over the last 800 years, and used it as a rallying call for action. It even influenced the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
That's why it's important.
Clinton won all 4 counties in 2016, Miami and Broward by 2 to 1. The other two only very narrowly.
I dont believe 239m is the registered total but cant find that
This year is not all else being equal. I think many see a genuine threat to US democracy and its institutions, and so I think in all but the reddest states you'd find them breaking Democrat this time.
I stand ready to be corrected by someone who follows that particular issue more closely than me.
These bets shouldn't come in anyway, but they are value.