Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

A CON majority no longer outright favourite for next election – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited August 18 in General
imageA CON majority no longer outright favourite for next election – politicalbetting.com

There’s been a little of movement on a few betting markets in reaction to the latest developments in Afghanistan. Probably the most significant is above on the outcome of the next election.

Read the full story here

«1

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,974
    Test
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,290
    NOM = end of Union?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 903

    NOM = end of Union?

    Probably not.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573
    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,534
    edited August 18
    I still love that Con Maj bet. So much in it's favour history and ratings/VI wise
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,755

    NOM = end of Union?

    Like 2017?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,827
    FPT - Sandpit
    What a monumental cluster that we’re even having to talk about this. But surely by now there are a bunch of such gents [Hereford branch of the diplomatic corp] figuring out an extraction plan for British citizens stranded outside of Kabul.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,989
    Lay the favourite!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    NOM = end of Union?

    The odds certainly shorten if one is thinking of the three different Unions at the same time. NI for instance.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    NOM = end of Union?

    I don't think it will make much difference, to be honest. I don't believe in inevitability, but I think the factors that will tip the balance one way or another will cause a political outcome, rather than the political outcome of a GE making much contribution to the shift in opinion. That's not suggesting an insight on Scotland, just that I think the end result there will come, messily or otherwise, whatever the GE, which will just affect how messy it is.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,460
    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 224
    Short Malta trip report: document check at airport very slick - you go through passport control, baggage check and customs, then the arrival hall has been turned into a covid document check area. Through the whole thing from disembarkation to taxi in 15 mins.

    Rather than the usual middle aged englishmen and germans, the place is full of young french and poles, due to it being one of the very few warm places on their green lists. The lady at the Tourist Information said she is hopeful that they will go home and spread the word, and Malta might get more varied tourists in the future.

    It is, however, rather hot here. The tomato harvest, much of which goes to Italy, has been spoilt by extreme heat blistering the fruit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,510
    edited August 18

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573
    isam said:

    I still love that Con Maj bet. So much in it's favour history and ratings/VI wise

    That's because it's a fantastic bet.

    You have a combination of boundary changes, an uninspiring Labour leader, and history on your side.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 6,638
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    An unconverted member of a people or nation who does not acknowledge the God of the Bible slightly more than others?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,724
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    If there’s going to be a great reckoning, can you advertise the date and time. I wouldn’t want to miss it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    How do you know it's a fake email address? Do you ask them to reply?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,460
    HYUFD said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer UK alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
    HYUFD's view on the union distilled:

    Tory majority = no IndyRef = good for union.
    No Tory majority = no Tory PM = good for union.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,290

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    HYUFD said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer UK alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
    HYUFD's view on the union distilled:

    Tory majority = no IndyRef = good for union.
    No Tory majority = no Tory PM = good for union.
    Karl Popper had views on such hypotheses.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Hang on! It's 0-10%, so say 5% of not Con or NOM.

    But that's not just a Labour majority. That's also covers:

    (1) A party like Reform or the Greens winning a majority
    (2) The Conservatives cleaving in two and one of the (no longer named Conservatives) parties winning.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,290

    HYUFD said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer UK alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
    HYUFD's view on the union distilled:

    Tory majority = no IndyRef = good for union.
    No Tory majority = no Tory PM = good for union.
    You missed out the tanks, and the beating up old ladies.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,699
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    TSE?

    :smile:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,212
    edited August 18
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    But we’d miss Hyufd. Who else would we wind up for lols?

    Edited to add - on the substantive point, that does actually slightly surprise me. I mean, we all knew the poster in question was a gibbering idiot - confusing contingency planning with clairvoyance was a bit of a giveaway - but I was assuming stupidity not malice.

    Maybe just another poster trying to put the opposite view to their classic one, so they can be proved right in the end?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,827
    OT (on topic)
    Uncertainty in the Tory leader at election time is feeding this trend regardless of what the odds on Johnson exit date might say.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,241

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
  • TazTaz Posts: 2,476
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    Let the speculation begin.

    Does someone want to put up any odds ?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,618
    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,058
    kle4 said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    I don't think it will make much difference, to be honest. I don't believe in inevitability, but I think the factors that will tip the balance one way or another will cause a political outcome, rather than the political outcome of a GE making much contribution to the shift in opinion. That's not suggesting an insight on Scotland, just that I think the end result there will come, messily or otherwise, whatever the GE, which will just affect how messy it is.
    Your most politely vacuous comment yet, and there is strong competition
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,058

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    That's the spirit.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,989
    moonshine said:

    FPT - Sandpit
    What a monumental cluster that we’re even having to talk about this. But surely by now there are a bunch of such gents [Hereford branch of the diplomatic corp] figuring out an extraction plan for British citizens stranded outside of Kabul.

    There’s probably a few of them arrived already on one of the evac mil flights, or at least stationed forward in UAE or somewhere similar. They’ll be watching very carefully if the Taliban block Westerers from getting to the airport. Sadly there’s some evidence of this today, with more evac planes not being full. There will be an awful lot of plans being run, very difficult with a constantly changing situation.

    I remember feeling so sorry for Hague, I think he was Foreign Secretary at the time, getting a real grilling as to why the evac plane to Tripoli hadn’t taken off yet. It became clear a few days later, as a couple of Hercules landed on a makeshift runway in the middle of the Libyan desert, to collect the Western oil field workers - who had all been rounded up by the SAS and ‘built’ the runway! It was of those stories that makes you proud to be British.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    But we’d miss Hyufd. Who else would we wind up for lols?

    Edited to add - that does actually slightly surprise me. I mean, we all knew the poster in question was a gibbering idiot - confusing contingency planning with clairvoyance was a bit of a giveaway - but I was assuming stupidity not malice.

    Maybe just another poster trying to put the opposite view to the classic one, so they can be proved right in the end?
    Apparently he's not a robot. People have actually met him. Though rather a lot to choose from in the way of local councillors *googles*. Not very socialist in Epping (not sure what Residents Association types are like - are the shy Tories, like 'Independents' in rural Scotland?).
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,460
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    But we’d miss Hyufd. Who else would we wind up for lols?

    Edited to add - on the substantive point, that does actually slightly surprise me. I mean, we all knew the poster in question was a gibbering idiot - confusing contingency planning with clairvoyance was a bit of a giveaway - but I was assuming stupidity not malice.

    Maybe just another poster trying to put the opposite view to their classic one, so they can be proved right in the end?
    Have I missed some "fun"? I have no clue what "poster in question" is being spoken about.

    Been away on holiday (in Cumbria) this weekend without much in the way of internet. Did I miss any news? Seems to have been like a Smithson holiday. 😕
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,290
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    I still love that Con Maj bet. So much in it's favour history and ratings/VI wise

    That's because it's a fantastic bet.

    You have a combination of boundary changes, an uninspiring Labour leader, and history on your side.
    I tend to concur. After following polls and elections for decades I cannot recall an Opposition winning the following GE without huge and sustained mid-term leads.

    Johnson (4 point lead) Sturgeon (22 point lead) and Drakeford (no post May polling?) are all looking good thus far.

    (No idea who’s in charge in NI and don’t care. A failed state.)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    But we’d miss Hyufd. Who else would we wind up for lols?

    Edited to add - on the substantive point, that does actually slightly surprise me. I mean, we all knew the poster in question was a gibbering idiot - confusing contingency planning with clairvoyance was a bit of a giveaway - but I was assuming stupidity not malice.

    Maybe just another poster trying to put the opposite view to their classic one, so they can be proved right in the end?
    Have I missed some "fun"? I have no clue what "poster in question" is being spoken about.

    Been away on holiday (in Cumbria) this weekend without much in the way of internet. Did I miss any news? Seems to have been like a Smithson holiday. 😕
    Quite an interesting discussion on the nature of a clapper gate in the countryside. Not a mention of Scotland or Brexit, no siree.
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 276
    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    edited August 18
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    I don't think it will make much difference, to be honest. I don't believe in inevitability, but I think the factors that will tip the balance one way or another will cause a political outcome, rather than the political outcome of a GE making much contribution to the shift in opinion. That's not suggesting an insight on Scotland, just that I think the end result there will come, messily or otherwise, whatever the GE, which will just affect how messy it is.
    Your most politely vacuous comment yet, and there is strong competition
    One cannot change one's nature. Perhaps if I'd said "I don't think the fucking GE result will change the direction of THE UNION, as a cabbie suggested to me the other day in Laos. Shitfuck." it would have more substance?

    I'm sorry if thinking the GE result is peripheral to the political direction of Sindy isn't exciting. I lack dramatic flair, we're not all flint knappers extraordinaires.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,290

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    Sure, but considered in context of the age of Scotland as a whole and its brief.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,290

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573
    edited August 18
    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    The problem with using time since vaccination is that that also correlates very strongly with age. Simply older people, whose immune systems are weaker and who are more likely to get seriously sick if they get Covid, got the vaccine first.

    So, are you really measuring vaccine efficacy fading? Or are you measuring susceptibility of a person to infection?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,860
    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    Better not post from the work VPN anymore then!
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,058
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    I don't think it will make much difference, to be honest. I don't believe in inevitability, but I think the factors that will tip the balance one way or another will cause a political outcome, rather than the political outcome of a GE making much contribution to the shift in opinion. That's not suggesting an insight on Scotland, just that I think the end result there will come, messily or otherwise, whatever the GE, which will just affect how messy it is.
    Your most politely vacuous comment yet, and there is strong competition
    One cannot change one's nature. Perhaps if I'd said "I don't think the fucking GE result will change the direction of THE UNION, as a cabbie suggested to me the other day in Laos. Shitfuck." it would have more substance?

    I'm sorry if thinking the GE result is peripheral to the political direction of Sindy isn't exciting. I lack dramatic flair, we're not all flint knappers extraordinaires.
    I was gently teasing you in an otherwise boring thread

    Your politeness is generally commendable, and I see you as a bellwether on PB, ie if Kle4 takes an actual new position there is probably something worth looking at in the argument

    I just thought I’d insult you out of random malice. Hope that’s OK
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 4,260

    HYUFD said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer UK alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
    HYUFD's view on the union distilled:

    Tory majority = no IndyRef = good for union.
    No Tory majority = no Tory PM = good for union.
    Fable of the wind and the Sun, innit?

    The simple fact of a non-Conservative government will do quite a bit to cement the Union in place for a few more decades. That's before we get devoMax with a thistle on top. (It's really obvious how that pas-de-deux plays out. There will be nothing before the election. Afterwards, the SNP will have to do whatever's needed to kick the Conservatives out and Labour will have to offer something in exchange, but not much.) In the event of a Starmer minority government in 2024 and a referendum pencilled in for about 2028 (a short generation, but... let's just say I've been a secondary school teacher and I know of what I speak) would be a win for "No" at a canter. To the extent that I can see the SNP looking for reasons not to hold it.

    An ongoing Conservative hegemony, on the other hand, keeps Scotland in the Union by refusing a referendum. That will work as long as the balance of Scottish opinion is in the 45/55 range either way. But it accelerates the time when Scotland breaks decisively for independence. Beyond a certain point, it doesn't matter if Westminster refuses a referendum. I don't know where that point is, but a wildcat referendum where a majority of the electorate (not just voters) voted for independence would be blooming hard to ignore.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,989
    edited August 18
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    Better not post from the work VPN anymore then!
    I was thinking the same. I might have been in Singapore or London for an hour, earlier in the evening. Will avoid in future!
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,914
    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    Leon said:

    [snipped]

    On a different theme, I wasn't keeping track today: did you get to the Pnyx?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    edited August 18
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    I don't think it will make much difference, to be honest. I don't believe in inevitability, but I think the factors that will tip the balance one way or another will cause a political outcome, rather than the political outcome of a GE making much contribution to the shift in opinion. That's not suggesting an insight on Scotland, just that I think the end result there will come, messily or otherwise, whatever the GE, which will just affect how messy it is.
    Your most politely vacuous comment yet, and there is strong competition
    One cannot change one's nature. Perhaps if I'd said "I don't think the fucking GE result will change the direction of THE UNION, as a cabbie suggested to me the other day in Laos. Shitfuck." it would have more substance?

    I'm sorry if thinking the GE result is peripheral to the political direction of Sindy isn't exciting. I lack dramatic flair, we're not all flint knappers extraordinaires.
    I was gently teasing you in an otherwise boring thread

    Your politeness is generally commendable, and I see you as a bellwether on PB, ie if Kle4 takes an actual new position there is probably something worth looking at in the argument

    I just thought I’d insult you out of random malice. Hope that’s OK
    Of course it is, all in good fun, and what a dull place it would be if it were all leons or all kle4s! - frankly I need to toughen up when it comes to mild criticism and teasing in any case, I can take it too personally. I wish I had boldness even pseudonomously. I've been told workwise I also need to be more decisive and direct in setting out my opinions, which will not come as a shock to people I think, so expect some punchy opinions from here on out!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573
    Re proxies.

    There are lists on the internet of open proxy servers that I run the IPs of posters against from time-to-time. If someone seems to always post through a different open proxy, I tend to get a little suspicious.

    If that person also has an obviously fake email address that I do not get a response from, then that scepticism gets increased dramatically.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,618
    The WHO is right to call a temporary halt to COVID vaccine boosters
    Richer countries should focus on ramping up vaccine supply to the billions who are still waiting for their first dose.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02219-w
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 6,638
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    But we’d miss Hyufd. Who else would we wind up for lols?

    Edited to add - that does actually slightly surprise me. I mean, we all knew the poster in question was a gibbering idiot - confusing contingency planning with clairvoyance was a bit of a giveaway - but I was assuming stupidity not malice.

    Maybe just another poster trying to put the opposite view to the classic one, so they can be proved right in the end?
    Apparently he's not a robot. People have actually met him. Though rather a lot to choose from in the way of local councillors *googles*. Not very socialist in Epping (not sure what Residents Association types are like - are the shy Tories, like 'Independents' in rural Scotland?).
    He’s given so many clues as to his real identity that he’s basically not anonymous anymore.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
    I think the Labour Party would probably need at least 310 seats, and probably more like 315, to avoid needing the SNP.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    DougSeal said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PBers: if you are accessing the site through a proxy server to hide your real IP address, and using a fake email address for registration, then I reserve the right to assume you are a troll and to ban you.

    I'm not naming names. Yet.

    But we’d miss Hyufd. Who else would we wind up for lols?

    Edited to add - that does actually slightly surprise me. I mean, we all knew the poster in question was a gibbering idiot - confusing contingency planning with clairvoyance was a bit of a giveaway - but I was assuming stupidity not malice.

    Maybe just another poster trying to put the opposite view to the classic one, so they can be proved right in the end?
    Apparently he's not a robot. People have actually met him. Though rather a lot to choose from in the way of local councillors *googles*. Not very socialist in Epping (not sure what Residents Association types are like - are the shy Tories, like 'Independents' in rural Scotland?).
    He’s given so many clues as to his real identity that he’s basically not anonymous anymore.
    Quite. I didn't bother to look further - just curious as to how dominant the Tories were in Epping. Makes Labour Scotland look like a minority government if I'm right about the 'Resident's Association'.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    What's [insert SLAB leader here] up to thesedays anyway?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,482

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    300 seats is light years away without Scotland. The single most important factor is the 80 seat majority.
    That won't be overturned in one go without something remarkably dramatic.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,103

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
    Presumably to win 300 seats without Scotland Labour need to be taking seats like, I don't know, Bournemouth West?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,860
    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,058
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    [snipped]

    On a different theme, I wasn't keeping track today: did you get to the Pnyx?
    Yes, and it was quite absorbing, tho not quite as epiphanic as the Athenian Agora. But that’s a high bar

    Athens is just stuffed with wonderful things to see. I’ve been here nine days (with a couple left) and I could do another week easily and not get bored

    Maybe the Pnyx didn’t totally wow me because I was wholly wowed earlier by lunch at the Acropolis Museum. It’s an utterly fantastic restaurant (seriously world class food) AND you get to eat it (and drink great Greek wine) with a majestic view of the Parthenon. That’s also a high bar

    I got sloshed and ate split pea with salami and squid and radish and weirdness and it was brilliant and I toasted the goddess Athena

    I don’t know if you missed our earlier discussion of modern Greek food (at least in Athens) but it is genuinely first rate. You eat better in Athens, on average, than Paris, very easily. Possibly better than London or Madrid. AND it is markedly cheaper
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,460

    HYUFD said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer UK alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
    HYUFD's view on the union distilled:

    Tory majority = no IndyRef = good for union.
    No Tory majority = no Tory PM = good for union.
    Fable of the wind and the Sun, innit?

    The simple fact of a non-Conservative government will do quite a bit to cement the Union in place for a few more decades. That's before we get devoMax with a thistle on top. (It's really obvious how that pas-de-deux plays out. There will be nothing before the election. Afterwards, the SNP will have to do whatever's needed to kick the Conservatives out and Labour will have to offer something in exchange, but not much.) In the event of a Starmer minority government in 2024 and a referendum pencilled in for about 2028 (a short generation, but... let's just say I've been a secondary school teacher and I know of what I speak) would be a win for "No" at a canter. To the extent that I can see the SNP looking for reasons not to hold it.

    An ongoing Conservative hegemony, on the other hand, keeps Scotland in the Union by refusing a referendum. That will work as long as the balance of Scottish opinion is in the 45/55 range either way. But it accelerates the time when Scotland breaks decisively for independence. Beyond a certain point, it doesn't matter if Westminster refuses a referendum. I don't know where that point is, but a wildcat referendum where a majority of the electorate (not just voters) voted for independence would be blooming hard to ignore.
    A majority of the electorate is an insanely high threshold to cross though. It would require 62.5% of the vote at an 80% turnout. A wildcat referendum would suppress turnout so that would be even harder to achieve (afterall if you've settled for that ambition then it doesn't matter if 100 No votes are suppressed for every Yes vote, since only Yes votes matter).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,989
    rcs1000 said:

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
    I think the Labour Party would probably need at least 310 seats, and probably more like 315, to avoid needing the SNP.
    The really fun one would be the Tories on 300.

    Starmer would be better keeping the Tories in as a minority, than be utterly dependent on the SNP for every vote, and with a fresh election clearly coming quickly down the line.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,618
    Incidentally, I booked my flu jab (and possibly covid booster) today for the autumn. I was quite surprised to get the txt so early in the season.

    Am I the first on PB?

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    edited August 18
    Read Joshua Rozenberg's Enemies of the People? How judges shape society the other day. Assumed from the title it would be pretty polemical, but it was actually a rather fascinating look at various developments in the law and judicial approaches to interpreting and creating law, and pretty even handed. He quotes Sumption quite a lot and obviously takes issues with some of his more conservative interpretations of judicial authority and responsibilities, but lays everything out pretty fairly as far as I could see, without (to this layman) obvious axes to grind or a single viewpoint to push.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    kle4 said:



    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    What's [insert SLAB leader here] up to thesedays anyway?
    Demanding that the Cambo oilfield not be developed and blaming the SNP, apparently. Oh, and celebrating the movement for independence from England. When it comes to Pakistan
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,914
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
    Not terribly recent though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    edited August 18
    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:



    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    What's [insert SLAB leader here] up to thesedays anyway?
    Demanding that the Cambo oilfield not be developed and blaming the SNP, apparently. Oh, and celebrating the movement for independence from England. When it comes to Pakistan
    His dad's now a governor out there apparently. What a varied career he must have had.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 913
    Carnyx said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The odds certainly shorten if one is thinking of the three different Unions at the same time. NI for instance.
    Surely there are four unions?
    Though the chances of England leaving the Union are low but would be hilarious if it ever happened.

    ((For All Time timeline this exact situation happened))

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    [snipped]

    On a different theme, I wasn't keeping track today: did you get to the Pnyx?
    Yes, and it was quite absorbing, tho not quite as epiphanic as the Athenian Agora. But that’s a high bar

    Athens is just stuffed with wonderful things to see. I’ve been here nine days (with a couple left) and I could do another week easily and not get bored

    Maybe the Pnyx didn’t totally wow me because I was wholly wowed earlier by lunch at the Acropolis Museum. It’s an utterly fantastic restaurant (seriously world class food) AND you get to eat it (and drink great Greek wine) with a majestic view of the Parthenon. That’s also a high bar

    I got sloshed and ate split pea with salami and squid and radish and weirdness and it was brilliant and I toasted the goddess Athena

    I don’t know if you missed our earlier discussion of modern Greek food (at least in Athens) but it is genuinely first rate. You eat better in Athens, on average, than Paris, very easily. Possibly better than London or Madrid. AND it is markedly cheaper
    Well! That's something to add to the bucket list, on which the Wasa, the Aland Islands, and the Finnish Tank Museum are already inscribed. And a ride on the Viking ships at Roskilde.

    On which: I have no idea if Hellenic Navy Ship Olympias the trieres/trireme is even accessible to the public. Probably not. And it won't be rowing around. Not easy to drum up so many rowers at once, never mind socially distanced. Thouigh I did meet one on the train once.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,827
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
    What would be seen as a successful benchmark for Dose 3 uptake?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    kle4 said:

    Read Joshua Rozenberg's Enemies of the People? How judges shape society the other day. Assumed from the title it would be pretty polemical, but it was actually a rather fascinating look at various developments in the law and judicial approaches to interpreting and creating law, and pretty even handed. He quotes Sumption quite a lot and obviously takes issues with some of his more conservative interpretations of judicial authority and responibilities, but lays everything out pretty fairly as far as I could see, without (to this layman) obvious axes to grind or a single viewpoint to push.

    Rozenberg is a superb writer who is always worth a read on any legal issue.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    Carnyx said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The odds certainly shorten if one is thinking of the three different Unions at the same time. NI for instance.
    Surely there are four unions?
    Though the chances of England leaving the Union are low but would be hilarious if it ever happened.

    ((For All Time timeline this exact situation happened))

    Quite right. Though for many people it woiujld not compute, because of the default assumption involved.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,460
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
    I think the Labour Party would probably need at least 310 seats, and probably more like 315, to avoid needing the SNP.
    The really fun one would be the Tories on 300.

    Starmer would be better keeping the Tories in as a minority, than be utterly dependent on the SNP for every vote, and with a fresh election clearly coming quickly down the line.
    The Tories on life support until the plug is turned off would be good for Starmer.

    The risk is, a la Corbyn/May, that the Tories get a new leader that rejuvenates the party and finds a winning formula.

    I'm sceptical that trick can be repeated again though.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,058
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
    It matters psychologically, unfortunately. My Dad is really pretty elderly - with a younger but also very vulnerable wife - they were jabbed back in January and news like this will just prolong their reluctance to have any kind of normal life

    A lot of people are still horribly frightened, this won’t help
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
    Not terribly recent though.
    Another poster was arguing that SNP hegemony isn't that long-lived when it comes to things like the Iapetus Suture and the formation of the Moon (basically). So a bit of that rubbed off.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 903
    edited August 18

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Starmer doesn't have to treat with the SNP regardless and, what's more, he'd be foolish to do so. Firstly, offering sweeties to separatist Scottish politicians merely risks confirming the Tory narrative that he'll screw over the English and Welsh (who still return Labour MPs in large numbers) to funnel more money to the Scots (who don't.) Secondly, the SNP MPs can't do any worse than make mischief. Their left-leaning, anti-Tory posture makes it, if not theoretically, then in practical political terms impossible for them to support the only available alternative as Prime Minister, i.e. whoever succeeds Boris Johnson if he's beaten.

    I stand to be corrected by events, of course, but as I see it the position of Scottish Nationalism at Westminster is extremely weak. This is wholly unsurprising when you consider that they are the third largest party, with less than 10% of the seats; they can't realistically work with one of the big two (and you can hardly extract a price for being kingmakers when you're only willing to back one claimant to the throne;) and parties 1, 2, 4 and 5 are all Unionist and, therefore, diametrically opposed to the SNPs core aim. The sole route to getting what they want is to build a substantial and sustained majority for secession amongst popular opinion at home.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,827
    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    [snipped]

    On a different theme, I wasn't keeping track today: did you get to the Pnyx?
    Yes, and it was quite absorbing, tho not quite as epiphanic as the Athenian Agora. But that’s a high bar

    Athens is just stuffed with wonderful things to see. I’ve been here nine days (with a couple left) and I could do another week easily and not get bored

    Sure but you have wasted at least one day with your ahem own company
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,347
    Covid anecdote...

    A colleague in her twenties has been off work sick this week with you-know-what.

    Single jabbed, I think.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,860
    moonshine said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
    What would be seen as a successful benchmark for Dose 3 uptake?
    70-80% of eligible people, I'd guess so around 40% of the population. I'd be surprised if the government doesn't simply make it available to everyone before the middle of December. There will be a lot of prevarication but ultimately it will be decided that risking a second cancellation of Christmas for the sake of saving 15m vaccine doses we've already bought isn't a good trade off.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
    I think the Labour Party would probably need at least 310 seats, and probably more like 315, to avoid needing the SNP.
    The really fun one would be the Tories on 300.

    Starmer would be better keeping the Tories in as a minority, than be utterly dependent on the SNP for every vote, and with a fresh election clearly coming quickly down the line.
    The Tories on life support until the plug is turned off would be good for Starmer.

    The risk is, a la Corbyn/May, that the Tories get a new leader that rejuvenates the party and finds a winning formula.

    I'm sceptical that trick can be repeated again though.
    Surprised the Liberal Democratic Party (of Japan) don't give out training courses on that trick.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,860
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
    It matters psychologically, unfortunately. My Dad is really pretty elderly - with a younger but also very vulnerable wife - they were jabbed back in January and news like this will just prolong their reluctance to have any kind of normal life

    A lot of people are still horribly frightened, this won’t help
    It's quite possible that by the middle of September they'll already be being called up for their third doses.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,914
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
    Not terribly recent though.
    Another poster was arguing that SNP hegemony isn't that long-lived when it comes to things like the Iapetus Suture and the formation of the Moon (basically). So a bit of that rubbed off.
    Ah, fair enough. I will concede that on cosmological timescales SLab have had good leaders.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,827
    MaxPB said:

    moonshine said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
    What would be seen as a successful benchmark for Dose 3 uptake?
    70-80% of eligible people, I'd guess so around 40% of the population. I'd be surprised if the government doesn't simply make it available to everyone before the middle of December. There will be a lot of prevarication but ultimately it will be decided that risking a second cancellation of Christmas for the sake of saving 15m vaccine doses we've already bought isn't a good trade off.
    I had assumed we didn’t have enough doses to do the whole country. Don’t see why else you’d prevaricate on that.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,241
    kle4 said:

    Read Joshua Rozenberg's Enemies of the People? How judges shape society the other day. Assumed from the title it would be pretty polemical, but it was actually a rather fascinating look at various developments in the law and judicial approaches to interpreting and creating law, and pretty even handed. He quotes Sumption quite a lot and obviously takes issues with some of his more conservative interpretations of judicial authority and responibilities, but lays everything out pretty fairly as far as I could see, without (to this layman) obvious axes to grind or a single viewpoint to push.

    I only know him from his stints on R4 but he does seem almost preternaturally evenhanded. Still can’t believe he’s married to Melanie Phillips.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 4,260

    HYUFD said:

    NOM = end of Union?

    The reverse. NOM likely means PM Starmer, indyref2 + devomax and a narrow No win and securing of Scotland's position in the Union for a genuine generation more.

    Also it likely means closer UK alignment to the SM and CU for GB removing the Irish Sea border also cementing GB closer to NI.

    NOM is thus likely bad for the Tories as they lose office, even the DUP may prefer Starmer for the reasons in my second sentence however it would be good for the Union
    HYUFD's view on the union distilled:

    Tory majority = no IndyRef = good for union.
    No Tory majority = no Tory PM = good for union.
    Fable of the wind and the Sun, innit?

    The simple fact of a non-Conservative government will do quite a bit to cement the Union in place for a few more decades. That's before we get devoMax with a thistle on top. (It's really obvious how that pas-de-deux plays out. There will be nothing before the election. Afterwards, the SNP will have to do whatever's needed to kick the Conservatives out and Labour will have to offer something in exchange, but not much.) In the event of a Starmer minority government in 2024 and a referendum pencilled in for about 2028 (a short generation, but... let's just say I've been a secondary school teacher and I know of what I speak) would be a win for "No" at a canter. To the extent that I can see the SNP looking for reasons not to hold it.

    An ongoing Conservative hegemony, on the other hand, keeps Scotland in the Union by refusing a referendum. That will work as long as the balance of Scottish opinion is in the 45/55 range either way. But it accelerates the time when Scotland breaks decisively for independence. Beyond a certain point, it doesn't matter if Westminster refuses a referendum. I don't know where that point is, but a wildcat referendum where a majority of the electorate (not just voters) voted for independence would be blooming hard to ignore.
    A majority of the electorate is an insanely high threshold to cross though. It would require 62.5% of the vote at an 80% turnout. A wildcat referendum would suppress turnout so that would be even harder to achieve (afterall if you've settled for that ambition then it doesn't matter if 100 No votes are suppressed for every Yes vote, since only Yes votes matter).
    No question- it's an very high threshold. In 2014, the referendum was roughly 38% Yes, 50% No, 12% did not vote. It's a lot of votes to shift. And the only way it happens is a decade or so of hyper-unionist pulling (and noises about pulling) powers back to Westminster as the sole true focus of democracy.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
    Not terribly recent though.
    Another poster was arguing that SNP hegemony isn't that long-lived when it comes to things like the Iapetus Suture and the formation of the Moon (basically). So a bit of that rubbed off.
    Well we have to mollify our despair about the endurance of the SNP hegemony somehow.
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 276
    rcs1000 said:

    NOM, doesn't necessarily mean Labour would have to do a deal with the SNP (presuming the Tories definitely couldn't form a government if they lack a majority). If Labour win 300+ seats they could probably cobble up enough support from the Lib Dems, SDLP and Lucas to get a thin majority if Sinn Fein don't bother to show up. Also if Starmer were willing to give the DUP their pork, 300 would definitely be enough.

    Ho ho.

    There is a website called Electoral Calculus. Run by a nice mathematician/finance chap called Martin Baxter. Have a wee look around there. Take your time. Fiddle about with his various calculators. Then have a good, long, hard, cold look at the words you just typed.
    I think the Labour Party would probably need at least 310 seats, and probably more like 315, to avoid needing the SNP.
    Thing is that's assuming the Lib Dems remain static. I think there's a fair chance Labour are making gains against the Tories, then so would the Lib Dems (ala 1997). Assume Labour actually need the support of 330 MPs in the Commons to govern stably enough. If the Lib Dems have 20 seats, then Labour would need 310 for that. Assume Labour are willing to give the DUP their pork, and the SDLP (if they retain their 2 existing constituencies) support Labour. Then they'd only need 300.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,743
    Sainsbury's -- masks worn by almost all customers but fewer staff than last time. Same in B&M. Some gaps on shelves, including Coke and some brands of cat food. A pallet of bottled water was being manoeuvred to replenish shelves that have been empty for some weeks.

    Not as many customers as usual, and there was not much traffic on the roads either. Not sure why.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,229
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    [snipped]

    On a different theme, I wasn't keeping track today: did you get to the Pnyx?
    Yes, and it was quite absorbing, tho not quite as epiphanic as the Athenian Agora. But that’s a high bar

    Athens is just stuffed with wonderful things to see. I’ve been here nine days (with a couple left) and I could do another week easily and not get bored

    Maybe the Pnyx didn’t totally wow me because I was wholly wowed earlier by lunch at the Acropolis Museum. It’s an utterly fantastic restaurant (seriously world class food) AND you get to eat it (and drink great Greek wine) with a majestic view of the Parthenon. That’s also a high bar

    I got sloshed and ate split pea with salami and squid and radish and weirdness and it was brilliant and I toasted the goddess Athena

    I don’t know if you missed our earlier discussion of modern Greek food (at least in Athens) but it is genuinely first rate. You eat better in Athens, on average, than Paris, very easily. Possibly better than London or Madrid. AND it is markedly cheaper
    Well! That's something to add to the bucket list, on which the Wasa, the Aland Islands, and the Finnish Tank Museum are already inscribed. And a ride on the Viking ships at Roskilde.

    On which: I have no idea if Hellenic Navy Ship Olympias the trieres/trireme is even accessible to the public. Probably not. And it won't be rowing around. Not easy to drum up so many rowers at once, never mind socially distanced. Thouigh I did meet one on the train once.
    IIRC The Olympias is displayed in a dry dock. No longer sea worthy, but maintained - triremes had/have a short life.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,573

    kle4 said:

    Read Joshua Rozenberg's Enemies of the People? How judges shape society the other day. Assumed from the title it would be pretty polemical, but it was actually a rather fascinating look at various developments in the law and judicial approaches to interpreting and creating law, and pretty even handed. He quotes Sumption quite a lot and obviously takes issues with some of his more conservative interpretations of judicial authority and responibilities, but lays everything out pretty fairly as far as I could see, without (to this layman) obvious axes to grind or a single viewpoint to push.

    I only know him from his stints on R4 but he does seem almost preternaturally evenhanded. Still can’t believe he’s married to Melanie Phillips.
    Poor bastard.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,999

    kle4 said:

    Read Joshua Rozenberg's Enemies of the People? How judges shape society the other day. Assumed from the title it would be pretty polemical, but it was actually a rather fascinating look at various developments in the law and judicial approaches to interpreting and creating law, and pretty even handed. He quotes Sumption quite a lot and obviously takes issues with some of his more conservative interpretations of judicial authority and responibilities, but lays everything out pretty fairly as far as I could see, without (to this layman) obvious axes to grind or a single viewpoint to push.

    I only know him from his stints on R4 but he does seem almost preternaturally evenhanded. Still can’t believe he’s married to Melanie Phillips.
    Bloody hell, I didn't know that. Amazing. Poor old Joshua.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
    Not terribly recent though.
    Another poster was arguing that SNP hegemony isn't that long-lived when it comes to things like the Iapetus Suture and the formation of the Moon (basically). So a bit of that rubbed off.
    Ah, fair enough. I will concede that on cosmological timescales SLab have had good leaders.
    Only an eyeblink since they had K. Hardie in charge.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,229
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released three studies on Wednesday that federal officials said provided evidence that booster shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna coronavirus vaccines would be needed by all Americans in the coming months.

    NYTimes



    Looks like US is heading towards booster shots this winter.

    This does rather imply they think Pfizer fades in efficacy. Surely
    Does it matter? We've bought 60m Pfizer doses as an insurance policy. We've got enough Pfizer doses to do all groups 1-10 with a booster shot and enough other vaccines to do groups 11, 12 and 13 as well.

    Additionally GSK has fixed the CureVac vaccine so the 2nd gen version will not only work against all of the variants (current and possibly a few predicted ones now that we have a common evolutionary path figured out) but will have extremely high efficacy.

    Finally, waning efficacy is based on the 3 week gap for Pfizer. Moderna notably doesn't see much drop off in efficacy at all in the same time period and incoming PHE numbers based on the 8-12 week gap for Pfizer will show whether our dosing strategy will deliver another victory against COVID. The JCVI has said the preliminary data for keeping the dosing gap at 8 weeks convinced them to hold onto it despite having no supply issues from around May onwards for Pfizer/Moderna.
    It matters psychologically, unfortunately. My Dad is really pretty elderly - with a younger but also very vulnerable wife - they were jabbed back in January and news like this will just prolong their reluctance to have any kind of normal life

    A lot of people are still horribly frightened, this won’t help
    It's quite possible that by the middle of September they'll already be being called up for their third doses.
    That's the plan, isn't it? I'm pretty sure that one of the medical posters here mentioned being actually told this was happening - not just the usual vague plans.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    edited August 18

    kle4 said:

    Read Joshua Rozenberg's Enemies of the People? How judges shape society the other day. Assumed from the title it would be pretty polemical, but it was actually a rather fascinating look at various developments in the law and judicial approaches to interpreting and creating law, and pretty even handed. He quotes Sumption quite a lot and obviously takes issues with some of his more conservative interpretations of judicial authority and responibilities, but lays everything out pretty fairly as far as I could see, without (to this layman) obvious axes to grind or a single viewpoint to push.

    I only know him from his stints on R4 but he does seem almost preternaturally evenhanded. Still can’t believe he’s married to Melanie Phillips.
    Ugh, I hate people who always try to present as evenhanded. It's just smugness and self satisfaction really. *shifts*
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,566
    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the betting markets are wrong.

    My estimate would be 65-70% probability Conservative majority, 25-30% NOM.

    As high as a 10% chance of a Labour majority?
    Effectively that would be saying that there is a 10% chance of SNP collapse before the next UK GE.
    Perhaps the PB Enders of SNP Honeymoons can finally break their duck.
    Their record is extraordinarily poor.

    End of SNP Honeymoon* is as much a PB meme as “Scottish Tory Surge” used to be.

    (*most honeymoons do not last 14 years)
    And "Victorious-to-be New Slab Leader".
    One year they'll actually appoint a concrete slab to be SLab leader, and it will surprise us by having more personality and electability than any of their recent leaders.
    Not fair. Wendy Alexander.
    Not terribly recent though.
    Another poster was arguing that SNP hegemony isn't that long-lived when it comes to things like the Iapetus Suture and the formation of the Moon (basically). So a bit of that rubbed off.
    Well we have to mollify our despair about the endurance of the SNP hegemony somehow.
    You do have the heat death of the universe to look forward to, as a clear termination thereof.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,058
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    [snipped]

    On a different theme, I wasn't keeping track today: did you get to the Pnyx?
    Yes, and it was quite absorbing, tho not quite as epiphanic as the Athenian Agora. But that’s a high bar

    Athens is just stuffed with wonderful things to see. I’ve been here nine days (with a couple left) and I could do another week easily and not get bored

    Maybe the Pnyx didn’t totally wow me because I was wholly wowed earlier by lunch at the Acropolis Museum. It’s an utterly fantastic restaurant (seriously world class food) AND you get to eat it (and drink great Greek wine) with a majestic view of the Parthenon. That’s also a high bar

    I got sloshed and ate split pea with salami and squid and radish and weirdness and it was brilliant and I toasted the goddess Athena

    I don’t know if you missed our earlier discussion of modern Greek food (at least in Athens) but it is genuinely first rate. You eat better in Athens, on average, than Paris, very easily. Possibly better than London or Madrid. AND it is markedly cheaper
    Well! That's something to add to the bucket list, on which the Wasa, the Aland Islands, and the Finnish Tank Museum are already inscribed. And a ride on the Viking ships at Roskilde.

    On which: I have no idea if Hellenic Navy Ship Olympias the trieres/trireme is even accessible to the public. Probably not. And it won't be rowing around. Not easy to drum up so many rowers at once, never mind socially distanced. Thouigh I did meet one on the train once.
    Add the Solovetsky Islands. In the White Sea. Notably difficult to reach but one of THE great travel destinations.

    Plus you get to boast forever after. Simply because you’ve been. I did it in 2019

    “Oh yes my favourite holidays was in the Solovetsky Islands”

    “Where???”

    “Oh it’s a remote Russian archipelago in the White Sea, and a sacred mediaeval site of Orthodoxy, with a sensational microclimate, and it was the first Gulag, and Peter the Great built a chapel on an island of lesbians, and they make the world’s best fish and chips, have you not been? You just need to go to St Petersburg then get a night train then persuade a driver to take you to the tiny port which is only open two months a year, it’s lovely”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solovetsky_Islands
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,103

    Covid anecdote...

    A colleague in her twenties has been off work sick this week with you-know-what.

    Single jabbed, I think.

    And guess what - this is going to happen to most people in the coming years. A week off with a bad cold. Some people might have to go to hospital. Or worse.

    A bit like most respiratory viruses.
This discussion has been closed.