Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

I do not think the phrase "display in a threatening manner" is intended to be limited to something like lifting my shirt to show I have a gun stuffed into the waist of my pants. If it was, it would need further specificity, such as "revealing a lawfully concealed firearm in such a manner to induce fear..."

I agree about banning open carry in most cases. I've never personally met anyone with a concealed carry permit that worried me but I have never yet met a person who open carries in the manner of the recent Michigan protesters who wasn't a complete and total richard head.

I didn't mean to infer it was limiting to cover just that. Just that it was written broadly to make sure it covered stuff like that.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Goddam, it's gonna get ugly in those southern and rural parts of the country, especially the ones easing social distancing, or never implemented it in the first place.

the sheer numbers may not be as large as in NYC and the other big cities, just because of geographical distance, it may not explode exponentially as it did there, but it's gonna be steady, and long term.

These people dont even understand. They probably think since the world didnt end the day after things opened up they are ok.

fade,

Screw heroin...they arent good enough for that. Give them bleach and a needle and remind them what Trump told them. Or tell them shooting themselves in the dick/**** will cure them. I am out of phucks to give time to Kill 'Em All (metaphorically) and let God sort it out.

<img src="https://i.etsystatic.com/18759917/c/847/673/0/108/il/143aef/2276083028/il_340x270.2276083028_9hdu.jpg" />

 

[The Rube]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

You can't go full open. Not yet. That is asking for disaster. Although, it would solve a lot of problems

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Dr. Birx says they're now targeting 100,000 to 240,000 deaths. That's right, they're okay with having 240,000 dying.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">TRUMP, April 20: "We’re going toward 50 or 60,000 [deaths]."<br><br>BIRX, today with death toll at 68,000: "Our projections have always been between 100,000 and 240,000 [deaths]." <a href="https://t.co/js68n55bSW">pic.twitter.com/js68n55bSW</a></p>— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1257034304842055685?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 3, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Well before Trump said "60k" the number I saw thrown around the most was "100-200" so she isnt wrong. She, like Fauci, is just telling the world to pay no attention to the moron at the podium.

Hell I bet this is a legit conversation that happened.

Trump: Why wont they let this go?
Fauci: Because the virus is here...
Trump: But isnt it a hoax?
Brix: Mr. President it is not a hoax
Trump: where is Jared...
Fauci: Sir projections from the CDC...
Trump: FAKE NEWS!!
Fauci: ...are not very good and we havent even really hit the peak
Trump: Jhina did this with the Democrats to stop me from winning!!
Brix: Mr. President, if we dont do something it could be bad...REAL BAD!
Fauci: Experts predicting it could be over 100k dead...upwards of a quarter million even! There is going to be a lot of dead...
Trump: Flu kills people!
Brix: Only about 60k in a year this will be much faster!
Trump: See Fauci...just like the flu! This will kill 60k and go away real fast!!
Brix: Sir that isnt...
Trump: America will beat this and then the hoax will be over and we can then beat Sleepy Joe. This is all his and Obama's fault!
Fauci: ...........

**Trump Exits**

Fauci: Ok when he is done rambling on TV you and I will tell the truth so at least half the country hears what is going on
Brix: Deal! Though one of us will be fired when we zoom past 60k...

 

[The Rube]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Through all of this, although I understand the reason why, is the massive gap between the minimum and maximum projections of deaths....can't someone narrow it down even a little? A +/- of 140K doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

It’s giant because the max was no social distancing at all.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

100k by Independence Day? We could wager on that

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Even this is far too low. We’ll be at 70,000 dead in a couple days, and now states are re-opening. Seems like we’ll have 100,000 dead by Fourth of July. Just a colossal, unmitigated disaster. <a href="https://t.co/VbuRc1SLsO">https://t.co/VbuRc1SLsO</a></p>— Michael Ian Black (@michaelianblack) <a href="https://twitter.com/michaelianblack/status/1257130337890689025?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 4, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[The Rube]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

By July 4? I'll take the over 100K.

 

[leswp1]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Through all of this, although I understand the reason why, is the massive gap between the minimum and maximum projections of deaths....can't someone narrow it down even a little? A +/- of 140K doesn't sit right with me.

NO.
It doesn't need to sit with anyone. That is the way it is. Not everything is predictable, even if you want it to be.

It all depends on whether people stay home of decide they are tired of playing Pandemic and want to go out. Between the buffoons in the WH, the nimrods in various states and now the nutbags that are going out to protest people trying to keep them safe there is no way to predict how many stupids there are and whether it will be a perfect storm or a lucky miss.

And no way to predict who will do what. I had a conversation with someone last night who is "mostly compliant" and feels like that is better than nothing. Can't understand why I am upset. THey mostly are good. THis person believes all of the stuff that is being said. Posts things that say the rules are smart. But they are tired of being compliant and that one little trip can't be bad because it is only the one trip- with the 2 of them in a grocery store. He is hi risk. Ticks all the boxes of risk except not >65- has all the comorbidities. She doesn't but would put him at risk. She feels it is necessary to visit her mother who is >80. Only she should visit. Everyone else needs to stay away. With this type of logic nothing will work.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

NO.
It doesn't need to sit with anyone. That is the way it is. Not everything is predictable, even if you want it to be.

It all depends on whether people stay home of decide they are tired of playing Pandemic and want to go out. Between the buffoons in the WH, the nimrods in various states and now the nutbags that are going out to protest people trying to keep them safe there is no way to predict how many stupids there are and whether it will be a perfect storm or a lucky miss.

And no way to predict who will do what. I had a conversation with someone last night who is "mostly compliant" and feels like that is better than nothing. Can't understand why I am upset. THey mostly are good. THis person believes all of the stuff that is being said. Posts things that say the rules are smart. But they are tired of being compliant and that one little trip can't be bad because it is only the one trip- with the 2 of them in a grocery store. He is hi risk. Ticks all the boxes of risk except not >65- has all the comorbidities. She doesn't but would put him at risk. She feels it is necessary to visit her mother who is >80. Only she should visit. Everyone else needs to stay away. With this type of logic nothing will work.

The margin of error is bigger than the minimum prediction...that's............well that is effed up.

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

The margin of error is bigger than the minimum prediction...that's............well that is effed up.

No, it isn't...it's how this all works.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

No, it isn't...it's how this all works.

Then just say they don't know. Don't make a prediction. Or at the very least, just predict a max. Leave out the min.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Then just say they don't know. Don't make a prediction. Or at the very least, just predict a max. Leave out the min.

Just because you don’t understand (don’t worry, o don’t either) doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

 

[jflory81]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Well before Trump said "60k" the number I saw thrown around the most was "100-200" so she isnt wrong. She, like Fauci, is just telling the world to pay no attention to the moron at the podium.

The current official government model still only projects 72K deaths, with a confidence range of 60K - 115K. The projection has ranged from 60K-75K after updates for like a month, and it's mostly been on the lower end of that range. It's incredibly disingenous to suggest that the projections were always between 100K and 240K when the current model's projection falls under that range, and almost all of that range falls even outside the confidence range of their model.

Once the social distancing was enacted no one was talking about six figure deaths, particuarly in the government/CDC.

If she was being honest she would point out that we're careening back towards those higher numbers because of lapses in social distancing, not that "this was always the prediction".

Through all of this, although I understand the reason why, is the massive gap between the minimum and maximum projections of deaths....can't someone narrow it down even a little? A +/- of 140K doesn't sit right with me.

Um....that's +/- 70K. The range is 140K.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Just because you don’t understand (don’t worry, o don’t either) doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

That’s an understatement.

The min is very important as is the entire range. And not just to people like myself with graduate degrees built on this

 

[The Rube]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Just because you don’t understand (don’t worry, o don’t either) doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

I fully admit I have no clue on these predictions. I don't want the reports to go into "scare" mode, and I don't expect them to be dead-on accurate (because we don't really know), I just wish they could narrow it down a little?

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

It’s hard to narrow it down better when so many dumb ****s are stopping distancing and acting like we can reopen. See, the entire south.

 

[psych]

It’s hard to narrow it down better when so many dumb ****s are stopping distancing and acting like we can reopen. See, the entire south.

Not that I’m disagreeing about much of the South reopening, but when were Colorado, Maine, and Minnesota last considered southern states? Unfortunately, some blue governors and blue states are reopening way too quickly too, and that’s almost what makes it more infuriating for US liberals when we can’t just blame it on stupid Southerners.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Not that I’m disagreeing about much of the South reopening, but when were Colorado, Maine, and Minnesota last considered southern states? Unfortunately, some blue governors and blue states are reopening way too quickly too, and that’s almost what makes it more infuriating for US liberals when we can’t just blame it on stupid Southerners.

I used an example, it wasn’t meant to be exhaustive.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Covfefe-19: We Can Handle Slight Inconveniences. Part 8.

Through all of this, although I understand the reason why, is the massive gap between the minimum and maximum projections of deaths....can't someone narrow it down even a little? A +/- of 140K doesn't sit right with me.

This makes no sense. The spread is what it is because of different potential responses. It's not inexact, it's indeterminate. There's a difference.

Edit: I read farther. Rube, this isn't a margin of error. This is the spread in a game where the team hasn't decided whether to play Aaron Rogers or Tim Tebow. If you posit a particular regime of precautions then you get much tighter predictions. It's likely a double hump distribution centered around 100k for staying closed and 240k opening again.

The only reason there is any question of which path will be chosen by political leadership is every Republican left in this country is some permutation of criminal, imbecile, and lunatic.