I read this article, and see it’s all about what CNN’s host Dana Bash has to say on the matter.
I understand that it really pisses some people off when their target doesnt take their bait. I’m sure he’s just sexist, since he refused to give a woman the sound bite she was so desperately trolling for. Probably racist, too.
Trump is simply overmatched by the coronavirus and a situation wherein he is up for reelection in November. I credit the Chinese, not the Democrats, with finally likely having found and deployed Trump’s kryptonite.
We all are good at some stuff and not as good at other things. Trump suffers from messaging shortfall . . . maybe imprecision would be a better word. It began where he originated, in Queens years ago. It’s a failing possessed by many guys who were denizens of NYC’s outer boroughs back then. It sort of came with the territory.
What started back in yesterday’s Queens, and worked for Trump for many years, does not work for the President of the United States of America. But Trump appears unable to escape his past, despite having been bit over and over and over.
Excuse me but are you just going off the rails here now ?
reporter asks question, he dodged it, … so now he’s sexist and racist ? geez get a grip
No everyone doesn’t think everyone is sexist and racist when they don’t give reporters answers.
No its not “trolling” for a reporter to ask a head of a government health agency about something like this.
The president should NOT be spouting totall bullshit lies like that. In no ordinary time has that ever been OK or accptable or something that reporters would just ignore. And it sure as hell is not at all even close to OK for the president to be lying about now. So yes reporters should and must ask
Again, you have to have been exposed to the genre. What comes out of his mouth is more cocky hyperbole than lie. But I’m actually on your side. I agree it can be seen as a lie, and it doesn’t help to point out that they all “lie” in that manner.
Trump might be the only person of his ilk to whom many Americans ever have been exposed. I have been among many of them. They all do what Trump does. After a while you just sort of factor it in and go on from there. But I realize that might not be possible for a great many Americans never before exposed to New York City people from back when Trump was coming up.
She didnt ask a question. She was not a reporter. She made a statement and then expected him to agree with her. There was no right answer no matter what he said, the subsequent derogatory headline had already been written. They only needed to plug in the “he said yes”, “he said no”, or “he didnt answer”.
Either that “interview” or the linked article (I didnt watch the actual program, so I dont know which) is blatant trolling with an agenda.
And I’ll bet you nearly anything that the “99%” proves to be far more accurate than the doomsday terroristic-esque claims coming from certain other mouths. It’s all guessing; at this point the only possible lie is to claim someone is lying.
The mortality rate is around 0.5% alone. The hospitalization rate for confirmed cases is around 20% according to the WHO.
For a lot of people though, barely making it alive after days on ventilator, in the ICU, or hospitalized, or even simply feeling sick and getting quarantined is not the typical definition of harmless. Personally, my own definition of harmless is closer to meaning that I suffer no noticeable negative effects whatsoever.
Maybe the asymptomatic rate would be what I could accept as harmless rate. I could buy it being upper bound around 75 or 80% - although various studies have shown large variation probably due to their definition of mild symptoms vs. asymptomatic - but there’s plenty of evidence to know it’s definitely not going to be near 99%.
“No! Just going from confirmed cases, we have 3 million cases and only 133000 deaths. That’s only… Zero POINT Zero Zero FOUR… ummm… PERCENT! Can’t you even do METH?
Plus we all know there’s about 300 asymptomatic (and untested) cases for every confirmed case! So it’s really even lower than that!” – Random Trump Cult Member
Yes, very productive. And very mature.
Not really. But I have observed nearly that word-for-word response in real life multiple times, so…
And to a lesser extent it’s shown up in this thread, too, with claims of <0.01% with no data whatsoever to back that up (CDC’s last conservatively low estimate was around 0.25, just for the immediate deaths).
I see Bend3r, you were quick to take out “the less educated Trump supporters” lol
The group “Trump voters” over-represents people with no high school education and/or no college degrees. Facts are facts. Being less educated doesn’t make them less important, I did not imply or claim that.
This is a new anomaly. In pre-Trump elections there was not such a skew for white educated vs white non-educated voters. It partially explains why repeating demonstrably false lies over and over seems to work well for Trump’s “base”, and also why there is such a migration of educated voters.
Coronavirus stimulus - Round Two
Even if you received a payment during the first round, you might not be able to double dip:
Forbes: New stimulus income limit could top out far lower than before
Easy come, easy go . . . I guess. 
This is not the kind of news we all are looking for:
Study in Spain puts damper on hope for herd immunity
In a peer-reviewed paper published in the Lancet medical journal Monday, researchers from Harvard, MIT and several Spanish institutions analyzed findings from a wide scale study on antibody prevalence in Spain.
I wouldn’t get too excited about this potential bill either considering how far there is between it and the House bill.
As far as Spain study is, it kinda confirms what was suspected from other Coronaviruses unfortunately and empirical data of patient becoming infected again after recovery. That does not point to an end soon from natural infection + recovery process.
Shandril
Is it your thinking that House and Senate will be unable to come together and produce any second round stimulus legislation at all?
I dont understand. What “hope” for herd immunity? We’ve done just about everything possible over the past 4 months to delay or prevent herd immunity. Any hope of achieving it any time soon was abandoned with the first closings.
But, the 5% penetration rate does mean they are much closer to herd immunity than indicated by the .5% penetration rate based on confirmed case count. 5% is enough to start having an positive effect - a relatively minor effect, but an effect non the less.
Trends towards higher cases not leading to more deaths. Hospitalization and mortality rates per case seem to, at least for now, be falling.
I think the signals are that both chambers want a second round (or at least making a show of it). But I don’t think any of the numbers or details or even large parts of either bills are solid at this point.
And I don’t rule out that some parts of either bill may be dealbreakers for the other chamber and they end up in a staring match not getting anything done.