The Money Mustache Community
Other => Off Topic => Topic started by: ReadySetMillionaire on March 13, 2020, 07:33:43 AM
-
Sorry for starting a new thread. The other threads seem to be focused on news updates and providing information, and I did not want to hijack those threads.
I cannot recall a single situation in my lifetime where the federal government so badly fucked up anything in my entire life. I’m on record here saying this coronavirus was not a big deal, but that was with the assumption that the federal government would do what it has normally done during the Trump administration — ignore his Twitter bullshit and actually run a moderately effective yet unconventional government (even if you disagreed with the policy). That hasn’t happened.
We have known about the outbreak for several months now. The Trump administration did absolutely nothing except institute a travel ban from China. They did not get testing ramped up, they did not remove red tape to allow the private sector to develop vaccines, they did not coordinate with state and local governments. A complete fuck-up on so many levels.
When the virus did get here, Trump flat out lied about damn near every important detail. It’s clear at this point that he intentionally wanted low testing so that numbers stayed low. Then he said “if you need a test, you can get a test” — a total lie. A complete abomination.
Trump also has put political people in charge instead of experts. It’s one thing to put “outsiders” in certain agencies to shake things up. But good heavens, in public health? There is nobody running the show that’s competent. Every branch of government you’d want to handle this is completely understaffed and does not have qualified leaders in place.
As things got worse, it was blatantly clear Trump was worried about the economy, not this disease. He bitched about the Fed rate, talked incessantly about stimulus, etc. Hey bud, WHAT ABOUT TESTING??? It’s patently clear he did not care about testing, and was far more concerned with the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
When Trump had an opportunity to calm the nation, he made it worse. He announced a travel ban from Europe without (a) advising DHS or (b) coordinating with Europe. He did not give any information about testing. He did not give any recommendations about precautions people and local governments should take. It was a tour de force of incompetence.
The unfortunate result of all this is mass hysteria, and a complete loss of faith in the federal government. Perhaps I’m wrong, but the reason everything is being canceled is because normal people and local governments don’t have any assurance from the feds, so they need to exercise tremendous caution. I applaud my governor, Mike DeWine, for taking such measures.
The “Trump” economy — his best case for reelection — has crashed. When Trump was finally confronted with a crisis not of his own making, he absolutely failed. This is why I did not vote for him in 2016 — I did not think he could pull his head from his ass when the nation really needed it.
Barring Biden’s competence issues taking a dramatic turn for the worse, or him performing awful in the debates, Trump is done.
-
I never thought I'd see a day when pro sports, who live for nothing but $$$ and lots of it, would be the grown ups in the room and lead the charge to start doing the right things. Thankfully that has cascaded on a local level, at least, and more and more things are shutting down. But the fact that the greedy pro sports leagues had to be the ones to step up tells you all you need to know about how badly the feds screwed this up.
-
I sincerely hope you are right. I am grateful that Gretchen Whitmer, gov. of Michigan, and my local city authorities are acting quickly and decisively. Trump is completely unprepared for this or any other crisis and does not seem to have even the minimum amount of empathy or cognitive capacity to understand the actual issues, and has wasted far too much time blaming anyone but his own administration for their negligence. Mike Pence and the CDC are left to kowtow to him publicly while wasting time on damage control.
Our federal executive branch has utterly failed us, and the legislative branch may not be far behind, depending on the behavior of the GOP senators. At this point, we can only hope that actions taken by state and local governments and private businesses will keep this from reaching worst-case scenario.
-
I think you're probably right. This isn't even a right vs left thing. It's a leadership thing and he/executive branch has failed miserably. I've seen far more proactive measures and leadership at the local and business level
-
The ironic thing is the fact that since people are actually doing something about this at a local level, the result will be a manageable disease, which will feed into Trump's message that this isn't as bad of a disease as everyone is saying.
After 2016, I will never be shocked about political outcomes again. "The End of Trump" has been trumpeted countless times, and every time it seems to simply fuel his message.
-
Unfortunately, I don't quite agree.
Today's American Right don't vote for competence. They want to burn everything down. Trump is just doing that. Burning down federal agencies, american capabilities etc. The white nationalists have determined they won't win in the long run. So they are just trying to make sure everyone else loses as well.
They aren't phased by kids being mowed down by guns. You think 4-5% of older people dying is going to make them wink?
-
I would expect the Dem candidate to be playing clips of Trump calling it a hoax on a loop from now until November.
-
Trump is over 70 and has been exposed multiple times to Covid-19 this week. I'm looking at his weight and neck and thinking "ahhhh, he's not a fantastic candidate for mechanical ventilation".
If he catches it, there's a reasonable chance that he either won't be around or healthy enough to contest in November.
-
Unfortunately, I don't quite agree.
Today's American Right don't vote for competence. They want to burn everything down. Trump is just doing that. Burning down federal agencies, american capabilities etc. The white nationalists have determined they won't win in the long run. So they are just trying to make sure everyone else loses as well.
They aren't phased by kids being mowed down by guns. You think 4-5% of older people dying is going to make them wink?
I don’t agree with this. I think you’re projecting one wing of the Republican base onto the entire party, and that’s not fair.
-
Unfortunately, I don't quite agree.
Today's American Right don't vote for competence. They want to burn everything down. Trump is just doing that. Burning down federal agencies, american capabilities etc. The white nationalists have determined they won't win in the long run. So they are just trying to make sure everyone else loses as well.
They aren't phased by kids being mowed down by guns. You think 4-5% of older people dying is going to make them wink?
I don’t agree with this. I think you’re projecting one wing of the Republican base onto the entire party, and that’s not fair.
I sincerely hope you are right and I am wrong.
I won't bet money on it, however!
<edited to add>
My pessimism is because of how I perceive the right wing mouthpieces to have changed in recent years. National Review, Washington Examiner etc were quite respectable before Obama. They did sometime give platform to dog-whistles, but I never encountered explicit white nationalist propaganda there 10 years ago.
Transformation started once Obama was elected. And I lost all hope once I read an article in National Review, sometime in 2016, where the author argued he was against "immigration" due to "cultural changes". To me, the right wing transformation seems total and complete in the US.
-
Trump can fuck it up more today at 3pm.
------
If the virus fades in the summer heat, it won't touch his ratings at all. He'll take it as a sign that he was right and Foxnews will parrot the claim that it was a Democrat hoax. Until Round 2, like the Spanish Flu, returns in the fall.
-
It's sad to see partisans use the situation to try to gain a political advantage. The people in the White House are not the health experts on this virus. The best that they can do is to work with Congress to provide Federal funding ($8.5B so far), implement policies which the health experts cannot do themselves (travel bans), and let the experts direct the response.
-
Yup, I just hope that he takes Mitch McConnell out with him.
-
The people in the White House are not the health experts on this virus.
Why is that again? (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/)
-
It's not really Trump's fault.
His government dismantled the whole set of structures and agencies that were designed to provide pandemic response, and all the competent people in his government have either been fired or resigned. The only people left are toadies and sycophants, who aren't capable of dealing with this problem. This was inevitable. Dismantling protections from a pandemic are certainly not the only thing they've damaged . . . it just happens to be the first real crisis that this government has so far run into (that wasn't caused by their own actions).
Why do I argue that it's not Trump's fault? He has always been a deaf and blind man angrily swinging a baseball bat through the china shop that is politics. His supporters like him precisely because he was always so wildly unqualified for the job. This is the fault of every Republican who has enabled Trump to weaken the US in this way. They are now reaping the fruits of electing, supporting, and enabling a dangerously stupid man in a position where he is in charge of life/death decisions.
-
Why do I argue that it's not Trump's fault? He has always been a deaf and blind man angrily swinging a baseball bat through the china shop that is politics. His supporters like him precisely because he was always so wildly unqualified for the job. This is the fault of every Republican who has enabled Trump to weaken the US in this way. They are now reaping the fruits of electing, supporting, and enabling a dangerously stupid man in a position where he is in charge of life/death decisions.
I half agree, but who were the adults in the room? The senators. I fully expected Mitch McConnell to be the adult in the room and to shepherd Trump out the door a la Nixon. Since that hasn't happened, fuck them all.
-
The people in the White House are not the health experts on this virus.
Why is that again? (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/)
That article quotes a political blogger and a journalist, not health experts. And they are wrong.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/false-claim-about-cdcs-global-anti-pandemic-work/
-
Fox really pushed the "It's a hoax!" narrative. Is it just another case of anti-science groupthink?
"Worldwide pandemic? Hogwash! Who ever heard of a 'virus' going around the world? <snort>"
Or CNN, etc., picked up on it first and Fox has to suggest the opposite?
Or Fox's demographic is old people who fear change and this will seriously change their world?
In other words, why the virulent response to a virus quickly spreading around the world?
-
That article quotes a political blogger and a journalist, not health experts. And they are wrong.
Look what I found on the very first page of Google: I ran the White House pandemic office. Trump closed it. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/nsc-pandemic-office-trump-closed/2020/03/13/a70de09c-6491-11ea-acca-80c22bbee96f_story.html) - Beth Cameron is vice president for global biological policy and programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative. She previously served as the senior director for global health security and biodefense on the White House National Security Council. A position that no longer exists on the NSC.
-
Why do I argue that it's not Trump's fault? He has always been a deaf and blind man angrily swinging a baseball bat through the china shop that is politics. His supporters like him precisely because he was always so wildly unqualified for the job. This is the fault of every Republican who has enabled Trump to weaken the US in this way. They are now reaping the fruits of electing, supporting, and enabling a dangerously stupid man in a position where he is in charge of life/death decisions.
I half agree, but who were the adults in the room? The senators. I fully expected Mitch McConnell to be the adult in the room and to shepherd Trump out the door a la Nixon. Since that hasn't happened, fuck them all.
The senators were doing what their constituents wanted. Are they supposed to violate the wishes of the people who voted them into office?
-
The senators were doing what their constituents wanted. Are they supposed to violate the wishes of the people who voted them into office?
They were supposed to do what was best for their party and for the country, that's always the point of the upper house. I believe in Canada you talk about this as a "sober second thought?"
-
Unfortunately, I don't quite agree.
Today's American Right don't vote for competence. They want to burn everything down. Trump is just doing that. Burning down federal agencies, american capabilities etc. The white nationalists have determined they won't win in the long run. So they are just trying to make sure everyone else loses as well.
They aren't phased by kids being mowed down by guns. You think 4-5% of older people dying is going to make them wink?
If the bolded actually happens, he will lose big, it's his base! His voters are going to die the most.
As with most Trump policies, the people who get screwed the most by them are the people who voted for them.
-
Being 25 minutes late (and counting) for a major press conference doesn’t exactly instill confidence.
-
We won't need more than 5 million tests. I'm skeptical of that claim.
But, otherwise, it was a good response. The market certainly liked it.
Edit: Dr. Birx said that an HIV test took 4 years but a Covid19 test took only weeks. The power of the free market! That's rich, especially considering that Pence is standing behind her.
-
The market does seem to like it, though I don't understand why. Does not seem to be much new. If this new rapid testing comes through, that's big but based on the track record of this administration I am skeptical.
-
No problem, it is actually Obama's fault.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1238410044263333894
For the address, I am on the part where health industry business leaders show up and make it seem like all the great american companies are coming together to rapidly transition the might of american manufacturing towards producing war material to fight those Japanese and Germans! Oh. I mean test for the Corona virus. Anyway it'll be just like how great the response was during WWII.
-
The market does seem to like it, though I don't understand why.
I guess because there will be testing and the government showed a modicum of organization? Currently listening to Pence gaslighting (I am on a delay) and it is making me ill. Does his tongue get sore from the boot licking?
-
I am not particularly reassured. A serious response is long overdue, and I cannot stomach the bootlicking.
-
I certainly hope so.
Every once in a while, we get a stark reminder that it actually matters that the occupant of the White House knows what the hell he or she is doing.
This is one of those times.
Unfortunately, the right wing misinformation campaigns are robust enough to keep a certain segment of the population snowed.
Let’s hope the rest of us pay attention and act accordingly.
-
I cannot recall a single situation in my lifetime where the federal government so badly fucked up anything in my entire life.
Iraq WMDs
-
Lots of time for people to forget until November. I for one will forever refer to this man as Donald "I didn't know the flu can kill people" Trump as a gentle reminder.
-
You folks must realize that our health care systems gross inadequacy to meet the demands of this crisis have been decades in the making? Not to excuse any response from the Fed govt, or lack thereof, but every link in our health care system was unprepared. It's great to see Roche develop and bring to market a valid diagnostic for covid in RECORD breaking time. Both lab Corp and quest will have these en masses this weekend. When tshtf, the FDA was able to move nimbly, albeit we did get off to a slow start.
-
Of course it's possible that the cornona virus could spell the end of Trump, but it's also possible it could be spun into a major win if the US ends up having a significantly lower number of cases than Europe.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html)
Confirmed Cases by Country/Region/Sovereignty:
80,945 China
15,113 Italy
11,364 Iran
7,979 Korea, South
4,334 Spain
3,156 Germany
2,882 France
1,268 US
1,125 Switzerland
809 Sweden
804 Netherlands
788 Denmark
750 Norway
-
@YttriumNitrate
Which is why Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump's administration was suppressing testing efforts. But luckily, that can't fly forever in this country.
-
<snip> albeit we did get off to a slow start.
Understatement of the year. And from this reporting: https://www.npr.org/2020/03/12/814881355/white-house-knew-coronavirus-would-be-a-major-threat-but-response-fell-short
But at the same time, Secretary Azar has not always given the president the worst-case scenario of what could happen. My understanding is he did not push to do aggressive additional testing in recent weeks, and that's partly because more testing might have led to more cases being discovered of coronavirus outbreak, and the president had made clear - the lower the numbers on coronavirus, the better for the president, the better for his potential reelection this fall.
The top goal here is to keep the reported number of the virus down, not to actually reduce the threat of the virus, if this reporting is correct. Sounds very much like the Ukraine corruption fiasco, where the top goal was to have the Ukrainians announce an investigation into Joe Biden, whereas the investigation itself is immaterial. We should not be surprised that this reality TV show star is primarily driven to make things look good for him/bad for his opposition, regardless of how the underlying issue is handled. And usually, it's hard to actually do something real that makes a difference so they...just didn't.
-
This is the beginning of the end for Trump, the walls are closing in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1ab6uxg908
-
I noticed that today Peter Wehner former Reagan, Bush, and W Bush staffer and Senior Fellow at the conservative think tank Ethics and Public Policy Center wrote this opinion piece: The Trump Presidency Is Over (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/peter-wehner-trump-presidency-over/607969/).
-
If Americans will vote in Trump despite obvious racism and outright misogyny, they are not going to be worried about a few hundred thousand/million deaths, particularly when the causal link with Trump is not blindingly clear (and has several other factors mixed in).
-
I noticed that today Peter Wehner former Reagan, Bush, and W Bush staffer and Senior Fellow at the conservative think tank Ethics and Public Policy Center wrote this opinion piece: The Trump Presidency Is Over (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/peter-wehner-trump-presidency-over/607969/).
That guy can write!
-
Well, it's a good thing that we already established that NOTHING the president does to help himself get re-elected is impeachable if he BELIEVES his re-election is in the national interest. I hope the president and his enablers didn't purposefully avoid testing because they didn't want the numbers to go up. Yes, we turned down tests from the WHO. Yes, we refused to allow private labs and hospitals to use their own tests. Yes, we have Trump on the record at the CDC saying that he wanted to keep people on an infested cruise ship because he liked the numbers where they were - those numbers being actual people infected with a contagious virus. No, we still aren't testing in significant numbers. But maybe keeping the numbers low isn't the reason. I'm am really looking forward to putting the Trump era in the rear-view mirror. It's not about party affiliation or policies at this point. It's about empathy, decency and expertise. Baseball was the one thing I was looking forward to. But, nope. It's 2020 so we can't have nice things*
*Not belittling the seriousness of the virus or the necessity to shut everything down. Everyone stay safe.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
-
It's not really Trump's fault.
His government dismantled the whole set of structures and agencies that were designed to provide pandemic response, and all the competent people in his government have either been fired or resigned. The only people left are toadies and sycophants, who aren't capable of dealing with this problem. This was inevitable. Dismantling protections from a pandemic are certainly not the only thing they've damaged . . . it just happens to be the first real crisis that this government has so far run into (that wasn't caused by their own actions).
Why do I argue that it's not Trump's fault? He has always been a deaf and blind man angrily swinging a baseball bat through the china shop that is politics. His supporters like him precisely because he was always so wildly unqualified for the job. This is the fault of every Republican who has enabled Trump to weaken the US in this way. They are now reaping the fruits of electing, supporting, and enabling a dangerously stupid man in a position where he is in charge of life/death decisions.
Sums it up/. Americans voted him in, say no more.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
Many of us who live in Dumbfuckistan didn't vote for him and are doing everything in our power to make him a one-term president.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is the kind of attitude that got Trump elected. When will we learn?
-
If Americans will vote in Trump despite obvious racism and outright misogyny, they are not going to be worried about a few hundred thousand/million deaths, particularly when the causal link with Trump is not blindingly clear (and has several other factors mixed in).
The racism and misogyny are a feature not a bug.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is remarkably counterproductive rhetoric, and is part of the reason Trump is in the White House right now.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is the kind of attitude that got Trump elected. When will we learn?
Nahh, people didn't vote for Trump because they thought it would be pointed out to them how aweful he is. Trump is a product of a system that has been failing the middle/lower class for decades. Remember Bernie and Trump were arguably the most popular candidates in 2016 because they railed against the system and were considered "outsiders." Bernie was certainly more popular than Trump and was predicted to mop the floor with him. Unfortunately when Clinton got the nomination many Bernie supporters stayed home or voted Trump. This has been beaten into the ground. If people are going to vote for Trump because somebody insulted them, then they probably aren't very intelligent. I mean let's be honest here.
The Carnivorous response from this administration was to be expected. Did anyone really think Trump would step up to be a leader during an extreme crisis? I sure didn't. That's never been one of his redeeming qualities. He commands loyalty, pushes people around and knows how to manipulate to get what he wants. He is a narcissist who never takes responsibility for his actions. He lies to the public, even while people are getting sick and dying. A good leader possesses none of these qualities. He is not good at unifying. Hopefully just enough people can now finally see this to tip the scales and get this failed experiment out of office.
-
I remember the 2005 Hurricane Katrina disaster, and similar lack of coordinated response from the Fed government.
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5183478
-
This is where I think Donald Trump's personal situation could play an outsized role. We don't know Donald Trump's current financial situation. He may or may not be the owner of a series of hotels and golf resorts. He may or may not be in a ton of debt. Hotels and golf resorts tend not to do well when there is an ongoing viral outbreak. There is a chance that the virus was being downplayed because he didn't/doesn't want people to stop staying at his properties/resorts. He may or may not have business interruption insurance that covers pandemics. The economic stimulus package may or may not get filtered through the lens of "will this help me and my family with our business interests." Trust and credibility are going to be very important over the next few months.
-
It is sickening watching how politicized this pandemic has become. This is truly a time for people to set aside their differences and work as members of the same human race to overcome something bigger, more impactful, and immediate than politics.
Instead, we are getting misinformation and outright lies from our government.
We are getting press conferences where CEOs are paraded out to tell the POTUS how wonderful he is when all we have had is obstruction and lies (clarifying that I am referring ONLY to a lack of testing to determine the breadth and severity of this pandemic, and the lies about basic information that the general population needs to stay safe).
It is clear now more than ever that the administration cares about wealth over health.
It is so incredibly short-sighted.
People will die, and he will shirk all responsibility, saying VPOTUS was in charge, when POTUS has been doing all of the tweeting, press conferences, etc.
His ego knows no bounds.
Now more than ever we need testing and transparency. There are already almost twice as many confirmed cases this morning (2,175 as of 10:12am EST) as there were yesterday afternoon (1,268 2:38 PM EST), and still almost no testing being performed. We need leadership, and we don't have it.
Case in point:
Trump sends signed chart showing stock market gains to supporters after he declared coronavirus a national emergency
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/13/politics/trump-stock-market-gains-signed-photo/index.html
(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/200313220217-donald-trump-stock-signature-exlarge-169.jpg)
-
. I applaud my governor, Mike DeWine, for taking such measures.
Fellow Ohioan here - I agree on DeWine. I didn't vote for him, but think he has done a great job leading the charge.
I thought this little article did a great job of looking at DeWine's response (and Hurray Dr. Acton!):
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2020/03/14/coronavirus-why-ohio-leading-u-s-response/5040630002/
-
. I applaud my governor, Mike DeWine, for taking such measures.
Fellow Ohioan here - I agree on DeWine. I didn't vote for him, but think he has done a great job leading the charge.
I thought this little article did a great job of looking at DeWine's response (and Hurray Dr. Acton!):
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2020/03/14/coronavirus-why-ohio-leading-u-s-response/5040630002/
DeWine has done a good job with the Carnivorous. So has Beshear south of us. I say that as I generally despise DeWine for funneling money to bailout a couple failing coal and nuclear facilities while gutting the green energy mandate and not doing more to combat the opioid epidemic.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is remarkably counterproductive rhetoric, and is part of the reason Trump is in the White House right now.
<Off topic (Duh! This is off topic forum, after all)>
Semi-rhetorical and semi-genuinely-curious question:
Are people really voting based on what others think of them?
In my professional career, I've hopped between jobs in Consulting, Wall St trading desks and other financial firms. So, as a matter of necessary survival skill - I have an extraordinarily thick skin. When I was in consulting, I used to fly out weekly to some Midwestern or Southern city. So I am keenly aware that people in the Midwest and South are much more "easy going" and much less "aggressive and pushy" than myself or others from more fast-paced environs. Indeed, I learned it the hard way, after causing 2-and-a-half major incidents early in my career where my style of following-up and managing dependencies was deemed too "aggressive and pushy". So I am keenly aware to actively adjust my style depending on where I am and who I am speaking with.
Even with this awareness of how delicate Midwestern or Southern feelings could be - attempting to decide what kind of healthcare you would like, tax policies you will like etc based on what others think of you seems like the height of snowflake-ish behavior to me. Are people really doing that? What is their expectation? That others need to learn to be politically correct when interacting with them?
The rhetorical part of this question is to point out the irony of Trump supporters acting like snowflakes and expecting political correctness.
The genuine part of the question is - how prevalent is this? It's quite natural for any political tribe - left or right - to have some snowflakes. Are they just marginal determinants? or the majority of the right-wing body politic?
</Off topic>
-
I sincerely hope you are right. I am grateful that Gretchen Whitmer, gov. of Michigan, and my local city authorities are acting quickly and decisively. Trump is completely unprepared for this or any other crisis and does not seem to have even the minimum amount of empathy or cognitive capacity to understand the actual issues, and has wasted far too much time blaming anyone but his own administration for their negligence.
One of the good things about the US, though, is that state and city authorities can do the right things in the absence of any leadership from central government. The fact that the president can't even read the policy off the autocue without messing up doesn't stop things from happening. And Trump's policy of calling it a hoax is better than some of the things he might have done - he's not blamed Mexico for the problem, or said that prayer was the best way to combat it or something.
-
lexde,
As a rabid leftist I'm not sure I agree. I hope that the left does not waste this crisis and instead uses it to extract as many concessions from the neo-liberal elites as possible. My friends are already losing their jobs, and this could go on for a long time.
EDITed to add - in western Europe I'm a centrist, which makes me a radical leftist in the USA.
-
lexde,
As a rabid leftist I'm not sure I agree. I hope that the left does not waste this crisis and instead uses it to extract as many concessions from the neo-liberal elites as possible. My friends are already losing their jobs, and this could go on for a long time.
<I am not sure I will classify myself as a "leftist". I am equally repulsed by whatever little I have tried to understand of the political prescriptions the Marx gang as I am by Milton Friedman gang.>
I don't know if asking for "leftist" concessions is appropriate. Any ideologically driven stance is dangerous. Leftist Trump can be just as dangerous as the present one.
Why not "American" concessions? Or "common-sense" concessions?
We have a very good template. Taking America back to before Reagan, i.e. when US used to be actually entrepreneurial and innovative as a society, with high social mobility, when the Americans used to live about as long and about as healthy as other OECD countries - would likely be a good idea. Any "leftist" solution may end up being just as bad as the current right-wing infection.
-
Why not "American" concessions? Or "common-sense" concessions?
IDK, ask Mitch McConnell.
EDITed to add - because the last time we had any of that was before I was born. I didn't create this system, I just live here.
-
lexde,
As a rabid leftist I'm not sure I agree. I hope that the left does not waste this crisis and instead uses it to extract as many concessions from the neo-liberal elites as possible. My friends are already losing their jobs, and this could go on for a long time.
I hope that we take care of each other. It seems as though Trump is being forced to make a lot of "socialist" moves for relief, which is what the left has been working toward for years. I hope that we as a country move forward in a more progressive manner, including the emergency funding for CDC/public health, relief for individual workers, subsidizing paid time off.
Maybe people will see that this is a better way, and that it doesn't have to take a pandemic to do right by each other. That our tax dollars don't have to be poured into war and hate by the trillions, and that instead we can do better at home by taking care of people without it being labeled GOP/Dem one way or the other.
I don't want anyone to lose their jobs, their livelihoods, their nest eggs, or their lives for an "I told you so" opportunity. Making any progress on this thing REQUIRES that our government lean harder left (on those items listed above and others, including temporarily ceasing to massively profit from the student loan crisis) and I hope that we can make that the new norm.
Surely the Trumpers aren't complaining about paid sick leave, subsidizing the working class, and more widely-available testing now that they are directly impacted. And not to sound too drum-circle-hippie, but I do hope that we can stop weaponizing a disease for political gain and instead work together, see that working together actually works, and progress from there.
-
Agree with subject line of this thread.
Could this be a sign of a future weakening of the federal govt and strengthening of the states?
Already we pay too much damn attention to the emperor.
Or is this not a valid approach because the emperor taxes us the most and controls the nukes?
-
Surely the Trumpers aren't complaining about paid sick leave, subsidizing the working class, and more widely-available testing now that they are directly impacted. And not to sound too drum-circle-hippie, but I do hope that we can stop weaponizing a disease for political gain and instead work together, see that working together actually works, and progress from there.
As far as I have seen/read/heard, Trumpers never complain about handouts directed to them. Any spending or welfare meant for people who don't look like them (cite: "welfare queen" stereotype by Reagan), or vote like them (cite: Texas delegation's vote for Hurricane Sandy relief efforts compared to their vote for harvey).
This has been the defining libertarian right-wing behavior for a few decades now.
So I don't know what you find surprising in the current behavior.
-
Surely the Trumpers aren't complaining about paid sick leave, subsidizing the working class, and more widely-available testing now that they are directly impacted. And not to sound too drum-circle-hippie, but I do hope that we can stop weaponizing a disease for political gain and instead work together, see that working together actually works, and progress from there.
As far as I have seen/read/heard, Trumpers never complain about handouts directed to them. Any spending or welfare meant for people who don't look like them (cite: "welfare queen" stereotype by Reagan), or vote like them (cite: Texas delegation's vote for Hurricane Sandy relief efforts compared to their vote for harvey).
This has been the defining libertarian right-wing behavior for a few decades now.
So I don't know what you find surprising in the current behavior.
I don't find anything surprising in the current behavior. I'm just hoping that everyone takes a step back and sees that when you stop labeling things as "socialist" and label it as a "responsible allocation of tax dollars to do the most good" that we can actually progress as a society instead of screaming in each others' faces.
-
I don't think the coronavirus is the end of Trump because I've expected the end of Trump was going to come after the election, had the coronavirus never even existed.
-
I hope this is the end of Trump. Unfortunately, I doubt he loses any followers as a result of this, or anything else. There have been countless opportunities for people to turn away from supporting Trump based on some lie, or some misstep, or false claim he makes. But no, the bootlicking intensity is increased. So, just a reminder, we have alot of work to do to get out people to vote who want to see this president gone. Do not become complacent. We have to vote him out, and we will need voters to do this.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is remarkably counterproductive rhetoric, and is part of the reason Trump is in the White House right now.
nbcnews.com › politics › 2016-election › hillary-clinton-half-tr...
Sep 10, 2016 - Clinton: Half of Trump Supporters 'Basket of Deplorables' 1:44 ... they are irredeemable, but they are not America but the other basket … are ...
Agree.
Kyle S. has also warned of the fruitlessness of abrasive rhetoric.
When Ezra Klein (Vox) spoke to the Commonwealth Club he said that when one faction (A) tells an opposed faction (B) "you're wrong," faction B becomes unpersuadable
His new book is titled Why We're Polarized.
-
I hope this is the end of Trump. Unfortunately, I doubt he loses any followers as a result of this, or anything else. There have been countless opportunities for people to turn away from supporting Trump based on some lie, or some misstep, or false claim he makes. But no, the bootlicking intensity is increased. So, just a reminder, we have alot of work to do to get out people to vote who want to see this president gone. Do not become complacent. We have to vote him out, and we will need voters to do this.
100% this. I'm early voting tomorrow, can't wait.
-
Could this be a sign of a future weakening of the federal govt and strengthening of the states?
I doubt it.
Federalism (States' rights) has been on the wane since the late 1930s.
-
It is sickening watching how politicized this pandemic has become. This is truly a time for people to set aside their differences and work as members of the same human race to overcome something bigger, more impactful, and immediate than politics.
Right versus Left
Democrat versus Republican
Liberal versus Conservative
Marxist versus Libertarian
Take your pick.
Stalwart Democratic Party operative James Carville said "Politics is war."
I'm sure prominent Republicans have made similar, bellicose statements.
The enmity between the political factions is so deep and longstanding that it is unhealable.
Many on each side have such a consuming hatred of the other side that it blinds them to the fact that in America the freedom to choose includes political affiliation.
What is worse is that the hate-filled factions fail to understand that hatred is a negative passion that is unhealthy for themselves.
-
Didn't the US unite somewhat during 9/11? That's what I heard. Some of the animosity with this could be the nature of the problem: you don't know who's dangerous right now. Not sure it's particularly partisan. There's animosity up here in Canada too.
-
Some of the animosity with this could be the nature of the problem: you don't know who's dangerous right now.
A few days ago I heard discussion of the divisiveness of pandemics.
The opinion expressed was that pandemics naturally divide people because person A fears they will get the disease from person B and vice versa.
-
I think we will come together if (hopefully not when) people start getting sick or dying in large numbers. Right now this is still just a bad flu to some. It hasn't hit most people other than the shuttering of sports. Some states still don't think they have any cases. 9/11 brought people together because we were attacked from the outside and all fell back on "patriotism." If people start getting sick they will need health care. They won't care who the doctor or nurse voted for, they will just want to get better. I hope we are able to avoid the more dire scenarios, but if we are not, it *should* make us realize how pointless our political squabbles are when faced with losing friends and family members.
I am the only member of my family who isn't a Democrat. We don't see eye to eye on political issues or the best solutions to systemic problems. Even though we disagree on lots of issues they know there is just about nothing that I wouldn't do for them. There is a not a single one of them that I wouldn't want in my life just because we don't agree and certainly not due to this virus. I hope we don't have to come close to losing anyone to realize that life > politics.
-
I think we will come together if (hopefully not when) people start getting sick or dying in large numbers. Right now this is still just a bad flu to some. It hasn't hit most people other than the shuttering of sports. Some states still don't think they have any cases. 9/11 brought people together because we were attacked from the outside and all fell back on "patriotism." If people start getting sick they will need health care. They won't care who the doctor or nurse voted for, they will just want to get better. I hope we are able to avoid the more dire scenarios, but if we are not, it *should* make us realize how pointless our political squabbles are when faced with losing friends and family members.
I'm not really convinced this is the case because it's already become a political thing.
By the time there's enough concrete evidence to bring people together, the boulder will be pushed down the hill. And at that point, blaming/fingerpointing is going to result, not unity.
-
I'm really impressed with New Zealand's Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern. When she gave the speech announcing tight border controls, she made it clear that freight is not blocked. Her government has been ready with testing and very open about numbers. People here are aware and being careful, but not doing panic shopping.
Lucky New Zealand, to have her.
-
This is the beginning of the end for Trump, the walls are closing in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1ab6uxg908
^ This should be required viewing for every pundit and Democratic operative. Trump's base does not care about anything he says or does, they just like the idea of Trump and nothing, literally nothing, will change their minds. Until some fraction of Republicans decide to oppose Trump--which in my opinion will never happen--this will not be the end of Trump.
-
This is the beginning of the end for Trump, the walls are closing in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1ab6uxg908
^ This should be required viewing for every pundit and Democratic operative. Trump's base does not care about anything he says or does, they just like the idea of Trump and nothing, literally nothing, will change their minds. Until some fraction of Republicans decide to oppose Trump--which in my opinion will never happen--this will not be the end of Trump.
Yeah, I tend to agree. Unless we define 'end of Trump' as losing the next election (which could happen even without coronavirus response). Trump's recent behavior will no doubt solidify the intent of conservative-leaning swing voters like my father (who voted for Trump b/c !BENGHAZI! !EMAILS!, and then within 6 months decided he'd made the hugest mistake of his voting life) to vote against Trump no matter what. But that might happen anyway.
If we define 'end of Trump' as this ~35% of voters that are passionately in support staying home or voting Dem? I don't believe that will happen. This pandemic likely won't budge them at all b/c they are with Trump as a matter of identity solidarity, not policy and not practical competence. (You could find similar intensity of allegiance among hardcore Sanders, etc., voters, I suspect).
-
^ This should be required viewing for every pundit and Democratic operative. Trump's base does not care about anything he says or does, they just like the idea of Trump and nothing, literally nothing, will change their minds. Until some fraction of Republicans decide to oppose Trump--which in my opinion will never happen--this will not be the end of Trump.
It's not that Trump supporters don't care about what the President does. It's that they are tired of the media blaming him for every bad thing that happens in the world. It's that kind of video which energizes them and makes them more eager than ever to reject the media narrative that Trump is a bad man.
-
^ This should be required viewing for every pundit and Democratic operative. Trump's base does not care about anything he says or does, they just like the idea of Trump and nothing, literally nothing, will change their minds. Until some fraction of Republicans decide to oppose Trump--which in my opinion will never happen--this will not be the end of Trump.
It's not that Trump supporters don't care about what the President does. It's that they are tired of the media blaming him for every bad thing that happens in the world. It's that kind of video which energizes them and makes them more eager than ever to reject the media narrative that Trump is a bad man.
Or they are tired of "learning" that the media blames President Trump for everything, as told to them by Fox News, which is out to paint Trump as unfairly victimized by...everyone that pipes up with any peep of criticism...and who are all trying ruin his perfect presidency, whereas he is just a good ol' David fighting that Goliath.
It's not clear that the real Trump devotees actually consume that other media first-hand enough to know whether they actually do blame him for "every bad thing that happens in the world" or if any of it is justified if so.
-
^ This should be required viewing for every pundit and Democratic operative. Trump's base does not care about anything he says or does, they just like the idea of Trump and nothing, literally nothing, will change their minds. Until some fraction of Republicans decide to oppose Trump--which in my opinion will never happen--this will not be the end of Trump.
It's not that Trump supporters don't care about what the President does. It's that they are tired of the media blaming him for every bad thing that happens in the world. It's that kind of video which energizes them and makes them more eager than ever to reject the media narrative that Trump is a bad man.
There is a whole lot more.
Anytime you hear any of the following, they seem to me like excuses:
1. "Media blaming Trump".....
2. "they call us deplorables"
3. "they look at us funny"
Trump is not the first politician who is using identity politics, nor will he be the last - unfortunately! It's the norm in banana republics abundant in Africa, and in many parts of Asia. Follow voting news in Afganistan - and you will notice how tribes vote according to identity and nothing the candidate does (or even who the candidate is) quite matters.
"Identitarians" voting for Trump are upset that the middle-aged W.A.S.P. men are no longer the sole power brokers. Silicon valley CEOs are brown, women are often the bosses in many fields now, and the last president was black. Now, even LGBT people can become the overlords of these "real americans" (as they like to fashion themselves).
The rage generated from this "identity humiliation" is not amenable by typical levers of democracy.
Trump is not the first politician to use identity politics. Look up the Tamil Rebels. They used to be the minority "elite class" in Sri Lanka. The majority Sinhalese took over in the last 50 years, and enacted some pretty draconian measures against the minority (no Tamil language education - for example). That, of course enraged them. They are the ones who invented suicide bombing!!
Trump is not even the first politician in the US to use identity politics. Read up American History when Lincoln was trying to negotiate with the south and all his attempt to compromise failed.
It does not matter if the identity grudges are real. Just the fact that these "real americans" perceive there is an "american carnage" (Trump's words) means they will act accordingly.
------------
Just do a thought experiment to see what I mean about "execuses". Will a red-hat-wearing-MAGA supporter start voting for democrats if they were treated politely?
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is remarkably counterproductive rhetoric, and is part of the reason Trump is in the White House right now.
<Off topic (Duh! This is off topic forum, after all)>
Semi-rhetorical and semi-genuinely-curious question:
Are people really voting based on what others think of them?
In my professional career, I've hopped between jobs in Consulting, Wall St trading desks and other financial firms. So, as a matter of necessary survival skill - I have an extraordinarily thick skin. When I was in consulting, I used to fly out weekly to some Midwestern or Southern city. So I am keenly aware that people in the Midwest and South are much more "easy going" and much less "aggressive and pushy" than myself or others from more fast-paced environs. Indeed, I learned it the hard way, after causing 2-and-a-half major incidents early in my career where my style of following-up and managing dependencies was deemed too "aggressive and pushy". So I am keenly aware to actively adjust my style depending on where I am and who I am speaking with.
Even with this awareness of how delicate Midwestern or Southern feelings could be - attempting to decide what kind of healthcare you would like, tax policies you will like etc based on what others think of you seems like the height of snowflake-ish behavior to me. Are people really doing that? What is their expectation? That others need to learn to be politically correct when interacting with them?
The rhetorical part of this question is to point out the irony of Trump supporters acting like snowflakes and expecting political correctness.
The genuine part of the question is - how prevalent is this? It's quite natural for any political tribe - left or right - to have some snowflakes. Are they just marginal determinants? or the majority of the right-wing body politic?
</Off topic>
Perhaps we agree to disagree on what "snowflake" means. To you it apparently means any negative reaction to any comment, even if the underlying comment is rude. To me, "snowflake" is a overreaction in response to something benign or meant without malicious intent.
Calling someone or a group of people "dumbfucks" based on where they live is just flat out rude. To respond negatively is not to be a "snowflake." The response will be somewhat of a middle finger. The political version of the middle finger is Donald J. Trump.
-
Until some fraction of Republicans decide to oppose Trump--which in my opinion will never happen--this will not be the end of Trump.
Anthony Scaramucci, his former communications director says that he has alienated too many women and people of color to get reelected (https://www.cnn.com/business/live-news/stock-market-news-today-030420/h_f0e5d1abf51f05f505c62f0e79420cc6). But you are correct that 35% of the country may always love him.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is the kind of attitude that got Trump elected. When will we learn?
The attitude of a middle aged woman in New Zealand did not get Trump elected, sorry. You people did that all on your own. I hear about your weird voter system that allowed a twit like him to win when apparently nobody voted for him. Guess what? Also your fault. You managed to "accidentally" get the guy in, and nothing you've done is likely to get him out. It'll be no surprise at all to me that Planet Yank has managed to vote him in for a second term. Hell, you might even change the laws and let him play at being president for the next 20 years. This is what the rest of the world knows - individually, even in small groups, Americans are some of the nicest and smartest people on earth. Collectively? All bets are off. Gun laws, health care, international wars, Dumbfuckistan for the win! Trump is really just a big old orange cherry on top.
-
Perhaps we agree to disagree on what "snowflake" means. To you it apparently means any negative reaction to any comment, even if the underlying comment is rude. To me, "snowflake" is a overreaction in response to something benign or meant without malicious intent.
I'm using the dictionary definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snowflake
"someone who is overly sensitive"
"someone regarded or treated as unique or special"
I'd also like to point out that the definition you are using will quickly lead to contradiction if you tried to think through it. The words "benign" and "malicious intent" would mean different things, most of the time, to the person saying something and the person listening to it.
It is quite common among Trumpets to utter misogynistic jokes around women involving rape, sex etc. From what I know and have seen, the rude a*seholes ("amaholes" if you work for Amazon) of Wall St or Silicon Valley are working hard to resolve it. The "polite" mid-western and southern middle-aged WASP male bosses seem to still mostly operate with the 60s mindset.
By your definition, the woman objecting to the advances of the said "polite" boss would be called a snowflake, while a new WASP wall-st intern protesting against the "rude" skewering he got from his black-female boss for totally job related reasons would not!
-
I do believe that this will be the end of Trump (although I'm far from certain).
I would credit my opinion to how poorly his administration has handled the situation, but more importantly to the fact that this has impacted people directly. They're upset and they'll be even more upset after a few weeks/months without entertainment and travel, being sick, watching their savings fall, and losing loved ones. People need someone to blame when they're upset and the president is always a prime target, especially when he actually is part of the problem.
I think we, who care enough about politics to discuss them on the internet with strangers, drastically overestimate how closely some voters pay attention. Many don't vote based on logic or the issues, they vote on emotion. I think that applies to enough people to kill Trump's chance of re-election. We'll see.
-
I do believe that this will be the end of Trump (although I'm far from certain).
I would credit my opinion to how poorly his administration has handled the situation, but more importantly to the fact that this has impacted people directly. They're upset and they'll be even more upset after a few weeks/months without entertainment and travel, being sick, watching their savings fall, and losing loved ones. People need someone to blame when they're upset and the president is always a prime target, especially when he actually is part of the problem.
I think we, who care enough about politics to discuss them on the internet with strangers, drastically overestimate how closely some voters pay attention. Many don't vote based on logic or the issues, they vote on emotion. I think that applies to enough people to kill Trump's chance of re-election. We'll see.
And yet.... you have a cheeto for a president.
-
Perhaps we agree to disagree on what "snowflake" means. To you it apparently means any negative reaction to any comment, even if the underlying comment is rude. To me, "snowflake" is a overreaction in response to something benign or meant without malicious intent.
I'm using the dictionary definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snowflake
"someone who is overly sensitive"
"someone regarded or treated as unique or special"
I'd also like to point out that the definition you are using will quickly lead to contradiction if you tried to think through it. The words "benign" and "malicious intent" would mean different things, most of the time, to the person saying something and the person listening to it.
It is quite common among Trumpets to utter misogynistic jokes around women involving rape, sex etc. From what I know and have seen, the rude a*seholes ("amaholes" if you work for Amazon) of Wall St or Silicon Valley are working hard to resolve it. The "polite" mid-western and southern middle-aged WASP male bosses seem to still mostly operate with the 60s mindset.
By your definition, the woman objecting to the advances of the said "polite" boss would be called a snowflake, while a new WASP wall-st intern protesting against the "rude" skewering he got from his black-female boss for totally job related reasons would not!
Dude, there is no need to be so tediously academic when the inquiry is whether calling people "dumbfucks" is rude and might result in some sort of pushback.
-
I do believe that this will be the end of Trump (although I'm far from certain).
I would credit my opinion to how poorly his administration has handled the situation, but more importantly to the fact that this has impacted people directly. They're upset and they'll be even more upset after a few weeks/months without entertainment and travel, being sick, watching their savings fall, and losing loved ones. People need someone to blame when they're upset and the president is always a prime target, especially when he actually is part of the problem.
I think we, who care enough about politics to discuss them on the internet with strangers, drastically overestimate how closely some voters pay attention. Many don't vote based on logic or the issues, they vote on emotion. I think that applies to enough people to kill Trump's chance of re-election. We'll see.
And yet.... you have a cheeto for a president.
We’re well aware, thanks. As I stated above, not all of us who live in “Dumbfuckistan,” as per your term, voted for him or will ever vote for him. Rather, we have been doing everything in our power to vote out his party (as we did in my state in 2018) and to make him a one-term president. I understand that you’re panicked, as are many, but does it really help to insult many of your fellow forummers?
-
Perhaps we agree to disagree on what "snowflake" means. To you it apparently means any negative reaction to any comment, even if the underlying comment is rude. To me, "snowflake" is a overreaction in response to something benign or meant without malicious intent.
I'm using the dictionary definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snowflake
"someone who is overly sensitive"
"someone regarded or treated as unique or special"
I'd also like to point out that the definition you are using will quickly lead to contradiction if you tried to think through it. The words "benign" and "malicious intent" would mean different things, most of the time, to the person saying something and the person listening to it.
It is quite common among Trumpets to utter misogynistic jokes around women involving rape, sex etc. From what I know and have seen, the rude a*seholes ("amaholes" if you work for Amazon) of Wall St or Silicon Valley are working hard to resolve it. The "polite" mid-western and southern middle-aged WASP male bosses seem to still mostly operate with the 60s mindset.
By your definition, the woman objecting to the advances of the said "polite" boss would be called a snowflake, while a new WASP wall-st intern protesting against the "rude" skewering he got from his black-female boss for totally job related reasons would not!
Dude, there is no need to be so tediously academic when the inquiry is whether calling people "dumbfucks" is rude and might result in some sort of pushback.
Sure it's rude and unproductive. But claiming it's one of the reasons why Trump was elected and will be elected again doesn't really make sense. Joe Schmo standing up and applauding at a weekly Trump rally as he belittles, lies and insults anyone he doesn't like probably isn't going to vote for Trump because someone else said something insulting.
-
Dude, there is no need to be so tediously academic when the inquiry is whether calling people "dumbfucks" is rude and might result in some sort of pushback.
I didn't mean to be academic over this, but I can see why my post came across that way. I didn't litigate that issue academically with an aim to obfuscate - apologies if it came across that way.
Yes, calling entire parts of geography "dumbfukistan" is uncalled for.
No, pointing out large parts of Trumpets are "deplorables" is not - let's say - incorrect.
No, people who take umbrage over the "deplorables" comment will not suddenly stop liking Trump. They are pissed off at the deplorables comment because they already *do* self-identify, almost cult-like, as Trump Supporters.
At worst, the pushback you speak of seems to be a confirmation of a pre-existing thought process.
I've spent 2 years living in the Cincinnati/Northern-Kentucky area as a transplant. So I am somewhat familiar with the "rage" people feel in these places against the "coastal elites". It is not a new thing. It existed even back then - one and a half decade ago - when I used to live there. I've been heard snide remarks even back then when people heard I was a computer programmer, originally from the NYC area, have what they considered a "very good" job (consulting can be a very sweet gig when you are single).
There are some complicated reasons for why people feel resentful against others for grabbing opportunities that they do not feel they even have a shot at. A lot of "oh the coastal elites think they are better than us" is a projection of one's own thought process - and will not change even if Hillary stops calling "them" deplorable.
The above is just based on what I felt and saw, and not data driven science.
You live there now. So maybe things changed between what I saw and what happened since the Trump revolution. If you can point out why my thought process above is incorrect, and why what I experienced in my extensive travel through mid-west for several years does not apply, then I might stand corrected. I'm *always* curious about how other people see things and what they think.
-
Most of the posters here are left-leaning, so of course the general consensus is going to be that "there is no way Trump could win in 2020." That sounds to me a lot like the refrain I heard in 2016.
40%+ of voters will vote for President Trump, period. In much the same way that 40%+ will vote for whomever the Democratic Party nominates. It's a matter of tribal identity.
I find it amazing that both factions of our political duopoly will be offering up slightly different versions of the same demographic: old white guys with questionable grips on reality.
ETA: clarified that its voters, not the population. Most people don't vote.
-
Most of the posters here are left-leaning, so of course the general consensus is going to be that "there is no way Trump could win in 2020." That sounds to me a lot like the refrain I heard in 2016.
40%+ of the population will vote for President Trump, period. In much the same way that 40%+ of the population will vote for whomever the Democratic Party nominates. It's a matter of tribal identity.
I find it amazing that both factions of our political duopoly will be offering up slightly different versions of the same demographic: old white guys with questionable grips on reality.
Right? I recently responded to a boomer who was lamenting the lack of younger voters and wondering how to convince them that voting was important with “maybe both parties could stop exclusively nominating white men in their 70s who don’t seem to have a real understanding of life for the non-upper middle class, non-corporate-owner class, non-Medicare demographic?”
-
Most of the posters here are left-leaning, so of course the general consensus is going to be that "there is no way Trump could win in 2020." That sounds to me a lot like the refrain I heard in 2016.
40%+ of the population will vote for President Trump, period. In much the same way that 40%+ of the population will vote for whomever the Democratic Party nominates. It's a matter of tribal identity.
I find it amazing that both factions of our political duopoly will be offering up slightly different versions of the same demographic: old white guys with questionable grips on reality.
Right? I recently responded to a boomer who was lamenting the lack of younger voters and wondering how to convince them that voting was important with “maybe both parties could stop exclusively nominating white men in their 70s who don’t seem to have a real understanding of life for the non-upper middle class, non-corporate-owner class, non-Medicare demographic?”
Heck, I see this and I'm (arguably) a boomer. Interestingly, I think that Bernie Sanders has done a remarkable job of cutting across age demographics in spite of his advanced age. I may not agree with him much philosophically, but he is a passionate and I think genuine person. Even moreso with Tulsi Gabbard. It's more than a little telling to me that absent a miracle, neither of these people will be on the ballot to oppose President Trump come November*.
Unfortunately, in our politics the name of the game is achieving and maintaining power, not achieving consensus or moving society forward.
*(full disclosure. I view partisan politics as a net negative to society and I don't vote. And I urge others to do the same.)
-
It is sickening watching how politicized this pandemic has become. This is truly a time for people to set aside their differences and work as members of the same human race to overcome something bigger, more impactful, and immediate than politics.
Right versus Left
Democrat versus Republican
Liberal versus Conservative
Marxist versus Libertarian
Take your pick.
Stalwart Democratic Party operative James Carville said "Politics is war."
I'm sure prominent Republicans have made similar, bellicose statements.
The enmity between the political factions is so deep and longstanding that it is unhealable.
Many on each side have such a consuming hatred of the other side that it blinds them to the fact that in America the freedom to choose includes political affiliation.
What is worse is that the hate-filled factions fail to understand that hatred is a negative passion that is unhealthy for themselves.
We also have the choice not to participate. A highly maligned choice, at least among the politically obsessed. But a rational and honorable one nonetheless.
-
It is sickening watching how politicized this pandemic has become. This is truly a time for people to set aside their differences and work as members of the same human race to overcome something bigger, more impactful, and immediate than politics.
Right versus Left
Democrat versus Republican
Liberal versus Conservative
Marxist versus Libertarian
Take your pick.
Stalwart Democratic Party operative James Carville said "Politics is war."
I'm sure prominent Republicans have made similar, bellicose statements.
The enmity between the political factions is so deep and longstanding that it is unhealable.
Many on each side have such a consuming hatred of the other side that it blinds them to the fact that in America the freedom to choose includes political affiliation.
What is worse is that the hate-filled factions fail to understand that hatred is a negative passion that is unhealthy for themselves.
We also have the choice not to participate. A highly maligned choice, at least among the politically obsessed. But a rational and honorable one nonetheless.
My grandparents were activists in the fight for my right to vote. It would be dishonourable for me not to vote.
-
It is sickening watching how politicized this pandemic has become. This is truly a time for people to set aside their differences and work as members of the same human race to overcome something bigger, more impactful, and immediate than politics.
Right versus Left
Democrat versus Republican
Liberal versus Conservative
Marxist versus Libertarian
Take your pick.
Stalwart Democratic Party operative James Carville said "Politics is war."
I'm sure prominent Republicans have made similar, bellicose statements.
The enmity between the political factions is so deep and longstanding that it is unhealable.
Many on each side have such a consuming hatred of the other side that it blinds them to the fact that in America the freedom to choose includes political affiliation.
What is worse is that the hate-filled factions fail to understand that hatred is a negative passion that is unhealthy for themselves.
We also have the choice not to participate. A highly maligned choice, at least among the politically obsessed. But a rational and honorable one nonetheless.
My grandparents were activists in the fight for my right to vote. It would be dishonourable for me not to vote.
My immigrant grandmother never got to vote. Women have only been allowed to vote in my country for 100 years. Yeah, I'm fucking exercising my right to vote and encouraging everyone else to do so. If you don't vote, fine, your choice, but you've pretty much absolved yourself of the right to complain about your elected leadership at all levels because you couldn't even be arsed to show up and tick a box on a ballot.
If you sit out national elections, yeah, your one vote won't matter (although the 2016 election is a great example of the potential consequence of that attitude en masse). At a local level, though? Your mayor and clerk and city council and school board make the decisions about your taxes and public services, and all of them are elected officials. Sometimes they win by one or two votes.
-
Most of the posters here are left-leaning, so of course the general consensus is going to be that "there is no way Trump could win in 2020." That sounds to me a lot like the refrain I heard in 2016.
40%+ of voters will vote for President Trump, period. In much the same way that 40%+ will vote for whomever the Democratic Party nominates. It's a matter of tribal identity.
I find it amazing that both factions of our political duopoly will be offering up slightly different versions of the same demographic: old white guys with questionable grips on reality.
ETA: clarified that its voters, not the population. Most people don't vote.
I think you are confusing the fact that left-leaning voters on this forum might find it hypothetically baffling as to how so many people support Trump that he could be elected/re-elected, but in practice I doubt many of us are fooling ourselves that those voters still exist. We can read polls. His voters haven't abandoned him, so I'm pretty sure most of us are well aware that he stands a reasonable shot at re-election. Most of the vote is locked in for ANY election; thus, just getting the nomination means any given candidate has a very good chance to win in any given year, despite personality, policies, competence, etc.
-
I find it interesting that in the space of about 24 hours, COVID-19 went from being "a mild cold, a Democrat hoax to discredit Trump, an over-hyped media panic, already contained and soon to be zero cases", to a huge problem that Trump has quickly addressed like no other response in history to a major health threat. And the only thing that held him back was the onerous regulations put in place by Obama.
-
I think we, who care enough about politics to discuss them on the internet with strangers, drastically overestimate how closely some voters pay attention.
Many don't vote based on logic or the issues, they vote on emotion.
I think that applies to enough people to kill Trump's chance of re-election. We'll see.
A candidate's likability also influences voters
As annoyer in chief, in some quarters Trump has none.
-
So...does anyone else expect new outbreaks focused around US airports receiving international flights after the US government botched yet another response?
Trump defends US over airport crowding amid virus fears (https://www.twincities.com/2020/03/15/trump-defends-us-over-airport-crowding-amid-virus-fears/)
Pritzker said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the administration should have bolstered staffing at the receiving airports in anticipation of long lines. But instead, he said, passengers “were stuck in a small area, hundreds and hundreds of people, and that’s exactly what you don’t want in this pandemic.”
He predicted Sunday would “be even worse.”
President Donald Trump defended the administration’s actions in a tweet Sunday.
“We are doing very precise Medical Screenings at our airports. Pardon the interruptions and delays, we are moving as quickly as possible, but it is very important that we be vigilant and careful. We must get it right. Safety first!” he wrote.
-
I hope this is the end of Trump. Unfortunately, I doubt he loses any followers as a result of this, or anything else. There have been countless opportunities for people to turn away from supporting Trump based on some lie, or some misstep, or false claim he makes. But no, the bootlicking intensity is increased. So, just a reminder, we have alot of work to do to get out people to vote who want to see this president gone. Do not become complacent. We have to vote him out, and we will need voters to do this.
Well, his followers skew older and from jurisdictions where health care is vastly underfunded and devalued. If this virus gets as bad as it seems to be threatening, Trump may well have a lot fewer followers in a few months.
Those that remain might well be looking at the mass graves of their friends and family and looking for someone to blame. They may be somewhat resistant to attempts to blame people who were NOT in power at the time of the disaster.
Of course, I hope that doesn't come to pass (the deaths and suffering). If it does, Trump takes a lot of the blame for the pathetic response to the crisis in the early days. If it doesn't, you know he will take all the credit he can claim for 'stopping' it.
-
I hope it’s the end of the orange moron!
-
I find it interesting that in the space of about 24 hours, COVID-19 went from being "a mild cold, a Democrat hoax to discredit Trump, an over-hyped media panic, already contained and soon to be zero cases", to a huge problem that Trump has quickly addressed like no other response in history to a major health threat. And the only thing that held him back was the onerous regulations put in place by Obama.
Yeah, the outdated regulations were mentioned several times by Trump during Friday's press junket. They prevented him from doing something 4 weeks ago or 2 weeks ago and it's only NOW that those outdated regulations have been vanquished.
I suspect it's because it finally became reality to him. Seeing fellow world leaders get it, possibly? Or big business is reacting faster than the US government? Or maybe he or Pence have it.
-
Big news in Germany right now that the Trump administration is attempting to acquire a German-developed vaccine for US use only. Who wants to place bets on whether he wanted to take credit for a "US developed vaccine only available to Americans," charge out the ass for it and rake in the big bucks, or some of both.
Earlier, the Welt am Sonntag German newspaper reported that U.S. President Donald Trump had offered funds to lure CureVac to the United States, and the German government was making counter-offers to tempt it to stay.
Responding to the report, the U.S. ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, wrote on Twitter: “The Welt story was wrong.”
A U.S. official said: “This story is wildly overplayed ... We will continue to talk to any company that claims to be able to help. And any solution found would be shared with the world.”
A German Health Ministry spokeswoman, confirming a quote in the newspaper, said: “The German government is very interested in ensuring that vaccines and active substances against the new coronavirus are also developed in Germany and Europe.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-germany-usa/germany-tries-to-stop-us-from-luring-away-firm-seeking-coronavirus-vaccine-idUSKBN2120IV
The Trump administration has offered a German medical company “large sums of money” for exclusive access to a Covid-19 vaccine, German media have reported.
The German government is trying to fight off what it sees as an aggressive takeover bid by the US, the broadsheet Die Welt reports, citing German government circles.
The US president had offered the Tübingen-based biopharmaceutical company CureVac “large sums of money” to gain exclusive access to their work, wrote Die Welt.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/15/trump-offers-large-sums-for-exclusive-access-to-coronavirus-vaccine
-
Big news in Germany right now that the Trump administration is attempting to acquire a German-developed vaccine for US use only. Who wants to place bets on whether he wanted to take credit for a "US developed vaccine only available to Americans," charge out the ass for it and rake in the big bucks, or some of both.
Earlier, the Welt am Sonntag German newspaper reported that U.S. President Donald Trump had offered funds to lure CureVac to the United States, and the German government was making counter-offers to tempt it to stay.
Responding to the report, the U.S. ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, wrote on Twitter: “The Welt story was wrong.”
A U.S. official said: “This story is wildly overplayed ... We will continue to talk to any company that claims to be able to help. And any solution found would be shared with the world.”
A German Health Ministry spokeswoman, confirming a quote in the newspaper, said: “The German government is very interested in ensuring that vaccines and active substances against the new coronavirus are also developed in Germany and Europe.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-germany-usa/germany-tries-to-stop-us-from-luring-away-firm-seeking-coronavirus-vaccine-idUSKBN2120IV
The Trump administration has offered a German medical company “large sums of money” for exclusive access to a Covid-19 vaccine, German media have reported.
The German government is trying to fight off what it sees as an aggressive takeover bid by the US, the broadsheet Die Welt reports, citing German government circles.
The US president had offered the Tübingen-based biopharmaceutical company CureVac “large sums of money” to gain exclusive access to their work, wrote Die Welt.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/15/trump-offers-large-sums-for-exclusive-access-to-coronavirus-vaccine
I posted this earlier and an american told me it was fake news!
-
I posted this earlier and an american told me it was fake news!
In America, any news you disagree with is fake news. So, it depends on the American you asked/told you.
-
I posted this earlier and an american told me it was fake news!
Any news that doesn't portray Trump as a anointed saintly angel is fake news.
-
I posted this earlier and an american told me it was fake news!
Any news that doesn't portray Trump as a anointed saintly angel is fake news.
He looks like someone annointed him with gravy powder.
-
Is it too late to get Obama back in office?
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is remarkably counterproductive rhetoric, and is part of the reason Trump is in the White House right now.
Agree.
Kyle S. has also warned of the fruitlessness of abrasive rhetoric.
It's defeatist as well. The rhetoric suggests that there's no point in trying to make things better. People are not born Republican or Democratic. Everyone who wants more than just "my team vs your team" rhetoric needs to figure out how to make politics local again.
-
I do believe that this will be the end of Trump (although I'm far from certain).
I would credit my opinion to how poorly his administration has handled the situation, but more importantly to the fact that this has impacted people directly. They're upset and they'll be even more upset after a few weeks/months without entertainment and travel, being sick, watching their savings fall, and losing loved ones. People need someone to blame when they're upset and the president is always a prime target, especially when he actually is part of the problem.
I think we, who care enough about politics to discuss them on the internet with strangers, drastically overestimate how closely some voters pay attention. Many don't vote based on logic or the issues, they vote on emotion. I think that applies to enough people to kill Trump's chance of re-election. We'll see.
And yet.... you have a cheeto for a president.
We’re well aware, thanks. As I stated above, not all of us who live in “Dumbfuckistan,” as per your term, voted for him or will ever vote for him. Rather, we have been doing everything in our power to vote out his party (as we did in my state in 2018) and to make him a one-term president. I understand that you’re panicked, as are many, but does it really help to insult many of your fellow forummers?
Dumbfuckistan isn't my term - I took it from a common meme, as I pointed out in the original post. Also, I don't mean to insult you or fellow forummers. I understand that there's a huge difference between the american people and 'Merica. I'v never met an american who wasn't a lovely, warm and friendly person, but 'Merica is something I loathe. You and other forummers are strictly in my american people category. Dumbfuckistan is a place in 'Merica. I hope that makes sense, because I really don't mean to offend you guys individually.
-
Dumbfuckistan isn't my term - I took it from a common meme, as I pointed out in the original post. Also, I don't mean to insult you or fellow forummers. I understand that there's a huge difference between the american people and 'Merica. I'v never met an american who wasn't a lovely, warm and friendly person, but 'Merica is something I loathe. You and other forummers are strictly in my american people category. Dumbfuckistan is a place in 'Merica. I hope that makes sense, because I really don't mean to offend you guys individually.
And yet you have had several people tell you it was rude and divisive. So maybe stop and think instead of doubling down?
Explaining the thinking behind a post is hardly doubling down. Meanwhile, either take it the way it was intended or don't. Won't impact my day one iota.
-
Dumbfuckistan isn't my term - I took it from a common meme, as I pointed out in the original post. Also, I don't mean to insult you or fellow forummers. I understand that there's a huge difference between the american people and 'Merica. I'v never met an american who wasn't a lovely, warm and friendly person, but 'Merica is something I loathe. You and other forummers are strictly in my american people category. Dumbfuckistan is a place in 'Merica. I hope that makes sense, because I really don't mean to offend you guys individually.
And yet you have had several people tell you it was rude and divisive. So maybe stop and think instead of doubling down?
Explaining the thinking behind a post is hardly doubling down. Meanwhile, either take it the way it was intended or don't. Won't impact my day one iota.
Meh. I’m an American, and I agree with Anna about Merica.
-
“Dumbfuckistan” generalization is wrong, like all stereotypes are.
Reaction to that stereotype is just as much warranted as the “make liberals cry” t-shirts in the Trump rallies.
If there is someone who was just as much upset about the right wing war against decency and what they call “political correctness”, something that started way before the “dumbfukistan” meme, then they have my full support.
If someone is selectively outraged by the ‘dumbfukistan’ meme, but found no issues with many other outrageous stereotypes the right and their orange chief spews, then they can be safely ignored as common snowflakes.
I probably have a defeatist perspective here. I suspect that you can’t really fix partisan snowflakes. It takes a certain degree of EQ to be able to empathize with others, yet more with others who don’t look like you, and you can’t manufacture that in large groups of people who has been trained to replace empathy with manufactured outrage.
-
“Dumbfuckistan” generalization is wrong, like all stereotypes are.
Yes, but at the same time it is pertinent to this discussion about the end of Trump, or Trumpism, or the US dollar as the global reserve currency. We can only screw up so much and be the leader of the free world, eventually people will sell our bonds and tell us to pound sand. I fear that point is getting close.
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is the kind of attitude that got Trump elected. When will we learn?
The attitude of a middle aged woman in New Zealand did not get Trump elected, sorry. You people did that all on your own. I hear about your weird voter system that allowed a twit like him to win when apparently nobody voted for him. Guess what? Also your fault. You managed to "accidentally" get the guy in, and nothing you've done is likely to get him out. It'll be no surprise at all to me that Planet Yank has managed to vote him in for a second term. Hell, you might even change the laws and let him play at being president for the next 20 years. This is what the rest of the world knows - individually, even in small groups, Americans are some of the nicest and smartest people on earth. Collectively? All bets are off. Gun laws, health care, international wars, Dumbfuckistan for the win! Trump is really just a big old orange cherry on top.
Well, if you're not even in the US, I guess your ignorance can be excused. For your own education, you can see that there is plenty of blue spread throughout the country, and plenty of red on the coasts.
https://brilliantmaps.com/2016-county-election-map/
-
Trump is a frickin idiot with a wide voter base of other frickin idiots. Have you seen that meme of the east and west coasts of the USA labelled "America" and the rest labelled "Dumbfuckistan"? Dumbfuckistan is a large place. Not sure you can get rid of the king.
This is the kind of attitude that got Trump elected. When will we learn?
The attitude of a middle aged woman in New Zealand did not get Trump elected, sorry. You people did that all on your own. I hear about your weird voter system that allowed a twit like him to win when apparently nobody voted for him. Guess what? Also your fault. You managed to "accidentally" get the guy in, and nothing you've done is likely to get him out. It'll be no surprise at all to me that Planet Yank has managed to vote him in for a second term. Hell, you might even change the laws and let him play at being president for the next 20 years. This is what the rest of the world knows - individually, even in small groups, Americans are some of the nicest and smartest people on earth. Collectively? All bets are off. Gun laws, health care, international wars, Dumbfuckistan for the win! Trump is really just a big old orange cherry on top.
Well, if you're not even in the US, I guess your ignorance can be excused. For your own education, you can see that there is plenty of blue spread throughout the country, and plenty of red on the coasts.
https://brilliantmaps.com/2016-county-election-map/
Yes, and even that map is misleading...I am in one of the reddest of the red counties in the middle, but almost one third of the county still voted for Clinton in 2016. And that's true across a lot of the red counties. And vice versa. That's why the popular vote in the U.S. is usually quite close. It wasn't that "nobody voted for Trump" but somehow he got elected. Tons of people voted for him, and even more people voted for Clinton. But we have winner take all electoral college, and Trump got more state delegates. It is a crazy system, but it doesn't result in candidates with no support winning. It CAN result in candidates with a not-quite-majority of popular votes winning, as happened here and a few other times.
-
So over the last 24 hours Trump has spent a lot of time babbling about pardoning Michael Flynn. Because that's an important use of his time, platform and the nation's attention. This while the markets have yet again triggered a pause in trading today and "his" one great achievement is supposed to be how great the economy is under his administration? Not to mention the many other priorities he could be working on or at the least bringing much-needed attention to.
-
Still waiting for further confirmation, but NY Times just posted this:
President Trump told a group of governors Monday morning that they should not wait for the federal government to fill the growing demand for respirators needed to help people diagnosed with coronavirus.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/world/coronavirus-news.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/world/coronavirus-news.html)
-
I suspect it's because it finally became reality to him. Seeing fellow world leaders get it, possibly? Or big business is reacting faster than the US government? Or maybe he or Pence have it.
Nope. Yesterday at the presser he said "we have tremendous control (over COVID19)." His first instinct is to lie about everything. He clearly does not understand the seriousness of the situation.
-
I suspect it's because it finally became reality to him. Seeing fellow world leaders get it, possibly? Or big business is reacting faster than the US government? Or maybe he or Pence have it.
Nope. Yesterday at the presser he said "we have tremendous control (over COVID19)." His first instinct is to lie about everything. He clearly does not understand the seriousness of the situation.
Of course not. He has never faced serious consequences for anything in his life.
-
I suspect it's because it finally became reality to him. Seeing fellow world leaders get it, possibly? Or big business is reacting faster than the US government? Or maybe he or Pence have it.
Nope. Yesterday at the presser he said "we have tremendous control (over COVID19)." His first instinct is to lie about everything. He clearly does not understand the seriousness of the situation.
Of course not. He has never faced serious consequences for anything in his life.
This is what happens when you get a million dollars at age 12.
We can't deny that declaring a national emergency isn't a good idea. It's weeks late but he did announce it. On 3rd thought, maybe he finally agreed to do something because of market gyrations and the hit to the economy. As sui noted ^^^, that is his greatest accomplishment.
-
I live in "Dumbfuckistan." It's LCOL compared to the coasts, but you do have to go your own way culturally if you are not right-wing. I can get by pretty easily because I am white, male, heterosexual, Christian, and fairly well-off. Others have a more difficult time. I don't consider my neighbors to be literal dumb-fucks, more like misinformed or perhaps un-enlightened.
-
My father is a right leaning independent in a 'Dumfuckistan' swing state that went narrowly for Trump. My father voted for Trump. My father is also an atheist-leaning agnostic, who just announced to me that he wishes Trump would get the virus and die. Not only does Trump deserve it, but then Dad might actually be persuaded there was a god LOL.
So there you go. Even dumfuckistanians can learn, apparently.
-
I live in "Dumbfuckistan." It's LCOL compared to the coasts, but you do have to go your own way culturally if you are not right-wing. I can get by pretty easily because I am white, male, heterosexual, Christian, and fairly well-off. Others have a more difficult time. I don't consider my neighbors to be literal dumb-fucks, more like misinformed or perhaps un-enlightened.
Where I grew up in West Michigan, being a republican was a thing for a lot of people, myself included, not so much because you actually agreed with their policies necessarily, but because "you can't out-vote Detroit" (there's some racism in that statement I didn't appreciate when I was younger), and electing republicans gave a feeling of having a voice. I personally was never a registered republican, but voted that way more often than not. Age and distance and now I can't imagine myself ever voting for a Republican again personally. Kind of the antithesis of that Churchill quote heart/brains.
-
So Trump got on TV again at 3:30 this afternoon, and the DJIA started dropping as soon as he started talking. He couldn’t wait till 4:00?
Does anyone think he’s playing this to short the market so he and his buds can profit?
To answer the OPs statement, I thought “grab ‘em by the pussy” was the end. We know how that turned out.
-
Does anyone think he’s playing this to short the market so he and his buds can profit?
I think he created the virus (maybe under contract with China) because he thought it would secure him the presidency if he came up with a cure really fast, but then the german biotech company he had contacted to make a cure decided to cheat him because they are selling it to Russia.
-
So Trump got on TV again at 3:30 this afternoon, and the DJIA started dropping as soon as he started talking. He couldn’t wait till 4:00?
Does anyone think he’s playing this to short the market so he and his buds can profit?
To answer the OPs statement, I thought “grab ‘em by the pussy” was the end. We know how that turned out.
I did an off-schedule rebalance to the tune of $15K today. Thanks Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump!
Edit: I forgot to refer to Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump by his full name.
-
I'm sure Trump is very upset, hurt, and furious inside about what is happening with the coronavirus.
Oh, not because of the pain, suffering, and death of Americans, but because of how it reflects on him and his chances of getting re-elected.
-
So Trump got on TV again at 3:30 this afternoon, and the DJIA started dropping as soon as he started talking. He couldn’t wait till 4:00?
Does anyone think he’s playing this to short the market so he and his buds can profit?
To answer the OPs statement, I thought “grab ‘em by the pussy” was the end. We know how that turned out.
Markets were tripping over circuit-breakers today over and over again. That creates it's own volatility because all pricing and indexing algo's go heyware.
e.g. real world example from a commodities index for which I had written back-end code before the 2008 crisis:
circuit breaker -> no more price signal -> try to infer price signals from options market -> if that is not available, have the head trader mark some "fair price" after getting sign-off from 15 people.
In all these, volatility would skyrocket.
So my horse-sense is that today's volatility probably because of technical reasons and Trump had little to contribute. I heard the gist of what he said on CNBC - and it seems like he is now much more somber and acknowledging this to be a serious crisis. That (i.e. that fact that he is acting less like a petulant kid and more like a grown-up capable of stopping himself from reflexively lying) would count more as a positive.
-
I wonder if Trump will send autographed charts to his followers after today's market?
-
I wonder if Trump will send autographed charts to his followers after today's market?
*laughs in coronavirus*
-
I'm sure Trump is very upset, hurt, and furious inside about what is happening with the coronavirus.
Oh, not because of the pain, suffering, and death of Americans, but because of how it reflects on him and his chances of getting re-elected.
I dunno, seems like he thinks he's done so well at this that he is probably thinking his chances are better than ever! He's given himself a 10 out of 10 rating on how well he's performed (this is my shocked face). https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/487883-trump-gives-himself-10-out-of-10-on-coronavirus-response
-
I'm sure Trump is very upset, hurt, and furious inside about what is happening with the coronavirus.
Oh, not because of the pain, suffering, and death of Americans, but because of how it reflects on him and his chances of getting re-elected.
I dunno, seems like he thinks he's done so well at this that he is probably thinking his chances are better than ever! He's given himself a 10 out of 10 rating on how well he's performed (this is my shocked face). https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/487883-trump-gives-himself-10-out-of-10-on-coronavirus-response
He's overcompensating for his real failures.
-
I'm sure Trump is very upset, hurt, and furious inside about what is happening with the coronavirus.
Oh, not because of the pain, suffering, and death of Americans, but because of how it reflects on him and his chances of getting re-elected.
I dunno, seems like he thinks he's done so well at this that he is probably thinking his chances are better than ever! He's given himself a 10 out of 10 rating on how well he's performed (this is my shocked face). https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/487883-trump-gives-himself-10-out-of-10-on-coronavirus-response
He's overcompensating for his real failures.
It's possible that he's lived such a mediocre life that this really is a shining success from his perspective.
-
Sheesh !
Some of you guys would blame a flat tire on Trump.
It's not like Biden or Bernie have anything up their sleeves to cure the virus and turn this around.
-
Bernie would tax the virus to death.
Besides, if we had a flat tire, Trump would have the best spare, I mean a really great spare.
-
Sheesh !
Some of you guys would blame a flat tire on Trump.
It's not like Biden or Bernie have anything up their sleeves to cure the virus and turn this around.
Huh. Anybody other than the Cheeto Chief would have *many* major superpowers that could have helped us:
1. Not claiming this is a liberal/conservative/sith conspiracy.
2. Not twiddling their thumbs for weeks and letting the virus establish a foothold in the US - you know, by crossing the ocean for f*ck's sake.
3. Not firing the pandemic response team set up for *exactly* this situation.
4. Not filling up the government with dumbf*cks who doesn't know their a*se from their head, with the side benefits like testing kits would actually work.
etc. etc. etc.
You know, kinda like how Obama dealt with Ebola.
Didn't you know, not being stupid is a major superpower in dumbfuckistan. Not being incompetent on top of that is a Thanos level power.
-
Have to say, I feel very sorry for the USA in general, and Dumbfuckistan in particular. I'm sure everyone who did vote for Trump did so with the best of intentions..... and now you have a cheeto in control of the zombie apocalypse. No one could have anticipated this and certainly no one deserves it.
MOD NOTE: Adding this is rude to a large segment of the population, whatever you think of them, and doesn't contribute to the conversation. Please stop.
-
My father is a right leaning independent in a 'Dumfuckistan' swing state that went narrowly for Trump. My father voted for Trump. My father is also an atheist-leaning agnostic, who just announced to me that he wishes Trump would get the virus and die. Not only does Trump deserve it, but then Dad might actually be persuaded there was a god LOL.
So there you go. Even dumfuckistanians can learn, apparently.
Is it safe to say that four years ago he said "I could never vote for Hillary!" while looking around for his cronies' nodding heads. Never mind that she had been a successful senator. Never mind that she had been the hardest working Secretary of State, ever. No. He voted for Trump with the idea that he knew nothing and was a 'Washington Outsider'. A self-made man, a businessman.
And is now rethinking that regrettable choice.
-
I'm not sure any incumbent has much chance of reelection after this crisis is past. People who survive a major crisis tend to want to move on, no matter how well the leadership may have done (see: Churchill and most other Allied war leaders losing immediately after the war. Truman got a pass because he was not FDR).
Trump hasn't been doing himself any favours by clinging to his belief that he could lie and bluster his way through a tsunami of harsh reality.
If the worst case, or even the medium case scenarios come to pass on this pandemic I think Trump will be lucky to make it to November with his head still attached to his body.
-
Sheesh !
Some of you guys would blame a flat tire on Trump.
It's not like Biden or Bernie have anything up their sleeves to cure the virus and turn this around.
No one is blaming the virus on Trump. It's simply being pointed out the slow reaction times, the blatant lies, the "let's sweep this under the rug since it might hurt my chances at re-election" attitude. You can support Trump all you want because you like his personality or his policy positions or whatever. But he is not a leader. Never has been and never will be. He is very good a dictating, but that's not a trait of a good leader.
I firmly believe literally any other 2016 candidate (Republican or Dem) would have done an exponentially better job than Trump.
-
Sheesh !
Some of you guys would blame a flat tire on Trump.
It's not like Biden or Bernie have anything up their sleeves to cure the virus and turn this around.
No one is blaming the virus on Trump. It's simply being pointed out the slow reaction times, the blatant lies, the "let's sweep this under the rug since it might hurt my chances at re-election" attitude. You can support Trump all you want because you like his personality or his policy positions or whatever. But he is not a leader. Never has been and never will be. He is very good a dictating, but that's not a trait of a good leader.
I firmly believe literally any other 2016 candidate (Republican or Dem) would have done an exponentially better job than Trump.
If for no other reason than they would have just acknowledged it as a threat timely and not cut the CDC. It wouldn't have taken much in this case to do exponentially better. We were hamstrung from the start.
-
Sheesh !
Some of you guys would blame a flat tire on Trump.
It's not like Biden or Bernie have anything up their sleeves to cure the virus and turn this around.
No one is blaming the virus on Trump. It's simply being pointed out the slow reaction times, the blatant lies, the "let's sweep this under the rug since it might hurt my chances at re-election" attitude. You can support Trump all you want because you like his personality or his policy positions or whatever. But he is not a leader. Never has been and never will be. He is very good a dictating, but that's not a trait of a good leader.
I firmly believe literally any other 2016 candidate (Republican or Dem) would have done an exponentially better job than Trump.
As do I. At this point, I’m pretty sure Mike Pence would have done a much better job on his own, without having to seek permission from Trump and Family.
-
Don’t forget how his obsession on the markets meant that the fed and the federal government has *much* less firepower to address the economic fallout.
Imagine an alternative world where Trump did not jawbone the fed into cutting rates right in the middle of the longest economic expansion on record. Market said “meh!” To a 1% rate cut. Would it have said meh! To a 3% one?
Imagine again that trumps cronies and billionaires were not given a $2T handout after “borrowing” the money from my and your kids generation (what is borrowing without permission called, again?). Could that money, perhaps, be spent on tackling the economic impact of COVID-19?
But the Cheeto chief is not the disease, just the symptom.
Why?
Imagine again the world where trillions of dollars were spent on US local economy, instead of chasing the weapons of mass “distraction”.
-
I think that the Trump Presidency will very much still be going on if one or more SCOTUS justices contract this virus and cannot serve anymore.
-
1. The man that led the pandemic task force says that current staffing is up to the task. Anyone saying otherwise is misrepresenting the situation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-house-didnt-dissolve-its-pandemic-response-office/#click=https://t.co/9DSuJbU8Cy
2. Republicans are less concerned because quarantine fits into their habits better. Buy a few extra supplies when you go grocery shopping. Your nearest neighbor could be a quarter mile away and you haven't talked to them in weeks.
3. Democrats won't be able to capitalize on the virus because one front runner has had a heart attack and the other seems to be confused half the time. They should run someone younger and healthy to reassure people. Too late for that.
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
And any calculations for socialized care were made on the fact they could be made cheap in China. Now with pushes to reshore those industries all those figures can be thrown out the window.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/business/economy/coronavirus-china-trump-drugs.html
Granted things might change but right now I doubt the virus will topple Trump.
-
I posted this earlier and an american told me it was fake news!
In America, any news you disagree with is fake news. So, it depends on the American you asked/told you.
*Only if you're right-leaning. Very few on the left respond simply "fake news".
A guy called fake news un-ironically on an article that showed up on my Facebook feed. The publication you might ask? The Onion. Calling fake news on an "article" from the onion - the onion should write an article about that actually.
-
My father is a right leaning independent in a 'Dumfuckistan' swing state that went narrowly for Trump. My father voted for Trump. My father is also an atheist-leaning agnostic, who just announced to me that he wishes Trump would get the virus and die. Not only does Trump deserve it, but then Dad might actually be persuaded there was a god LOL.
So there you go. Even dumfuckistanians can learn, apparently.
Is it safe to say that four years ago he said "I could never vote for Hillary!" while looking around for his cronies' nodding heads. Never mind that she had been a successful senator. Never mind that she had been the hardest working Secretary of State, ever. No. He voted for Trump with the idea that he knew nothing and was a 'Washington Outsider'. A self-made man, a businessman.
And is now rethinking that regrettable choice.
Close. Yes, he despised Hillary for unclear 'reasons' (probably sexism, since he voted for Bill Clinton at least once). My father made his living by starting and running a (small time, but very successful) real estate company and has always been obsessed with the idea that a businessman should be president. He also seemed to not ever get the memo that Trump wasn't nearly as successful a businessperson as his advertising claimed (he claims he had no idea about all the bankruptcies or all the shady loans from Russian banks, etc). I strongly suspect my father watches a lot of Fox news, which would explain the latter gaps in his knowledge.
-
1. The man that led the pandemic task force says that current staffing is up to the task. Anyone saying otherwise is misrepresenting the situation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-house-didnt-dissolve-its-pandemic-response-office/#click=https://t.co/9DSuJbU8Cy
Even the woman that led it? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/nsc-pandemic-office-trump-closed/2020/03/13/a70de09c-6491-11ea-acca-80c22bbee96f_story.html) To be fair, the Washington Post publish opposing op-eds by the different former senior directors of global health security and biodefense on the National Security Council. The truth is probably in the middle, but accepting one of the claims while saying that the other claim is "misrepresenting the situation" seems pretty low.
-
1. The man that led the pandemic task force says that current staffing is up to the task. Anyone saying otherwise is misrepresenting the situation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-house-didnt-dissolve-its-pandemic-response-office/#click=https://t.co/9DSuJbU8Cy
Even the woman that led it? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/nsc-pandemic-office-trump-closed/2020/03/13/a70de09c-6491-11ea-acca-80c22bbee96f_story.html) To be fair, the Washington Post publish opposing op-eds by the different former senior directors of global health security and biodefense on the National Security Council. The truth is probably in the middle, but accepting one of the claims while saying that the other claim is "misrepresenting the situation" seems pretty low.
Or I didn't see that one yet. That is why we have conversations. To convey information.
Sounds like we have two conflicting accounts.
-
Or I didn't see that one yet. That is why we have conversations. To convey information.
That's fair. It is posted on page one of this thread.
-
I posted this earlier and an american told me it was fake news!
In America, any news you disagree with is fake news. So, it depends on the American you asked/told you.
*Only if you're right-leaning. Very few on the left respond simply "fake news".
A guy called fake news un-ironically on an article that showed up on my Facebook feed. The publication you might ask? The Onion. Calling fake news on an "article" from the onion - the onion should write an article about that actually.
To be fair, it is getting harder and harder to tell the difference between reality and satire. I've often done double-takes on Onion and Borowitz Report headlines in my Facebook newsfeed because they're almost plausible.
-
^ Here's another one: And his presser today Trump said he knew this was going to be a pandemic long before it was actually a pandemic, despite volumnous tweets to the contrary.
Think of the brass it takes to lie like that.
-
Wow...that's a new level of bravado.
And soon he will say that he gave everybody money to help them through the crisis. Nice way to buy votes.
-
I approve of this. In a recession you need people to spend money. Tax cuts for the wealthy don't help.
In other news, the dipshits at Fox News it isn't a hoax after all and went from downplaying the threat to championing Trump's courageous actions in the face of adversity.
It must be hard to think of ways to be a bigger hypocrite than you were the day before everyday, but those guys are awfully good at it.
I can't wait to hear how Rush "this is the common cold, folks!" Limbaugh walks his load of BS back.
-
I can't wait to hear how Rush "this is the common cold, folks!" Limbaugh walks his load of BS back.
Rush was already a dead man walking, he isn't likely to be alive in 4 months. Ditto a fair number of other aged reality denial enthusiasts.
-
I can't wait to hear how Rush "this is the common cold, folks!" Limbaugh walks his load of BS back.
Rush was already a dead man walking, he isn't likely to be alive in 4 months. Ditto a fair number of other aged reality denial enthusiasts.
Fewer old angry white men spewing hate might be the only silver lining to this whole covid thing.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Many, many Americans.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Many, many Americans.
These may be the same americans that have never traveled anywhere and only watch/read american news channels? It's bizarre to me that it's such an inward looking culture. New York is the greatest city in the world? Heard of Tokyo by any chance?
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
+1
Italy isn't abandoning people because they can't afford healthcare. It's due to a critical shortage of triage centers, supplies, staff etc. Funny how folks can see the same scenario two different ways. I see the opposite happening. The fact that the US has to include free testing in a bill is idiotic. And how about the uninsured? With the economic fallout for already cash strapped and largely under-insured/uninsured Americans what do you think this means? They are far less likely to seek treatment thus exacerbating the pandemic. There is a reason countries like Denmark are telling their folks to leave the US. The Italian healthcare system may be overwhelmed, but at least they don't have to worry about payment. Wait until the medical bills start rolling out in the US.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Many, many Americans.
These may be the same americans that have never traveled anywhere and only watch/read american news channels? It's bizarre to me that it's such an inward looking culture. New York is the greatest city in the world? Heard of Tokyo by any chance?
Yes we are a very inward-looking country, particularly those who are stuck in the “Fox News” version of reality. In that world everything foreign is suspect. Particularly the evil socialized health care found in every other first-world country.
-
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Those with money.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-king/saudi-king-to-seek-medical-treatment-in-u-s-idUSTRE6AK0X620101121 (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-king/saudi-king-to-seek-medical-treatment-in-u-s-idUSTRE6AK0X620101121)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/business/china-medical-tourism-hospital.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/business/china-medical-tourism-hospital.html)
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Many, many Americans.
These may be the same americans that have never traveled anywhere and only watch/read american news channels? It's bizarre to me that it's such an inward looking culture. New York is the greatest city in the world? Heard of Tokyo by any chance?
Yes we are a very inward-looking country, particularly those who are stuck in the “Fox News” version of reality. In that world everything foreign is suspect. Particularly the evil socialized health care found in every other first-world country.
I know, I sometimes go and have a look at Fox News, just for the entertainment factor. You have some very strange people allotted air time. That Trish Regan woman is a wee bit insane, like there's actually something wrong with the poor lady's brain. I get most of my news from BBC or Al Jazeera, the american stuff from the Washington Post and NY Times sites. I find even CNN quite bizarrely US-centric. NZ news is quite different. Our news in mainly what's happening in other countries (particularly how other countries are reacting to NZ), plus a few local issues, and at least one 'cow found wandering Auckland' or 'crashed truck spills beer all over road, locals upset' or 'feline burglar that we regularly report on is now stealing kid's soft toys' type of story. What can I say? We're a little wee country!
-
New York is the greatest city in the world? Heard of Tokyo by any chance?
Now you’ve gone too far! Take that back! 😉
-
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-supercut-coronavirus-lies_n_5e713d64c5b63c3b64866869
If Bloomberg can just drop a billion dollars to have this play on every TV between now and November that'd be great, thanks.
Here's a link to the video itself, it is indeed quite damning: https://youtu.be/xfPk1HIBLfM
-
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-supercut-coronavirus-lies_n_5e713d64c5b63c3b64866869
If Bloomberg can just drop a billion dollars to have this play on every TV between now and November that'd be great, thanks.
Here's a link to the video itself, it is indeed quite damning: https://youtu.be/xfPk1HIBLfM
And it was shared by the official CDC account? Interesting
-
And it was shared by the official CDC account? Intereesting
No, Youtube is automatically adding that CDC link (for US-based viewers) on any videos that mention Coronavirus/COVID in an effort to combat misinformation:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9777243?p=covid19_updates&visit_id=637201360834502601-3054744073&rd=1
How is YouTube fighting misinformation around coronavirus (COVID-19)?
We’re committed to providing timely and helpful information at this critical time, including raising up authoritative sources in search and recommendations and showing information panels, linking to locally relevant sources like WHO, on relevant videos. We will also continue to quickly remove videos that violate our policies when they are flagged, including those that discourage people from seeking medical treatment or claim harmful substances have health benefits. Finding trustworthy content is especially critical as news is breaking, and we’ll continue to make sure YouTube delivers accurate information for our users.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Many, many Americans.
These may be the same americans that have never traveled anywhere and only watch/read american news channels? It's bizarre to me that it's such an inward looking culture. New York is the greatest city in the world? Heard of Tokyo by any chance?
Yes we are a very inward-looking country, particularly those who are stuck in the “Fox News” version of reality. In that world everything foreign is suspect. Particularly the evil socialized health care found in every other first-world country.
I know, I sometimes go and have a look at Fox News, just for the entertainment factor. You have some very strange people allotted air time. That Trish Regan woman is a wee bit insane, like there's actually something wrong with the poor lady's brain. I get most of my news from BBC or Al Jazeera, the american stuff from the Washington Post and NY Times sites. I find even CNN quite bizarrely US-centric. NZ news is quite different. Our news in mainly what's happening in other countries (particularly how other countries are reacting to NZ), plus a few local issues, and at least one 'cow found wandering Auckland' or 'crashed truck spills beer all over road, locals upset' or 'feline burglar that we regularly report on is now stealing kid's soft toys' type of story. What can I say? We're a little wee country!
Fox News is absolute trash. The 24-hour “news” channels are basically televised tabloids, as far as I can tell (haven’t had cable television in years). I get news from NY Times, Reuters, BBC, NPR, and a couple of state and local papers.
-
4. The advantage they had in healthcare is dwindling. Running on socialized healthcare is going to get smacked with images of Italy abandoning people to die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/world/europe/12italy-coronavirus-health-care.html
LOL are you serious? Italy is testing and treating everyone that they possibly can. Even if you offered to pay more for treatment privately you couldn't get it because there's simply not enough equipment (ventilators) in the world. Do you really want rich ass dementia ridden 80 year olds on ventilators for months, which might each stop 10 people aged 30-40 with kids at home getting treatment? That's the choice Italy is making
Your people cannot even get tested because there are not enough testing kits, or they cannot afford to get tested because the resulting medical bill will bankrupt them.
In your health system you will still end up dead. It won't even get to the point of deciding on treatments because you'll be dead before that. And you might take down a few more people with you because you couldn't get tested in the first place to know whether you had it or not.
Exactly. All the people who brag the US healthcare system is the best in the world are in for a rude awakening when it collapses under the weight of this problem.
Who in their right mind thinks the USA has the best healthcare system in the world???
Many, many Americans.
These may be the same americans that have never traveled anywhere and only watch/read american news channels? It's bizarre to me that it's such an inward looking culture. New York is the greatest city in the world? Heard of Tokyo by any chance?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lealane/2019/05/02/percentage-of-americans-who-never-traveled-beyond-the-state-where-they-were-born-a-surprise/#504796de2898 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/lealane/2019/05/02/percentage-of-americans-who-never-traveled-beyond-the-state-where-they-were-born-a-surprise/#504796de2898)
In a country as huge and diverse as ours, there ends up being a huge chunk of the population that never or rarely travels beyond U.S. borders. Also, for poorer people without cable or internet, they wouldn't have access to more than a handful of basic news channels beyond whatever is broadcast on their local city or town's tv station, let alone international channels and news. ETA: Or access to any travel, either. My husband and I have parents who fit into the latter category. No smart phones, no internet, no cable. B/C no money.
-
Lest anybody look down upon those who don't travel . . . it's all the fuckers jet-setting around the world who inflicted this plague upon us. Without them it would have died out locally. :P
-
Lest anybody look down upon those who don't travel . . . it's all the fuckers jet-setting around the world who inflicted this plague upon us. Without them it would have died out locally. :P
YEAH! SCREW YOU AREBELSPY!
(just teasing!)
-
It will be interesting to see, when Trump loses in November, how quickly his republican sycophants (politicians and Fox News cheerleaders included) will rush to abandon him. The rats will be fleeing the Trump ship.
-
Lest anybody look down upon those who don't travel . . . it's all the fuckers jet-setting around the world who inflicted this plague upon us. Without them it would have died out locally. :P
Nah, it happened like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqCVB0tOSVQ&t=20
-
It will be interesting to see, when Trump loses in November, how quickly his republican sycophants (politicians and Fox News cheerleaders included) will rush to abandon him. The rats will be fleeing the Trump ship.
Trump's loss is in NO WAY guaranteed in November (as much as I would like it to be). I suggest you temper that attitude lest we repeat 2016.
-
It will be interesting to see, when Trump loses in November, how quickly his republican sycophants (politicians and Fox News cheerleaders included) will rush to abandon him. The rats will be fleeing the Trump ship.
Trump's loss is in NO WAY guaranteed in November (as much as I would like it to be). I suggest you temper that attitude lest we repeat 2016.
He stands no chance of winning.
-
Really? Not even if he cheats?
-
I second the opinion that King Drumpf's loss is in no way guaranteed.
This is a godsend opportunity to suppress voter turnout. You think Republicans are going to let go of that?
When Ohio's primary was rescheduled - I felt sad. US had organized elections through the civil war, spanish flu and everything else. It seems now democracy is becoming expendable.
-
I second the opinion that King Drumpf's loss is in no way guaranteed.
This is a godsend opportunity to suppress voter turnout. You think Republicans are going to let go of that?
When Ohio's primary was rescheduled - I felt sad. US had organized elections through the civil war, spanish flu and everything else. It seems now democracy is becoming expendable.
Primaries are run on the state level and aren't even mandated by law. The federal election is a different story.
-
He stands no chance of winning.
I said the same thing about him in 2016, twice.
-
He stands no chance of winning.
I said the same thing about him in 2016, twice.
Yup. I said that Brexit would never pass and that Trump would never get elected.
-
He stands no chance of winning.
I said the same thing about him in 2016, twice.
Yup. I said that Brexit would never pass and that Trump would never get elected.
No one, and I mean NO ONE who voted against him in 2016 will have been persuaded to vote for him in 2020 after the disaster of his presidency. And his demographic of angry old white dudes has been, let's just say, actuarially challenged in the last 4 years.
-
No one, and I mean NO ONE who voted against him in 2016 will have been persuaded to vote for him in 2020 after the disaster of his presidency
Judges, borrowing to fund billionaire welfare - these are things the right love.
Did you keep a tab of how the "never Trumper" ranks thinned on the republican side?
Let's just say there was a non-zero set of right-wingers who disliked the pu**y grabbing, but loved the borrow-from-kids-for-billionaire-welfare economic playbook. They would, and many of them *did* convert.
And his demographic of angry old white dudes has been, let's just say, actuarially challenged in the last 4 years.
Actuarial challange will show up in senate seats and state governorships someday. 2020 - I'm not quite sure. We can talk once Texas flips - sometime in late 2020's or early 2030's.
-
Did you keep a tab of how the "never Trumper" ranks thinned on the republican side?
Let's just say there was a non-zero set of right-wingers who disliked the pu**y grabbing, but loved the borrow-from-kids-for-billionaire-welfare economic playbook. They would, and many of them *did* convert.
I don't have any hard data but I can't believe there was any significant number of "never Trumper" republicans who voted for Hillary in 2016. They all fell in line because they hated her so much.
I honestly don't know where Trump can pick up votes since the 2016 election, which I'll remind you, he lost.
Given the outrages of the past 3+ years, it'll be a landslide against him.
-
Yes we are a very inward-looking country, particularly those who are stuck in the “Fox News” version of reality. In that world everything foreign is suspect. Particularly the evil socialized health care found in every other first-world country.
Here is a supercut of Fox News Hosts downplaying the situation. Then soberly explaing how serious it is. Hilarity ensues:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifKbwDf51bA
-
He stands no chance of winning.
I said the same thing about him in 2016, twice.
Yup. I said that Brexit would never pass and that Trump would never get elected.
No one, and I mean NO ONE who voted against him in 2016 will have been persuaded to vote for him in 2020 after the disaster of his presidency. And his demographic of angry old white dudes has been, let's just say, actuarially challenged in the last 4 years.
That's a fantasy. Tax cuts, judges, Supreme Court...those things alone will have brought some people over.
I mentioned my independent-voter father upthread. It's true that he voted for Trump, and in THIS election (presuming the Dem were Biden or Bloomberg), he insists he won't make that mistake again, and regularly wishes a variety of painful deaths on Trump. You would think this would hearten me as to Trump's nonviability next November.
HOWEVER, let us rewind to 2004, when I was absolutely CERTAIN that no wishy washy independent voters would possibly lean into a second term for W (at that point the biggest fuck up of a president of the modern era), esp given the centrist, non-threatening, very experienced John Kerry as an opponent. But....surprise...they did!
I have been utterly disgusted with American voters ever since, but I will never overestimate their judgement again. An guess what my father did in THAT election? He voted for Al Gore in 2000 b/c he thought Bush was a 'lightweight', BUT THEN VOTED FOR BUSH IN 2004, DESPITE ADMITTING TO ME HE LIKED KERRY FINE! You know why? Small government, tax cuts, strong military blah blah blah blah. About 6 months after THAT vote, Dad was bemoaning it as the worst vote of his life (which it was, until his vote for Trump, obvs).
Now, you can judge my father to have extremely poor political instincts, and I'd be the first to agree. But he isn't actually stupid (he graduated from college, was extremely successful building and running a small business, was a self made millionaire, and is a MMM, frugal, practical sort who would love Pete's philosophy in many ways.)
Yet he still made these two votes, against all apparent logic. B/C: State and local rights, military funding, tax cuts, conservative judges, etc.
I think Trump's odds of winning re-election have shrunk to just under even, if the recession bites down and holds. But after 2004, I will never underestimate the probability of seemingly insane voter decisions. And certainly not after 2012.
-
That's a fantasy. Tax cuts, judges, Supreme Court...those things alone will have brought some people over.
Brought people over from where, though? Anyone who is persuaded by those things would have voted for him in 2016. That's kind of my point, the right-wingers circled their wagons around Trump in 2016. I don't see where any new wagons would come from in the past 4 years???
-
That's a fantasy. Tax cuts, judges, Supreme Court...those things alone will have brought some people over.
Brought people over from where, though? Anyone who is persuaded by those things would have voted for him in 2016. That's kind of my point, the right-wingers circled their wagons around Trump in 2016. I don't see where any new wagons would come from in the past 4 years???
Here's hoping. Like I said, I never trust voters to make what appears to be a logical decision.
-
I honestly don't expect Trump to lose in November. I do hope that the good people of Kentucky will finally tell Mitch McConnell to fuck off.
-
Did you keep a tab of how the "never Trumper" ranks thinned on the republican side?
Let's just say there was a non-zero set of right-wingers who disliked the pu**y grabbing, but loved the borrow-from-kids-for-billionaire-welfare economic playbook. They would, and many of them *did* convert.
I don't have any hard data but I can't believe there was any significant number of "never Trumper" republicans who voted for Hillary in 2016. They all fell in line because they hated her so much.
I honestly don't know where Trump can pick up votes since the 2016 election, which I'll remind you, he lost.
Given the outrages of the past 3+ years, it'll be a landslide against him.
He could lose again, even bigger, and yet still win. There are definitely likely scenarios folks like 538 have been looking at that show Trump winning the electoral college with an even bigger gap - like losing the popular vote by 5 or 6 million. We all need to move to MI, PA or WI....
-
Starting point: any state with a GOP secretary of State Trump wins. They will find a way.
-
Did you keep a tab of how the "never Trumper" ranks thinned on the republican side?
Let's just say there was a non-zero set of right-wingers who disliked the pu**y grabbing, but loved the borrow-from-kids-for-billionaire-welfare economic playbook. They would, and many of them *did* convert.
I don't have any hard data but I can't believe there was any significant number of "never Trumper" republicans who voted for Hillary in 2016. They all fell in line because they hated her so much.
I honestly don't know where Trump can pick up votes since the 2016 election, which I'll remind you, he lost.
Given the outrages of the past 3+ years, it'll be a landslide against him.
He could lose again, even bigger, and yet still win. There are definitely likely scenarios folks like 538 have been looking at that show Trump winning the electoral college with an even bigger gap - like losing the popular vote by 5 or 6 million. We all need to move to MI, PA or WI....
Please move here and vote!
-
I honestly don't expect Trump to lose in November.
I expect him to lose because he annoys so many people including people who don't live in America.
A candidate's likability matters a lot.
Will I be shocked if he is reelected?
No.
-
I expect him to lose because he's dangerously unfit for the job who has also been proven to be both wildly corrupt, ignorant of the basics required for his work, and a terrible leader. And in my world, those are not the qualities you look for in the guy you put in charge. But the US proved me wrong once on that front already . . . so . . .
-
I expect him to lose because he's dangerously unfit for the job who has also been proven to be both wildly corrupt, ignorant of the basics required for his work, and a terrible leader. And in my world, those are not the qualities you look for in the guy you put in charge. But the US proved me wrong once on that front already . . . so . . .
I expect him to win for the same reasons you describe. People in the States love that - he ain't no regular politician!
-
Well, it turns out that competence in leadership actually matters. Let's see if it matters in an election.
If he lives that long. >1M dead bodies in the next 3 months could end up with his head on a spike.
-
It will be interesting to see, when Trump loses in November, how quickly his republican sycophants (politicians and Fox News cheerleaders included) will rush to abandon him. The rats will be fleeing the Trump ship.
Trump's loss is in NO WAY guaranteed in November (as much as I would like it to be). I suggest you temper that attitude lest we repeat 2016.
He stands no chance of winning.
I’m so far left you can only see me if you’re cool. And I do not agree. Not at all.
-
I should clarify that I don't expect him to win, but I'm the guy that said he wouldn't win the first time. Don't trust me, I have a horrible track-record.
-
I should clarify that I don't expect him to win, but I'm the guy that said he wouldn't win the first time. Don't trust me, I have a horrible track-record.
~2 years prior to Trump's win I read about a realignment of the electorate that favored the Democratic Party.
And the polling indicated a win for HRC (not my candidate).
So I thought she would win.
Wrong!
-
I don't know if he will win or not, but after the disastrous first term Biden might not have enough time to hammer away at all the lies, unfulfilled promises and shitty stuff he's done during their debates.
-
I'm already exhausted by the slow drip process we have been engaged in for two weeks now. Bad news after bad news after bad news after bad news.
We need to be moving towards the South Korean model as quickly as humanly possible. Test, test, test, and then monitor and quarantine those who are infected/exposed.
I would issue a shelter in place order for 7-14 days and dedicate all available resources of the United States government to getting testing up to its full capacity.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/coronavirus-cases-have-dropped-sharply-south-korea-whats-secret-its-success
-
Have you seen the spring break pictures on the Florida beaches?
We are so far from the South Korea response (not even blaming Trump here) it is silly.
-
Indeed there are cultural reasons to think that Americans will never submit to cultural changes even if proven successful elsewhere. Trump is a symptom of this and cannot be blamed for causing it.
-
Have you seen the spring break pictures on the Florida beaches?
We are so far from the South Korea response (not even blaming Trump here) it is silly.
I get what you're saying - we are a much less compliant country on the whole.
But don't you think if the testing efforts had ramped up a month or two earlier, and good information was being shared, maybe even the spring breakers would have taken more notice?
-
Have you seen the spring break pictures on the Florida beaches?
We are so far from the South Korea response (not even blaming Trump here) it is silly.
STD's and CORVID-19 make for an epic spring break.
-
Have you seen the spring break pictures on the Florida beaches?
We are so far from the South Korea response (not even blaming Trump here) it is silly.
STD's and CORVID-19 make for an epic spring break.
Very non-pc, but this one always gives me a chuckle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUw4Qh9uFK8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUw4Qh9uFK8)
-
Have you seen the spring break pictures on the Florida beaches?
We are so far from the South Korea response (not even blaming Trump here) it is silly.
I get what you're saying - we are a much less compliant country on the whole.
But don't you think if the testing efforts had ramped up a month or two earlier, and good information was being shared, maybe even the spring breakers would have taken more notice?
Maybe. One would think they would pay attention right now to all of the mess of Italy but they are not. I do not feel strongly that testing would have made a big difference in their opinion.
My money right now is on getting a super fast tracked vaccine and a viral treatment. Both are really close if we are willing to take a little risk (I am willing personally...I would rather have a 0.1% chance of a side effect from a viral treatment than a 5% chance of dying or ending up with lung damage)
-
Thing is, the news didn't really break until the week before spring break for the schools in our city. A bunch of other schools were already on spring break that week.
Nobody who is already at the beach on a bender is watching CNN . . .
-
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-testing-specialrep/special-report-how-korea-trounced-u-s-in-race-to-test-people-for-coronavirus-idUSKBN2153BW?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=twitter
The first coronavirus case in the U.S. and South Korea was detected on the same day. By late January, Seoul had medical companies starting to work on a diagnostic test — one was approved a week later. Today, the U.S. isn’t even close to meeting test demand
-
I should clarify that I don't expect him to win, but I'm the guy that said he wouldn't win the first time. Don't trust me, I have a horrible track-record.
~2 years prior to Trump's win I read about a realignment of the electorate that favored the Democratic Party.
And the polling indicated a win for HRC (not my candidate).
So I thought she would win.
Wrong!
I told my Mexican neighbor the evening after Trump came down the golden staircase and spewed his nonsense about Mexican rapists, that there was no way America could elect that guy. Nothing that happened between then and the election changed my mind.
Wrong.
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
Can you point to some people who have made posts that they're 'insulted he didn't take power immediately'?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been due to Trump's dismantling of the agency designed to protect against global pandemics, his repeated reductions of funding for CDC infectious disease controls, his weeks of telling people that there was nothing to be worried about when there way, his repeated lies related to the virus that have confused people or given them misinformation, his racially based blaming of the disease, and then his abdication of all responsibility for anything. Many people are guaranteed to die because of Trump's actions so far.
Don't confuse disgust with dangerous levels of incompetence in Trump with a left/right argument. The premier of Ontario right now is extremely right wing, and I don't agree with him on most things. But I do think he's doing a decent job so far of handling the coronavirus issue. And nobody has accused him of being a dictator. From my perspective, there's a pretty large difference between implementing measures that health experts say are necessary, and taking power to as a dictator.
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
Can you point to some people who have made posts that they're 'insulted he didn't take power immediately'?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been due to Trump's dismantling of the agency designed to protect against global pandemics, his repeated reductions of funding for CDC infectious disease controls, his weeks of telling people that there was nothing to be worried about when there way, his repeated lies related to the virus that have confused people or given them misinformation, his racially based blaming of the disease, and then his abdication of all responsibility for anything. Many people are guaranteed to die because of Trump's actions so far.
Don't confuse disgust with dangerous levels of incompetence in Trump with a left/right argument. The premier of Ontario right now is extremely right wing, and I don't agree with him on most things. But I do think he's doing a decent job so far of handling the coronavirus issue. And nobody has accused him of being a dictator. From my perspective, there's a pretty large difference between implementing measures that health experts say are necessary, and taking power to as a dictator.
Agree. There is a fundamental difference between someone using powers as a dictator, which is all about benefitting the dictator's political and financial situation, and someone using emergency powers for the benefit of the people, to prevent/limit the economic and physical suffering caused by a pandemic
-
In light of the GOP Senators engaged in rampant insider trading, we must see the stock trades of the Trump family in the month of February.
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
Can you point to some people who have made posts that they're 'insulted he didn't take power immediately'?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been due to Trump's dismantling of the agency designed to protect against global pandemics, his repeated reductions of funding for CDC infectious disease controls, his weeks of telling people that there was nothing to be worried about when there way, his repeated lies related to the virus that have confused people or given them misinformation, his racially based blaming of the disease, and then his abdication of all responsibility for anything. Many people are guaranteed to die because of Trump's actions so far.
Don't confuse disgust with dangerous levels of incompetence in Trump with a left/right argument. The premier of Ontario right now is extremely right wing, and I don't agree with him on most things. But I do think he's doing a decent job so far of handling the coronavirus issue. And nobody has accused him of being a dictator. From my perspective, there's a pretty large difference between implementing measures that health experts say are necessary, and taking power to as a dictator.
Agree. There is a fundamental difference between someone using powers as a dictator, which is all about benefitting the dictator's political and financial situation, and someone using emergency powers for the benefit of the people, to prevent/limit the economic and physical suffering caused by a pandemic
In fact, instead of taking actions to guarantee our public health, Trump was floating a possible action to pardon a campaign surrogate who is facing jail time: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-s-strongly-considering-full-pardon-michael-flynn-n1159476 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-s-strongly-considering-full-pardon-michael-flynn-n1159476)
I think this is dictator behavior.
-
In fact, instead of taking actions to guarantee our public health, Trump was floating a possible action to pardon a campaign surrogate who is facing jail time: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-s-strongly-considering-full-pardon-michael-flynn-n1159476 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-s-strongly-considering-full-pardon-michael-flynn-n1159476)
I think this is dictator behavior.
Really? You want to accuse him of being a dictator for that? Presidential pardon power is vast. Many before have used it to pardon close friends.
I'm all for Trump bashing but let's pick our battles. The "coronavirus is nothing and will be gone and we don't need WHO testing kits and it's nothing to worry about" seems to be a good one to hammer home.
-
@dividendman
"I didn't know the flu kills people."
"You're saying a flu vaccine won't work."
"The reports of this being bad are a hoax by the democrats."
"I'm a racist". (paraphrasing a bunch of tweets on this one)
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
Can you point to some people who have made posts that they're 'insulted he didn't take power immediately'?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been due to Trump's dismantling of the agency designed to protect against global pandemics, his repeated reductions of funding for CDC infectious disease controls, his weeks of telling people that there was nothing to be worried about when there way, his repeated lies related to the virus that have confused people or given them misinformation, his racially based blaming of the disease, and then his abdication of all responsibility for anything. Many people are guaranteed to die because of Trump's actions so far.
Don't confuse disgust with dangerous levels of incompetence in Trump with a left/right argument. The premier of Ontario right now is extremely right wing, and I don't agree with him on most things. But I do think he's doing a decent job so far of handling the coronavirus issue. And nobody has accused him of being a dictator. From my perspective, there's a pretty large difference between implementing measures that health experts say are necessary, and taking power to as a dictator.
Agree. There is a fundamental difference between someone using powers as a dictator, which is all about benefitting the dictator's political and financial situation, and someone using emergency powers for the benefit of the people, to prevent/limit the economic and physical suffering caused by a pandemic
Some folks don't understand the difference between dictatorship and true leadership. A likely reason for the straw-man that was proposed.
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
Can you point to some people who have made posts that they're 'insulted he didn't take power immediately'?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been due to Trump's dismantling of the agency designed to protect against global pandemics, his repeated reductions of funding for CDC infectious disease controls, his weeks of telling people that there was nothing to be worried about when there way, his repeated lies related to the virus that have confused people or given them misinformation, his racially based blaming of the disease, and then his abdication of all responsibility for anything. Many people are guaranteed to die because of Trump's actions so far.
Don't confuse disgust with dangerous levels of incompetence in Trump with a left/right argument. The premier of Ontario right now is extremely right wing, and I don't agree with him on most things. But I do think he's doing a decent job so far of handling the coronavirus issue. And nobody has accused him of being a dictator. From my perspective, there's a pretty large difference between implementing measures that health experts say are necessary, and taking power to as a dictator.
I had always thought the argument was that "if we give Trump any kind of power he won't give it up." I'm pointing out that had he acted unilaterally you would be screaming "dictator!"
Also Congress increased CDC funding regardless of Trump's wishes.
https://apnews.com/d36d6c4de29f4d04beda3db00cb46104
And we have conflicting accounts on why CDC positions were removed.
-
@dividendman
"I didn't know the flu kills people."
"You're saying a flu vaccine won't work."
"The reports of this being bad are a hoax by the democrats."
"I'm a racist". (paraphrasing a bunch of tweets on this one)
I hope Biden has the fucking balls to blame Trump for this, regardless if he deserves the blame or not. All we should be seeing are ads and mentions about how Trump failed to act, tanked the economy and cost what's likely to be hundreds of thousands of American lives.
Just replay that over and over.
Question in the debate about social security? Answer: "Social security is an important issue. We might have had some time to deal with it if Mr. Trump acted sooner and didn't just tell us lies about the virus so we were woefully unprepared".
Question about Iran getting nukes? Answer: "Iran getting nukes is an important issue. It's unfortunate that we are dealing with a national calamity that Trump could have mitigated so we can't spend time on this issue and instead are burying our dead."
etc.
-
In light of the GOP Senators engaged in rampant insider trading, we must see the stock trades of the Trump family in the month of February.
3 GOP senators & 1 Democrat senator (Diane Feinsten)
It sure is weird how that last part didn't make it into your comment. It's almost as if bias is coming through...
Feinstein sold AT THE BOTTOM. But sure...go with 75% of Senators discovered so far are GOP. It's all the same lmao
-
@dividendman
"I didn't know the flu kills people."
"You're saying a flu vaccine won't work."
"The reports of this being bad are a hoax by the democrats."
"I'm a racist". (paraphrasing a bunch of tweets on this one)
I hope Biden has the fucking balls to blame Trump for this, regardless if he deserves the blame or not. All we should be seeing are ads and mentions about how Trump failed to act, tanked the economy and cost what's likely to be hundreds of thousands of American lives.
Just replay that over and over.
Question in the debate about social security? Answer: "Social security is an important issue. We might have had some time to deal with it if Mr. Trump acted sooner and didn't just tell us lies about the virus so we were woefully unprepared".
Question about Iran getting nukes? Answer: "Iran getting nukes is an important issue. It's unfortunate that we are dealing with a national calamity that Trump could have mitigated so we can't spend time on this issue and instead are burying our dead."
etc.
This is an awful idea. Just fucking terrible.
In Illinois it was the governor that decided to shutter restaurants. I doubt you will find a way to blame Trump when Governor's are the ones doing the action.
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
Democrats had declared closed borders "racist". And depending on how bad things get in Europe, socialized healthcare will be a dead issue.
This plan just makes Biden sound even more dementia riddled than usual.
-
Corona certainly could be the end of Trump, and the key metric I'm watching is the unemployment rate. While we're certainly going to see a huge spike in March/April, and if unemployment is (still?) in double digits come October, he's going to have a tough time.
....
in the last 80 years, no sitting US president has lost their bid for reelection when the unemployment rate was below 7%. Some have been reelected when unemployment was above that threshold, but none have lost below it. Of course, the sample size is small, so the confidence level is not fantastic.
Unemployment data can be found here: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 (https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000)
Information on age of president at inauguration can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age)
-
This is an awful idea. Just fucking terrible.
...
And depending on how bad things get in Europe, socialized healthcare will be a dead issue.
Remind me what happened in South Korea (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-testing-specialrep/special-report-how-korea-trounced-u-s-in-race-to-test-people-for-coronavirus-idUSKBN2153BW), keeping in mind that South Korea and the USA got their first confirmed case on the same day?
Remind me what sort of healthcare systems Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea have?
Remind me which countries are going to look prescient when this is over? Not the USA, that's for sure. Plenty of Trump tweets about how "[w]e have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine" and "it’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear."
EDITed to add - At the exact same time that South Korea was rallying their medical industrial complex Trump was tweeting that there wasn't a problem. The USA is at best on par with Italy in terms of response. American exceptionalism is going to die for lack of enough ventilators and test kits.
-
@dividendman
"I didn't know the flu kills people."
"You're saying a flu vaccine won't work."
"The reports of this being bad are a hoax by the democrats."
"I'm a racist". (paraphrasing a bunch of tweets on this one)
I hope Biden has the fucking balls to blame Trump for this, regardless if he deserves the blame or not. All we should be seeing are ads and mentions about how Trump failed to act, tanked the economy and cost what's likely to be hundreds of thousands of American lives.
Just replay that over and over.
Question in the debate about social security? Answer: "Social security is an important issue. We might have had some time to deal with it if Mr. Trump acted sooner and didn't just tell us lies about the virus so we were woefully unprepared".
Question about Iran getting nukes? Answer: "Iran getting nukes is an important issue. It's unfortunate that we are dealing with a national calamity that Trump could have mitigated so we can't spend time on this issue and instead are burying our dead."
etc.
This is an awful idea. Just fucking terrible.
In Illinois it was the governor that decided to shutter restaurants. I doubt you will find a way to blame Trump when Governor's are the ones doing the action.
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
Democrats had declared closed borders "racist". And depending on how bad things get in Europe, socialized healthcare will be a dead issue.
This plan just makes Biden sound even more dementia riddled than usual.
I'm not talking about the "fairness" of it. I'm just saying how you win elections. Republicans were excellent at saying everything Obama did was wrong whether it was or not. Republicans are good at winning elections that way.
I've said this before in other threads. If anything goes wrong you blame it on the current administration.
It's absolutely mind-boggling to me that Democrats didn't 100% blame Bush for 9/11. Who cares about the fairness? Republicans would have blamed a Democratic President.
Now is another time. This time he's obviously incompetent, but even if he's doing the right things now, we shouldn't be able to look at a website, or watch tv without an ad that blames Trump for every American death and the economic toil that is happening.
The worst calamities of the last 2 decades have happened on a Republican's watch and somehow they skate... fuck that.
-
In light of the GOP Senators engaged in rampant insider trading, we must see the stock trades of the Trump family in the month of February.
3 GOP senators & 1 Democrat senator (Diane Feinsten)
It sure is weird how that last part didn't make it into your comment. It's almost as if bias is coming through...
Feinstein sold AT THE BOTTOM. But sure...go with 75% of Senators discovered so far are GOP. It's all the same lmao
Today I learned that February 18 was the bottom.
I guess no one told that to the market over the last month.
The only really obvious case of insider trading is Burr. Loeffler, Feinstein, and Inhofe all claim to have not even been aware of the trades since they hold them in blind trusts (Feinstein) or their financial advisors were executing on previous instructions (Loeffler, Inhofe).
Burr's "defense" is "yeah I had non-public information, and yeah I directed those trades", but I "relied solely on public news reports to guide my decision regarding the sale of stocks on February 13." Riiiiiight.
-
In light of the GOP Senators engaged in rampant insider trading, we must see the stock trades of the Trump family in the month of February.
3 GOP senators & 1 Democrat senator (Diane Feinsten)
It sure is weird how that last part didn't make it into your comment. It's almost as if bias is coming through...
Feinstein sold AT THE BOTTOM. But sure...go with 75% of Senators discovered so far are GOP. It's all the same lmao
Today I learned that February 18 was the bottom.
I guess no one told that to the market over the last month.
Whoa, did she sell an index fund?? Oh, whoops. Didn't want to provide that point, did you?
Burr and Loeffler continued to publicly talking up the economy in February, while they dumped their stocks. Loeffler then invested in Citrix. What do they do?
Also, it wasn't Feinstein who made the trades. It was her husband.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein disclosed that her husband, Richard C. Blum, sold a biotech stock in January, when it was trading near its 2020 intraday lows.
Blum, the founder and head of investment firm Blum Capital Partners, sold $500,001 to $1 million in Allogene Therapeutics stock on Jan. 31, according to a form the senator filed with the Secretary of the Senate. Specific values aren’t required for disclosure, only ranges.
You...you do realize stocks have different highs and lows than the broad market, right?
The day that Blum sold Allogene stock, shares of the cancer researcher traded for as low as $21.28, just above the current 2020 intraday low of $21.25, which was set the next trading day, Feb. 1.
Since then, however, Allogene stock has been rising, closing Friday at $27.00 for a year-to-date gain of 3.9%, while the S&P 500 index, a proxy for the broader market, has fallen 8.6%. Last year, Allogene stock slipped 3.5% while the S&P 500 rose 28.9%.
But sure, investigate all members of Congress who made irregular trades (i.e. non-reoccurring) since January 24th.
I see you are failing to note anything from Burr or Loeffler. Wonder why that is? Bias?
Keep posting in bad faith. You are doing so great at it so far, sweetie.
-
In light of the GOP Senators engaged in rampant insider trading, we must see the stock trades of the Trump family in the month of February.
3 GOP senators & 1 Democrat senator (Diane Feinsten)
It sure is weird how that last part didn't make it into your comment. It's almost as if bias is coming through...
Feinstein sold AT THE BOTTOM. But sure...go with 75% of Senators discovered so far are GOP. It's all the same lmao
Today I learned that February 18 was the bottom.
I guess no one told that to the market over the last month.
The only really obvious case of insider trading is Burr. Loeffler, Feinstein, and Inhofe all claim to have not even been aware of the trades since they hold them in blind trusts (Feinstein) or their financial advisors were executing on previous instructions (Loeffler, Inhofe).
Burr's "defense" is "yeah I had non-public information, and yeah I directed those trades", but I "relied solely on public news reports to guide my decision regarding the sale of stocks on February 13." Riiiiiight.
Loeffler's husband is the chairman of the NYSE. And she decided to invest in Citrix in February. Hmmm...wonder what they do?
-
The only really obvious case of insider trading is Burr. Loeffler, Feinstein, and Inhofe all claim to have not even been aware of the trades since they hold them in blind trusts (Feinstein) or their financial advisors were executing on previous instructions (Loeffler, Inhofe).
Burr's "defense" is "yeah I had non-public information, and yeah I directed those trades", but I "relied solely on public news reports to guide my decision regarding the sale of stocks on February 13." Riiiiiight.
Loeffler's husband is the chairman of the NYSE. And she decided to invest in Citrix in February. Hmmm...wonder what they do?
Ah, I was not aware of as many of the specifics as you seem to be. Only Burr and Loeffler are being referred to the SEC, so it seems people in-the-know agree with you.
-
...snip...
February 18th close of ALLO was 24.25, which is considerably lower than it's recent high of 28.25, is also considerably higher than the 3/20 close price of 20.29. Saying she had no say because her husband made the trades is silly.
I hate (almost) all politicians equally. It's just dishonest to only target the ones with an (R) next to their name and makes you no better than a certain president who spins things to make himself look better.
That ALLO price was also much lower on 1/31, at around $21, when her husband sold the first batch of shares, near the current price.
Of course, it wasn't him personally -- it was for his company, which invests in small and mid-sized companies, that he started before he met Feinstein. He bought ALLO last year after he sold Nvidia, which he was buying in 01/2019.
Unless he went to cash or bonds, we don't really know if he was taking advantage of the intel meeting. Since his fund is in and out of stocks frequently, he could've bought Dave & Buster's and now his fund is really suffering.
But, yeah, there's certainly a chance it was corona related. That's how politicians be.
-
...snip...
February 18th close of ALLO was 24.25, which is considerably lower than it's recent high of 28.25, is also considerably higher than the 3/20 close price of 20.29. Saying she had no say because her husband made the trades is silly.
I hate (almost) all politicians equally. It's just dishonest to only target the ones with an (R) next to their name and makes you no better than a certain president who spins things to make himself look better.
I said all should be investigated. I'm also not "only targeting the ones with an (R) next to their name." There are a) more of them accused of insider trading and b) at least two of them are more egregious on their face than Feinstein.
Good try, though.
-
@dividendman
"I didn't know the flu kills people."
"You're saying a flu vaccine won't work."
"The reports of this being bad are a hoax by the democrats."
"I'm a racist". (paraphrasing a bunch of tweets on this one)
I hope Biden has the fucking balls to blame Trump for this, regardless if he deserves the blame or not. All we should be seeing are ads and mentions about how Trump failed to act, tanked the economy and cost what's likely to be hundreds of thousands of American lives.
Just replay that over and over.
Question in the debate about social security? Answer: "Social security is an important issue. We might have had some time to deal with it if Mr. Trump acted sooner and didn't just tell us lies about the virus so we were woefully unprepared".
Question about Iran getting nukes? Answer: "Iran getting nukes is an important issue. It's unfortunate that we are dealing with a national calamity that Trump could have mitigated so we can't spend time on this issue and instead are burying our dead."
etc.
This is an awful idea. Just fucking terrible.
In Illinois it was the governor that decided to shutter restaurants. I doubt you will find a way to blame Trump when Governor's are the ones doing the action.
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
Democrats had declared closed borders "racist". And depending on how bad things get in Europe, socialized healthcare will be a dead issue.
This plan just makes Biden sound even more dementia riddled than usual.
I'm not talking about the "fairness" of it. I'm just saying how you win elections. Republicans were excellent at saying everything Obama did was wrong whether it was or not. Republicans are good at winning elections that way.
I've said this before in other threads. If anything goes wrong you blame it on the current administration.
It's absolutely mind-boggling to me that Democrats didn't 100% blame Bush for 9/11. Who cares about the fairness? Republicans would have blamed a Democratic President.
Now is another time. This time he's obviously incompetent, but even if he's doing the right things now, we shouldn't be able to look at a website, or watch tv without an ad that blames Trump for every American death and the economic toil that is happening.
The worst calamities of the last 2 decades have happened on a Republican's watch and somehow they skate... fuck that.
Your plan boils down to "Orange Man bad!" They have been saying that for four years now. No policy recommendations. How is that different from what they have been doing?
This is an awful idea. Just fucking terrible.
...
And depending on how bad things get in Europe, socialized healthcare will be a dead issue.
Remind me what happened in South Korea (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-testing-specialrep/special-report-how-korea-trounced-u-s-in-race-to-test-people-for-coronavirus-idUSKBN2153BW), keeping in mind that South Korea and the USA got their first confirmed case on the same day?
Remind me what sort of healthcare systems Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea have?
Remind me which countries are going to look prescient when this is over? Not the USA, that's for sure. Plenty of Trump tweets about how "[w]e have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine" and "it’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear."
EDITed to add - At the exact same time that South Korea was rallying their medical industrial complex Trump was tweeting that there wasn't a problem. The USA is at best on par with Italy in terms of response. American exceptionalism is going to die for lack of enough ventilators and test kits.
None of those countries were held up as examples by Bernie Sanders. If any Nordic countries fall apart then you have problems.
-
I hate (almost) all politicians equally. It's just dishonest to only target the ones with an (R) next to their name and makes you no better than a certain president who spins things to make himself look better.
Hatred is a negative passion so I avoid it.
I do dislike politicians, particularly for their mendacity.
-
I'm not talking about the "fairness" of it. I'm just saying how you win elections. Republicans were excellent at saying everything Obama did was wrong whether it was or not. Republicans are good at winning elections that way.
I've said this before in other threads. If anything goes wrong you blame it on the current administration.
It's absolutely mind-boggling to me that Democrats didn't 100% blame Bush for 9/11. Who cares about the fairness? Republicans would have blamed a Democratic President.
Now is another time. This time he's obviously incompetent, but even if he's doing the right things now, we shouldn't be able to look at a website, or watch tv without an ad that blames Trump for every American death and the economic toil that is happening.
The worst calamities of the last 2 decades have happened on a Republican's watch and somehow they skate... fuck that.
Your plan boils down to "Orange Man bad!" They have been saying that for four years now. No policy recommendations. How is that different from what they have been doing?
It's not my plan. I wish we could talk about the issues and possible solutions. I wish we could come to compromises and work for the good of everyone.
I'm simply saying that democrats should use the republican's playbook to win elections. Oppose everything the administration is doing. Say it's all bad. And say, ever chance you get, that he is responsible for the death of thousands of Americans and the current economy.
-
I find it odd that for three years everyone claimed "He's going to take power and rule as a dictator." Now a crisis is upon us and everyone is insulted he didn't take the power immediately. Everyone here would have taken the "we told you he was a dictator" ball and run with if they had the chance
Can you point to some people who have made posts that they're 'insulted he didn't take power immediately'?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been due to Trump's dismantling of the agency designed to protect against global pandemics, his repeated reductions of funding for CDC infectious disease controls, his weeks of telling people that there was nothing to be worried about when there way, his repeated lies related to the virus that have confused people or given them misinformation, his racially based blaming of the disease, and then his abdication of all responsibility for anything. Many people are guaranteed to die because of Trump's actions so far.
Don't confuse disgust with dangerous levels of incompetence in Trump with a left/right argument. The premier of Ontario right now is extremely right wing, and I don't agree with him on most things. But I do think he's doing a decent job so far of handling the coronavirus issue. And nobody has accused him of being a dictator. From my perspective, there's a pretty large difference between implementing measures that health experts say are necessary, and taking power to as a dictator.
I had always thought the argument was that "if we give Trump any kind of power he won't give it up." I'm pointing out that had he acted unilaterally you would be screaming "dictator!"
I'm not sure I understand you here.
Exactly what unilateral action do you think Trump should have taken? Nobody's complaining that he was not unilateral enough. As mentioned, weakening the ability of the US to respond to this pandemic, misrepresenting the truth, and not listening to medical practitioners are the problems people have identified with his behaviour.
As for 'screaming dictator!' - you don't know a thing about me . . . and I very much doubt that you can guess how I'll behave in any given situation.
Also Congress increased CDC funding regardless of Trump's wishes.
https://apnews.com/d36d6c4de29f4d04beda3db00cb46104
That's true. I should have typed 'calls for reduction', not 'reduction', that was my mistake. Congress was able to contain Trump's misjudgement in this instance.
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
What are you talking about? It's it great that innocent people in an adversarial country are dying en masse? /s
And this is why we have to give Trump no quarter when it comes to who is to blame. His supporters literally cheer the death of innocent people. Like what the fuck are we talking about?
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Their leaders decided they needed nuclear weapons more than they needed medical supplies. Why aren't you upset about that?
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
What are you talking about? It's it great that innocent people in an adversarial country are dying en masse? /s
And this is why we have to give Trump no quarter when it comes to who is to blame. His supporters literally cheer the death of innocent people. Like what the fuck are we talking about?
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
What are you talking about? It's it great that innocent people in an adversarial country are dying en masse? /s
And this is why we have to give Trump no quarter when it comes to who is to blame. His supporters literally cheer the death of innocent people. Like what the fuck are we talking about?
Their leaders decided they needed nuclear weapons more than they needed medical supplies. Why aren't you upset about that?
I fixed your quote-nesting for you. Another approach would have been to actually reply to the correct post if you wanted to only respond to MasterStache.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt with that comment, but your doubling-down proves me wrong. This is just vile.
Iran was complying with the nuclear treaty and everyone knows it. Every single country and agency in the world says so except for Trump, including Trump's own State Department (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/07/17/537793465/state-department-certifies-irans-compliance-with-nuclear-deal). Take your lies and cheering-for-the-deaths-of-innocent-people somewhere else.
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
What are you talking about? It's it great that innocent people in an adversarial country are dying en masse? /s
And this is why we have to give Trump no quarter when it comes to who is to blame. His supporters literally cheer the death of innocent people. Like what the fuck are we talking about?
Their leaders decided they needed nuclear weapons more than they needed medical supplies. Why aren't you upset about that?
I fixed your quote-nesting for you. Another approach would have been to actually reply to the correct post if you wanted to only respond to MasterStache.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt with that comment, but your doubling-down proves me wrong. This is just vile.
Iran was complying with the nuclear treaty and everyone knows it. Every single country and agency in the world says so except for Trump, including Trump's own State Department (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/07/17/537793465/state-department-certifies-irans-compliance-with-nuclear-deal). Take your lies and cheering-for-the-deaths-of-innocent-people somewhere else.
Even if they weren't complying, why cheer the death of their civilians? Do you think dude selling pitas is the one who made the decision to try to develop nukes?
Have some compassion. I don't think anyone is defending Iranian leaders. But to say it's great that they can't get medical supplies to their people is on another level.
Note that the US government has also chosen to have nukes (more military spending) instead of more medical supplies, but I don't think you'll be happy if your parents/loved ones die now due to this choice.
EDIT: More importantly, I won't be happy that people die due to this choice either, even though I was against more military spending.
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
What are you talking about? It's it great that innocent people in an adversarial country are dying en masse? /s
And this is why we have to give Trump no quarter when it comes to who is to blame. His supporters literally cheer the death of innocent people. Like what the fuck are we talking about?
Their leaders decided they needed nuclear weapons more than they needed medical supplies. Why aren't you upset about that?
I fixed your quote-nesting for you. Another approach would have been to actually reply to the correct post if you wanted to only respond to MasterStache.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt with that comment, but your doubling-down proves me wrong. This is just vile.
Iran was complying with the nuclear treaty and everyone knows it. Every single country and agency in the world says so except for Trump, including Trump's own State Department (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/07/17/537793465/state-department-certifies-irans-compliance-with-nuclear-deal). Take your lies and cheering-for-the-deaths-of-innocent-people somewhere else.
Even if they weren't complying, why cheer the death of their civilians? Do you think dude selling pitas is the one who made the decision to try to develop nukes?
Have some compassion. I don't think anyone is defending Iranian leaders. But to say it's great that they can't get medical supplies to their people is on another level.
Note that the US government has also chosen to have nukes (more military spending) instead of more medical supplies, but I don't think you'll be happy if your parents/loved ones die now due to this choice.
EDIT: More importantly, I won't be happy that people die due to this choice either, even though I was against more military spending.
I'll defend Iranian leaders as far as nuclear weapons go. They were following the agreement they made in good faith with America. It's not their fault that Trump decided to re-neg on his side just to be an asshole. And the Iranian people certainly shouldn't die because of America's untrustworthiness.
-
None of those countries were held up as examples by Bernie Sanders. If any Nordic countries fall apart then you have problems.
What does that have to do with literally anything?
-
I think to myself, at least once a day now, that Trump probably wishes he'd been impeached (and removed).
-
It's already starting: Republicans for the rule of law (https://www.ruleoflawrepublicans.com/mr-president-tell-us-the-truth/).
EDITed to add - the video that they put out (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxG241bExqY).
-
Apparently, Trump's blathering over the last week has been effective for him? https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/20/poll-majority-of-americans-now-approve-of-trumps-coronavirus-management-138570
I just can't believe anyone listens to him and feels anything other than 1) confused, 2) horrified or 3) annoyed. His rant today against the journalist that just asked him what he would say to Americans who are scared? People approve of that bullshit?
-
Saw this good summary of how the US has been doing under Trump during the pandemic:
First US case of covid-19 = January 20
First S. Korean case of covid-19 = January 20
# of tests performed in US = 60,000
# of tests performed in S. Korea = 290,000
Population of US in 2020 (est) = 331 million
Population of S. Korea in 2020 (est) = 51 million
# total known cases in US on Mar 20 = 20,193
# total known cases in SK on Mar 20 = 8,799
# deaths of covid-19 (confirmed) in US by Mar 20 = 280
# deaths of covid-19 (confirmed) in SK by Mar 20 = 102
-
An important comparison. However it's also important to point out that this reflects systemic problems in the US, rather than problems with old Drumpf himself.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-testing-specialrep/special-report-how-korea-trounced-u-s-in-race-to-test-people-for-coronavirus-idUSKBN2153BW (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-testing-specialrep/special-report-how-korea-trounced-u-s-in-race-to-test-people-for-coronavirus-idUSKBN2153BW)
The administration of President Donald Trump was tripped up by government rules and conventions, former officials and public health experts say. Instead of drafting the private sector early on to develop tests, as South Korea did, U.S. health officials relied, as is customary, on test kits prepared by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, some of which proved faulty. Then, sticking to its time-consuming vetting procedures, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration didn’t approve tests other than the CDC’s until Feb. 29, more than five weeks after discussions with outside labs had begun.
Had he ordered agencies to ignore laws and regulations, I think his detractors would have had something to say about that.
The US is a country with over 16,000 law enforcement agencies. There are likewise many thousands of healthcare agencies, from local to state to federal, and many and various regulatory bodies and so on and so forth. Checks and balances are excellent for democracy, but are really terrible for quick action. The issues revealed by the disasters of Hurricane Katrina and now the pandemic are ones which a President could only resolve by himself if he became absolute dictator of the United States, which I think you do not want.
Just as you accept firearms deaths as the price you pay for the right to bear arms, so too you must accept disaster and pandemic deaths as the price you pay for regulation and checks and balances. That's just the system you choose to live under.
So long as you continue to blame individual Presidents for your country's woes, you will never resolve them.
Of course, you can quite fairly blame some congresspeople for insider trading...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-congress/u-s-senators-defend-selling-shares-before-coronavirus-crash-idUSKBN2171AL (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-congress/u-s-senators-defend-selling-shares-before-coronavirus-crash-idUSKBN2171AL)
-
South Korea took a risk, releasing briskly vetted tests, then circling back later to spot check their effectiveness. By contrast, the United States’ FDA said it wanted to ensure, upfront, that the tests were accurate before they went out to millions of Americans.
“There are always opportunities to learn from situations like this one,” FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, who has been on the job only three months, told Reuters. “But one thing I will stand firm on: We cannot compromise on the quality of the tests because what would be worse than no tests at all is wildly inaccurate test results.”
bolds mine. Look at who the commissioner was before him... and before him... and before him... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hahn_(oncologist)
I don't know if they are bad or unqualified people, but turnover seems rather high!
That said you are probably right that there are structural issues that slowed down our response. But Trump did not take coronavirus seriously until it was too late.
-
Just as you accept firearms deaths as the price you pay for the right to bear arms, so too you must accept disaster and pandemic deaths as the price you pay for regulation and checks and balances. That's just the system you choose to live under.
What?
This is weird reasoning. South Korea's doing massively better than the US. Is your argument that there are no checks and balances there? Or in the Netherlands? That doesn't follow at all.
-
Iran is crippled with Corona. Thanks to sanctions they can't get medical supplies from anywhere. The sanctions are doing their job.
This caught my eye. How fucking horrible do you have to be as a human being to root for people to suffer and die? Just awful.
Wow. Yeah, that is pretty freaking grotesque, gentmach.
What are you talking about? It's it great that innocent people in an adversarial country are dying en masse? /s
And this is why we have to give Trump no quarter when it comes to who is to blame. His supporters literally cheer the death of innocent people. Like what the fuck are we talking about?
Their leaders decided they needed nuclear weapons more than they needed medical supplies. Why aren't you upset about that?
I fixed your quote-nesting for you. Another approach would have been to actually reply to the correct post if you wanted to only respond to MasterStache.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt with that comment, but your doubling-down proves me wrong. This is just vile.
Iran was complying with the nuclear treaty and everyone knows it. Every single country and agency in the world says so except for Trump, including Trump's own State Department (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/07/17/537793465/state-department-certifies-irans-compliance-with-nuclear-deal). Take your lies and cheering-for-the-deaths-of-innocent-people somewhere else.
Even if they weren't complying, why cheer the death of their civilians? Do you think dude selling pitas is the one who made the decision to try to develop nukes?
Have some compassion. I don't think anyone is defending Iranian leaders. But to say it's great that they can't get medical supplies to their people is on another level.
Note that the US government has also chosen to have nukes (more military spending) instead of more medical supplies, but I don't think you'll be happy if your parents/loved ones die now due to this choice.
EDIT: More importantly, I won't be happy that people die due to this choice either, even though I was against more military spending.
Personally I would allow Iran to have nukes. The simplicity of "Mutually Assured Destruction" doctrine being appealing to me. It would be better to have them as a trading partner. But some people disagree with that stance and I can understand that.
Their leaders could negotiate for relief but they don't want to. I'm not going to tell Iranians how to run their country. If they are disappointed they can express it at the next election.
It isn't that I lack compassion. Simply, what exactly are we supposed to do? Send care packages? Compassion without action is simply "sending thoughts and prayers." What does that accomplish?
-
Just as you accept firearms deaths as the price you pay for the right to bear arms, so too you must accept disaster and pandemic deaths as the price you pay for regulation and checks and balances. That's just the system you choose to live under.
Bullshit.
The administration's response has been a steady stream of lies, denials, fingerpointing, mixed messages and bumbling. When this first broke, Trump went into denial mode. Hence his administration went into denial mode. Top officials from Trump on down said there was no problem, it was contained, it would go away on its own, patients were getting better, and therefore we didn't have to take it seriously.
In testimony before congress the acting director of DHS (like many agencies, DHS has an acting director instead of an appointed director because Trump is too lazy to nominate anyone) was unable to state even basic details about coronavirus. A couple weeks later DHS rolled out airport screening and guess what? It was a big disaster. Trump only wants to hear what he wants to hear, so he surrounds himself with suckasses. That's great for his ego, but the suckasses don't dare do or say anything that might upset the boss.
You may have heard the first community transmission in the US occurred in Washington State. The reason why we know that is a research group (Seattle Flu Study) became alarmed and asked permission from FDA to start testing and were denied. They concluded it was unethical NOT to test and sure enough found coronavirus. FDA still got all pissed off at them. This is a public health emergency. It is okay to suspend rules in an emergency. But the suckasses didn't dare.
And the stream of lies just won't stop. Trump is still lying about test kit availability. Two days ago he said hydroquinine would be approved "very soon." FDA had to walk that one back and say they don't have a timeline. He constantly contradicts his own public health advisers. Trump's lies and finger pointing have been picked up and parroted by his surrogates in the media like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, which leads to even more confusion.
When Trump finally decided he needed a task force, he originally packed it with political and financial people. The health care experts came later. You know who hasn't been sucking Trump's ass? CDC. You know who don't see on stage at the pressers? Someone from CDC. You know, the government agency whose actual job is disease control. Trump doesn't like them so they're out of the picture. Does that sound smart to you? Is sounds stupid as shit to me.
Trump didn't create the virus and he didn't spread it to these shores. But he sure as fuck has bumbled the response.
-
Their leaders could negotiate for relief but they don't want to. I'm not going to tell Iranians how to run their country. If they are disappointed they can express it at the next election.
It isn't that I lack compassion. Simply, what exactly are we supposed to do? Send care packages? Compassion without action is simply "sending thoughts and prayers." What does that accomplish?
Iranians should not be forced to negotiate for human lives. Secondly, Iran does not exist in a vacuum. They rely on medicine, equipment, vaccines etc. that they cannot produce themselves. It was reported long before the Caronavirus came about that the US sanctions were making it extremely difficult for Iranians to obtain simply vaccines.
And yes you do lack compassion. In fact that's a gross understatement. You could have realized the grotesque nature of your comment and at least tried make some shitty excuses for it, but you've only doubled down. You cannot take back your decision to applaud the needless suffering and death of innocent people. You could have simply pointed out some of the unintended outcomes of the sanctions. But instead, you took it way beyond and claimed the sanctions were doing their job.
BTW, medical supplies are not part of the sanctions. In fact they are exempt. However, hammering away at the financial industry makes it exponentially more difficult to obtain medical supplies, medicine etc.
-
Just as you accept firearms deaths as the price you pay for the right to bear arms, so too you must accept disaster and pandemic deaths as the price you pay for regulation and checks and balances. That's just the system you choose to live under.
Bullshit.
The administration's response has been a steady stream of lies, denials, fingerpointing, mixed messages and bumbling. When this first broke, Trump went into denial mode. Hence his administration went into denial mode. Top officials from Trump on down said there was no problem, it was contained, it would go away on its own, patients were getting better, and therefore we didn't have to take it seriously.
In testimony before congress the acting director of DHS (like many agencies, DHS has an acting director instead of an appointed director because Trump is too lazy to nominate anyone) was unable to state even basic details about coronavirus. A couple weeks later DHS rolled out airport screening and guess what? It was a big disaster. Trump only wants to hear what he wants to hear, so he surrounds himself with suckasses. That's great for his ego, but the suckasses don't dare do or say anything that might upset the boss.
You may have heard the first community transmission in the US occurred in Washington State. The reason why we know that is a research group (Seattle Flu Study) became alarmed and asked permission from FDA to start testing and were denied. They concluded it was unethical NOT to test and sure enough found coronavirus. FDA still got all pissed off at them. This is a public health emergency. It is okay to suspend rules in an emergency. But the suckasses didn't dare.
And the stream of lies just won't stop. Trump is still lying about test kit availability. Two days ago he said hydroquinine would be approved "very soon." FDA had to walk that one back and say they don't have a timeline. He constantly contradicts his own public health advisers. Trump's lies and finger pointing have been picked up and parroted by his surrogates in the media like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, which leads to even more confusion.
When Trump finally decided he needed a task force, he originally packed it with political and financial people. The health care experts came later. You know who hasn't been sucking Trump's ass? CDC. You know who don't see on stage at the pressers? Someone from CDC. You know, the government agency whose actual job is disease control. Trump doesn't like them so they're out of the picture. Does that sound smart to you? Is sounds stupid as shit to me.
Trump didn't create the virus and he didn't spread it to these shores. But he sure as fuck has bumbled the response.
Everything you said 👍🏽
-
China is ultimately to blame here.
"Yet last December—before people all over China began falling sick with pneumonia-like symptoms, before people around the world grew alarmed about a disease leaping from captured wild animals to human shoppers in dense Chinese food markets, and before the coronavirus reached new shores after being carried onto planes by human hosts, forcing the World Health Organization to declare a global emergency—eight people discussed how several patients in Wuhan were experiencing severe, rapid breakdowns in their respiratory systems.
They were part of a medical school’s alumni group on WeChat, a popular social network in China, and they were concerned that SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, was back.
It wasn’t long before police detained them. The authorities said these eight doctors and medical technicians were “misinforming” the public, that there was no SARS, that the information was obviously wrong, and that everyone in the city must remain calm. On the first day of 2020, Wuhan police said they had “taken legal measures” against the eight individuals who had “spread rumors.”
-
I dunno. The spin China put out doesn't sound all that different from the spin the US put out 2 months later. The US doesn't seem to have arrested doctors though, just fired them.
Globally poor preparation for a pandemic has a lot of people, organizations and countries that could be blamed. The fact is that we almost always learn how to deal with these catastrophes the hard way.
-
I dunno. The spin China put out doesn't sound all that different from the spin the US put out 2 months later. The US doesn't seem to have arrested doctors though, just fired them.
Globally poor preparation for a pandemic has a lot of people, organizations and countries that could be blamed. The fact is that we almost always learn how to deal with these catastrophes the hard way.
Orwellian doublespeak is not a given.
I don't remember any claims from Obama during Ebola that it is a hoax or a conservative conspiracy to make him look bad. I also haven't read about any such in news reports from Japan or South Korea.
-
China is ultimately to blame here.
"Yet last December—before people all over China began falling sick with pneumonia-like symptoms, before people around the world grew alarmed about a disease leaping from captured wild animals to human shoppers in dense Chinese food markets, and before the coronavirus reached new shores after being carried onto planes by human hosts, forcing the World Health Organization to declare a global emergency—eight people discussed how several patients in Wuhan were experiencing severe, rapid breakdowns in their respiratory systems.
They were part of a medical school’s alumni group on WeChat, a popular social network in China, and they were concerned that SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, was back.
It wasn’t long before police detained them. The authorities said these eight doctors and medical technicians were “misinforming” the public, that there was no SARS, that the information was obviously wrong, and that everyone in the city must remain calm. On the first day of 2020, Wuhan police said they had “taken legal measures” against the eight individuals who had “spread rumors.”
This is pretty much exactly the spin I expect Trump to do in order to make this situation look like he was a victim, regardless of whether it fizzles out or is catastrophic or something inbetween.
"It was China's fault, see, we need stronger boarders" or some variant.
-
China is ultimately to blame here.
"Yet last December—before people all over China began falling sick with pneumonia-like symptoms, before people around the world grew alarmed about a disease leaping from captured wild animals to human shoppers in dense Chinese food markets, and before the coronavirus reached new shores after being carried onto planes by human hosts, forcing the World Health Organization to declare a global emergency—eight people discussed how several patients in Wuhan were experiencing severe, rapid breakdowns in their respiratory systems.
They were part of a medical school’s alumni group on WeChat, a popular social network in China, and they were concerned that SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, was back.
It wasn’t long before police detained them. The authorities said these eight doctors and medical technicians were “misinforming” the public, that there was no SARS, that the information was obviously wrong, and that everyone in the city must remain calm. On the first day of 2020, Wuhan police said they had “taken legal measures” against the eight individuals who had “spread rumors.”
This is pretty much exactly the spin I expect Trump to do in order to make this situation look like he was a victim, regardless of whether it fizzles out or is catastrophic or something inbetween.
"It was China's fault, see, we need stronger boarders" or some variant.
Ultimately, a 'cool' global leader looks like a sissy when they cry and complain that someone else didn't do something all that well and blame them for suffering more infections and deaths than that 'third world country' that screwed them.
Guess what, China has this under control and we are spinning out of control and wanting our government, with all those fantastic resources, to actually make this better. Trump and Trump supporters blaming China at this point is like salt to the wound. The wound that is getting bigger today, tomorrow, etc.
-
China is ultimately to blame here.
"Yet last December—before people all over China began falling sick with pneumonia-like symptoms, before people around the world grew alarmed about a disease leaping from captured wild animals to human shoppers in dense Chinese food markets, and before the coronavirus reached new shores after being carried onto planes by human hosts, forcing the World Health Organization to declare a global emergency—eight people discussed how several patients in Wuhan were experiencing severe, rapid breakdowns in their respiratory systems.
They were part of a medical school’s alumni group on WeChat, a popular social network in China, and they were concerned that SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, was back.
It wasn’t long before police detained them. The authorities said these eight doctors and medical technicians were “misinforming” the public, that there was no SARS, that the information was obviously wrong, and that everyone in the city must remain calm. On the first day of 2020, Wuhan police said they had “taken legal measures” against the eight individuals who had “spread rumors.”
This is pretty much exactly the spin I expect Trump to do in order to make this situation look like he was a victim, regardless of whether it fizzles out or is catastrophic or something inbetween.
"It was China's fault, see, we need stronger boarders" or some variant.
Ultimately, a 'cool' global leader looks like a sissy when they cry and complain that someone else didn't do something all that well and blame them for suffering more infections and deaths than that 'third world country' that screwed them.
Guess what, China has this under control and we are spinning out of control and wanting our government, with all those fantastic resources, to actually make this better. Trump and Trump supporters blaming China at this point is like salt to the wound. The wound that is getting bigger today, tomorrow, etc.
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
-
To make it even more pathetic, China has a population of 1.4B and GDP of roughly 12T vs. USA having 327M and 19.4T (2017 numbers). We have plenty of money and less people, should be easy to mitigate the severity of a pandemic, and yet here we are, blaming the past administration and other countries instead of actually doing the triage that they have done. This is only going to continue to get worse unless we, as individuals, demand less finger pointing and more accountability and action. Localities are doing their best to fill the gaps the federal government continues to leave open.
-
This is weird reasoning. South Korea's doing massively better than the US. Is your argument that there are no checks and balances there? Or in the Netherlands? That doesn't follow at all.
There are not none, but there are many less so, yes.
The US, as I said, has 16,000 different law enforcement agencies. RoK, etc do not. The USA has 50 states, and countless municipal governments with wide powers. RoK does not. The US has two houses of congress, and each of its 50 states have, as well, as well as separately-elected governors. RoK does not.
And so on and so forth.
The US is a clusterfuck of competing and overlapping agencies and organisations and departments and lobby groups and political action committees with checks and balances and regulations and procedures and people having quiet meetings off the books to get what they want done and so on and so forth. This is why you never get anything done. Now, this means your government can never do anything really awful, but it also means it can never do anything really useful.
-
Not to defend Trump's response (impossible, even if by some remote chance one wanted to) but I'm not sure that comparisons to South Korea are the right ones. That was a pretty unique case, with a high proportion of cases coming from one superspreader, Patient 31, who was known about before their superspreading event at the church. That meant that the testing was of a limited and known population and it was practical to test widely among that limited population to chase down the lines of infection. Other countries have unknown and multiple points of entry for the virus and without whole population testing will always be behind the infection curve.
-
We had one case in mid-January. Instead of test and contain, he opted to deny and misinform.
-
This is weird reasoning. South Korea's doing massively better than the US. Is your argument that there are no checks and balances there? Or in the Netherlands? That doesn't follow at all.
There are not none, but there are many less so, yes.
The US, as I said, has 16,000 different law enforcement agencies. RoK, etc do not. The USA has 50 states, and countless municipal governments with wide powers. RoK does not. The US has two houses of congress, and each of its 50 states have, as well, as well as separately-elected governors. RoK does not.
And so on and so forth.
The US is a clusterfuck of competing and overlapping agencies and organisations and departments and lobby groups and political action committees with checks and balances and regulations and procedures and people having quiet meetings off the books to get what they want done and so on and so forth. This is why you never get anything done. Now, this means your government can never do anything really awful, but it also means it can never do anything really useful.
There are two ways to interpret the overlapping sovereignties:
1. Lack of clear direction.
2. Multiplicity of opinions can battle it out in the open with none of them suppressed.
The idea of America is founded in the second interpretation. I dare say it has been quite successful.
Even though we have a dumbf*ck in power, individual states are taking competent actions by themselves. In the end, that’s what will likely save some of our a*ses.
I shudder th o think what would happen if we had a dumbf*ck in power with the kind of centralized system you imply.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
"A few misteps" LOL.
They arrested doctors warning about this new virus: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/02/04/chinese-doctor-has-coronavirus/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/02/04/chinese-doctor-has-coronavirus/)
"Wuhan police released Li on Jan. 3 after he signed a document saying that he committed “illegal acts.” The doctor, who did not immediately respond to The Washington Post on Tuesday, later explained to CNN that his family would “worry sick” about him “if I lose my freedom for a few days.” "
So if Trump finally gets on board and does stuff, we are going to sing praises on here about his eventual response, right guys?
Look, I do think Trump is totally messing this up and I wish we had anyone else in power, even Dan Quayle would probably be better, but China DOES NOT get a pass on this from me.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
"A few misteps" LOL.
They arrested doctors warning about this new virus: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/02/04/chinese-doctor-has-coronavirus/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/02/04/chinese-doctor-has-coronavirus/)
"Wuhan police released Li on Jan. 3 after he signed a document saying that he committed “illegal acts.” The doctor, who did not immediately respond to The Washington Post on Tuesday, later explained to CNN that his family would “worry sick” about him “if I lose my freedom for a few days.” "
So if Trump finally gets on board and does stuff, we are going to sing praises on here about his eventual response, right guys?
Look, I do think Trump is totally messing this up and I wish we had anyone else in power, even Dan Quayle would probably be better, but China DOES NOT get a pass on this from me.
China reacted in line with it's cultural norms, but rapidly realised that this is a human issue and not a Chinese one. Then went against their own norms to let everyone know. I think that's worth a huge amount. They let us know in time for us to act. And then they demonstrated how to act. I think we have a huge amount to thank China for. Like lives, many, many lives.
-
China reacted in line with it's cultural norms, but rapidly realised that this is a human issue and not a Chinese one. Then went against their own norms to let everyone know. I think that's worth a huge amount. They let us know in time for us to act. And then they demonstrated how to act. I think we have a huge amount to thank China for. Like lives, many, many lives.
Difference of opinion I guess. I see it as little different from Trump initially denying the virus and then going against his own norms and finally signing some emergency bills and such. I don't give Trump a pass for his initial actions and I don't give China a pass either. It is great that they finally decided to act and also great that they have a society that is very used to the government limiting freedoms with a heavy hand such that people would not ignore decrees as they are doing here in the USA and did in Italy and France.
-
China reacted in line with it's cultural norms, but rapidly realised that this is a human issue and not a Chinese one. Then went against their own norms to let everyone know. I think that's worth a huge amount. They let us know in time for us to act. And then they demonstrated how to act. I think we have a huge amount to thank China for. Like lives, many, many lives.
Difference of opinion I guess. I see it as little different from Trump initially denying the virus and then going against his own norms and finally signing some emergency bills and such. I don't give Trump a pass for his initial actions and I don't give China a pass either. It is great that they finally decided to act and also great that they have a society that is very used to the government limiting freedoms with a heavy hand such that people would not ignore decrees as they are doing here in the USA and did in Italy and France.
I think my point is that China very quickly overruled centuries of keeping things very insular, for the sake of the rest of the world. They learned from SARs and other contagions and they acted. I'm not going to comment on Trump, except to say that he wouldn't have even had the opportunity to handle this if China had not done something incredibly brave and show it's vulnerability to it's political enemies. And it did that for everyone else's good, not it's own.
-
I think my point is that China very quickly overruled centuries of keeping things very insular, for the sake of the rest of the world. They learned from SARs and other contagions and they acted. I'm not going to comment on Trump, except to say that he wouldn't have even had the opportunity to handle this if China had not done something incredibly brave and show it's vulnerability to it's political enemies. And it did that for everyone else's good, not it's own.
See, I think China did what it did because they realized they have (1 billion?) people and they better get this under control asap or they will collapse their production oriented economy. I also think they realized they could not hide a lockdown of 10 million people from the world.
Again, difference of opinion. China will always be the country that killed my two cats by putting melamine in their food to fool the protein sensors, so I may be biased.
-
I think my point is that China very quickly overruled centuries of keeping things very insular, for the sake of the rest of the world. They learned from SARs and other contagions and they acted. I'm not going to comment on Trump, except to say that he wouldn't have even had the opportunity to handle this if China had not done something incredibly brave and show it's vulnerability to it's political enemies. And it did that for everyone else's good, not it's own.
See, I think China did what it did because they realized they have (1 billion?) people and they better get this under control asap or they will collapse their production oriented economy. I also think they realized they could not hide a lockdown of 10 million people from the world.
Again, difference of opinion. China will always be the country that killed my two cats by putting melamine in their food to fool the protein sensors, so I may be biased.
I did a research project on the melamine situation. In China, milk was collected locally. In other countries, it's collected centrally. It was the local business men that added melamine to up their profit margin. It wasn't the Chinese government by any stretch of the imagination. And don't forget that melamine killed more Chinese babies than others. That whole situation was a nightmare for NZ, because we obviously supply a lot of milk products to China. They're one of our top 3 trading partners.
Sorry your cats died. Poor wee mites. I would hate someone that poisoned mine also.
-
Oh PUH-LEASE!
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Several months before the coronavirus pandemic began, the Trump administration eliminated a key American public health position in Beijing intended to help detect disease outbreaks in China, Reuters has learned."
WHY???
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-cdc-exclusiv/exclusive-u-s-axed-cdc-expert-job-in-china-months-before-virus-outbreak-idUSKBN21910S
-
By way of contrast, I attach a link to a recent address to Germany by Chancellor Angela Merkel. No finger pointing, no point scoring. A good explanation of the term 'flattening the curve', and a good point in that keeping distance is an expression of care.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLxrxyk_wYo
-
I have a bad feeling about the outcome of the blame game at this point in proceedings. If you think things are bad now, they could be so very much worse.
-
I am completely floored that ANYONE is still defending Trump, after the childish way he acts in a moment of GLOBAL CRISIS.
-
My fear is that Teflon Don actually gets re-elected over this because:
a) by continuing to call it the Chinese virus he gets to blame another country, and reinforce his emphasis on protecting our borders;
b) he will get voters to believe that they should not change leadership in the middle of an unprecedented health and financial pandemic.
Hence, pandemic = DT re-elected.
-
Also, Republicans pretty uniformly believe he's doing a great job. In fact, a poll last week showed that 55% of Americans think he's doing a great job. So yeah, he may get reelected over this.
-
My fear is that Teflon Don actually gets re-elected over this because:
a) by continuing to call it the Chinese virus he gets to blame another country, and reinforce his emphasis on protecting our borders;
b) he will get voters to believe that they should not change leadership in the middle of an unprecedented health and financial pandemic.
Hence, pandemic = DT re-elected.
I'm not so sure. 90% of the responses I get when I talk politics is "but how is your 401(k) doing?" - and now that that's shot (Dow is at what, 18,825 right now?) I don't know that a lot of his supporters will continue to vote for him. That said, his competition has to start speaking up with actual solutions to these immediate problems, otherwise the bolstering may (barely) out-bid the silence.
-
One thing i remember from the late 2000s was that everyone talked about how bad a job Bush did on Katrina. Like, had Katrina been in 2004 rather than 2005, he might not have been reelected. I guess I wasn't paying very close attention to politics at the time because I don't remember people saying he was handling it so badly *during* the immediate aftermath/crisis. Only years later. For those that were there/paying attention at the time, how does the contemporaneous reaction to Bush compare to the currently in-process reaction to Trump?
I feel like the one thing i remember from Katrina was that Bush said something about how great it was going and how Brown, the FEMA Director (?) was doing a great job. And people are still pissed about that to this day. But like, Trump says he's doing a perfect job like every time he opens his mouth, so...? I guess it's better to say it constantly than to say it just once if it's untrue?
-
My fear is that Teflon Don actually gets re-elected over this because:
a) by continuing to call it the Chinese virus he gets to blame another country, and reinforce his emphasis on protecting our borders;
b) he will get voters to believe that they should not change leadership in the middle of an unprecedented health and financial pandemic.
Hence, pandemic = DT re-elected.
I'm not so sure. 90% of the responses I get when I talk politics is "but how is your 401(k) doing?" - and now that that's shot (Dow is at what, 18,825 right now?) I don't know that a lot of his supporters will continue to vote for him. That said, his competition has to start speaking up with actual solutions to these immediate problems, otherwise the bolstering may (barely) out-bid the silence.
Meh. His new talking point is "The cure is worse than the sickness" -- meaning that the economic effects of isolating will be worse than the coronavirus itself. I'm already seeing his supporters parroting that. So this is their new way to absolve Trump of responsibility.
-
My fear is that Teflon Don actually gets re-elected over this because:
a) by continuing to call it the Chinese virus he gets to blame another country, and reinforce his emphasis on protecting our borders;
b) he will get voters to believe that they should not change leadership in the middle of an unprecedented health and financial pandemic.
Hence, pandemic = DT re-elected.
I'm not so sure. 90% of the responses I get when I talk politics is "but how is your 401(k) doing?" - and now that that's shot (Dow is at what, 18,825 right now?) I don't know that a lot of his supporters will continue to vote for him. That said, his competition has to start speaking up with actual solutions to these immediate problems, otherwise the bolstering may (barely) out-bid the silence.
Meh. His new talking point is "The cure is worse than the sickness" -- meaning that the economic effects of isolating will be worse than the coronavirus itself. I'm already seeing his supporters parroting that. So this is their new way to absolve Trump of responsibility.
JFC. The idiocy knows no bounds.
-
Trump supporters are going to be even less likely to trust the media, because the media industry abandoned any illusion of objectivity in 2016.
Lol
Or...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/17/trump-learns-pitfalls-his-pinocchio-presidency/
"An alarming new poll from NPR, PBS NewsHour and Marist shows that the number of Republicans who believe the virus is a real threat has actually fallen over the past month, from 72 percent in February to just 40 percent now. A majority of Republicans now say the threat has been blown out of proportion — more than double the 23 percent who said so last month."
-
@Kris
Seems it takes a month or so for Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump's base to internalize his message.
-
Colbert used to joke that reality had a known liberal bias... I think that's increasingly true, sadly. What's the end game when a significant chunk of the US population is prone to believing wild conspiracy theories and rejecting reality?
-
Colbert used to joke that reality had a known liberal bias... I think that's increasingly true, sadly. What's the end game when a significant chunk of the US population is prone to believing wild conspiracy theories and rejecting reality?
MAGA rallies that become a disease cluster?
-
By repeating the mantra "the media are biased!" the right wing have given themselves permission to reject any facts that might conflict with their world view. Trump has his surrogates spent months repeating obvious lies like "pretty soon we'll be at zero cases." and "it goes away in spring like a miracle," "we'll have a vaccine very soon," and "everybody who wants a test can be tested" etc.
Since Trump is a fountain of good news, he must be doing a great job right? Anyone who says otherwise is biased.
-
Look at the stats for "those not concerned at all": https://twitter.com/jdcivicscience/status/1241464305129791489/photo/1
So ... rallies, pro wrestling, monster truck shows, nascar, evangelical gatherings ... all should be A-OK
-
This is weird reasoning. South Korea's doing massively better than the US. Is your argument that there are no checks and balances there? Or in the Netherlands? That doesn't follow at all.
There are not none, but there are many less so, yes.
The US, as I said, has 16,000 different law enforcement agencies. RoK, etc do not. The USA has 50 states, and countless municipal governments with wide powers. RoK does not. The US has two houses of congress, and each of its 50 states have, as well, as well as separately-elected governors. RoK does not.
And so on and so forth.
The US is a clusterfuck of competing and overlapping agencies and organisations and departments and lobby groups and political action committees with checks and balances and regulations and procedures and people having quiet meetings off the books to get what they want done and so on and so forth. This is why you never get anything done. Now, this means your government can never do anything really awful, but it also means it can never do anything really useful.
There are two ways to interpret the overlapping sovereignties:
1. Lack of clear direction.
2. Multiplicity of opinions can battle it out in the open with none of them suppressed.
The idea of America is founded in the second interpretation. I dare say it has been quite successful.
Even though we have a dumbf*ck in power, individual states are taking competent actions by themselves. In the end, that’s what will likely save some of our a*ses.
I shudder th o think what would happen if we had a dumbf*ck in power with the kind of centralized system you imply.
"A constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory, whether of paternalism and the organic relation of the citizen to the State or of laissez faire. It is made for people of fundamentally different views." Justice Holmes Lochner dissent 1905
-
I think our respective electorates will look very different 3 months from now.
What percentage of Trump supporters (or their parents/loved ones) dying of this disease will move the needle? Because that is looking like the metric that will undo him.
You can bullshit all you want, but if one in 8 people over 60 die in a town people will notice. At the very least, his base skews hard to the old, white demographic. There will be fewer of them in a couple of months.
I don't wish death on anyone, but it seems like some of these folks are choosing death over reconsidering their biases. Unfortunately, they will kill a lot of the rest of us as well.
-
Colbert used to joke that reality had a known liberal bias... I think that's increasingly true, sadly. What's the end game when a significant chunk of the US population is prone to believing wild conspiracy theories and rejecting reality?
They slant older, and Trump has told them not to be concerned about this virus. Maybe they'll die in great enough numbers to fix the disbelief in reality thing that they've started.
-
Colbert used to joke that reality had a known liberal bias... I think that's increasingly true, sadly. What's the end game when a significant chunk of the US population is prone to believing wild conspiracy theories and rejecting reality?
They slant older, and Trump has told them not to be concerned about this virus. Maybe they'll die in great enough numbers to fix the disbelief in reality thing that they've started.
Natural selection at work.
-
https://twitter.com/RonPaul/status/1239551403074433025
Ron Paul tweeted out six days ago that the coronavirus is a hoax. His son has tested positive.
-
https://twitter.com/RonPaul/status/1239551403074433025
Ron Paul tweeted out six days ago that the coronavirus is a hoax. His son has tested positive.
Pretty hard situation. Tough to keep on telling everyone the truth when the deep state even turns your children against you.
-
Based on my very limited exposure to people in the last couple of weeks, those who supported Trump before will continue to support him, and those who outright hated him before still do. I don't know anyone who has ever been "on the fence" about him.
As for why some people, largely Trump supporters, appear to not be taking the pandemic seriously, I think Paula Pant outlined the reason pretty accurately on her podcast last week. She described the current situation as the media's "boy who cried wolf" moment. For years, the media has fed fear because it led to better ratings. Now that there is actually something that people need to fear, certain people aren't believing the hype from the media.
Trump supporters are going to be even less likely to trust the media, because the media industry abandoned any illusion of objectivity in 2016.
Just based on the economic impact alone, I would agree that this is probably going to be the end of Trump, and I'm perfectly okay with that. I don't think Joe Biden will be a bad choice for president. My favorite candidate from the beginning was Yang, and I was surprised that he didn't get any traction - his universal income idea would be pretty popular right now.
YEah. I think 5-6 months from now people may wish they had a "do-over" who they voted for in the primaries. Basically more socialist policies like universal income and universal healthcare will be seen in a more favorable light.
-
https://twitter.com/RonPaul/status/1239551403074433025
Ron Paul tweeted out six days ago that the coronavirus is a hoax. His son has tested positive.
https://time.com/5808407/sen-rand-paul-senate-capitol-coronavirus/
On top of that he remained at work for 6 days after taking the test while waiting for the results. Like half of the senate is 65+ so I'm sure this'll end well.
-
The US is a clusterfuck of competing and overlapping agencies and organisations and departments and lobby groups and political action committees with checks and balances and regulations and procedures and people having quiet meetings off the books to get what they want done and so on and so forth. This is why you never get anything done. Now, this means your government can never do anything really awful,but it also means it can never do anything really useful.
The Framers endeavored to design a country of enduring, maximum liberty.
The Framers' dread of a concentration of power is the overarching reason they formed a tripartite, check-and-balances national government.
And in keeping with their commitment to dispersion of power they granted each State its own sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment's principle of federalism.
The result is an America comprised of 51 sovereign powers, the federal government plus the 50 States.
While speaking at a law school in Hawaii Justice Scalia said "it's game over" if a concentration of power ever obtains.
During a rare appearance on a morning TV show Justice Gorsuch also emphasized the essentiality of limited power, and that the meaning of the Constitution's fundamental law, and its other provisions, is found in the definition of the words the Framers used at the time they drafted the Constitution.
This interpretative approach preserves fundamental liberties.
Here is Justice Black's inimitable reverence for "Our Federalism."
Younger v. Harris (1971)
This underlying reason for restraining courts of equity from interfering with criminal prosecutions is reinforced by an even more vital consideration, the notion of "comity," that is, a proper respect for state functions, a recognition of the fact that the entire country is made up of a Union of separate state governments, and a continuance of the belief that the National Government will fare best if the States and their institutions are left free to perform their separate functions in their separate ways.
This, perhaps for lack of a better and clearer way to describe it, is referred to by many as "Our Federalism," and one familiar with the profound debates that ushered our Federal Constitution into existence is bound to respect those who remain loyal to the ideals and dreams of "Our Federalism."
The concept does not mean blind deference to "States' Rights" any more than it means centralization of control over every important issue in our National Government and its courts.
The Framers rejected both these courses.
What the concept does represent is a system in which there is sensitivity to the legitimate interests of both State and National Governments, and in which the National Government, anxious though it may be to vindicate and protect federal rights and federal interests, always endeavors to do so in ways that will not unduly interfere with the legitimate activities of the States.
It should never be forgotten that this slogan, "Our Federalism," born in the early struggling days of our Union of States, occupies a highly important place in our Nation's history and its future.
-
My fear is that Teflon Don actually gets re-elected over this because:
a) by continuing to call it the Chinese virus he gets to blame another country, and reinforce his emphasis on protecting our borders;
b) he will get voters to believe that they should not change leadership in the middle of an unprecedented health and financial pandemic.
Hence, pandemic = DT re-elected.
I'm not so sure. 90% of the responses I get when I talk politics is "but how is your 401(k) doing?" - and now that that's shot (Dow is at what, 18,825 right now?) I don't know that a lot of his supporters will continue to vote for him. That said, his competition has to start speaking up with actual solutions to these immediate problems, otherwise the bolstering may (barely) out-bid the silence.
The flip side is if this takes 3 months to resolve and does so in a way that hasn't done long term economic damage, it's possible the market rockets up right before the election, which of course Trump will take credit for and perhaps have the opposite effect.
-
My fear is that Teflon Don actually gets re-elected over this because:
a) by continuing to call it the Chinese virus he gets to blame another country, and reinforce his emphasis on protecting our borders;
b) he will get voters to believe that they should not change leadership in the middle of an unprecedented health and financial pandemic.
Hence, pandemic = DT re-elected.
I'm not so sure. 90% of the responses I get when I talk politics is "but how is your 401(k) doing?" - and now that that's shot (Dow is at what, 18,825 right now?) I don't know that a lot of his supporters will continue to vote for him. That said, his competition has to start speaking up with actual solutions to these immediate problems, otherwise the bolstering may (barely) out-bid the silence.
The flip side is if this takes 3 months to resolve and does so in a way that hasn't done long term economic damage, it's possible the market rockets up right before the election, which of course Trump will take credit for and perhaps have the opposite effect.
Well, if you are willing to bet on science and the fact that Trump is putting the economy (and his narcissism and ignorance) ahead of the essential steps required to stop the virus from spreading, then we are in for a further deteriorating market and situation for the foreseeable future, with a bunch of 'exciting' ups and downs along the way. Still, it is possible that folks see Trump as a wartime President and choose the 'reassuring reality TV persona' over the unknown. Americans, more than anyone, prefer the promise of a quick fix (chloroquine tablets, conspiracy theories, blaming fake news and foreigners) vs. facing reality (putting in time and personal sacrifice). Being 'free' is a double edged sword. This election just might boil down to choosing between a 'deep fried chicken sandwich' (so tasty and tempting, but will kill you in the medium term) vs. 'veggies and salad' (boring, but better in the long run) for President.
-
The thing is that Biden is not a perfect candidate. He has tried for the office before, with there often being better candidates running then. He didn't challenge Clinton in 2016, for whatever reason. It doesn't mean it wouldn't be an improvement from our current President, but your salad analogy breaks down a little there.
And--when life returns to anything like normalcy--there's also the 40% of the country who simply believe it's a recession whenever the person in the White House has a D after his name.
-
there's also the 40% of the country who simply believe it's a recession whenever the person in the White House has a D after his name.
How much do they contribute economically? To the GDP?
-
Many of the ones I've met in this group own (small) businesses.
-
Many of the ones I've met in this group own (small) businesses.
Yes, they are very important for the specific, local economy.
How important are those specific local economies to the US economy?
Some stats: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2016/11/29/another-clinton-trump-divide-high-output-america-vs-low-output-america/
I could not find specific economic projections - but from the charts and lists it seems to me that one-third of GDP represented by "Trump Counties" are also primarily declining ones. So, if the trend from 2000->2016 continues, the "trump counties" will likely be no more than a fourth or a fifth of the GDP (this is entirely a "gut feel statement" without numbers backing it up to any degree of rigor).
My point is, the economic importance of those "40%" that you cite is much less than their "40% share of electorate" would seem to imply.
-
This is good data analysis, particularly the growth piece. I wonder whether looking at the blue counties wouldn't yield the result that the wealthier people IN those blue counties tend to still support Republicans? (with the counties being blue because those wealthy supporters are few in number)
-
This is good data analysis, particularly the growth piece. I wonder whether looking at the blue counties wouldn't yield the result that the wealthier people IN those blue counties tend to still support Republicans? (with the counties being blue because those wealthy supporters are few in number)
It is difficult to get a handle on the actual data.
My gut feel - it is unlikely in the coastal areas that the wealthier people are closet Trump supporters.
Trump supporters fall in two categories where I live (CT) and work (Manhattan):
1. Non college educated people. Think plumbers, builders etc. While some of them can be wealthy, the average is anything but in places where 100k is considered a lower-middle-class income.
2. A few of the higher income people, more to stand out as contrarians.
Vast majority of your typical, run-of-the-mill doctors, engineers, bankers profess to have a deep dislike for Trumpism.
It is, of course, always possible that some of those typical run-of-the-mill upper middle class people hide their true feelings. I think the best substitute is to take the actual voting numbers in all the different counties in 2018 election. That would not paint a good picture for Trumpism in these states.
But, even if for argument's sake the wealthy people in the coastal areas were actually closet trump supporters, I doubt they would think we are in a recession any time a democrat is a president. After all, they are used to living under a liberal state government, and a population that tends to be very liberal. So, it seems plausible that they are not relevant for the specific discussion at hand.
-
there's also the 40% of the country who simply believe it's a recession whenever the person in the White House has a D after his name.
How much do they contribute economically? To the GDP?
When you talk about contributing economically GDP I'm not sure what you are getting at here. What is your point? Do you mean do they own stock? That they are business owners?
That their opinion doesn't matter?
As for 40% of the country thinking that there is a recession if the person in the White house has a D after his name. I think that is an exaggeration. I grew up blue collar. My husband blue collar and we are both college educated and we own a lot of stock. My husband is an engineer with a masters degree. I can tell you that we and that the people I know who are republicans care more about unemployment numbers and that the people they know and love have a job that hopefully they like and can support themselves with. So yes, if you are talking stock here, it and less about their stock market portfolios. (Not that we don't care about it but we care less ) . Since Ds are known as being anti business. They are fearful for their job. It was drummed into me as a child how important it is to have a job.
What worries me about the current situation is less my stock losses or even my own health (I am a nurse nearing retirement age and WILL be exposed to coronavirus. I can't run and hide even if I wanted to) and more that my adult children could potentially end up homeless because they are going to be unemployed. I like Trump am not sure that I want the cure to be worse than the disease.
-
there's also the 40% of the country who simply believe it's a recession whenever the person in the White House has a D after his name.
How much do they contribute economically? To the GDP?
When you talk about contributing economically GDP I'm not sure what you are getting at here. What is your point? Do you mean do they own stock? That they are business owners?
That their opinion doesn't matter?
As for 40% of the country thinking that there is a recession if the person in the White house has a D after his name. I think that is an exaggeration. I grew up blue collar. My husband blue collar and we are both college educated and we own a lot of stock. My husband is an engineer with a masters degree. I can tell you that we and that the people I know who are republicans care more about unemployment numbers and that the people they know and love have a job that hopefully they like and can support themselves with. So yes, if you are talking stock here, it and less about their stock market portfolios. (Not that we don't care about it but we care less ) . Since Ds are known as being anti business. They are fearful for their job. It was drummed into me as a child how important it is to have a job.
What worries me about the current situation is less my stock losses or even my own health (I am a nurse nearing retirement age and WILL be exposed to coronavirus. I can't run and hide even if I wanted to) and more that my adult children could potentially end up homeless because they are going to be unemployed. I like Trump am not sure that I want the cure to be worse than the disease.
When talltexan talked about people who act as if the country is in recession if a D is president - then he is describing people with an extremely partisan viewpoint who DO NOT consider political opposition as legitimate, i.e. they do not consider democracy itself to be legitimate!!
We can plainly deduce that a lot of such people exist. Otherwise gerrymandering and voter suppression efforts would not be so prevalent in the republican states.
My point was that they don't exactly carry as much economic weight as the 40% figure talltexan was citing.
I acknowledge my response was based on "gut feel" and not a rigorous data analysis. I doubt such a data analysis is even feasible short of a massive research project. So I'd agree with your comment that the 40% figure seem to be an exeggeration.
>> Since Ds are known as being anti business.
I find this statement to be a little difficult to digest for many reasons. I don't know where you live. Where I live, there would be plenty of business owners, startup founders etc who would argue it is GOP policies that are counter-growth and counter-innovation. e.g. I know I myself did not take a risky plunge into joining a startup because I could not risk the group health insurance from megacorp right before my first daughter was due.
But, I guess this thread is not a good place for that discussion.
-
...and in "either I'm going insane or the world is" news, Trump's approval ratings have ticked UP during this past few weeks of mixed-message insanity. It's early days yet, but still pretty amazing.
Not just one poll either; Fivethirtyeight's metadata analyses show the same.
-
...and in "either I'm going insane or the world is" news, Trump's approval ratings have ticked UP during this past few weeks of mixed-message insanity. It's early days yet, but still pretty amazing.
Not just one poll either; Fivethirtyeight's metadata analyses show the same.
Ignorance is contagious, too.
-
Frankly, I interacted with a ton of small business owners who felt like Obamacare fucked them over, and didn't like Obama because of that. You have only to look at the rise of the NFIB sentiment index (or even consumer sentiment) immediately follow Trump's election to realize how many of these people there are.
-
...and in "either I'm going insane or the world is" news, Trump's approval ratings have ticked UP during this past few weeks of mixed-message insanity. It's early days yet, but still pretty amazing.
Not just one poll either; Fivethirtyeight's metadata analyses show the same.
I haven't bee reading polls, but it's amazing if true. My opinion of Trump continues to decline, to new lows this week. What he says has gotten beyond ridiculous.
-
I read this in the NY Times.
“Mr. Trump's performance has put on display the traits that Democrats and some Republicans consider so jarring -- the profound need for personal praise, the propensity to blame others, the lack of human empathy, the pension for rewriting history, the disregard for expertise, the distortion of facts, the impatience with scrutiny or criticism. For years, skeptics expressed concern about how he would handle a genuine crisis threatening the nation, and now they know.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-leadership.html
-
And yet his approval rating is back up to 50%.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/489340-poll-trump-lands-50-percent-approval-for-first-time-in-two
-
Perhaps because the more people look at Biden and Pelosi, Trump doesn't seem so bad.
One would think either party could capture the political high ground by proposing a "just help people directly affected and not attach other baggage" bill, but the reflex actions of both parties seem too strong to allow for that.
-
And yet his approval rating is back up to 50%.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/489340-poll-trump-lands-50-percent-approval-for-first-time-in-two
That is truly disturbing.
This is no doubt more accurate:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?cid=rrpromo
-
I read this in the NY Times.
“Mr. Trump's performance has put on display the traits that Democrats and some Republicans consider so jarring -- the profound need for personal praise, the propensity to blame others, the lack of human empathy, the pension for rewriting history, the disregard for expertise, the distortion of facts, the impatience with scrutiny or criticism. For years, skeptics expressed concern about how he would handle a genuine crisis threatening the nation, and now they know.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-leadership.html
Unbelievable how that quote describes anyone of his press conferences
-
And yet his approval rating is back up to 50%.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/489340-poll-trump-lands-50-percent-approval-for-first-time-in-two
That is truly disturbing.
This is no doubt more accurate:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?cid=rrpromo
Probably more accurate, but still disturbing in that it has gone up in recent days. Even if he's jumping over the very low bar of doing something to address the crisis, I can't believe there are people that have changed their minds about him over the very poor performance compared to like most of the rest of humanity.
-
And yet his approval rating is back up to 50%.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/489340-poll-trump-lands-50-percent-approval-for-first-time-in-two
That is truly disturbing.
This is no doubt more accurate:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?cid=rrpromo
Probably more accurate, but still disturbing in that it has gone up in recent days. Even if he's jumping over the very low bar of doing something to address the crisis, I can't believe there are people that have changed their minds about him over the very poor performance compared to like most of the rest of humanity.
Perhaps this explains it:
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/02/05/trumps-rising-approval-numbers-resulting-from-differential-nonresponse/
-
And yet his approval rating is back up to 50%.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/489340-poll-trump-lands-50-percent-approval-for-first-time-in-two
That is truly disturbing.
This is no doubt more accurate:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?cid=rrpromo
Probably more accurate, but still disturbing in that it has gone up in recent days. Even if he's jumping over the very low bar of doing something to address the crisis, I can't believe there are people that have changed their minds about him over the very poor performance compared to like most of the rest of humanity.
Perhaps this explains it:
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/02/05/trumps-rising-approval-numbers-resulting-from-differential-nonresponse/
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
-
This is good data analysis, particularly the growth piece. I wonder whether looking at the blue counties wouldn't yield the result that the wealthier people IN those blue counties tend to still support Republicans? (with the counties being blue because those wealthy supporters are few in number)
It is difficult to get a handle on the actual data.
My gut feel - it is unlikely in the coastal areas that the wealthier people are closet Trump supporters.
Trump supporters fall in two categories where I live (CT) and work (Manhattan):
1. Non college educated people. Think plumbers, builders etc. While some of them can be wealthy, the average is anything but in places where 100k is considered a lower-middle-class income.
2. A few of the higher income people, more to stand out as contrarians.
Vast majority of your typical, run-of-the-mill doctors, engineers, bankers profess to have a deep dislike for Trumpism.
It is, of course, always possible that some of those typical run-of-the-mill upper middle class people hide their true feelings. I think the best substitute is to take the actual voting numbers in all the different counties in 2018 election. That would not paint a good picture for Trumpism in these states.
But, even if for argument's sake the wealthy people in the coastal areas were actually closet trump supporters, I doubt they would think we are in a recession any time a democrat is a president. After all, they are used to living under a liberal state government, and a population that tends to be very liberal. So, it seems plausible that they are not relevant for the specific discussion at hand.
Don't underestimate the stupid of trumpism. There are legions if trump supporters that will flat out tell you Trump inherited a dumppster fire of an economy.
-
Trump will remain president.
There won't be an election as you know it. Esp. not if there's a remote chance he'd lose the vote.
A way will be found to drastically reduce D voter turnout (in swing states) and that will seal it.
-
Trump isn't a president; he's a cult leader. There isn't a way to get rid of him now.
-
Whether Trump wins or loses in the Nov election is an important issue, but comparatively it's an insignificant detail next to another related issue that is *far* more important - belief in "trumpism" among trump followers.
The ardent belief in "Trumpism" among a large section of the population is what Trump derives his power from. Even if Trump loses, Trumpism can come back again next time, and will almost certainly be much more virulent at that time because *anyone else* would likely be more competent than Trump - with much greater capacity to cause damage.
So, whether Trump wins or loses in 2020 is not exactly the issue that I lose sleep over. I am much more interested in handicapping the underlying thought process of a Trump supporter.
-
Frankly, I interacted with a ton of small business owners who felt like Obamacare fucked them over, and didn't like Obama because of that.
<not directly related to "how many such people are there" or "how big an economic impact they have">
I remember having some interesting conversations with small business owners on this topic right after '08.
Ultimately, whenever I have had a chance to talk to someone, the issue boils down to EMTALA. The small business owners and their employees have the right to emergency medical care if they - for example - break their leg. Since it is not a proximate issue right in front of them all the time - they tend to feel they have no responsibility to pay for it.
Joe Schmoe the plumber was now asked to fork over $15k/year in real money, for some "abstract" benefits like:
1. ER care under EMTALA (which he got anyway, just did not pay for it earlier)
2. Insurance can't be denied or taken away for "pre-existing-conditions" - again not relevant for majority, but only if you are unfortunate to have the situation.
It's no wonder he will be mad, especially when the right skillfully managed the outrage!!
I'm not sure if there was any alternative though!!
Should Joe Schmoe have continued to enjoy EMTALA-mandated ER care guarantee without paying anything into it? Should John Doe have continued uninsured because he has a pre-existing condition (which is - like - half of the population)?
The political right (that skillfully managed this outrage) wasn't even interested in exploring any alternatives when ACA negotiations were happening. I found it confusing at that time. But the reasons are clear to me now once I have learned to see through what libertarians and the political right nominally profess, and understand that they are allergic to the concept of "personal responsibility" (cite: Rand Paul continuing to infect others while waiting for test results).
-
Prior to 2008, there were a lot of people who thought that Bush Jr. would find a way to remain in office, because they viewed him as a dictator. I find it odd that people as smart and level-headed as the MMM crowd would believe the same nonsense about Trump.
I've seen the claim of there being large numbers of people who believed Bush Jr and Obama would stay past two terms a number of times. However, I'm yet to see any actual evidence that there were in fact any significant number of people who actually did think Bush Jr or Obama would stay in office after the limit of two terms.
Whether a fear that Trump will try to unlawfully remain in office is valid, I think the difference is that neither Bush Jr or Obama ever made remarks regarding trying to and wanting to whereas Trump has repeatedly done so.
-
Prior to 2008, there were a lot of people who thought that Bush Jr. would find a way to remain in office, because they viewed him as a dictator. I find it odd that people as smart and level-headed as the MMM crowd would believe the same nonsense about Trump.
I've seen the claim of there being large numbers of people who believed Bush Jr and Obama would stay past two terms a number of times. However, I'm yet to see any actual evidence that there were in fact any significant number of people who actually did think Bush Jr or Obama would stay in office after the limit of two terms.
Whether a fear that Trump will try to unlawfully remain in office is valid, I think the difference is that neither Bush Jr or Obama ever made remarks regarding trying to and wanting to whereas Trump has repeatedly done so.
+1.
A few conspiracy theory nutjobs advancing a harebrained idea does not a valid argument make.
-
Whether Trump wins or loses in the Nov election is an important issue, but comparatively it's an insignificant detail next to another related issue that is *far* more important - belief in "trumpism" among trump followers.
The ardent belief in "Trumpism" among a large section of the population is what Trump derives his power from. Even if Trump loses, Trumpism can come back again next time, and will almost certainly be much more virulent at that time because *anyone else* would likely be more competent than Trump - with much greater capacity to cause damage.
So, whether Trump wins or loses in 2020 is not exactly the issue that I lose sleep over. I am much more interested in handicapping the underlying thought process of a Trump supporter.
Trump, I believe, is a unique case. His policy positions are not unique, e.g. xenophobia, tax cuts for the wealthy, crony capitalism. etc. But his methods are certainly unique. He simply trains his fire on however he perceives his opponent to be without concern that he may need to build consensus. For example:
https://youtu.be/5D-tKJzkBdc
However, Trump supporters support Trump unconditionally so his former opponents just fall in line. It is crazy. I've never seen anything like it. But that works both ways. Since he never reaches out, he's had extraordinarily few legislative accomplishments. His promises have also been absurd and unworkable. Mexico will pay for the wall. 6% economic growth. But again, his supporters don't hold him accountable for a stunning string of failed promises.
But I think Trump is a one-off. No one else in my memory has made his style of pugilistic politics work. It is all becomes Trump's base love him more than any other politician, or even any other particular political position.
-
Biden should save that supercut of Trump's bullshit, find as big a tablet as he can. Then at any debates, any time Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump attacks him, just play that at full volume.
Or just refuse any debates in the interest of public health and play that as a campaign ad incessantly.
-
Biden should save that supercut of Trump's bullshit, find as big a tablet as he can. Then at any debates, any time Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump attacks him, just play that at full volume.
Or just refuse any debates in the interest of public health and play that as a campaign ad incessantly.
There are a lot of recent Trump statements that can be used. The "American Resurrection" one may be next, given that it likely coincides with NY's infection peak.
-
At least one NPR station has decided to stop airing the briefings live due to the rampant misinformation. FROM THE FUCKING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Hope this trend spreads real fast.
Freedom of the press - very important right now.
-
At least one NPR station has decided to stop airing the briefings live due to the rampant misinformation. ...
Just read this article, from a twitter thread:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-and-msnbc-staffers-wary-of-airing-trump-coronavirus-pressers (https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-and-msnbc-staffers-wary-of-airing-trump-coronavirus-pressers)
What could he possibly have to say that is relevant to the nation for more than an hour? This is why we have a free press - one way to hold the government accountable is to refuse them a platform when it the lies are obvious.
-
The more people see and hear directly from both Trump and Biden, the more people's choice can be an informed one, unfiltered by Fox, MSNBC, etc.
-
At least one NPR station has decided to stop airing the briefings live due to the rampant misinformation. ...
Just read this article, from a twitter thread:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-and-msnbc-staffers-wary-of-airing-trump-coronavirus-pressers (https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-and-msnbc-staffers-wary-of-airing-trump-coronavirus-pressers)
What could he possibly have to say that is relevant to the nation for more than an hour? This is why we have a free press - one way to hold the government accountable is to refuse them a platform when it the lies are obvious.
It’s such a waste of time and energy for all of those people on stage with him who are actually trying to do their jobs (Fauci, Birx, Pence). Maybe it’s best if Trump stays on the golf course at Mar-a-lago. Can we find some busy work for him so that the grownups can do their jobs?
-
Trump supporters are going to be even less likely to trust the media, because the media industry abandoned any illusion of objectivity in 2016.
Lol
Or...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/17/trump-learns-pitfalls-his-pinocchio-presidency/
"An alarming new poll from NPR, PBS NewsHour and Marist shows that the number of Republicans who believe the virus is a real threat has actually fallen over the past month, from 72 percent in February to just 40 percent now. A majority of Republicans now say the threat has been blown out of proportion — more than double the 23 percent who said so last month."
So... survival of the fittest? There are people who listen to Trump and FoxNews and then there are those people who listen to the scientists and medical experts...
DW and I try to make the best judgement for our family we can based on real information from real experts.
-
Trump supporters are going to be even less likely to trust the media, because the media industry abandoned any illusion of objectivity in 2016.
Lol
Or...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/17/trump-learns-pitfalls-his-pinocchio-presidency/
"An alarming new poll from NPR, PBS NewsHour and Marist shows that the number of Republicans who believe the virus is a real threat has actually fallen over the past month, from 72 percent in February to just 40 percent now. A majority of Republicans now say the threat has been blown out of proportion — more than double the 23 percent who said so last month."
So... survival of the fittest? There are people who listen to Trump and FoxNews and then there are those people who listen to the scientists and medical experts...
DW and I try to make the best judgement for our family we can based on real information from real experts.
I have no problem if most Republicans listen to their leader and willingly go through this trial of survival of the fittest. By the time it's over and done with, the US may even get to have a viable 3rd party.
-
https://www.mediaite.com/news/twitter-deletes-post-from-the-federalist-proposing-chickenpox-parties-to-deliberately-spread-coronavirus/
https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1242440826317344768
These people are insane.
-
I haven't read the entire thread, and I'm hesitant to get into a political thread, but LOL if you think incompetence and buffoonery is going to be trump's downfall. He had all these characteristics before the crisis, and people still elected him. This will not be his downfall. Even as he spouts misinformation and flat out lies every day, and the number of infections increases, and the hospitals become overloaded and the deaths pile up at an alarming rate...people will still love Trump! People in my neighborhood are putting out huge "Trump 2020!" flags in front of their houses.
I'm sure many people here are thinking that everyone else will act logically and rationally, because they think they do so themselves. But that's not how people work. Some segment of the population will not take this pandemic seriously no matter what. Look at Italy: infections soaring, people dieing, mandatory lock down, and people still whooping it up in the streets like nothing is going on to the point they are having a difficult time getting people to comply with social distancing.
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
-
https://www.mediaite.com/news/twitter-deletes-post-from-the-federalist-proposing-chickenpox-parties-to-deliberately-spread-coronavirus/
https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1242440826317344768These people are insane.
From a purely selfish standpoint, Chicken pox style parties to get the disease early are a pretty good idea. In the chart below, there are three general periods when you will get the disease: 1) the period before resources are overwhelmed, 2) the period when resources are overwhelmed, and 3) after the period after resources are overwhelmed. Obviously, the third period is optimal since treatments will improve over time, but getting it in the first period is preferable to the second period. With that in mind, chicken pox style parties make sense at least for a little bit longer (Probably not a good idea after the first week in April). Of course, from a societal perspective chicken pox parties are terrible, but on an individual level they make sense.
(https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/vox-1-700x432.png)
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You have a low death rate because your timeline is behind other countries. Wait. Preferably in self isolation.
I'm in NZ. Our death rate is currently 0%. The entire country is in full lock down for four weeks. Because our government understands how epidemics work AND is prepared to do something about it.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine. It made sense before there was a vaccine available, because it's much more preferable to get it as a young child than get it later in life where the disease will be far more severe. But it's even more preferable to get a vaccine and not get the disease at all. In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either. Even if you just want to get it and get it over with, there is no guarantee you won't be a contributing factor to overwhelming the healthcare system. And even the most dire predictions I've seen don't come anywhere close to having 100% of the population infected, so it's not even a guarantee you'll get infected anyway, even if this virus runs absolutely rampant through the global population and kills tens of millions of people...there is still a decent chance in that scenario that you never get infected.
Also case in point with the last few posts. The US response to the crisis has been embarrassingly abysmal by any objective metric, yet some seemingly smart and rational people in this community think they are doing a fine job. Just imagine what average normal people outside of this community think, keeping in mind they are the people that elected Trump in the first place.
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
And the virus is quietly rampaging through your communities, untested. I've seen the USA curves. In a weeks time there will be increasing deaths. In two-three weeks time the population will be terrified, the deaths will be terrifying, the hospitals will be overwhelmed, people will be dying unnoticed in their homes. It's going to be horrendous, and it's going to start happening very fast from now.
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
And the virus is quietly rampaging through your communities, untested. I've seen the USA curves. In a weeks time there will be increasing deaths. In two-three weeks time the population will be terrified, the deaths will be terrifying, the hospitals will be overwhelmed, people will be dying unnoticed in their homes. It's going to be horrendous, and it's going to start happening very fast from now.
Not true. I've been told we can all celebrate and shake hands on Easter!
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
And the virus is quietly rampaging through your communities, untested. I've seen the USA curves. In a weeks time there will be increasing deaths. In two-three weeks time the population will be terrified, the deaths will be terrifying, the hospitals will be overwhelmed, people will be dying unnoticed in their homes. It's going to be horrendous, and it's going to start happening very fast from now.
Not true. I've been told we can all celebrate and shake hands on Easter!
It's like he thinks whatever he says just magically becomes reality. And the, when it doesn't, he forgets he said it.....
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
And the virus is quietly rampaging through your communities, untested. I've seen the USA curves. In a weeks time there will be increasing deaths. In two-three weeks time the population will be terrified, the deaths will be terrifying, the hospitals will be overwhelmed, people will be dying unnoticed in their homes. It's going to be horrendous, and it's going to start happening very fast from now.
Not true. I've been told we can all celebrate and shake hands on Easter!
It's like he thinks whatever he says just magically becomes reality. And the, when it doesn't, he forgets he said it.....
It does. At least to his base. He's got the right-wing blogs and media behind him, after all.
https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/trump-supporters-turn-on-dr-fauci-claiming-he-s-a-member-of-the-deep-state-NewK4dKgLUCIK9Dn-jzr9g?fbclid=IwAR2zxNh10d8ZY0i8LjN1UO1Z3uf_g2vPYWfG3eiADiH5f3DjR-bS4kX63cE
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
And the virus is quietly rampaging through your communities, untested. I've seen the USA curves. In a weeks time there will be increasing deaths. In two-three weeks time the population will be terrified, the deaths will be terrifying, the hospitals will be overwhelmed, people will be dying unnoticed in their homes. It's going to be horrendous, and it's going to start happening very fast from now.
Not true. I've been told we can all celebrate and shake hands on Easter!
It's like he thinks whatever he says just magically becomes reality. And the, when it doesn't, he forgets he said it.....
It does. At least to his base. He's got the right-wing blogs and media behind him, after all.
https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/trump-supporters-turn-on-dr-fauci-claiming-he-s-a-member-of-the-deep-state-NewK4dKgLUCIK9Dn-jzr9g?fbclid=IwAR2zxNh10d8ZY0i8LjN1UO1Z3uf_g2vPYWfG3eiADiH5f3DjR-bS4kX63cE
He's like the cult leader that has all his supporters out on a hillside waiting to be picked up by aliens as the chosen ones. If the aliens come, he wins. If they don't, it's because his followers weren't praying hard enough, and he wins. It's a very bizarre thing to watch from outside the US.
-
Since Italy hasn't reported yet today, we're temporarily ahead of them on total confirmed cases! USA! USA! USA!
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
-
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You are misunderstanding the situation. It takes several weeks to die of covid-19, quite possibly involving 3 or 4 weeks on a ventilator before dying. The death rate in the USA will not still be 1.5% in a few weeks' time, once infected people have had time to die.
And the virus is quietly rampaging through your communities, untested. I've seen the USA curves. In a weeks time there will be increasing deaths. In two-three weeks time the population will be terrified, the deaths will be terrifying, the hospitals will be overwhelmed, people will be dying unnoticed in their homes. It's going to be horrendous, and it's going to start happening very fast from now.
Not true. I've been told we can all celebrate and shake hands on Easter!
It's like he thinks whatever he says just magically becomes reality. And the, when it doesn't, he forgets he said it.....
It does. At least to his base. He's got the right-wing blogs and media behind him, after all.
https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/trump-supporters-turn-on-dr-fauci-claiming-he-s-a-member-of-the-deep-state-NewK4dKgLUCIK9Dn-jzr9g?fbclid=IwAR2zxNh10d8ZY0i8LjN1UO1Z3uf_g2vPYWfG3eiADiH5f3DjR-bS4kX63cE
He's like the cult leader that has all his supporters out on a hillside waiting to be picked up by aliens as the chosen ones. If the aliens come, he wins. If they don't, it's because his followers weren't praying hard enough, and he wins. It's a very bizarre thing to watch from outside the US.
And from within.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You have a low death rate because your timeline is behind other countries. Wait. Preferably in self isolation.
I'm in NZ. Our death rate is currently 0%. The entire country is in full lock down for four weeks. Because our government understands how epidemics work AND is prepared to do something about it.
NZ?? LOL Comparing countries with populations of 5 million vs. 330 million makes perfect sense.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You have a low death rate because your timeline is behind other countries. Wait. Preferably in self isolation.
I'm in NZ. Our death rate is currently 0%. The entire country is in full lock down for four weeks. Because our government understands how epidemics work AND is prepared to do something about it.
NZ?? LOL Comparing countries with populations of 5 million vs. 330 million makes perfect sense.
You know how percentages work, right?
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Chicken pox is a known virus. We know how it plays out long term. We don't know anything about corona virus in the long term. Do you get an immunity? Does it come back? Does it make you infertile? Does it damage organs in the long term and require hospitalisation down the track? Does it cause issues with learning or cognitive changes? Does it cause future pregnancies to terminate or impact the fetus? Viruses can do all of those things. We know nothing about this!
-
I don't see Trump's failures as something that will hurt him in Nov.
Yes, the virus could result in some Trump supporters' death (it will also result in many deaths of people who wouldn't have voted for Trump). But Trump's rhetoric will position cities--which are largely run by Democrats--as the incubators and blame them for the harm; conservative media will fall in line behind this strategy once he runs it. He already did this with trade and immigration. The Trump supporters who remain healthy (and this is nearly all of them) will add this to the long list of grievances that inflamed them in 2016. Their increased turnout will more than offset the deaths, and Trump will be able to hold his coalition together and win in November.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You have a low death rate because your timeline is behind other countries. Wait. Preferably in self isolation.
I'm in NZ. Our death rate is currently 0%. The entire country is in full lock down for four weeks. Because our government understands how epidemics work AND is prepared to do something about it.
NZ?? LOL Comparing countries with populations of 5 million vs. 330 million makes perfect sense.
It's a percentage. You're showing off that world renowned US education system, my friend.
India has had 16 deaths. Guess what? They're in lockdown. Population? Somewhere north of a billion.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Because even young healthy people are dying from the coronavirus. It's a terrible plan for exactly the reasons yytriumnitrate laid out in the post I responded to. Even if you are below 40 without comorbidities and decide you want to get your immunity and get it over with, a whole heap of people are going to not be able to just "ride it out" at home and will be part of that big fat curve that's above the health care system capacity. The way we flatten the curve and keep the hump below that line (which is already not going to happen) is to slow the spread and lessen the amount of sick people which is the exact opposite of your coronavirus party plan.
-
I'll let Governor Cuomo's slide speak to your plan:
(https://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2020/03/24/cuomo-powerpoint/24-cuomo-powerpoint-go-there-3.nocrop.w710.h2147483647.jpg)
Young people, YOU ARE WRONG.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Because even young healthy people are dying from the coronavirus. It's a terrible plan for exactly the reasons yytriumnitrate laid out in the post I responded to. Even if you are below 40 without comorbidities and decide you want to get your immunity and get it over with, a whole heap of people are going to not be able to just "ride it out" at home and will be part of that big fat curve that's above the health care system capacity. The way we flatten the curve and keep the hump below that line (which is already not going to happen) is to slow the spread and lessen the amount of sick people which is the exact opposite of your coronavirus party plan.
There's also the small fact that 'recovered' does not mean what people think it does. People who recovered from MERs and SARs (corona viruses) were left with permanent respiratory damage, among other issues. People who recovered from those viruses spent months in rehab because they'd been in comas for so long.
-
Also case in point with the last few posts. The US response to the crisis has been embarrassingly abysmal by any objective metric, yet some seemingly smart and rational people in this community think they are doing a fine job. Just imagine what average normal people outside of this community think, keeping in mind they are the people that elected Trump in the first place.
Somewhat reminiscent of "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job!" re: Hurricane Katrina.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Because even young healthy people are dying from the coronavirus. It's a terrible plan for exactly the reasons yytriumnitrate laid out in the post I responded to. Even if you are below 40 without comorbidities and decide you want to get your immunity and get it over with, a whole heap of people are going to not be able to just "ride it out" at home and will be part of that big fat curve that's above the health care system capacity. The way we flatten the curve and keep the hump below that line (which is already not going to happen) is to slow the spread and lessen the amount of sick people which is the exact opposite of your coronavirus party plan.
Yeah, we've had some notable cases locally of men in their 30s with no known underlying conditions who have already died of COVID-19. Two hospitals in one of our major regional health systems are already at capacity, and they're reporting plenty of younger patients. NYC is reporting the same, and one of the first cases in Louisiana was an otherwise very healthy man in his early 40s. How many young adults want to play russian roulette with this virus? I certainly don't.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Because even young healthy people are dying from the coronavirus. It's a terrible plan for exactly the reasons yytriumnitrate laid out in the post I responded to. Even if you are below 40 without comorbidities and decide you want to get your immunity and get it over with, a whole heap of people are going to not be able to just "ride it out" at home and will be part of that big fat curve that's above the health care system capacity. The way we flatten the curve and keep the hump below that line (which is already not going to happen) is to slow the spread and lessen the amount of sick people which is the exact opposite of your coronavirus party plan.
There's also the small fact that 'recovered' does not mean what people think it does. People who recovered from MERs and SARs (corona viruses) were left with permanent respiratory damage, among other issues. People who recovered from those viruses spent months in rehab because they'd been in comas for so long.
Already early signs of permanent lung damage among people who have "recovered" from covid-19.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Because even young healthy people are dying from the coronavirus. It's a terrible plan for exactly the reasons yytriumnitrate laid out in the post I responded to. Even if you are below 40 without comorbidities and decide you want to get your immunity and get it over with, a whole heap of people are going to not be able to just "ride it out" at home and will be part of that big fat curve that's above the health care system capacity. The way we flatten the curve and keep the hump below that line (which is already not going to happen) is to slow the spread and lessen the amount of sick people which is the exact opposite of your coronavirus party plan.
Even young healthy people die of chickenpox. It does not mean that the best solution is to shut everything down and keep everyone in isolation for a month and a half, even though we know that it would eliminate the virus.
Also, please be respectful of other posters' questions, when done in good faith. It was never "my" coronavirus party plan; I never have had any intention to perform such a stunt, nor have I recommended it to anybody else. I was simply asking about the potential for such a solution. You state matter-of-factly that young people would overwhelm the hospitals*, but from the very limited data I can gather it appears that coronavirus isn't that much more deadly or debilitating in young people than chickenpox (admitting that the data is extremely sketchy at the moment (missing much of the infected people), and considering the complications that accompany shingles).
Please present actual data to support your position, so that myself and others can make actual informed decisions. Anecdotal data is fine (as some posters have added), but major policy decisions should probably be made off statistical data.
*I admit that my original suggestion of "everybody under 40" doing this at the same time wasn't well thought out and would probably devastate medical facilities, but that doesn't eliminate the possibility of phased approaches.
-
I'm pretty damn tired of people implicitly equating other illnesses with very different presentations, infection rates, and mortality rates to Covid-19.
-
chickenpox parties don't make any sense anymore since we have a vaccine.... In the case of coronavirus parties, it doesn't make any sense either.
I agree on chickenpox, but why do you think the situation from coronavirus is all that different? If everybody with household members, say, below 40 years old (and without comorbidities) were to have corona parties and then self-isolate for a month, wouldn't that go a long way toward herd immunity, allow many of us to get back to work without fear of getting the disease, and not overwhelm the medical system (while acknowledging not everybody would come out of this without some complications)?
Because even young healthy people are dying from the coronavirus. It's a terrible plan for exactly the reasons yytriumnitrate laid out in the post I responded to. Even if you are below 40 without comorbidities and decide you want to get your immunity and get it over with, a whole heap of people are going to not be able to just "ride it out" at home and will be part of that big fat curve that's above the health care system capacity. The way we flatten the curve and keep the hump below that line (which is already not going to happen) is to slow the spread and lessen the amount of sick people which is the exact opposite of your coronavirus party plan.
Even young healthy people die of chickenpox. It does not mean that the best solution is to shut everything down and keep everyone in isolation for a month and a half, even though we know that it would eliminate the virus.
Also, please be respectful of other posters' questions, when done in good faith. It was never "my" coronavirus party plan; I never have had any intention to perform such a stunt, nor have I recommended it to anybody else. I was simply asking about the potential for such a solution. You state matter-of-factly that young people would overwhelm the hospitals*, but from the very limited data I can gather it appears that coronavirus isn't that much more deadly or debilitating in young people than chickenpox (admitting that the data is extremely sketchy at the moment (missing much of the infected people), and considering the complications that accompany shingles).
Please present actual data to support your position, so that myself and others can make actual informed decisions. Anecdotal data is fine (as some posters have added), but major policy decisions should probably be made off statistical data.
*I admit that my original suggestion of "everybody under 40" doing this at the same time wasn't well thought out and would probably devastate medical facilities, but that doesn't eliminate the possibility of phased approaches.
The mortality rate for chicken pox in children age 1-14 is approximately 1 in 100,000 compared with approximately 25 in 100,000 for adults. So getting chicken pox as a youngen is far preferable to getting it as an adult. Those mortality rates differ so much that it even makes sense to get chicken pox as a child and take that small risk of complications or death just to gain immunity and completely sidestep the risk as an adult. I had chicken pox as a child and was intentionally infected to ensure I got it while I was young and healthy. I didn't need to go to the hospital, and if I had needed to there were plenty of beds and ventilators available at the time because we weren't in the midst of an epidemic. They approved a vaccine when I was 12 years old.
We don't know exactly what the mortality rate for covid-19 is, or exactly how it breaks down by age group. It will take a lot of data to know for sure, but all the data we do have suggests it is orders of magnitude higher than 1 in 100,000, even without an overwhelmed healthcare system.
-
There's also the small fact that 'recovered' does not mean what people think it does. People who recovered from MERs and SARs (corona viruses) were left with permanent respiratory damage, among other issues. People who recovered from those viruses spent months in rehab because they'd been in comas for so long.
This is a good point. It's like when the media reports the number of people who died and the number of people who were injured in a car wreck or something. Well, it's great that they didn't die, but is their injury a broken toe or a broken neck resulting in quadriplegia? It would be nice to have data on FULL recoveries (so far as we can tell, up to this point, not ruling out future problems).
-
I'm pretty damn tired of people implicitly equating other illnesses with very different presentations, infection rates, and mortality rates to Covid-19.
How we are supposed to make sense of a disease without comparing it to other diseases we are more familiar with? Or is this truly the apocalypse?
-
I'm pretty damn tired of people implicitly equating other illnesses with very different presentations, infection rates, and mortality rates to Covid-19.
How we are supposed to make sense of a disease without comparing it to other diseases we are more familiar with? Or is this truly the apocalypse?
I did not say comparing. I said equating.
Comparing is good. Comparing points out the differences in circumstance, infection rates, etc. But many of these posts are not really doing that at all.
-
I'm pretty damn tired of people implicitly equating other illnesses with very different presentations, infection rates, and mortality rates to Covid-19.
How we are supposed to make sense of a disease without comparing it to other diseases we are more familiar with? Or is this truly the apocalypse?
I did not say comparing. I said equating.
Comparing is good. Comparing points out the differences in circumstance, infection rates, etc. But many of these posts are not really doing that at all.
Comparing considers differences and similarities.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compare (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compare)
-
I would like to congratulate @Boofinator for being just the 5th MMM forum member to make it onto my "Ignore" list, joining @runewell and @slythr on a truly selective committee. This is the first addition in years - truly a tremendous, historic honor! Your work in this thread has been exemplary!
-
I'm pretty damn tired of people implicitly equating other illnesses with very different presentations, infection rates, and mortality rates to Covid-19.
How we are supposed to make sense of a disease without comparing it to other diseases we are more familiar with? Or is this truly the apocalypse?
I did not say comparing. I said equating.
Comparing is good. Comparing points out the differences in circumstance, infection rates, etc. But many of these posts are not really doing that at all.
Comparing considers differences and similarities.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compare (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compare)
Yes. I know what comparing means. That is why I did not use that word.
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
I totally agree that Trump's lack of leadership was a calamitous failure and has put us behind in many ways and will result in many more deaths than would have been necessary if he hadn't been calling it a hoax.
However, states and counties started filling in the gaps to the degree they were able, when they realized they were going to have to be the ones to step up. Because of that, we'll see much different results across the country - it will be much worse in some places and much better in others. For instance, the link below is informative and a ways down it compares the neighboring states of KY and TN and their different trends based on earlier action in KY (a Democratic governor, btw) and later action in TN (a Republican governor). Also see the notes on the Bay Area and Seattle. Whereas places like OK (not mentioned in article), I bet we'll see a much worse situation. So, it's not quite accurate to predict an outcome (or talk about a set of current circumstances) for our country as a whole. Since the national gov failed to take action early, we missed the chance to do a better job AND we are now in the situation where there is no one situation in our country, but thousands of different ones based on the actions of governors and county health commissioners.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/news/2020/03/25/482278/social-distancing-fight-coronavirus-strategy-working-must-continue/
I hope the case of KY vs. TN gets pointed out during the elections and that that *does* spell the end of Trump and some end to Trumpism as well (as nearly all Repubs are implicated in that).
-
However, states and counties started filling in the gaps to the degree they were able, when they realized they were going to have to be the ones to step up. Because of that, we'll see much different results across the country - it will be much worse in some places and much better in others. For instance, the link below is informative and a ways down it compares the neighboring states of KY and TN and their different trends based on earlier action in KY (a Democratic governor, btw) and later action in TN (a Republican governor). Also see the notes on the Bay Area and Seattle. Whereas places like OK (not mentioned in article), I bet we'll see a much worse situation. So, it's not quite accurate to predict an outcome (or talk about a set of current circumstances) for our country as a whole. Since the national gov failed to take action early, we missed the chance to do a better job AND we are now in the situation where there is no one situation in our country, but thousands of different ones based on the actions of governors and county health commissioners.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/news/2020/03/25/482278/social-distancing-fight-coronavirus-strategy-working-must-continue/
I hope the case of KY vs. TN gets pointed out during the elections and that that *does* spell the end of Trump and some end to Trumpism as well (as nearly all Repubs are implicated in that).
Trump is now claiming that midwest states will be encouraged to loosen social distancing soon.
"We could go to certain states right now that have virtually no problem or a very small problem. We don't have to test the entire state in the middle west, or wherever they may be. We don't have to test the entire state. I think it's ridiculous. We don't have to do it."
It's unclear if he truly thinks it's an urban/liberal vs rural/conservative virus or if he's following the lead of Foxnews hosts or Foxnews viewers. Who's leading whom here? Regardless, it's fascinating to watch.
OK, which doesn't have any state directed distancing guidelines, is in the top 16 of new cases. That's with little testing, too. The only hope for states like OK and KS and NE is that it's a seasonal virus and the warmer weather reduces the infection rate.
Of course, will forever Trumpers care? Isn't it China's fault?
-
Of course, will forever Trumpers care? Isn't it China's fault?
I hear Mexico will pay for it, so no reason to worry.
-
However, states and counties started filling in the gaps to the degree they were able, when they realized they were going to have to be the ones to step up. Because of that, we'll see much different results across the country - it will be much worse in some places and much better in others. For instance, the link below is informative and a ways down it compares the neighboring states of KY and TN and their different trends based on earlier action in KY (a Democratic governor, btw) and later action in TN (a Republican governor). Also see the notes on the Bay Area and Seattle. Whereas places like OK (not mentioned in article), I bet we'll see a much worse situation. So, it's not quite accurate to predict an outcome (or talk about a set of current circumstances) for our country as a whole. Since the national gov failed to take action early, we missed the chance to do a better job AND we are now in the situation where there is no one situation in our country, but thousands of different ones based on the actions of governors and county health commissioners.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/news/2020/03/25/482278/social-distancing-fight-coronavirus-strategy-working-must-continue/
I hope the case of KY vs. TN gets pointed out during the elections and that that *does* spell the end of Trump and some end to Trumpism as well (as nearly all Repubs are implicated in that).
Trump is now claiming that midwest states will be encouraged to loosen social distancing soon.
"We could go to certain states right now that have virtually no problem or a very small problem. We don't have to test the entire state in the middle west, or wherever they may be. We don't have to test the entire state. I think it's ridiculous. We don't have to do it."
It's unclear if he truly thinks it's an urban/liberal vs rural/conservative virus or if he's following the lead of Foxnews hosts or Foxnews viewers. Who's leading whom here? Regardless, it's fascinating to watch.
OK, which doesn't have any state directed distancing guidelines, is in the top 16 of new cases. That's with little testing, too. The only hope for states like OK and KS and NE is that it's a seasonal virus and the warmer weather reduces the infection rate.
Of course, will forever Trumpers care? Isn't it China's fault?
I'm in a midwestern state, but I've seen it tightening up, and our biggest cities aren't being hit anything like NYC (yet), and the smaller cities are getting cases at an even lower rate, some counties have no cases yet, so I don't see the social distancing ending anytime soon when the storm is still coming in, and not to all areas of the state at the same rate. Trump makes no sense. It's truly sad that someone with such low intelligence surrounded by many like minds is making any recommendations. They need to listen to the health care experts who say it's a bad idea. Trump has been a failure. Our governor took the meaningful action to protect citizens.
-
Not true. I've been told we can all celebrate and shake hands on Easter!
...because Orange Jesus is going to resurrect the economy!
-
I would like to congratulate @Boofinator for being just the 5th MMM forum member to make it onto my "Ignore" list, joining @runewell and @slythr on a truly selective committee. This is the first addition in years - truly a tremendous, historic honor! Your work in this thread has been exemplary!
Wait, we have an ignore list?!
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You have a low death rate because your timeline is behind other countries. Wait. Preferably in self isolation.
I'm in NZ. Our death rate is currently 0%. The entire country is in full lock down for four weeks. Because our government understands how epidemics work AND is prepared to do something about it.
NZ?? LOL Comparing countries with populations of 5 million vs. 330 million makes perfect sense.
It's a percentage. You're showing off that world renowned US education system, my friend.
India has had 16 deaths. Guess what? They're in lockdown. Population? Somewhere north of a billion.
That's cute, my friend. I'll bide my time and check back in once this blows over. We can compare data then. buh bye
-
That's cute, my friend. I'll bide my time and check back in once this blows over. We can compare data then. buh bye
Stay safe man. Seriously. The US is the most infected country in the world, with no signs of slowing down.
-
That's cute, my friend. I'll bide my time and check back in once this blows over. We can compare data then. buh bye
I'm pretty sure you wont be back to compare anything once it blows over. The data is likely to be too obvious for you to want to admit how very wrong you were. I honestly hope not, but the writing is writ large on the wall.
-
That's cute, my friend. I'll bide my time and check back in once this blows over. We can compare data then. buh bye
I'm pretty sure you wont be back to compare anything once it blows over. The data is likely to be too obvious for you to want to admit how very wrong you were. I honestly hope not, but the writing is writ large on the wall.
I'm confused. What do you think that Brother Esau is wrong about?
-
Trump may actually emerge from this crisis more popular than he was and he may very well be reelected. Regardless of how it turns out or how incompetently you think he botched the response.
I think this is very possible, maybe even likely. After all, his approval is going up currently.
However, as I mentioned upthread, people were pissed at Bush's handling of Katrina, and he was also considered incompetent and a buffoon by many (oh, how I wish we could go back to just that level of incompetence and buffoonery!). So what's the difference here? Why are people rallying to Trump during this disaster when they rallied away from Bush?
I think the U.S. is handling this situation well. Kinda like "hold my beer and watch this". The markets sure believe that. Just about anyone in the white house would gain support.
Wait, you think the USA is handling the corona virus situation well???
Absolutely. As well or better than could be expected. Notice I didn't say Trump is handling it well.
The USA isn't testing in anywhere the numbers it needs to be, it hasn't locked down early enough or sufficiently, it's just now starting to churn out vital PPE, and the politicians are arguing over everything from stimulus packages to future measures. It's a shit show calamity unfolding that will make Italy and Spain look like a summer holiday. The USA did not recognise what was happening at the beginning, and I'm not convinced it has any real idea now. And een if it did, there's no co-ordinated response. I feel very, very sorry for your country and what is about to happen there.
1.5% death rate is second lowest on the planet (South Korea is 1.3%). Stock Markets up 15% in 3 days. Thank god I live in this country and not Europe, China, etc.
You have a low death rate because your timeline is behind other countries. Wait. Preferably in self isolation.
I'm in NZ. Our death rate is currently 0%. The entire country is in full lock down for four weeks. Because our government understands how epidemics work AND is prepared to do something about it.
NZ?? LOL Comparing countries with populations of 5 million vs. 330 million makes perfect sense.
It's a percentage. You're showing off that world renowned US education system, my friend.
India has had 16 deaths. Guess what? They're in lockdown. Population? Somewhere north of a billion.
That's cute, my friend. I'll bide my time and check back in once this blows over. We can compare data then. buh bye
I really hope I'm the one in the wrong here, and I really hope you're around at the end of it to tell me so.
-
https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1243352869010649089?s=19
-
I'm confused. What do you think that Brother Esau is wrong about?
That the USA is handling the crisis well.
-
Oh, FFS. Trump: I don't believe you really need that many ventilators (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/03/26/trump-ventilators-coronavirus-151311)
THAT is how things are being handled in the USA. An idiot pseudo-dictator is essentially overseeing a death panel by default because a state governor refused to lick his boots and stroke his ego. Presumably that means that we in Michigan will also be thrown under the bus. Seriously, fuck him and his entire spoiled, nepotistic family. Let him start up his damned rallies again and shake all the attendees' hands.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Yeah. And I worked at a major regional medical campus during H1N1 10 years ago, and the hospital wasn’t asking for community donations of PPE like they are now.
This is different for so many reasons.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
This poster may end up being my first ever “ignore” for sheer volume of nonsense posted.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Oh! didn't know that. I guess it's time to freak out, panic, and go hoard TP. Thank you for that information.
-
Welp, his approval ratings are up another 5 points. Jesus.
-
Welp, his approval ratings are up another 5 points. Jesus.
Up to 45% or 49% if you only take the most favorable polls. This ain't exactly a Bush after 9/11 jump.
-
Welp, his approval ratings are up another 5 points. Jesus.
Every President enjoys an approval rating bump in the immediate aftermath of a crisis. That it's only 5% is a testament to the man's incompetence.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Oh! didn't know that. I guess it's time to freak out, panic, and go hoard TP. Thank you for that information.
On top of being plainly ignorant, this is incredibly insensitive. There were more 911 calls yesterday in NYC than on September 11th. And we still haven't reached the inflection point on this thing. I'm all for being a rational optimist. But that calls for, you know, rationality. You're showing none.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Oh! didn't know that. I guess it's time to freak out, panic, and go hoard TP. Thank you for that information.
Do you actually have an opinion on the facts being presented or are you just here to mock anyone who acknowledges there might be a problem?
Obviously no one is advocating panic and tp hoarding because those things accomplish nothing regardless of the severity of the situation. Obviously the sky isn't falling, we'll get past this as a society and most of us will survive.
But your initial argument was that the US government is handling the situation well. Since then lots of evidence to the contrary has been presented and your only response is sarcasm. If you wish to avoid negative thinking outside your circle of control, that's fine and maybe it's the right choice for you, but mocking people for discussing the reality of the situation isn't helping anyone. This is not TopIsIn.
-
This is not TopIsIn.
Trump Top is in?
-
This is not TopIsIn.
Trump Top is in?
Bottom is in. thorstach told me so.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Oh! didn't know that. I guess it's time to freak out, panic, and go hoard TP. Thank you for that information.
Do you actually have an opinion on the facts being presented or are you just here to mock anyone who acknowledges there might be a problem?
Obviously no one is advocating panic and tp hoarding because those things accomplish nothing regardless of the severity of the situation. Obviously the sky isn't falling, we'll get past this as a society and most of us will survive.
But your initial argument was that the US government is handling the situation well. Since then lots of evidence to the contrary has been presented and your only response is sarcasm. If you wish to avoid negative thinking outside your circle of control, that's fine and maybe it's the right choice for you, but mocking people for discussing the reality of the situation isn't helping anyone. This is not TopIsIn.
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Oh! didn't know that. I guess it's time to freak out, panic, and go hoard TP. Thank you for that information.
Do you actually have an opinion on the facts being presented or are you just here to mock anyone who acknowledges there might be a problem?
Obviously no one is advocating panic and tp hoarding because those things accomplish nothing regardless of the severity of the situation. Obviously the sky isn't falling, we'll get past this as a society and most of us will survive.
But your initial argument was that the US government is handling the situation well. Since then lots of evidence to the contrary has been presented and your only response is sarcasm. If you wish to avoid negative thinking outside your circle of control, that's fine and maybe it's the right choice for you, but mocking people for discussing the reality of the situation isn't helping anyone. This is not TopIsIn.
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
Unfortunately, that's completely true.
-
The sky is falling! Just like back in 2008.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall hospitals in New York buying refrigerated tractor trailers to load dead into because they were running out of morgue space in 2008.
Oh! didn't know that. I guess it's time to freak out, panic, and go hoard TP. Thank you for that information.
Do you actually have an opinion on the facts being presented or are you just here to mock anyone who acknowledges there might be a problem?
Obviously no one is advocating panic and tp hoarding because those things accomplish nothing regardless of the severity of the situation. Obviously the sky isn't falling, we'll get past this as a society and most of us will survive.
But your initial argument was that the US government is handling the situation well. Since then lots of evidence to the contrary has been presented and your only response is sarcasm. If you wish to avoid negative thinking outside your circle of control, that's fine and maybe it's the right choice for you, but mocking people for discussing the reality of the situation isn't helping anyone. This is not TopIsIn.
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
Unfortunately, that's completely true.
:-(
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
-
This article was meant for this thread: https://theweek.com/articles/904958/trump-never-been-worse--but-approval-surging-why
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
You're saying the same thing.
"as well as in the past" = "more poorly than should be expected."
I don't know why anyone who was an adult during Hurricane Katrina would expect the US to handle national disasters well. Hope for? Sure. Expect? No.
-
This article was meant for this thread: https://theweek.com/articles/904958/trump-never-been-worse--but-approval-surging-why
Yep. I could have written that myself.
-
This article was meant for this thread: https://theweek.com/articles/904958/trump-never-been-worse--but-approval-surging-why
Yep. I could have written that myself.
Well that article is depressing.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
You're saying the same thing.
"as well as in the past" = "more poorly than should be expected."
I don't know why anyone who was an adult during Hurricane Katrina would expect the US to handle national disasters well. Hope for? Sure. Expect? No.
I'd give the US gov't a C for Katrina, a D for Iraq, and an F minus minus for this epidemic. The fact that the US is spiraling out of control worse than every other country on the planet after being given a head start on preparing is beyond failing. And we're nowhere near heading in the right direction, other than putting a 2T band-aid on our gaping, mostly self inflicted wound.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
Churchill:
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was appalling to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, but that night he "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." The US would enter the war.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
Churchill:
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was appalling to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, but that night he "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." The US would enter the war.
Better late than never, huh?
-
Last night on the official White House Facebook page, I saw a comment from a woman in Michigan. She was begging the President to not withhold ventilators and other aid from Michigan because their governor didn’t support him. She ended her comment by saying, “She might not believe in you, but many other people here do, including me.”
So, she actually knew/feared that Trump was about to withhold aid to the citizens of an entire state, including her and her loved ones, because their governor hurt his feelings — and she still believes in him.
This kind of lunacy is why I don’t think coronavirus is the end of Trump.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
Churchill:
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was appalling to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, but that night he "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." The US would enter the war.
Better late than never, huh?
You're welcome.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
Churchill:
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was appalling to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, but that night he "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." The US would enter the war.
Better late than never, huh?
You're welcome.
Self-interest that masquerades as heroism.
Quintessentially American.
-
Last night on the official White House Facebook page, I saw a comment from a woman in Michigan. She was begging the President to not withhold ventilators and other aid from Michigan because their governor didn’t support him. She ended her comment by saying, “She might not believe in you, but many other people here do, including me.”
So, she actually knew/feared that Trump was about to withhold aid to the citizens of an entire state, including her and her loved ones, because their governor hurt his feelings — and she still believes in him.
This kind of lunacy is why I don’t think coronavirus is the end of Trump.
Completely unbelievable to me, but I guess I've had to come to terms with the fact that I'm not normal, so maybe not surprised.
What does surprise me though is that we Americans often make a lot about being hostile to being told what to do and tyranny from government, given our history. I especially associate this attitude with the kind of people who are Trump supporters. Yet they're happy to be obsequious to him?
Many people I've always thought were too proud to lick anyone's boots have spent many public appearances doing just that. And somehow the disgusting picture they make is unimportant, and they become more popular for being a boot licker. Usually Americans would reject anyone displaying these characteristics.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
You're saying the same thing.
"as well as in the past" = "more poorly than should be expected."
I don't know why anyone who was an adult during Hurricane Katrina would expect the US to handle national disasters well. Hope for? Sure. Expect? No.
This is such a dumb take. How did the govt handle Ebola and H1N1 vs covid-19?
"The U.S. govt poorly handled a natural disaster 15 years ago, therefore of course the govt would handle a global pandemic poorly" just lacks all logic. It ignores that natural disasters are different than pandemics, changes made to government agencies, etc.
I guess if there's consistencies, it's that Republican Administrations are absolutely horrible at using the powers of federal government to save lives. See: Katrina, Maria, covid-19, etc.
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
Churchill:
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was appalling to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, but that night he "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." The US would enter the war.
Better late than never, huh?
You're welcome.
How's that better late than never working for you in a pandemic?
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
Reminds me of the classic Churchill quote;
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else"
Churchill:
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was appalling to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, but that night he "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." The US would enter the war.
Better late than never, huh?
You're welcome.
How's that better late than never working for you in a pandemic?
See my original post
-
"The U.S. govt poorly handled a natural disaster 15 years ago, therefore of course the govt would handle a global pandemic poorly" just lacks all logic. It ignores that natural disasters are different than pandemics, changes made to government agencies, etc.
You have a system which handles large problems poorly. This has been demonstrated time and again, even if it's denied by a large chunk of the population, with Republicans denying all military failures, and Democrats denying all welfare failures, and so on.
You spend more than anyone else on your military, yet can't defeat a bunch of goatherds, and allow another great power to stomp over your allies freely. You spend more than anyone else on education, yet large chunks of your population lack functional literacy. You spend more than anyone else on healthcare, yet get worse outcomes of infant and maternal mortality, and have descending longevity. You spend more than anyone else on transport, yet have crumbling infrastructure. And so on.
To a degree, this is nothing inherent in the American character, though the insistence on "freedom!" means endless duplication of effort, and like the wonderful scene in The Wire where four guys struggle moving a desk through the door because nobody bothered to ask if they wanted to move it out or in, you have many groups trying to help but actually hindering each-other. That part is your character, but it's a minor issue. The main issue is simply that sufficiently complex systems will inevitably fail.
As a country or organisation encounters problems, it adds systems and staff and layers of bureaucracy and rules to deal with them. These initially help, but of course have gaps. So more systems and staff and layers of bureaucracy and rules are come up with - and each addition helps by a smaller amount, until those diminishing returns become negative returns, which is to say that things get worse. As things get worse, the response is of course to... do it all again, and make things worse still.
And this is what leads to the collapse of complex societies. One of the unfortunate aspects of collapse is that each step down is followed by a slight recovery, so that everyone thinks things are picking up and there's no need to change anything fundamental - which then continues undermining things and leads to the next drop down.
It's hard to see it. A fish can't see the water. There are things which you'll be able to see clearly about my country I won't be aware of, too.
-
"The U.S. govt poorly handled a natural disaster 15 years ago, therefore of course the govt would handle a global pandemic poorly" just lacks all logic. It ignores that natural disasters are different than pandemics, changes made to government agencies, etc.
You have a system which handles large problems poorly. This has been demonstrated time and again, even if it's denied by a large chunk of the population, with Republicans denying all military failures, and Democrats denying all welfare failures, and so on.
You spend more than anyone else on your military, yet can't defeat a bunch of goatherds, and allow another great power to stomp over your allies freely. You spend more than anyone else on education, yet large chunks of your population lack functional literacy. You spend more than anyone else on healthcare, yet get worse outcomes of infant and maternal mortality, and have descending longevity. You spend more than anyone else on transport, yet have crumbling infrastructure. And so on.
To a degree, this is nothing inherent in the American character, though the insistence on "freedom!" means endless duplication of effort, and like the wonderful scene in The Wire where four guys struggle moving a desk through the door because nobody bothered to ask if they wanted to move it out or in, you have many groups trying to help but actually hindering each-other. That part is your character, but it's a minor issue. The main issue is simply that sufficiently complex systems will inevitably fail.
As a country or organisation encounters problems, it adds systems and staff and layers of bureaucracy and rules to deal with them. These initially help, but of course have gaps. So more systems and staff and layers of bureaucracy and rules are come up with - and each addition helps by a smaller amount, until those diminishing returns become negative returns, which is to say that things get worse. As things get worse, the response is of course to... do it all again, and make things worse still.
And this is what leads to the collapse of complex societies. One of the unfortunate aspects of collapse is that each step down is followed by a slight recovery, so that everyone thinks things are picking up and there's no need to change anything fundamental - which then continues undermining things and leads to the next drop down.
It's hard to see it. A fish can't see the water. There are things which you'll be able to see clearly about my country I won't be aware of, too.
This is all completely true. Americans are so insistent on individual freedoms that they have hamstrung any ability to work under one leader with one aim. You're a country run by committee. You know what they say about committees - a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
-
Again, it's partly cultural, but it's also just what inevitably happens with large and complex countries.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Archaeology-ebook/dp/B001AOZ3PM
-
Of course it's a problem. It's more than a "problem" , it's a crisis. My opinion is that the U.S. is dealing with it as well as we've dealt with past problems. Flame away....
That's your opinion. I think the US is dealing with this particular problem at this particular time much more poorly than should be expected. We have plenty of smart people, resources, and national pride to do better.
You're saying the same thing.
"as well as in the past" = "more poorly than should be expected."
I don't know why anyone who was an adult during Hurricane Katrina would expect the US to handle national disasters well. Hope for? Sure. Expect? No.
I'd give the US gov't a C for Katrina, a D for Iraq, and an F minus minus for this epidemic. The fact that the US is spiraling out of control worse than every other country on the planet after being given a head start on preparing is beyond failing. And we're nowhere near heading in the right direction, other than putting a 2T band-aid on our gaping, mostly self inflicted wound.
How would you grade the US's handling of hurricane Harvey? (I noticed the Houston location in your profile)
-
Again, it's partly cultural, but it's also just what inevitably happens with large and complex countries.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Archaeology-ebook/dp/B001AOZ3PM
World's smallest hyperlink. The Collapse of Complex Societies (https://www.amazon.com.au/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Archaeology-ebook/dp/B001AOZ3PM)
-
author=AnnaGrowsAMustache
This is all completely true. Americans are so insistent on individual freedoms that they have hamstrung any ability to work under one leader with one aim. You're a country run by committee. You know what they say about committees - a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
[/quote]
'Tis true.
One-leader, one-aim governance is repugnant to the undergirding, constitutional principle of dispersion of power and antithetical to democratic diversity in all its forms.
America's founders held that the security of unalienable rights necessitated government that derived its "just powers from the consent of the governed."
America's population is ~330,000,000.
In 2018, ~153,000,000 people were registered to vote.
Thus, the "governed" is a committee as it were, comprised of hundreds of millions of people, who, if governance is to be just, must consent to all manner of it.
A committee of such colossal proportion does not conduce to quick passage of legislation or easily reached governmental consensus.
-
America's population is ~330,000,000.
In 2018, ~153,000,000 people were registered to vote.
Woah. Is it even really a democracy if half the people can't vote?
-
America's population is ~330,000,000.
In 2018, ~153,000,000 people were registered to vote.
Woah. Is it even really a democracy if half the people can't vote?
That population includes non-citizens, citizens younger than 18 years of age, and people who did not opt to register in opt-in states.
-
America's population is ~330,000,000.
In 2018, ~153,000,000 people were registered to vote.
Woah. Is it even really a democracy if half the people can't vote?
At least some of them don't bother. So it's not that they can't, it's that they won't.
For many of them, though, they are stymied by lack of convenient polling places, or the lack of a national election day so they have to work and can't get time off, or bosses that won't let them leave and come back...
For still others, they don't bother because gerrymandering and other practices have made the elections in their area so non-competitive as to be a joke.
And then, of course, there are the ones whose vote a certain political party does its best to suppress... and has largely succeeded...
-
Also have to be 18 years old to vote in the US, because you can't really trust children to make good decisions. So that's like 70 or 80 million of that 330 million population.
-
Also have to be 18 years old to vote in the US, because you can't really trust children to make good decisions. So that's like 70 or 80 million of that 330 million population.
Sadly, I actually laughed out loud at your comment. Not that you aren't correct. But just that these days, the idea that adults can be trusted to make good decisions... well, yeah. :laughs in tired:
-
Also have to be 18 years old to vote in the US, because you can't really trust children to make good decisions. So that's like 70 or 80 million of that 330 million population.
Sadly, I actually laughed out loud at your comment. Not that you aren't correct. But just that these days, the idea that adults can be trusted to make good decisions... well, yeah. :laughs in tired:
I was going to say something about the current administration and deleted it before posting - glad you read between the lines there.
-
America's population is ~330,000,000.
In 2018, ~153,000,000 people were registered to vote.
Woah. Is it even really a democracy if half the people can't vote?
Many who are eligible to register to vote do not.
Many registered voters do not vote.
The ~330,000,000 includes persons <18 who are not eligible to vote and others not eligible.
-
I'm a weirdo who has issues with many eligibility requirements. Generally, I think that the government should always err on the side of allowing a person to vote.
I've never seen a valid reason to disallow a 17 year old from voting. Or a prisoner. Or someone who is a long term resident but not a citizen. It seems to me that problems usually arise from denying someone a right to vote, but almost never from being too permissive.
-
I've never seen a valid reason to disallow a 17 year old from voting.
How about age 16? 15? ... 1?
Of course 18 is arbitrary, but how does one implement non-arbitrary criteria for voter eligibility?
One suggestion might be "anyone who could pass a voter's intelligence test should be allowed to vote." Good in theory, but that approach has worked poorly in practice.
-
I've never seen a valid reason to disallow a 17 year old from voting.
How about age 16? 15? ... 1?
Of course 18 is arbitrary, but how does one implement non-arbitrary criteria for voter eligibility?
One suggestion might be "anyone who could pass a voter's intelligence test should be allowed to vote." Good in theory, but that approach has worked poorly in practice.
At one point, that was the main reason that I could logically agree with age limits. But these days I'd argue that anyone capable of and interested in selecting someone from the list should be allowed to vote. If a six year old wants to vote, let 'em. (Without help from parents obviously.) I bet there would be either:
- so few of these votes that it wouldn't matter
- they would be random enough to not have any appreciable change in outcomes
As you mentioned, there's nothing preventing stupid people from voting because it's way too easily abused. . . . and their vote is way more dangerous than the toddler vote. I'd rather err on the side of permissiveness. Seems like the least objectionable way forward.
-
So, are we assuming that the folks that don't vote would make a better decision than the ones who are voting? If not, how would the outcome improve?
Besides, didn't Putin sway the vote for Trump? If more people had chosen to vote would fewer of them, or more of them, have been influenced by Russia?
-
At one point, that was the main reason that I could logically agree with age limits. But these days I'd argue that anyone capable of and interested in selecting someone from the list should be allowed to vote. If a six year old wants to vote, let 'em.
I would say that if a bunch of six year olds voting would make no substantial difference to the outcomes of your system, there is something profoundly wrong with your system.
The dismal failing of US democracy notwithstanding, and speaking more generally: the other aspect is: our society lacks rites of passage, and rituals and markers generally. We scorn the old time courtship rituals, and they do seem excessively rigid to me, but I would also say that the prevalence of date rape, and things like people sending penis pictures on dating apps and going on dates with 100+ people and yet never settling down with anyone even for a few months - well, a complete lack of structure isn't helping people.
Historically, it's not only stone age cultures with rites of passage - for example, the Jewish bar/bat mitzvah continues today. In this, the child reads a passage from Torah, which is to say, they demonstrate their ability to read and understand some aspect of the Law, and thus participate as an (almost) adult in the wider community.
With this in mind, there may be a benefit in having various rights tied to particular ages and/or tests. At this age you can have sex, at this age you can have sex, at this age you can drive, at this age you can vote, at this age you can marry, and so on. Consider the various requirements countries put on migrants becoming citizens - what if we imposed them on the native born population, too?
There are many possibilities, not all of them bad.
-
Again, it's partly cultural, but it's also just what inevitably happens with large and complex countries.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Archaeology-ebook/dp/B001AOZ3PM
I don't think that it has as much to do with the size of the United States as it does its fundamental nature.
Compare the USA to China in this - China is much more equipped culturally to handle, well, anything like this, because their country is much more top-down oriented as far as power structures go.
The United States is fundamentally different in this regard because since inception, states and even municipalities within states have ownership over many civic aspects. You see this in all sorts of ways in "peacetime" - different laws/regulations, different tax structures (some very different between states), schools, etc. All of these things are more or less operated at the state or county/city level.
What this means is that when there is something big that affects the whole USA in this fashion, it is difficult to effectively coordinate and organize a cohesive national response because nearly by definition the USA isn't structured to operate this way. This is particularly true with something less "obvious" for lack of better word in severity than covid-19.
The practical implication is need there to be actual leadership at the federal level to persuade/convince states to follow a coordinated plan. Which is pretty clearly missing now.
-
I don't think that it has as much to do with the size of the United States as it does its fundamental nature.
Compare the USA to China in this - China is much more equipped culturally to handle, well, anything like this, because their country is much more top-down oriented as far as power structures go.
The US has been building up complex systems since 1776, or arguably, 1865. PRC has been doing it since 1949. The US has just had longer to build up needless counterproductive bureaucracy, and let more pigs get their snouts in the trough.
But in either case: China's been held up as an example of successfully handling this. I disagree. Successful handling of an epidemic would mean minimising loss of lives while minimising economic damage (which kills people, too). They've demonstrated neither so far, and we still need another year or two to assess this, since their opening things up again may create another wave of deaths.
RoK, Taiwan, HK and Singapore offer us better models so far. They're all countries which have been independent for much less time than the US, and are much smaller.
The USA's best hope is devolution of powers to states, or secession. Just consider what would happen if a budget/debt ceiling impasse in Congress, rather than giving a shutdown of federal agencies for a week or two, if it lasted 12 months. At some point the states would step in to collect the revenue the federal government wasn't so they could provide the services the federal government wasn't. Just temporarily, of course.
Now, the state systems are not desperately efficient, either. That's why Seattle spends $100,000 per homeless person on services yet still has homeless (just giving them $50k each would cost half as much and probably be much more effective). but they are less inefficient than the federal one.
I agree that American character and culture are a significant part of it. But a large part is simply the size and age of the country. It's like heart disease: yes, there is a genetic component, but if you're 80 years old, or if you're 400lbs, you're going to have problems whatever your genetics. The ones with bad genes just cop it at 200lbs or 40 years old, instead.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
I have no doubt whatsoever that China did that. Having a big outbreak looks bad on a country. But by not providing working tests to any of the states for the first month that the virus was spreading through the country, didn't the US effectively under-report the extent of the coronavirus outbreak - both total cases and deaths?
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
I have no doubt whatsoever that China did that. Having a big outbreak looks bad on a country. But by not providing working tests to any of the states for the first month that the virus was spreading through the country, didn't the US effectively under-report the extent of the coronavirus outbreak - both total cases and deaths?
Our president is on-record saying that he wanted to suppress the numbers.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
I have no doubt whatsoever that China did that. Having a big outbreak looks bad on a country. But by not providing working tests to any of the states for the first month that the virus was spreading through the country, didn't the US effectively under-report the extent of the coronavirus outbreak - both total cases and deaths?
That may be, but there's a difference between purposeful underreporting of information you have and underreporting because you don't have information (whether due to gross incompetence or not). Even if there is underreporting because the information was purposely not collected (as some might argue is a fair characterization of the US), it's still not as bad as having information you refuse to share. Though closer to that than to not having the information through incompetence, I'd propose.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
I have no doubt whatsoever that China did that. Having a big outbreak looks bad on a country. But by not providing working tests to any of the states for the first month that the virus was spreading through the country, didn't the US effectively under-report the extent of the coronavirus outbreak - both total cases and deaths?
That may be, but there's a difference between purposeful underreporting of information you have and underreporting because you don't have information (whether due to gross incompetence or not). Even if there is underreporting because the information was purposely not collected (as some might argue is a fair characterization of the US), it's still not as bad as having information you refuse to share. Though closer to that than to not having the information through incompetence, I'd propose.
Yeah, but it's not that the tests were impossible to get. Trump turned down an offer of tests from Germany. Why would he do that if he wasn't trying to hide what was happening?
-
Yeah, but it's not that the tests were impossible to get. Trump turned down an offer of tests from Germany. Why would he do that if he wasn't trying to hide what was happening?
Because he truly has a God complex and thought he could flatten the curve with his will?
He was taking a guess? If he was right, and it was a nothingburger, he looks like a genius. If not, his base will forget.
Or..."Buy America" sounds better to his base than "Supplied by the UN"?
-
@bacchi but the left are the ones politicizing this . . .
-
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
Personally I have little doubt the US intelligence community is correct in this assertion.
However, I find it funny the US intelligence community is believed in this assertion when so much time and effort has gone in to discrediting that same community when it asserted Russia influenced the 2016 election.
-
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
Personally I have little doubt the US intelligence community is correct in this assertion.
However, I find it funny the US intelligence community is believed in this assertion when so much time and effort has gone in to discrediting that same community when it asserted Russia influenced the 2016 election.
Yep.
-
I actually think China has done an amazing job. This random disease pops up in China, they manage to identify that it's something new and then go on to GO AGAINST THEIR CULTURAL NORMS to let the rest of the world not only KNOW but SHARE ALL THEIR RESEARCH. Then they follow that up by managing their own outbreak in spectacularly successful fashion. China looked at this and (ok there were a few missteps) thought this is big, this is so far outside political considerations that we need to co-operate fully with other human beings as a species. In return they're got racism, blame and a lot of the western world pissing about being political before pretending to take it seriously. The Chinese people must be looking at the west and wondering why on earth people want to live in this kind of society.
Before you go pinning the "country of the year" award on China, might want to look at this:
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html (https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-concealed-extent-virus-outbreak-151550902.html)
"(Bloomberg) -- China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, under-reporting both total cases and deaths it’s suffered from the disease, the U.S. intelligence community concluded in a classified report to the White House, according to three U.S. officials."
Also note it is Bloomberg, not Fox news.
I have no doubt whatsoever that China did that. Having a big outbreak looks bad on a country. But by not providing working tests to any of the states for the first month that the virus was spreading through the country, didn't the US effectively under-report the extent of the coronavirus outbreak - both total cases and deaths?
That may be, but there's a difference between purposeful underreporting of information you have and underreporting because you don't have information (whether due to gross incompetence or not). Even if there is underreporting because the information was purposely not collected (as some might argue is a fair characterization of the US), it's still not as bad as having information you refuse to share. Though closer to that than to not having the information through incompetence, I'd propose.
Yeah, but it's not that the tests were impossible to get. Trump turned down an offer of tests from Germany. Why would he do that if he wasn't trying to hide what was happening?
I think it was simpler than that. He doesn't like Angela. I mean why would he? She's not a bimbo and if he grabbed her by the pussy, she'd have his arm off! He's that petty that he would turn down tests.
-
I think it was simpler than that. He doesn't like Angela. I mean why would he? She's not a bimbo and if he grabbed her by the pussy, she'd have his arm off! He's that petty that he would turn down tests.
What a mind picture. Wouldn't that make an interesting video? I'm sure it would go viral.
-
I cannot find any part of this article that is false. You guys?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwib2MvO2cnoAhWkd98KHQVIBA0QFjABegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fslate.com%2Fnews-and-politics%2F2020%2F03%2Ftrump-coronavirus-social-distancing-extension-flattery-self-interest.html&usg=AOvVaw3RewLKVH_uo4C56O-60OCT (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwib2MvO2cnoAhWkd98KHQVIBA0QFjABegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fslate.com%2Fnews-and-politics%2F2020%2F03%2Ftrump-coronavirus-social-distancing-extension-flattery-self-interest.html&usg=AOvVaw3RewLKVH_uo4C56O-60OCT)
-
I cannot find any part of this article that is false. You guys?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwib2MvO2cnoAhWkd98KHQVIBA0QFjABegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fslate.com%2Fnews-and-politics%2F2020%2F03%2Ftrump-coronavirus-social-distancing-extension-flattery-self-interest.html&usg=AOvVaw3RewLKVH_uo4C56O-60OCT (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwib2MvO2cnoAhWkd98KHQVIBA0QFjABegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fslate.com%2Fnews-and-politics%2F2020%2F03%2Ftrump-coronavirus-social-distancing-extension-flattery-self-interest.html&usg=AOvVaw3RewLKVH_uo4C56O-60OCT)
Seems about right. And plenty of us over here stand with “that woman from Michigan.” Gov. Whitmer won by a decent margin in 2018 and I think everyone but the Trump cultists are happy about that. Our last round of state GOP leadership gave us the Flint Water Crisis.
-
Trump is a sociopath. He put us in this position as revenge for his impeachment. We had everything in place to defend against this pandemic, but he dismantled it. The PPE that the hospitals needed was shipped to China as COVID-19 was heading here. Other shipments have since been sent to Thailand. Obama had a source for economical ventilators, but Trump rejected them in order for Kushner to work some backroom private deals for expensive units.
Trump is a sociopath.
-
I just saw that 6.6 million new unemployment filings were completed during the past week. I don't know how to put this number in any kind of context. It's so different than the 230,000 we were averaging for much of the past few years.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-unemployment-claims-march-coronavirus-economy (https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-unemployment-claims-march-coronavirus-economy)
Presidents have survived 10+% unemployment rates to win re-election (FDR, Ronald Reagan). It doesn't mean Trump is cooked.
-
I just saw that 6.6 million new unemployment filings were completed during the past week. I don't know how to put this number in any kind of context. It's so different than the 230,000 we were averaging for much of the past few years.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EUmVLO3XYAAAa8n?format=png&name=900x900)
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49727821492_b062220c77_c.jpg)
There . . . that looks better.
-
Presidents have survived 10+% unemployment rates to win re-election (FDR, Ronald Reagan). It doesn't mean Trump is cooked.
Although unemployment did exceed 10% for about a year during his first term, in November 1984 unemployment was at 7.4% when Reagan was re-elected. https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet (https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet)
7 months to go to the election. A lot can happen between now and then.
-
I'm honestly not sure public schools will be open again before that November election.
-
Are you completely sure there will be an election?
-
It's not up to Trump. It's ultimately up to states, right?
-
It's not up to Trump. It's ultimately up to states, right?
Not really even that. How each state runs its elections is largely up to the states, but the election day is set by current law and would require a change in the law. Also the constitution states that Trump's current term ends Jan 20, 2021, so if an election has not taken place to replace him then the presidency would fall down through the order of ascension until we find someone who is technically still in office. Assuming that Republicans care at all about following the constitution that is...
-
There will be an election. However, I could see very effective voter suppression in dense blue areas of red states simply by dint of the governors ordering enforced social distancing such that polling places simply could not accommodate the volume of space required when voters have to stay separated in line. I could see lines stretching for blocks and blocks (discouraging voters by visual impression) and local police being told to look for instances of accidental trespass related to these huge lines and arresting people for it, etc. Or red city/states could enforce local curfews, cutting down time available to vote in busy polling places. The GOP certainly will fight any effort for mail in voting.
That kind of thing I think is FAR more likely than trying to cancel the election outright.
-
It's not up to Trump. It's ultimately up to states, right?
Not really even that. How each state runs its elections is largely up to the states, but the election day is set by current law and would require a change in the law. Also the constitution states that Trump's current term ends Jan 20, 2021, so if an election has not taken place to replace him then the presidency would fall down through the order of ascension until we find someone who is technically still in office. Assuming that Republicans care at all about following the constitution that is...
If you go through this...no elections held...then Trump's term ends 1/20/21. It then goes to Pence, whose term also ends 1/20/21. It would then go to Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, but wait...the House had no elections and thus, no one there to vote for Speaker of the House. So then, from there, it would go to the President pro tempore of the Senate. Considering none of the Senate candidates up in '20 had elections, the balance would tilt to the Democrats since more R's are up in '20. It would go to the longest-tenured Senate Dem which is...Patrick Leahy.
-
Is there anyone with anything bad to say about Leahy, other than his advanced age?
He would be an excellent President. He responses intelligently everytime I ask him why the AUMF is still in effect.
-
It's not up to Trump. It's ultimately up to states, right?
Not really even that. How each state runs its elections is largely up to the states, but the election day is set by current law and would require a change in the law. Also the constitution states that Trump's current term ends Jan 20, 2021, so if an election has not taken place to replace him then the presidency would fall down through the order of ascension until we find someone who is technically still in office. Assuming that Republicans care at all about following the constitution that is...
If you go through this...no elections held...then Trump's term ends 1/20/21. It then goes to Pence, whose term also ends 1/20/21. It would then go to Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, but wait...the House had no elections and thus, no one there to vote for Speaker of the House. So then, from there, it would go to the President pro tempore of the Senate. Considering none of the Senate candidates up in '20 had elections, the balance would tilt to the Democrats since more R's are up in '20. It would go to the longest-tenured Senate Dem which is...Patrick Leahy.
Right, but while this is technically true it's also never going to happen.
Besides the weirdness with the presidency you'd also end up with a completely empty House, and a bunch of empty state legislatures, etc. I agree with wenchsenior. The election will happen, but Republicans will fight tooth and nail against adding voter protections in any way, knowing full well that the more they can suppress the vote the better they'll do (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/490879-georgias-gop-house-speaker-says-vote-by-mail-system-would-be-devastating).
See also this video from the 80s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw&feature=youtu.be) by the founder of the Heritage Foundation...
-
I will never again vote by anything other than absentee ballot. It's beyond absurd for me to carve time out of my work schedule and go stand in line to cast my vote when it can all be done via absentee ballot. Plus I really like getting the ballot ahead of time and knowing exactly what is on it so I have time to evaluate and think about my choices.
I can only assume with this much lead time that the entire process is going to end up being done by absentee ballot for everyone. At least it should be, in my opinion.
-
I will never again vote by anything other than absentee ballot. It's beyond absurd for me to carve time out of my work schedule and go stand in line to cast my vote when it can all be done via absentee ballot. Plus I really like getting the ballot ahead of time and knowing exactly what is on it so I have time to evaluate and think about my choices.
I can only assume with this much lead time that the entire process is going to end up being done by absentee ballot for everyone. At least it should be, in my opinion.
Right, it should be, we agree, but it won't be. Because then too many people would be able to vote, and Republicans would lose.
"The things they had in there were crazy," Trump said of the voter protection and expansion proposals in the bill. "They had things—levels of voting that, if you ever agreed to it, you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again."
-
I will never again vote by anything other than absentee ballot. It's beyond absurd for me to carve time out of my work schedule and go stand in line to cast my vote when it can all be done via absentee ballot. Plus I really like getting the ballot ahead of time and knowing exactly what is on it so I have time to evaluate and think about my choices.
I can only assume with this much lead time that the entire process is going to end up being done by absentee ballot for everyone. At least it should be, in my opinion.
Absolutely, I haven't voted in person in a decade or decade and a half and I don't miss it at all, even though I never lived in a place where polling places were plagued by long lines.
And Michigan's new no-excuse absentee ballot should be a boon for your state at this time. I read that the Governor and SOS are making sure an absentee ballot application is being sent to every registered voter in the state before the May 5 election and it looks like voters can mark down that they want to do permanent absentee at that time. Some of these election reforms passed by the MI voters in 2018 were attempted to be undermined by the Republican legislature but I understand they were largely unsuccessful. And you have a Democratic gov and SOS, so MI has better protections for democracy than many other states. And luckily all 3 former "blue wall" states have Dem governors, so hopefully the November election will be somewhat protected in November, but the Republican legislatures will still be up to various hijinx in the meantime.
-
I will never again vote by anything other than absentee ballot. It's beyond absurd for me to carve time out of my work schedule and go stand in line to cast my vote when it can all be done via absentee ballot. Plus I really like getting the ballot ahead of time and knowing exactly what is on it so I have time to evaluate and think about my choices.
I can only assume with this much lead time that the entire process is going to end up being done by absentee ballot for everyone. At least it should be, in my opinion.
Absolutely, I haven't voted in person in a decade or decade and a half and I don't miss it at all, even though I never lived in a place where polling places were plagued by long lines.
And Michigan's new no-excuse absentee ballot should be a boon for your state at this time. I read that the Governor and SOS are making sure an absentee ballot application is being sent to every registered voter in the state before the May 5 election and it looks like voters can mark down that they want to do permanent absentee at that time. Some of these election reforms passed by the MI voters in 2018 were attempted to be undermined by the Republican legislature but I understand they were largely unsuccessful. And you have a Democratic gov and SOS, so MI has better protections for democracy than many other states. And luckily all 3 former "blue wall" states have Dem governors, so hopefully the November election will be somewhat protected in November, but the Republican legislatures will still be up to various hijinx in the meantime.
This is true about the May election ballots (and about the GOP' unsuccessful attempts to overturn the will of the voters). I suspect that we will see much more interest in absentee voting in August and November, as well. Yet another reason to be grateful that we passed Prop 3 in 2018 by a large margin.
-
I will never again vote by anything other than absentee ballot. It's beyond absurd for me to carve time out of my work schedule and go stand in line to cast my vote when it can all be done via absentee ballot. Plus I really like getting the ballot ahead of time and knowing exactly what is on it so I have time to evaluate and think about my choices.
I can only assume with this much lead time that the entire process is going to end up being done by absentee ballot for everyone. At least it should be, in my opinion.
Right, it should be, we agree, but it won't be. Because then too many people would be able to vote, and Republicans would lose.
"The things they had in there were crazy," Trump said of the voter protection and expansion proposals in the bill. "They had things—levels of voting that, if you ever agreed to it, you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again."
But why don't non-trump states just do it anyway on a statewide level? In Michigan I already can absentee vote in all elections. I don't even have to provide any type of reason why I want to vote absentee with the recent law changes. Before that it was only allowable for certain circumstances but you could easily just lie and they couldn't verify it. Yea I might be on vacation that day, or I might have to go out of town for work, so gimme my damn absentee ballot.
I remember when Obama got elected the first time the polls were absolute madness. I ended up spending something like 2 hours waiting in a line that extended out of the school and down the sidewalk when I was available to be physically present at the polls. I vowed on that day I would never, ever vote in person again and would always get absentee ballots even if I had to lie about my situation to obtain them. Thankfully with the law change we don't need to lie about it anymore, and hopefully that encourages more people to vote absentee.
-
I've never voted by absentee ballot, though I suppose that will be the plan for November. It's probably a good idea to email state legislators to ensure that such a plan is in place in case this continues on throughout 2020.
I'm pretty sure it's always been an option to everyone. You usually just have to give some valid reason like you are military, or you have a planned vacation, or there is a reasonable chance you will be out of town for work, or you are disabled. Many states don't even require an excuse, just a desire to vote early/absentee. I encourage everyone to vote absentee, and if they require an excuse just lie about it because fuck them it's none of their god damn business why you want to absentee vote. And if you feel uncomfortable "lying" about it, just remember there is a non-zero chance that you may have some type of emergency that prevents you from voting on election day. Just vote absentee in anticipation of that 0.1% chance potentially affecting you.
-
"The things they had in there were crazy," Trump said of the voter protection and expansion proposals in the bill. "They had things—levels of voting that, if you ever agreed to it, you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again."
When "more people voting" is the death of your party, maybe time to re-think that platform a bit.
-
But why don't non-trump states just do it anyway on a statewide level? In Michigan I already can absentee vote in all elections. I don't even have to provide any type of reason why I want to vote absentee with the recent law changes. Before that it was only allowable for certain circumstances but you could easily just lie and they couldn't verify it. Yea I might be on vacation that day, or I might have to go out of town for work, so gimme my damn absentee ballot.
I remember when Obama got elected the first time the polls were absolute madness. I ended up spending something like 2 hours waiting in a line that extended out of the school and down the sidewalk when I was available to be physically present at the polls. I vowed on that day I would never, ever vote in person again and would always get absentee ballots even if I had to lie about my situation to obtain them. Thankfully with the law change we don't need to lie about it anymore, and hopefully that encourages more people to vote absentee.
I mean I don't disagree. But you're going to get very different voter participation numbers between the options of (for example):
1) Individually encouraging every single voter to lie and potentially risk prosecution to request an absentee ballot.
2) Automatically mailing every registered voter a ballot.
And the states where Republicans already have enough power to resist expanded voter protections are also (by sheer coincidence?!!!!) the same ones that have the most voter suppression and could be benefited the most by expanded voter protections. Like my state, NC, or Georgia. It's mind-blowing how far Republicans in these states have already gone to steal power and undermine democracy.
-
I've never voted by absentee ballot, though I suppose that will be the plan for November. It's probably a good idea to email state legislators to ensure that such a plan is in place in case this continues on throughout 2020.
I'm pretty sure it's always been an option to everyone. You usually just have to give some valid reason like you are military, or you have a planned vacation, or there is a reasonable chance you will be out of town for work, or you are disabled. Many states don't even require an excuse, just a desire to vote early/absentee. I encourage everyone to vote absentee, and if they require an excuse just lie about it because fuck them it's none of their god damn business why you want to absentee vote. And if you feel uncomfortable "lying" about it, just remember there is a non-zero chance that you may have some type of emergency that prevents you from voting on election day. Just vote absentee in anticipation of that 0.1% chance potentially affecting you.
I looked through TN's reasons to vote via absentee ballot, and I certainly don't qualify for any of them. While I wouldn't mind saying I can't vote in person because I'm ill, I think that might not work when scaled to a statewide level without making a change. It would be a good idea for state governments to have a plan to waive those restrictions this year, just in case.
Like I said, I have absolutely no problem with people outright lying about it because I think it's an unfair restriction in the first place. Just tell them you have medical/digestive issues and don't want to risk diarrheaing all over the polls. Are they going to come inspect everyone's buttholes just to keep people honest?
-
At this point, I don't think think we can forecast anything to be "the end of Trump." We could only wish it was so. There have been so many occasions for reasonable people to conclude, "That's the final straw!" but it never happens. His supporters (and there are many of them) love him for everything he stands for.
I'm reading a fiction book right now (written before Trump was elected) where one of the evil dudes (a neo-Nazi leader) gives a monologue defending his views by saying, in effect, "People say they want democracy, but what they really want is an authoritarian government. Authoritarian governments make them feel safe, protected." Sadly, it's true. This describes Trump and the appearance of so many other recently-elected authoritarian world leaders who traffic in lies, corruption, conspiracies, divisiveness, xenophobic rhetoric, and being "macho" (Duterte, Bolsinaro, Boris Johnson, Orban, el-Sisi,...)
The people in my family who are Trump supporters -- you could tell them until you're blue in the face about all his corruption and self-serving and disgusting actions, and it wouldn't matter one bit to them. They'd tell you they like that about him and besides, "everyone does it."
-
I just today got an absentee ballot mailed to me for Ohio's primary election. I always vote in person. I didn't have to request it. It just showed up. I highly doubt that if Covid is still a problem in November Ohio won't do the same thing. And we have a republican governor. Adding, the postage stamp is already on the return envelope. I don't even have to have/ go out and buy a stamp.
-
I just today got an absentee ballot mailed to me for Ohio's primary election. I always vote in person. I didn't have to request it. It just showed up. I highly doubt that if Covid is still a problem in November Ohio won't do the same thing. And we have a republican governor. Adding, the postage stamp is already on the return envelope. I don't even have to have/ go out and buy a stamp.
I'm a bit surprised, although dewine has seemed to be less trumpian than other R govs and better at handling this mess for sure. MA and MD also. TN, GA and FL are not doing so well though. I don't consider any of these states make it or break it states, thankfully. Though some do consider OH and FL swing states still.
-
At this point, I don't think think we can forecast anything to be "the end of Trump." We could only wish it was so. There have been so many occasions for reasonable people to conclude, "That's the final straw!" but it never happens. His supporters (and there are many of them) love him for everything he stands for
There are people in my neighborhood sporting giant trump flags.
-
‘It's a sh-- sandwich': Republicans rage as Florida becomes a nightmare for Trump (https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2020/04/03/its-a-sh-sandwich-republicans-rage-as-florida-becomes-a-nightmare-for-trump-1271172)
-
Trump is losing Michigan as well.
Kristol's group is airing ads in several battleground states: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxG241bExqY&
-
Here is an anecdote:
I have a FB friend in Arkansas. She is the Trumpiest trumper whoever trumped.
Tonight she posted a desperate post on FB, so upset that people were not staying home.
I replied: “I don’t understand why Trump doesn’t proclaim a nation-wide stay at home order.”
I honestly thought she would lose her shit on me.
Instead, she said, “I don’t know! It needs to happen!”
I was pretty surprised. The tide may be shifting ever so slightly.
-
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/04/us-edits-national-stockpile-website-after-kushner-claims-its-not-for-states
One comment: "It is being reported by NBC News that the federal government has been buying supplies from China, then distributing them to private vendors, who then sell them to states. Since the states are all bidding against each other, the price goes up. Then FEMA swoops in and buys the supplies. So, friends of Trump in the private sector make oodles of cash on the bidding war, then sell it to the feds. Kushner says he got supplies to friends of Trump when they couldn't get them anywhere else. Trump also sends all the supplies that governors of red states request, but blue state governors like Whitmer in MI are given much less.
The outright corruption is beyond stunning, beyond criminal. It's obvious that these people have no souls, with the mighty dollar meaning more than people dying due to lack of proper equipment and tests. I can only hope they will all face jail terms when this is all over."
-
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/04/us-edits-national-stockpile-website-after-kushner-claims-its-not-for-states
One comment: "It is being reported by NBC News that the federal government has been buying supplies from China, then distributing them to private vendors, who then sell them to states. Since the states are all bidding against each other, the price goes up. Then FEMA swoops in and buys the supplies. So, friends of Trump in the private sector make oodles of cash on the bidding war, then sell it to the feds. Kushner says he got supplies to friends of Trump when they couldn't get them anywhere else. Trump also sends all the supplies that governors of red states request, but blue state governors like Whitmer in MI are given much less.
The outright corruption is beyond stunning, beyond criminal. It's obvious that these people have no souls, with the mighty dollar meaning more than people dying due to lack of proper equipment and tests. I can only hope they will all face jail terms when this is all over."
I can only hope they will all burn in hell when this is all over.
-
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/04/us-edits-national-stockpile-website-after-kushner-claims-its-not-for-states
One comment: "It is being reported by NBC News that the federal government has been buying supplies from China, then distributing them to private vendors, who then sell them to states. Since the states are all bidding against each other, the price goes up. Then FEMA swoops in and buys the supplies. So, friends of Trump in the private sector make oodles of cash on the bidding war, then sell it to the feds. Kushner says he got supplies to friends of Trump when they couldn't get them anywhere else. Trump also sends all the supplies that governors of red states request, but blue state governors like Whitmer in MI are given much less.
The outright corruption is beyond stunning, beyond criminal. It's obvious that these people have no souls, with the mighty dollar meaning more than people dying due to lack of proper equipment and tests. I can only hope they will all face jail terms when this is all over."
I haven't been able to find any NBC reports making this claim. I suspect it would be making headlines if it were true.
-
Dose of salt then...
-
https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/admiral-defends-federal-government-sending-medical-supplies-to-the-private-sector-81600069633
-
I have a FB friend in Arkansas. She is the Trumpiest trumper whoever trumped...
I have a very good friend who's dad trusted whatever Fox news told him. But now, Fox news told him that Covid-19 wasn't a big deal, but it really really is. So now he doesn't trust Fox news anymore. Seriously, this guy has been on the Trump bandwagon the whole time because Fox told him to, and now he's off the Fox train. The sad thing is he has no idea who to listen to now. He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust.
-
I have a FB friend in Arkansas. She is the Trumpiest trumper whoever trumped...
I have a very good friend who's dad trusted whatever Fox news told him. But now, Fox news told him that Covid-19 wasn't a big deal, but it really really is. So now he doesn't trust Fox news anymore. Seriously, this guy has been on the Trump bandwagon the whole time because Fox told him to, and now he's off the Fox train. The sad thing is he has no idea who to listen to now. He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust.
I would suggest detaching themselves from major news networks and finding reliable sources of information coupled with fact checking, etc.
-
I have a FB friend in Arkansas. She is the Trumpiest trumper whoever trumped...
I have a very good friend who's dad trusted whatever Fox news told him. But now, Fox news told him that Covid-19 wasn't a big deal, but it really really is. So now he doesn't trust Fox news anymore. Seriously, this guy has been on the Trump bandwagon the whole time because Fox told him to, and now he's off the Fox train. The sad thing is he has no idea who to listen to now. He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust.
That is sad. Reuters and AP News are widely considered both centrist and very reliable. Unfortunately for those withdrawing from Fox News, they are not televised infotainment services full of fancy graphics, outrageous statements, and air-headed GOP shills.
-
I have a FB friend in Arkansas. She is the Trumpiest trumper whoever trumped...
I have a very good friend who's dad trusted whatever Fox news told him. But now, Fox news told him that Covid-19 wasn't a big deal, but it really really is. So now he doesn't trust Fox news anymore. Seriously, this guy has been on the Trump bandwagon the whole time because Fox told him to, and now he's off the Fox train. The sad thing is he has no idea who to listen to now. He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust.
I would suggest detaching themselves from major news networks and finding reliable sources of information coupled with fact checking, etc.
Sure, but as a Trump supporter, he has been taught that all of the reliable sources of information and fact checking resources are fake news. The cult won’t allow him to do this.
-
I have a FB friend in Arkansas. She is the Trumpiest trumper whoever trumped...
I have a very good friend who's dad trusted whatever Fox news told him. But now, Fox news told him that Covid-19 wasn't a big deal, but it really really is. So now he doesn't trust Fox news anymore. Seriously, this guy has been on the Trump bandwagon the whole time because Fox told him to, and now he's off the Fox train. The sad thing is he has no idea who to listen to now. He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust.
If he doesn't want to watch any American news source, what about BBC? I'd say CBC but a lot of Canadian news has content about American Federal government acts that are driving us crazy, so not a good source for someone coming off Fox news.
Or you could cause a total brain explosion and suggest Al Jazeera. ;-) Compared to it any American news channel might seem safe and cozy and American-focused, it is very international in its presentation. I watched it while I was in New Zealand and it was good.
-
Someone in my Facebook feed posted a picture of what purported to be an empty hospital, commenting on the hoax, intended to force mail balloting so that Biden can win in November with "Obama style fraud". And several people agreed.
So if Biden does indeed win, there's the narrative.
-
When simply "more people voting" is the death-knell for your party . . .
-
Sure, but as a Trump supporter, he has been taught that all of the reliable sources of information and fact checking resources are fake news. The cult won’t allow him to do this.
Yup, and now that he sees that Fox is fake he thinks that they all are.
If he doesn't want to watch any American news source, what about BBC? I'd say CBC but a lot of Canadian news has content about American Federal government acts that are driving us crazy, so not a good source for someone coming off Fox news.
These are good ideas! In fact, I said BBC and his daughter said CBC. Hopefully he can get there.
-
Sure, but as a Trump supporter, he has been taught that all of the reliable sources of information and fact checking resources are fake news. The cult won’t allow him to do this.
Yup, and now that he sees that Fox is fake he thinks that they all are.
If he doesn't want to watch any American news source, what about BBC? I'd say CBC but a lot of Canadian news has content about American Federal government acts that are driving us crazy, so not a good source for someone coming off Fox news.
These are good ideas! In fact, I said BBC and his daughter said CBC. Hopefully he can get there.
Al Jazeera is a great global news channel also.
-
When simply "more people voting" is the death-knell for your party . . .
Seeing as most people seem to be idiots, I'd be all for less people voting, as long as those people actually were knowledgeable, anyway.
There are too many people (including on this forum) who are only capable of seeing things from one side and both believe and spread misinformation.
Not that my thought would ever work in real life, but it's fun to think about.
The misinformation spread from the right > than that from the left.
That is Fox News' great achievement - convincing large numbers of people that high quality, politically central news sources such as the New York Times are "the extreme left and spreading fake news". When they themselves are only a little better than a propaganda machine.
That being said, I can't tell you how many people on my Facebook feed are complaining about "you're gonna have to pay back the stimulus check!" Even pushing back when I provide a detailed explanation of how that probably isn't true.
-
...politically central news sources such as the New York Times....
One would presume that a politically central news source would have endorsed at least one candidate from each of the major political parties in the past 60 years. That does not describe the NYT.
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
But the vast majority of news outlets exercise their first amendment rights to support the political position of their choice, be that right or left.
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
Would it be centrist to present an article about WWII, and follow it with an article denying the Holocaust? Or to provide an article showing pictures of the Earth from space, followed with an article from flat Earthers denying that the world is round?
Sometimes opposing views are so full of shit they don't deserve the recognition that providing them a platform gives. In these cases it's not centrist at all to give both 'sides' of the story.
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
Would it be centrist to present an article about WWII, and follow it with an article denying the Holocaust? Or to provide an article showing pictures of the Earth from space, followed with an article from flat Earthers denying that the world is round?
Sometimes opposing views are so full of shit they don't deserve the recognition that providing them a platform gives. In these cases it's not centrist at all to give both 'sides' of the story.
Beat me to it.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/real-clear-politics/
Several of the sources used by Real Clear Politics are listed as Mixed factual due to failed fact checks.
-
I find Democracy Now reports on subjects and from POVs that I don't see from other sources. Most would likely consider it left leaning, but they criticise Democrats too. I've been watching it for about 20 years.
-
Would it be centrist to present an article about WWII, and follow it with an article denying the Holocaust? Or to provide an article showing pictures of the Earth from space, followed with an article from flat Earthers denying that the world is round?
Sometimes opposing views are so full of shit they don't deserve the recognition that providing them a platform gives. In these cases it's not centrist at all to give both 'sides' of the story.
Nice strawmen but not relevant here.
Many political opinions are not falsifiable because we can't run tests. E.g., would things be better or worse now if Clinton had won instead of Trump? Partisans on both sides will vent their opinions but there is no way to know.
-
Several of the sources used by Real Clear Politics are listed as Mixed factual due to failed fact checks.
Gosh, I guess that rules out Fox, CNN, NYT, etc., who have all failed fact checks at one time or another.
-
Several of the sources used by Real Clear Politics are listed as Mixed factual due to failed fact checks.
Gosh, I guess that rules out Fox, CNN, NYT, etc., who have all failed fact checks at one time or another.
Well, yeah, if you read them exclusively. Fox is right wing news, CNN is left wing news, and NYT is left-leaning.
In general, the majority of stories from Real Clear Politics comes from a right leaning perspective.
RCP is better than reading CNN or Fox exclusively but don't fool yourself that it's not biased. There are more "fair and balanced" sites out there. CSM is a good choice.
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
:HEADDESK:
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
Would it be centrist to present an article about WWII, and follow it with an article denying the Holocaust? Or to provide an article showing pictures of the Earth from space, followed with an article from flat Earthers denying that the world is round?
Sometimes opposing views are so full of shit they don't deserve the recognition that providing them a platform gives. In these cases it's not centrist at all to give both 'sides' of the story.
And sometimes this is just the strategy. The news source picks the other sides opposing views solely because they are so full of shit but the omits the views that are full of shit from their side.
That's the problem I have with fact checking sites. They don't fact check everything.
-
:HEADDESK:
I'll take that as agreement. ;)
-
Sure, but as a Trump supporter, he has been taught that all of the reliable sources of information and fact checking resources are fake news. The cult won’t allow him to do this.
Yup, and now that he sees that Fox is fake he thinks that they all are.
If he doesn't want to watch any American news source, what about BBC? I'd say CBC but a lot of Canadian news has content about American Federal government acts that are driving us crazy, so not a good source for someone coming off Fox news.
These are good ideas! In fact, I said BBC and his daughter said CBC. Hopefully he can get there.
Al Jazeera is a great global news channel also.
I agree, it is a very solid news channel.
Sadly, your average Fox News viewer is convinced that my hometown is under sharia because some bigoted idiot who's never set foot in Michigan, let alone Dearborn (the largest Muslim population in the USA), put forth that rumor. My own aunt who lives two hours north seems to believe it, and her son owns a business in Dearborn. Fox News brainwashing is akin to cult-level madness. Probably something that doesn't sound "foreign and scary" would be more successful for early deprogramming.
-
RCP is better than reading CNN or Fox exclusively but don't fool yourself that it's not biased. There are more "fair and balanced" sites out there. CSM is a good choice.
I assume you mean Christian Science Monitor (https://www.csmonitor.com/) and not some other CSM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSM). :) I don't know enough about them to comment, but it would be good if they are as factual as advertised. First impression looking at their site is positive - thanks!
Don't know all the details about mediabiasfactcheck either, but the first impression wasn't so positive. E.g., from their review of RCP, "In reviewing original Real Clear Politics articles, there is a right leaning bias in wording and story selection such as this: Gov. Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown's Warning to Fellow Democrats (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/20/gov_jerry_moonbeam_browns_warning_to_fellow_democrats_138972.html). Although this is an opinion piece, it completely lacks sourcing of any kind."
Reading the article in question, there are many quotes - none apparently out of context - so the "lacks sourcing" bit is confusing.
-
Sure, but as a Trump supporter, he has been taught that all of the reliable sources of information and fact checking resources are fake news. The cult won’t allow him to do this.
Yup, and now that he sees that Fox is fake he thinks that they all are.
If he doesn't want to watch any American news source, what about BBC? I'd say CBC but a lot of Canadian news has content about American Federal government acts that are driving us crazy, so not a good source for someone coming off Fox news.
These are good ideas! In fact, I said BBC and his daughter said CBC. Hopefully he can get there.
Al Jazeera is a great global news channel also.
I agree, it is a very solid news channel.
Sadly, your average Fox News viewer is convinced that my hometown is under sharia because some bigoted idiot who's never set foot in Michigan, let alone Dearborn (the largest Muslim population in the USA), put forth that rumor. My own aunt who lives two hours north seems to believe it, and her son owns a business in Dearborn. Fox News brainwashing is akin to cult-level madness. Probably something that doesn't sound "foreign and scary" would be more successful for early deprogramming.
Yeah, I once mentioned to a Trump-supporting former friend (long story) that Al-Jazeera was one of the many news sources I used. She reacted as though I told her I had just joined ISIS.
-
One question is that once the dust settles on the pandemic and if it turns out that the US ends up doing no worse in terms of per capita deaths than say Spain, the UK, France and Italy, it might be difficult to make the case that Trump did any worse than Conti, Johnson, Macron and Sanchez in terms of national leadership. Now, if it turns out that things turn out significantly worse, that's another matter.
-
Don't know all the details about mediabiasfactcheck either, but the first impression wasn't so positive. E.g., from their review of RCP, "In reviewing original Real Clear Politics articles, there is a right leaning bias in wording and story selection such as this: Gov. Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown's Warning to Fellow Democrats (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/20/gov_jerry_moonbeam_browns_warning_to_fellow_democrats_138972.html). Although this is an opinion piece, it completely lacks sourcing of any kind."
Reading the article in question, there are many quotes - none apparently out of context - so the "lacks sourcing" bit is confusing.
Uh oh. It's not good if the bias checkers are biased.
The op-ed author uses Brown's warning as the lynch pin of everything that follows but using Jerry Brown's words to support the conservative positions taken in this op-ed is the definition of "taken out of context."
How would we know? Maybe if we had a citation of the original interview we could listen to it.
http://wlrh.org/NPR-News/jerry-browns-exit-interview-dont-say-he-didnt-warn-you
That ^^ is an edited version. This is the transcript: https://www.npr.org/2018/12/11/675647260/transcript-nprs-full-interview-with-california-gov-jerry-brown
So there's plenty of opportunity for Republicans if they just pause, look at the world as it really is, and try to come up with something in the tradition of Lincoln and Eisenhower and other great Republicans.
(bold added)
-
Concerning the thought of Eisenhower as a good Republican, on the immigration side of things, an issue that is often brought up of why Trump is so extreme, right wing, nasty etc. I believe Eisenhower was quite content with and never sought to significantly change US immigration policy in the 1950's which was restrictive in overall numbers and pro European in terms of who was allowed in. OTOH, in other respects, such as income inequality, union membership, income tax rates, a non-globalized and healthy manufacturing base, in those measurements people on the left would find much to admire in the US economy of those Eisenhower years.
-
Don't know all the details about mediabiasfactcheck either, but the first impression wasn't so positive. E.g., from their review of RCP, "In reviewing original Real Clear Politics articles, there is a right leaning bias in wording and story selection such as this: Gov. Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown's Warning to Fellow Democrats (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/20/gov_jerry_moonbeam_browns_warning_to_fellow_democrats_138972.html). Although this is an opinion piece, it completely lacks sourcing of any kind."
Reading the article in question, there are many quotes - none apparently out of context - so the "lacks sourcing" bit is confusing.
Uh oh. It's not good if the bias checkers are biased.
The op-ed author uses Brown's warning as the lynch pin of everything that follows but using Jerry Brown's words to support the conservative positions taken in this op-ed is the definition of "taken out of context."
How would we know? Maybe if we had a citation of the original interview we could listen to it.
http://wlrh.org/NPR-News/jerry-browns-exit-interview-dont-say-he-didnt-warn-you
So there's plenty of opportunity for Republicans if they just pause, look at the world as it really is, and try to come up with something in the tradition of Lincoln and Eisenhower and other great Republicans.
(bold added)
There are indeed opportunities for all, with the CARES act being just the latest example. Either party could have offered a bill without items extraneous to helping those most in need, but neither did.
Back to mediabiasfactcheck and its review of the RCP article. The charge was "it completely lacks sourcing of any kind" and that seems an unsupportable charge.
Yes, I agree with you that Brown is no conservative. The question is whether Brown's "The weakness of the Republican Party has let the Democratic Party, I think, go get further out than I think the majority of people want" is valid. Not so much the "weakness of the Republican Party" as whether "the Democratic Party [has gone] further out than...the majority of people want."
The examples given in the RCP opinion piece are of positions where the writer thinks Democrats may have gone too far out. Is the writer correct? Maybe, maybe not. We can speculate on what the majority of people want, but we won't know until the pertinent votes are counted.
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
Odd that such a centrist brand would own something like this:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/realclear-media-has-a-secret-facebook-page-filled-with-far-right-memes?ref=scroll
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
Odd that such a centrist brand would own something like this:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/realclear-media-has-a-secret-facebook-page-filled-with-far-right-memes?ref=scroll
Ah, the ol' "guilt by association," eh? I don't think anyone has suggested the article's topic site as a good example of anything positive. Let's return to the site under discussion.
As even that article notes, "RealClearPolitics has taken major pains to be seen as nonpartisan and non-ideological in its reporting. The site’s news reporting focuses on horserace-style coverage of elections, evenly weighing opinions from both parties, while the RealClear pages curate a mix of stories and opinion articles from sites across the political spectrum."
It does further note "But the willingness to share and aggregate all political views has also made the site more receptive to Trump-friendly writing than some other outlets. Of the seven featured “opinion writers” listed in a tab on the site, three—including occasional Trump adviser Steve Cortes—are openly supportive of the president’s agenda."
Is it so terrible to share and aggregate "all political views" (and by "all" let's assume we're excluding the maniacal tails on both ends of the population distribution)?
-
Just popped into this thread to see if the enlightened ones are admitting that this country has a whole lot more problems in front of us right now then Donald J Trump.
I can see that’s not the case. In an odd way, I find it comforting that Donald is still taking up so much of your brain bandwidth.
Carry on.
-
One can go to news aggregators such as Real Clear Politics and find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
It's not only about presenting opposing views. It's also about what stories/op-eds they publish and where they're from. Some of their sources are questionable.
RCP isn't centrist.
If presenting opposing views and letting the reader decide which seems more correct isn't centrist, what is?
Odd that such a centrist brand would own something like this:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/realclear-media-has-a-secret-facebook-page-filled-with-far-right-memes?ref=scroll
Ah, the ol' "guilt by association," eh?
They were not associated with Conservative Country, they owned it. It was effectively part of the "RealClear" brand, they just chose not to put their name on it.
The fact that they owned this site isn't proof that RealClear can't be unbiased, but I do think the views of the founders is relevant. It's a very small organization.
-
They were not associated with Conservative Country, they owned it. It was effectively part of the "RealClear" brand, they just chose not to put their name on it.
The fact that they owned this site isn't proof that RealClear can't be unbiased, but I do think the views of the founders is relevant. It's a very small organization.
Regardless of the size of the organization and what other activities it pursues, the topic here is whether RCP provides a place where one can find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
This goes back to an earlier comment, "He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust." One could replace Fox with CNN without changing the meaning.
Thoughts on the rest of the post?
As even that article notes, "RealClearPolitics has taken major pains to be seen as nonpartisan and non-ideological in its reporting. The site’s news reporting focuses on horserace-style coverage of elections, evenly weighing opinions from both parties, while the RealClear pages curate a mix of stories and opinion articles from sites across the political spectrum."
It does further note "But the willingness to share and aggregate all political views has also made the site more receptive to Trump-friendly writing than some other outlets. Of the seven featured “opinion writers” listed in a tab on the site, three—including occasional Trump adviser Steve Cortes—are openly supportive of the president’s agenda."
Is it so terrible to share and aggregate "all political views" (and by "all" let's assume we're excluding the maniacal tails on both ends of the population distribution)?
-
They were not associated with Conservative Country, they owned it. It was effectively part of the "RealClear" brand, they just chose not to put their name on it.
The fact that they owned this site isn't proof that RealClear can't be unbiased, but I do think the views of the founders is relevant. It's a very small organization.
Regardless of the size of the organization and what other activities it pursues, the topic here is whether RCP provides a place where one can find juxtaposed opposing views (e.g., "President Trump: Commander of Confusion" and "Dems, Media Try to Pin Blame on Trump. It Won't Work" from yesterday) from various sources, then read each and decide which seems more correct.
This goes back to an earlier comment, "He knows not to trust Fox, but he doesn't know who to trust." One could replace Fox with CNN without changing the meaning.
Thoughts on the rest of the post?
As even that article notes, "RealClearPolitics has taken major pains to be seen as nonpartisan and non-ideological in its reporting. The site’s news reporting focuses on horserace-style coverage of elections, evenly weighing opinions from both parties, while the RealClear pages curate a mix of stories and opinion articles from sites across the political spectrum."
It does further note "But the willingness to share and aggregate all political views has also made the site more receptive to Trump-friendly writing than some other outlets. Of the seven featured “opinion writers” listed in a tab on the site, three—including occasional Trump adviser Steve Cortes—are openly supportive of the president’s agenda."
Is it so terrible to share and aggregate "all political views" (and by "all" let's assume we're excluding the maniacal tails on both ends of the population distribution)?
I'm not especially familiar with RCP. I just wanted to point out their participation in extremist media. Again, it's not proof of anything but it does make me less likely to trust them.
Taking pains to be seen as non-partisan is not the same as being non-partisan. Fox News call themselves "fair and balanced" after all.
-
Just popped into this thread to see if the enlightened ones are admitting that this country has a whole lot more problems in front of us right now then Donald J Trump.
People can think about and discuss more than one subject in any given day.
-
Just popped into this thread to see if the enlightened ones are admitting that this country has a whole lot more problems in front of us right now then Donald J Trump.
I can see that’s not the case. In an odd way, I find it comforting that Donald is still taking up so much of your brain bandwidth.
Carry on.
https://xkcd.com/386/
-
Just popped into this thread to see if the enlightened ones are admitting that this country has a whole lot more problems in front of us right now then Donald J Trump.
I can see that’s not the case. In an odd way, I find it comforting that Donald is still taking up so much of your brain bandwidth.
Carry on.
Trump is supposed to save my oil and gas industry from Russia and Saudi Arabia. Until he pulls that off, I get to think about how f'ed I am and complain about how his 'genius business acumen' might have been a hoax. Oh, and the fact that he has Jared Kushner and Mike Pence as his pandemic response linchpins. I'm f'ed and I'm gonna die, but yeah, other than that, just carrying on with life as usual... Oh yeah, and when he signed the 2T CARES bill, Trump issued a signing statement (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/us/trump-signing-statement-coronavirus.html) that it is himself, and not Congress, that gets the oversight role of how the 500B for businesses is spent. So he's also going to rob me and my children while I'm f'ed and dying.
-
Many political opinions are not falsifiable because we can't run tests. E.g., would things be better or worse now if Clinton had won instead of Trump?
Zoom out a bit in time-granularity, and political positions become almost certainly falsifiable.
Private market healthcare and a laissez-faire economics where labor has been systematically devalued in favor of capital-owners is 40+ years in the making, since Reagan. It is absolutely possible to test what the real outcomes are for those actions and take a position if you consider the outcomes good or bad.
It may also be possible to zoom inside and falsify other stuff. e.g. $2Tln deficit driven handout in 2017 with 80% going to the top1% didn't exactly make the Obama trend-line budge, AND it depleted the arsenal at the disposal of the federal government.
It is probably also falsifiable that running up deficits come boom or bust, like a certain political party seems to be doing whenever they have the power since Reagan is not a good economic policy, that hypocrisy is not a sound governing policy etc. etc. etc.
-
Many political opinions are not falsifiable because we can't run tests. E.g., would things be better or worse now if Clinton had won instead of Trump?
Zoom out a bit in time-granularity, and political positions become almost certainly falsifiable.
If you will admit the adjective "some" to "political positions" then we are saying the same thing.
-
Many political opinions are not falsifiable because we can't run tests. E.g., would things be better or worse now if Clinton had won instead of Trump?
Zoom out a bit in time-granularity, and political positions become almost certainly falsifiable.
If you will admit the adjective "some" to "political positions" then we are saying the same thing.
"Testable political positions" = falsifiable at some time granularity, may not be immediate, or even in the same decade. If there is any effect on society, it is testable. If no measurable effect - it is not important.
If by "some" you mean important ones, the ones that actually have any effect on society - then we are saying the same thing.
Why would we worry about political positions that have no measurable impact on society anyway??
It is sometimes difficult to disambiguate social outcomes using statistical methods. It may be difficult to get the six-sigma confidence levels (99.7%) due to this - but hypothesis testing results with lesser degree of confidence (e.g. 2-sigma, i.e. 68%) are almost always obtainable for any measurable social phenomena.
-
"Testable political positions" = falsifiable at some time granularity, may not be immediate, or even in the same decade. If there is any effect on society, it is testable. If no measurable effect - it is not important.
If by "some" you mean important ones, the ones that actually have any effect on society - then we are saying the same thing.
Why would we worry about political positions that have no measurable impact on society anyway??
It is sometimes difficult to disambiguate social outcomes using statistical methods. It may be difficult to get the six-sigma confidence levels (99.7%) due to this - but hypothesis testing results with lesser degree of confidence (e.g. 2-sigma, i.e. 68%) are almost always obtainable for any measurable social phenomena.
a) We would be better off now if Clinton had been elected in 2016.
b) We would be worse off now if Clinton had been elected in 2016.
Test away.
Note that this should be easier than similar options in 2016, with "in 2020" replacing "now," and "is" replacing "had been".
Of course those on the right will have great reasons why they believe "b" is true while those on the left will have great reasons why they believe "a" is true.
-
"Testable political positions" = falsifiable at some time granularity, may not be immediate, or even in the same decade. If there is any effect on society, it is testable. If no measurable effect - it is not important.
If by "some" you mean important ones, the ones that actually have any effect on society - then we are saying the same thing.
Why would we worry about political positions that have no measurable impact on society anyway??
It is sometimes difficult to disambiguate social outcomes using statistical methods. It may be difficult to get the six-sigma confidence levels (99.7%) due to this - but hypothesis testing results with lesser degree of confidence (e.g. 2-sigma, i.e. 68%) are almost always obtainable for any measurable social phenomena.
a) We would be better off now if Clinton had been elected in 2016.
b) We would be worse off now if Clinton had been elected in 2016.
Test away.
Note that this should be easier than similar options in 2016, with "in 2020" replacing "now," and "is" replacing "had been".
Of course those on the right will have great reasons why they believe "b" is true while those on the left will have great reasons why they believe "a" is true.
Let's assume Clinton had to deal with congress/senate that was almost certainly republican.
Would her administration have signed a tax bill increasing deficits by 2Tln, right before all that money could be so much more useful for the current recession/depression?
How about following policies that lead to 2 million more uninsured? (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/nearly-2-million-more-uninsured-under-trump)
Is it in some way right/left wing partisan point of view to expect a sound economic policy (more deficit/liquidity during bust times and less during boom times) or to expect better health outcomes (which more uninsured directly runs counter to) for the population?
Of course those on the right will have great reasons why they believe "b" is true while those on the left will have great reasons why they believe "a" is true.
Measurable reasons? I'm all ears.
Else, pfft - who cares?
-
One question is that once the dust settles on the pandemic and if it turns out that the US ends up doing no worse in terms of per capita deaths than say Spain, the UK, France and Italy, it might be difficult to make the case that Trump did any worse than Conti, Johnson, Macron and Sanchez in terms of national leadership. Now, if it turns out that things turn out significantly worse, that's another matter.
It'll be hard to make that comparison (in either direction) unless the numbers turn out to be wildly different. There's always going to be enough special factors to explain away any differences. All of those countries have universal health systems run and funded by government. All of those countries have lower rates of obesity, hypertension etc. than the US. Italy & Germany have the 2nd and 3rd oldest populations in the world, Spain & France aren't too far behind. Italy & Spain have large numbers of people in multi-generational households. The UK has a much higher level of immigration than the US and massively higher levels of international travel. England is four times more densely populated than the US. We're already seeing a big difference between Italy & Germany in terms of death rates.
-
I like Tim Dillon's take on this(be warned, this podcast is not PG or PC at all, but this section is pretty tame):
https://youtu.be/NFtR_N92PvU?t=5066
To summarize, if the coronavirus ends up being brutal and generally hard on the country, the electorate probably won't fall for the Trump song-and-dance again. They were comfortable with an entertainer before; will that remain the case if the country actually gets tested by this virus?
-
I like Tim Dillon's take on this(be warned, this podcast is not PG or PC at all, but this section is pretty tame):
https://youtu.be/NFtR_N92PvU?t=5066
To summarize, if the coronavirus ends up being brutal and generally hard on the country, the electorate probably won't fall for the Trump song-and-dance again. They were comfortable with an entertainer before; will that remain the case if the country actually gets tested by this virus?
If?!
-
One question is that once the dust settles on the pandemic and if it turns out that the US ends up doing no worse in terms of per capita deaths than say Spain, the UK, France and Italy, it might be difficult to make the case that Trump did any worse than Conti, Johnson, Macron and Sanchez in terms of national leadership. Now, if it turns out that things turn out significantly worse, that's another matter.
It'll be hard to make that comparison (in either direction) unless the numbers turn out to be wildly different. There's always going to be enough special factors to explain away any differences. All of those countries have universal health systems run and funded by government. All of those countries have lower rates of obesity, hypertension etc. than the US. Italy & Germany have the 2nd and 3rd oldest populations in the world, Spain & France aren't too far behind. Italy & Spain have large numbers of people in multi-generational households. The UK has a much higher level of immigration than the US and massively higher levels of international travel. England is four times more densely populated than the US. We're already seeing a big difference between Italy & Germany in terms of death rates.
But seriously, if there weren't a President that was so narcissistic to take this pandemic as a personal political affront, almost any person running the country would have done better. Trump wanted this to be 'just the flu' and continued to hold rallys up until the moment the scientists finally convinced him this would kill his supporters. The United States are going to be uniquely battered by this. Italy and Spain will look terrible now but be on the mend while our situation drags out...
-
One question is that once the dust settles on the pandemic and if it turns out that the US ends up doing no worse in terms of per capita deaths than say Spain, the UK, France and Italy, it might be difficult to make the case that Trump did any worse than Conti, Johnson, Macron and Sanchez in terms of national leadership. Now, if it turns out that things turn out significantly worse, that's another matter.
It'll be hard to make that comparison (in either direction) unless the numbers turn out to be wildly different. There's always going to be enough special factors to explain away any differences. All of those countries have universal health systems run and funded by government. All of those countries have lower rates of obesity, hypertension etc. than the US. Italy & Germany have the 2nd and 3rd oldest populations in the world, Spain & France aren't too far behind. Italy & Spain have large numbers of people in multi-generational households. The UK has a much higher level of immigration than the US and massively higher levels of international travel. England is four times more densely populated than the US. We're already seeing a big difference between Italy & Germany in terms of death rates.
But seriously, if there weren't a President that was so narcissistic to take this pandemic as a personal political affront, almost any person running the country would have done better. Trump wanted this to be 'just the flu' and continued to hold rallys up until the moment the scientists finally convinced him this would kill his supporters. The United States are going to be uniquely battered by this. Italy and Spain will look terrible now but be on the mend while our situation drags out...
It's not just Trump. There's also that vile, slimy little freak he calls a son in law. If there were ever a case for lizard people existing, that guy is it.
-
"Testable political positions" = falsifiable at some time granularity, may not be immediate, or even in the same decade. If there is any effect on society, it is testable. If no measurable effect - it is not important.
If by "some" you mean important ones, the ones that actually have any effect on society - then we are saying the same thing.
Why would we worry about political positions that have no measurable impact on society anyway??
It is sometimes difficult to disambiguate social outcomes using statistical methods. It may be difficult to get the six-sigma confidence levels (99.7%) due to this - but hypothesis testing results with lesser degree of confidence (e.g. 2-sigma, i.e. 68%) are almost always obtainable for any measurable social phenomena.
a) We would be better off now if Clinton had been elected in 2016.
b) We would be worse off now if Clinton had been elected in 2016.
Test away.
Note that this should be easier than similar options in 2016, with "in 2020" replacing "now," and "is" replacing "had been".
Of course those on the right will have great reasons why they believe "b" is true while those on the left will have great reasons why they believe "a" is true.
Let's assume Clinton had to deal with congress/senate that was almost certainly republican.
Would her administration have signed a tax bill increasing deficits by 2Tln, right before all that money could be so much more useful for the current recession/depression?
How about following policies that lead to 2 million more uninsured? (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/nearly-2-million-more-uninsured-under-trump)
Is it in some way right/left wing partisan point of view to expect a sound economic policy (more deficit/liquidity during bust times and less during boom times) or to expect better health outcomes (which more uninsured directly runs counter to) for the population?
Of course those on the right will have great reasons why they believe "b" is true while those on the left will have great reasons why they believe "a" is true.
Measurable reasons? I'm all ears.
Else, pfft - who cares?
Great questions, and discussed at great length in threads such as What comes after the ACA? (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-comes-after-the-aca/)
But questions aren't tests, and the absence of tests is what leads to "not falsifiable".
-
Great questions, and discussed at great length in threads such as What comes after the ACA? (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-comes-after-the-aca/)
But questions aren't tests, and the absence of tests is what leads to "not falsifiable".
Wikipedia has a good article on what statistical hypothesis testing is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_hypothesis_testing
You start with a big question - whether option A or option B is better.
Then you define "better" - that's where your values *can* come into play. Is it better to have more people insured? Is it better to decrease money supply into a boom? Note: You can also use statistical hypothesis testing to determine the desirability of these "axioms" - I personally find that to be better than "values". The economic expansion/contraction and boom/bust cycles I mentioned is in this category.
Then, in light of these axioms, you measure shorter duration political events and determine if they are "better" per your hypothesis tested axioms. So, assuming you consider it a duty of the government to take prudent economic measures of contracting when it is boom, and expanding when there is a bust - you can now measure your definition of "better".
Sometimes you can directly measure from your definitions/axioms. Is it better to have more uninsured? That is directly testable from data.
It is perfectly alright if you think Trump was preferable to Clinton, or the other way around. I know more than one people - some of them personally - who has supported Trump with clear, logically consistent and not-morally-objectionable reasons (e.g. I heard a speech by Peter Thiel where he explained that he wants US to become a "normal" country, explained details of what he means by that, and why that concern overrides all other extracurricular activities of Trump). You don't need to mess around with widely accepted social-science definitions of what is testable - sometimes directly and sometimes by inference and deduction - and what is not, in order to make any such case.
A very large variety of things does become testable once you think hard enough at it - just ask any actuary. Alternatively, whenever you want to find testable angles for nebulous questions - just try to transform it to an actuarial question. Actuaries and wall street kiddo's do it every day. If you are not near wall street - just head over to your local utility that still has coal plants and ask the guy who "values" or "mark"s the price of coal contracts (these are typically decades, sometimes century long contracts with very-difficult-to-value terms).
-
I like Tim Dillon's take on this(be warned, this podcast is not PG or PC at all, but this section is pretty tame):
https://youtu.be/NFtR_N92PvU?t=5066
To summarize, if the coronavirus ends up being brutal and generally hard on the country, the electorate probably won't fall for the Trump song-and-dance again. They were comfortable with an entertainer before; will that remain the case if the country actually gets tested by this virus?
I'm not convinced of this. There's already been a deliberate realignment of expectations over the past week or two. Trump is banking on us being able to keep deaths near or below 100k, so that he can claim victory. His approval ratings have gone *up* by ~5% since the start of the crisis.
Also, if there are positive results from larger-scale trials of hydroxychloroquine - Trump has been pushing that so hard that any glimpse of positive news on that front will be claimed as a huge victory - and if this happens to be the case, his reelection will be a near-guarantee.
Plus, assuming we'll begin to lift restrictions by some time in the summer fall, the economy will be on the upswing - which will be good for approval ratings - even if things suck on a relative scale they'll be tracking in a positive direction.
There are gigantic avenues of attack based on things that Trump has botched/contradicted himself with respect to this pandemic, but I'm not convinced that it's going to matter.
-
His approval ratings have gone *up* by ~5% since the start of the crisis.
That may not last long (https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/05/politics/trump-approval-poll-of-the-week/index.html).
-
Great questions, and discussed at great length in threads such as What comes after the ACA? (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-comes-after-the-aca/)
But questions aren't tests, and the absence of tests is what leads to "not falsifiable".
Wikipedia has a good article on what statistical hypothesis testing is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_hypothesis_testing
You start with a big question - whether option A or option B is better.
Then you define "better" - that's where your values *can* come into play. Is it better to have more people insured? Is it better to decrease money supply into a boom? Note: You can also use statistical hypothesis testing to determine the desirability of these "axioms" - I personally find that to be better than "values". The economic expansion/contraction and boom/bust cycles I mentioned is in this category.
Then, in light of these axioms, you measure shorter duration political events and determine if they are "better" per your hypothesis tested axioms. So, assuming you consider it a duty of the government to take prudent economic measures of contracting when it is boom, and expanding when there is a bust - you can now measure your definition of "better".
Sometimes you can directly measure from your definitions/axioms. Is it better to have more uninsured? That is directly testable from data.
It is perfectly alright if you think Trump was preferable to Clinton, or the other way around. I know more than one people - some of them personally - who has supported Trump with clear, logically consistent and not-morally-objectionable reasons (e.g. I heard a speech by Peter Thiel where he explained that he wants US to become a "normal" country, explained details of what he means by that, and why that concern overrides all other extracurricular activities of Trump). You don't need to mess around with widely accepted social-science definitions of what is testable - sometimes directly and sometimes by inference and deduction - and what is not, in order to make any such case.
A very large variety of things does become testable once you think hard enough at it - just ask any actuary. Alternatively, whenever you want to find testable angles for nebulous questions - just try to transform it to an actuarial question. Actuaries and wall street kiddo's do it every day. If you are not near wall street - just head over to your local utility that still has coal plants and ask the guy who "values" or "mark"s the price of coal contracts (these are typically decades, sometimes century long contracts with very-difficult-to-value terms).
Agreed - good points!
Perhaps I'm not making my point clear enough, or it is clear but so simplistic that one skips past it: we can't test whether things would have been better or worse under Clinton because we can't run the experiment of Clinton being president for the past three years. And the same can be said for any other hypotheses that would require a working time machine to test.
-
Perhaps I'm not making my point clear enough, or it is clear but so simplistic that one skips past it: we can't test whether things would have been better or worse under Clinton because we can't run the experiment of Clinton being president for the past three years. And the same can be said for any other hypotheses that would require a working time machine to test.
I'd still dispute your point.
Yes, you "can't test whether things would have been better or worse under Clinton because we can't run the experiment of Clinton being president for the past three years".
Consider,
you can't measure an electron's momentum and position accurately simultaneously. But that still doesn't preclude you from building fantastic microprocessors relying on aggregate properties of those electrons.
you can't ever prove anything in physics with the degree of certainty like you can in Mathematics. We're still able to hurl rockets to space pretty accurately.
What you can't measure is not connected with reality, and not relevant for reality. You start with what you *can* measure and that forms the basis of your scientific reality.
This basic, simple truth is what entirety of science rests on.
When you focus on "irrelevant" - a.k.a. non-measureable - issues (e.g. whether we can build a time machine and test something in a very specific way) you are espousing the right-wing dogma of the tribal epistemology (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/22/14762030/donald-trump-tribal-epistemology - can't find a non-left-wing source), either knowingly or unknowingly, that is so prevalent among the Trump supporters today. The same thought process leads to denying other scientific truths and realities in many different topics. If you can dispute the existence of *any* objective processes, truths etc - then it becomes easy to play footsie with truth and establish false equivalences.
The scientific method is to start with the best possible observation/test you have, form conclusion, and then update that conclusion when you have better tests and observations available.
-
Perhaps I'm not making my point clear enough, or it is clear but so simplistic that one skips past it: we can't test whether things would have been better or worse under Clinton because we can't run the experiment of Clinton being president for the past three years. And the same can be said for any other hypotheses that would require a working time machine to test.
I'd still dispute your point.
OK, consider it disputed. :)
-
I like Tim Dillon's take on this(be warned, this podcast is not PG or PC at all, but this section is pretty tame):
https://youtu.be/NFtR_N92PvU?t=5066
To summarize, if the coronavirus ends up being brutal and generally hard on the country, the electorate probably won't fall for the Trump song-and-dance again. They were comfortable with an entertainer before; will that remain the case if the country actually gets tested by this virus?
I'm not convinced of this. There's already been a deliberate realignment of expectations over the past week or two. Trump is banking on us being able to keep deaths near or below 100k, so that he can claim victory. His approval ratings have gone *up* by ~5% since the start of the crisis.
Also, if there are positive results from larger-scale trials of hydroxychloroquine - Trump has been pushing that so hard that any glimpse of positive news on that front will be claimed as a huge victory - and if this happens to be the case, his reelection will be a near-guarantee.
Plus, assuming we'll begin to lift restrictions by some time in the summer fall, the economy will be on the upswing - which will be good for approval ratings - even if things suck on a relative scale they'll be tracking in a positive direction.
There are gigantic avenues of attack based on things that Trump has botched/contradicted himself with respect to this pandemic, but I'm not convinced that it's going to matter.
Good points.
-
That is Trump's insight. Being President allows him to move the goal-posts when he fails. He has such a talent for shifting the discussion on any issue such that he wins because he can define winning. He'll do it here, too. Whether he needs winning be to < 200,000 deaths or < 2,000,000 deaths.
-
I like Tim Dillon's take on this(be warned, this podcast is not PG or PC at all, but this section is pretty tame):
https://youtu.be/NFtR_N92PvU?t=5066
To summarize, if the coronavirus ends up being brutal and generally hard on the country, the electorate probably won't fall for the Trump song-and-dance again. They were comfortable with an entertainer before; will that remain the case if the country actually gets tested by this virus?
I'm not convinced of this. There's already been a deliberate realignment of expectations over the past week or two. Trump is banking on us being able to keep deaths near or below 100k, so that he can claim victory. His approval ratings have gone *up* by ~5% since the start of the crisis.
Also, if there are positive results from larger-scale trials of hydroxychloroquine - Trump has been pushing that so hard that any glimpse of positive news on that front will be claimed as a huge victory - and if this happens to be the case, his reelection will be a near-guarantee.
Plus, assuming we'll begin to lift restrictions by some time in the summer fall, the economy will be on the upswing - which will be good for approval ratings - even if things suck on a relative scale they'll be tracking in a positive direction.
There are gigantic avenues of attack based on things that Trump has botched/contradicted himself with respect to this pandemic, but I'm not convinced that it's going to matter.
Agree. Anybody who couldn't see that the 100-200k prediction was a deliberate over-estimate so Trump/CDC/FDA could declare "victory" after their unprecedented incompetence needs to think a little bit harder next time.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
-
That is Trump's insight. Being President allows him to move the goal-posts when he fails. He has such a talent for shifting the discussion on any issue such that he wins because he can define winning. He'll do it here, too. Whether he needs winning be to < 200,000 deaths or < 2,000,000 deaths.
I just wonder if that will actually work on people that lost loved ones, know of someone that was put in the line of fire (nurses without proper PPE like some of our neighbors that were begging for masks if anyone had any), and people that lost their jobs or were economically devastated. It's hard to hear a President say he did a great job when your life has been turned upside down (and Trump is extra special when he pats himself on the back with his A pluses and 'near perfect, well perfect actually' crap when he rates himself).
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
I certainly could not estimate myself. But just based on what a liar Trump is and his pathological need to make himself look good, the mere fact that he is admitting to 100,000 makes me feel like he's been told it will likely be much worse.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
50k?!
You have 10k already, and It's barely started. There are still states that aren't quarantining, this isn't going away soon.
That said, even .1% is 327k deaths due to your population.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
50k?!
You have 10k already, and It's barely started. There are still states that aren't quarantining, this isn't going away soon.
That said, even .1% is 327k deaths due to your population.
50K is currently the lower bound for total death estimate... so it's not out of the realm of possibility. Especially since it's been fairly consistently heading toward the lower bound lately:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
50k?!
You have 10k already, and It's barely started. There are still states that aren't quarantining, this isn't going away soon.
That said, even .1% is 327k deaths due to your population.
My reason for optimism:
1) The data is pointing towards the early hot zones (Washington state and NYC) having already reached their peaks. Washington is basically under control and NYC hospitalizations are down remarkably drastically.
2) Private sector is showing promise with treatment and being able to produce PPE.
3) The hospitalization and ICU rate continue to go down as more people test positive.
4) Vast majority of country is doing social distancing very well (you're never going to get compliance like in China so don't even dream of it).
So now you're seeing states as big as Ohio (11M people) have estimates of about 500 dead. Pennsylvania (13M) is predicted to have about 800. California (40M) predicted to have 1,800.
These numbers will keep going down. The United States is completely disjointed by its very structure, but once all the gears start spinning in the same direction, it's a force that I don't even think COVID-19 can defeat.
-
Sadly, I think that it'll go the way it has here in Canada. Nursing homes are too hard to completely isolate, and when it arrives, it hits the elderly hard.
-
Sadly, I think that it'll go the way it has here in Canada. Nursing homes are too hard to completely isolate, and when it arrives, it hits the elderly hard.
We are having a debate in our family about pulling my grandmother out of her retirement community right now. She is 94 and in good health otherwise. The big question is how well she can be protected outside of the retirement community.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
The way we're tracking right now, 50k may be an achievable "stretch goal"(NYC appears to be near its peak right now) - I think we could easily keep the total under 100k if people continue to be sensible.
*caveat applies that we're probably undercounting deaths caused by the virus due to undertesting and indirect deaths caused by hospital overcrowding.
The flip side of this is, it's entirely possible that we could screw this up if we turn social distancing to "off" too soon and start packing sports stadiums, megachurches, and other recklessness, instead of a sensible, controlled reopening of things in a risk-managed manner. We don't have a vaccine yet, and herd immunity will be neglegible outside the hardest-hit areas. That means we're going to need to maintain some level of restrictions(though not necessarily a full lockdown) for another 6+ months.
-
Hmmmmm, I wonder why Trump keeps calling on 'OAN (One America Network)' in his coronavirus briefings?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnSILVWDKL8
Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_America_News_Network
The channel was launched with the intention of serving a conservative audience. OAN President Charles Herring told the Conservative Political Action Conference: "Fox News has done a great job serving the center-right and independent audiences... But those who consider themselves liberal have a half-dozen or more choices on TV each day..."[17] Herring also emphasized the network's separation of news from opinion content. He said that straight news would be reported throughout the day, with limited opinion and commentary on evening talk shows, including The Daily Ledger, hosted by Graham Ledger, and The Tipping Point, hosted by Liz Wheeler.
The rise of OAN was likely in the works before coronavirus made Donald Trump need to be Presidential. Scary stuff, to me at least. This is not the America I grew up feeling proud of. This is very isolating and uninformed and bullying. I'm an American, I'm not worried about being deported (unless they send me back to Ohio from Texas), but I can only imagine how first generation or 'non-American' looking Americans might feel nowadays.
-
*caveat applies that we're probably undercounting deaths caused by the virus due to undertesting and indirect deaths caused by hospital overcrowding.
In my social media feed, here in NYS, an alarming number of posts are memorials to family or friends passed away in the last week. Mostly covid, but also other causes. I think I'm hearing of over 4 deaths a day, many from people in their 40s and 50s.
On the subject of indirect deaths, one death was from a heart attack... friend's father in law couldn't go to his nearest hospital, but had to be transferred.
-
Hmmmmm, I wonder why Trump keeps calling on 'OAN (One America Network)' in his coronavirus briefings?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnSILVWDKL8
Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_America_News_Network
The channel was launched with the intention of serving a conservative audience. OAN President Charles Herring told the Conservative Political Action Conference: "Fox News has done a great job serving the center-right and independent audiences... But those who consider themselves liberal have a half-dozen or more choices on TV each day..."[17] Herring also emphasized the network's separation of news from opinion content. He said that straight news would be reported throughout the day, with limited opinion and commentary on evening talk shows, including The Daily Ledger, hosted by Graham Ledger, and The Tipping Point, hosted by Liz Wheeler.
The rise of OAN was likely in the works before coronavirus made Donald Trump need to be Presidential. Scary stuff, to me at least. This is not the America I grew up feeling proud of. This is very isolating and uninformed and bullying. I'm an American, I'm not worried about being deported (unless they send me back to Ohio from Texas), but I can only imagine how first generation or 'non-American' looking Americans might feel nowadays.
Super creepy. I haven't watched that guy (can't even type his name any more) for months and months because he conveys no useful information. And I won't watch his stupid network.
-
Hmmmmm, I wonder why Trump keeps calling on 'OAN (One America Network)' in his coronavirus briefings?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnSILVWDKL8
Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_America_News_Network
The channel was launched with the intention of serving a conservative audience. OAN President Charles Herring told the Conservative Political Action Conference: "Fox News has done a great job serving the center-right and independent audiences... But those who consider themselves liberal have a half-dozen or more choices on TV each day..."[17] Herring also emphasized the network's separation of news from opinion content. He said that straight news would be reported throughout the day, with limited opinion and commentary on evening talk shows, including The Daily Ledger, hosted by Graham Ledger, and The Tipping Point, hosted by Liz Wheeler.
The rise of OAN was likely in the works before coronavirus made Donald Trump need to be Presidential. Scary stuff, to me at least. This is not the America I grew up feeling proud of. This is very isolating and uninformed and bullying. I'm an American, I'm not worried about being deported (unless they send me back to Ohio from Texas), but I can only imagine how first generation or 'non-American' looking Americans might feel nowadays.
Super creepy. I haven't watched that guy (can't even type his name any more) for months and months because he conveys no useful information. And I won't watch his stupid network.
I follow some of the alt-right boards and they're starting to turn against Foxnews in favor of OAN. They're also rabidly anti-Fauci.
Kinda fascinating, really. How many of the conspiracy theories do they believe in or are they just non-stop trolling?
-
Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, the GOP is engaging in bald-faced election stealing (successfully, it seems).
Which, of course, could help Trump immensely in November.
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-6-2020?r=51ao3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=copy
-
Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, the GOP is engaging in bald-faced election stealing (successfully, it seems).
Which, of course, could help Trump immensely in November.
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-6-2020?r=51ao3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=copy
The SC will fix it. As long as the Republicans haven't stacked the Supreme Court with partisan judges, there's nothing to worry about. Oh, wait . . .
-
Do any of the rest of you wonder what will happen the moment it gets announced that one of the SCOTUS justices has this virus?
-
Do any of the rest of you wonder what will happen the moment it gets announced that one of the SCOTUS justices has this virus?
I thought the shitty response of the Republicans and Trump regarding covid-19 was a plot to get more hyper-partisan Republican judges on the bench. They could wipe all those libtard judges out in one fell swoop!
-
Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, the GOP is engaging in bald-faced election stealing (successfully, it seems).
Which, of course, could help Trump immensely in November.
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-6-2020?r=51ao3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=copy
The SC will fix it. As long as the Republicans haven't stacked the Supreme Court with partisan judges, there's nothing to worry about. Oh, wait . . .
While I disagree with the end result, I largely agree with the majority's reasoning. It is a basic separation of powers issue. The judiciary does not have the legal or equitable power to change statutes. That is the job of the legislature.
I know it's hard to pull yourself out of the current situation, but you cannot use extraordinary times to create horrible precedent. Having an appointed and un-elected federal judge change the election rules is bad precedent.
Think long term here -- imagine there's an outbreak in November. Trump sues, arguing that because of the outbreak, absentee ballots should be able to be postmarked until the second Tuesday after the election, even though Congress has not authorized this. Now imagine we had this Wisconsin precedent to bolster his argument.
You have to think long term.
The shame and blame lies with the Wisconsin legislature.
-
Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, the GOP is engaging in bald-faced election stealing (successfully, it seems).
Which, of course, could help Trump immensely in November.
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-6-2020?r=51ao3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=copy
The SC will fix it. As long as the Republicans haven't stacked the Supreme Court with partisan judges, there's nothing to worry about. Oh, wait . . .
While I disagree with the end result, I largely agree with the majority's reasoning. It is a basic separation of powers issue. The judiciary does not have the legal or equitable power to change statutes. That is the job of the legislature.
I know it's hard to pull yourself out of the current situation, but you cannot use extraordinary times to create horrible precedent. Having an appointed and un-elected federal judge change the election rules is bad precedent.
Think long term here -- imagine there's an outbreak in November. Trump sues, arguing that because of the outbreak, absentee ballots should be able to be postmarked until the second Tuesday after the election, even though Congress has not authorized this. Now imagine we had this Wisconsin precedent to bolster his argument.
You have to think long term.
The shame and blame lies with the Wisconsin legislature.
Suppressing black votes is a human rights issue - and states have repeatedly shown themselves incapable of legislating fairly on human rights issues throughout the history of the US.
-
While I disagree with the end result, I largely agree with the majority's reasoning. It is a basic separation of powers issue. The judiciary does not have the legal or equitable power to change statutes. That is the job of the legislature.
............
The shame and blame lies with the Wisconsin legislature.
This.
The fundamental problem is that a sizeable chunk of the legislature is acting in a way that is brazenly partisan, rather than acting in a responsible way in the wake of a public health crisis.
It should be readily apparent to everyone right now that the right thing to do is either A) postpone state/local elections scheduled in the immediate future, or B) expand absentee balloting (assuming the infrastructure exists to do so securely and uniformly) so that the election can happen without creating undue risk for viral propagation.
The fact that many politicians are willing to fight against the above speaks for itself.
-
Trump Says He Never Read, Looked for Memo Warning of Possible Coronavirus Pandemic (https://www.newsweek.com/trump-says-he-never-read-looked-memo-warning-possible-coronavirus-pandemic-1496707)
-
While I disagree with the end result, I largely agree with the majority's reasoning. It is a basic separation of powers issue. The judiciary does not have the legal or equitable power to change statutes. That is the job of the legislature.
............
The shame and blame lies with the Wisconsin legislature.
This.
The fundamental problem is that a sizeable chunk of the legislature is acting in a way that is brazenly partisan, rather than acting in a responsible way in the wake of a public health crisis.
It should be readily apparent to everyone right now that the right thing to do is either A) postpone state/local elections scheduled in the immediate future, or B) expand absentee balloting (assuming the infrastructure exists to do so securely and uniformly) so that the election can happen without creating undue risk for viral propagation.
The fact that many politicians are willing to fight against the above speaks for itself.
I actually agree with this as well. It should never have made it to the SC.
-
Trump Says He Never Read, Looked for Memo Warning of Possible Coronavirus Pandemic (https://www.newsweek.com/trump-says-he-never-read-looked-memo-warning-possible-coronavirus-pandemic-1496707)
Oh, the deflections. What’s the political equivalent of “the dog ate my homework”? Because I’m pretty sure we’re about to hear it from Trump.
-
Trump Says He Never Read, Looked for Memo Warning of Possible Coronavirus Pandemic (https://www.newsweek.com/trump-says-he-never-read-looked-memo-warning-possible-coronavirus-pandemic-1496707)
Oh, the deflections. What’s the political equivalent of “the dog ate my homework”? Because I’m pretty sure we’re about to hear it from Trump.
This didn't surprise me at all. Trump doesn't read anything but Twitter.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
50k?!
You have 10k already, and It's barely started. There are still states that aren't quarantining, this isn't going away soon.
That said, even .1% is 327k deaths due to your population.
50K is currently the lower bound for total death estimate... so it's not out of the realm of possibility. Especially since it's been fairly consistently heading toward the lower bound lately:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/
I think it will be well over 50K because now that we have beaches being reopened in Florida, and bunch of people protesting to open businesses. We may see increased in number of infected people from these folks who were not social distancing while protesting, on the beach, etc, and then spreading the virus to people back in their homes and community.
And yes I agree that the initial number were inflated on purpose so that later Trump can claim victory. See... only 100K death... it could have been 2M! We I did such a beautiful job... perfect actually...
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
50k?!
You have 10k already, and It's barely started. There are still states that aren't quarantining, this isn't going away soon.
That said, even .1% is 327k deaths due to your population.
50K is currently the lower bound for total death estimate... so it's not out of the realm of possibility. Especially since it's been fairly consistently heading toward the lower bound lately:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/
I think it will be well over 50K because now that we have beaches being reopened in Florida, and bunch of people protesting to open businesses. We may see increased in number of infected people from these folks who were not social distancing while protesting, on the beach, etc, and then spreading the virus to people back in their homes and community.
And yes I agree that the initial number were inflated on purpose so that later Trump can claim victory. See... only 100K death... it could have been 2M! We I did such a beautiful job... perfect actually...
C'mon guys, look at the numbers. We are at 40K deaths right now and losing 1500-1750 per day right now. We will be well over 50K in less than a week. This is regardless of the Beachgoers/Protesters as the sickness spread by these idiots won't be reflected in death data for another 2-4 weeks. The first wave has peaked in NYC, New Orleans, Detroit, CT, Seattle but is still peaking in New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Philadelphia area. Unfortunately, Texas and Florida (2nd and 3rd most populous states) are just getting started and they seem unlikely to ramp up their testing or double down on distancing at this time. My guess is 60K+ by end of April. If things open up nationally, we will easily pass 100K by end of May.
-
I think your numbers are right, except that I'm seeing rate statistics of 3,000 deaths per day.
-
I think your numbers are right, except that I'm seeing rate statistics of 3,000 deaths per day.
You need to cite since no major publication is showing this.
If you look at Italy, Spain, France, etc. there's a quick rise to the peak in terms of daily deaths, and then a really long downslope in the 70-90% of the daily peak # for weeks after that. In other words, there are >50% of total deaths on the backside of the peak. We're probably heading for 70k, and that's before factoring in "re-opening" to appease the President.
-
I will acknowledge that you're spot on. I cannot find anywhere that supports my 3,000 deaths/day claim.
-
The average for 3/14-3/19 is 3,060 per day, based on a snapshot from John Hopkins dashboard I've taken daily around 5pm. Granted, this is inflated by the cases added on 3/15, but it is factual.
3/14 2,687
3/15 5,067
3/16 1,697
3/17 3,324
3/18 2,523
We have had more than 1300 deaths per day since 4/7.
-
The average for 3/14-3/19 is 3,060 per day, based on a snapshot from John Hopkins dashboard I've taken daily around 5pm. Granted, this is inflated by the cases added on 3/15, but it is factual.
3/14 2,687
3/15 5,067
3/16 1,697
3/17 3,324
3/18 2,523
We have had more than 1300 deaths per day since 4/7.
That 5,000+ number was because: "New York City today has reported 3,778 additional deaths that have occurred since March 11 and have been classified as "probable," defined as follows: “decedent [...] had no known positive laboratory test for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) but the death certificate lists as a cause of death “COVID-19” or an equivalent" [source]. We will add these to the New York State total as soon as it is determined whether the historical distribution can be obtained"
So there was a bunch added to that date from throughout the entire outbreak.
-
^Also not how causes of death work. You can't just list cause of death as X without ever knowing if the person had X. But here we are.
-
^Also not how causes of death work. You can't just list cause of death as X without ever knowing if the person had X. But here we are.
You do realize that most reported causes of death used for statistics don't involve a full autopsy/dissection/lab work on bodily fluids, right?
If foul play isn't suspected, most causes of death are inferred from symptoms, etc - unless it's something blatantly obvious like a car crash or a gunshot wound. Coronavirus is no different.
Estimating causes of death during a pandemic is messy. If anything, we're probably undercounting:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html
-
Edit: JS beat me to it
-
"Coronavirus is the End of Trump".
I keep waiting but he seems to immune to it. Mitch McConnell hasn't contracted it yet either.
Oh well, I'll keep hoping. ;)
-
^Also not how causes of death work. You can't just list cause of death as X without ever knowing if the person had X. But here we are.
You do realize that most reported causes of death used for statistics don't involve a full autopsy/dissection/lab work on bodily fluids, right?
If foul play isn't suspected, most causes of death are inferred from symptoms, etc - unless it's something blatantly obvious like a car crash or a gunshot wound. Coronavirus is no different.
Estimating causes of death during a pandemic is messy. If anything, we're probably undercounting:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html
Exactly right, I mean seriously, if an otherwise healthy person suddenly drops dead from respiratory failure, it's unlikely to be death caused by misadventure.
Can easily check someone's final phone records and texts to family. "I'm coughing a lot lately" would seem to indicate it's going to be Covid without having to do a full autopsy.
-
There are the collateral deaths as well. People who arrest outside the hospital, probably heart attack, can’t be taken to the normal hospital A, have to go to B, hospital A not taking transfers, this person could have made it if the health care system was in good shape. I read in NYC, if you arrested outside the hospital, you get 2 rounds of CPR and that is it, if that’s true then many more lives are lost than just the proven and suspected Covid cases.
-
"Coronavirus is the End of Trump".
I keep waiting but he seems to immune to it. Mitch McConnell hasn't contracted it yet either.
Oh well, I'll keep hoping. ;)
"I sure hope people from the other political party die."
Or perhaps just a near-death experience and subsequent conversion from the stupidity of arrogance, as with our own dear Boris.
-
I feel like it's simultaneously possible to believe that Trump is a terrible President whose mistakes are literally resulting in thousands of unnecessary deaths, and also believe that Trump's death would cause an earthquake in our society that would be so much worse than even his Presidency.
-
^Also not how causes of death work. You can't just list cause of death as X without ever knowing if the person had X. But here we are.
You do realize that most reported causes of death used for statistics don't involve a full autopsy/dissection/lab work on bodily fluids, right?
If foul play isn't suspected, most causes of death are inferred from symptoms, etc - unless it's something blatantly obvious like a car crash or a gunshot wound. Coronavirus is no different.
Estimating causes of death during a pandemic is messy. If anything, we're probably undercounting:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html
I have family running tests. We're still seeing a lot more positives on RVPs - standard respiratory viruses - than we are covid-19. "Respiratory failure = covid-19" is not an accurate way of determining cause of death if no RVP was run.
-
I feel like it's simultaneously possible to believe that Trump is a terrible President whose mistakes are literally resulting in thousands of unnecessary deaths, and also believe that Trump's death would cause an earthquake in our society that would be so much worse than even his Presidency.
Trump is a symptom of the race resentment of the white working class.
His incompetence costs lives, but likely saves many more. If he was competent, like - say - Victor Orban, then the death of the good old idea of America was certain. His incompetence gives America a chance to survive.
As a mere symptom, Trump's death is unlikely to "cause" any earthquake(s). A reckoning is due for the white race resentment. But that won't be caused by Trump, or his death. The real causes predate Trump.
-
I feel like it's simultaneously possible to believe that Trump is a terrible President whose mistakes are literally resulting in thousands of unnecessary deaths, and also believe that Trump's death would cause an earthquake in our society that would be so much worse than even his Presidency.
I agree with that, but every tomorrow living with Trump has been worse than the day before. I'd choose an earthquake over a terminal social disease any day. Can our democracy endure four more years of Trump? How divided can a society become before it fails? What are Putin's plans for us from that point?
-
I have family running tests. We're still seeing a lot more positives on RVPs - standard respiratory viruses - than we are covid-19. "Respiratory failure = covid-19" is not an accurate way of determining cause of death if no RVP was run.
Perhaps not, but we know that there are thousands of deaths more than are expected, and COVID is identified as responsible for only a portion of these. So what are all these people dying from if not COVID?
-
There are the collateral deaths as well. People who arrest outside the hospital, probably heart attack, can’t be taken to the normal hospital A, have to go to B, hospital A not taking transfers, this person could have made it if the health care system was in good shape. I read in NYC, if you arrested outside the hospital, you get 2 rounds of CPR and that is it, if that’s true then many more lives are lost than just the proven and suspected Covid cases.
This is exactly what happened to the father-in-law of a friend. He died three weeks ago of a heart attack but was unable to go to the hospital closest to him because it was reserved for Covid patients.
Although it is not certain that it wasn't covid either: Covid seems to be associated with symptoms that go beyond the usual respiratory illnesses, including heart damage. Two people I know of had sudden relapses after recovery from Covid: one is in critical condition at the hospital, and one died, perhaps as a result of blood clotting.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heart-damage-in-covid-19-patients-puzzles-doctors/
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/covid-19-patients-blood-clots/story?id=70131612
-
I have family running tests. We're still seeing a lot more positives on RVPs - standard respiratory viruses - than we are covid-19. "Respiratory failure = covid-19" is not an accurate way of determining cause of death if no RVP was run.
Perhaps not, but we know that there are thousands of deaths more than are expected, and COVID is identified as responsible for only a portion of these. So what are all these people dying from if not COVID?
I'm not a death statistician or medical expert, but yes there are likely many covid-19 deaths going unreported as such. I'm just saying, there are still other respiratory illnesses still going around that cause death. We can't just blanket assume all respiratory failure deaths are due to covid-19.
I know some are pushing the non peer-reviewed study out of Santa Clara showing covid-19 may be much more widespread and trying to say the death rate is much smaller. They also ignore the 20% increase in deaths for the month of March, YoY, in Santa Clara county. A 17% increase in deaths at home. So I'd say, yeah, perhaps a lot of people aren't going to the hospital and then dying at home because it's too late to get treatment, a ventilator, etc. Just one county, so lot of grains of salt.
-
That Santa Clara study falls apart if the false-positive rate is 1% or more on the tests they used- their results become indistinguishable from zero. Those tests didn't go through the usual FDA approval process, although the Stanford scientists did try to verify them themselves and found a 0.5% false positive rate. But I'd say there is still some doubt about those tests - the 99.5% specificity is based on a 369/371 result - not exactly a huge number of samples available for verifying the test is good.
Buried that assumption in the report though, and it underpins the whole stastical analysis of finding 50 positives in 3330 tests and claiming "3-4% infection rate in this county". https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/19/fatal-flaws-in-stanford-study-of-coronavirus-prevalence/ (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/19/fatal-flaws-in-stanford-study-of-coronavirus-prevalence/)
Caution should be the order of the day until the science has had time to play out - I hope the situation is as good or better than they found in that study, but I don't think that is clear at all yet. Certainly not clear enough to justify a rush to re-open everything.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
50k?!
You have 10k already, and It's barely started. There are still states that aren't quarantining, this isn't going away soon.
That said, even .1% is 327k deaths due to your population.
Fortunately we no longer have to worry about any more deaths from Coronavirus, now that the brilliant scientific and medical mind known as Donald Trump has revealed a cure in the form of injecting ultraviolet light and/or disinfectants into the human body. Combining this cure with the test that anyone can get any time they want one, such as those that have been offered at at every single Target, Walmart, Walgreens, and CVS parking lot for at least a month, free and on demand, and tracked by Google's nationwide testing and tracking platform, our deaths and total cases will soon go to down to zero. Not zero MORE, but zero, period, erasing all previous cases.*
*Note actual sarcasm, instead of pretend sarcasm a day later
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprised?
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprise!
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprise!
MAGA!
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprised?
But once we factor in the intravenous bleach and other household cleaner use orally, we'll see the death rate go way down. MAGA
-
The bleach and UV light mess might at least stop Trump from suggesting unsupported theories. He didn't take any questions today and it was a very short briefing.
I actually don't think Trump was suggesting that drinking bleach is a cure. He doesn't think before he speaks and that's ok if you're surrounded by YesMen who always nod and agree with you. He was probably suggesting to ingest some other chemical -- a real, medically approved, one.
This could also be an early sign of dementia. He didn't used to be such a loose, stream of consciousness, speaker.
-
The bleach and UV light mess might at least stop Trump from suggesting unsupported theories. He didn't take any questions today and it was a very short briefing.
I actually don't think Trump was suggesting that drinking bleach is a cure. He doesn't think before he speaks and that's ok if you're surrounded by YesMen who always nod and agree with you. He was probably suggesting to ingest some other chemical -- a real, medically approved, one.
This could also be an early sign of dementia. He didn't used to be such a loose, stream of consciousness, speaker.
Most likely, it’s this: Revealed: leader of group peddling bleach as coronavirus 'cure' wrote to Trump this week (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirus)
-
The bleach and UV light mess might at least stop Trump from suggesting unsupported theories. He didn't take any questions today and it was a very short briefing.
I actually don't think Trump was suggesting that drinking bleach is a cure. He doesn't think before he speaks and that's ok if you're surrounded by YesMen who always nod and agree with you. He was probably suggesting to ingest some other chemical -- a real, medically approved, one.
This could also be an early sign of dementia. He didn't used to be such a loose, stream of consciousness, speaker.
Most likely, it’s this: Revealed: leader of group peddling bleach as coronavirus 'cure' wrote to Trump this week (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirus)
Wow, ok, then. Stupid or gullible? Or maybe he was promised a cut?
Tucker is still bringing in sand bags to a river that's already overflowed.
He regularly uses his daily press briefings to tout potential new medical advances.
Ok, Tucker, whatever you say.
-
The bleach and UV light mess might at least stop Trump from suggesting unsupported theories. He didn't take any questions today and it was a very short briefing.
I actually don't think Trump was suggesting that drinking bleach is a cure. He doesn't think before he speaks and that's ok if you're surrounded by YesMen who always nod and agree with you. He was probably suggesting to ingest some other chemical -- a real, medically approved, one.
This could also be an early sign of dementia. He didn't used to be such a loose, stream of consciousness, speaker.
Most likely, it’s this: Revealed: leader of group peddling bleach as coronavirus 'cure' wrote to Trump this week (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirus)
Wow, ok, then. Stupid or gullible? Or maybe he was promised a cut?
Probably D. All of the above.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprise!
It's not "The Price is Right"
The death toll exceeding @ReadySetMillionaire 's estimate doesn't mean I win. I'm still worried that it will eventually exceed my estimate, too.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprise!
It's not "The Price is Right"
The death toll exceeding @ReadySetMillionaire 's estimate doesn't mean I win. I'm still worried that it will eventually exceed my estimate, too.
I hope not. The longer it takes to get there, the more chance people have to absorb information that will keep them safer - like self isolation, distancing, masks etc. I think there will be a lot more deaths, unfortunately, but I'm hoping the message becomes normalised.
-
I'm worried that 200,000 is not an overestimate, but a fair one. I'm worried that--on top of this death toll--the economic disruption (which will reduce the number of deaths compared to a world in which we did not try it--will cost millions of people substantially.
I'd be quite surprised if we break 50,000.
Surprise!
It's not "The Price is Right"
The death toll exceeding @ReadySetMillionaire 's estimate doesn't mean I win. I'm still worried that it will eventually exceed my estimate, too.
There are numerous warnings about opening up businesses too early, easing restrictions etc. And numerous warnings about another more potentially deadly round of coronavirus. I hope none of this is true, however 50K might seem more like a "sure would have been nice to stop there" pipe dream. I still remember when they said it passed the 9/11 death toll.
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/fk1yu.jpg)
-
This could also be an early sign of dementia. He didn't used to be such a loose, stream of consciousness, speaker.
Or a sign of hydroxychloroquine overdose.
-
The National Republican Senatorial Committee just released a strategy memo that included "Don't defend Trump" - Trump campaign lashes out over 'Don't defend Trump' memo (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/27/trump-campaign-china-strategy-memo-213958).
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
It seems to me that it would be very reasonable for the government to require everyone to wear masks whenever in public indoor spaces. That simple & reasonable requirement hasn't happened and it appears that there would be a large public resistance to it, which I can't understand given the current numbers.
We are seeing protesters carrying weapons, which should be met with the National Guard being called in. Governors seem hesitant since these "fine people" are also carrying Trump signs. They appear to be shielded by the Unimpeachable One's ability to say FU to everyone in his path. I'm curious what the response will be after there is a trigger pulled?
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
I live in Michigan and none of this is true. Check your sources.
-
I see I was wrong. I was researching CSAs and read it on a CSA website. I researched it further and it looks like Garden Centers were opened up April 24 in Michigan. Question for you though. Whether or not you think it is necessary, I am under the impression that Michigan's lock down is quite a bit harsher than those in surrounding states. Would you agree this is true? Do you think the independents in Michigan and the blue collar workers who changed parties and voted for Trump think it's true?
Michigan is an important state for the Democrats to win.
In any state, there is a point though were people could be less upset with "stupid Trump" tweets than with what they see as unreasonable lockdowns. I personally am OK with how Ohio is handling things. My husband is not. Everyone draws the line somewhere and not everyone who thinks we've gone to far is openly carrying weapons and protesting without a mask (or even agrees with those tactics)
-
I see I was wrong. I was researching CSAs and read it on a CSA website. I researched it further and it looks like Garden Centers were opened up April 24 in Michigan. Question for you though. Whether or not you think it is necessary, I am under the impression that Michigan's lock down is quite a bit harsher than those in surrounding states. Would you agree this is true? Do you think the independents in Michigan and the blue collar workers who changed parties and voted for Trump think it's true?
Michigan is an important state for the Democrats to win.
In any state, there is a point though were people could be less upset with "stupid Trump" tweets than with what they see as unreasonable lockdowns. I personally am OK with how Ohio is handling things. My husband is not. Everyone draws the line somewhere and not everyone who thinks we've gone to far is openly carrying weapons and protesting without a mask (or even agrees with those tactics)
Given how hard we were hit, there's generally broad support for the governor's actions. We have the third highest death count and highest death rate per positive cases in the entire USA. Without the stay home order, our case and death counts would look even worse.
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
All of the Michigan orders came within ~24 hours of the Ohio orders. Not sure why you think Ohio has been locked down longer.
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
All of the Michigan orders came within ~24 hours of the Ohio orders. Not sure why you think Ohio has been locked down longer.
Right, and Michigan got hit a lot harder than Ohio. The restrictions were initially a lot less onerous, but so few people were staying home that it quickly became apparent that heavier restrictions were needed. My husband works in retail. Until the “Stay Home, Stay Safe” order was enacted and his store was required to close its storefronts (while remaining open for online/telephone sales), the in-store sale numbers were on par with Black Friday for several days straight. In a pandemic. In Wayne County, which has been a major US epicenter. The in-state travel restriction was to protect rural and less well-equipped areas from having to deal with an influx of people from my area who might have brought the virus with them.
Even during the heaviest restrictions, people could still travel to work if they weren’t able to work at home and their workplace hadn’t closed, grocery shop, fill their gas tanks, shop at hardware stores (and buy garden supplies there) and pet supply stores, pick up carry-out orders from restaurants, drop off things at each other’s homes (e.g., the various groceries I dropped off at my parents’ home), and visit local parks. We weren’t locked in our homes.
-
Michigan orders became more restrictive because no one was listening to them and taking them seriously. Every business decided they qualified as essential, and every aspect of an "essential" business was deemed essential by extension and people were taking advantage of that. For example home depot was considered essential, so everything they did was considered essential even though most of it was clearly not, so people were going to home depot and buying non essential things just to get out of the house and have something do. They were buying furniture, paint, garden supplies, etc instead of actual essential stuff to keep their houses running. And people were going to walmart and browsing for tvs and kids toys. This resulted in more clarification from the governor over what is essential and many stores were ordered to shut down non-essential parts of their business.
I don't necessarily agree that garden centers are "non-essential" in the several week period before planting season, but they were closed off anyway. They have since been reopened though.
Also I'm getting kind of annoyed with people throwing the word quarantine around all the time. You are allowed to leave your house and go for walks or bike rides, you are allowed to go to the grocery store, you can order takeout from any restaurant, you can go to home depot, or walmart, etc. Yeah movie theaters and barber shops are shut down, and you aren't supposed to gather in groups, but you are not fucking quarantined.
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
All of the Michigan orders came within ~24 hours of the Ohio orders. Not sure why you think Ohio has been locked down longer.
Maybe https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/did-ohio-get-it-right-early-intervention-preparation-for-pandemic-may-pay-off/ar-BB12oQtl
Additionally I have March 23rd for Michigan and March 21 for Ohio but whatever. Even if it is less than 24 hours it is still earlier. But this is besides the point. You guys are nit picking details. My point is Coronovirus lockdowns approval rating do seem to run on party lines. Michigan has a lot of out of work blue collar workers who might not agree with them.
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
All of the Michigan orders came within ~24 hours of the Ohio orders. Not sure why you think Ohio has been locked down longer.
Maybe https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/did-ohio-get-it-right-early-intervention-preparation-for-pandemic-may-pay-off/ar-BB12oQtl
Additionally I have March 23rd for Michigan and March 21 for Ohio but whatever. Even if it is less than 24 hours it is still earlier. But this is besides the point. You guys are nit picking details. My point is Coronovirus lockdowns approval rating do seem to run on party lines. Michigan has a lot of out of work blue collar workers who might not agree with them.
Not the ones that I know, here in metro Detroit. People want to know that their employers will protect them before they go back to work. We all see what is happening in the meatpacking plants.
Otherwise,
Just 36 percent of Michigan respondents said they approve of Trump's response, compared with 63 percent who said the same of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D).
(Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495504-governors-in-all-50-states-get-better-marks-than-trump-for-covid (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495504-governors-in-all-50-states-get-better-marks-than-trump-for-covid)
Also note that the armed toddler tantrums at the state capitol have been organized in part by out of state groups, such as the Proud Boys. These are not “very good people,” as Trump claims. They are using a global pandemic to further their own sick goals.https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/michigan-gunmen-statehouse-coronavirus-protests-trump-working-people-a9494336.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/michigan-gunmen-statehouse-coronavirus-protests-trump-working-people-a9494336.html)
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
All of the Michigan orders came within ~24 hours of the Ohio orders. Not sure why you think Ohio has been locked down longer.
Maybe https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/did-ohio-get-it-right-early-intervention-preparation-for-pandemic-may-pay-off/ar-BB12oQtl
Additionally I have March 23rd for Michigan and March 21 for Ohio but whatever. Even if it is less than 24 hours it is still earlier. But this is besides the point. You guys are nit picking details. My point is Coronovirus lockdowns approval rating do seem to run on party lines. Michigan has a lot of out of work blue collar workers who might not agree with them.
SKP:
"Even if it is less than 24 hours it is still earlier."
Also SKP:
"You guys are nit picking details."
*eyeroll*
-
The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me.
Prohibiting Michiganders from traveling to their rural vacation homes is an unconstitutional overreach.
This treatment of this class of Michiganders is unreasonable because it is not substantially related to the achievement of Michigan's objective of reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Thus this prohibition is a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
-
The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me.
Prohibiting Michiganders from traveling to their rural vacation homes is an unconstitutional overreach.
This treatment of this class of Michiganders is unreasonable because it is not substantially related to the achievement of Michigan's objective of reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Thus this prohibition is a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
So far, a court ruling begs to differ. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate)
-
re: Michigan vs. Ohio - even though we essentially closed within 24 hours of each other, I wonder if we had more notice of closing in Ohio? And therefor had slightly less panic buying in the few days leading up to the closures?
For instance, even though March 13 was the last day of instruction for both my husband and kiddos - they announced it advance. My husband had a weeks' notice and our school announced on the 10th that parents should prepare for closing in the coming days (and then officially announced it a couple of days later).
It looks like Whitmer announced on the 13th that schools would be closed starting immediately.
We did grocery/pharmacy stock ups and library trips in the week before everything officially shut down because my DH's university announced it would be closing. We were able to avoid the stores for a solid two weeks.
I think there are likely other things at play than closure dates (Whitmer initiated shut downs when there were only 12 cases in the state - so good on her) but I wonder if the Ohio schools being ahead of the curve (with guidance from Acton and DeWine) may have helped us a bit.
-
I'm starting to wonder if coronavirus might be the end of the Democrats. Today, I was thinking of Michigan because I read that you can't even get vegetables to plant your vegetable garden. Even the garden centers are locked down. The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me. At least in Ohio which has been locked down longer but not as aggressively, we can get a vegetable garden in. I think most people are OK with reasonable restrictions.
All of the Michigan orders came within ~24 hours of the Ohio orders. Not sure why you think Ohio has been locked down longer.
Maybe https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/did-ohio-get-it-right-early-intervention-preparation-for-pandemic-may-pay-off/ar-BB12oQtl
Additionally I have March 23rd for Michigan and March 21 for Ohio but whatever. Even if it is less than 24 hours it is still earlier. But this is besides the point. You guys are nit picking details. My point is Coronovirus lockdowns approval rating do seem to run on party lines. Michigan has a lot of out of work blue collar workers who might not agree with them.
As Kris noted, you seem to be the one picking nits. And nothing in your article, btw, shows anything about March 21st.
https://www.businessinsider.com/michiganders-approve-of-whitmer-on-coronavirus-despite-protests-poll-2020-4
And as OtherJen noted, Michiganders overwhelmingly approve of Michigan's orders.
-
@skp We don't honestly know. Republican governors--like DeWine--have responded very well to the crisis. It sounds as though you do not believe Whitmer has. But your consistent mention of the out-of-work blue collar workers implies you think they'll blame Whitmer for shutting the state down, rather than blame Trump for the poor national economy that makes it hard to find work because there's very little demand for new automobiles..
-
The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me.
Prohibiting Michiganders from traveling to their rural vacation homes is an unconstitutional overreach.
This treatment of this class of Michiganders is unreasonable because it is not substantially related to the achievement of Michigan's objective of reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Thus this prohibition is a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
So far, a court ruling begs to differ. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate)
Speaking as someone who lives in an area with a lot of holiday and vacation homes, albeit not in Michigan, it has been mainly holiday home owners who have been bringing the virus into the county and taking up the beds in the hospital.
And, really, anyone who thinks people who own holiday homes are the victims in this global pandemic is barking up the wrong tree in the wrong forest.
-
@skp We don't honestly know. Republican governors--like DeWine--have responded very well to the crisis. It sounds as though you do not believe Whitmer has. But your consistent mention of the out-of-work blue collar workers implies you think they'll blame Whitmer for shutting the state down, rather than blame Trump for the poor national economy that makes it hard to find work because there's very little demand for new automobiles..
Here's the perspective from the UAW: UAW not comfortable resuming auto manufacturing in early May (https://www.abc12.com/content/news/UAW-not-comfortable-resuming-auto-manufacturing-in-early-May-569902281.html)
The workers haven't missed that many of their coworkers in the Big 3 plants have become sick and several have died. https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2020/04/17/uaw-gm-tech-center-worker-dies-coronavirus/5154936002/ (https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2020/04/17/uaw-gm-tech-center-worker-dies-coronavirus/5154936002/)
-
The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me.
Prohibiting Michiganders from traveling to their rural vacation homes is an unconstitutional overreach.
This treatment of this class of Michiganders is unreasonable because it is not substantially related to the achievement of Michigan's objective of reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Thus this prohibition is a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
So far, a court ruling begs to differ. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate)
Speaking as someone who lives in an area with a lot of holiday and vacation homes, albeit not in Michigan, it has been mainly holiday home owners who have been bringing the virus into the county and taking up the beds in the hospital.
And, really, anyone who thinks people who own holiday homes are the victims in this global pandemic is barking up the wrong tree in the wrong forest.
This. Good lord.
-
@skp We don't honestly know. Republican governors--like DeWine--have responded very well to the crisis. It sounds as though you do not believe Whitmer has. But your consistent mention of the out-of-work blue collar workers implies you think they'll blame Whitmer for shutting the state down, rather than blame Trump for the poor national economy that makes it hard to find work because there's very little demand for new automobiles..
The upset folks in Michigan are protesting against Whitmer, not the Director of Public Health, a man.
The upset folks in Ohio are protesting against Dr. Amy Acton (Director of Public Health), showing up outside her home this past weekend and not DeWine (the governor), a man.
Hmmm.
-
The upset folks in Michigan are protesting against Whitmer, not the Director of Public Health, a man.
The upset folks in Ohio are protesting against Dr. Amy Acton (Director of Public Health), showing up outside her home this past weekend and not DeWine (the governor), a man.
Hmmm.
For what it's worth, here in Wisconsin they're almost entirely raging against Governor Evers, a man, rather than the DHS Secretary Andrea Palm. Not sure how big the've been elsewhere but the protests here have been a pretty small (but vocal) minority, the largest one drew maybe 1,500 people I believe.
-
The upset folks in Michigan are protesting against Whitmer, not the Director of Public Health, a man.
The upset folks in Ohio are protesting against Dr. Amy Acton (Director of Public Health), showing up outside her home this past weekend and not DeWine (the governor), a man.
Hmmm.
For what it's worth, here in Wisconsin they're almost entirely raging against Governor Evers, a man, rather than the DHS Secretary Andrea Palm. Not sure how big the've been elsewhere but the protests here have been a pretty small (but vocal) minority, the largest one drew maybe 1,500 people I believe.
I don't think we've had one larger than that. Most of the state thinks they're behaving terribly, like toddlers with long guns.
-
The lock down in Michigan due to coronavirus seems overly aggressive to me.
Prohibiting Michiganders from traveling to their rural vacation homes is an unconstitutional overreach.
This treatment of this class of Michiganders is unreasonable because it is not substantially related to the achievement of Michigan's objective of reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Thus this prohibition is a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
So far, a court ruling begs to differ. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495416-michigan-court-rules-governors-stay-at-home-order-does-not-violate)
On or about 22 or 24 April Whitmer's overreaching stay-at-home order was modified to allow travel to and from residences in Michigan including vacation homes.
I'm not sure of exactly what was done that led Whitmer to modify her order.
To uphold the stay-at-home order's other measures the court relied on language that typifies permissible exercise of the police power such as "public crisis," "consistent with the law," and "subject to reasonable regulation by the state."
-
@John Galt incarnate! LOL at your interpretation of Holiday Home owners being a protected class of citizens as defined in the 1868 amendment, the purpose of which appears to be the granting of citizenship to slaves following the civil war.
Sounds a lot like the equivalence of "well regulated militia" to disturbed teenagers carrying military machine guns into primary schools.
I would normally point out that I'm just joking, but your Supreme Court disagrees with me.
The US Constitution and its amendments are a lot like the bible. Written in a time period for the time period. Probably needs a refresh.
-
The US Constitution and its amendments are a lot like the bible. Written in a time period for the time period. Probably needs a refresh.
You radical. Next you'll be telling me that women should have rights in the constitution.
-
The US Constitution and its amendments are a lot like the bible. Written in a time period for the time period. Probably needs a refresh.
You radical. Next you'll be telling me that women should have rights in the constitution.
Corporations are people but women are not, right?
-
The US Constitution and its amendments are a lot like the bible. Written in a time period for the time period. Probably needs a refresh.
You radical. Next you'll be telling me that women should have rights in the constitution.
Corporations are people but women are not, right?
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
Many gun laws came about because black people were arming themselves back in the 1960s.
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
Many gun laws came about because black people were arming themselves back in the 1960s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJqfNroFp8U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJqfNroFp8U)
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
Many gun laws came about because black people were arming themselves back in the 1960s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJqfNroFp8U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJqfNroFp8U)
ROFLMAO.
-
One of the x-factors that hasn't really been talked about at length as of yet, and is probably highly relevant to the 2020 elections:
In the US, the media has cast stances on reopening as a matter of Red vs. Blue, with Republicans/Trump pushing more aggressively to reopen and Democrats falling more on the side of keeping things locked down to get the virus under control. This may be missing something among voters:
The demographic most at risk from failing control the virus(older voters) are a traditionally right-leaning demographic, while those to whom it presents minimal risk(young voters) are left-leaning. The parties' respective stances on how much to emphasize economic risk vs. public health risk runs counter to these groups' normal political allegiances.
Already there is some evidence that Older voters are trending more towards Biden than they did toward Clinton in 2016, and younger voters(to a much smaller extent) toward Trump. Will be interesting to see if/how this persists as this crisis continues to unfold - and also particularly important when it comes to certain key states that have demographics that could exaggerate the effects of this kind of shift.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/us/politics/trump-older-voters-2020.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/upshot/polls-biden-trump-election.html
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
Doubt you'll find much opposition to this nowadays, or lawmakers rushing to change the law because of this.
Armed citizens escort lawmaker into Michigan State Capitol (https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/stories/armed-citizens-escort-lawmaker-into-michigan-state-capitol,14339)
Anthony and other lawmakers met this morning for an appropriations committee meeting. The scene was quiet. Anthony’s cadre of Second Amendment advocates had no trouble entering the building. They left to quietly stand on the front steps after Anthony made it inside an elevator.
“We want to change the narrative, first of all. We want people to understand that people of color can come out here with guns just the same as anybody else can,” said Michael Lynn Jr., a black Lansing firefighter and community activist who helped organize Anthony’s security detail.
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
Doubt you'll find much opposition to this nowadays, or lawmakers rushing to change the law because of this.
Armed citizens escort lawmaker into Michigan State Capitol (https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/stories/armed-citizens-escort-lawmaker-into-michigan-state-capitol,14339)
Anthony and other lawmakers met this morning for an appropriations committee meeting. The scene was quiet. Anthony’s cadre of Second Amendment advocates had no trouble entering the building. They left to quietly stand on the front steps after Anthony made it inside an elevator.
“We want to change the narrative, first of all. We want people to understand that people of color can come out here with guns just the same as anybody else can,” said Michael Lynn Jr., a black Lansing firefighter and community activist who helped organize Anthony’s security detail.
I am grateful that these men stepped up to protect her. I hate that it is necessary at all. And I sincerely hope that nothing happens to these men, as we've all seen that the shooting of even unarmed black men in this country is all too easily justified by law enforcement.
-
The government can tell me what I can and can't do with my own uterus but apparently telling men to stay home during a global pandemic is several bridges too far.
Well, only one of those affects old white dudes so...
Ding ding ding, we have a winner!
I know exactly what would have happened if all those armed Ted Nugent cosplayers who stormed my state's capitol last week were a few shades darker. White privilege in action.
Doubt you'll find much opposition to this nowadays, or lawmakers rushing to change the law because of this.
Armed citizens escort lawmaker into Michigan State Capitol (https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/stories/armed-citizens-escort-lawmaker-into-michigan-state-capitol,14339)
Anthony and other lawmakers met this morning for an appropriations committee meeting. The scene was quiet. Anthony’s cadre of Second Amendment advocates had no trouble entering the building. They left to quietly stand on the front steps after Anthony made it inside an elevator.
“We want to change the narrative, first of all. We want people to understand that people of color can come out here with guns just the same as anybody else can,” said Michael Lynn Jr., a black Lansing firefighter and community activist who helped organize Anthony’s security detail.
I am grateful that these men stepped up to protect her. I hate that it is necessary at all. And I sincerely hope that nothing happens to these men, as we've all seen that the shooting of even unarmed black men in this country is all too easily justified by law enforcement.
+1. The fact that these particular black men were able to do something in this instance that white men can do every day of the week is notable for exactly how rare it is. We all know those men were taking much more risk than any of the white men protesting with guns were. Just because they survived it this time doesn't mean anything has actually changed.