Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » WH2020: We need a market on who will President on January 21st

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited July 31 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » WH2020: We need a market on who will President on January 21st – the day after inauguration

Following his Tweet yesterday suggesting that the Presidential election on November 3rd should be postponed there has been a huge amount of speculation about what Trump will do if if he doesn’t win re-election which based on current polling looks very unlikely.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,764
    edited July 31
    Don't see it.

    There is no power to cancel an election in the Constitution.

    He can talk about it all he likes - but there is nothing that even the most partisan can build a legal argument on.

    He can say "I am the President" - but if the election goes against him, he automatically ceases to become President in January.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,928
    What on earth has he had done to himself. It looks like someone has drawn a face on a tick.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    No.

    If he even hinted he refuses to budge, even the Republican senate would impeach him on a charge of treason.

    Some things are sacred to Americans - the constitution being one. And even if it isn't sacred to all of them, it will be sacred to enough of them.

    And that's even before we consider that any senator who refused to vote to remove a PResident trying to hang on to office is guilty of breaking their oaths and therefore could themselves be put on trial for treason.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665
    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,711
    It will surely be Biden - which for the world of politics - gives a whole new level for the notion of the 'least worst' option. Fortunately he may not last the 4 years so hopefully the VP choice wil be better!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 82,942
    Lock him up!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 34,309
    FPT: Telegraph seem to be using the local authority area data from PHE.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 10,739
    FPT it took me a moment to work out who this "Catharine Hoey" getting a peerage was...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 60,345
    Pelosi becomes the actual president I believe if Trump refuses to budge. If he's lost, he's not president on Jan 21st.
    Betfair will have settled on Biden by this point as he'll be projected president via ECV.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,069
    The 20th Amendment to the Constitution has something to say about this:

    Section 1.

    The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 5,106

    Don't see it.

    There is no power to cancel an election in the Constitution.

    He can talk about it all he likes - but there is nothing that even the most partisan can build a legal argument on.

    He can say "I am the President" - but if the election goes against him, he automatically ceases to become President in January.

    Presidential Emergency Powers?

    Taking control of the internet, military boots on the streets. The conditions for voting Biden could be less than optimal.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    The law and order groups - the police, the army, the CIA, the FBI - simply wouldn't obey him. Again, remember their oaths are to uphold the law of the United States, the most important of those laws being the Constitution.

    America is a troubled democracy, but it's not gone that far.

    Part of me is almost hoping he does try this, so he can be arrested and quietly locked away for the rest of his natural span where he can do no more trouble.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 7,372
    A strongman is only strong whilst winning.
    Lose and power will drain quickly. Especially if he loses both Houses.
    Under such a scenario Republicans will give his barmy ideas a wide berth.
    Problem is if it is disputed.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,155

    FPT it took me a moment to work out who this "Catharine Hoey" getting a peerage was...

    I think it was for services to fox hunting.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,661
    edited July 31

    FPT: Telegraph seem to be using the local authority area data from PHE.

    From the article:

    The latest data from Public Health England shows the rate of infection is now above 40 per 100,000 people in Oldham, Bradford, Pendle and Trafford in the week to July 27 as cases continue to rise.

    The rate in Calderdale has sprung up from 20.8 to 33.6 in the space of a week and from 13.9 to 25.9 in Manchester.


    The headline was of course about the rural areas that only had four cases per 10,000.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 82,942
    DavidL said:

    Oh good a new thread where I can spell copyright correctly.

    Blame autocorrect.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    Pulpstar said:

    Pelosi becomes the actual president I believe if Trump refuses to budge. If he's lost, he's not president on Jan 21st.
    Betfair will have settled on Biden by this point as he'll be projected president via ECV.

    I think that only happens if the EC has not elected a president by then.

    If the EC has met, and elected Biden, he becomes President. All he needs is a judge to administer the oath of office.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 60,345
    edited July 31
    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    Yeah the Mitch McConnells of this world and heads of the Air Force, Navy, Army and so on won't consider him Commander in Chief on the 21st if he's lost.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 82,942
    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,661
    edited July 31

    The 20th Amendment to the Constitution has something to say about this:

    Section 1.

    The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

    Yeah, without a constitutional amendment it is hard to see him going beyond that date if he isn't voted in by the electoral college.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665

    DavidL said:

    Oh good a new thread where I can spell copyright correctly.

    Blame autocorrect.
    That proves I’m too hot to work. I didn’t even think about that.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Did he have a big cock?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Oh good a new thread where I can spell copyright correctly.

    Blame autocorrect.
    That proves I’m too hot to work. I didn’t even think about that.
    I've been struggling to concentrate today as well.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 60,345
    dixiedean said:

    A strongman is only strong whilst winning.
    Lose and power will drain quickly. Especially if he loses both Houses.
    Under such a scenario Republicans will give his barmy ideas a wide berth.
    Problem is if it is disputed.

    He's got the right to dispute the result, even take it to SCOTUS should he wish as Gore (Or was it Bush ?) did in 2000. It'll be settled by the 20th though. And that result is final.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 26,233
    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 82,942
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    Yeah the Mitch McConnells of this world and heads of the Air Force, Navy, Army and so on won't consider him Commander in Chief on the 21st if he's lost.
    You sure about that? IIRC the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs joined Trump on his recent controversial walk to church.

    Something he now regrets.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 82,942

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    The power of pardons?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    A strongman is only strong whilst winning.
    Lose and power will drain quickly. Especially if he loses both Houses.
    Under such a scenario Republicans will give his barmy ideas a wide berth.
    Problem is if it is disputed.

    He's got the right to dispute the result, even take it to SCOTUS should he wish as Gore (Or was it Bush ?) did in 2000. It'll be settled by the 20th though. And that result is final.
    Gore.

    But in that case, because there were problems the SCOTUS agree to hear the case.

    If Trump is just trying to drag things out after losing every state bar Montana, they will tell him to do one.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,764
    RobD said:

    FPT: Telegraph seem to be using the local authority area data from PHE.

    From the article:

    The latest data from Public Health England shows the rate of infection is now above 40 per 100,000 people in Oldham, Bradford, Pendle and Trafford in the week to July 27 as cases continue to rise.

    The rate in Calderdale has sprung up from 20.8 to 33.6 in the space of a week and from 13.9 to 25.9 in Manchester.


    The headline was of course about the rural areas that only had four cases per 10,000.
    That seems to match my daily data
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,198

    FPT it took me a moment to work out who this "Catharine Hoey" getting a peerage was...

    Getting a WHAT?
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 757
    DavidL said:

    Oh good a new thread where I can spell copyright correctly.

    You wouldn't steal a car......

    Oh wait. I'm from Liverpool. Of course I would.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    The law and order groups - the police, the army, the CIA, the FBI - simply wouldn't obey him. Again, remember their oaths are to uphold the law of the United States, the most important of those laws being the Constitution.

    America is a troubled democracy, but it's not gone that far.

    Part of me is almost hoping he does try this, so he can be arrested and quietly locked away for the rest of his natural span where he can do no more trouble.
    Indeed. It’s not 3rd January we need to worry about, it’s the election in November. The voter suppression techniques that may be attempted in response to the virus are a much greater risk.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 60,345

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    Yeah the Mitch McConnells of this world and heads of the Air Force, Navy, Army and so on won't consider him Commander in Chief on the 21st if he's lost.
    You sure about that? IIRC the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs joined Trump on his recent controversial walk to church.

    Something he now regrets.
    Trump is still Commander in Chief right now though, if he ordered a pre-emptive strike on Pyongyang, the military would be expected to follow through with it. If he loses the election though, noones going to follow his orders.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,764

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    Yeah the Mitch McConnells of this world and heads of the Air Force, Navy, Army and so on won't consider him Commander in Chief on the 21st if he's lost.
    You sure about that? IIRC the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs joined Trump on his recent controversial walk to church.

    Something he now regrets.
    The public expression of that regret tells a tale, just by itself.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,198

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Could be nasty if they object.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 26,233

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    The power of pardons?
    For a few of the immediate henchmen, yes. But they'll be outcasts too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    edited July 31
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    The law and order groups - the police, the army, the CIA, the FBI - simply wouldn't obey him. Again, remember their oaths are to uphold the law of the United States, the most important of those laws being the Constitution.

    America is a troubled democracy, but it's not gone that far.

    Part of me is almost hoping he does try this, so he can be arrested and quietly locked away for the rest of his natural span where he can do no more trouble.
    Indeed. It’s not 3rd January we need to worry about, it’s the election in November. The voter suppression techniques that may be attempted in response to the virus are a much greater risk.
    Yes, that makes sense. He's quite capable of trying to rig the election.

    But even dictators usually give up when they've lost elections (especially elections they've rigged). Mugabe was a dazzling exception but does anyone think even Maduro or Putin would survive an election defeat? Apart from anything else, they would look like losers and their supporters would run like rabbits to whoever could protect them.

    So in America, with independent courts and a separate elected assembly, plus a military with a strong commitment to upholding the Constitution, it just isn't going to happen.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,098
    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    A strongman is only strong whilst winning.
    Lose and power will drain quickly. Especially if he loses both Houses.
    Under such a scenario Republicans will give his barmy ideas a wide berth.
    Problem is if it is disputed.

    He's got the right to dispute the result, even take it to SCOTUS should he wish as Gore (Or was it Bush ?) did in 2000. It'll be settled by the 20th though. And that result is final.
    Gore.

    But in that case, because there were problems the SCOTUS agree to hear the case.

    If Trump is just trying to drag things out after losing every state bar Montana, they will tell him to do one.
    But what happens if Biden hasnt realised he's won ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,661

    RobD said:

    FPT: Telegraph seem to be using the local authority area data from PHE.

    From the article:

    The latest data from Public Health England shows the rate of infection is now above 40 per 100,000 people in Oldham, Bradford, Pendle and Trafford in the week to July 27 as cases continue to rise.

    The rate in Calderdale has sprung up from 20.8 to 33.6 in the space of a week and from 13.9 to 25.9 in Manchester.


    The headline was of course about the rural areas that only had four cases per 10,000.
    That seems to match my daily data
    Doubled in the space of a week seems appropriate to trigger a reaction.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,198
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    Yeah the Mitch McConnells of this world and heads of the Air Force, Navy, Army and so on won't consider him Commander in Chief on the 21st if he's lost.
    You sure about that? IIRC the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs joined Trump on his recent controversial walk to church.

    Something he now regrets.
    Trump is still Commander in Chief right now though, if he ordered a pre-emptive strike on Pyongyang, the military would be expected to follow through with it. If he loses the election though, noones going to follow his orders.
    Isn't there something about legitimate orders?

    Are we looking at the equivalent of the Curragh Mutiny, which changed the Governments policy. Allegedly, anyway.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 46,964
    edited July 31
    'A lot' of British Muslims have not taken the threat of coronavirus 'seriously enough' ...bloody racists...says Bradford Mosque leader...ohhh...

    ---------

    We lost a member of our congregation two weeks ago and there were 50 people gathered at his house to express their sympathies.’ A single road in Bradford registered an astonishing 17 coronavirus cases within six days, it has emerged.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8580399/Muslim-leaders-condemn-minute-lockdown-announcement-eve-Eid-abuse-power.html
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 4,000
    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    The point of Trump is something that will keep historians gainfully employed for decades during which he will hopefully be seen to have been an increasingly odd aberration.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    edited July 31

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    Yeah the Mitch McConnells of this world and heads of the Air Force, Navy, Army and so on won't consider him Commander in Chief on the 21st if he's lost.
    You sure about that? IIRC the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs joined Trump on his recent controversial walk to church.

    Something he now regrets.
    Trump is still Commander in Chief right now though, if he ordered a pre-emptive strike on Pyongyang, the military would be expected to follow through with it. If he loses the election though, noones going to follow his orders.
    Isn't there something about legitimate orders?

    Are we looking at the equivalent of the Curragh Mutiny, which changed the Governments policy. Allegedly, anyway.
    Curragh was weird, because the officers concerned were asked what they would do if given a choice between marching on Belfast to restore order or resigning their commissions.

    To which they replied, they would resign their commissions.

    What if you are ordered to go to Belfast to restore order?

    Ah, that's different, said the officers. Then we'd follow orders.

    But because Seeley was the second most useless drunken twat in the cabinet, he only heard the first part and panicked.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 2,187
    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Why wonder, it isn't going to happen for Farage , and Corbyn would refuse one.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 907
    edited July 31
    So today we had 9 deaths in hospital yet 120 in all settings? PHE is beyond parody now.
    The number of people in hospital in England has gone down by 28 in a day to 807.

    My personal favourite stat, on the 29th July 64 people were admitted to hospital in Wales with Covid yet only 23 in England. Now what are the chances of that??

    The stats are pure nonsense.

    https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/healthcare
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 2,809
    Ian Botham?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,661

    Ian Botham?

    That's Lord Botham to you. :p
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 15,267
    edited July 31

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    Tom Cotton has set himself up as continuity Trump for when Trump loses.

    I would back him for Republican 2024 nominee right now @50
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,198
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    K'nell Corbyn's not getting a peerage as well, is he?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 60,345
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    The law and order groups - the police, the army, the CIA, the FBI - simply wouldn't obey him. Again, remember their oaths are to uphold the law of the United States, the most important of those laws being the Constitution.

    America is a troubled democracy, but it's not gone that far.

    Part of me is almost hoping he does try this, so he can be arrested and quietly locked away for the rest of his natural span where he can do no more trouble.
    Indeed. It’s not 3rd January we need to worry about, it’s the election in November. The voter suppression techniques that may be attempted in response to the virus are a much greater risk.
    Yes, that makes sense. He's quite capable of trying to rig the election.

    But even dictators usually give up when they've lost elections (especially elections they've rigged). Mugabe was a dazzling exception but does anyone think even Maduro or Putin would survive an election defeat? Apart from anything else, they would look like losers and their supporters would run like rabbits to whoever could protect them.

    So in America, with independent courts and a separate elected assembly, plus a military with a strong commitment to upholding the Constitution, it just isn't going to happen.
    The USA has particularly strong safeguards against dictatorship I think.
    It's a two party system where neither party ever gets particularly weak - certainly at the moment both parties are in reasonable health; it's enshrined in the constitution (Which is taken very very seriously by those that matter) that noone can be president for more than 8 years. The Supreme Court and both houses are independent of the President - their SC can't be undone by an act of parliament as ours could potentially be and their elections have a history of being utterly invioble even when one could argue they don't need to take place as there is a pandemic or world war (late twenties, early 40s) on.

    It'd be easier to pull off in this country quite frankly.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,098
    DavidL said:

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    The point of Trump is something that will keep historians gainfully employed for decades during which he will hopefully be seen to have been an increasingly odd aberration.
    hes simply the touchstone for a reaction to globalism. If it wasnt Trump it would be someone else. The more curious question is why this reaction is coming from the right rather than the left. The left has given up on defending workers and jobs which has been its traditional raison detre
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    K'nell Corbyn's not getting a peerage as well, is he?
    No, sorry if I alarmed you.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Could be nasty if they object.
    Probably too scared though. You know what they are like.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 2,809
    edited July 31
    RobD said:

    Ian Botham?

    That's Lord Botham to you. :p
    What trick question in the sporting round of a pub quiz is Botham the answer to?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 41,072
    Daniel Moylan (another contemporary of Philip & Theresa May) on the peerage list too. Fun that Frank Field. Kate Hoey, Ian Austin, Gisela Stuart and John Woodcock were not nominated by Corbyn!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 15,267
    DavidL said:

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    The point of Trump is something that will keep historians gainfully employed for decades during which he will hopefully be seen to have been an increasingly odd aberration.
    The reason why I started betting on Trump for the Republican nomination back in late 2015 was that he was plainly very popular with Republican voters.

    The desperate but understandable desire to view him as an aberration rather than a symptom is a massive mistake.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 12,809
    Not going down this rabbit hole. The President on 21st January 2021 will be Joe Biden. Provided that Joe Biden still walks among us on that day.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665

    So today we had 9 deaths in hospital yet 120 in all settings? PHE is beyond parody now.
    The number of people in hospital in England has gone down by 28 in a day to 807.

    My personal favourite stat, on the 29th July 64 people were admitted to hospital in Wales with Covid yet only 23 in England. Now what are the chances of that??

    The stats are pure nonsense.

    https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/healthcare

    I’ve been moaning about this for a while. The statistics on which decisions are being made are indeed nonsensical. But what else do we have?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic I just can’t see this. Trump is mad enough but too many he would need to pull off such a thing have too much to lose. Look how Republicans dismissed his proposal that the election be postponed out of hand.

    The law and order groups - the police, the army, the CIA, the FBI - simply wouldn't obey him. Again, remember their oaths are to uphold the law of the United States, the most important of those laws being the Constitution.

    America is a troubled democracy, but it's not gone that far.

    Part of me is almost hoping he does try this, so he can be arrested and quietly locked away for the rest of his natural span where he can do no more trouble.
    Indeed. It’s not 3rd January we need to worry about, it’s the election in November. The voter suppression techniques that may be attempted in response to the virus are a much greater risk.
    Yes, that makes sense. He's quite capable of trying to rig the election.

    But even dictators usually give up when they've lost elections (especially elections they've rigged). Mugabe was a dazzling exception but does anyone think even Maduro or Putin would survive an election defeat? Apart from anything else, they would look like losers and their supporters would run like rabbits to whoever could protect them.

    So in America, with independent courts and a separate elected assembly, plus a military with a strong commitment to upholding the Constitution, it just isn't going to happen.
    The USA has particularly strong safeguards against dictatorship I think.
    It's a two party system where neither party ever gets particularly weak - certainly at the moment both parties are in reasonable health; it's enshrined in the constitution (Which is taken very very seriously by those that matter) that noone can be president for more than 8 years. The Supreme Court and both houses are independent of the President - their SC can't be undone by an act of parliament as ours could potentially be and their elections have a history of being utterly invioble even when one could argue they don't need to take place as there is a pandemic or world war (late twenties, early 40s) on.

    It'd be easier to pull off in this country quite frankly.
    Yes, there are very few controls on Prime Ministers. They have extraordinary prerogative power and very few actual restraints. One key difference I suppose is that they can be instantly removed, but they only have to prorogue parliament and even that power vanishes.

    One minor quibble - under the Constitution it's 10 years maximum, not eight years.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 2,187
    edited July 31
    DavidL said:

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Could be nasty if they object.
    Probably too scared though. You know what they are like.

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Pray humour me..., where do you find these articles? Is your search engine set to find:-" man, sex, chickens"?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 41,072
    It's fun listening to interviewers going out in search of enraged voters in Vox Pops, finding most people are supportive of the government's action. Another confirmation that Twitter ≠ The Real World
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,546

    DavidL said:

    My view is that at soon as he loses, virtually the entire Republican establishment will move rapidly to distance themselves from him. What is the point of Trump if he's not even a winner?

    The point of Trump is something that will keep historians gainfully employed for decades during which he will hopefully be seen to have been an increasingly odd aberration.
    hes simply the touchstone for a reaction to globalism. If it wasnt Trump it would be someone else. The more curious question is why this reaction is coming from the right rather than the left. The left has given up on defending workers and jobs which has been its traditional raison detre
    It was very close to being Trump v Sanders in 2016. I don’t know which way that would have gone.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 2,809

    DavidL said:

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Could be nasty if they object.
    Probably too scared though. You know what they are like.

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Pray humour me..., where do you find these articles? Is your search engine set to find man, sex, chickens?
    Did you not see his user name? Why do you think those eagles are screaming?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104

    DavidL said:

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Could be nasty if they object.
    Probably too scared though. You know what they are like.

    Sounds like fowl play.

    Man pleads guilty to having sex with chickens.

    https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/18620366.man-pleads-guilty-sex-chickens/

    Pray humour me..., where do you find these articles? Is your search engine set to find:-" man, sex, chickens"?
    He's a lawyer. He googled to find who was convicted of indecent assault by the beaks and came up with an unexpected answer.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 23,049
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    Or perhaps the Unnatural History Museum ?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,155
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 1,825

    Daniel Moylan (another contemporary of Philip & Theresa May) on the peerage list too. Fun that Frank Field. Kate Hoey, Ian Austin, Gisela Stuart and John Woodcock were not nominated by Corbyn!


    Pretty good list all in all. Charles Moore is a bonus.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 8,297

    It's fun listening to interviewers going out in search of enraged voters in Vox Pops, finding most people are supportive of the government's action. Another confirmation that Twitter ≠ The Real World
    Well yes, for all the bluster about the government putting the information out wrongly. The information got out there and people now know it.

    People very rarely care about process. They care about safety, and the government is trying to make things safer.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,661
    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
    Probably says more about those within Westminster than without.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 907
    DavidL said:

    So today we had 9 deaths in hospital yet 120 in all settings? PHE is beyond parody now.
    The number of people in hospital in England has gone down by 28 in a day to 807.

    My personal favourite stat, on the 29th July 64 people were admitted to hospital in Wales with Covid yet only 23 in England. Now what are the chances of that??

    The stats are pure nonsense.

    https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/healthcare

    I’ve been moaning about this for a while. The statistics on which decisions are being made are indeed nonsensical. But what else do we have?
    There is only one bit of reliable data, NHS deaths in England. It is comprehensive and correct. Unfortunately it does not get anywhere near enough coverage.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 2,809
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
    Probably says more about those within Westminster than without.
    It was the ones without Westminster that made sure he never got there.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,155
    edited July 31

    It's fun listening to interviewers going out in search of enraged voters in Vox Pops, finding most people are supportive of the government's action. Another confirmation that Twitter ≠ The Real World
    Is this another of those definitions of people who are rich = those who have or are earning more money than I have/do?

    Where were the respondents? On the South Coast?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 6,454
    "Big Tech is suppressing science
    Social-media platforms are cracking down on anyone who challenges the Covid narrative.
    Liam Deacon"

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/07/30/big-tech-is-suppressing-science/
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,665
    algarkirk said:

    Daniel Moylan (another contemporary of Philip & Theresa May) on the peerage list too. Fun that Frank Field. Kate Hoey, Ian Austin, Gisela Stuart and John Woodcock were not nominated by Corbyn!


    Pretty good list all in all. Charles Moore is a bonus.
    Claire Fox is an interesting choice.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,155
    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
    So what? He achieved, via political campaigning, a seismic change in British politics against just about everyone's expectations.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 20,282
    DavidL said:

    So today we had 9 deaths in hospital yet 120 in all settings? PHE is beyond parody now.
    The number of people in hospital in England has gone down by 28 in a day to 807.

    My personal favourite stat, on the 29th July 64 people were admitted to hospital in Wales with Covid yet only 23 in England. Now what are the chances of that??

    The stats are pure nonsense.

    https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/healthcare

    I’ve been moaning about this for a while. The statistics on which decisions are being made are indeed nonsensical. But what else do we have?
    The death statistics are a nonsense, but the testing and new case numbers by event day aren't. There's very high quality data that the main decisions are being made on. Afaik the government has disregarded the PHE death statistics for decision making and is now using the ONS series instead which runs about a week behind with almost complete data and two weeks behind with complete data.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 23,049
    The good news is that this really does not seem the most difficult virus to develop an effective vaccine against. Here's yet another one, along with clear evidence of neutralising antibodies (in mice).

    Replication-competent vesicular stomatitis virus vaccine vector protects against SARS-CoV-2-mediated pathogenesis in mice
    https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(20)30421-2
    Previously, we developed a replication-competent vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) expressing a modified form of the SARS-CoV-2 spike gene in place of the native glycoprotein gene (VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2). Here, we show that vaccination with VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 generates neutralizing immune responses and protects mice from SARS-CoV-2. Immunization of mice with VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 elicits high antibody titers that neutralize SARS-CoV-2 and target the receptor binding domain that engages human angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE2). Upon challenge with a human isolate of SARS-CoV-2, mice expressing human ACE2 and immunized with VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 show profoundly reduced viral infection and inflammation in the lung, indicating protection against pneumonia. Passive transfer of sera from VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2-immunized animals also protects naïve mice from SARS-CoV-2 challenge. These data support development of VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 as an attenuated, replication-competent vaccine against SARS-CoV-2.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 907
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    So today we had 9 deaths in hospital yet 120 in all settings? PHE is beyond parody now.
    The number of people in hospital in England has gone down by 28 in a day to 807.

    My personal favourite stat, on the 29th July 64 people were admitted to hospital in Wales with Covid yet only 23 in England. Now what are the chances of that??

    The stats are pure nonsense.

    https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/healthcare

    I’ve been moaning about this for a while. The statistics on which decisions are being made are indeed nonsensical. But what else do we have?
    The death statistics are a nonsense, but the testing and new case numbers by event day aren't. There's very high quality data that the main decisions are being made on. Afaik the government has disregarded the PHE death statistics for decision making and is now using the ONS series instead which runs about a week behind with almost complete data and two weeks behind with complete data.
    The hospital admission data showing three times as many hospital admissions for Covid in Wales than in England?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 15,267

    algarkirk said:

    Daniel Moylan (another contemporary of Philip & Theresa May) on the peerage list too. Fun that Frank Field. Kate Hoey, Ian Austin, Gisela Stuart and John Woodcock were not nominated by Corbyn!


    Pretty good list all in all. Charles Moore is a bonus.
    Claire Fox is an interesting choice.
    Fuck me. That is genuinely disgusting.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 4,000
    Mr May has been knighted.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 31,665
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    So easy to confuse those institutions, even on a less warm day. I think that the key is to remember that the Natural History Museum is genuinely interesting.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
    So what? He achieved, via political campaigning, a seismic change in British politics against just about everyone's expectations.
    He believes he did.

    Just as Cummings believed that he, and he alone, thwarted John Prescott's plan for a NE Assembly.

    As always, it is more complicated than that. Many factors combined to take us out of the EU of which he was one part, but not the only or even the most important part.

    Ultimately, looked at with a cold eye he is a serial party hopper and egoist who campaigned on one issue and on that one issue won two minor elections with low turnouts that, rightly or wrongly, nobody took seriously. He has no friends, no influence and now he's quarelled with Banks and left the European PArliament gravy train, no money.

    So no, he doesn't deserve a place in the Lords and even if he did he's so unpopular with the actual powerbrokers nobody would nominate him for one, even without the rumours swirling of dubious foreign business activities.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    So easy to confuse those institutions, even on a less warm day. I think that the key is to remember that the Natural History Museum is genuinely interesting.
    I was suggesting that perhaps he should join the other dinosaurs.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,764
    England Case data - absolute -

    image
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,155
    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
    So what? He achieved, via political campaigning, a seismic change in British politics against just about everyone's expectations.
    He believes he did.

    Just as Cummings believed that he, and he alone, thwarted John Prescott's plan for a NE Assembly.

    As always, it is more complicated than that. Many factors combined to take us out of the EU of which he was one part, but not the only or even the most important part.

    Ultimately, looked at with a cold eye he is a serial party hopper and egoist who campaigned on one issue and on that one issue won two minor elections with low turnouts that, rightly or wrongly, nobody took seriously. He has no friends, no influence and now he's quarelled with Banks and left the European PArliament gravy train, no money.

    So no, he doesn't deserve a place in the Lords and even if he did he's so unpopular with the actual powerbrokers nobody would nominate him for one, even without the rumours swirling of dubious foreign business activities.
    Sorry that's deluded. If there was one person who was responsible for Brexit it was Nigel Farage.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 41,072

    algarkirk said:

    Daniel Moylan (another contemporary of Philip & Theresa May) on the peerage list too. Fun that Frank Field. Kate Hoey, Ian Austin, Gisela Stuart and John Woodcock were not nominated by Corbyn!


    Pretty good list all in all. Charles Moore is a bonus.
    Claire Fox is an interesting choice.
    Also who isn't there....I suspect Sir Alan Duncan wouldn't have said no, but then he's on the record for calling Johnson a c*nt......
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 5,764
    England case data - scaled to 100k population -

    image
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 30,104
    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    I wonder if Nigel F was offered a peerage. He would have fitted nicely with the nominations for non-affiliated Peerages.

    Surely he belongs in the Natural History Museum with Jeremy Corbyn rather than the House of Lords?
    He is arguably the most effective politician of the last 30 years. If that doesn't merit a peerage what does?
    The most effective politician of the last 30 years, who has never won a seat at Westminster?
    So what? He achieved, via political campaigning, a seismic change in British politics against just about everyone's expectations.
    He believes he did.

    Just as Cummings believed that he, and he alone, thwarted John Prescott's plan for a NE Assembly.

    As always, it is more complicated than that. Many factors combined to take us out of the EU of which he was one part, but not the only or even the most important part.

    Ultimately, looked at with a cold eye he is a serial party hopper and egoist who campaigned on one issue and on that one issue won two minor elections with low turnouts that, rightly or wrongly, nobody took seriously. He has no friends, no influence and now he's quarelled with Banks and left the European PArliament gravy train, no money.

    So no, he doesn't deserve a place in the Lords and even if he did he's so unpopular with the actual powerbrokers nobody would nominate him for one, even without the rumours swirling of dubious foreign business activities.
    Sorry that's deluded. If there was one person who was responsible for Brexit it was Nigel Farage.
    There wasn't.

    That was the point.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 907
    Nigelb said:

    The good news is that this really does not seem the most difficult virus to develop an effective vaccine against. Here's yet another one, along with clear evidence of neutralising antibodies (in mice).

    Replication-competent vesicular stomatitis virus vaccine vector protects against SARS-CoV-2-mediated pathogenesis in mice
    https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(20)30421-2
    Previously, we developed a replication-competent vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) expressing a modified form of the SARS-CoV-2 spike gene in place of the native glycoprotein gene (VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2). Here, we show that vaccination with VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 generates neutralizing immune responses and protects mice from SARS-CoV-2. Immunization of mice with VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 elicits high antibody titers that neutralize SARS-CoV-2 and target the receptor binding domain that engages human angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE2). Upon challenge with a human isolate of SARS-CoV-2, mice expressing human ACE2 and immunized with VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 show profoundly reduced viral infection and inflammation in the lung, indicating protection against pneumonia. Passive transfer of sera from VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2-immunized animals also protects naïve mice from SARS-CoV-2 challenge. These data support development of VSV-eGFP-SARS-CoV-2 as an attenuated, replication-competent vaccine against SARS-CoV-2.

    I dont get why they are not just giving potential vaccines to people in Care Homes and use them as the test subjects. They have shown thay they are harmless so if they work great, if they don't no harm done. Australia look likely to do this.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8578411/Coronavirus-vaccine-developed-Australian-researchers-develops-immune-response.html
Sign In or Register to comment.