Huh, I guess all the European leaders must be murderers. More than 200,000 dead in Europe with less confirmed cases. Higher death rate than the US. This is from CNN too, not Fox News.
Europe has reported 4.4 million cases and 217,278 deaths among a population of 750 million, while the US has reported 6.7 million cases and 198,000 deaths in a population of 330 million.
@Balrog99: First, according to this source, America has a higher rate of cases and a higher rate of deaths as a percentage of the population. Having a lower rate of deaths as a percentage of cases isn't nearly as meaningful as the number of people overall who are actually dying or suffering long-term complications.
Second, yes--we CAN in fact lay blame on European leaders for failing to contain the virus. We should. They have the same culpability as Trump.
Either way, it's grim news. Europe is seeing a second wave in the wake of decreased regulations, less social distancing, and people returning home from summer vacations. It's a bad omen for us, too--even if we do see a significant drop, it can still come back.
Europe has reported 4.4 million cases and 217,278 deaths among a population of 750 million, while the US has reported 6.7 million cases and 198,000 deaths in a population of 330 million.
@Balrog99: First, according to this source, America has a higher rate of cases and a higher rate of deaths as a percentage of the population. Having a lower rate of deaths as a percentage of cases isn't nearly as meaningful as the number of people overall who are actually dying or suffering long-term complications.
Second, yes--we CAN in fact lay blame on European leaders for failing to contain the virus. We should. They have the same culpability as Trump.
Either way, it's grim news. Europe is seeing a second wave in the wake of decreased regulations, less social distancing, and people returning home from summer vacations. It's a bad omen for us, too--even if we do see a significant drop, it can still come back.
It was inevitable though. Barring draconian measures, similar to China and, to a lesser degree Korea, people just aren't going to continue to live under lockdown conditions. I was rather amazed at how the US was able to pull together and 'almost' get it under control back in March and early April. Then the inevitable idiocy started and it all went to Hell. Europe was able to keep it up a bit longer but the cracks are starting to show. If this were an experiment, I'd say it's back to the drawing board after this.
Well, I did just read some good news, however. Apparently, because of the Covid-19 measures, this year's flu season is predicted to be significantly less severe than normal. So we got that going for us anyway...
Ontario is in its second wave, and Ford has rolled back social gathering rules to accommodate the spike.
There was a prediction of a second wave hitting after restrictions have been lifted in both Europe and Canada. People lowered their guard as less people got infected and they were let out to socialize. The virus isn't gone and all it takes is one moron to spread it to others to kickstart another wave. Leaders of countries are not responsible for that.
Its how those leaders handle that second wave that dictates if they are murderers or not. If they are like Ford and let science take the lead (cautiously) they will probably prevent more deaths than cause. Compare that to the US's 'we're waiting for a miracle' that shows the neglect and lack of compassion for their citizens that makes people consider them murderers for letting the virus get out of control.
Huh, I guess all the European leaders must be murderers. More than 200,000 dead in Europe with less confirmed cases. Higher death rate than the US. This is from CNN too, not Fox News.
That article is pretty misleading. Case numbers from March and April are in no way comparable to those now because the extent of testing is so different. While reported cases in the UK are now pushing up towards the 5,000 or so per day seen in the first wave the actual number of cases at that time was estimated at 100,000 per day and we're still only at a small fraction of that now.
Death rates give a much better guide to trends over time. Here is the comparison between the US and UK in relation to attributed deaths from Covid-19.
That makes it clear the differences in the extent to which the first wave was beaten down and also (in the UK anyway) how much difference there is between the first wave and the 'second wave' (you can also go further and look at excess deaths, to see the extent to which potential Covid-19 deaths have not been reported as such - see this article for instance).
That's not to say there is no reason for concern in the UK (and elsewhere in Europe). Cases have been rising for several weeks and that's recently started to have small impacts on hospitalizations and deaths. If no action were taken in the next 6 weeks or so it would be conceivable European countries would be back in a similar position to February / March. That won't happen though because the monitoring systems (while still not good enough) are vastly better than earlier in the year and it is highly unlikely any European country will take no action.
I know I've made the point before, but it's worth saying again that I don't think trying to beat the disease down to very low levels is necessarily always the best course of action. The implications of the lockdown on the UK in terms of things like cancer survival, long-term mental health and children's education will take many years to tease out - even before considering the more direct economic impacts. For that reason I'm not certain that the US has been wrong in not fully locking down. I am certain though that Trump (whether because he's a pathological liar or just extremely lacking in scientific knowledge and judgment) has made things worse than they needed to be.
No it wasn't. There's a REASON these cases are being pointed out as exceptional.
It isn't exceptional if you know anything about the average American. What was exceptional was that we were almost able to pull off what Europe did. I know the type of people on the far right. The fact that the US was a couple weeks away from leveling the curve is frankly incredible. I think the only reason we were anywhere near that level of success is because of all the unknowns. I honestly thought we were going to succeed until about mid-April. When the gun-toting morons started hanging around Lansing I figured we were fucked...
Edit: The reason I compared all of Europe to the US is to compare apples to apples. Every US state had their own individual plan, just like Europe. Some worked better than others. For example, Michigan did terrible at the beginning, but considerably better than most after the initial period. Comparing the US to any one country, which I've seen quite often on the internet and in this thread, is not a fair comparison. This while clusterfuck isn't over yet either so I wouldn't be surprised to see anything when new data comes in.
There is no level of success. Let me be absolutely clear about this. Our closest neighbor (literally next door) didn't have a SINGLE death one day this week. Not one. The US is #1 in deaths, #1 in cases, and now somewhere around #6 in deaths per million, a number that is climbing every single day. In the end, the only countries we won't likely catch on that metric are Ecuador and Peru, and India and Brazil (who are also ruled by right-wing autocratic thugs).
We passed Italy in deaths per million a week ago, and that is a country who was refusing service to older patients they couldn't save at one point. We passed the UK mid-week.
I have no idea what the fuck the word "success" is supposed to mean in this context. Europe and the US are not the be all end all of the world, because there is a shitload of countries (including the one up North) who HAVE contained the virus. The only explanation for this viewpoint is that people have become numb to it. A country where 4 diplomats being tragically killed in Benghazi is an earth-shaking scandal, but 205,000 is just "shit happens". A country where we still have yearly solemn day of remberance for 3000 dead, but say of 70x that number "they were old and unhealthy, and I want my appetizer platter from TGI Friday's".
As for the US being 50 separate countries.......yeah, sometimes. Not during a national emergency. We didn't fight World War II with separate battle plans being implemented by Missouri and Vermont. We know from our own ears, and what has been reported since, that this Administration sought not only to abandon blue states (states where, I will add, even in the most extreme cases, STILL have at least 40% Republican voters), but to actively make the situation worse for political reasons. It's right up to the line of biological warfare or genocide. There has never been a President in history who literally treats any place on the map that didn't collectively vote for him as a foreign adversary, but that is 100% what we have right now.
There is no level of success. Let me be absolutely clear about this. Our closest neighbor (literally next door) didn't have a SINGLE death one day this week. Not one. The US is #1 in deaths, #1 in cases, and now somewhere around #6 in deaths per million, a number that is climbing every single day. In the end, the only countries we won't likely catch on that metric are Ecuador and Peru, and India and Brazil (who are also ruled by right-wing autocratic thugs).
We passed Italy in deaths per million a week ago, and that is a country who was refusing service to older patients they couldn't save at one point. We passed the UK mid-week.
I have no idea what the fuck the word "success" is supposed to mean in this context. Europe and the US are not the be all end all of the world, because there is a shitload of countries (including the one up North) who HAVE contained the virus. The only explanation for this viewpoint is that people have become numb to it. A country where 4 diplomats being tragically killed in Benghazi is an earth-shaking scandal, but 205,000 is just "shit happens". A country where we still have yearly solemn day of remberance for 3000 dead, but say of 70x that number "they were old and unhealthy, and I want my appetizer platter from TGI Friday's".
As for the US being 50 separate countries.......yeah, sometimes. Not during a national emergency. We didn't fight World War II with separate battle plans being implemented by Missouri and Vermont. We know from our own ears, and what has been reported since, that this Administration sought not only to abandon blue states (states where, I will add, even in the most extreme cases, STILL have at least 40% Republican voters), but to actively make the situation worse for political reasons. It's right up to the line of biological warfare or genocide. There has never been a President in history who literally treats any place on the map that didn't collectively vote for him as a foreign adversary, but that is 100% what we have right now.
That isn't exactly my point. Trump is a symptom, not the disease. The American people themselves are the problem with our response to Covid-19. The problem is individualism. That selfsame problem in this scenario can be our greatest strength in other situations. Ideally there would be more people in the middle so that the strengths could be enhanced and the weaknesses ameliorated. That doesn't seem to be the case in this day and age.
What caused the U.S to have such a high mortality rate?
Mostly poor performance at the very beginning. New York, New Jersey and Michigan failed to protect older folks in rest homes. Luckily, the stupider southern states had time to gauge the results from the early hiccups or it would have been much worse. Still a pretty pathetic response overall considering we almost pulled off levelling the curve. The western states did a good job initially, but opening back up too soon by a couple weeks coupled with moronic responses down south at the beginning of their outbreaks, pretty much sealed our fate.
Edit: I will say that Michigan, NY, and NJ did do a much better job after fumbling the ball initially. Despite disagreeing with Whitmer on some of her more arbitrary restrictions, overall I have to say she's done a pretty good job after the initial confusion.
The problem, overwhelmingly, was a President who viewed the virus as a plot against his reelection chances rather than a once in a century public health crisis, and pretended it wasn't real for two months. And for every semi-normal thing he said about it, he'd say three more that were winks and nods to his supporters to not take it seriously, or, indeed, to actively engage in behavior to spread it. We needed a national effort, and a massive campaign from the bully pulpit to convince the public to take it seriously. Not only didn't that happen, they went full-speed in the OPPOSITE direction 75% of the time, until there was nothing left but medical quackery and conspiracy theories. As I have said, plenty of Governors made mistakes, sometimes grievous ones. But that is entirely different than spending almost all your political capital convincing 30% of the population it was a hoax. Everything else is just ancillary. The reporting and public record on this are beyond question and utterly damning. If people decide to ignore that in November, then I honestly, at long last, do give the fuck up.
Yes, Cuomo made a terrible mistake sending some of the patients to nursing homes. However, Cuomo still gets high marks from the public because he was at least PROJECTING a sense of taking the virus seriously and not dismissing it. And he was. He made errors. It didn't help that his state was the test case for the whole country (incidentally, New York is now probably the safest place in the country because they now know how serious it is). And this is because the Federal Government ABANDONED the states and basically pitted them against each other in a sort of Hunger Games of federalism. Where Governors were having to fly in PPE in the dark of night to airports so it wouldn't be confiscated by the feds. The strategy, from the beginning was "I may be President of the United States, but this has nothing to do with me, I take no responsibility for it, and you're on your own." It's just absolutely mind-boggling that isn't enough to have him losing 70%-30% in the polls on it's own. He abandoned all of us. There aren't even words to describe how unacceptable that is coming from a national leader. And everyone, even his supporters, know that's what he did.
I'm not going to sit here and repost Trump's endless public statements downplaying or outright dismissing the virus. I'm not going to repost the dozens of news stories that back up what I've said in the previous paragraphs. I just don't have the energy to do so. This was a catastrophic disaster. The only possible comparisons are Andrew Johnson and Herbert Hoover. This was just blatant and willful abdication of his #1 duty, which is protecting the citizens of the country he leads. But, people were warned. We tried. It wasn't heeded. I barely have to will to continue arguing about it. Mostly because the very idea that there is a still a debate about this is enough to drive a semi-rational person insane. The state of affairs is genuinely, truely depressing. And rest assured the rest of the world is watching us in horror.
I don’t know where you are getting your Canadian numbers from, but the death count at the start of September from Canada reads like this:
6,3,6,0,2,2,1,7,2,8,0,7,9,5,7,5,6
Granted those numbers aren’t the 1000s of death the US is looking at, but we still have cases and they are currently rising.
Canada is far from actually containing it, but we aren’t letting it run rampant either. My biggest worry, and the biggest worry of most Canadians now these days, is Americans crossing the border illegally and spreading the virus to communities that were able to skirt it from the beginning.
And contrary to what Trump says, we do not want our border reopened. We may want loved ones separated by the virus to come to Canada, self isolate for two weeks and then never return home but it’s hard to make sure those people are quarantining properly.
I don’t know where you are getting your Canadian numbers from, but the death count at the start of September from Canada reads like this:
6,3,6,0,2,2,1,7,2,8,0,7,9,5,7,5,6
Granted those numbers aren’t the 1000s of death the US is looking at, but we still have cases and they are currently rising.
Canada is far from actually containing it, but we aren’t letting it run rampant either. My biggest worry, and the biggest worry of most Canadians now these days, is Americans crossing the border illegally and spreading the virus to communities that were able to skirt it from the beginning.
And contrary to what Trump says, we do not want our border reopened. We may want loved ones separated by the virus to come to Canada, self isolate for two weeks and then never return home but it’s hard to make sure those people are quarantining properly.
When I said they didn't have a death one day last week, I literally meant "one" day. It was phrased wrong. At this point, even having a single day with no deaths is so far from what the reality of what is happening in the US is that it is more than worthy of pointing out.
I'm not disagreeing with you, per se. What bothers me the most is how close we were to succeeding even without support from our buck-naked Emperor. Once the genie got out of the bottle though, with the way the far-right thinks and how entrenched they are below the Mason-Dixon Line, we were duly fucked. I briefly hoped we'd avoid the worst of this back in May, but Memorial Day pretty much ended any hopes I had of nipping this in the bud. After that point I was just hoping things would open up enough to get back to some sort of normal and hope the death count didn't mount too much. As far as I can see, there isn't much hope of getting any kind of control of the virus in this country until there's a vaccine. I'm not even in favor of another shutdown anymore because I dont see any hope of it working and without full support of the American people it will just cause more misery to people who can't afford to stay at home anymore. I know it's bleak, but that's how I see it.
I'm not disagreeing with you, per se. What bothers me the most is how close we were to succeeding even without support from our buck-naked Emperor. Once the genie got out of the bottle though, with the way the far-right thinks and how entrenched they are below the Mason-Dixon Line, we were duly fucked. I briefly hoped we'd avoid the worst of this back in May, but Memorial Day pretty much ended any hopes I had of nipping this in the bud. After that point I was just hoping things would open up enough to get back to some sort of normal and hope the death count didn't mount too much. As far as I can see, there isn't much hope of getting any kind of control of the virus in this country until there's a vaccine. I'm not even in favor of another shutdown anymore because I dont see any hope of it working and without full support of the American people it will just cause more misery to people who can't afford to stay at home anymore. I know it's bleak, but that's how I see it.
It would have definitely helped if the President set a good example and wasn't one of the ones pushing against health measures. That just has undermined our whole country. Given license to the far right to do the dumb stuff and excuses to young people who think they're immortal anyway.
I'm not disagreeing with you, per se. What bothers me the most is how close we were to succeeding even without support from our buck-naked Emperor. Once the genie got out of the bottle though, with the way the far-right thinks and how entrenched they are below the Mason-Dixon Line, we were duly fucked. I briefly hoped we'd avoid the worst of this back in May, but Memorial Day pretty much ended any hopes I had of nipping this in the bud. After that point I was just hoping things would open up enough to get back to some sort of normal and hope the death count didn't mount too much. As far as I can see, there isn't much hope of getting any kind of control of the virus in this country until there's a vaccine. I'm not even in favor of another shutdown anymore because I dont see any hope of it working and without full support of the American people it will just cause more misery to people who can't afford to stay at home anymore. I know it's bleak, but that's how I see it.
It would have definitely helped if the President set a good example and wasn't one of the ones pushing against health measures. That just has undermined our whole country. Given license to the far right to do the dumb stuff and excuses to young people who think they're immortal anyway.
He is still making fun of Biden for wearing a mask at every single rally. This is what I mean by the "wink and nod". Every couple weeks, he'll make some absolutely bare minimum statement about the importance of preventative measures. But his supporters KNOW that is him playing with the press so they write one of their endless "pivot" stories. They know he's against masks. He knows what he's doing, and so do they. His true communication with his followers is always the red meat, not his manipulative statements to the frankly pathetically naive DC press. He's lowered the bar so low for himself that if he doesn't act like a zoo monkey throwing shit at visitors for 15 minutes, it produces endless "change in tone" pieces the next day in every newspaper and CNN pundit.
The latest in a series of leaks of financial information is the FinCen Files. This helps show the extent to which banks are being used to transfer dodgy money internationally.
I think the usefulness of the UK to money launderers has been a scandal for at least 20 years, if not a particularly well-known one. Successive UK governments of both political persuasions have taken the line that the financial sector in the UK is of such importance that they didn't want to risk discouraging that through strong regulation. As a result there are many thousands of off-the-shelf companies operating here where nothing is known of their true owners and this is one of the major reasons why so many Russians have links with the UK. There are currently proposals to tighten up somewhat on regulations, such as requiring directors to verify their identities, but I'm doubtful about how much difference those will make in practice.
One reason for posting here is to note that the leaks include a bit of information on how donations have been used to buy access to politicians. I don't think that's a major problem in the UK (at least compared to the US), but I would prefer it to not be a problem at all.
Edit: here's a bit more information about the way money laundering works.
@Balrog99 "What bothers me the most is how close we were to succeeding even without support from our buck-naked Emperor."
What? In what universe were close to "succeeding"? What does success look like to you?!
Back in March when the shutdown was real. Perhaps it wasn't as stark where you live, but it was eerie driving to work then. I remember being the only car on the freeway for miles down by Toledo, OH one Saturday. It could have worked, but it didn't.
Since she didn't get her due over the weekend, a great factoid about Ruth Bader Ginsburg: if you are a widower who receives Social Security benefits after the death of your spouse, she is the person to thank, since she won that case as a lawyer. Prior to that, only women received benefits from their deceased husband, not the other way around. You probably can't put a measurement on how this positively impacted the lives of single fathers whose wives died prematurely. Also puts to bed any posthumous smears of "radical feminism":
This is also an example of how rights are not given. Often, they have to be taken while those denying them are pulled kicking and screaming. And why government policies and court decisions matter. To some, this may seem mundane. For most people, it would never effect them. For those it does, it's life-altering.
At this point, a Democrat sticking to their previous position on this issue and not cynically lying about it is basically ceding to being engaged in asymmetrical warfare on the losing end. We need someone as cynical and cold as McConnell in the worst way. This is why they fucking lose. Absolutely no understanding they are now dealing with the dynamics of raw power and nothing else. Feinstein basically said the same thing today about the filibuster. These two have had too many lunches with Republican colleagues over the years, and yet they still don't understand them at all.
They don't give a flying fuck about the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is CENTRAL to the power move they are making. They WANT you to know they are being hypocritical. It's them saying, "we can do whatever we want, and you can't and won't stop us". It's a demoralization technique.
This is Ned Stark handing Barristan Robert's last words and Cersei ripping them up in his face. The Democrats think this is "The West Wing" and Republicans correctly realize it's actually "Game of Thrones".
At this point, a Democrat sticking to their previous position on this issue and not cynically lying about it is basically ceding to being engaged in asymmetrical warfare on the losing end. We need someone as cynical and cold as McConnell in the worst way. This is why they fucking lose. Absolutely no understanding they are now dealing with the dynamics of raw power and nothing else. Feinstein basically said the same thing today about the filibuster. These two have had too many lunches with Republican colleagues over the years, and yet they still don't understand them at all.
They don't give a flying fuck about the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is CENTRAL to the power move they are making. They WANT you to know they are being hypocritical. It's them saying, "we can do whatever we want, and you can't and won't stop us". It's a demoralization technique.
This is Ned Stark handing Barristan Robert's last words and Cersei ripping them up in his face. The Democrats think this is "The West Wing" and Republicans correctly realize it's actually "Game of Thrones".
Pushing ahead with the nomination represents a significant gamble by the Republicans. It's only convention that has prevented the Supreme Court from being a political football for many years. Unlike you, I don't believe that the Democrats will tolerate a situation in perpetuity where they maintain adherence to conventions that the Republicans ignore.
I suspect there's a very large straw coming down on a camel already severely weakened by coronavirus . If a nomination does go through, and the Democrats do take the Senate, I would say the odds are that they will indeed expand SCOTUS. I can understand why they won't want to say that now, as suggesting there's a way out would have a tendency to depress Democrat turnout, but that doesn't mean they won't end up doing it anyway.
There's also a danger with the current Republican argument that a nomination should go through now because the president and Senate are under the same control. Apart from ignoring the role of the House, this opens the door to future arguments about mandates for controversial issues. For instance SCOTUS determined nearly 50 years ago in Roe v Wade that there was a constitutional right to abortion. That's something that SCOTUS could well overturn in future, but such a move would probably be to say there is no constitutional right - not that the constitution prohibits abortion. That means the Republicans would be foolish to rely on SCOTUS to block future federal legislation, by a Democrat-run government, mandating a right to abortion - and such legislation would almost certainly go well past the existing rights which have been chipped away at by actions of individual States.
At this point, a Democrat sticking to their previous position on this issue and not cynically lying about it is basically ceding to being engaged in asymmetrical warfare on the losing end. We need someone as cynical and cold as McConnell in the worst way. This is why they fucking lose. Absolutely no understanding they are now dealing with the dynamics of raw power and nothing else. Feinstein basically said the same thing today about the filibuster. These two have had too many lunches with Republican colleagues over the years, and yet they still don't understand them at all.
They don't give a flying fuck about the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is CENTRAL to the power move they are making. They WANT you to know they are being hypocritical. It's them saying, "we can do whatever we want, and you can't and won't stop us". It's a demoralization technique.
This is Ned Stark handing Barristan Robert's last words and Cersei ripping them up in his face. The Democrats think this is "The West Wing" and Republicans correctly realize it's actually "Game of Thrones".
Pushing ahead with the nomination represents a significant gamble by the Republicans. It's only convention that has prevented the Supreme Court from being a political football for many years. Unlike you, I don't believe that the Democrats will tolerate a situation in perpetuity where they maintain adherence to conventions that the Republicans ignore.
I suspect there's a very large straw coming down on a camel already severely weakened by coronavirus . If a nomination does go through, and the Democrats do take the Senate, I would say the odds are that they will indeed expand SCOTUS. I can understand why they won't want to say that now, as suggesting there's a way out would have a tendency to depress Democrat turnout, but that doesn't mean they won't end up doing it anyway.
There's also a danger with the current Republican argument that a nomination should go through now because the president and Senate are under the same control. Apart from ignoring the role of the House, this opens the door to future arguments about mandates for controversial issues. For instance SCOTUS determined nearly 50 years ago in Roe v Wade that there was a constitutional right to abortion. That's something that SCOTUS could well overturn in future, but such a move would probably be to say there is no constitutional right - not that the constitution prohibits abortion. That means the Republicans would be foolish to rely on SCOTUS to block future federal legislation, by a Democrat-run government, mandating a right to abortion - and such legislation would almost certainly go well past the existing rights which have been chipped away at by actions of individual States.
It's hard to say. A big part of Trump's 2016 victory was getting squishy conservatives to vote for him specifically on the promise that he would appoint justices that would usher in victory on some decades-long conservative projects like overturning Roe. Fulfilling that promise now could be good for him and other Republican Senators.
I certainly agree that it will also boost Democratic turnout. But Trump has kind of boxed himself into an electoral corner in his three years. He can't credibly make a play to the center of the electorate, so he has to rely on rallying just enough social conservatives in a place like Pennsylvania to get a narrow Electoral College win.
The opposite play -- accommodating Democratic demands to hold off on the vote -- don't seem to have the same upside for Trump imo. Centrists uncommitted to the conservative project have largely already abandoned him.
If anything, for true conservatives, holding off on the vote is the gamble here. Securing a durable conservative majority on the court is probably worth lowering your election odds in a race you were likely to lose anyway. The electoral landscape can change radically in two or four years.
I still think if they flip the senate they are going to go after Kavanaugh and impeach him for lying under oath. The Democrats will “steal” the seat that way.
I agree packing the courts isn’t the road you want to go down as nothing prevents the Republicans from doing it in the future. What’s worse I think, is that the just the talk of this might give them enough leeway to do it now. Push 3 justices through instead of just one, taking away Robert’s now central stance. We’ll have to see.
@Balrog99 "What bothers me the most is how close we were to succeeding even without support from our buck-naked Emperor."
What? In what universe were close to "succeeding"? What does success look like to you?!
Back in March when the shutdown was real. Perhaps it wasn't as stark where you live, but it was eerie driving to work then. I remember being the only car on the freeway for miles down by Toledo, OH one Saturday. It could have worked, but it didn't.
Except that more people had already died that could have been prevented. It was a late start and a failure out the gate.
Romney has acquiesced to McConnell. Trump's pick will be on the court before January. If Trump were to prevail in November, it's almost assured it will end up 7-2 within four years given Breyer's age. An untimely death of either Kagan or Sotomayor could drive it as far as 8-1. That isn't remotely out of the realm of possibility.
Comments
Huh, I guess all the European leaders must be murderers. More than 200,000 dead in Europe with less confirmed cases. Higher death rate than the US. This is from CNN too, not Fox News.
Second, yes--we CAN in fact lay blame on European leaders for failing to contain the virus. We should. They have the same culpability as Trump.
Either way, it's grim news. Europe is seeing a second wave in the wake of decreased regulations, less social distancing, and people returning home from summer vacations. It's a bad omen for us, too--even if we do see a significant drop, it can still come back.
It was inevitable though. Barring draconian measures, similar to China and, to a lesser degree Korea, people just aren't going to continue to live under lockdown conditions. I was rather amazed at how the US was able to pull together and 'almost' get it under control back in March and early April. Then the inevitable idiocy started and it all went to Hell. Europe was able to keep it up a bit longer but the cracks are starting to show. If this were an experiment, I'd say it's back to the drawing board after this.
Well, I did just read some good news, however. Apparently, because of the Covid-19 measures, this year's flu season is predicted to be significantly less severe than normal. So we got that going for us anyway...
Edit: Here's the article about the flu.
https://heavy.com/news/2020/09/coronavirus-mitigation-less-severe-flu-season/
There was a prediction of a second wave hitting after restrictions have been lifted in both Europe and Canada. People lowered their guard as less people got infected and they were let out to socialize. The virus isn't gone and all it takes is one moron to spread it to others to kickstart another wave. Leaders of countries are not responsible for that.
Its how those leaders handle that second wave that dictates if they are murderers or not. If they are like Ford and let science take the lead (cautiously) they will probably prevent more deaths than cause. Compare that to the US's 'we're waiting for a miracle' that shows the neglect and lack of compassion for their citizens that makes people consider them murderers for letting the virus get out of control.
That article is pretty misleading. Case numbers from March and April are in no way comparable to those now because the extent of testing is so different. While reported cases in the UK are now pushing up towards the 5,000 or so per day seen in the first wave the actual number of cases at that time was estimated at 100,000 per day and we're still only at a small fraction of that now.
Death rates give a much better guide to trends over time. Here is the comparison between the US and UK in relation to attributed deaths from Covid-19.
That makes it clear the differences in the extent to which the first wave was beaten down and also (in the UK anyway) how much difference there is between the first wave and the 'second wave' (you can also go further and look at excess deaths, to see the extent to which potential Covid-19 deaths have not been reported as such - see this article for instance).
That's not to say there is no reason for concern in the UK (and elsewhere in Europe). Cases have been rising for several weeks and that's recently started to have small impacts on hospitalizations and deaths. If no action were taken in the next 6 weeks or so it would be conceivable European countries would be back in a similar position to February / March. That won't happen though because the monitoring systems (while still not good enough) are vastly better than earlier in the year and it is highly unlikely any European country will take no action.
I know I've made the point before, but it's worth saying again that I don't think trying to beat the disease down to very low levels is necessarily always the best course of action. The implications of the lockdown on the UK in terms of things like cancer survival, long-term mental health and children's education will take many years to tease out - even before considering the more direct economic impacts. For that reason I'm not certain that the US has been wrong in not fully locking down. I am certain though that Trump (whether because he's a pathological liar or just extremely lacking in scientific knowledge and judgment) has made things worse than they needed to be.
No it wasn't. There's a REASON these cases are being pointed out as exceptional.
It isn't exceptional if you know anything about the average American. What was exceptional was that we were almost able to pull off what Europe did. I know the type of people on the far right. The fact that the US was a couple weeks away from leveling the curve is frankly incredible. I think the only reason we were anywhere near that level of success is because of all the unknowns. I honestly thought we were going to succeed until about mid-April. When the gun-toting morons started hanging around Lansing I figured we were fucked...
Edit: The reason I compared all of Europe to the US is to compare apples to apples. Every US state had their own individual plan, just like Europe. Some worked better than others. For example, Michigan did terrible at the beginning, but considerably better than most after the initial period. Comparing the US to any one country, which I've seen quite often on the internet and in this thread, is not a fair comparison. This while clusterfuck isn't over yet either so I wouldn't be surprised to see anything when new data comes in.
We passed Italy in deaths per million a week ago, and that is a country who was refusing service to older patients they couldn't save at one point. We passed the UK mid-week.
I have no idea what the fuck the word "success" is supposed to mean in this context. Europe and the US are not the be all end all of the world, because there is a shitload of countries (including the one up North) who HAVE contained the virus. The only explanation for this viewpoint is that people have become numb to it. A country where 4 diplomats being tragically killed in Benghazi is an earth-shaking scandal, but 205,000 is just "shit happens". A country where we still have yearly solemn day of remberance for 3000 dead, but say of 70x that number "they were old and unhealthy, and I want my appetizer platter from TGI Friday's".
As for the US being 50 separate countries.......yeah, sometimes. Not during a national emergency. We didn't fight World War II with separate battle plans being implemented by Missouri and Vermont. We know from our own ears, and what has been reported since, that this Administration sought not only to abandon blue states (states where, I will add, even in the most extreme cases, STILL have at least 40% Republican voters), but to actively make the situation worse for political reasons. It's right up to the line of biological warfare or genocide. There has never been a President in history who literally treats any place on the map that didn't collectively vote for him as a foreign adversary, but that is 100% what we have right now.
That isn't exactly my point. Trump is a symptom, not the disease. The American people themselves are the problem with our response to Covid-19. The problem is individualism. That selfsame problem in this scenario can be our greatest strength in other situations. Ideally there would be more people in the middle so that the strengths could be enhanced and the weaknesses ameliorated. That doesn't seem to be the case in this day and age.
Mostly poor performance at the very beginning. New York, New Jersey and Michigan failed to protect older folks in rest homes. Luckily, the stupider southern states had time to gauge the results from the early hiccups or it would have been much worse. Still a pretty pathetic response overall considering we almost pulled off levelling the curve. The western states did a good job initially, but opening back up too soon by a couple weeks coupled with moronic responses down south at the beginning of their outbreaks, pretty much sealed our fate.
Edit: I will say that Michigan, NY, and NJ did do a much better job after fumbling the ball initially. Despite disagreeing with Whitmer on some of her more arbitrary restrictions, overall I have to say she's done a pretty good job after the initial confusion.
Yes, Cuomo made a terrible mistake sending some of the patients to nursing homes. However, Cuomo still gets high marks from the public because he was at least PROJECTING a sense of taking the virus seriously and not dismissing it. And he was. He made errors. It didn't help that his state was the test case for the whole country (incidentally, New York is now probably the safest place in the country because they now know how serious it is). And this is because the Federal Government ABANDONED the states and basically pitted them against each other in a sort of Hunger Games of federalism. Where Governors were having to fly in PPE in the dark of night to airports so it wouldn't be confiscated by the feds. The strategy, from the beginning was "I may be President of the United States, but this has nothing to do with me, I take no responsibility for it, and you're on your own." It's just absolutely mind-boggling that isn't enough to have him losing 70%-30% in the polls on it's own. He abandoned all of us. There aren't even words to describe how unacceptable that is coming from a national leader. And everyone, even his supporters, know that's what he did.
I'm not going to sit here and repost Trump's endless public statements downplaying or outright dismissing the virus. I'm not going to repost the dozens of news stories that back up what I've said in the previous paragraphs. I just don't have the energy to do so. This was a catastrophic disaster. The only possible comparisons are Andrew Johnson and Herbert Hoover. This was just blatant and willful abdication of his #1 duty, which is protecting the citizens of the country he leads. But, people were warned. We tried. It wasn't heeded. I barely have to will to continue arguing about it. Mostly because the very idea that there is a still a debate about this is enough to drive a semi-rational person insane. The state of affairs is genuinely, truely depressing. And rest assured the rest of the world is watching us in horror.
I don’t know where you are getting your Canadian numbers from, but the death count at the start of September from Canada reads like this:
6,3,6,0,2,2,1,7,2,8,0,7,9,5,7,5,6
Granted those numbers aren’t the 1000s of death the US is looking at, but we still have cases and they are currently rising.
Canada is far from actually containing it, but we aren’t letting it run rampant either. My biggest worry, and the biggest worry of most Canadians now these days, is Americans crossing the border illegally and spreading the virus to communities that were able to skirt it from the beginning.
And contrary to what Trump says, we do not want our border reopened. We may want loved ones separated by the virus to come to Canada, self isolate for two weeks and then never return home but it’s hard to make sure those people are quarantining properly.
I will also say, school boards here are taking the spread seriously. Two teachers and two students both tested positive for Covid and the school has shut down for two weeks. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/monsignor-paul-baxter-closure-1.5731705
When I said they didn't have a death one day last week, I literally meant "one" day. It was phrased wrong. At this point, even having a single day with no deaths is so far from what the reality of what is happening in the US is that it is more than worthy of pointing out.
I'm not disagreeing with you, per se. What bothers me the most is how close we were to succeeding even without support from our buck-naked Emperor. Once the genie got out of the bottle though, with the way the far-right thinks and how entrenched they are below the Mason-Dixon Line, we were duly fucked. I briefly hoped we'd avoid the worst of this back in May, but Memorial Day pretty much ended any hopes I had of nipping this in the bud. After that point I was just hoping things would open up enough to get back to some sort of normal and hope the death count didn't mount too much. As far as I can see, there isn't much hope of getting any kind of control of the virus in this country until there's a vaccine. I'm not even in favor of another shutdown anymore because I dont see any hope of it working and without full support of the American people it will just cause more misery to people who can't afford to stay at home anymore. I know it's bleak, but that's how I see it.
It would have definitely helped if the President set a good example and wasn't one of the ones pushing against health measures. That just has undermined our whole country. Given license to the far right to do the dumb stuff and excuses to young people who think they're immortal anyway.
He is still making fun of Biden for wearing a mask at every single rally. This is what I mean by the "wink and nod". Every couple weeks, he'll make some absolutely bare minimum statement about the importance of preventative measures. But his supporters KNOW that is him playing with the press so they write one of their endless "pivot" stories. They know he's against masks. He knows what he's doing, and so do they. His true communication with his followers is always the red meat, not his manipulative statements to the frankly pathetically naive DC press. He's lowered the bar so low for himself that if he doesn't act like a zoo monkey throwing shit at visitors for 15 minutes, it produces endless "change in tone" pieces the next day in every newspaper and CNN pundit.
I think the usefulness of the UK to money launderers has been a scandal for at least 20 years, if not a particularly well-known one. Successive UK governments of both political persuasions have taken the line that the financial sector in the UK is of such importance that they didn't want to risk discouraging that through strong regulation. As a result there are many thousands of off-the-shelf companies operating here where nothing is known of their true owners and this is one of the major reasons why so many Russians have links with the UK. There are currently proposals to tighten up somewhat on regulations, such as requiring directors to verify their identities, but I'm doubtful about how much difference those will make in practice.
One reason for posting here is to note that the leaks include a bit of information on how donations have been used to buy access to politicians. I don't think that's a major problem in the UK (at least compared to the US), but I would prefer it to not be a problem at all.
Edit: here's a bit more information about the way money laundering works.
What? In what universe were close to "succeeding"? What does success look like to you?!
Back in March when the shutdown was real. Perhaps it wasn't as stark where you live, but it was eerie driving to work then. I remember being the only car on the freeway for miles down by Toledo, OH one Saturday. It could have worked, but it didn't.
https://www.nytimes.com/1973/03/11/archives/a-widower-sues-for-benefits-widower-sues-for-benefits.html
This is also an example of how rights are not given. Often, they have to be taken while those denying them are pulled kicking and screaming. And why government policies and court decisions matter. To some, this may seem mundane. For most people, it would never effect them. For those it does, it's life-altering.
They don't give a flying fuck about the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is CENTRAL to the power move they are making. They WANT you to know they are being hypocritical. It's them saying, "we can do whatever we want, and you can't and won't stop us". It's a demoralization technique.
This is Ned Stark handing Barristan Robert's last words and Cersei ripping them up in his face. The Democrats think this is "The West Wing" and Republicans correctly realize it's actually "Game of Thrones".
Pushing ahead with the nomination represents a significant gamble by the Republicans. It's only convention that has prevented the Supreme Court from being a political football for many years. Unlike you, I don't believe that the Democrats will tolerate a situation in perpetuity where they maintain adherence to conventions that the Republicans ignore.
I suspect there's a very large straw coming down on a camel already severely weakened by coronavirus
There's also a danger with the current Republican argument that a nomination should go through now because the president and Senate are under the same control. Apart from ignoring the role of the House, this opens the door to future arguments about mandates for controversial issues. For instance SCOTUS determined nearly 50 years ago in Roe v Wade that there was a constitutional right to abortion. That's something that SCOTUS could well overturn in future, but such a move would probably be to say there is no constitutional right - not that the constitution prohibits abortion. That means the Republicans would be foolish to rely on SCOTUS to block future federal legislation, by a Democrat-run government, mandating a right to abortion - and such legislation would almost certainly go well past the existing rights which have been chipped away at by actions of individual States.
It's hard to say. A big part of Trump's 2016 victory was getting squishy conservatives to vote for him specifically on the promise that he would appoint justices that would usher in victory on some decades-long conservative projects like overturning Roe. Fulfilling that promise now could be good for him and other Republican Senators.
I certainly agree that it will also boost Democratic turnout. But Trump has kind of boxed himself into an electoral corner in his three years. He can't credibly make a play to the center of the electorate, so he has to rely on rallying just enough social conservatives in a place like Pennsylvania to get a narrow Electoral College win.
The opposite play -- accommodating Democratic demands to hold off on the vote -- don't seem to have the same upside for Trump imo. Centrists uncommitted to the conservative project have largely already abandoned him.
If anything, for true conservatives, holding off on the vote is the gamble here. Securing a durable conservative majority on the court is probably worth lowering your election odds in a race you were likely to lose anyway. The electoral landscape can change radically in two or four years.
I still think if they flip the senate they are going to go after Kavanaugh and impeach him for lying under oath. The Democrats will “steal” the seat that way.
I agree packing the courts isn’t the road you want to go down as nothing prevents the Republicans from doing it in the future. What’s worse I think, is that the just the talk of this might give them enough leeway to do it now. Push 3 justices through instead of just one, taking away Robert’s now central stance. We’ll have to see.
Except that more people had already died that could have been prevented. It was a late start and a failure out the gate.