All of this news is coming out at the same time. Now Biden is saying herd immunity will be reached by this summer. Trump was criticized for using the term "Herd Immunity"
Governor Newsom To Lift All Stay At Home Orders In Cali
- Thread starter shufan1993
- Start date
You are kidding right? Do you really believe that or are you having fun?
The data part is accurate.
I think the restrictions and removal is certain restrictions were both reasonable based on the trends.
No it’s called redefining the truth, same as Fulton county Atlanta. The real numbers never lie problem is the real numbers can be manipulated same as the words. Fact is we could go back and forth forever but when you sit back in your chair and think about it you know exactly what’s happening. We all want to believe it’s magic but the bunny rabbit was always in the hat. Joe is promising 1 million people per day for 100 days, Prior administration has been averaging 1.3. Did you notice the conversation on the media is now about dogs and ice cream soon hot dogs and beers. If you close your eyes everything will be OK crowd is back. It’s magic! Can we at least agree it looks suspicious so we can least maintain some credibility.
Last edited:
Yes I have seen the media now pushing for things to open up. Especially on CNN.
Am I nuts for saying the Democratic governors took advantage of the pandemic and conspired to shut down the economies to take advantage of the opportunity to get Trump out of office?
Now Joseph Robinette Biden is in office and it appears things are slowly opening up. Is this not true?
Am I nuts for saying the Democratic governors took advantage of the pandemic and conspired to shut down the economies to take advantage of the opportunity to get Trump out of office?
Now Joseph Robinette Biden is in office and it appears things are slowly opening up. Is this not true?
Deaths have yet to go down. Cases are still higher than when restrictions were put in. You can clearly argue both sides depending your view. I'm thrilled to see them loosen restrictions, but if they wanted to reverse the decision and leave the restricitions, it's very easily justified.
I offered to discuss your concerns about Fulton county in the other thread. Your post is about people being manipulated by news and then posting about an unsupported conspiracy theory that was pushed by a few media outlets seems a little ironic.
I don't disagree, but what do you think I have manipulated or misrepresented in this thread?
Nationally, the test positivity rate is the lowest it has been in over two months. The umber of people currently hospitalized is the lowest it has been on over a month. This is happening just as we are ramping up vaccinations. Those are all very positive signs.
Even if we all agreed that the motivation to lockdown was political, why would people be arguing against reducing restrictions when we are clearly on the right path.
I think you have to get over it. It's now just part of life. What was once bad is now good and vice versa. Look at Bezos, the richest man in the country leading the charge for mail in voting, yet he won't let his company do mail in voting for unionization because of the extremely high risk of fraud. As that story grows it's only going to infuriate those who believe the election was stolen.
Deaths lag behind positivity rate, cases and hospitalizations.
That has been the case since the beginning of this.
I am sure the media and politicians could twist things. I am just giving you my view here.
My view is that the metrics are showing favorable trends just as we are also vaccinating more than a million people per day. That is exactly when I would hope we would start to reduce restrictions.
You cannot agree it looks suspicious? You avoided answering that simple meeting of the minds question. We all want the same thing here it’s just an insult to intelligent thought to suggest it’s not political. So do we agree it looks suspicious and go about our day?
They want to make it harder for people to vote because they know the likely outcome if it's easy.
Kind of like the 2020 mail in voting.
Sure, if you don't try to look at the data and understand the fact pattern... then it can look suspicious.
When you dig in, you realize it's probably not that suspicious. Kind of like how you are still talking about Fulton county.
Bluntly, I find a claim that California enforced stay at home orders a month after the election, on December 5th to make Trump look bad as completely absurd. The election was over, Trump was on his way out. As I showed in the chart in this thread, California issued stay at home orders right before the massive uptick in cases and removed them just after the decline. Isn't that the ideal situation?
I find that argument that they are reopening because of political pressure to at least be a little compelling since CA hospitals still appear fairly full, but like I said... point to a spot on that chart where you would add and then remove restrictions (assuming you had to) and if you provide an honest response like SHUHoopsFan did, you will probably end up very close to what California actually did.
The problem is there's no standards at the top. It's all about let's play the game by one set of rules today and a different set of rules tomorrow because that's what fits me best.
Nope, that's exactly what happened. They took a real issue, blew it out of proportion and realized it was a golden opportunity to hurt Trump, get more people on the government rolls and get bailout money for their poorly run states. A Democrat's dream come true.
So what do you take from this graph other than the lag and I presume the dark winter?Sure. I'll include case increase as well so you can see the lag between case increases leading to the increase in deaths
That regardless of politics or our perceived political motivation... The timing of the additional restrictions placed on 12/5 and removing some restrictions on 1/25 actually looks pretty reasonable.
It's easy to see why people would buy into the theory that some Democratic governors tanked to make Trump's economy look bad. They were all desperate to get him out. Cuomo was among the most draconian when it came to restrictions (sans nursing homes), suddenly is clamoring for opening businesses, shortly after the election.
The restrictions started before Trump really had a position on lockdowns. Trump still had an opportunity to play the pandemic to his favor by trying to unite the country against the enemy that caused the pandemic (China) but he didn't. He gambled that this would be a blue state issue and he lost that bet and ultimately the election because it it.
Cuomo just said he isn't considering indoor dining yet. It's not like they are all pretending like Covid is better now. He isn't clamoring for businesses to reopen because of the change in the administration. We just happen to be in a moment where things are improving AND we are administering the vaccine, and so many countries also locked down. None of that had anything to do with Trump.
The fact politicians "play the pandemic" is down right disgusting and should be impeachable.
We would fortunately have no more politicians if that were the case.
Everyone played it. It would have been interesting if Trump came out in support of lockdowns. We would probably have had democratic governors speaking out against them... A theory I would have liked to test, but as it stands I agreed with trying to limit the spread of the virus and agreed with the politicians who ended up on that side of the argument. I would have been on that same side had the republicans been there.
Really? Doesn't Florida have a very similar curve as California? I'm pretty sure they went about it 2 completely different ways.
Correct. They handled it differently, but each still were still playing the party line.
Desantis fired a whistleblower, raided her home and blocked helath experts from discussing the pandemic running up to the election. He downplayed the risk, and wouldn’t let cities in the state create their own Covid restrictions. Etc... He also played politics with this. Just different than Dems did.
Again I think playing politics with a pandemic is criminal.
I can’t say Newsoms numbers went down because of a stay at home order when Florida has the same curve withour going Newsoms route. Because of that I’m not so sure your theory is accurate.
Last edited:
And they can read polls. Trump for all his flaws (and I'm no supporter) was well on his way to a fairly smooth reelection at the beginning of last year. I recall seeing a poll that his popularity and approval rating was at its highest early last year when the D's were beating each other up during the primary debates and the economy had plenty of positive things going for it. Cue COVID, the D power-brokers getting together to coalesce around a traditional D candidate that people know and (at least some) generally like compared to other candidates running, get Bernie out of the picture because some of his more controversial views might scare folks from voting from him (even over Trump), and you go from there.
Politicians care about getting power and staying in power, period. Not all. But most. They will leverage anything to their advantage and rationalize it after the fact somehow.
My firm has 5 offices in Florida. They've generally been open even though some folks are working from home. Whatever the motivation was from Gov. Desantis, Florida isn't any worse off than anywhere else, particularly compared to places like NY with less people and a similar elderly population. And, unlike NY, Florida's economy hasn't been utterly destroyed.
Like how Murphy opened up amusement parks in the summer. Remember last spring when President Trump said the virus would slow and maybe come to a stop by last summer.
And it did slow although did not come to a stop.
Maybe it was other strains.
But in all seriousness many lives were saved by mail in votes.
Different challenges in each state without a doubt. What makes sense in California might not make sense in Florida (or NJ, NY.. etc) just saying their responses were both based on politics.
Well... yes? States are different.
Said from the beginning that there should have been standard recommended restrictions for when an area hit certain metrics across the country. CA saw the virus spreading in densely populated areas which pushed their hospital capacity. Florida has luckily not had that same type of risk.
Tampa area may be saved that small alottment of super bowl tickets may end up in local hands vs having fans from two other markets come
Yes, I too remember from the beginning. I also remember when FL did at one point have an uptick in CASES. So-Glad you reminded us where the auditor has been since the beginning .... and so you think federal government should dictate when/where/why/etc?
This is what I said in July.
Not sure what your obsession is with me being an auditor. I think I mentioned it once in a relevant discussion? While I disagree with people here from time to time, I try to discuss things in good faith. Just comes off pretty childish honestly.
So then your theory would have to take into effect the different challenges in each state. You can't just say Newsom was right and DeSantis is wrong as both went about things completely different.
I'm not basing this on anything scientific, just common sense, but I think you saw a spike at Thanksgiving and Christmas, then a decline after because of get togethers. I worry Superbowl parties may cause another spike up. All 3 instances are when people are with others they are comfortable with and let their guard down. Go to work, the store, etc most people are very aware of their surroundings. Just my 2 cents, stay at home orders or get your ass back to work orders aren't impacting it very much.
Now you’re getting it, it’s called federalism and should be applied to almost all issues. I hope you remember this when the elitist federal government tries to ram all sorts of things down our throats.
fwiw, that's not what I meant. I said they were both played politics in their responses.
I don't think that is unfair. I do think the pandemic kind of manages itself in some ways. When things start to heat up in a community, that community starts to take it more seriously. Sometimes the community can manage that risk on their own with very limited restrictions like in Florida or it gets out of hand and hospitals start to fill up quickly like in parts of California and that's when government needs to act.
You and I have always agreed on that premise. Where we disagree is the proportion of federal involvement.
