2020 US Election (Part Two)

[onejayhawk]

cumulative cases over time would drop if there were less new cases

Not in this universe.

but it continues on at exactly the same rate ever since mid-March, meaning nothing has slowed down at all.

Not that either. The curve flattened significantly at the right extreme, meaning the rate has slowed.

I can explain these things to you if you're not here in bad faith, but I can't understand them for you.

Don't bother. You have not even read your own chart correctly.

And when it resurfaces in the fall?

We already know that the hospitals will not be overwhelmed. For symptomatic persons under age 50, survival is 99.5%.

It's time to start putting lives back together.

J

 

[cardgame]

you mean the last two days on the chart? what happened to 'it started last month'? bad faith detected

 

[onejayhawk]

you mean the last two days on the chart? what happened to 'it started last month'?

Yes, I mean the last few days of the chart. Bear in mind that increased test has shown increased asymptomatic cases, so not everything is equal. New hospital cases is much more reliable.

Define "it". We started reopening things six weeks ago in Georgia, four weeks ago in several other states.

bad faith detected

Not really. You just did sloppy work. I'll give a pass this time, but you need to step up both your sources and your understanding of what they say.

J

 

[cardgame]

For some reason you assumed I have the intelligence of a third grader. Cumulative cases will not drop because they are cumulative. This is so basic I can't believe you thought you knew something I didn't. What was meant, what was obvious to me, was that the graph showing more and more cumulative cases over time would start to decline and level off.

 

[Sommerswerd]

We started reopening things six weeks ago in Georgia, four weeks ago in several other states.

I thought you were in Texas

Red states started opening early because they are red states, not because it was medically or scientifically sound to do so.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Who else is digging Subcomandante Biden's new look?

 

[Berzerker]

Warren was Bernie's main competition for people left of center and she was the only one to stay in the race for Super Tuesday while Biden's competition for the center and right dropped. Bernie would have wanted her to drop and endorse him while the Biden forces wanted her to hang around and divide the left.

 

[caketastydelish]

A lot of you are heavily criticizing Biden. And there are valid criticisms to be made. But those of you who are in America (and can legally vote) I hope you all vote for him in November. Honestly, I kind of hate both candidates on the ballot (that have any legit chance of winning) but one is not as bad as the other. Biden is at least a moderate (in comparison to Trump, anyway) who will be less harmful to the country. "protest vote" for a third party or independent, or not voting at all, is not going to help here. Try to be pragmatic, people. You can vote for someone without giving them a free pass for things they've done that are wrong.

 

[Socrates99]

Hypothetically speaking let's pretend McCain had won in 2008. Let's say that over the course of his presidency he ramped up oil production in the US making the country a net exporter, he took us from two wars to 7, he made Bush's tax cuts permanent, pushed an outsourcing trade deal with China, gave us a rightwing healthcare plan and started mass deportations. Does anybody think he could've done all that without Democrat voters screaming bloody murder?

Obama could. Obama and Clinton proved that just picking a lesser evil doesn't really give us less evil. It just makes it more palatable. Personally I'd rather see 4 more years of outrage over Trump than for people to go to sleep because we have an adult for president again.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Hypothetically speaking let's pretend McCain had won in 2008. Let's say that over the course of his presidency he ramped up oil production in the US making the country a net exporter, he took us from two wars to 7, he made Bush's tax cuts permanent, pushed an outsourcing trade deal with China, gave us a rightwing healthcare plan and started mass deportations. Does anybody think he could've done all that without Democrat voters screaming bloody murder?

Obama could. Obama and Clinton proved that just picking a lesser evil doesn't really give us less evil. It just makes it more palatable. Personally I'd rather see 4 more years of outrage over Trump than for people to go to sleep because we have an adult for president again.

4 years of Trump, a stacked Supreme Court, and gerrymandering to ensure 8 years of Pence, Pompeo or Ivanka, whichever runs.

 

[Gorbles]

We already know that the hospitals will not be overwhelmed. For symptomatic persons under age 50, survival is 99.5%.

Speaking of sloppy work, it's very funny to see you criticise others for it and then come out with this as a response to rah's entirely fair question of what happens later in the year.

Not only are you saying that an average of 0.5% deaths per population is acceptable for that (incredibly large) demographic, you're omitting the morality rates for people older than 50, which according to available evidence spikes dramatically (UK source, but I'm sure there are other corroborating articles out there, plus, more this alone is more than anything you've provided for your optimistic claims thus far).

You talk about putting lives back together. That's not what this virus does. What the government (any government) should do is pivot to putting in measures that allow social distancing, working from home, relief packages, etc, to become a part of a new normal (when necessary. Nobody's saying everyone has to social distance until the end of time). In a number of countries various governments' responses to the pandemic has shown how easily logistical flaws become massively exacerbated (the US and UK being key examples with regards to social security, job security, and care for the elderly, alongside regular healthcare). We can't, and shouldn't, just go back to how things were before the lockdown(s).

 

[Imaus]

4 years of Trump, a stacked Supreme Court, and gerrymandering to ensure 8 years of Pence, Pompeo or Ivanka, whichever runs.

Hypothetically speaking let's pretend McCain had won in 2008. Let's say that over the course of his presidency he ramped up oil production in the US making the country a net exporter, he took us from two wars to 7, he made Bush's tax cuts permanent, pushed an outsourcing trade deal with China, gave us a rightwing healthcare plan and started mass deportations. Does anybody think he could've done all that without Democrat voters screaming bloody murder?

Obama could. Obama and Clinton proved that just picking a lesser evil doesn't really give us less evil. It just makes it more palatable. Personally I'd rather see 4 more years of outrage over Trump than for people to go to sleep because we have an adult for president again.

Democrats screaming bloody murder is useless.

What we need to do is wrangle power away from the Republicans in as many offices as possible. Are we banking on the Republicans using the honor system to not stack the government their way for generations? Yea, I'd rather not spend four years watching them run wild anymore, thanks.

 

[rah]

Actually, either side will try to stack the government their way every chance they get. The question is which side do you want to see doing the stacking.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Actually, either side will try to stack the government their way every chance they get. The question is which side do you want to see doing the stacking.

Not entirely true.
Obama for example went out of his way to nominate respectable, eminently qualified middle-of-the-roaders to the Supreme Court in the hope that they might be acceptable. The Republicans squealed at them as loudly as they would if he'd suggested militant extremists.

 

[Imaus]

Actually, either side will try to stack the government their way every chance they get. The question is which side do you want to see doing the stacking.[/QUOTE

Yea, that's the point. And I'll rather see Democrats clean house than Republicans.

 

[rah]

Not entirely true.
Obama for example went out of his way to nominate respectable, eminently qualified middle-of-the-roaders to the Supreme Court in the hope that they might be acceptable. The Republicans squealed at them as loudly as they would if he'd suggested militant extremists.

I live in Illinois and the Dems have gerrymandered the state so they have total control. No different then the Repugs in neighbor states. To think one side has the moral high ground in this regard is just plain silly.
A couple of exceptions my Obama don't disprove the general rule.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I live in Illinois and the Dems have gerrymandered the state so they have total control. No different then the Repugs in neighbor states. To think one side has the moral high ground in this regard is just plain silly.
A couple of exceptions my Obama don't disprove the general rule.

Not claiming the Democrats are perfect but one side does have the moral low ground and has deliberately positioned themselves there.

 

[rah]

Gerrymandering is unacceptable regardless of who's doing it.

 

[Samson]

Gerrymandering is unacceptable regardless of who's doing it.

So if one side is doing it unapologetically, and it is within the letter of the law, should the other side not follow suit and therefore be resigned to never again winning? I compare this to the "rolling on the floor like you have been shot" in football, sure it degrades the game as a spectacle but when others are doing it you kind of have to if you want to compete.

 

[rah]

should the other side not follow suit

I love your judgement on assuming who did it first. It's bad regardless, end of discussion.