President Trump

[It will be fine]

Containing or controlling the effects of the virus of our population has to do a lot with the land mass and the density of each countries major cities. New Zealand and Australia are fairly large but are isolated land masses, South Korea and Vietnam are small than the state of Ohio. I presume that the New York City population by itself is larger that New Zealand's, that is an estimate that I will test on google search.

Nothing but excuses. I don’t buy it. America has been a unique failure in containing the virus compared to the rest of the world. Even countries that are going back up had cases drop for a while. America is the only country that was a failure from the start and never did anything.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Nothing but excuses. I don’t buy it. America has been a unique failure in containing the virus compared to the rest of the world. Even countries that are going back up had cases drop for a while. America is the only country that was a failure from the start and never did anything.

Nothing in your post is true.
Typical for you.

 

[newfie]

Nothing but excuses. I don’t buy it. America has been a unique failure in containing the virus compared to the rest of the world. Even countries that are going back up had cases drop for a while. America is the only country that was a failure from the start and never did anything.

your truthfulness has been in even bigger failure

 

[vantexan]

Containing or controlling the effects of the virus of our population has to do a lot with the land mass and the density of each countries major cities. New Zealand and Australia are fairly large but are isolated land masses, South Korea and Vietnam are small than the state of Ohio. I presume that the New York City population by itself is larger that New Zealand's, that is an estimate that I will test on google search.

New Zealand's total land area is about the same as Colorado's. Last I looked it's population was close to 5 million. To put that in perspective Great Britain is of similar size but has around 65 million people. Australia is roughly the size of the continental U.S. but has only about 24 million, less than Texas.

 

[vantexan]

A quick follow up..New York City by itself has a population of 18,804,000..New Zealand is set at 5,000,000.

South Korea is the size of Indiana.

Vietnam is the size of California.

That's New York's metro area which includes parts of New Jersey and Connecticut. The actual city population is a bit over 8 million.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

New Zealand's total land area is about the same as Colorado's. Last I looked it's population was close to 5 million. To put that in perspective Great Britain is of similar size but has around 65 million people. Australia is roughly the size of the continental U.S. but has only about 24 million, less than Texas.

Islands with strong immigration policies are the best they can use as examples...

They're not too bright.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Where epidemiology says you are.

You mean like we should believe what Dr. Fauci says to do?
Fauci was wrong more times than Trump! LOL

BTW ... epidemiology is the study (scientific, systematic, and data-driven) of the distribution (frequency, pattern) and determinants (causes, risk factors) of health-related states and events (not just diseases) in specified populations (neighborhood, school, city, state, country, global)

Epidemiology doesn't have enough data at this point to even weigh in on COVID-19.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

How do you explain the countries where it has been contained?

I Googled and look at several returned pages.
COVID-19 has not been contained except in island nations that cut off all trade and outsiders entering country.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Nothing but excuses. I don’t buy it. America has been a unique failure in containing the virus compared to the rest of the world. Even countries that are going back up had cases drop for a while. America is the only country that was a failure from the start and never did anything.

Probably because the US is doing large general lock downs and not focused on isolating symptomatic cases as the WHO recommended in the article I was referencing.

From Donald Laskin's report on covid response statistics:

"TrendMacro, my analytics firm, tallied the cumulative number of reported cases of Covid-19 in each state and the District of Columbia as a percentage of population, based on data from state and local health departments aggregated by the Covid Tracking Project. We then compared that with the timing and intensity of the lockdown in each jurisdiction. That is measured not by the mandates put in place by government officials, but rather by observing what people in each jurisdiction actually did, along with their baseline behavior before the lockdowns. This is captured in highly detailed anonymized cellphone tracking data provided by Google and others and tabulated by the University of Maryland’s Transportation Institute into a “Social Distancing Index.”
Measuring from the start of the year to each state’s point of maximum lockdown—which range from April 5 to April 18—it turns out that lockdowns correlated with a greater spread of the virus. States with longer, stricter lockdowns also had larger Covid outbreaks. The five places with the harshest lockdowns—the District of Columbia, New York, Michigan, New Jersey and Massachusetts—had the heaviest caseloads.
It could be that strict lockdowns were imposed as a response to already severe outbreaks. But the surprising negative correlation, while statistically weak, persists even when excluding states with the heaviest caseloads. And it makes no difference if the analysis includes other potential explanatory factors such as population density, age, ethnicity, prevalence of nursing homes, general health or temperature. The only factor that seems to make a demonstrable difference is the intensity of mass-transit use."


I was commenting on the apparent connection between lock downs and increased severity of outbreaks back in August. Boy, I should be charging millions for all of my brilliant insights, but you get to enjoy them for free.

Like you said, they've been claiming it since the beginning. Why should anyone change their mind in the face of what the media keeps telling them to believe?

Once the dust settles, and we root out all the fraud, then we'll see how things really went. I mean, we won't even get close to the 2 million dead that was projected. That's an obvious win right now. And they'll also be able to definitively prove that all the experts that everyone was listening to were completely wrong, and that lock downs were completely unnecessary at best, and likely a terrible, deadly decision.

But feel free to keep pushing the extremely ridiculous narrative. It will help those who aren't completely deranged to see that they are being lied to. Even the citizens of the lefties' darling Germany are fed up and flooding the streets to protest their lock down. I guess they'll spike again because they are protesting for their freedom, and not some communist agenda issue. Lol!

I got no problem calling out bad decisions. I could pull out the facts about the China Town festivals of the democrats, or the decision of democratic leaders to shuffle actively infected people off to elder care facilities. And I know Trump would, and has, pointed out that he shut down travel from China, then Europe.

But let's be real, if Trump's administration had come up with a comprehensive plan, would the Democrat states have followed it? The difference between pro-big government liberals, and anti-big government conservatives is that big government types actually believe the President should dictate from the oval office, if it's their president. They criticize everything the President does if it's not their president, even if Orange Man changes his mind and does something they agree with, he's still a failure. Anti-big government types believe each state should have their own emergency plans and systems in place. The Federal Government should only step in where and when needed, so they see this as a failure at the state level.

Lack of stockpiled medical equipment, lack of testing, inadequate tracing... all red herrings. I believe we could have potentially minimized the death toll further if we had focused our resources as I explained in a previous post. Instead, almost all states blew their resources chasing their tails in an attempt to leverage excessive government overreach into the lives of the citizenry. Aside from that, I am unconvinced that any plan would have done much to change the outcome. The virus spread regardless of, and possibly because of, the lock downs, or mask use.

If you actually look at graphs of places that did lock downs, and compare when they did them to when their numbers dropped, you will not see even a correlation between lock downs and decreases in cases. To suggest that this drop was in any way due to a lock down is on par with telling people they need to wear masks. Absolute nonsense. Most places took months to work through their covid numbers. My state is taking even longer because my stupid governor keeps mandating things that make the spread worse, then blames us for not complying enough. We didn't have enough cases to even consider taking any action when we locked down. Then, our cases exploded after the lock downs were over. Of course people say we reopens too soon, but that's not true. The lock downs caused the explosion of cases.

 

[MAKAVELI]

have you seen trumps approval ratings among blacks? up to 46 percent now

 

[MECH-lift]

 

[floridays]

Islands with strong immigration policies are the best they can use as examples...

They're not too bright.

They are bright (the purveyors), their audience isn't.

@It will be fine, is a member of their audience.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Islands with strong immigration policies are the best they can use as examples...

They're not too bright.

Those islands would have to maintain their strict policies indefinitely to avoid new outbreaks. When they open up, they will be hit pretty hard because their populations won't have had the chance to adapt along with the virus.

 

[It will be fine]

Probably because the US is doing large general lock downs and not focused on isolating symptomatic cases as the WHO recommended in the article I was referencing.

From Donald Laskin's report on covid response statistics:

"TrendMacro, my analytics firm, tallied the cumulative number of reported cases of Covid-19 in each state and the District of Columbia as a percentage of population, based on data from state and local health departments aggregated by the Covid Tracking Project. We then compared that with the timing and intensity of the lockdown in each jurisdiction. That is measured not by the mandates put in place by government officials, but rather by observing what people in each jurisdiction actually did, along with their baseline behavior before the lockdowns. This is captured in highly detailed anonymized cellphone tracking data provided by Google and others and tabulated by the University of Maryland’s Transportation Institute into a “Social Distancing Index.”
Measuring from the start of the year to each state’s point of maximum lockdown—which range from April 5 to April 18—it turns out that lockdowns correlated with a greater spread of the virus. States with longer, stricter lockdowns also had larger Covid outbreaks. The five places with the harshest lockdowns—the District of Columbia, New York, Michigan, New Jersey and Massachusetts—had the heaviest caseloads.
It could be that strict lockdowns were imposed as a response to already severe outbreaks. But the surprising negative correlation, while statistically weak, persists even when excluding states with the heaviest caseloads. And it makes no difference if the analysis includes other potential explanatory factors such as population density, age, ethnicity, prevalence of nursing homes, general health or temperature. The only factor that seems to make a demonstrable difference is the intensity of mass-transit use."


I was commenting on the apparent connection between lock downs and increased severity of outbreaks back in August. Boy, I should be charging millions for all of my brilliant insights, but you get to enjoy them for free.

Glad you agree America did a terrible job containing the virus. You haven’t provided an explanation for the countries that have done a decent job so far. If the virus is so contagious that it lingers in the air for hours how are some countries doing so much better than America?

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Glad you agree America did a terrible job containing the virus. You haven’t provided an explanation for the countries that have done a decent job so far. If the virus is so contagious that it lingers in the air for hours how are some countries doing so much better than America?

Lots of factors. Cutting their own throats economically? Increased absolute humidity? Herd immunity? Fraudulent reporting? Lower population density? Better demographics? Just wait, something will change, that's out of the government's control, and they will flare up again.

Why all the concern over containment? Everyone knew it would be impossible to contain. That's why we tried to flatten the curve, not stop it. If it was going to be contained, it would have needed to be done in China. After that, cat's out of the bag, no putting it back in.

Death rates are way down. At this point it isn't even the flu, it's a seasonal cold, like its cousins. It's pretty foolish to waste so many resources on a virus that is only a significant threat to such a tiny portion of the population. Do you understand the law of diminishing returns? I'll wait while you Google it.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Probably because the US is doing large general lock downs and not focused on isolating symptomatic cases as the WHO recommended in the article I was referencing.

From Donald Laskin's report on covid response statistics:

"TrendMacro, my analytics firm, tallied the cumulative number of reported cases of Covid-19 in each state and the District of Columbia as a percentage of population, based on data from state and local health departments aggregated by the Covid Tracking Project. We then compared that with the timing and intensity of the lockdown in each jurisdiction. That is measured not by the mandates put in place by government officials, but rather by observing what people in each jurisdiction actually did, along with their baseline behavior before the lockdowns. This is captured in highly detailed anonymized cellphone tracking data provided by Google and others and tabulated by the University of Maryland’s Transportation Institute into a “Social Distancing Index.”
Measuring from the start of the year to each state’s point of maximum lockdown—which range from April 5 to April 18—it turns out that lockdowns correlated with a greater spread of the virus. States with longer, stricter lockdowns also had larger Covid outbreaks. The five places with the harshest lockdowns—the District of Columbia, New York, Michigan, New Jersey and Massachusetts—had the heaviest caseloads.
It could be that strict lockdowns were imposed as a response to already severe outbreaks. But the surprising negative correlation, while statistically weak, persists even when excluding states with the heaviest caseloads. And it makes no difference if the analysis includes other potential explanatory factors such as population density, age, ethnicity, prevalence of nursing homes, general health or temperature. The only factor that seems to make a demonstrable difference is the intensity of mass-transit use."


I was commenting on the apparent connection between lock downs and increased severity of outbreaks back in August. Boy, I should be charging millions for all of my brilliant insights, but you get to enjoy them for free.

Basically what you and others have been saying for months.
Protect the vulnerable, isolate the sick and the rest of society continues as normal.

The DemWit governors have it backasswards!
That's why their states are getting hit the hardest.

 

[It will be fine]

Lots of factors. Cutting their own throats economically? Increased absolute humidity? Herd immunity? Fraudulent reporting? Lower population density? Better demographics? Just wait, something will change, that's out of the government's control, and they will flare up again.

Why all the concern over containment? Everyone knew it would be impossible to contain. That's why we tried to flatten the curve, not stop it. If it was going to be contained, it would have needed to be done in China. After that, cat's out of the bag, no putting it back in.

Death rates are way down. At this point it isn't even the flu, it's a seasonal cold, like its cousins. It's pretty foolish to waste so many resources on a virus that is only a significant threat to such a tiny portion of the population. Do you understand the law of diminishing returns? I'll wait while you Google it.

I’m not arguing any specific containment measure. I’m saying I don’t buy the argument that there was nothing America could have done better to contain the virus. We have been a massive failure and I don’t believe that’s debatable or excusable.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

I’m not arguing any specific containment measure. I’m saying I don’t buy the argument that there was nothing America could have done better to contain the virus. We have been a massive failure and I don’t believe that’s debatable or excusable.

And there is plenty of blame to go around ... Nationally, Statewide and Locality ... and Repugs and DemWits.

After November 3rd, maybe politicians will use their brains instead of playing politics ... I know it not likely ... but you gotta hope!

 

[newfie]

I’m not arguing any specific containment measure. I’m saying I don’t buy the argument that there was nothing America could have done better to contain the virus. We have been a massive failure and I don’t believe that’s debatable or excusable.

there is some thing better it requires a complete shutdown and an economic catastrophy

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Those islands would have to maintain their strict policies indefinitely to avoid new outbreaks. When they open up, they will be hit pretty hard because their populations won't have had the chance to adapt along with the virus.

But there will be therapeutics, cures and vaccines if they wait long enough.