Liberate Michigan! Liberate Minnesota! Liberate Virginia!

1. 88

   crankaliciousposted 4 years ago

   After basically admitting that state governors had the authority about when to reopen their states and backing off his claim of having the authority to make them open at the will of the President, President Trump issued the above tweets.
   
   Given that protests in Michigan pitted people wanting the state to re-open against the governor's stay-at-home restrictions, what do you think was the purpose of Trump's tweets? Don't his tweets undermine the governors of those states? Don't those tweets encourage residents to violate existing stay-at-home orders? Don't those tweets create conflict at a time when such conflict is dangerous? Don't those tweets contradict Trump's own guidance about COVID-19?
   
   Trump has made clear in his statements that he wants to re-open the economy. Are these tweets an effort by him to circumvent the Constitution and get the states to move forward more quickly with re-opening?
   
   Thoughts?

   replyreport
   1. 96

      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      IMO the tweets were designed to grow support for him in the next election.  Not only was he supporting "the people" in their wishes, but trying to start the economy; an economy on which his re-election likely hinges.
      
      But could be wrong.  Perhaps he got a message from those governors that he didn't like and is hitting back.  Perhaps someone, somewhere, said they should not re-open those states for months to come.  Trump has a habit of striking back at anyone disagreeing with him, as we all know.

      replyreport
   2. 94

      Tim Truzy info4uposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I always look at Trump's Tweets with a bit of skeptical humor. His Tweets may be historic electronic documents, but its the actions he takes that matter. He tends to talk and Tweet out of both sides of his mouth. He likes shock value and then he steps back. It's his pattern of communication.
      Now, he will say again he's saved the country and we as Americans should be thankful and vote for him this election year. If he wins, he will want us to satisfy another political goal, etc.
      His tweets are only valuable as wet kindling because he knows he only can control any fire so much.
      He backed off because of the state rights' portion of his support, knowing he didn't have the power to begin with in demanding states return to normal. He worried about loosing Michigan in the next election, and the other states he mentioned. He wants his supporters to come out to the arena and cheer him on.
      If you study some of the wrestling shows, with the loud threats and promises, and then a backing off - you will get Trumps act. It's grand theater to him.

      replyreport
   3. 81

      peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      fools.
      ..
      ..
      ..

      replyreport
2. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago

   He's simply laying the groundwork for blaming the tanking economy on Democratic governors. His base eats it up. They're not happy unless they have an enemy to rail against and Trump knows this and is happy to help rile them up.

   replyreport
   1. 88

      crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      If that is true, that would be pretty smart politically.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Not really...it's simply his MO. Have you ever witnessed Trump take the blame for anything?  At all? Ever? In his entire life?

         replyreport
      2. 78

         Eastwardposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         This reminds me somewhat of the Thai Minister of Health's approach to blaming the west for the virus because he saw some white foreigners without masks on. He is well aware that immigration took months to finally come around to automatically extending visas that required hundreds (if not thousands) of people to stand in lines and crowd into tight spaces.
         
         He's gone on racist rants about the need to trust Asians over Europeans and tweeted out a concise "F@ck the west". It seems there is a good chance he is playing his cards in case lots of foreign visitors end up sick or dead and is building up to full-on blame.  Also, he's making sure he reduces any tensions or focus on China, as that's where the bulk of tourism money comes from. Of course, he may truly be an Asian supremacist in addition to his political machinations.

         replyreport
   2. 89

      GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Oh well, more proof of the 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' position the president is in.
      
      First, he is condemned and ridiculed for saying he has the authority to reopen our economy, and now he is being criticized for political maneuvering for letting the governors do it.
      
      What the hell . . .
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Aren't we talking about the tweets:  Liberate Michigan! Liberate Minnesota! Liberate Virginia!
         
         That is what I am damning him for. You would not?

         replyreport
         1. 89

            GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            I guess I lost focus. I was commenting on the reaction, not the tweets.
            
            GA

            replyreport
      2. 88

         crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         More interested in why you think he made those tweets and what they meant.

         replyreport
      3. 88

         crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Some information suggests that these protests aren't organic, but the result of far right pro-gun groups. Interesting.
         
         https://www.washingtonpost.com/technolo … -protests/
         
         https://politicalwire.com/2020/04/19/pr … -protests/

         replyreport
3. 89

   GA Andersonposted 4 years ago

   PrettyPanther pointed out, (rightly), that I missed the point of the OP.
   
   I don't know what to make of the tweets. I gave up trying way back at "covfefe."
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 88

      crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Would you say that the tweets are inciting people to protest in those states?

      replyreport
      1. 96

         wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I actually doubt it.  We've had protests in Idaho, and that is not a state on Trump's list.  People are sick and tired of the lockdown and want it ended - far too many are more concerned about their personal life and circumstances that about their neighbors or the country.  Even if it's simply a matter "I don't want to participate in my child's education" or "I want to buy a new dress" vs an almost certain rise in the death toll.
         
         So while it makes a great point to bash Trump with, I don't see it as having any real effect outside of (perhaps) gaining votes in the election and forcing a governor to reconsider their orders.  All political results, then.

         replyreport
         1. 88

            crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Isn't that precisely what those tweets encourage people to do though? Liberate Michigan? Seems like a message directly from the President to oppose the stay-at-home measure in those states. Is that not even a legitimate interpretation?
            
            If you want to frame it as "bash Trump", okay, but he's advocating for people to follow his guidelines in one breath but is saying not to in certain states. Seems like a dangerous thing to say.

            replyreport
            1. 96

               wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               You asked if I thought his tweets produced, or had a part in producing, the demonstrations.  I answered "No", and will stand by that.  I do not think they did.
               
               You may interpret it as you wish, you may even say that the tweets encouraged people to demonstrate, but you asked for an opinion and I gave one.  Should you wish to give another that is your privilege; as support for my own, and a part of my reasoning I offered two other thoughts.  The demonstration in my own state (that I believe happened before the tweets) and that people are getting fed up with the lockdowns.  I know the one is true and believe the other to be also true, based on what I see in the news and what I hear from friends.
               
               Do you have something other than an interpretation to support your reasoning that Trump's tweets played a part in causing those demonstrations to happen?  Or just that it "encouraged" them and therefore they would not have happened without the tweets?

               replyreport
               1. 88

                  crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  I just don't think there is any other interpretation than the one I've provided. What other message do you think the tweets convey?
                  
                  Is saying that Trump wants people to liberate those states by pushing its leadership to move quicker to get things moving fair?

                  replyreport
                  1. 96

                     wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     I gave my interpretation above.  Trump is playing the political game to gain votes in the next election.  You think he isn't, that he intends to convince people to do what he says not to do.
                     
                     I guess I don't see him as that deep a player in the game.

                     replyreport
                     1. 88

                        crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        That's a very generous interpretation. I feel as though I'm doing nothing more than interpreting exactly what he wrote, which encourages people to protest in those states. He's giving a call to action, regardless of whether he intends to or not.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree, how else can you honestly interpret his own words? It's strange Trump's supporters see and hear differently what he tweets and says.

                           replyreport
                           1. 88

                              crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              Liberate is a verb. It's a call to action. What does it mean to tell somebody to liberate something. Trump knows perfectly well that his supporters listen to what he says.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                 Yes Trump knows what he's doing with the tweets, but he'll deny he meant the states should be "liberated." Just like his supporters will do for him as we've seen here.
                                 
                                 The excuses given by those who enable him are becoming really ridiculous these days...not saying they already weren't.

                                 replyreport
            2. 60

               Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               No matter what Trump says, there will be those who defend his words, especially those who know he lies and still continue to deny and defend him. Namely, those who were unfortunate enough to elect him.

               replyreport
4. 94

   Readmikenowposted 4 years ago

   I believe with or without those tweets from President Donald Trump...those protests would occur.  They are a reaction to people feeling their liberties have been infringed.  Some of the restrictions of some of these governors are absolutely ridiculous.
   
   One example is Michigan.  Why can't you go to your second home?  Why can't you use a jet ski?  NO gatherings of any people who aren't part of a single household? Why can't you purchase carpeting, furniture or paint?
   
   What does this have to do with handling a virus?
   
   
   Here are just some of her restrictions.
   
   
   * No gatherings of any people who are not part of a single household
   
   * No travel to in-state vacation or second homes
   
   * Large stores can admit only four customers for every 1,000 square feet of customer floor space. And hardware and home-repair stores must close all areas “dedicated to carpeting, flooring, furniture, garden centers, plant nurseries, or paint.”
   
   * No motorboat or jet ski use
   
   https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/15/ … trictions/

   replyreport
   1. 88

      crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      A decent argument. I believe you are probably correct that some kind of protests would occur.
      
      The question really is then: is it responsible of the President to encourage such things? Under normal circumstances, perhaps. But now?
      
      Do you even believe he's encouraging it?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         We have protesters here in Oregon and I believe it has more to do with our governor being Democrat than anything, but I also see how Trump's initial response (remember "Democrat hoax"?) followed by so much conflicting and misleading information has created additional skepticism among the right-wing Trumpers. They already live in a constant state of victimhood (the media, the liberals, the government are all out to get them) and Trump feeds the BS to keep them fearful and enraged.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            I'll be watching the guinea pigs, mostly Trump supporters I hope, for a few weeks before I venture out again. It won't take long since Kemp is reopening Georgia Friday. 
            
            i think it's a terrible gamble with the numbers here still high and the state not meeting the  Federal guidelines for reopening the state. I wish Stacy Abrams was the governor at a time like this.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               Tim Truzy info4uposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Our state is planning to look at reopening in a few weeks. A bigger question is whether a president should be encouraging protests based on the particular party in power when we are in a state of crisis? Shouldn't unity be emphasized? We've had protests here in our state's capital without arrests. Our governor has reopened a few beaches, but restrictions still remain.
               The president has the "bully pulpit," and he knows it. I think he knows the influencing power that comes with it.
               He doesn't seem to let it register, some people are unstable, which could lead to more crises. Our common enemy is a virus right now; defeat it for the common good. Now is not the time to continue to further divide the country. That's why I mostly ignore his Tweets. He's a clever one-trick pony.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  But he continues to tell lies everyday, Pete. I'm sick of listening to him make excuses for the lack of coordination between the WH and the states.
                  
                  They were--and are--vying against each other for test kits and PPE as we speak. The Republican governor of Maryland, Larry Hogan, bought 500,000 test kits from South Korea for 9 million dollars on his own initiative. I'm a democrat, but he's a republican I admire.
                  
                  He was reelected by a majority democratic electorate, so this should tell you how much he's admired.

                  replyreport
      2. 94

         Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         "The question really is then: is it responsible of the President to encourage such things? Under normal circumstances, perhaps. But now?
         
         "Do you even believe he's encouraging it?"
         
         Let me respond to this in a detailed way.  Politics is all about strategy and action.  This is how things get accomplished.  There are so many cases where the state governments are absolutely out of control. 
         
         A man was arrested in front of his daughter because he broke social distancing regulations?
         
         "Man handcuffed in front of daughter at Brighton park for allegedly violating social distancing.
         
         BRIGHTON, Colo. (KDVR) -- Matt Mooney feels Brighton police owe him a huge apology. The 33-year-old says he was handcuffed at Donelson Park in front of his 6-year-old daughter Sunday afternoon after police told him he violated the state’s social distancing guidelines."
         
         https://kdvr.com/news/man-arrested-in-f … istancing/
         
         You mean to tell me this man should not have gotten off with just a warning?  This is extreme.
         
         This is one of at least a hundred examples I could cite of state governments being dictatorial in their behavior.  This has to stop.  People need to stand up to these state governors.  They need to realize they serve citizens not subjects.
         
         So, President Donald Trump could not directly get involved.  This would have made the governors victims and it would have emboldened them to defy anything President Donald Trump suggested.
         
         So, the president's followers got organized and staged protests.  In some cases, it was Republican state legislators who organized the protests.  In other places, it was conservative groups.  The protest I went to was organized by a county Republican group.
         
         These are members of the base of President Donald Trump's support. 
         
         By tweeting out support for the protesters he achieved two goals.
         
         1. He was able to have action taken against the behavior of the governors without getting involved.
         2. He was able to show support to his base of voters. This, of course, will be a huge benefit to him in the fall. 
         
         Do I believe he encourages it?  Yes.
         Do I think it is responsible?  Yes. Unless these governors are held accountable for their dictatorial actions, they will only get worse. 
         
         So, I think his tweets were the right thing for him to have done based on the behavior of the governors and their treatment of their state's citizens.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            So if people get sick because they went out and protested after his tweets were made, it's his responsibility?

            replyreport
            1. 94

               Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Sorry Randy, you need to study about individual rights and responsibilities.  Freedom isn't free.  If you choose to protest and you get harmed, it's on you as it is your choice.
               
               I participated in a protest and haven't had any problems.  Nobody I went to the protest with has had any problems and we were a pretty big group.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Was this over two weeks ago, Mike? If not, you're still not sure you weren't infected or infected someone else.

                  replyreport
         2. 88

            crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Oh, look, more links to Fox News.
            
            Fox News has conditioned its viewers for years through blatant lies that Democrats and the government is out to get them, so no surprise that being conditioned to believe this, that's exactly Mike's point.
            
            Those governors are out to get everyone.
            
            And definitely, some of the restrictions don't make any sense. However, they're not permanent.
            
            You know what is permanent? Death.
            
            So you have no problem with the President putting his supporters at risk by recommending they go out and protest and advocate for lifting restrictions and letting them go back to work, but you have a great problem with people having some freedoms curtailed for a few weeks while we wait for this virus to subside a bit.
            
            Good to know.
            
            What's hilarious about all this is that Trump is marching his own supporters into a giant gas chamber first. He's also endangering the rest of us, but it's certainly his supporters, especially in some of the red states, who are likely to take the brunt of his idiocy.
            
            But by all means, Georgians, head to the gym for a good, sweaty workout. Floridians - head to the beach!
            
            Good luck.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Carnk,
               
               As far as I'm concerned, a virus with a 98 percent recovery rate doesn't require such drastic actions.  I've ignored just about every rule put down by my governor...I'm okay.  Haven't worn a face mask, regularly meet with friends, still go on hikes even if it is forbidden.  I refuse to give into the fear and the hype.

               replyreport
               1. 88

                  crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  I am sure all the people who have gotten sick and/or died thank you and people like you. As do our hospital workers.
                  
                  But I appreciate the honesty. If we stop hearing from you, we’ll know why.
                  
                  Fight the power, Mike!

                  replyreport
                  1. 94

                     Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     All I have to say to that is 98 percent recovery rate.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Marisa Writesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        You are right, there is a 98% recovery rate on average. If you're over 70, your chance of dying is about 1 in 10.  If you're young and healthy, your chance of dying is more like 1 in 250.
                        
                        But that is not the point. The point is that although most recover, thousands need hospital treatment to do so.   If you haven't studied the Italian outbreak, I suggest you do.
                        
                        Northern Italy's hospitals are some of the best in the world, equal to anything in the US. Yet they were overwhelmed by coronavirus cases, meaning many died who might've been saved.  And many more people died as a result - heart attack patients who couldn't get an ambulance in time, cancer patients whose operations had to be cancelled, car crash victims, etc.
                        
                        That is what people are trying to avoid by locking down.

                        replyreport
                        1. 96

                           wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           I suspect that when we figure out how many people had the disease without ever suffering severe symptoms (if we ever do) we'll find that the recovery rate is much higher than 98%.
                           
                           Nevertheless, the point of overloaded hospitals and other health care, along with the fatality rate of those at risk, is very well taken.  To a point, I fully agree that we need to take actions to protect them...the only question is how far to go.  How long do we keep businesses closed, how much can we print to give away to those out of work, etc.  Eventually (and I rather think that "eventually" is not far off) we will do more damage, and cause more long term suffering and death, with the very actions taken to help.

                           replyreport
         3. 81

            peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            "The question really is then: is it responsible of the President to encourage such things? Under normal circumstances, perhaps. But now?
            
            Especially now. Trump is what you guys call "commander in chief". He is the head of the state. So he is responsible for the organization. That's his job. Not just tweeting around.
            
            What I've seen Trump doing for weeks now is blaming other people. Blaming China, Blaming WHO, blaming the foreigners comming in. And now blaming the governors. Like a spoiled brat blaming the referee instead of accepting that he is a terrible football player.
            
            Today, sadly for those millions of Americans, you see a president who is far over his head in a league he does not belong to. Compare Trump with Reagan, with Bush Sr, with Obama and you see what a amateur he really is.
            
            So again. The responsibility in a crisis like this, lies not at a governor level but at a presidential level. Imagine a civil war broke loose and Trump would leave it to the governors to restore peace...It is counterproductive.
            Terrible misjudgement of a crisis.
            Take care, and stay at home.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I think you are more than a bit confused on this topic.
               
               The Chinese played a role in this pandemic.  President Donald Trump should point it out as others are now accepting they are the source.
               
               The WHO protected China and their behavior in the pandemic.  President Donald Trump is right to point this out.  He also as the legal authority to pull the US funding of it.  I support him in this.  It will probably be reinstated soon, but they need to realize funding from the United States can be taken away.
               
               Are you aware of the many countries that have closed their borders? Most of them.  So, President Donald Trump did the right thing to seal off the country and temporarily stop immigration.
               
               You don't seem to know much about the political history of our country.  There has always been a controversy concerning what is the power of the federal government and what are the rights of the states.  This has going on since the 1700s.  Every president knows if they come down too hard on any state, they defy the federal government.  The choice then comes to how do deal with this situation.
               
               It is the right call to let the governors of each state decide.  Hawaii is very different from Alaska.  They are very different from Arizona, who is very different from Maine and so on.
               
               The state's governor's know how best to handle this situation in their state.  It is the right call for our country.
               
               He's doing the right things.  You should stop reading American leftest propaganda that is considered news.

               replyreport
               1. 88

                  crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  When did Trump seal off the country?

                  replyreport
               2. 81

                  peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  The pandemic started in China. That's the role China played.
                  The head of the WHO is close with China. And the WHO doesn't want to recognize Taiwan for instance. There are a lot of questions you can ask. But the WHO has no power whatsoever. It is an advisory organization that can only give advice. The WHO has done tons of good things and to stop funding it will cost thousands of lives.
                  If you want to change the WHO you have to do it from within. And for sure after this is over questions will be asked... But stop shooting the messenger. Make the WHO better if you don't like it.
                  
                  I'm living in Spain  Readmikenow, a country hardest hit by the virus next to Italy. There is a severe lockdown over here. As I see the results around me, I'm flabbergasted by the slow and chaotic responses from the UK and the US. They saw what happened in other countries but reacted incredibly slow and lax in my opinion.
                  Maybe I'm wrong but to me, this looks like a crisis. What happened in New York at 9/11 was it the governor of New York who called the shots or the President. And this is worse than 9/11, and nationwide (worldwide), Mike. More people are dying on the virus than on the 9/11 attack. And it does not look as if there is a plan.
                  Maybe the chaos and uncertainty of the president tells it all (so far from what I've seen on his Youtube briefings.)
                  I hope things will settle down for you guys. But people who are demonstrating to open up are just naive fools to me.
                  Take care.

                  replyreport
                  1. 94

                     Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     How do you feel about Sweden not locking down?
                     
                     They've not had any serious problems with the virus in their country.  I often wonder how that happened.  It makes me wonder if lock down was actually a bad thing.
                     
                     "Sweden resisted a lockdown, and its capital Stockholm is expected to reach ‘herd immunity’ in weeks
                     
                     Unlike its neighbors, Sweden did not impose a lockdown amid the coronavirus outbreak.
                     
                     The strategy — aimed at building a broad-base of immunity while protecting at-risk groups like the elderly — has proved controversial.
                     
                     But Sweden’s chief epidemiologist has said “herd immunity” could be reached in Stockholm within weeks.
                     
                     https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/no-lock … weeks.html

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        CHRIS57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        I would be very careful about Sweden. Last days show a Corona related mortality of 50% of natural mortality. Same number for the US is currently 25%. Social distancing makes some difference.
                        
                        Sweden doesn´t have a poverty and race issue like the US. So Sweden doesn´t have an excuse concerning poverty and race related preconditions. With this in mind, Swedish Corona death rate still double of the US - should make you think.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           Plus, I seriously doubt Sweden has many minorities such as the blacks and hispanics who are especially prone to the virus in the US.

                           replyreport
                           1. 96

                              wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              I haven't seen a single thing, even speculation, that one race is more prone than another.
                              
                              The virus WILL strike harder in areas of poverty - those areas are typically very high density and health care, both from hospitals and doctors, but from personal habits is not as good.
                              
                              But there is nothing to indicate that the black race, or hispanic, is hit any harder than any other race.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                 There's this:
                                 
                                 https://abc7ny.com/black-americans-coro … s/6086065/
                                 
                                 https://www.aarp.org/health/conditions- … id-19.html

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 96

                                    wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                    Both simply repeat that blacks (and/or hispanics) have a higher fatality rate.  Neither addresses whether other races in similar circumstances has an equal, lesser or higher rate.
                                    
                                    Which was the point: is it the race or the environment they tend to congregate in?  It would be hard (impossible) to argue that percentages living in poverty, or in close proximity to others, is the same for all the races in America.    There are certainly diseases that attack different races differently or more virulently, but I haven't seen any evidence Covid 19 is one of them.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 60

                                       Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                       A higher fatality rate was my point, Dan. There aren't as many blacks and hispanics in Sweden as we have here. I was speaking of Sweden when I made the comment.

                                       report
                     2. 81

                        peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        I think it depends on the country. Some countries are harder hit than others. My theory is that Italy and Spain are far more community organized then Sweden.
                        I don't believe in the so-called herd immunity, although I'm not an expert of course. It didn't work in Holland.
                        It also has to do with the healthcare system. Most people who got it worse and died where elderly people, living in care homes. Also, a lot of people died in Italy, Spain and Germany who lived in air polluted areas.
                        
                        https://www.theguardian.com/environment … v4FcCWNcwM

                        replyreport
                        1. 89

                           GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           I don't know if it is applicable to your comment peterstreep, but I was surprised to read that about 50% of Swedish households are single occupant.
                           
                           That is so counter-intuitive, to me, that I am unsure what to make of it—regarding this pandemic.
                           
                           GA

                           replyreport
                           1. 81

                              peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              I didn’t know that GA, interesting. Yes, I can imagine it helped.
                              
                              

                              replyreport
                        2. 60

                           CHRIS57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           Very doubtful, the correlation between air pollution and Corona. Could only be a reference to long term pollution back to the 60ties to 80ties. There is no real evidence. For every so called proof, there is a counterproof.
                           
                           A little example: Most polluted regions in Germany were in former East Germany. But exactly those regions have lowest death rates in Germany now. How come? This guy from Martin Luther University should know. That is in East Germany. Possibly Corona knows that pollution was not measured in former GDR.
                           
                           First outbreak in Germany with high local death toll was on the Niederrhein (close to Dutch border). No industry, no pollution... but heavy on carneval celebrations and gatherings in February. 
                           
                           There definitely is  correlation between Corona and corrupted immune systems.

                           replyreport
                           1. 81

                              peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              I would think that the Ruhrgebiet. Köln,Dusseldorf, Essen etc. would be the most polluted area. It’s highly industrial together with Holland and Belgium (highly dense population and industry) it makes sense that this area near the border is far more hit then the former  DDR.
                              People who already had long problems are hit the hardest, it makes sense to me.
                              
                              

                              replyreport
                     3. 0

                        Marisa Writesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        Time will tell.
                        
                        Let's face it, this is a unique situation we're facing.  It's inevitable that governments will make mistakes trying to handle it.  Time will tell who made the right choice and who made the wrong choice.
                        
                        I'm not sure Sweden's approach would work in the US.  Sweden is a socialist country with a compliant population (to give you an idea, vaccination isn't compulsory, yet 98% of children are vaccinated).  Though there is no compulsory lockdown, people are social distancing, and even though restaurants etc are open, people are staying away.

                        replyreport
                     4. 89

                        GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        There are some recent articles about Sweden's efforts that you should read, Readmikenow. Apparently Sweden's path hasn't been as successful as earlier portrayed.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
               3. 60

                  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  It's been discovered the first death from the virus was 2/6/20, someone who hadn't traveled anywhere abroad. This was before the first recorded death on 2/26/20, almost 3 weeks earlier than thought.

                  replyreport
5. 94

   Readmikenowposted 4 years ago

   According to a Stanford University study, Coronavirus has a much lower death rate than currently believed.  It could be less than one percent. 
   
   “That also means coronavirus is potentially much less deadly to the overall population than initially thought. As of Tuesday, the US’s coronavirus death rate was 4.1% and Stanford researchers said their findings show a death rate of just 0.12% to 0.2%.”
   
   
   https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ … ly-thought

   replyreport
   1. 88

      crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry, but Mike, you're clearly a smart guy. The ignorance is kind of staggering here.
      
      It's not the death rate, although that's important, it's the inability to stop the virus from spreading that's the big issue. So even if the death rate was the same as the flu, Coronavirus would spread far more widely and kill far more people and be catastrophic in its damage.
      
      That's why some of us are wearing masks and following social distancing guidelines since many of us are asymptomatic and will spread this to other people.
      
      But you know, hey, Darwinism I guess. Thank God places like Georgia are taking the lead on testing this all out and seeing if they all drop dead and/or spread this all over the place and put us back to square one.
      
      Also, you know, math. Rural America is starting to see this come to them at precisely the time they're starting to decide they're sick and tired of all these rules/recommendations.
      
      Good luck!

      replyreport
      1. 65

         tsadjatkoposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I’m sorry but Crank, As the Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO), Tedros Adhanom, explained in his February 28 briefing, “Most people will have mild disease and get better without needing any special care.” Several studies have found that about 80% of all the COVID-19 cases have relatively minor symptoms which end without severe illness and therefore remain unreported.
         
         Death rates in the recent past are likely to come down over time, because they happened before promising new clinical trials of antiviral drugs that proved effective against more deadly viruses such as SARS, HIV and Ebola.
         
         For perspective, the SARS coronavirus killed 774 people out of 8096 known cases in 2003, which was a death rate of 9.6% before it vanished the next year. Bird flu in 1997 was predicted to be a deadly pandemic, but it killed very few people before it disappeared. In its February 22 U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report, “CDC estimates that so far this season there have been at least 32 million flu illnesses… and 18,000 deaths from flu.” Dividing 18,000 by 32 million implies a low U.S. death rate of .0138% from the flu. Looking at the death rate alone is obviously not enough: We also have to look at the numbers of people infected, and the duration of the epidemic, which is why the flu killed so many more people than SARS. Still, it is important to avoid scaring people about the risk of death from COVID-19 by continuing to ignore the fact that the vast majority of cases “have mild disease and get better without needing any special care.”
         
         You say “ the inability to stop the virus from spreading that's the big issue.”
         
         Well if history tells us anything it is highly likely that this “threat” of it spreading is blown way out of proportion and certainly doesn’t merit destroying our economy which is what the insane continuation of this economic shut down is doing and will do.
         
         It’s also insane to listen to governors lament over the daily reported deaths in their state without even mentioning, never mentioning, their concern for the families of people killed daily from other causes some identical to this threat like the flu which are killing many more people daily than covid19. Nobody cares to mention any deaths but Covid19 deaths which tells you right there something is wrong about how they are promoting only Covid19 to create fear of the unknown which actually isn’t that unknown, more like ignored and taken totally out of context.
         
         

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            You're acting as though there will be no more deaths from the virus in 2020, while the other deaths you listed are for an entire year. Are you saying the virus is over?
            
            Or is this simply a distraction?
            
            "In 2020 the Worldometer website gained popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic. It came under cyber attack in March 2020. The site was hit with a DDoS attack, and was then hacked a few days later, resulting in incorrect information being shown on its COVID-19 statistics page for approximately 20 minutes. The hacked site showed a dramatic rise in COVID-19 cases in Vatican City, which caused panic among some users of social media.[10"

            replyreport
         2. 60

            CHRIS57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            @tsadjatko:
            Please be careful with these kinds of lists. They don´t say very much and if they do, it is very easy to take from it whatever you want.
            
            Example: Deaths from traffic accidents. The list gives 339k for 3 months, that is 12 weeks. So it is 28k per week, linear.
            
            Today we are a good 3 weeks in April, from April 1st. Death count of corona increased 150k in the past 3 weeks. That is 50k per week.
            So by April, it is 78% (50/28-1) more likely for a world citizen to die from Corona than in a traffic accident. See what i mean. You can twist and squeeze statistics in whatever way you want.
            
            Corona in its full strength for a short period of time is quite dangerous.

            replyreport
            1. 65

               tsadjatkoposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               To begin with Nothing I said was based on that chart.
               
               I just put it there to add some perspective to the world wide figures mostly in reference to my disgust with the ignorant behavior of the media and governors only expressing regret for corona deaths day after day.
               
               Obviously you are the only one taking just what you want from everything I said and twisting it!
               
               I Wonder why deaths from abortions and starvation that are astronomically larger than Covid19 and can be controlled mean nothing to you! To me I find that appalling.
               
               Taking that from the chart and applying it to you I suppose you could care less about the astronomical deaths of innocent people that can be easily prevented or reduced.

               replyreport
               1. 88

                  crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  What does Frank Turek have to say about all this?

                  replyreport
                  1. 65

                     tsadjatkoposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     So your job is to deflect for Chris57?
                     
                     Well I guess you are good for something.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        How did you achieve such a low profile score? Usually non-english speaking folk score in the 60's? Just curious....

                        replyreport
                        1. 65

                           tsadjatkoposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           As usual the pot smuggler is too busy shinning his “badge of honor” while smoking a doobie, both his own public claims to fame, to make any comment pertinent to the forum topic.
                           
                           Of course without neglecting his bigotry toward non-English speaking populations.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              I have no animosity for non-english speaking people. That would be yours and your role model's party. So once again, how did you achieve such a low profile score?

                              replyreport
                              1. 65

                                 tsadjatkoposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                 On a topic about the economy all you have to say is “ Usually non-english speaking folk score in the 60's? ” definitely a bigoted statement about non-English people implying they are inferior based on a score you don’t even know how’s it ascertained.
                                 
                                 Now you are going to whine,  as you always do that people don’t answer your stupid questions that never have anything to do with the topic of discussion.
                                 
                                 If you are anything we all know you are that predictable.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                    Usually non-english speaking people are ignorant of the correct usage of some words in the English language and it often shows in their writing. This has nothing to do with their intelligence at all, but it often leads to a low profile score.
                                    
                                    But you don't have that excuse, or do you?
                                    
                                    And you're wrong again. I never expect you to answer.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 65

                                       tsadjatkoposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                       Dig your hole deeper pot smuggler. Your “shoot the messenger” tactic is known by everyone on hp as all your brain damaged signature can muster besides “smoking a doobie makes me smart”

                                       report
               2. 60

                  CHRIS57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Abortions are not counted in natural death rates, derived from life expectancy. You may offend to this for whatever reason. It is not counted.
                  
                  Starvation is certainly an issue, but aren´t we discussing first world countries and not precarious situations in the third world or war zones?
                  
                  If you want to compare something, then do it with natural mortality (that includes already traffic accidents, starvation, smoking, cancer ...)
                  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 … eaths.html
                  https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/21/number-d … -12586536/
                  Overall death count in the books of 2020 are since Corona significantly higher than average natural death count in same period years ago. Even leads to the conclusion that reported corona death numbers are way too low. Or do we have an additional pandemic, disease ... eating us up.
                  
                  Of course, a remote county in a state xyz may not be affected at all by Corona. But - NYC certainly is affected with Corona death rate easily tripling natural death rate, not over the year, but in these weeks of April.

                  replyreport
      2. 94

         Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Crank,
         
         I'm shocked.  This is a study is from Stanford, which is a very prestigious medical university.  The study has been peer reviewed.  With how you are reacting to it, I'm wondering if you're anti-science. 
         
         Guess what?  There was actually two peer reviewed studies that came to the same conclusion.
         
         "Two studies approaching publication indicate that the number of people infected with 2019 novel coronavirus may be much greater than anyone had previously thought—as much as 85 times greater. If the studies (one by researchers out of Stanford University School of Medicine, the other by the University of Southern California and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health) are accurate, there is an almost unending list of good news. First, it appears that the novel coronavirus sparks serious disease in a much smaller percentage of the population than previously thought. Likewise, the case fatality rate would be hugely lower—something like 0.2%."
         
         https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/4 … kely-wrong

         replyreport
         1. 88

            crankaliciousposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Did you read your own link?
            
            "Non-peer reviewed study from Stanford found virus may be 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicate"
            
            I do always enjoy the yahoos on the internet telling me they know better than the experts. I guess we'll find out how that works in Georgia.
            
            And Mike, I think it's all solved anyway. I'm going to go lie in my tanning bed after swallowing a few Lysol wipes.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               "I think it's all solved anyway. I'm going to go lie in my tanning bed after swallowing a few Lysol wipes."
               
               Okay, I almost lost a mouthful of coffee when I read this.  I would respond, but it's just too funny to me.  You made my day.  Thanks for the laugh!

               replyreport
6. 60

   Randy Godwinposted 4 years ago

   Never mind. Keep making stuff up if it makes you feel better.

   replyreport