You guys picked up the news that Romney is going to vote to convict Trump? I`ve wondered whether Reps may go down this line in order to get rid of him.
Jeff Flake and Dean Heller are not Republican Senators any more. Lee and Crapo maybe Mormon but are long term loyal party members.
Basically there are only these Senators who are not solid partisans:
Of those only Collins and McSally are facing a Republican Primary, so basically it was always going to be down to maybe Manchin and Romney switching parties. Murkowski is an Independent who caucuses with Republicans.
When I read this, I though "Oh, so Mitt isn't his real first name. I wonder what is"
If Ms Collins is Primaried, then the Republicans can kiss goodbye to Maine. They would be incredibly dumb to remove her.
Collins and McSally might lose even if Trump wins re-election, but if Trump loses they definitely lose too.
They want to stay as Senators, and for that step 1 is winning their Primary and step 2 is help Trump win their State.
Agree 100%. But if I was Trump and the Republican Senate leadership, I would be backing off Collins as much as possible and allowing her to demonstrate her independence.
I certainly wouldn't be encouraging a Primary challenge.
For her to vote to convict the Party Leader that has 94% approval among Party Voters in an Election Year in front of National TV is political suicide for Collins, she will never do it.
Yes, agree. The most she could probably do would be abstain.
Collins just looks like an idiot.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/susan-collins-murkowski-donald-trump-learned-his-lesson.html Evincing no understanding whatsoever of President Donald J. Trump’s character, she insisted that she feels he will now behave lawfully: “The president has been impeached. That’s a pretty big lesson.” The president reportedly responded immediately to her statement by disputing that he had done anything wrong during an off-the-record press meeting before the State of the Union. Asked about Collins’ claim that he’d learned a lesson, Trump said absolutely not. “It was a perfect call.”...
Back in 2008, I remember the Clinton team being apoplectic that Obama had been organised and won things like the Wyoming caucus.
Clinton, people forget, won the popular vote against Obama. He just knew how to organise a campaign, and how to win.
We're seeing a similar thing here. Buttigigeg knows how to win this. He knows where to send his people to maximise his delegates. I have little doubt that he'll be just as well organised in Nevada and in other caucus states.
I guess that is what you expect from a McKinsey consultant.
It's what you expect from a competent candidate who wants to win.
I got on Pete, when Axelrod tweeted many, many months ago that Buttigieg was the one to watch.
Back in 2008, I remember the Clinton team being apoplectic that Obama had been organised and won things like the Wyoming caucus.
Clinton, people forget, won the popular vote against Obama. He just knew how to organise a campaign, and how to win.
We're seeing a similar thing here. Buttigigeg knows how to win this. He knows where to send his people to maximise his delegates. I have little doubt that he'll be just as well organised in Nevada and in other caucus states.
The other thing the Obama team did well was prioritize states, ie:
Put as much money as is necessary to a winner take all state you can win, put anything left over in to 'Proportional' states. Ignore all the Winner take all, that you will lose anyway.
The Clinton Team seemed to take an approach of:
See what state is next and throw what money you have at it.
it is ironic that in two important elections she won the most votes* but lost the election because she/her team could not do election maths.
Depending on how you count it.
It is not ironic that the Clinton team made, as you say, precisely the same cock-up twice. LBA. Lady Bracknell applies.
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
So what is what on that graph
According to the translation the red figure is Confirmed cases, orange is Suspected cases, green Cured, grey Dead.
I'm scratching my head because in non-Chinese cases the death rate is 0.5% and under those figures in China it's 16%.
Don't believe those numbers mean that or legit for a second.
269 cured seems like total bullshit. Nearly 100 dead for every cured person - not a chance on earth.
There are some quite wild but believeable theories on Twitter, which say that China is massaging the coronavirus mortaliity/recovery figures, to reassure the world economy
A death rate of 2% feels psychologically manageable. SARS, by contrast, has a death rate of 10% and MERS is 30%, and avian flu is a full-on 60%. Terrifying.
A virus that kills 60% of the hosts doesn’t survive long in the wild
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
So what is what on that graph
According to the translation the red figure is Confirmed cases, orange is Suspected cases, green Cured, grey Dead.
I'm scratching my head because in non-Chinese cases the death rate is 0.5% and under those figures in China it's 16%.
Don't believe those numbers mean that or legit for a second.
269 cured seems like total bullshit. Nearly 100 dead for every cured person - not a chance on earth.
There are some quite wild but believeable theories on Twitter, which say that China is massaging the coronavirus mortaliity/recovery figures, to reassure the world economy
A death rate of 2% feels psychologically manageable. SARS, by contrast, has a death rate of 10% and MERS is 30%, and avian flu is a full-on 60%. Terrifying.
A virus that kills 60% of the hosts doesn’t survive long in the wild
Yes, I’m not sure why anyone would feel reassured by a mortality rate of 2%. In a global pandemic, that would be catastrophic.
It isn't all that matters if you claim to be the voice of the people against the political elite. Trump won office after a political elite overruled the popular vote.
Trump's victory has nothing to do with political elitism. The states are different and all parties knew that going into the election.
Saying winning the US Presidential election because you got more popular votes is like saying the winner of the Premier League is whoever has the best goal difference while ignoring the individual games results.
Over a 4-game period if one club wins two games 5-0 then loses the next two games 1-0 have they had a better period than a club that wins all 4 games 1-0? One club has scored 10 goals only conceding 2 for a goal difference of 8, while the other club has scored only 4 goals for a goal difference of 4, so who has done better?
Over the course of the Premier League it is the 38 games that matter not just one overall goal tally. In the US politics it is the 50 States that matter not just one overall vote tally.
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
While I can believe official stats might be falsified I doubt a digital editor at tencent would have the inside track on the true numbers. In that case both sets of stats would be garbage.
FWIW, the article says the figures were updated "moments later". Actually the new table is dated nearly two days later, is a different screen with different text and slightly different fonts.
16% probably way too high. Probably. Though it is in line with numbers that were coming out Taiwan, what, 10 days ago?
We haven't yet had any meaningful recovery rates. We don't know how many deaths are being misdiagnosed as "flu". The Chinese authorities are appearing to be honest in their dealings. They may not be in possession of the full facts yet.
But China does give the impression of a very worried country.
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
So what is what on that graph
According to the translation the red figure is Confirmed cases, orange is Suspected cases, green Cured, grey Dead.
I'm scratching my head because in non-Chinese cases the death rate is 0.5% and under those figures in China it's 16%.
Don't believe those numbers mean that or legit for a second.
269 cured seems like total bullshit. Nearly 100 dead for every cured person - not a chance on earth.
There are some quite wild but believeable theories on Twitter, which say that China is massaging the coronavirus mortaliity/recovery figures, to reassure the world economy
A death rate of 2% feels psychologically manageable. SARS, by contrast, has a death rate of 10% and MERS is 30%, and avian flu is a full-on 60%. Terrifying.
A virus that kills 60% of the hosts doesn’t survive long in the wild
Rabies says hello. "Death rate" is % of infected, not of population.
New figures seen by the Guardian show that 4,024 allegations led to guilty verdicts at court after police investigations since 2014 into decades-old child sex offences.
Officers say hundreds of offenders, including teachers, religious workers, youth and care workers, thought they had got away with their crimes. Many victims have been traumatised, and some have killed themselves or been left with severe mental health problems.
Police believe the figures, which show that 35% of all allegations led to guilty verdicts, demonstrate that inquiries into non-recent sexual abuse are not “spaffing money up the wall”, as Boris Johnson last year claimed. Labour said Johnson should apologise to victims....
There’s no way 35% of allegations could lead to guilty convictions.
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
So what is what on that graph
According to the translation the red figure is Confirmed cases, orange is Suspected cases, green Cured, grey Dead.
I'm scratching my head because in non-Chinese cases the death rate is 0.5% and under those figures in China it's 16%.
Don't believe those numbers mean that or legit for a second.
269 cured seems like total bullshit. Nearly 100 dead for every cured person - not a chance on earth.
There are some quite wild but believeable theories on Twitter, which say that China is massaging the coronavirus mortaliity/recovery figures, to reassure the world economy
A death rate of 2% feels psychologically manageable. SARS, by contrast, has a death rate of 10% and MERS is 30%, and avian flu is a full-on 60%. Terrifying.
A virus that kills 60% of the hosts doesn’t survive long in the wild
Yes, I’m not sure why anyone would feel reassured by a mortality rate of 2%. In a global pandemic, that would be catastrophic.
Catastrophic? Really? It would be significant, traumatic even, but nothing like the Black Death (30% mortatlity in C14th Europe). Even that did not wipe out civilization.
When were the seats last contested that come up in May? I'd assumed that local elections in May will be thirds from those elected in May 2017? Which was Con 38%, Labour 27% LibDems 18%
But I can't see those Metropolitan thirds for 2017. Did thirds only kick in later?
(2018 thirds were when the result was 35% Labour, 35% Cons,16% Libem.
2019 thirds were 28% Labour, 28% Cons, 19% Libdem.)
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
So what is what on that graph
According to the translation the red figure is Confirmed cases, orange is Suspected cases, green Cured, grey Dead.
I'm scratching my head because in non-Chinese cases the death rate is 0.5% and under those figures in China it's 16%.
Don't believe those numbers mean that or legit for a second.
269 cured seems like total bullshit. Nearly 100 dead for every cured person - not a chance on earth.
There are some quite wild but believeable theories on Twitter, which say that China is massaging the coronavirus mortaliity/recovery figures, to reassure the world economy
A death rate of 2% feels psychologically manageable. SARS, by contrast, has a death rate of 10% and MERS is 30%, and avian flu is a full-on 60%. Terrifying.
A virus that kills 60% of the hosts doesn’t survive long in the wild
Yes, I’m not sure why anyone would feel reassured by a mortality rate of 2%. In a global pandemic, that would be catastrophic.
Catastrophic? Really? It would be significant, traumatic even, but nothing like the Black Death (30% mortatlity in C14th Europe). Even that did not wipe out civilization.
Spanish flu killed 3-6% of the world population (mortality rate 10-20%, infection rate 33%) without anyone really noticing. We need to bear in mind that people are dying of stuff all the time, anyway.
A death rate of 16% for a disease that transmits like the common cold would be devastating for civilization.
But the official death rate outside of China is only 0.5% so far.
So what is what on that graph
According to the translation the red figure is Confirmed cases, orange is Suspected cases, green Cured, grey Dead.
I'm scratching my head because in non-Chinese cases the death rate is 0.5% and under those figures in China it's 16%.
The mortality rate is not 0.5%. As has been mentioned you must compare deaths to the number of recovered, not number of infected. The number of recovered outside China is still very low.
We cannot calculate the mortality rate yet, because the deaths precede recovery and we have little data on non-symptomatic rates. It seems the natural recovery period is 2-3 weeks, so the bulk of those infected have not yet had a chance to recover.
The higher the non-symptomatic rates, the lower the real mortality rate, but also the harder containment becomes if, as suspected, people can be infectious without showing symptoms
Treat all models and numbers associated with this outbreak with great caution this early on.
The other thing is that mild symptoms will be easy to dismiss as due to a normal cold/flu virus. This is more the case for China, than for other countries where people who have recently travelled to China will tend to be more suspicious of such symptoms, because of the coincidence.
This would lead to a higher Chinese death rate because fewer of the mild cases will be picked up in their numbers, compared to the rest of the world.
Won't the people in China with mild flu like symptoms be equally suspicious of the coincidence that they are actually IN China which is the known epicentre of the disease?
You might be right for the wrong reason though, that people in China don't get diagnosed because 1. they think they obviously *have* got it anyway and 2. hospitals are so busy that if you go for diagnosis you just get put in a holding tank and 3. if you are diagnosed you are effectively imprisoned, so why not self diagnose and self quarantine?
That reason too, but I think someone in China with mild symptoms is more likely to think, "I'm glad I'm not seriously ill with that coronavirus," whereas anyone outside of, but recently visited, China are now in many cases being asked to self-isolate/be tested even if they're asymptomatic, let alone clearing their throat...
Comments
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/susan-collins-murkowski-donald-trump-learned-his-lesson.html
Evincing no understanding whatsoever of President Donald J. Trump’s character, she insisted that she feels he will now behave lawfully: “The president has been impeached. That’s a pretty big lesson.” The president reportedly responded immediately to her statement by disputing that he had done anything wrong during an off-the-record press meeting before the State of the Union. Asked about Collins’ claim that he’d learned a lesson, Trump said absolutely not. “It was a perfect call.”...
I got on Pete, when Axelrod tweeted many, many months ago that Buttigieg was the one to watch.
It reminds me of Florida in 2000:
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1225168116994445312
https://twitter.com/DanielPFlatley/status/1220402496868421635
Saying winning the US Presidential election because you got more popular votes is like saying the winner of the Premier League is whoever has the best goal difference while ignoring the individual games results.
Over a 4-game period if one club wins two games 5-0 then loses the next two games 1-0 have they had a better period than a club that wins all 4 games 1-0? One club has scored 10 goals only conceding 2 for a goal difference of 8, while the other club has scored only 4 goals for a goal difference of 4, so who has done better?
Over the course of the Premier League it is the 38 games that matter not just one overall goal tally. In the US politics it is the 50 States that matter not just one overall vote tally.
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1225168116994445312
We haven't yet had any meaningful recovery rates. We don't know how many deaths are being misdiagnosed as "flu". The Chinese authorities are appearing to be honest in their dealings. They may not be in possession of the full facts yet.
But China does give the impression of a very worried country.
https://twitter.com/lib_crusher/status/1225185083872743424
Sanders and Warren votes are being miscounted as Deval and Steyer votes, and that is trickling to SDE's.
When were the seats last contested that come up in May? I'd assumed that local elections in May will be thirds from those elected in May 2017? Which was Con 38%, Labour 27% LibDems 18%
But I can't see those Metropolitan thirds for 2017. Did thirds only kick in later?
(2018 thirds were when the result was 35% Labour, 35% Cons,16% Libem.
2019 thirds were 28% Labour, 28% Cons, 19% Libdem.)
Try the next one.