Do you still think Bernie is going to be challenging Trump?

No I think it's a near certainty that Biden has got the nomination now.

The others all dropping out and endorsing Biden before Super Tuesday made the difference.

I think this plays well into Trump's hands. Biden is the easiest opponent for him because he can use the same model that worked against Hilary:

- "Establishment swamp" - Biden has had the same establishment forces rallying behind him that Hilary had to ensure that he got the nomination. Neither really had a groundswell grass roots movement.

- "Corruption" - Hunter Biden will be the "Hilary's emails" of the campaign.

Hilary was at least a confident debater. Biden is a bumbler who will look weak in comparison to Trump. He also possesses some of Trump's unpleasant characteristics (arrogant, smug, sexist, rude) without going all out and owning it like Trump does.

However it's not in the bag for Trump because coronavirus and the likely economic impacts will remove Trump's ace in the pack about "booming economy" and also expose him as a weak leader, if it hits the US medical system hard and he is seen to be ineffective in dealing with it and instead using the crisis to just blame others. It's easy for people to rally behind Trump's attacks on others when people aren't experiencing the effects themselves, but coronavirus impacts are going to hit his base too.

Trump doesn't have a broad coalition of voters, his strategy is on holding his base firm and making sure the electoral college holds for him, so he's vulnerable to a small degradation of that base. Biden has a chance of beating him no matter how unimpressive he is, as just the "anyone but Trump" candidate.

One thing which will be decisive will be whether Bernie's supporters actively campaign for Biden (which will be hard for them to accept) or whether some just don't bother turning out and voting - I think this hit Hilary.

If Biden becomes President though, I expect him to be a very unimpressive President and an easy target for Republican media. The best thing he could do is see himself as a one term President and intend to hand over the reins to one of the younger ones next time. So the choice of running mate will be quite interesting.

I think your synopsis is spot on - Biden is unimpressive as a potential leader - I find it incredible that there aren't better candidates in the whole of the US. Trump should be an easy target - but then the Tories should have been a slam dunk for Labour - look what happened

The problem I hope for Trump is that they have actually seen him at work, rather than purely based on what he says before an election.

Trump expected to declare national emergency over coronavirus.

But I thought it was a liberal hoax? I thought the US were doing just great?

These tinpot leaders can lie all they want about jobs, the economoy, trade, and immigration, but when people start panicking, getting sick and dying from a virus, there's only so many porkies you can tell before your cover's very quickly blown.

Boris is not everyone's cup of tea but his handling of Covid19 has been very good - he has got the tone just about right

Boris' response has probably shown a big difference between him and Trump.

When Boris was London Mayor one of the things that got said about him was that he was by nature a delegator. He doesn't have the delusion that Trump does that he's an all-knowing genius. Hence his reliance on Dominic Cummings for general policy strategy.

With this crisis, Boris has at least recognised his limitations and brought experts with him to the press conferences. But like you say he has struck the right tone, he hasn't tried to be political or overly bombastic, and he has largely deferred to the experts without looking like he's shoving the blame on to them.

I think he's done OK, he's clearly uncomfortable in this kind of situation as he is more in his element doing the "pumping up the nations' spirits" talk rather than dealing with matters as serious as this, some of his phrasing has been a bit bumbling but overall I think he's been OK.

Trump on the other hand is a complete disaster, it is apparent that he doesn't know what he is doing and I'm sure this is making the panic worse especially on the stock markets.

Obama would have stood up to the plate and given leadership to the world, and Trump and the Republicans would have been sniping from the outside. They are like rabbits in the headlights when the responsibility is on them.

Johnson isn’t my cup of tea, but I agree he’s done okay. It’s impossible to know what is the best course of action, and that’d apply to any leader, but the tone is serious enough without being too panicky, and the plan seems a reasonable best guess.

For now we’re all on the same side. Hopefully it’ll pass without too much pain and loss and we can get back to our gammon-snowflake mutual loathing soon!

Hancock has gone up in my estimation - he has handled this really well. Whatever the government do it will not be right for all people. In Italy and Spain they have locked everything down doesn't seem to have slowed the infections/deaths any? We still have to be able to function the country simply cannot come to grinding halt surely?

As for the elderly the government is between a rock and a hard place - isolate them and they will suffer mentally and physically - do nothing and there is a potential for an increase in the death-rate?

Difficult to know what would have happened, and how much faster the spread, if they’d taken a different approach.

Everybody’s trying their best and having to make it up as they go along.

Absolutely agree - the government is doing its best

Quote ="Sal Paradise"Hancock has gone up in my estimation - he has handled this really well. Whatever the government do it will not be right for all people. In Italy and Spain they have locked everything down doesn't seem to have slowed the infections/deaths any? We still have to be able to function the country simply cannot come to grinding halt surely? '" God it's irritating when people think they know everything based on zero evidence or expertise. It's Brexit summed up but this is probably even more serious. Your comments about Italy are, of course, factually incorrect - Italy is turning the corner and the rates are slowing. I know you're smart enough not to believe this is some sort of switch you can flick and expect results with no time lag. https://kalingatv.com/world/italy-coron ... med-cases/

Quote ="Sal Paradise"Hancock has gone up in my estimation - he has handled this really well. Whatever the government do it will not be right for all people. In Italy and Spain they have locked everything down doesn't seem to have slowed the infections/deaths any? We still have to be able to function the country simply cannot come to grinding halt surely? '" God it's irritating when people think they know everything based on zero evidence or expertise. It's Brexit summed up but this is probably even more serious. Your comments about Italy are, of course, factually incorrect - Italy is turning the corner and the rates are slowing. I know you're smart enough not to believe this is some sort of switch you can flick and expect results with no time lag. https://kalingatv.com/world/italy-coron ... med-cases/

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"God it's irritating when people think they know everything based on zero evidence or expertise. It's Brexit summed up but this is probably even more serious. Your comments about Italy are, of course, factually incorrect - Italy is turning the corner and the rates are slowing. I know you're smart enough not to believe this is some sort of switch you can flick and expect results with no time lag. https://kalingatv.com/world/italy-coron ... med-cases/'" Your report also says there is significant missing data - so it could actually be rising - nothing new from you there - the all seeing eye - I know more than everyone else Shame your posts don't back up your arrogance. Notice you didn't mention Spain - not support your argument I guess?

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"God it's irritating when people think they know everything based on zero evidence or expertise. It's Brexit summed up but this is probably even more serious. Your comments about Italy are, of course, factually incorrect - Italy is turning the corner and the rates are slowing. I know you're smart enough not to believe this is some sort of switch you can flick and expect results with no time lag. https://kalingatv.com/world/italy-coron ... med-cases/'" Your report also says there is significant missing data - so it could actually be rising - nothing new from you there - the all seeing eye - I know more than everyone else Shame your posts don't back up your arrogance. Notice you didn't mention Spain - not support your argument I guess?

Other than in the countries where they have comprehensive testing (S Korea, China etc) the data on caseload is likely to be inaccurate because it completely depends on the country's testing criteria.

If they are only testing a certain sub population - those who end up in hospital or who have recently travelled back from an infected region (which is now basically everywhere) then once it becomes widespread, the official figures on cases will not be an accurate measure of the underlying caseload in the population.

But if the mortality rate from the disease (whatever it is) stays constant over time, you can use the number of deaths announced per day as a way to infer what is happening with the underlying caseload. If the average time from showing symptoms till death is 14 to 17 days, then the number of patients that die today tells you something about what the underlying caseload was 14 to 17 days ago.

The mortality rate may not stay totally constant over time - once the case load reaches a level where the health service is over capacity the mortality rate will rise and when it falls below that level it should fall down again. But it may be reasonable to assume these as one-off shifts at certain points, rather than the mortality rate varying a lot over time.

So to track the effectiveness of distancing measures brought in, look at what happens to daily deaths in about 2 to 3 weeks after they were brought in. What you hope to see is some change - if not a fall in absolute terms, at least a levelling off of the rate of growth, which suggests you've got it under control.

As we are still in the early stages this might be a 'noisy' indicator in that from day to day the numbers might bounce around a lot and also there will be some patients who became sick in the early stages and who have been in ICU for a long time and ultimately die several weeks later, so for a few weeks there will still be some deaths from the 'pre-measures' point, coming up in the daily death rates.

I think we should expect to see some very sharp rises in the daily death rates in the next couple of weeks, which will be alarming, but if the growth rate starts to fall after that, even if the deaths keep rising, that will suggest that the measures are starting to work, and should hopefully level off, and then start falling.

How many of these unfortunate deaths would have occurred anyway if they had got a particular strain of the flu? I agree we will see some escalation in the numbers over the next week.

Probably a lot - but thats the whole point of the risk here. These are people who are vulnerable.

I think there will be some "displacement" in the death count of people who would have died of other causes (eg terminal illnesses) but who die sooner because of complications from coronavirus and they will be in the coronavirus tallies. If this is true then we may see some offsetting fall in the numbers of people recorded as dying of other causes, during this pandemic.

But there will also likely be a rise in death rate to other things than coronavirus, because the health service is fully occupied, so things that may have been treatable otherwise will not be.

To get a true estimate of the impact of coronavirus you'd need to look at the aggregate death rate (broken down by age) for all causes, and see how much it varies in 2020/21 from the normal trend.

Spain has only just instituted a lock down you muppet, of course it won't have turned the corner yet. Is your argument really that you don't think a lock down will reduce infection rates/flatten the curve? Really?

We are following the American model of minimum testing therefore our death rate will be higher. The reasons are obvious the more tests will increase the number with the virus but the death rate will not change.
We are currently nor testing those in the NHS who have to self isolate and are now no longer providing full protection wear in some trusts. I would say therefore that Raab is not doing such a good job and the years of under funding are now catching up with them but sadly also increases the chance of unnecessary deaths.

Not at all - there is a difference between infection and death and surely there is a trade off. Do we spread the infection amongst the general population who let's face will for the most part get a mild reaction and build up some immunity whilst isolating the vulnerable or lock down the whole country which will provide a temporary reprieve but build up no immunity?

Like you I am not a virologist so we have to follow the guidance - the question is - is it the lockdown that is slowing number or the natural lifespan/build up of immunity that is slowing the numbers down?

It's the lockdown. HTH.

You must be right - well in your own head

I bow to your superior knowledge.

At last a sensible post

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"God it's irritating when people think they know everything based on zero evidence or expertise. It's Brexit summed up but this is probably even more serious. Your comments about Italy are, of course, factually incorrect - Italy is turning the corner and the rates are slowing. I know you're smart enough not to believe this is some sort of switch you can flick and expect results with no time lag. https://kalingatv.com/world/italy-coron ... med-cases/'" Do you still think lock down in Italy is still working - i.e. numbers are reducing? Yesterday deaths reached 475 in a single day - the highest yet!! I suggested you haven't got a clue what you are talking about - seems the official data you love so much backs up my synopsis - you really haven't got a clue.

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"God it's irritating when people think they know everything based on zero evidence or expertise. It's Brexit summed up but this is probably even more serious. Your comments about Italy are, of course, factually incorrect - Italy is turning the corner and the rates are slowing. I know you're smart enough not to believe this is some sort of switch you can flick and expect results with no time lag. https://kalingatv.com/world/italy-coron ... med-cases/'" Do you still think lock down in Italy is still working - i.e. numbers are reducing? Yesterday deaths reached 475 in a single day - the highest yet!! I suggested you haven't got a clue what you are talking about - seems the official data you love so much backs up my synopsis - you really haven't got a clue.

Yesterdays deaths will be an indication of what the number of people getting infected was 14 to 17 days ago, given thats the average time between infection and death.

To see whether the lock down is working you need to look at whether the rate of growth is slowing down, not just the absolute numbers.