Initially when? February? Yeah fine, Fauci said that mask-wearing wouldn't do anything then, back when there were like a dozen cases isolated in New York City. If you haven't taken in new information since then, I don't know what to tell you. "WEAR MASKS WHEN AROUND OTHERS" has pretty much been shouted from the rooftops.

If you want to ignore it (like Jon), fine - that's your prerogative. But do so at your own risk.

And the risk of others. But hey, we're just sub-humans not worthy of respect or concern, NBD.

Well yeah, it's not really "fine" but I was I guess feeling charitable.

I don’t get the anti mask sentiment. In NJ probably 95/100 people have masks and it’s close to 100% indoors. That being said more than I would like are worn wrong but that’s to be expected. We have things Under pretty good control. Look are some other states where mask wearing is far less prevalent and they are out of control, but I’m sure it’s a coincidence.

Well, there is one young, healthy athlete looking at permanent damage.

This is what has to concern leagues/teams/players the most. Cannot assume young/healthy athletes will have positive outcomes. https://t.co/xtKTqnC74m

— Andrew Brandt (@AndrewBrandt) August 1, 2020

I'll add that even though for months scientific experts talk about how wearing masks is to prevent your air particles for traveling as far as they could as opposed to protecting you from the virus itself (though it did provide small protection), people still talk about how the mask "won't protect you". No shit. That's not been the point for months. If people don't know that by now they aren't listening.

FWIW, Republican voters are starting to come around on requiring masks:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/republicans-masks-coronavirus-polls.html

It is anti mask sentiment like that which basically Keeps my family stuck at home due to my wife’s medical condition.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

betting on the impatience, entitlement, and selfishness of the American people has always seemed like a viable play... not sure they can ring the bells with it, but it's just sensible to align yourselves that way

sprinkle in a little bit of resentment and bigotry as needed, and you've got a legitimate recipe

It's probably better to play off of that "small protection" that it gives to the mask-wearer vs trying to protect other people. I mean take Jon again as an example. I'd say he has maybe a little regard for his own well-being (though again, I'd wager not a ton). But whatever that little is, I'd also bet it's more than what he has for everyone else outside of maybe a half-dozen people. ;)

I think the "protect others" argument just doesn't work for many. They just don't care.

I had to look back to confirm, but the difference in concern v. the Ebola outbreak a few years ago is pretty interesting. Back then it was conservatives who were most concerned, and most likely to hold the the opinion that that those who put themselves in harms way deserve what they got.

Why were anti-maskers so afraid of Ebola but so sure COVID is a hoax?

Wasn't there something like 4 people with Ebola in the US?

Something like that, all medical workers.

And also we already knew everything about how Ebola spread. Which is, not very easily.

Maybe that Ebola mask concern was part of wanting to keep Ebola patients out of the US? I seem to remember that coming up as a bit of a political topic.

On the anti-maskers these days, I couldn't have been the only person that laughed at Jon's sheeple comment above. Blindly following right wing media and demon sperm experts is the sign of education and enlightenment in some circles. The anti-maskers that I know are also completely convinced that hydroxychloroquine is the magic cure for Covid. Trump just isn't able to put an end to this Democrat plot because of the media.

That Dilbert guy is a complete loon but he had a great point a few years ago about how Americans are watching two different movies rather than sharing the same reality. This is just another example. I just don't understand the right wing media's motivation. Wouldn't their electoral chances improve if the spread of the virus slowed substantially before the election?

It's a vicious cycle of promoting/cheering the Trump administration's position on the virus rather than risking pissing him or his followers off, turning to downplaying, doing a 180, excusing and blaming any and everyone else when things turn out not to be quite what they told us weeks and months ago. Trump has many faults, but by far his biggest is refusing to take any responsibility or admitting he is wrong, which would at least allow us to correct our path mid-nosedive. Instead, we're in a tailspin.

Confirmation is for suckers.

And they're just going to leave it vacant, right?

SI

On Fox News' website, it's hard to find any coverage of Covid. Right now, there's a video hit of Birx interviewed on F&F that is the 8th story down the page, just above a story about Ellen DeGeneres. On the right side of the page, there's a "Coronovirus Latest" column down the page with 5 stories, 3 of which are sports-related, 1 about a Bollywood star, and another about European mink farm outbreaks.

It's a good thing the virus outbreak is behind us!

Trump could have easily played this in a way that helped the country and fit into his narrative. He could have said that this virus is coming, and it is dangerous, and it is all China's fault, and fuck China. But we are Americans, and we won't let this Chinese virus take us down, and we will all band together and sacrifice just like our grandparents and great-grandparents did in WWII, and we will beat this Chinese virus.

But, Trump couldn't do that. First, he is a snake oil salesman, so his line always has to be "everything is fine." The car won't break down. The roof doesn't leak. You can never admit to a problem, regardless of whether it is your fault.

Second, shared sacrifice goes against the "Only I can fix it" model that he projects. We are the change we have been waiting for is such an Obama idea. The last thing an authoritarian wants is the Bobs to call him in and ask "So what would you say it is you do here?"

Third, it really would have required major sacrifice and inconvenience to get ahead of the virus. And a lot of Trump's voters picked him because they were tired of sacrifice and inconvenience for themselves. The whole point was to make other people start sacrificing so Trump's voters could finally stop having to be so angry all the time (Side note: It didn't really work, though, did it? If anything, winning has made the MAGAs even angrier and more aggrieved (there's probably a dissertation to be written about that)). So telling people that they have to sacrifice cuts against his base.

tl;dr The Chinese nature of the virus gave Trump a way to address it consistent with his views, but addressing it cut against too many other aspects of his image.

There are a lot of things a theoretical Trump could have done that would have helped both himself and the country, but the real Trump can't do any of those things.He's the scorpion on the frog's back, except he keeps stinging himself and blaming the frog.

The ironic thing of course being those same folks like talking about sacrifices that others do (the troops, the cops, WW2, etc) and went after millennials because they don't want to sacrifice. Then the first time they were asked to sacrifice, they throw a fit.

I can't believe we're still on this Hydroxy shit.

Smel those free markets.

#BREAKING: President Trump says TikTok must be bought by US company and pay cut of selling price into US Treasury: "Right now they don't have any rights unless we give it to them." pic.twitter.com/VJ7gC1u6nc

— The Hill (@thehill) August 3, 2020

Medium Buying
@MediumBuying
The Trump campaign has placed a Fox News-only buy in DC cable zones. 8/3-8/16 flight, $38K total

Got to keep the toddler happy

Those people are just lazy and will now get jobs as I have been told by some people here. Anxiously awaiting the massive drop in the unemployment rate now that the subsidy is over.

Yep

Yale study finds expanded jobless benefits did not reduce employment | YaleNews

The new talking point I'm seeing pushed on social media isn't that the jobs will be there when the stimulus goes away (because it will be apparent very soon that the jobs are not there).

It is that all of these people should have been saving their unemployment checks so that they would still have money to live on when the checks stopped.

So it will still be their fault. It is always their fault.

Reminder: Not only did extra unemployment benefit end, but PPP 8-week periods expired for many employers. So far I’ve heard of two people I know who were laid off *today.* Pray for our country. This could get significantly worse in a hurry.

Oh yeah. See that all over the place already.

Is this wrong? When did saving money and fiscal responsibility become evil?

My cousin and her boyfriend lost their jobs at the start of all of this. They just returned home from a 2 week beach vacation yesterday. She was complaining to my dad that they didn't know what they were going to do now that the extra money has run out.

Lots of stupid people out there.

No, it's not wrong. Just that most people aren't jumping around buying luxury items with their checks. It's just a useless stereotype like the "lazy unemployed worker" to try and defend a pathetic economic situation.

And in fact plenty of them were using that full amount to live. People tend to forget that the folks who were laid off weren't just fast food employees who were only pulling down $20,000 a year. You don't get to the levels of unemployment (esp compared to the numbers pre-pandemic) we currently have just by those jobs disappearing.

Whenever there is an economic downturn, the people who let it happen will look for a scapegoat. And that almost all the time is poorer people. Happened in 2008 and is happening again now. Sad thing is that it works.

I remember Bush did the same thing to Qwest. Party of free markets does not in fact like free markets.

That's not even a free markets thing. That's just Trump doing what's natural - attempting to take advantage of perceived leverage. I'm just shocked he didn't come right out and say they had to pay it to him or his family.

lol

Remember the guy that said the 2016 election was like flight 93 and voting Clinton winning would lead to all of our deaths? Now he says the 2020 election has even higher stakes!

I cannot believe Falwell would put that photo online and think he wouldn't be attacked for it.

Drunk.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Trump is rigging the Census by cutting it short by a month.

It's amazing how everyone understands that the GOP can't win national majorities, but we just pretend everything is normal.

"It would be a real shame if something would happen to your teen dancing video thing."

SI

And let's not forget that the main reason governments pay out money like that is to make sure those folk still spend it. It's done to benefit "the economy" as much as the people getting it. If everybody saved it, it wouldn't serve it's purpose.

I hope Trump continues to do interviews. He's the best ad for voting for Biden. His response to the question about John Lewis, immediately making it about himself - he didn't come to my inauguration, he didn't come to my SOTU speeches... it's just so on brand for a narcissist. And he keeps saying he's never met John Lewis and doesn't know much about him. How is that? You're effing President!

Perfect!

#COVID statistics, @realDonaldTrump edition: pic.twitter.com/Ifs3fCczXi

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) August 4, 2020

JFC

.@jonathanvswan: “Oh, you’re doing death as a proportion of cases. I’m talking about death as a proportion of population. That’s where the U.S. is really bad. Much worse than South Korea, Germany, etc.”@realdonaldtrump: “You can’t do that.”

Swan: “Why can’t I do that?” pic.twitter.com/MStySfkV39

— Axios (@axios) August 4, 2020

He's going to get re-elected lol.

If they spend the money, they are being irresponsible for not saving it.

If they save the money, they are being selfish for hording it when it is supposed to stimulate the economy.

The poor, by design, can never win these debates.

If by winning you mean never being criticized by someone on the internet, then there are no winners, except Betty White.

But the poor can help themselves by following good financial advice.

Hmmm . . . the least criticized Mount Rushmore. . .

Fred Rogers
Betty White
Willie Nelson
Tom Hanks

Like, if you met someone who legitimately disliked any of those four, you would immediately judge that person, right?