Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[REDSTATEWARD]

4) Are masks an effective and useful means of blocking and reducing viral transmission?

At the margins- USA mask wearing now is at its largest level with no discernible positive effect.    FACT CHECK NEEDED

https://www.wsj.com/articles/case-for-mask-mandate-rests-on-bad-data-11605113310?st=n62motj8zzeb8wu&reflink=article_email_share


Relevant excerpts


The top sci­en­tific jour­nal Na­ture Med­icine pub­lished a study on Oct. 23 with an as­tound­ing claim: By sim­ply wear­ing masks at higher rates, Amer­i-cans could pre­vent as many as 130,000 Covid-19 fa­tal­i­ties by the end of Feb­ruary 2021. Pro­duced by the Uni­ver­sity of Wash­ington’s In­sti­tute for Health Met­rics Eval­u­at ion, or IHME, the study gar­nered immediate acclaim..............

Un­for­tu­nately, the IHME mod­el­ers’ findings con­tained an er­ror that even min­imal scru­tiny should have caught. The projected num­ber of lives saved, and the im­plied case for a mask mandate, are based on a faulty sta­tis­tic. Us­ing a months-old sur­vey, IHME mod­el­ers assumed er­ro­neously that the U.S. mask-adop­tion rate stood at only 49% as of late Sep­tember, and therefore had plenty of room to in­crease to “uni­ver­sal adop­tion,” de­fined as 95%, or to a more plau­si­ble 85%. Ac­cord­ing to more re­cent sur­vey find­ings, how­ever, Amer­i­ca’s mask-adop­tion rate has hov­ered around 80% since the sum­mer.


Which also means the recent spikes came EVEN THOUGH mask wearing has been near its highest practical level since the summer.

[bodiddley]

Well, you didn't get much right, mostly evaded, and at times veered into incoherence.

Some thoughts:
1. Sweden has done worse than its neighbors.

2. Right answer; incoherent addendum

3. No answer/evasion

4. Transmission is occurring at a significantly higher rate in states without mask mandates, even though those states tend to be less densely populated.

5. Countries are only reporting confirmed cases.  So yes, the numbers are squishy, but they also provide a solid baseline, which can be extrapolated from.  But when you add in likely additional cases, the ratio between the US:China skews even worse, with the US infections perhaps 10x the confirmed number, while China might double it's confirmed count. 
Really Q5 was asking:
5. Why does the US has a much greater infection and death rate than China?

You failed to answer Q6.
To rephrase:
6. Does China have a negligible amount of virus and next to no domestic transmissions or is that false?

You got 1 right and partial credit on the mask question ...

[josh]

4) Are masks an effective and useful means of blocking and reducing viral transmission?

At the margins- USA mask wearing now is at its largest level with no discernible positive effect.    FACT CHECK NEEDED

https://www.wsj.com/articles/case-for-mask-mandate-rests-on-bad-data-11605113310?st=n62motj8zzeb8wu&reflink=article_email_share


Relevant excerpts


The top sci­en­tific jour­nal Na­ture Med­icine pub­lished a study on Oct. 23 with an as­tound­ing claim: By sim­ply wear­ing masks at higher rates, Amer­i-cans could pre­vent as many as 130,000 Covid-19 fa­tal­i­ties by the end of Feb­ruary 2021. Pro­duced by the Uni­ver­sity of Wash­ington’s In­sti­tute for Health Met­rics Eval­u­at ion, or IHME, the study gar­nered immediate acclaim..............

Un­for­tu­nately, the IHME mod­el­ers’ findings con­tained an er­ror that even min­imal scru­tiny should have caught. The projected num­ber of lives saved, and the im­plied case for a mask mandate, are based on a faulty sta­tis­tic. Us­ing a months-old sur­vey, IHME mod­el­ers assumed er­ro­neously that the U.S. mask-adop­tion rate stood at only 49% as of late Sep­tember, and therefore had plenty of room to in­crease to “uni­ver­sal adop­tion,” de­fined as 95%, or to a more plau­si­ble 85%. Ac­cord­ing to more re­cent sur­vey find­ings, how­ever, Amer­i­ca’s mask-adop­tion rate has hov­ered around 80% since the sum­mer.


Which also means the recent spikes came EVEN THOUGH mask wearing has been near its highest practical level since the summer.

He should stick to economics history.

His "science" is broken.

[bodiddley]

Trump is now working without a number of his top advisers. Chief of staff Mark Meadows is out with the coronavirus, as is David Bossie, an outside adviser helming the campaign's legal effort. Brian Jack, the White House political director, also has the virus, along with a number of other staffers in political affairs and assistants to several top administration officials, according to a White House official.

The White House now is far more vacant than it has been in weeks, with many aides concerned about catching coronavirus - or self-quarantining after having been exposed to it.

[kidcarter8]

Florida has obscured the true extent of its pandemic by using a misleading measure of positive cases to justify reopening schools and businesses, state data indicates. While the state has publicized that its positivity rate has regularly fallen below 5%, other health organizations are publishing data that shows the rate may be dramatically higher.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/coronavirus/os-ne-florida-coronavirus-wednesday-november-11-20201111-3dzmu5sj75eu7f4uxywmibhrgi-story.html

Right

So less than 1 in 20 non COVID cases each day in Florida presents as a new positive,  on 14 day average.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Paywall. But good analysis of McConnell-Biden potential for cooperation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/where-biden-and-mcconnell-can-agree-11605031093

Cut/paste, bro.   The WSJ paywall falls instantly and no Ken Jennings thumb move on the stopload button will thwart it.

It is usually difficult to discern the meaning of a national election, and 2020 is no exception. It was a defeat for Donald Trump but a victory for the Republican Party, which turned back most challenges to incumbent senators, fought off Democratic efforts to flip state legislatures, and made gains in the House. The American people have voted for divided government and a less divisive tone in national politics.

What does that mean for a national policy agenda? State ballot initiatives give more insight into the kinds of policies Americans favor, and it’s a contrast to conventional depictions of a hopelessly polarized electorate.

Take Florida, where voters gave Mr. Trump the largest margin of victory for any candidate since George W. Bush in 2004. Yet 61% of voters supported moving to a $15 hourly minimum wage by 2026. The measure received about 1.5 million more votes than Mr. Biden, nearly all of which must have come from Mr. Trump’s supporters.

On the opposite coast, two-thirds of California voters chose Joe Biden. Yet the bluest electorate in the country also nixed ballot initiatives pushed by Golden State progressives. Some 52% rejected a tax increase on commercial and industrial property; 56% disapproved of allowing 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections and replacing cash bail; 57% rejected reinstating affirmative action; and 60% said no to expanding local rent control. Nearly 60% favored a measure, opposed by Bernie Sanders, to treat Uber and Lyft drivers as independent contractors, not as employees entitled to benefits and labor-law protections. In Illinois, another deeply blue state, 55% of voters rejected a measure supported by Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker that would have permitted a graduated income tax to replace the current flat tax.

Yet voters also approved some initiatives favored by progressives. Californians supported criminal-justice reforms and strongly favored allowing former felons to regain their right to vote, as voters in Florida did two years ago. States across the country voted to liberalize their drug laws, and nearly three-quarters of Mississippi voters, among the most conservative in the country, supported the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes.

Americans still disagree on many issues, but the divisions aren’t as deep as partisan leaders make them appear. The two-party system exaggerates and exacerbates differences, obscuring the many issues on which rank-and-file Americans can agree. The 2020 election has given us the chance for a new beginning. Leaders who seek the center in a spirit of compromise have the power to make our country governable again.

Suppose that President Biden chose to lead off his legislative agenda with issues that could command bipartisan majorities: expanded federal support for the Covid-19 testing and supplies that schools and other facilities will need to reopen safely; renewed support for small businesses and workers who have exhausted their unemployment benefits; a reasonable compromise on assistance to states and localities; and universal broadband access, which would benefit rural communities as well as low-income students in big cities.

With presidential backing, a compromise on policing and criminal-justice reforms between Republican Sen. Tim Scott’s bill and more far-reaching measures favored by House Democrats should be possible. And according to a recent survey, two-thirds of Americans—including nearly half of Republicans—favor legislation that would give legal status to the “Dreamers,” young adults brought to this country as minors by parents who entered the country illegally. President Biden could begin with this consensus measure while continuing work on a broader package of immigration reforms.

Unless Democrats win both the runoff elections in Georgia in January and take control of the Senate by the narrowest of margins, the relationship between President Biden and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will determine the legislative possibilities for at least the next two years. If Mr. Biden leads with broadly supported measures on which compromise is possible, how will Mr. McConnell respond?

No one expects him to act in ways that could weaken his chance of retaining a Republican majority in 2022. But he has reason to believe that Americans are weary of nonstop partisan conflict and would welcome a period of productive governance before the parties return to the electoral fray. If Mr. Biden puts popular proposals on the table and Mr. McConnell walks away, the latter risks opening his party to charges of obstructionism—and losing the support of moderate and independent voters who deserted Mr. Trump.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Communities that have reformed and improved have created partnerships between the police and key members of the community who have influence. Together, they've defined "protect and serve" as protecting the citizenry and serving the community as being the responsibility of the police AND the people.

See no sign that Josh would disagree with this.   All this in response to him making a Twilight Zone joke?

josh would rather joke than consider a more nuance POV on this important issue? Look, rather than simply chanting "Defund the Police" or screaming "Back the Blue", as if those are actual arguments for addressing a complex issue that greatly varies from community to community and state to state, I'm offering a chance to discuss this realistically.

If you prefer the automatic gainsaying of the Reds and the Larrys of the fora, have at it.

[oilcan]

4) Are masks an effective and useful means of blocking and reducing viral transmission?

At the margins- USA mask wearing now is at its largest level with no discernible positive effect.    FACT CHECK NEEDED

https://www.wsj.com/articles/case-for-mask-mandate-rests-on-bad-data-11605113310?st=n62motj8zzeb8wu&reflink=article_email_share


Relevant excerpts


The top sci­en­tific jour­nal Na­ture Med­icine pub­lished a study on Oct. 23 with an as­tound­ing claim: By sim­ply wear­ing masks at higher rates, Amer­i-cans could pre­vent as many as 130,000 Covid-19 fa­tal­i­ties by the end of Feb­ruary 2021. Pro­duced by the Uni­ver­sity of Wash­ington’s In­sti­tute for Health Met­rics Eval­u­at ion, or IHME, the study gar­nered immediate acclaim..............

Un­for­tu­nately, the IHME mod­el­ers’ findings con­tained an er­ror that even min­imal scru­tiny should have caught. The projected num­ber of lives saved, and the im­plied case for a mask mandate, are based on a faulty sta­tis­tic. Us­ing a months-old sur­vey, IHME mod­el­ers assumed er­ro­neously that the U.S. mask-adop­tion rate stood at only 49% as of late Sep­tember, and therefore had plenty of room to in­crease to “uni­ver­sal adop­tion,” de­fined as 95%, or to a more plau­si­ble 85%. Ac­cord­ing to more re­cent sur­vey find­ings, how­ever, Amer­i­ca’s mask-adop­tion rate has hov­ered around 80% since the sum­mer.


Which also means the recent spikes came EVEN THOUGH mask wearing has been near its highest practical level since the summer.

Adoption rate is not evenly found through all 50 states.  80% is an average.  The states farthest below that average rate of mask adoption are the states with the largest spikes in new cases. 

That's the problem with using a paywalled source and then you deciding what are the "relevant exerpts." 

Facts aren't pure things that just float in the ether, waiting for us to pluck them.  They are made by the interpretation of data.  Good data is gathered by knowing where to look.  You don't just look at just Vermont or just North Dakota to determine how the United States is handling covid, or what measures are working.  You COMPARE different places and see what the variables are.

[Hamilton Samuels]

4) Are masks an effective and useful means of blocking and reducing viral transmission?

At the margins- USA mask wearing now is at its largest level with no discernible positive effect.    FACT CHECK NEEDED

https://www.wsj.com/articles/case-for-mask-mandate-rests-on-bad-data-11605113310?st=n62motj8zzeb8wu&reflink=article_email_share


Relevant excerpts


The top sci­en­tific jour­nal Na­ture Med­icine pub­lished a study on Oct. 23 with an as­tound­ing claim: By sim­ply wear­ing masks at higher rates, Amer­i-cans could pre­vent as many as 130,000 Covid-19 fa­tal­i­ties by the end of Feb­ruary 2021. Pro­duced by the Uni­ver­sity of Wash­ington’s In­sti­tute for Health Met­rics Eval­u­at ion, or IHME, the study gar­nered immediate acclaim..............

Un­for­tu­nately, the IHME mod­el­ers’ findings con­tained an er­ror that even min­imal scru­tiny should have caught. The projected num­ber of lives saved, and the im­plied case for a mask mandate, are based on a faulty sta­tis­tic. Us­ing a months-old sur­vey, IHME mod­el­ers assumed er­ro­neously that the U.S. mask-adop­tion rate stood at only 49% as of late Sep­tember, and therefore had plenty of room to in­crease to “uni­ver­sal adop­tion,” de­fined as 95%, or to a more plau­si­ble 85%. Ac­cord­ing to more re­cent sur­vey find­ings, how­ever, Amer­i­ca’s mask-adop­tion rate has hov­ered around 80% since the sum­mer.


Which also means the recent spikes came EVEN THOUGH mask wearing has been near its highest practical level since the summer.

Any serious scientist understands that to discuss the Covid merely by doing a mask-on/mask-off analysis is just plain silly.

The same with taking the POV that society should lockdown or go with herd immunity.

Social distancing in concert with wearing a mask has proven to be the essential key to reducing/slowing the outbreak of the virus.

The better term (since choosing the right term seems to have real political consequences) would be dial back, as in dial back access to enclosed areas that reduce opportunities to social distance (like indoor bars, restaurants, gyms).

So, for example, the NJ governor is choosing to dial back the hours a bar can be open, not closing them, but having them close earlier.

Still, you can't fix stupid---like the popular Jersey Shore bar that refused to take social distancing seriously, which led to 9 of its employees to test positive for the virus, and led to closing the establishment for an indefinite period. Or the stupidity that is college football, which allowed its fans to storm a field after winning a meaningless game. That has already led to more Covid positives at Notre Dame. And now, those same idiots will want to go home for Thanksgiving. Brilliant!

So, it's human behavior and not wanting to respect or understand the science that is causing much of our problems here in the USA.

And much of that lack of respect for both science and other humans has its origins on the right side of the political spectrum.

Like I said. You can't fix stupid.

To come on here and play games with "look what I found on masks" serves no purpose.

But it does show the limitations of one who would do so.

[REDSTATEWARD]

4) Are masks an effective and useful means of blocking and reducing viral transmission?

At the margins- USA mask wearing now is at its largest level with no discernible positive effect.    FACT CHECK NEEDED

https://www.wsj.com/articles/case-for-mask-mandate-rests-on-bad-data-11605113310?st=n62motj8zzeb8wu&reflink=article_email_share


Relevant excerpts


The top sci­en­tific jour­nal Na­ture Med­icine pub­lished a study on Oct. 23 with an as­tound­ing claim: By sim­ply wear­ing masks at higher rates, Amer­i-cans could pre­vent as many as 130,000 Covid-19 fa­tal­i­ties by the end of Feb­ruary 2021. Pro­duced by the Uni­ver­sity of Wash­ington’s In­sti­tute for Health Met­rics Eval­u­at ion, or IHME, the study gar­nered immediate acclaim..............

Un­for­tu­nately, the IHME mod­el­ers’ findings con­tained an er­ror that even min­imal scru­tiny should have caught. The projected num­ber of lives saved, and the im­plied case for a mask mandate, are based on a faulty sta­tis­tic. Us­ing a months-old sur­vey, IHME mod­el­ers assumed er­ro­neously that the U.S. mask-adop­tion rate stood at only 49% as of late Sep­tember, and therefore had plenty of room to in­crease to “uni­ver­sal adop­tion,” de­fined as 95%, or to a more plau­si­ble 85%. Ac­cord­ing to more re­cent sur­vey find­ings, how­ever, Amer­i­ca’s mask-adop­tion rate has hov­ered around 80% since the sum­mer.


Which also means the recent spikes came EVEN THOUGH mask wearing has been near its highest practical level since the summer.

He should stick to economics history.

His "science" is broken.

LOL

[Hamilton Samuels]

"Though he has been in the Oval Office late two nights this week, the president has done little in the way of governing and has instead been working the phones," AP reports. Trump is "calling advisers, allies, and friends," and he's "been 'trying to find people who will give him good news,'" the Post reports, quoting a Trump adviser.

In addition to phoning "friendly governors — in red states like Arizona, Texas, and Florida — and influential confidants in the conservative media, like Sean Hannity," AP reports, Trump "has been watching even more TV than usual in recent weeks, often from his private dining room just off the Oval Office." He's also been "matter-of-factly discussing a possible 2024 campaign — an indication that he knows his time as president is coming to an end, at least for now," the Post reports. Trump's aides, AP adds, "believe that he will at least openly flirt with the idea to enhance his relevance and raise interest in whatever money-making efforts he pursues."

"He has to go," a GOP source close to the administration tells The Daily Beast. "His team is seeping already. I've passed along four résumés today. ... I really think the worst for him is that all this just kind of goes on without him. He'll sulk out the door and my guess is Biden walks into an empty White House."

[Hamilton Samuels]

4) Are masks an effective and useful means of blocking and reducing viral transmission?

At the margins- USA mask wearing now is at its largest level with no discernible positive effect.    FACT CHECK NEEDED

https://www.wsj.com/articles/case-for-mask-mandate-rests-on-bad-data-11605113310?st=n62motj8zzeb8wu&reflink=article_email_share


Relevant excerpts


The top sci­en­tific jour­nal Na­ture Med­icine pub­lished a study on Oct. 23 with an as­tound­ing claim: By sim­ply wear­ing masks at higher rates, Amer­i-cans could pre­vent as many as 130,000 Covid-19 fa­tal­i­ties by the end of Feb­ruary 2021. Pro­duced by the Uni­ver­sity of Wash­ington’s In­sti­tute for Health Met­rics Eval­u­at ion, or IHME, the study gar­nered immediate acclaim..............

Un­for­tu­nately, the IHME mod­el­ers’ findings con­tained an er­ror that even min­imal scru­tiny should have caught. The projected num­ber of lives saved, and the im­plied case for a mask mandate, are based on a faulty sta­tis­tic. Us­ing a months-old sur­vey, IHME mod­el­ers assumed er­ro­neously that the U.S. mask-adop­tion rate stood at only 49% as of late Sep­tember, and therefore had plenty of room to in­crease to “uni­ver­sal adop­tion,” de­fined as 95%, or to a more plau­si­ble 85%. Ac­cord­ing to more re­cent sur­vey find­ings, how­ever, Amer­i­ca’s mask-adop­tion rate has hov­ered around 80% since the sum­mer.


Which also means the recent spikes came EVEN THOUGH mask wearing has been near its highest practical level since the summer.

He should stick to economics history.

His "science" is broken.

LOL

Why do you hate America?

[REDSTATEWARD]

Well, you didn't get much right, mostly evaded, and at times veered into incoherence.

Some thoughts:
1. Sweden has done worse than its neighbors.

2. Right answer; incoherent addendum

3. No answer/evasion

4. Transmission is occurring at a significantly higher rate in states without mask mandates, even though those states tend to be less densely populated.

5. Countries are only reporting confirmed cases.  So yes, the numbers are squishy, but they also provide a solid baseline, which can be extrapolated from.  But when you add in likely additional cases, the ratio between the US:China skews even worse, with the US infections perhaps 10x the confirmed number, while China might double it's confirmed count. 
Really Q5 was asking:
5. Why does the US has a much greater infection and death rate than China?

You failed to answer Q6.
To rephrase:
6. Does China have a negligible amount of virus and next to no domestic transmissions or is that false?

You got 1 right and partial credit on the mask question ...

No I got them all right.
Thanks for playing.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Trump concedes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjw0VPcodW8

[Hamilton Samuels]

 
No I got them all right.
Thanks for playing.
 

LOFL!