[teejers1]

Trying to make campaign issues out of this stuff by either Party just isn't going to work. Through February, there was too much consensus on an overly optimistic scenario.

Could not disagree more. It will be THE campaign issue, and there will be spinning and arguments from both sides.
But to say there was too much uncertainty to act is incorrect.  I'll give Newsom credit for acting quickly, and I believe things in CA will be under control on the front end relatively quickly.  [The really hard part comes in next stage:  navigating the grip on the reigns.].  Anyway, these actions in CA (and in other areas) can be compared and contrasted to federal actions.  That is a completely legit campaign issue . . . but one that I hope awaits the actual campaign.  (Burger, Outsider, and others are "jumping the gun" . . . but whatever, I'm no fan of direct censoring, "shame censoring" or whatever else.  Their commentary is far from baseless).

BTW, the headline in today's Merc talked about # of jobs lost in Bay Area now and CA overall.  It's not pretty.

[teejers1]

Trying to make campaign issues out of this stuff by either Party just isn't going to work. Through February, there was too much consensus on an overly optimistic scenario.

Could not disagree more. It will be THE campaign issue, and there will be spinning and arguments from both sides.
But to say there was too much uncertainty to act is incorrect.  I'll give Newsom credit for acting quickly, and I believe things in CA will be under control on the front end relatively quickly.  [The really hard part comes in next stage:  navigating the grip on the reigns.].  Anyway, these actions in CA (and in other areas) can be compared and contrasted to federal actions.  That is a completely legit campaign issue . . . but one that I hope awaits the actual campaign.  (Burger, Outsider, and others are "jumping the gun" . . . but whatever, I'm no fan of direct censoring, "shame censoring" or whatever else.  Their commentary is far from baseless).

BTW, the headline in today's Merc talked about # of jobs lost in Bay Area now and CA overall.  It's not pretty.

[BostonCard]

The ABC report was updated to include the MSCI's comment:

"As a matter of practice the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists," the statement said.

I am inclined to believe the statement given the timeline.  November 2019 was awfully early in the pandemic, probably before it was recognized. Even allowing for the CCP's delay in informing other entities, the likelihood that it was recognizable above normal influenza and pneumonia that early is pretty low.

But China notified the WHO on December 31, 2019, the first death was reported Jan. 11, the first cases outside of China occurred Jan. 20,  and the first case was reported in the US on Jan. 21.  You don't need to retcon that we should have known back in November to realize that impaired testing and not monitoring for community spread for a month was a failing.

BC

---

Trying to make campaign issues out of this stuff by either Party just isn't going to work. Through February, there was too much consensus on an overly optimistic scenario.

Could not disagree more. It will be THE campaign issue, and there will be spinning and arguments from both sides.
But to say there was too much uncertainty to act is incorrect.  I'll give Newsom credit for acting quickly, and I believe things in CA will be under control on the front end relatively quickly.  [The really hard part comes in next stage:  navigating the grip on the reigns.].  Anyway, these actions in CA (and in other areas) can be compared and contrasted to federal actions.  That is a completely legit campaign issue . . . but one that I hope awaits the actual campaign.  (Burger, Outsider, and others are "jumping the gun" . . . but whatever, I'm no fan of direct censoring, "shame censoring" or whatever else.  Their commentary is far from baseless).

BTW, the headline in today's Merc talked about # of jobs lost in Bay Area now and CA overall.  It's not pretty.

I agree with Teejers, and I would further compare the response to the outbreak in California (and Washington) to that in New York (so this isn't a partisan issue).  Even more impressive is the contrast between the city of San Francisco and the city of New York.  Getting on top of this early made a difference.

BC

[BostonCard]

The ABC report was updated to include the MSCI's comment:

"As a matter of practice the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists," the statement said.

I am inclined to believe the statement given the timeline.  November 2019 was awfully early in the pandemic, probably before it was recognized. Even allowing for the CCP's delay in informing other entities, the likelihood that it was recognizable above normal influenza and pneumonia that early is pretty low.

But China notified the WHO on December 31, 2019, the first death was reported Jan. 11, the first cases outside of China occurred Jan. 20,  and the first case was reported in the US on Jan. 21.  You don't need to retcon that we should have known back in November to realize that impaired testing and not monitoring for community spread for a month was a failing.

BC

---

Trying to make campaign issues out of this stuff by either Party just isn't going to work. Through February, there was too much consensus on an overly optimistic scenario.

Could not disagree more. It will be THE campaign issue, and there will be spinning and arguments from both sides.
But to say there was too much uncertainty to act is incorrect.  I'll give Newsom credit for acting quickly, and I believe things in CA will be under control on the front end relatively quickly.  [The really hard part comes in next stage:  navigating the grip on the reigns.].  Anyway, these actions in CA (and in other areas) can be compared and contrasted to federal actions.  That is a completely legit campaign issue . . . but one that I hope awaits the actual campaign.  (Burger, Outsider, and others are "jumping the gun" . . . but whatever, I'm no fan of direct censoring, "shame censoring" or whatever else.  Their commentary is far from baseless).

BTW, the headline in today's Merc talked about # of jobs lost in Bay Area now and CA overall.  It's not pretty.

I agree with Teejers, and I would further compare the response to the outbreak in California (and Washington) to that in New York (so this isn't a partisan issue).  Even more impressive is the contrast between the city of San Francisco and the city of New York.  Getting on top of this early made a difference.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

Hmm, when I saw it was ABC News reporting about a coronavirus intel brief in November, I was skeptical, so not surprised if it's incorrect. STILL, there were PDBs about the looming epidemic in January, and China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

[OutsiderFan]

Hmm, when I saw it was ABC News reporting about a coronavirus intel brief in November, I was skeptical, so not surprised if it's incorrect. STILL, there were PDBs about the looming epidemic in January, and China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

[Goose]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

[Goose]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

[Scooter_Stepford]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

This is yet another great post by you, Goose.  I’ve really appreciated your perspective throughout this.

A question I’ve had for a long time is why was Dr. Fauci so nonchalant about the threat for so long?  He was giving interviews into February where he almost completely discounted the risk to the US.  If there was so much evidence—and he presumably had access and interest in all of it—why did he do that?

(I’m not blaming Dr. Fauci, but I want to understand.)

[Scooter_Stepford]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

This is yet another great post by you, Goose.  I’ve really appreciated your perspective throughout this.

A question I’ve had for a long time is why was Dr. Fauci so nonchalant about the threat for so long?  He was giving interviews into February where he almost completely discounted the risk to the US.  If there was so much evidence—and he presumably had access and interest in all of it—why did he do that?

(I’m not blaming Dr. Fauci, but I want to understand.)

[Farm93]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

The heads of state in the rest of the world....

Ummm, you mean the heads of state in the western world.  

Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and several other Asia countries saw the January events, understood there was a major pandemic emerging, and took aggressive actions all before the first of February.   

It would be one thing if some Cardboard member was alone in the "I told you so world", but by late January there were dozens of world leaders taking action and literally running to their national playbooks on emerging pandemics. 

The USA playbook was written by Clintons, Obamas and Bushes.   That was "our" problem.  POTUS thinks very little of those people, so he opted to go with "cheerleading" instead.

The opposition advertising will write itself with President Trump's press conferences providing so many sound bites.  The one where he declares he is the USA's cheerleader will be front and center.

The SuperPac ads will conclude with something like this

We don't need a cheerleader, we need a commander.

[Farm93]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

The heads of state in the rest of the world....

Ummm, you mean the heads of state in the western world.  

Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and several other Asia countries saw the January events, understood there was a major pandemic emerging, and took aggressive actions all before the first of February.   

It would be one thing if some Cardboard member was alone in the "I told you so world", but by late January there were dozens of world leaders taking action and literally running to their national playbooks on emerging pandemics. 

The USA playbook was written by Clintons, Obamas and Bushes.   That was "our" problem.  POTUS thinks very little of those people, so he opted to go with "cheerleading" instead.

The opposition advertising will write itself with President Trump's press conferences providing so many sound bites.  The one where he declares he is the USA's cheerleader will be front and center.

The SuperPac ads will conclude with something like this

We don't need a cheerleader, we need a commander.

[Scooter_Stepford]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

The heads of state in the rest of the world....

Ummm, you mean the heads of state in the western world.  

Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and several other Asia countries saw the January events, understood there was a major pandemic emerging, and took aggressive actions all before the first of February.   

It would be one thing if some Cardboard member was alone in the "I told you so world", but by late January there were dozens of world leaders taking action and literally running to their national playbooks on emerging pandemics. 

The USA playbook was written by Clintons, Obamas and Bushes.   That was "our" problem.  POTUS thinks very little of those people, so he opted to go with "cheerleading" instead.

The opposition advertising will write itself with President Trump's press conferences providing so many sound bites.  The one where he declares he is the USA's cheerleader will be front and center.

The SuperPac ads will conclude with something like this

We don't need a cheerleader, we need a commander.

With a shot of Joe Biden cursing at a voter to emphasize the point.  That’s a winning strategy!

[Scooter_Stepford]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.
Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

The heads of state in the rest of the world....

Ummm, you mean the heads of state in the western world.  

Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and several other Asia countries saw the January events, understood there was a major pandemic emerging, and took aggressive actions all before the first of February.   

It would be one thing if some Cardboard member was alone in the "I told you so world", but by late January there were dozens of world leaders taking action and literally running to their national playbooks on emerging pandemics. 

The USA playbook was written by Clintons, Obamas and Bushes.   That was "our" problem.  POTUS thinks very little of those people, so he opted to go with "cheerleading" instead.

The opposition advertising will write itself with President Trump's press conferences providing so many sound bites.  The one where he declares he is the USA's cheerleader will be front and center.

The SuperPac ads will conclude with something like this

We don't need a cheerleader, we need a commander.

With a shot of Joe Biden cursing at a voter to emphasize the point.  That’s a winning strategy!

[BostonCard]

Might I humbly suggest we refrain from discussion of the November election.  It's one thing to discuss the administration's response, but once we start talking electoral politics, I'm afraid we are going to very quickly devolve into dangerous territory.  Let's just stipulate that some of us think Trump is incompetent and it's demonstrated in the pandemic response and will show in the November election.  Others of us think he's done as good a job as he can under the circumstances and that in any case the other candidate will be worse.

BC

[BostonCard]

Might I humbly suggest we refrain from discussion of the November election.  It's one thing to discuss the administration's response, but once we start talking electoral politics, I'm afraid we are going to very quickly devolve into dangerous territory.  Let's just stipulate that some of us think Trump is incompetent and it's demonstrated in the pandemic response and will show in the November election.  Others of us think he's done as good a job as he can under the circumstances and that in any case the other candidate will be worse.

BC

[Genuine Realist]

Might I humbly suggest we refrain from discussion of the November election.  It's one thing to discuss the administration's response, but once we start talking electoral politics, I'm afraid we are going to very quickly devolve into dangerous territory.  Let's just stipulate that some of us think Trump is incompetent and it's demonstrated in the pandemic response and will show in the November election.  Others of us think he's done as good a job as he can under the circumstances and that in any case the other candidate will be worse.

BC

My apologies to Teejers and BC for imprecision. I agree that the handling of the virus will be the ONLY issue on the 2020 election, and Trump - not Biden - will win or lose on it. What I meant was that looking for issues by micromanaging in hindsight the development of the crisis in January and February isn't going to get you anywhere. Almost no one in the Western world  had the foresight to see what is so obvious in retrospect. Even if it had existed, the political will and popular acceptance was completely missing. What the public accepts now was impossible before mid-March.

With that, I'm done on this line. I agree with BC that discussion of the event in connection with the elections should be kept to a minimum. It tends to take over.

[Genuine Realist]

Might I humbly suggest we refrain from discussion of the November election.  It's one thing to discuss the administration's response, but once we start talking electoral politics, I'm afraid we are going to very quickly devolve into dangerous territory.  Let's just stipulate that some of us think Trump is incompetent and it's demonstrated in the pandemic response and will show in the November election.  Others of us think he's done as good a job as he can under the circumstances and that in any case the other candidate will be worse.

BC

My apologies to Teejers and BC for imprecision. I agree that the handling of the virus will be the ONLY issue on the 2020 election, and Trump - not Biden - will win or lose on it. What I meant was that looking for issues by micromanaging in hindsight the development of the crisis in January and February isn't going to get you anywhere. Almost no one in the Western world  had the foresight to see what is so obvious in retrospect. Even if it had existed, the political will and popular acceptance was completely missing. What the public accepts now was impossible before mid-March.

With that, I'm done on this line. I agree with BC that discussion of the event in connection with the elections should be kept to a minimum. It tends to take over.

[terry]

With a shot of Joe Biden cursing at a voter to emphasize the point.  That’s a winning strategy!

I'm with BC. I also would prefer that this board not become a political debate forum.

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts such as the one quoted above have nothing to do with Covid-19 and would be better avoided, IMO.

[terry]

With a shot of Joe Biden cursing at a voter to emphasize the point.  That’s a winning strategy!

I'm with BC. I also would prefer that this board not become a political debate forum.

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts such as the one quoted above have nothing to do with Covid-19 and would be better avoided, IMO.

[magnus]

What the public accepts now was impossible before mid-March.

This is so true.  Who could have imagined last year that 90% of the country would be participating in social distancing or sheltering at home.

Does anyone think in a year (or even in 6 months) that you'll see more than 50% of the population wearing masks outside the house?  I can't imagine it, but stranger things have happened.

[magnus]

What the public accepts now was impossible before mid-March.

This is so true.  Who could have imagined last year that 90% of the country would be participating in social distancing or sheltering at home.

Does anyone think in a year (or even in 6 months) that you'll see more than 50% of the population wearing masks outside the house?  I can't imagine it, but stranger things have happened.

[BostonCard]

Quick note, I wasn't trying to single anyone out in my comment, and I specifically chose not to quote a particular poster.  While I have my own political preferences, which are probably not too hard to tease out, I don't want to imply that posts criticizing the president are ok and those criticizing his opponent are not (or vice versa).

BC

[BostonCard]

Quick note, I wasn't trying to single anyone out in my comment, and I specifically chose not to quote a particular poster.  While I have my own political preferences, which are probably not too hard to tease out, I don't want to imply that posts criticizing the president are ok and those criticizing his opponent are not (or vice versa).

BC

[Scooter_Stepford]

With a shot of Joe Biden cursing at a voter to emphasize the point.  That’s a winning strategy!

I'm with BC. I also would prefer that this board not become a political debate forum.

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts such as the one quoted above have nothing to do with Covid-19 and would be better avoided, IMO.

I’m sure your admonition meant to include the prior post that the quoted one was a response to.

Pretty much par for the course...

[Scooter_Stepford]

With a shot of Joe Biden cursing at a voter to emphasize the point.  That’s a winning strategy!

I'm with BC. I also would prefer that this board not become a political debate forum.

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts such as the one quoted above have nothing to do with Covid-19 and would be better avoided, IMO.

I’m sure your admonition meant to include the prior post that the quoted one was a response to.

Pretty much par for the course...

[terry]

I’m sure your admonition meant to include the prior post that the quoted one was a response to.

The prior post was mostly about the political response to Covid-19, here and abroad. Your post had nothing to do with Covid-19. That is the difference between being on-topic and off-topic, in my opinion.

[terry]

I’m sure your admonition meant to include the prior post that the quoted one was a response to.

The prior post was mostly about the political response to Covid-19, here and abroad. Your post had nothing to do with Covid-19. That is the difference between being on-topic and off-topic, in my opinion.

[Scooter_Stepford]

I’m sure your admonition meant to include the prior post that the quoted one was a response to.

The prior post was about the administration's response to Covid-19. Yours had nothing to do with Covid-19. That is why I believe your post was entirely off-topic.

Really?

“The opposition advertising will write itself with President Trump’s press conferences providing so many sound bites.  The one where he declares he will be the USA’s cheerleader will be front and center.

The SuperPac ads will conclude with something like this

We don’t need a cheerleader, we need a commander.” 

My bad to interpret that as political content.  In the future I’ll play it right down the middle, just like you do!

Sorry to offend...

[Scooter_Stepford]

I’m sure your admonition meant to include the prior post that the quoted one was a response to.

The prior post was about the administration's response to Covid-19. Yours had nothing to do with Covid-19. That is why I believe your post was entirely off-topic.

Really?

“The opposition advertising will write itself with President Trump’s press conferences providing so many sound bites.  The one where he declares he will be the USA’s cheerleader will be front and center.

The SuperPac ads will conclude with something like this

We don’t need a cheerleader, we need a commander.” 

My bad to interpret that as political content.  In the future I’ll play it right down the middle, just like you do!

Sorry to offend...

[terry]

If you want to defend the administration's response to Covid-19, go ahead. That's within the guidelines as I understand them. If you want to argue that the administration's response will be a political advantage in the election, then that's closer to the line, but I'm not going to call you out over it. I'm not going to try to parse the words and identify which specific parts are potentially off-topic in a post that is generally on the Covid-19 issue. 

But taking a shot at Biden over an issue that had nothing to do with Covid-19 is entirely off-topic and clearly over the line, IMO. That's not a close call.

[terry]

If you want to defend the administration's response to Covid-19, go ahead. That's within the guidelines as I understand them. If you want to argue that the administration's response will be a political advantage in the election, then that's closer to the line, but I'm not going to call you out over it. I'm not going to try to parse the words and identify which specific parts are potentially off-topic in a post that is generally on the Covid-19 issue. 

But taking a shot at Biden over an issue that had nothing to do with Covid-19 is entirely off-topic and clearly over the line, IMO. That's not a close call.

[Scooter_Stepford]

If you want to defend the administration's response to Covid-19, go ahead. That's within the guidelines as I understand them. If you want to argue that the administration's response will be a political advantage in the election, then that's closer to the line, but I'm not going to call you out over it. I'm not going to try to parse the words and identify which specific parts are potentially off-topic in a post that is generally on the Covid-19 issue. 

But taking a shot at Biden over an issue that had nothing to do with Covid-19 is entirely off-topic and clearly over the line, IMO. That's not a close call.

Of course it’s over the line, in your opinion.  And of course it’s not a close call, in your opinion.

What was off-topic was the conclusion of the original post, bringing politics in where it didn’t belong, IMO.  It was a cheap shot, IMO.  And worthy of a cheap shot in return, IMO.

As I said, in the future I’ll follow your example and play it straight down the middle.

[Scooter_Stepford]

If you want to defend the administration's response to Covid-19, go ahead. That's within the guidelines as I understand them. If you want to argue that the administration's response will be a political advantage in the election, then that's closer to the line, but I'm not going to call you out over it. I'm not going to try to parse the words and identify which specific parts are potentially off-topic in a post that is generally on the Covid-19 issue. 

But taking a shot at Biden over an issue that had nothing to do with Covid-19 is entirely off-topic and clearly over the line, IMO. That's not a close call.

Of course it’s over the line, in your opinion.  And of course it’s not a close call, in your opinion.

What was off-topic was the conclusion of the original post, bringing politics in where it didn’t belong, IMO.  It was a cheap shot, IMO.  And worthy of a cheap shot in return, IMO.

As I said, in the future I’ll follow your example and play it straight down the middle.

[Goose]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.

Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

The heads of state in the rest of the world....



Ummm, you mean the heads of state in the western world.  



Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and several other Asia countries saw the January events, understood there was a major pandemic emerging, and took aggressive actions all before the first of February.

(Don't forget Hong Kong) Beg to differ. Those nations did not have to take aggressive action because they had functioning test, track, and trace operation permanently in place to update them on exactly what was going on in their country. They knew more or less exactly where they stood, so they had a much easier decision tree. This public heath capability was organic, and left over from the SARS epidemic where these nations really took a hit. The heads of state didn't have to "activate" it. They never had to go into full "mitigation", so they never had to make that decision. They had ground truth in their own countries. The western nations did not.

[Goose]

China allowing the video of all the excavators deployed to build an emergency hospital on Jan 23, was ALL I needed to see to know this was a serious threat to the world.

Unfortunately, the heads of state in the rest of the world weren't as smart as you. That might be due to their loss function being much different than yours. If you are wrong, the worst that happens is that you maybe get teased about it. If a head of state is wrong, the consequences to him personally and his nation in general can be catastrophic. That is why most heads of state make decisions much more slowly than you do, and require much more consensus before they act. While it is true that this may cause them to act too slowly, it is almost always what will happen.

Also, unlike you, they actually have to do something. They have to convince their nation to follow them, while you can just be right all by yourself. It they recognize the problem but adopt a bad plan, they still get crushed, as does the nation. So it isn't apples to apples.

The heads of state in the rest of the world....



Ummm, you mean the heads of state in the western world.  



Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and several other Asia countries saw the January events, understood there was a major pandemic emerging, and took aggressive actions all before the first of February.

(Don't forget Hong Kong) Beg to differ. Those nations did not have to take aggressive action because they had functioning test, track, and trace operation permanently in place to update them on exactly what was going on in their country. They knew more or less exactly where they stood, so they had a much easier decision tree. This public heath capability was organic, and left over from the SARS epidemic where these nations really took a hit. The heads of state didn't have to "activate" it. They never had to go into full "mitigation", so they never had to make that decision. They had ground truth in their own countries. The western nations did not.

[OutsiderFan]

I appreciate the Goose perspective. I also recognize what those Asian country leaders did. Moreover, I faced my own skepticism and pushback from my SO about this situation in mid-February. She was so frustrated by the fact I was taking it seriously. So bothered by the suggestions I was making about stocking up on supplies, telling her not to go to the office and spin class. In her exasperation she even suggested I move into a hotel thinking I was trying to keep her from infecting me, rather than community spread doing it. There was quite a heated back and forth until I was able to convince her I was just trying to protect us. I ultimately got through to her, but it took much convincing.

Today, Hartford County passed Santa Clara County in confirmed cases, with over 1,500. Hartford County now has 75 Deaths to SCC’s 47. Hartford County has half the population of SCC. 

One other point about political will. Leaders lead. They assign importance to an objective and rally people to follow them. I had to do this in my own household. Any head of state has the same ability. They just have to have their priorities set to care about others under their watch.

[OutsiderFan]

I appreciate the Goose perspective. I also recognize what those Asian country leaders did. Moreover, I faced my own skepticism and pushback from my SO about this situation in mid-February. She was so frustrated by the fact I was taking it seriously. So bothered by the suggestions I was making about stocking up on supplies, telling her not to go to the office and spin class. In her exasperation she even suggested I move into a hotel thinking I was trying to keep her from infecting me, rather than community spread doing it. There was quite a heated back and forth until I was able to convince her I was just trying to protect us. I ultimately got through to her, but it took much convincing.

Today, Hartford County passed Santa Clara County in confirmed cases, with over 1,500. Hartford County now has 75 Deaths to SCC’s 47. Hartford County has half the population of SCC. 

One other point about political will. Leaders lead. They assign importance to an objective and rally people to follow them. I had to do this in my own household. Any head of state has the same ability. They just have to have their priorities set to care about others under their watch.

[Mick]

I'd be surprised if we don't surpass 18 million.  60.8 million people caught the swine flu.

My daughter, my wife, and I were among them. . . .

Man, that's no fun.  My brother caught it, was laid up for two weeks.

[Mick]

I'd be surprised if we don't surpass 18 million.  60.8 million people caught the swine flu.

My daughter, my wife, and I were among them. . . .

Man, that's no fun.  My brother caught it, was laid up for two weeks.