Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We could be just a week away from Biden’s VP pick and the bett

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited July 25 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We could be just a week away from Biden’s VP pick and the betting’s getting tighter

With Joe Biden totally dominating the next President polls the next big moment in WH2020 looks set to be the announcement of who is to be his running mate. Biden has already made it clear that it will be a woman and a lot of the betting is going on it being an African American.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 2,704
    First
  • Second, like Jezza
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    I will still be amazed if it isn’t Harris.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809
    Second hand like most info these days
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,573
    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 10,739
    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
  • Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,573

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    And hospital deaths?

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    nichomar said:

    Second hand like most info these days

    Actually fourth hand, like the 2019 Labour manifesto.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 25

    Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same

    At this moment AIUI the law requires the number of seats to be cut to 600, but Johnson has declared he wants to repeal that law to keep the Commons at around 650 seats.

    However, when that change has occurred here will be a further boundary review as the current boundaries are getting on for 15 years out of date.

    It might actually be good news for Labour (outside Wales) as their seats have larger populations on average, being highly urban. However, that might be offset if the electoral roll rather than raw population is the metric.
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 1,421

    Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same

    Yes they are keeping at 650 seats and a 5% threshold. There are 5 protected seats: Orkney and Shetland, Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Ynys Mon, and 2 for Isle of Wight.

    The main difference with the current boundaries is that Wales loses its over-representation so will likely lose 8 seats. The main winner region is likely to be the South East, which could gain 7 seats.

    The new boundaries should benefit the Tories but not as much as before the election. Electoral Calculus' current estimate is Con +6, Lab -3, SNP -2, Plaid - 1 vs 2019.

    The boundaries will be based on the electorates from March 2020. So I'm guessing the review will kick off either end of this year or early next year.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    FPT - Who was the worst BRITISH ambassador to the United States?

    Would nominateSir Lionel Sackville-West, who "served" 1881-88. During the 1888 presidential campaign, a Republican sent sir Lionel a letter under the assumed name "Charles F. Murchison" claiming to be a British immigrant to America, and asking HM's envoy for his advise on whom to vote for president.

    Here is S-W's reply"

    Sir: I am in receipt of your letter of the 4th instant, and beg to say that I fully appreciate the difficulty in which you find yourself in casting your vote.

    You are probably aware that any political party which openly favored the mother country at the present moment would lose popularity, and that the party in power is fully aware of this fact. The party, however, is, I believe, still desirous of maintaining friendly relations with Great Britain, and is still as desirous of settling all questions with Canada which have been unfortunately re-opened since the retraction of the treaty[note 1] by the Republican majority in the Senate and by the President's message, to which you allude.

    All allowances must, therefore, be made for the political situation as regards the Presidential election thus created. It is, however, impossible to predict the course which President Cleveland may pursue in the matter of retaliation should he be elected, but there is every reason to believe that, while upholding the position he has taken, he will manifest a spirit of conciliation in dealing with the question involved in his message. I inclose an article from the New York Times of the 22d of August, and remain, yours, faithfully,

    — L.S. Sackville West., Beverly, Mass., September 13, 1888

    "Murchison" immediately gave Sir Lionel's reply to the press. With the result that S-W was soon packing his bags to return to England, his career as a diplomat ended forever.

    BTW, Grover Cleveland won the popular vote in 1888, but lost in the Electoral College. And the Murchison Letter played a role by stoking anti-British sentiment against the Democrats and for the Republicans - just intended by "Murchison" and the GOP.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 25

    Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same

    Yes they are keeping at 650 seats and a 5% threshold. There are 5 protected seats: Orkney and Shetland, Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Ynys Mon, and 2 for Isle of Wight.

    The main difference with the current boundaries is that Wales loses its over-representation so will likely lose 8 seats. The main winner region is likely to be the South East, which could gain 7 seats.

    The new boundaries should benefit the Tories but not as much as before the election. Electoral Calculus' current estimate is Con +6, Lab -3, SNP -2, Plaid - 1 vs 2019.

    The boundaries will be based on the electorates from March 2020. So I'm guessing the review will kick off either end of this year or early next year.
    I ran a rough calculation based on the likely seats for Wales a few months back.

    I came up with Labour 14, Tory 12, Plaid 2 and a few which were too close to call. With Ynys Môn getting protected status, I’m going to hesitantly put that in the Tory column. I know it’s very close, but it’s 1951 since a sitting MP was defeated there. That leaves three I’m struggling with - two in Carmarthenshire which might go any one of three ways and one in the North.

    Any reduction for Wales will hurt Labour pretty badly because the Valleys are their last stronghold and they will inevitably take a pounding.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100

    FPT

    Ah-ha, you finally realised why I was ‘shouting?’
  • isamisam Posts: 33,119
    RIP Peter Green

    So sad. I loved Peter. This week I have been trying to learn Oh Well and Black Magic Woman on the guitar.

    I think had you offered him his last twenty five years back in the late 70s/early 80s he wouldn't have believed it possible. It could have been a lot, lot worse.

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084
    Apologies if this has already been discussed but WTF is wrong with GMB? Even without Piers Morgan. This clip is disgusting. 😡

  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    edited July 25
    Misinformation & misdirection re: VP pick is as American as mom's apple pie. The more money punter lose picking the wrong pony, the better Biden strategist will like it, as it shows they've achieved their objective of keeping the real pick under wraps until Uncle Joe's announcement.

    NOT sure why MS thinks an early (that is, pre-convention, or whatever it is this year) announcement is likely. What's in it for Biden? Personally think he'd be better served waiting until the last minute, to maintain SOME kind of suspense.

    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,749
    ydoethur said:

    I will still be amazed if it isn’t Harris.

    Though still favourite, Kamala Harris has been slowly drifting in the betting for days, if not weeks. Not long ago she was 4/6 -- or 60% likely to be chosen; now she is 6/4 (only 40% likely) or almost 2/1 on Betfair (33%). You can see it in the header graph. Depending on the probability range that corresponds to your amazement, it might be time to put your betting boots on.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    Breaking:

    Travellers returning to England from Spain will have to quarantine for 14 days from Sunday, the BBC understands.

    It is believed the measures will come into force in the early hours of Sunday.

    The government is expected to announce the change imminently, due to a significant spike in coronavirus cases in Spain.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,573
    Perhaps they should ban them from coming back into the country?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    Re; Harris, again keep in mind that anyone who dated Willie Brown while both were in the California state house MIGHT just have some vetting issues.

    Some think fact she scored off of Biden in one debate would make her unacceptable to Uncle Joe; personally think the opposite is true.

    HOWEVER, fact that she ran what virtually all observers rated as a poor presidential campaign is NOT a recommendation.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    alex_ said:

    Perhaps they should ban them from coming back into the country?
    Ban them from the country? Magnificent idea. Fully in favour as we need a proper gover...

    Oh, sorry, you meant the holidaymakers not the government!
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    ydoethur said:


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
    IF you are talking about after a Biden term or two, maybe.

    Personally think the notion that Uncle Joe is so frail and weak he'd not last four years is simply a GOP Great White Hope.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    alex_ said:

    Perhaps they should ban them from coming back into the country?
    To be fair, all those drunks rampaging around Shagaluf wouldn't be any great loss to anyone.

    But seriously, people going abroad for sunshine holidays under the present circumstances have to expect something like this, or perhaps being found to be a carrier by the efficient testing services of the host country at the airport, and spending their entire holiday incarcerated under police guard in a hotel room half-a-mile down the road.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,759
    RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always some going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.
    Yup - COVID demands either

    1) Total lockdown. Weld everyone in their houses.
    2) Flexible response, on a day to day basis.

    Since 1) can't work in the long run, we need to do 2)

    Expecting everyone to finish their 2 week holiday, before changing the rules, would mean that 2) would become impossible.
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 359
    Good evening all. Went to the gym today. Very well organised and surprisingly well attended albeit mainly by the young bodybuilding types. Temperature check on the way in, and very early days but everyone seemed to be adhering to social distancing, using the antibacterial wipes on the equipment and lathering on what seemed like weapons grade sanitiser.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 2,523
    edited July 25
    isam said:

    RIP Peter Green

    So sad. I loved Peter. This week I have been trying to learn Oh Well and Black Magic Woman on the guitar.

    I think had you offered him his last twenty five years back in the late 70s/early 80s he wouldn't have believed it possible. It could have been a lot, lot worse.

    My wife's family knew Peter Green's younger relatives, apparently. One of that generation of postwar East End Jewish boys drawn to the 'sixties creative industries ; Marc Bolan was another.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,759
    edited July 25

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday from the reported number.

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK yesterday. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday, from the reproved number

    image

    Last 3-5 days subject to change etc...
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,166
    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,859
    I would continue to sell all the players here. I think that - while Harris is probably rightly favourite - the can't be more than about a 30% chance. I can't see Warren getting it. Rice? Maybe, but she's not exactly a nation name or tested electorally, so 5-1 seems very ungenerous.

    There's also a significant chance it isn't *anyone* on the list.

    Sell 'em all.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,759

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106
    ydoethur said:

    Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same

    Yes they are keeping at 650 seats and a 5% threshold. There are 5 protected seats: Orkney and Shetland, Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Ynys Mon, and 2 for Isle of Wight.

    The main difference with the current boundaries is that Wales loses its over-representation so will likely lose 8 seats. The main winner region is likely to be the South East, which could gain 7 seats.

    The new boundaries should benefit the Tories but not as much as before the election. Electoral Calculus' current estimate is Con +6, Lab -3, SNP -2, Plaid - 1 vs 2019.

    The boundaries will be based on the electorates from March 2020. So I'm guessing the review will kick off either end of this year or early next year.
    I ran a rough calculation based on the likely seats for Wales a few months back.

    I came up with Labour 14, Tory 12, Plaid 2 and a few which were too close to call. With Ynys Môn getting protected status, I’m going to hesitantly put that in the Tory column. I know it’s very close, but it’s 1951 since a sitting MP was defeated there. That leaves three I’m struggling with - two in Carmarthenshire which might go any one of three ways and one in the North.

    Any reduction for Wales will hurt Labour pretty badly because the Valleys are their last stronghold and they will inevitably take a pounding.
    Labour are not very popular in the blue collar seats along the M4 corridor anyway. Boris Johnson by contrast is revered amongst people who considered Brexit to be the way forward.

    If Johnson can avoid any blame for any post-Covid and post- Brexit economic damage, and I believe Wales will be caned, particularly post-Brexit, he will pick up a few more seats outside Cardiff. I am sure he has his scapegoats lined up already.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084

    ydoethur said:


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
    IF you are talking about after a Biden term or two, maybe.

    Personally think the notion that Uncle Joe is so frail and weak he'd not last four years is simply a GOP Great White Hope.
    Once Biden has dislodged Trump from the Oval Office he will have served his purpose. At some point before long he should get a dignified retirement.
  • isamisam Posts: 33,119
    .

    isam said:

    RIP Peter Green

    So sad. I loved Peter. This week I have been trying to learn Oh Well and Black Magic Woman on the guitar.

    I think had you offered him his last twenty five years back in the late 70s/early 80s he wouldn't have believed it possible. It could have been a lot, lot worse.

    My wife's family knew Peter Green's younger relatives, apparently. One of that generation of postwar East End Jewish boys drawn to the 'sixties creative industries ; Marc Bolan was another.
    An incredibly sad story. The Man of the World documentary by the BBC is good. I think it is on iplayer, but no doubt will be shown again now he has sadly passed away. Spent his final years in Leigh-on-Sea I believe

    https://web.musicaficionado.com/main/article/Peter_Green_Article
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084
    The presidency rapidly ages people. I rather hope that Biden will be self-aware enough that if it becomes necessary he would rather retire than in four years time be proud of himself for being able to say "person woman man camera tv"
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,573

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    But they’ve opened all their nightclubs. Similar spikes are happening in other EU countries for the same reason. Which I doubt we’ll allow for a looong time.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    Probably low, if there is one lesson to be learnt is that the young become the main vector for rising infections. How you contain them is another matter.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100

    ydoethur said:

    Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same

    Yes they are keeping at 650 seats and a 5% threshold. There are 5 protected seats: Orkney and Shetland, Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Ynys Mon, and 2 for Isle of Wight.

    The main difference with the current boundaries is that Wales loses its over-representation so will likely lose 8 seats. The main winner region is likely to be the South East, which could gain 7 seats.

    The new boundaries should benefit the Tories but not as much as before the election. Electoral Calculus' current estimate is Con +6, Lab -3, SNP -2, Plaid - 1 vs 2019.

    The boundaries will be based on the electorates from March 2020. So I'm guessing the review will kick off either end of this year or early next year.
    I ran a rough calculation based on the likely seats for Wales a few months back.

    I came up with Labour 14, Tory 12, Plaid 2 and a few which were too close to call. With Ynys Môn getting protected status, I’m going to hesitantly put that in the Tory column. I know it’s very close, but it’s 1951 since a sitting MP was defeated there. That leaves three I’m struggling with - two in Carmarthenshire which might go any one of three ways and one in the North.

    Any reduction for Wales will hurt Labour pretty badly because the Valleys are their last stronghold and they will inevitably take a pounding.
    Labour are not very popular in the blue collar seats along the M4 corridor anyway. Boris Johnson by contrast is revered amongst people who considered Brexit to be the way forward.

    If Johnson can avoid any blame for any post-Covid and post- Brexit economic damage, and I believe Wales will be caned, particularly post-Brexit, he will pick up a few more seats outside Cardiff. I am sure he has his scapegoats lined up already.
    Greatly daring, my model puts the Newport seat in the Blue column.

    I have a feeling Labour is living on borrowed time in that seat.

    I really can’t see what seat they are likely to win outside the Valleys (counting Gower as part of the valleys) even if the boundaries are drawn more generously for them than at present.

    Coupled with the exhaustion and staleness of the Labour government in the Bay, and the Tories emerging as the first truly nationwide opposition party since the collapse of the Liberals after 1935, Labour have got big problems.
  • isamisam Posts: 33,119

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    isam said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
    Well, if nightclubs are a key source of transmission, one suggestion is don’t reopen fecking nightclubs.

    How many people would really miss them? Truthfully?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    edited July 25

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    Could we be seeing a flat, constant stream of deaths amongst those who have actually died of natural causes, but are being counted as Covid deaths because of the PHE cock-up, plus a number of genuine Covid deaths in the community? That being the case, you'd still expect the total mortality rate for non-hospital deaths to decline in the same manner as the hospital deaths, in line with the decreasing prevalence of the disease.

    If that is indeed the case then, if that trend continues, the hospital deaths will eventually decline to zero (or possibly some very low constant level, corresponding to a remaining background number of cases should the disease not entirely disappear from circulation,) and at about the same time the non-hospital deaths would also then plateau, because a fairly constant number of deaths from natural causes will carry on being attributed to the virus, at least until the frail elderly portion of the cohort that has tested positive in the past has died out?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809
    alex_ said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    But they’ve opened all their nightclubs. Similar spikes are happening in other EU countries for the same reason. Which I doubt we’ll allow for a looong time.
    Not all their discos but yes where the outbreaks are worse then indoor venues are a main source. As an aside a ‘night club’ is a brothel ! Large gatherings on outdoor terraces also a problem.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    It isn't.

    The blue dotted line has gone from above 30 at the start of the month, to below 10 now. Roughly a reduction of about 75%

    The orange dotted line has gone from about 65 to about 35 now in the same time period. Roughly a reduction of just under 50%

    Why have we seen a 3/4 reduction in one line, but only about a 1/2 reduction in the other? Well if my theory is right and the orange line is being inflated artificially then that would explain the difference.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,573

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Yes but regardless of the date of death, what is the criteria for deaths in hospitals. As all these stats make England look bad compared to the rUK I’m amazed that they aren’t challenging them more if they are misleading. On the other hand, maybe they think that ongoing relatively high, but not absolutely high figures are quite useful for maintaining public vigilance. The trouble comes if they start to generate “spikes” linked to the big expansion in the testing regime.

    I guess at that point they might take the opportunity to “clarify” all the figures.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114

    ydoethur said:


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
    IF you are talking about after a Biden term or two, maybe.

    Personally think the notion that Uncle Joe is so frail and weak he'd not last four years is simply a GOP Great White Hope.
    Once Biden has dislodged Trump from the Oval Office he will have served his purpose. At some point before long he should get a dignified retirement.
    You mean like Pope Emeritus Benny?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,759
    ydoethur said:

    isam said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
    Well, if nightclubs are a key source of transmission, one suggestion is don’t reopen fecking nightclubs.

    How many people would really miss them? Truthfully?
    Rework night clubs back to the 30s style - lots of tables, service at tables, lots of distancing....

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,759

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    Could we be seeing a flat, constant stream of deaths amongst those who have actually died of natural causes, but are being counted as Covid deaths because of the PHE cock-up, plus a number of genuine Covid deaths in the community? That being the case, you'd still expect the total mortality rate for non-hospital deaths to decline in the same manner as the hospital deaths, in line with the decreasing prevalence of the disease.

    If that is indeed the case then, if that trend continues, the hospital deaths will eventually decline to zero (or possibly some very low constant level, corresponding to a remaining background number of cases should the disease not entirely disappear from circulation,) and at about the same time the non-hospital deaths would also then plateau, because a fairly constant number of deaths from natural causes will carry on being attributed to the virus, at least until the frail elderly portion of the cohort that has tested positive in the past has died out?
    Could be.

    I see my role in this to come up with data, not answers. I'm not qualified to *create* the answers. That would require a medical degree. I am qualified to ask questions about the numbers.....
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 12,809
    edited July 25
    Just watched Gardener's World - on the BBC not Netflix - and it turned out to be one of the most interesting episodes ever. You might be incredulous of what I'm telling you here but Monty Don basically used the show as a platform to come out. Just straight out did it. "I love Pesto," he said, twinkle in his eye, as he was tending some plant or other. Real water-cooler television. And if you missed it it's there on iplayer. Cost each household what for today? 50 pence? Less than a packet of wine gums.
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,710
    nichomar said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    Probably low, if there is one lesson to be learnt is that the young become the main vector for rising infections. How you contain them is another matter.
    Today's swift and decisive action by Englland is widely criticised as too sudden - no government can win in these situations. I am very annoyed that in my area here in Spain the nightclubs and bars are open without apporopriate compliance with the rules. We've been lucky with infections so far but as we move into August the dangers get worse and worse. We are clearly into a second wave here and the Spanish government is dithering. Catalonia has been more decisive but here in Andalucia I think the tourist lobby is winning out. It will not end well.


  • Good analysis by Kinnock I would say.

    So why is he not higher up in the party?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    ydoethur said:

    isam said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
    Well, if nightclubs are a key source of transmission, one suggestion is don’t reopen fecking nightclubs.

    How many people would really miss them? Truthfully?
    Agree. I've been wondering for the last couple of days, whilst the possible causes of the Spanish spike have been debated, whether nightclubs are a key component - although it could also be that the Spaniards are less reticent about going out generally and have more of a culture of eating out, as a consequence of which they're packing out the bars and restaurants in much higher densities? Though someone who's actually familiar with what conditions are like over there at the moment would be better placed to comment.

    Specifically with regard to nightclubs, I have no time for them either but then again I'm a stick-in-the-mud fortysomething who's not exactly part of their target demographic. They are popular with a lot of people and, as with the arts, they should be propped up until it is safe for them to resume normal operations. Apart from anything else, since this has all started I've read more than one piece of comment on the nightclubs to the effect that, if the sector is allowed to collapse, the venues are a prime target to be bought up on the cheap and re-opened later by organised crime. This makes sense. They'd be somewhere ideal to ply the naive or reckless young with drugs.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084

    ydoethur said:


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
    IF you are talking about after a Biden term or two, maybe.

    Personally think the notion that Uncle Joe is so frail and weak he'd not last four years is simply a GOP Great White Hope.
    Once Biden has dislodged Trump from the Oval Office he will have served his purpose. At some point before long he should get a dignified retirement.
    You mean like Pope Emeritus Benny?
    Indeed.

    Of course all former Presidents are automatically Emeritus, they all retain the title President until the day they die (and I guess past then too even). Hence Obama's title is still President Obama. Even if Biden retires he'll still be President Biden.

    Its a shame that even if he loses the tangerine one will still be President Trump for as long as he's on this earth.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 25

    They'd be somewhere ideal to ply the naive or reckless young with drugs.

    Would be?!!!

    Edit - I have, incidentally, no particular objection to people going to nightclubs and enjoying themselves. But not if it’s going to cause a dangerous disease to run rampant in the population.
  • Minus the stuff about telling the electorate they're dumb for voting Tory. I can say that, Labour should not.

    Rest of it seemed reasonable to me anyway
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100

    ydoethur said:


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
    IF you are talking about after a Biden term or two, maybe.

    Personally think the notion that Uncle Joe is so frail and weak he'd not last four years is simply a GOP Great White Hope.
    Once Biden has dislodged Trump from the Oval Office he will have served his purpose. At some point before long he should get a dignified retirement.
    You mean like Pope Emeritus Benny?
    Indeed.

    Of course all former Presidents are automatically Emeritus, they all retain the title President until the day they die (and I guess past then too even). Hence Obama's title is still President Obama. Even if Biden retires he'll still be President Biden.

    Its a shame that even if he loses the tangerine one will still be President Trump for as long as he's on this earth.
    I take it that you can’t be stripped of the honorary title if you’re convicted of an offence? Not of course that it’s ever been tested thanks to Gerald Ford.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Can somebody explain the new boundaries as I thought the seat numbers were remaining the same

    Yes they are keeping at 650 seats and a 5% threshold. There are 5 protected seats: Orkney and Shetland, Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Ynys Mon, and 2 for Isle of Wight.

    The main difference with the current boundaries is that Wales loses its over-representation so will likely lose 8 seats. The main winner region is likely to be the South East, which could gain 7 seats.

    The new boundaries should benefit the Tories but not as much as before the election. Electoral Calculus' current estimate is Con +6, Lab -3, SNP -2, Plaid - 1 vs 2019.

    The boundaries will be based on the electorates from March 2020. So I'm guessing the review will kick off either end of this year or early next year.
    I ran a rough calculation based on the likely seats for Wales a few months back.

    I came up with Labour 14, Tory 12, Plaid 2 and a few which were too close to call. With Ynys Môn getting protected status, I’m going to hesitantly put that in the Tory column. I know it’s very close, but it’s 1951 since a sitting MP was defeated there. That leaves three I’m struggling with - two in Carmarthenshire which might go any one of three ways and one in the North.

    Any reduction for Wales will hurt Labour pretty badly because the Valleys are their last stronghold and they will inevitably take a pounding.
    Labour are not very popular in the blue collar seats along the M4 corridor anyway. Boris Johnson by contrast is revered amongst people who considered Brexit to be the way forward.

    If Johnson can avoid any blame for any post-Covid and post- Brexit economic damage, and I believe Wales will be caned, particularly post-Brexit, he will pick up a few more seats outside Cardiff. I am sure he has his scapegoats lined up already.
    Greatly daring, my model puts the Newport seat in the Blue column.

    I have a feeling Labour is living on borrowed time in that seat.

    I really can’t see what seat they are likely to win outside the Valleys (counting Gower as part of the valleys) even if the boundaries are drawn more generously for them than at present.

    Coupled with the exhaustion and staleness of the Labour government in the Bay, and the Tories emerging as the first truly nationwide opposition party since the collapse of the Liberals after 1935, Labour have got big problems.
    I once hoped any falling off of the Labour vote would go to Plaid, but they are still in chaos.

    I think you overstate Labour's unpopularity in the Bay. That is not to say a rainbow coalition of non-Labour AMs will not form the next Government.

    Johnson's Brexit credentials and racial dog whistles play very well to the over 40s here. Johnson's Covid performance is seen as strong from the people I almost rub shoulders with (2 metre distancing). Starmer's performance is seen as poor by comparison (don't ask me why).

    As a Johnson skeptic, I assumed the economic chaos to come would do for him in Wales. However, I believe he will get away with it.

    Now all in the garden is not rosy for the Conservatives. Sunak will not play as well with the people I meet as Johnson does, and by a Welsh mile!
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    felix said:

    nichomar said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    Probably low, if there is one lesson to be learnt is that the young become the main vector for rising infections. How you contain them is another matter.
    Today's swift and decisive action by Englland is widely criticised as too sudden - no government can win in these situations. I am very annoyed that in my area here in Spain the nightclubs and bars are open without apporopriate compliance with the rules. We've been lucky with infections so far but as we move into August the dangers get worse and worse. We are clearly into a second wave here and the Spanish government is dithering. Catalonia has been more decisive but here in Andalucia I think the tourist lobby is winning out. It will not end well.
    Some of these tourist resorts are playing with fire I think. You understand why they want the tourists back - they're desperate for the cash - but at least some of them rely on exactly the kind of clientele that you do not want when social distancing and restrained, good behaviour is important.

    Exhibit A: there were reports only a couple of nights ago about drunken British tourists rampaging through Magaluf. The locals were apparently outraged. Well, duh! If a key part of your business model revolves around shipping in drunken louts, and you then open your resort back up to drunken louts, then you should not be surprised if the drunken louts you rely on and want to attract behave like drunken louts. With the best will in the world, they aren't going to magically transform into art connoisseurs and ask very politely, in flawless, unaccented Spanish, to be directed to the nearest gallery. Whilst wearing a mask. Now, are they?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    SONGS OF THE BATTLE GROUND (AND POSSIBLE VP) STATES - NEW MEXICO

    BILLY THE KID
    Bill Dean & Paul Nelson (and performed by Ry Cooder)

    I'll sing you a song about Billy the Kid
    I'll sing the record of deeds that he did
    Way out in New Mexico a long time ago
    When a (G) man's only friend was his his own .44

    Now when Billy the Kid was a very young lad
    In old Silver City he went to the bad
    Way out west with a knife in his hand
    At the age of twelve years he killed his first man

    Fair Mexican maidens play guitars and sing
    Songs about Billy their boy bandit king
    Before his young manhood reached its sad end
    He'd a notch on his pistol for twenty one men

    It was on one black night that poor Billy died
    He said to his friends, I'm not satisfied
    There's twenty one men that I've put bullets through
    And sheriff Pat Garrett's gonna make twenty-two

    Well, this is how Billy the Kid met his fate
    A big moon was shining and the hour was late
    Shot down by Pat Garrett, Silver City's best friend
    The poor outlaw's life have reached its sad end
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    edited July 25

    I think you overstate Labour's unpopularity in the Bay. That is not to say a rainbow coalition of non-Labour AMs will not form the next Government.

    I don’t know. My impression is their support is patchy. I think Labour are in advanced and possibly terminal decay in the north outside Bangor, while in Dyfed-Powys they’ve been weak for years.

    But I would expect a Labour-Plaid coalition next year if only because I cannot see any other route to 30 other than Tory majority (which ain’t happening).

    But I can see Tories - most seats in 2021 (albeit it’s not the likeliest outcome) and taking power in 2025-26.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,759

    felix said:

    nichomar said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    Probably low, if there is one lesson to be learnt is that the young become the main vector for rising infections. How you contain them is another matter.
    Today's swift and decisive action by Englland is widely criticised as too sudden - no government can win in these situations. I am very annoyed that in my area here in Spain the nightclubs and bars are open without apporopriate compliance with the rules. We've been lucky with infections so far but as we move into August the dangers get worse and worse. We are clearly into a second wave here and the Spanish government is dithering. Catalonia has been more decisive but here in Andalucia I think the tourist lobby is winning out. It will not end well.
    Some of these tourist resorts are playing with fire I think. You understand why they want the tourists back - they're desperate for the cash - but at least some of them rely on exactly the kind of clientele that you do not want when social distancing and restrained, good behaviour is important.

    Exhibit A: there were reports only a couple of nights ago about drunken British tourists rampaging through Magaluf. The locals were apparently outraged. Well, duh! If a key part of your business model revolves around shipping in drunken louts, and you then open your resort back up to drunken louts, then you should not be surprised if the drunken louts you rely on and want to attract behave like drunken louts. With the best will in the world, they aren't going to magically transform into art connoisseurs and ask very politely, in flawless, unaccented Spanish, to be directed to the nearest gallery. Whilst wearing a mask. Now, are they?
    I have an idea involving a firehose and 60% alcohol......
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,710

    felix said:

    nichomar said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    Probably low, if there is one lesson to be learnt is that the young become the main vector for rising infections. How you contain them is another matter.
    Today's swift and decisive action by Englland is widely criticised as too sudden - no government can win in these situations. I am very annoyed that in my area here in Spain the nightclubs and bars are open without apporopriate compliance with the rules. We've been lucky with infections so far but as we move into August the dangers get worse and worse. We are clearly into a second wave here and the Spanish government is dithering. Catalonia has been more decisive but here in Andalucia I think the tourist lobby is winning out. It will not end well.
    Some of these tourist resorts are playing with fire I think. You understand why they want the tourists back - they're desperate for the cash - but at least some of them rely on exactly the kind of clientele that you do not want when social distancing and restrained, good behaviour is important.

    Exhibit A: there were reports only a couple of nights ago about drunken British tourists rampaging through Magaluf. The locals were apparently outraged. Well, duh! If a key part of your business model revolves around shipping in drunken louts, and you then open your resort back up to drunken louts, then you should not be surprised if the drunken louts you rely on and want to attract behave like drunken louts. With the best will in the world, they aren't going to magically transform into art connoisseurs and ask very politely, in flawless, unaccented Spanish, to be directed to the nearest gallery. Whilst wearing a mask. Now, are they?
    To be fair just after I posted Andalucia announced it is planning to ban street drinking parties [Botellones], limits on night time bars and clubs and general restrictions on movement next week. The detail is going to be interesting. Listen and learn UK!
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    ydoethur said:

    They'd be somewhere ideal to ply the naive or reckless young with drugs.

    Would be?!!!

    Edit - I have, incidentally, no particular objection to people going to nightclubs and enjoying themselves. But not if it’s going to cause a dangerous disease to run rampant in the population.
    You know what I mean. It'll make any existing problems an awful lot worse.

    I share your opinion: if it does finally transpire that we can get away with pretty much everything except for packed out nightclubs, then paying for them to stay shut for another six months or a year is a very modest price to pay.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809

    ydoethur said:

    isam said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
    Well, if nightclubs are a key source of transmission, one suggestion is don’t reopen fecking nightclubs.

    How many people would really miss them? Truthfully?
    Agree. I've been wondering for the last couple of days, whilst the possible causes of the Spanish spike have been debated, whether nightclubs are a key component - although it could also be that the Spaniards are less reticent about going out generally and have more of a culture of eating out, as a consequence of which they're packing out the bars and restaurants in much higher densities? Though someone who's actually familiar with what conditions are like over there at the moment would be better placed to comment.

    Specifically with regard to nightclubs, I have no time for them either but then again I'm a stick-in-the-mud fortysomething who's not exactly part of their target demographic. They are popular with a lot of people and, as with the arts, they should be propped up until it is safe for them to resume normal operations. Apart from anything else, since this has all started I've read more than one piece of comment on the nightclubs to the effect that, if the sector is allowed to collapse, the venues are a prime target to be bought up on the cheap and re-opened later by organised crime. This makes sense. They'd be somewhere ideal to ply the naive or reckless young with drugs.
    Let’s start with the temperature, it’s currently 28 there’s no way you are going to sleep anytime soon. Therefore eating in or out for most starts at 9:30 and goes into the early hours. Groups gather in restaurants, bars and on terraces until 4 or 5 in the morning, the young look for something more exciting so in the absence of discos etc just gather in larger groups. It’s holiday time but there are no fiestas, people are getting together for the first time in months, they hug and kiss. Yes many are bloody irresponsible it would not be too difficult to enjoy life with just a little thought but maybe alcohol is to blame. The R number is still below one, the ICU cases very low and the deaths negligible so maybe some are saying ‘what’s the problem’

    Even if you shut the bars down at 11 people would carry on on their terrace. It’s frustrating to us more elderly locals but that’s how it is. 10,000 people from Madrid on their way to our small town on Friday what On earth could could Go wrong?
  • We might get some new polls this evening :)
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    They aren't. The 7 day moving average lines on your graph show, for hospitals, a drop from 32 to 8, i.e a quartering but, for other settings, a drop from 70 to 35 i.e a halving. Parallel lines on graphs do not represent "equal rates" in terms of percentages, only "equal rates" in terms of numbers.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    Could we be seeing a flat, constant stream of deaths amongst those who have actually died of natural causes, but are being counted as Covid deaths because of the PHE cock-up, plus a number of genuine Covid deaths in the community? That being the case, you'd still expect the total mortality rate for non-hospital deaths to decline in the same manner as the hospital deaths, in line with the decreasing prevalence of the disease.

    If that is indeed the case then, if that trend continues, the hospital deaths will eventually decline to zero (or possibly some very low constant level, corresponding to a remaining background number of cases should the disease not entirely disappear from circulation,) and at about the same time the non-hospital deaths would also then plateau, because a fairly constant number of deaths from natural causes will carry on being attributed to the virus, at least until the frail elderly portion of the cohort that has tested positive in the past has died out?
    Could be.

    I see my role in this to come up with data, not answers. I'm not qualified to *create* the answers. That would require a medical degree. I am qualified to ask questions about the numbers.....
    That's fair comment. I'm certainly not qualified either, but if we refrained from making educated (or sometimes uneducated) guesses then where would PB be?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809

    felix said:

    nichomar said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    Probably low, if there is one lesson to be learnt is that the young become the main vector for rising infections. How you contain them is another matter.
    Today's swift and decisive action by Englland is widely criticised as too sudden - no government can win in these situations. I am very annoyed that in my area here in Spain the nightclubs and bars are open without apporopriate compliance with the rules. We've been lucky with infections so far but as we move into August the dangers get worse and worse. We are clearly into a second wave here and the Spanish government is dithering. Catalonia has been more decisive but here in Andalucia I think the tourist lobby is winning out. It will not end well.
    Some of these tourist resorts are playing with fire I think. You understand why they want the tourists back - they're desperate for the cash - but at least some of them rely on exactly the kind of clientele that you do not want when social distancing and restrained, good behaviour is important.

    Exhibit A: there were reports only a couple of nights ago about drunken British tourists rampaging through Magaluf. The locals were apparently outraged. Well, duh! If a key part of your business model revolves around shipping in drunken louts, and you then open your resort back up to drunken louts, then you should not be surprised if the drunken louts you rely on and want to attract behave like drunken louts. With the best will in the world, they aren't going to magically transform into art connoisseurs and ask very politely, in flawless, unaccented Spanish, to be directed to the nearest gallery. Whilst wearing a mask. Now, are they?
    The vast majority of tourist round me are Spanish with a few British second home owners at present. Benidorm is not yet a hot spot
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    Could we be seeing a flat, constant stream of deaths amongst those who have actually died of natural causes, but are being counted as Covid deaths because of the PHE cock-up, plus a number of genuine Covid deaths in the community? That being the case, you'd still expect the total mortality rate for non-hospital deaths to decline in the same manner as the hospital deaths, in line with the decreasing prevalence of the disease.

    If that is indeed the case then, if that trend continues, the hospital deaths will eventually decline to zero (or possibly some very low constant level, corresponding to a remaining background number of cases should the disease not entirely disappear from circulation,) and at about the same time the non-hospital deaths would also then plateau, because a fairly constant number of deaths from natural causes will carry on being attributed to the virus, at least until the frail elderly portion of the cohort that has tested positive in the past has died out?
    Could be.

    I see my role in this to come up with data, not answers. I'm not qualified to *create* the answers. That would require a medical degree. I am qualified to ask questions about the numbers.....
    That's fair comment. I'm certainly not qualified either, but if we refrained from making educated (or sometimes uneducated) guesses then where would PB be?
    It would be reliant solely on my awesome punning skills and @Cyclefree’s cooking tips.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 251

    The presidency rapidly ages people. I rather hope that Biden will be self-aware enough that if it becomes necessary he would rather retire than in four years time be proud of himself for being able to say "person woman man camera tv"

    What do you mean by "ages"?

    Most heads of government look a lot older after a stint in power than the time they've spent in office. But the only one I'm aware who actually developed clinically-diagnosed dementia in office was Wilson (who did then retire). And, as far as I'm aware, there's not a shred of evidence being PM accelerated his dementia

    FWIW, my own experience is that dementia usually sets in once someone's stopped being active (eg Thatcher and I think Reagan, but lots of people I know socially)

    Is there any evidence the old in office get demented relatively quickly? I'd have said that the evidence from QEII and Benedict XV is that having a real job in extreme old age keeps your brain working.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106
    ydoethur said:

    I think you overstate Labour's unpopularity in the Bay. That is not to say a rainbow coalition of non-Labour AMs will not form the next Government.

    I don’t know. My impression is their support is patchy. I think Labour are in advanced and possibly terminal decay in the north outside Bangor, while in Dyfed-Powys they’ve been weak for years.

    But I would expect a Labour-Plaid coalition next year if only because I cannot see any other route to 30 other than Tory majority (which ain’t happening).

    But I can see Tories - most seats in 2021 (albeit it’s not the likeliest outcome) and taking power in 2025-26.
    The Johnson factor may make Conservatives most seats next year.

    I know, I know, I live in a parallel universe where Johnson appears to be a catastrophe. But he is working class hero catnip to former Labour blue collar voters.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 34,369
    RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.

    Whack-a-mole is entirely appropriate here. Deal with problems as and when they pop up until they stop popping up.
    Of course it is

    This is UK wide and top marks to HMG for taking this decision
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084



    Good analysis by Kinnock I would say.

    So why is he not higher up in the party?

    Sorry to say but I think Kinnock's analysis was only partial. It played to people (like yourself) who already hated the Tories and using Corbyn and Brexit as a scapegoat for the defeat, but a lot of the analysis afterwards by the audience and other panelists touched on a lot of other points that were important too. The House of Cards author had some interesting points.


  • Good analysis by Kinnock I would say.

    So why is he not higher up in the party?

    Sorry to say but I think Kinnock's analysis was only partial. It played to people (like yourself) who already hated the Tories and using Corbyn and Brexit as a scapegoat for the defeat, but a lot of the analysis afterwards by the audience and other panelists touched on a lot of other points that were important too. The House of Cards author had some interesting points.
    They did - and if you read upwards I would say his comments in effect calling Tory voters dumb wasn't good for a Labour MP. I can say those things if I want to, Labour MPs and candidates should most certainly not.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,100
    Flanner said:

    The presidency rapidly ages people. I rather hope that Biden will be self-aware enough that if it becomes necessary he would rather retire than in four years time be proud of himself for being able to say "person woman man camera tv"

    What do you mean by "ages"?

    Most heads of government look a lot older after a stint in power than the time they've spent in office. But the only one I'm aware who actually developed clinically-diagnosed dementia in office was Wilson (who did then retire). And, as far as I'm aware, there's not a shred of evidence being PM accelerated his dementia

    FWIW, my own experience is that dementia usually sets in once someone's stopped being active (eg Thatcher and I think Reagan, but lots of people I know socially)

    Is there any evidence the old in office get demented relatively quickly? I'd have said that the evidence from QEII and Benedict XV is that having a real job in extreme old age keeps your brain working.
    Reagan had it while in office, to the extent his staff seriously considered invoking the 25th Amendment to hand power to Bush. But it wasn’t formally diagnosed until later.
  • isamisam Posts: 33,119
    People who want to criticise him see that huge outlier spike as the norm and the current position, a steady improvement in the long term, as evidence of his doing a bad job/becoming more unpopular.

  • ydoethur said:

    I think you overstate Labour's unpopularity in the Bay. That is not to say a rainbow coalition of non-Labour AMs will not form the next Government.

    I don’t know. My impression is their support is patchy. I think Labour are in advanced and possibly terminal decay in the north outside Bangor, while in Dyfed-Powys they’ve been weak for years.

    But I would expect a Labour-Plaid coalition next year if only because I cannot see any other route to 30 other than Tory majority (which ain’t happening).

    But I can see Tories - most seats in 2021 (albeit it’s not the likeliest outcome) and taking power in 2025-26.
    The Johnson factor may make Conservatives most seats next year.

    I know, I know, I live in a parallel universe where Johnson appears to be a catastrophe. But he is working class hero catnip to former Labour blue collar voters.
    To me it's just like Trump, I cannot understand his appeal at all. That's not to say he's just like Trump as he obviously is not.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 17,898
    ydoethur said:

    alex_ said:

    A week (or is it two?) after an “inquiry” was announced into PHE reporting are we any closer to having clarification on what the daily COVID death figures actually mean? Scotland, NI and Wales have no new deaths today. England has 25 in hospital and 61 in total. Is that actually 25/61 (on S/W/NI reporting basis) is it 0/0 or is it somewhere in between and which is it closer to?

    English non-hospital deaths include all those who have had a positive COVID death, whether or not that was noted on the death certificate. Given the recent falls in deaths, up to half the non-hospital deaths are likely in this category.
    I strongly suspect it could be even more. I did an estimate yesterday using maths and sourced numbers from the public domain and estimated 35 to 70 daily deaths from non COVID causes in care homes would be getting erroneously counted on this basis.
    25 people haven't died in hospital in a long while. 25 reported deaths today. 14 happened in the last week. Zero yesterday

    image

    61 people didn't die in all setting in the UK. 61 were reported today. 44 of whom died in the last week. 11 died yesterday

    image
    The error in the PHE data of counting anyone who has died for any reasons even if they've recovered fully from COVID is in the community death figures (all settings) not in the hospital figures.

    That 25 haven't died in a hospital in a long while, but all settings is so much higher every day, seems to fit my theory does it not?
    Why is the death in others settings falling at a similar rate to the deaths in hospital?

    image
    Could we be seeing a flat, constant stream of deaths amongst those who have actually died of natural causes, but are being counted as Covid deaths because of the PHE cock-up, plus a number of genuine Covid deaths in the community? That being the case, you'd still expect the total mortality rate for non-hospital deaths to decline in the same manner as the hospital deaths, in line with the decreasing prevalence of the disease.

    If that is indeed the case then, if that trend continues, the hospital deaths will eventually decline to zero (or possibly some very low constant level, corresponding to a remaining background number of cases should the disease not entirely disappear from circulation,) and at about the same time the non-hospital deaths would also then plateau, because a fairly constant number of deaths from natural causes will carry on being attributed to the virus, at least until the frail elderly portion of the cohort that has tested positive in the past has died out?
    Could be.

    I see my role in this to come up with data, not answers. I'm not qualified to *create* the answers. That would require a medical degree. I am qualified to ask questions about the numbers.....
    That's fair comment. I'm certainly not qualified either, but if we refrained from making educated (or sometimes uneducated) guesses then where would PB be?
    It would be reliant solely on my awesome punning skills and @Cyclefree’s cooking tips.
    Gardening tips, surely?

    Even my nearest and dearest would not put my cooking at the top of things they love me for.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084
    edited July 25
    Flanner said:

    The presidency rapidly ages people. I rather hope that Biden will be self-aware enough that if it becomes necessary he would rather retire than in four years time be proud of himself for being able to say "person woman man camera tv"

    What do you mean by "ages"?

    Most heads of government look a lot older after a stint in power than the time they've spent in office. But the only one I'm aware who actually developed clinically-diagnosed dementia in office was Wilson (who did then retire). And, as far as I'm aware, there's not a shred of evidence being PM accelerated his dementia

    FWIW, my own experience is that dementia usually sets in once someone's stopped being active (eg Thatcher and I think Reagan, but lots of people I know socially)

    Is there any evidence the old in office get demented relatively quickly? I'd have said that the evidence from QEII and Benedict XV is that having a real job in extreme old age keeps your brain working.
    I mean that the job is [unless your name is Trump and you don't care about it] a very physically and emotionally draining job that requires a lot of time and effort. You only need to look at before and after pictures of PMs and Presidents to see how they age in the job - even May who wasn't there long. And its not simply about appearances, or the natural effect of 3, 4 or 8 years.

    Can Biden cope with the demands of the job? Maybe he can now, but can he in 2 years time? If he can't, I hope he realises that and retires with dignity.

    Edit: PS you name Thatcher and Reagan and there is evidence for both that mental changes began before they retired.
  • isam said:

    People who want to criticise him see that huge outlier spike as the norm and the current position, a steady improvement in the long term, as evidence of his doing a bad job/becoming more unpopular.

    Yeah good point, be interested to see where he is post (if we) No Deal, after we leave the transition period.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 5,206
    nichomar said:

    ydoethur said:

    isam said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
    Well, if nightclubs are a key source of transmission, one suggestion is don’t reopen fecking nightclubs.

    How many people would really miss them? Truthfully?
    Agree. I've been wondering for the last couple of days, whilst the possible causes of the Spanish spike have been debated, whether nightclubs are a key component - although it could also be that the Spaniards are less reticent about going out generally and have more of a culture of eating out, as a consequence of which they're packing out the bars and restaurants in much higher densities? Though someone who's actually familiar with what conditions are like over there at the moment would be better placed to comment.

    Specifically with regard to nightclubs, I have no time for them either but then again I'm a stick-in-the-mud fortysomething who's not exactly part of their target demographic. They are popular with a lot of people and, as with the arts, they should be propped up until it is safe for them to resume normal operations. Apart from anything else, since this has all started I've read more than one piece of comment on the nightclubs to the effect that, if the sector is allowed to collapse, the venues are a prime target to be bought up on the cheap and re-opened later by organised crime. This makes sense. They'd be somewhere ideal to ply the naive or reckless young with drugs.
    Let’s start with the temperature, it’s currently 28 there’s no way you are going to sleep anytime soon. Therefore eating in or out for most starts at 9:30 and goes into the early hours. Groups gather in restaurants, bars and on terraces until 4 or 5 in the morning, the young look for something more exciting so in the absence of discos etc just gather in larger groups. It’s holiday time but there are no fiestas, people are getting together for the first time in months, they hug and kiss. Yes many are bloody irresponsible it would not be too difficult to enjoy life with just a little thought but maybe alcohol is to blame. The R number is still below one, the ICU cases very low and the deaths negligible so maybe some are saying ‘what’s the problem’

    Even if you shut the bars down at 11 people would carry on on their terrace. It’s frustrating to us more elderly locals but that’s how it is. 10,000 people from Madrid on their way to our small town on Friday what On earth could could Go wrong?
    Hmmmm... I think we all well remember that there have been similar concerns about mass gatherings over here as well - notably the great Bournemouth and Lulworth Cove beach panics - but this theory does sound as though it could be plausible nonetheless. Little knots of sunbathers will consist largely of family household groups and aren't going to be interacting with one another. Sounds like there's a lot more socialising going on in this instance.

    I wonder if there have been any clusters of cases traced back to illegal raves in this country?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:


    Agree with the "do no harm" rationale, esp. when Biden is already poised to make history, by nominating the first woman who realistically could be the next Vice President. (Walter Mondal made history with Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, but the ticket was NOT a good bet, as ultimate Reagan-Bush 49-state victory showed.

    Especially since there’s a far from trivial chance she could also be the first female President.
    IF you are talking about after a Biden term or two, maybe.

    Personally think the notion that Uncle Joe is so frail and weak he'd not last four years is simply a GOP Great White Hope.
    Once Biden has dislodged Trump from the Oval Office he will have served his purpose. At some point before long he should get a dignified retirement.
    You mean like Pope Emeritus Benny?
    Indeed.

    Of course all former Presidents are automatically Emeritus, they all retain the title President until the day they die (and I guess past then too even). Hence Obama's title is still President Obama. Even if Biden retires he'll still be President Biden.

    Its a shame that even if he loses the tangerine one will still be President Trump for as long as he's on this earth.
    I take it that you can’t be stripped of the honorary title if you’re convicted of an offence? Not of course that it’s ever been tested thanks to Gerald Ford.
    The Pope Benny bit was sarcasm. Up until today, Nixon is only example of president resigning mid-term. Even IF Tricky Dick had been tried, convicted, sentenced and jailed for his crimes, he'd still have been Mr. President in strictly honorific sense. Like Lord Archer is still a Lord.

    IF Biden is elected, you can bet your sweet bippy that he will NOT be nudged, pushed or persuaded to willingly step down. VERY un-Presidential, and only a cornered rat like Nixon would even consider it.

    Look at how Woodrow Wilson clung to office after his stroke or whatever it was. Ditto Winston Churchill.

    Would also point to example of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, whom top Liberal Party colleagues Asquith, Grey & Haldane (Relugas House compact) tried to kick upstairs in 1905 when Libs took power after a decade in opposition - they wanted to make C-B an honorary PM with the real power in their hands.

    Turned out that Sir Henry was made of sterner stuff than they realized. After discussing the situation with his wife - who told him to man up - he politely refused their kind offer, out-maneuvered them, and lead them and their party to a landslide election triumph in 1906 - the Liberal's last hurrah.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106

    RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.

    Whack-a-mole is entirely appropriate here. Deal with problems as and when they pop up until they stop popping up.
    Of course it is

    This is UK wide and top marks to HMG for taking this decision
    For goodness sake, Spain was on the radar for 14 days quarantine remaining in place when it was lifted elsewhere (and at the last minute Span). Johnson is behind the 8 ball again.

    Take the blinkers off!
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 2,273

    RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.

    Whack-a-mole is entirely appropriate here. Deal with problems as and when they pop up until they stop popping up.
    Of course it is

    This is UK wide and top marks to HMG for taking this decision
    For goodness sake, Spain was on the radar for 14 days quarantine remaining in place when it was lifted elsewhere (and at the last minute Span). Johnson is behind the 8 ball again.

    Take the blinkers off!
    I thought Spain with all its mask wearing would be safe - are we sure mask wearing does anything?
  • https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53536471

    Wiley is being cancelled, do we support this decision or is he entitled to free speech?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084
    isam said:

    People who want to criticise him see that huge outlier spike as the norm and the current position, a steady improvement in the long term, as evidence of his doing a bad job/becoming more unpopular.

    There was a rally to the flag bounce, followed by an unwind and reversion to mean.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,809

    RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.

    Whack-a-mole is entirely appropriate here. Deal with problems as and when they pop up until they stop popping up.
    Of course it is

    This is UK wide and top marks to HMG for taking this decision
    For goodness sake, Spain was on the radar for 14 days quarantine remaining in place when it was lifted elsewhere (and at the last minute Span). Johnson is behind the 8 ball again.

    Take the blinkers off!
    I thought Spain with all its mask wearing would be safe - are we sure mask wearing does anything?
    Mask wearing is a response not a cause
  • RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.

    Whack-a-mole is entirely appropriate here. Deal with problems as and when they pop up until they stop popping up.
    Of course it is

    This is UK wide and top marks to HMG for taking this decision
    For goodness sake, Spain was on the radar for 14 days quarantine remaining in place when it was lifted elsewhere (and at the last minute Span). Johnson is behind the 8 ball again.

    Take the blinkers off!
    I thought Spain with all its mask wearing would be safe - are we sure mask wearing does anything?
    Surely Spain is an indication of how close we could be to a second wave, it's very important we don't open up any further for the moment.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 37,084

    RH1992 said:

    But to me this is how the system should be working. Spain reports a spike and we act accordingly and swiftly. If we dithered then we'd be making the same mistakes as at the start of the pandemic.

    Most holiday providers have COVID guarantees now but there's always going to be some who lose out, it's a risk you take when you go abroad right now.

    Whack-a-mole is entirely appropriate here. Deal with problems as and when they pop up until they stop popping up.
    Of course it is

    This is UK wide and top marks to HMG for taking this decision
    For goodness sake, Spain was on the radar for 14 days quarantine remaining in place when it was lifted elsewhere (and at the last minute Span). Johnson is behind the 8 ball again.

    Take the blinkers off!
    I thought Spain with all its mask wearing would be safe - are we sure mask wearing does anything?
    Yes mask wearing helps protect others. It is not a panacea, but nor does it need to be. Every little helps.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106

    ydoethur said:

    I think you overstate Labour's unpopularity in the Bay. That is not to say a rainbow coalition of non-Labour AMs will not form the next Government.

    I don’t know. My impression is their support is patchy. I think Labour are in advanced and possibly terminal decay in the north outside Bangor, while in Dyfed-Powys they’ve been weak for years.

    But I would expect a Labour-Plaid coalition next year if only because I cannot see any other route to 30 other than Tory majority (which ain’t happening).

    But I can see Tories - most seats in 2021 (albeit it’s not the likeliest outcome) and taking power in 2025-26.
    The Johnson factor may make Conservatives most seats next year.

    I know, I know, I live in a parallel universe where Johnson appears to be a catastrophe. But he is working class hero catnip to former Labour blue collar voters.
    To me it's just like Trump, I cannot understand his appeal at all. That's not to say he's just like Trump as he obviously is not.
    Johnson's star will fall, although it is hard to see that happening any time soon when he is given a free pass for disaster after disaster.
  • https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anneliese-dodds-putting-up-taxes-would-not-be-sensible-we-must-go-for-growth-tmjccfb8p

    Labour has come to a view on taxation then. This is sure to piss off the left.

    Anneliese Dodds: Putting up taxes would not be sensible, we must go for growth
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 2,273

    nichomar said:

    ydoethur said:

    isam said:

    Spain had a very strict lockdown and a phased return to normality. We could be looking and learning from what is happening there now with Covid's return given that our cycle is a few weeks' behind their one. What are the chances?

    What do you think we should do?
    Well, if nightclubs are a key source of transmission, one suggestion is don’t reopen fecking nightclubs.

    How many people would really miss them? Truthfully?
    Agree. I've been wondering for the last couple of days, whilst the possible causes of the Spanish spike have been debated, whether nightclubs are a key component - although it could also be that the Spaniards are less reticent about going out generally and have more of a culture of eating out, as a consequence of which they're packing out the bars and restaurants in much higher densities? Though someone who's actually familiar with what conditions are like over there at the moment would be better placed to comment.

    Specifically with regard to nightclubs, I have no time for them either but then again I'm a stick-in-the-mud fortysomething who's not exactly part of their target demographic. They are popular with a lot of people and, as with the arts, they should be propped up until it is safe for them to resume normal operations. Apart from anything else, since this has all started I've read more than one piece of comment on the nightclubs to the effect that, if the sector is allowed to collapse, the venues are a prime target to be bought up on the cheap and re-opened later by organised crime. This makes sense. They'd be somewhere ideal to ply the naive or reckless young with drugs.
    Let’s start with the temperature, it’s currently 28 there’s no way you are going to sleep anytime soon. Therefore eating in or out for most starts at 9:30 and goes into the early hours. Groups gather in restaurants, bars and on terraces until 4 or 5 in the morning, the young look for something more exciting so in the absence of discos etc just gather in larger groups. It’s holiday time but there are no fiestas, people are getting together for the first time in months, they hug and kiss. Yes many are bloody irresponsible it would not be too difficult to enjoy life with just a little thought but maybe alcohol is to blame. The R number is still below one, the ICU cases very low and the deaths negligible so maybe some are saying ‘what’s the problem’

    Even if you shut the bars down at 11 people would carry on on their terrace. It’s frustrating to us more elderly locals but that’s how it is. 10,000 people from Madrid on their way to our small town on Friday what On earth could could Go wrong?
    Hmmmm... I think we all well remember that there have been similar concerns about mass gatherings over here as well - notably the great Bournemouth and Lulworth Cove beach panics - but this theory does sound as though it could be plausible nonetheless. Little knots of sunbathers will consist largely of family household groups and aren't going to be interacting with one another. Sounds like there's a lot more socialising going on in this instance.

    I wonder if there have been any clusters of cases traced back to illegal raves in this country?
    If we are not careful we will nanny ourselves back into the dark ages.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 1,114
    ydoethur said:

    Flanner said:

    The presidency rapidly ages people. I rather hope that Biden will be self-aware enough that if it becomes necessary he would rather retire than in four years time be proud of himself for being able to say "person woman man camera tv"

    What do you mean by "ages"?

    Most heads of government look a lot older after a stint in power than the time they've spent in office. But the only one I'm aware who actually developed clinically-diagnosed dementia in office was Wilson (who did then retire). And, as far as I'm aware, there's not a shred of evidence being PM accelerated his dementia

    FWIW, my own experience is that dementia usually sets in once someone's stopped being active (eg Thatcher and I think Reagan, but lots of people I know socially)

    Is there any evidence the old in office get demented relatively quickly? I'd have said that the evidence from QEII and Benedict XV is that having a real job in extreme old age keeps your brain working.
    Reagan had it while in office, to the extent his staff seriously considered invoking the 25th Amendment to hand power to Bush. But it wasn’t formally diagnosed until later.
    IIRC the potential invoking of 25th amendment occurred in immediate aftermath of attempted assassination, when Reagan was recovering from gunshot wound. NOT in the later part of his 2nd term (post Iran-Contra scandal).
Sign In or Register to comment.