@FarmerJayhawk what is a process argument?
approxinfinity
17303 posts
@DoubleDD the president is like a quarterback. He doesn't have the ability to make his receivers catch the ball but if he leads them with a good pass they will catch it. if he calls one play in the huddle, gets behind center and then runs a different bad audible, blames players in the huddle the subsequent play, maybe even blames players from four years ago, argues with his coach, throws his helmet and pouts, he may still be a better quarterback than Trump on coronavirus.
@jayballer73 that's scary. Can you get her out/transfered? She sounds high risk with lung issues.
@jayballer73 this one was on you. You brought up a fact raised on Fox. Therefore that's what we were talking about. The validity of a fact on Fox. Not a fact on CNN. Not about Biden. Come on man. This whole "everything is bullshit from everyone!!!" line is thrown around a lot these days to completely scramble logical process. It simply does not matter at all here. Let's stick with what we were talking about.
We are talking about a fact you brought up that you heard from Fox. If you know Fox spins for Trump, this makes it of utmost importance for you to verify information you receive from them in regards to a crisis in which Trump is front and center. Whatever about Biden or CNN, etx in no way changes the fact that you should verify your source, knowing that it's spin.
@FarmerJayhawk gave me a corroborating story, which was helpful, but that story didn't have too much more meat it in it either.
You need to not get hung up on defending Trump or Fox. I'm allowed to challenge the effectiveness of Trump or the validity of news on Fox without it having to be a fullstop drop everything and throw out "but the other guy does it" stuff. Questioning is part of the process to understand things better.
Stay with me man, I've already moved past it in the next post.
And if I ever quote something that I can't verify, and I fail to mention that it's not verifiable, please call me out. I want that kind of feedback. It makes our understanding better.
@FarmerJayhawk thanks. Yeah I skimmed it the first time you posted, reread it now.
So in this story, the who/when/where/why was...:
- on March 27th,
-
4 people were reported to have been reinfected
-
in Wuhan (so harder to get straight answers)
-
and questions remain as to whether it could be explained by there being a possible false negative in between the 2 positive results, and questions whether they are infectious when testing positive the second time. In the case of the latter theory, I guess then maybe they just have antibodies present that cause a positive result?
@jayballer73 to your point, it's something we should keep an eye on, for sure. And it's scary. But I'm hoping the testing just needs to be improved.
Still stuff like this, in addition to something I read yesterday that asymptomatic people are showing heart and liver (I think, though it might have been kidney) damage from COVID.... This also needs further evidence, but it's the kind of scary crap that makes me want to never get this even if I could get it and recover. Not worth it until we have answers.
@jayballer73 all I care about is facts. So if this is legit news, there should be quantifiable facts. How many people have been reinfected and when? You honestly think Fox News wouldn't drudge old stories and overblow them to help Trump look good and distract from his idiotic missteps? They do it all day every day. Standard playbook Fox. This isn't a crazy assumption on my part. It should be our assumption of what is going on here unless there are corroborating stories. Seriously, we should never assume Fox to be valid without corroborating stories. In this case, by "corroborating stories", I mean something that shows this to be a serious threat and not one instance of reinfection that happened 2 months ago. Maybe it's happening and maybe it's a greater problem, but I'm not finding it. So. We should!
@jayballer73 do you have a corroborating source that is real news? All I'm finding is one instance of reinfection from Feb 27th. I'm assuming Fox might be drudging up old news (like 1 person it happened to two months ago) and sensationalizing it in order to diffuse the backlash Trump is currently catching for his month of doing nothing and now his latest off the cuff train wreck of a press conference last night.
@Crimsonorblue22 I read about it but that probably isn't enough, unfortunately. I heard he said he could tell the Democratic governors to open up and they'd have to what he says. Did I miss anything notable?
@justanotherfan you nailed it!
@kjayhawks I take your point. Fauci was wrong too early on. The really critical period was February 2 (date of Trump's travel ban) to mid-March (when states started issuing stay-at-hoQme orders, California first). His lack of leadership there not directing people to stay home, and lying and bullshitting every press
conference was mind-blowing. I would like to see if they can distill that into effective messaging before election season.
A well polished ad. With Trumps horrible COVID response front and center down the stetch, I don't see how he's reelectable.
Here's the Trump Pence campaigns letter trying to get the ad taken down:
@nwhawkfan that was a good group. Recently, I wandered through all the Mark Twain award speeches on Youtube. They werent amazing, but they were an enjoyable watch; I like seeing behind the curtain on these people's lives and relationships, directly from them (not the paparazzi). Here's Amy Poehler on Tina Fey. Will Farrell's (i think about Tina Fey?) was also good.
@ajvan I picked Mason over Manning. That first half of the 88 Final I wasnt terribly impressed. Too many bad turnovers. And Frank's POY year he was automatic 20-5-5. #BIFM
@FarmerJayhawk said in Differentiating fact from opinion on COVID-19:
This story is BANANAS 🐦 View Tweet?s=21
And there it is. A coherent timeline from an insider. Chaos.
It's a good day to get together and appreciate family, even if you aren't Christian.
We hopped on a family zoom meeting and it was nice to see everyone together and not feel so isolated.
@FarmerJayhawk do you think Dot is quick enough to be elite as a fast break guy? He definitely needs other skills to stick, but I consider him elite in that dept at a college level. Not sure if it translates to elite at NBA level or not.
@Kcmatt7 well said. :hundred_points:
@Kcmatt7 we have tested more people than any other country, at least as reported. I agree we sucked at it and had an opportunity to be much better that we squandered by not allowing for independent testing until way late. But we are now at a place where we are much better at testing, I think? We just took too long to get here.
I'm wondering about a soft social distancing guarantee for every industry. In the case of automechanics for instance, no entering the car if you have extension tools that can reach from outside? I know that sounds absurd.
More generally im wondering if there is a way to loosely guarantee an individual has been socially distanced.
SNL was interesting tonight. They did the show with everyone working from home. It wasn't extremely funny but I appreciated the effort and it had its moments. Seeing entertainers in New York, people who rely heavily on their wits, struggle but stick with it through production of a show pumps me up. We are all in this together.
So how does the economy recover? We have 4 million people who are unemployed find new ways to get employed and the other 12 million on unemployment for a year? How long?
@mayjay lolol
When do we "open the country back up" and what does that mean? I don't have answers but I thought I'd put this thread out there for discussion as right now I don't think anyone has answers. I think it's important that we start thinking ahead and not week to week. Some critical decisions revolve around being able to see further than the tip of our nose.
There are likely to be case definition changes as early as Monday on what is an instance of coronavirus. This definition is likely to include presumed positives as positives which will cause the incidence levels to increase significantly in all models.
Ideally this should result in showing a more prolonged period that the curve has been flattened if we have effective social distancing practices.
Literally and figuratively, hold your breath.
Does opening it in incognito mode work @DoubleDD? That's all I got. I don't subscribe :-/
@DoubleDD The stats seem bad. You can continue to make excuses for Idiot in Chief.
@DoubleDD Our own hesitation to act, then becoming the clear epicenter of the world should serve as a cautionary tale.
@DoubleDD I hope it works out for them and their hospitals do not get overwhelmed. They may have less dense population centers, and sparse gatherings may be more natural for them? The article does that indicate that the rate of infection is acelerating and their policy will likely have to be reevaluated soon. Hopefully they aren't squandering a chance to control the outbreak better like UKs herd immunity plan. https://fortune.com/2020/04/06/uk-boris-johnson-coronavirus-icu-herd-immunity/ ↗
@bskeet :hundred_points: only throwing it out there as a consideration. Completely agree we don't know for sure. In this case I'm erring on the side of caution. Let's all keep digging around and get answers where we can.
@mayjay thanks for the detailed breakdown. i'll have to read Backmuns opinion on it. I appreciate your Con Law professor's take. Makes sense to me. And I never considered that assumptions about future technology played a hand in the ruling.
@benshawks08 it's possible that it could not be considered murder for the woman, but could be considered murder for the doctor to perform it in states where it was illegal. The woman could conceivably cross state lines if she needed it performed. That's not ideal, but with hindsight, I think it could have been better than the role Roe v. Wade played in partisan gridlock.
There are many other things that are illegal in some states though nothing of the same magnitude. There would have to be a compromise there. I don't think we can go back to state level legality now. I think the cat is out of the box. But if it never happened, organically the law would have developed on a state by state basis. I don't think it would have become nearly as contentious. Everyone has a passionate opinion about it now. I think we've been conditioned, and it didn't have to be that way.
@BShark said in Differentiating fact from opinion on COVID-19:
Stuff like this isn't helping.
awful.
!partisanism.png ↗
https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/partisan-composition.aspx ↗
Number of states with a divided legislative control has gone from 16 to 1 over time.
Number of states with divided state control has gone from 58% in 2005 down to 26% present day.
Without divided control there is no need for compromise. GIT 'ER DONE! :(
@benshawks08 said in The democratic nominee:
@approxinfinity said in The democratic nominee:
Roe v Wade is completely a religious issue @benshawks08. Once it became precedent in a SCOTUS case (thanks to ambitious feminist lawyers pushing it), it was Pandoras Box, we were never going back. The Republicans aligned with the Evangelicals and began their crusade to get it overturned.
It is very much NOT a religious issue. I think that’s all I will say on that as it could open it’s own Pandora’s box.
The contention around the issue is whether some people are able to restrict others from having an abortion or not. The main argument, as I understand it, for being able to restrict others from having an abortion (i.e. "pro-life") has to do with when a child or fetus can be regarded as a human life. The Church has taken the position that life begins at inception, and that all life being sacred, the fetus should be granted the same rights as other citizens. The arguments against allowing others to restrict one's ability to have an abortion (i.e. "pro-choice") argue that life begins at birth, and that circumstances such as unwanted pregnancy, health risks to the mother, birth defects, rape or any other reason are all valid reasons to have an abortion; it is the woman's right to choose.
I'm sure there are people in both camps that believe their reasons for or against are not religious, but the point of contention and the majority of people who are arguing against the right to have an abortion are Christian in this country.
I don't want to get into an argument about which is right. I really don't.
My point is that this shouldn't have gone to the Supreme Court. It caused the Evangelicals to align with the Republicans in order to win the Supreme Court so they could overturn Roe v. Wade. It put the Court under constant partisan attack thereafter. Had it stayed at the state level, with each state allowed to have its own law around abortion, our country would be better off. That's how I see it anyway. My hypothesis. I'd love to hear feedback if other people think it would have been positive or negative for the country if this hadn't been rules on by the Supreme Court, or if it was impossible to avoid.
I was trying to pinpoint the moment I think the Supreme Court jumped the shark @benshawks08 . I guess you were asking what this had to do with @FarmerJayhawk's post.
Roe v Wade is completely a religious issue @benshawks08. Once it became precedent in a SCOTUS case (thanks to ambitious feminist lawyers pushing it), it was Pandoras Box, we were never going back. The Republicans aligned with the Evangelicals and began their crusade to get it overturned.
@FarmerJayhawk i wish abortion was left at the state level, we never had Roe v Wade and the Republicans never had to adopt the Pro-Life position universally (and conversely, the Democrats adopting Pro-Choice) to woo the Evangelicals.
I think when Pro-Life v. Pro-Choice became a winner-take-all battle at the federal level, it pushed us further down the road of bitter partisanship in Washington and guaranteed that the Supreme Court would be dragged into partisan bullshit.
Jefferson was wise to advocate a separation of Church and State and when Roe v. Wade gets overturned it will mark the crossing of a line that should never have been crossed, which I think is why Republican appointees have to date not been willing to pull the trigger. Abortion should have been handled at the state level and kept the hell out of Washington.
I'm curious if you think that abortion was on a collision course with the SCOTUS, or if you think this could have been avoided if Weddington and Coffee didn't push Roe v. Wade or if the SCOTUS hadn't taken the case.
@kjayhawks said in The democratic nominee:
@BShark that’s my trouble with both sides, one side does it and it’s forgiven. The other side does it and should face the wrath of god himself. Its the hypocrisy back and forth anymore.
It goes back further. McConnell bitching and giving the Democrats hell for stalling on Kavanaugh, while the Republicsns delayed for a whole year on Garland and prevented the Democrats from having a nomination to the court under Obama. And there's a long history of both parties stalling on SCOTUS nominations before that.
Unfortunately, part of the problem here is that THE SHOW might bevthe THE ONLY EDUCATION the populace might get from the other side.
@kjayhawks yeah man :hundred_points: we're on the same page. they should really figure distribution out so we can get rid of blockers so we can handle something like this much much better going forward.
I read yesterday that farms are dumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of milk because they were so dependent on the restaurant industry. There should be a plan for diverting perishable food goods that would go to the restaurant industry, and also a plan for redundancy of distribution chains if certain areas are affected more heavily by disaster.
We need serious consideration and planning by many smart people to get this figured out and maintained so that all of the big players in food have a cohesive disaster relief plan.
Thanks @HighEliteMajor, you showed a lot of heart getting through these, given the times. Seriously. Much appreciated.
@HighEliteMajor I knew we needed him, I just didn't know if Moss was up for it. Wow. Bill Self won this one the Bill Self way.... and with the 4-1. As @drgnslayr says, I smell a run!
@kjayhawks said in Coronavirus Thread: Boy, guys. I really just don't know. Best to keep tabs.:
This whole thing is getting very stupid, cancel churches, school, restaurants and work. Me driving by Walmart seeing the parking lot full And probably at a minimum 500 people. Turn on news, hundreds, possibly thousands waiting in line for unemployment. The church’s are a bare minimum of concern at this point. Wal Mart needs to close its doors and only do pick up orders. I have a family member that’s a Wal Mart manager and thinks this is very doable. They could put all hands on deck and add more times. Greed is the only reason not to, Wal Mart made a $150 billion last year and the guy says it’s been like Black Friday for a month straight.
I like your thoughts here, I've been thinking down these lines...this whole thing has really shown us where our inefficiencies lie in times of crisis.
The big problem I think with closing down the stores completely is the lack of transparency of what stock is left at the stores in real time. The big stores should be able to do this fairly easily for future preparation.
Without clear visibility into what stock is left, when the store has major shortages, everything breaks down and the person feels like they have to go into the store to find what they need.
I'm not shopping at Walmart right now, so I don't know if their system is good enough to be accurate in real time. I know other stores' systems are not.
@BShark not at all. I feel you on the Kavanaugh comparison. However, there was no choice with Kavanaugh. Imagine if you had the choice between Kavanaugh and someone way worse and either way, it was happening.
@nuleafjhawk to be honest, I have the same general confusion around that exact point. I think either doctors have used confusing language about humans not being able to vaccinate against viruses, or the things we were told when we were younger no longer apply, because modern medicine has made possible the previously impossible.
I'm not sure. I need to dig in further. Here's a starting point with a whole bunch of words that appear to be arranged in a coherent pattern from the CDC.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/conversations/understanding-vacc-work.html ↗
I didn't see the specific answers I was looking for at a glance, but I did see some distinctions being made that seemed to be of interest between viruses and bacteria.
The question isnt "who will everyone else will vote for?" The question is "who will you vote for?" Everyone will try to sell you on an air of inevitability. Don't let it sway you. Vote for the guy who you think will do more good, or less bad for the country.
Yeah. I'm wiping stuff down before putting it in freezer. That'll be some shit when they think they've contained it and then people get themselves sick from frozen goods. I'm starting to feel like we will never conquer this without a vaccine.
@DoubleDD Puerto Rico is an American territory, not its own [shithole] country.
@DoubleDD preexisting health conditions is one factor.
Also...
populations in the cities in question are predominantly black, they probably are lower income and can't telecommute for their jobs, and may not have access to information about COVID or tests.
But white privilege doesn't exist.
So I'm all in on "racist disease". Final answer!