The Course of the Delta Variant Might Alter My Expectation for a Political Solution

well I am just glad that I can't read and definitely can't do math and love to exaggerate. I mean, maybe it does work like Trump told the Idiots all last year. Stop testing, hospitalizing and burying folks; then you won't have bad numbers.

Or maybe, in some alternate universe, HF will admit he was wrong and just wanted to argue with me, or try to insult me and give a mea culpa. Nah, he is incapable of doing that. he will come up with some kinda whataboutism to justify not admitting he was wrong.

We will know soon enough whether the cycle of a surge goes as expected. The models they have been using and that has been pretty accurate thus far say the spike should end around October and begin its decline thereafter. Sadly hospitalization and death lag behind so we will see an increase in deaths run though mid to late October. In fact deaths are increasing currently as hospitalizations have increased to the breaking point in the south mostly at this point.

I wonder if there’s any correlation between southern states being vastly Republican and anti vax and masks and the sharp continuous uptick in cases, hospitalization and soon deaths. Nah I’m sure it’s a coincidence. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Stop trying to rejoice over deaths in red states, putz.


You're premature. Blue states are going up, too, including California, which has been doing all of the lockdown and masking BS to a tee. It isn't helping.


The spikes are related to weather. Southerners are staying indoors a lot more in July and August compared to people in the northeast and west coast. That's why TX and FL are spiking first.


But when weather gets colder and more people go back indoors everywhere, you will see spikes everywhere - that is what happened last October-January, when California shit the bed and was the worst in the US.


The only thing that may alter the path this time is if a LOT more people get vaxxed between now and the end of September.

Its the end of times. Doom and gloom are the horizon now! Leading to a hopeful civil war! Guess who wins!!!!!!!!!!!!
Until then it will be more micro chipping and tracking. Re education camps and no rights for the unvaccinated. Get in line folks, the govt gonna take care of you.
Put on your helmets! The sky IS falling.

Stop trying to rejoice over deaths in red states, putz.


You're premature. Blue states are going up, too, including California, which has been doing all of the lockdown and masking BS to a tee. It isn't helping.


The spikes are related to weather. Southerners are staying indoors a lot more in July and August compared to people in the northeast and west coast. That's why TX and FL are spiking first.


But when weather gets colder and more people go back indoors everywhere, you will see spikes everywhere - that is what happened last October-January, when California shit the bed and was the worst in the US.


The only thing that may alter the path this time is if a LOT more people get vaxxed between now and the end of September. Originally Posted by Kinkster90210

Youre wrong on so much of your post I won’t even bother to address it. The only thing you wrote that was correct is the last sentence.

Hedonist, The link is broken and I can't find your article, but here's what they're talking about:

https://www.wptv.com/coronavirus/cdc...ntly-16-deaths

The CDC revised its estimate for one day upwards by 16 deaths.

The good news from the article, apparently Floridians are scared about the carnage and are getting vaccinated, so that the vaccination rate in your state is now approaching the U.S. average. Reported deaths in Florida yesterday were 233, and the 7 day average is 141 per day,

https://www.google.com/search?q=flor...4dUDCA4&uact=5 Originally Posted by Tiny

Thanks for clearing that up. I obviously made a mistake taking the number 16 as the total.


My apologies to 1blackman1, on THIS one, he was right and I was wrong. Never been afraid to admit when I'm wrong when it is proven to me.

More pesky facts that HF won’t accept as proving exactly what was said.

7 day average of deaths last week was 400 something. Today it is 540 or there abouts. The 7 day average of deaths to Covid is higher than it was last week and higher than the week prior.

Guess what 500 is greater than 400. And 400 is greater than 300.

Can one reasonable conclude that 500 deaths is greater that 400 deaths which is greater than 300 deaths. I would. But good ole HF calls that an exaggerating and I guess it’s not a fact (except maybe to the people that died and their loved ones).

HF where’s the mea culpa. Admit you were just being argumentative even though you were dead wrong (less dead however than the people you don’t accept that have died I suppose). Where ya at. Let’s see some more of your research and grand application of logic. Explain how deaths are not increasing.

I’m waiting.

Thanks for clearing that up. I obviously made a mistake taking the number 16 as the total.


My apologies to 1blackman1, on THIS one, he was right and I was wrong. Never been afraid to admit when I'm wrong when it is proven to me. Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Accepted.

well I am just glad that I can't read and definitely can't do math and love to exaggerate. I mean, maybe it does work like Trump told the Idiots all last year. Stop testing, hospitalizing and burying folks; then you won't have bad numbers.

Or maybe, in some alternate universe, HF will admit he was wrong and just wanted to argue with me, or try to insult me and give a mea culpa. Nah, he is incapable of doing that. he will come up with some kinda whataboutism to justify not admitting he was wrong. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Nope, I was wrong about the number and I admit it. Write this one down, they don't come along very often but I do make mistakes.


And let me see if I can clear up this issue. I don't argue for the sake of arguing KNOWING that I am wrong. Unlike some people on this board and every other board I've ever been on, there are people who do just that, LM would be a prime example of arguing just for the sake of arguing because he gets off on it. No real attempt at debate, which you do even when I disagree with your conclusions so I do give you credit for that, a mostly good faith attempt at debate. I just find your conclusions "suspect", when I'm thinking to myself, surely he knows better than that which BTW you have said to me often.


I'll make a renewed effort to keep the debate civil and when I'm wrong, I'll admit it, no problem at all, I just have to be convinced.


And "whataboutism" serves a legitimate purpose of comparison when used properly. First, address the issue with an answer and opinion, then offer the "whataboutism" for comparison. Avoiding the question and then a "whataboutism" is not a proper use of the term.


For example, you say "Trump did this" and I say "yes he did, or no he didn't" and then I address the fact that another person, Obama for example did the very same thing with a different reaction by a person or people with a different political ideology and that other person then can't bring themselves to admit that the whataboutism was valid.


"Whatabout" what Joe Biden is doing with regard to immigration compared to what Trump did would be the text book example of this theory.


While not ignoring that Trump set a policy that separated minors from adults, a law if detention is deemed proper, it is perfectly reasonable to point out that Biden has exacerbated a problem that Trump had essentially worked out. That is not trying to avoid the topic of Trump if Trump is addressed before making the comparison.



Now we face the worst catastrophe and it is a catastrophe at the border than we have ever seen and getting worse by the day with Biden's approval rate on immigration now about 35%.


A perfectly reasonable example of applying "whataboutism" the proper way which I believe I do each and every time I use it and and will continue to use it when it provides a necessary comparison.

HF - thank you, good sir!
A lesson in cogent and constructive debate.

So we will get back to our civil debate. I’m on board.

I thought viruses surge in the fall and winter, never the summer.


https://youtu.be/ItPkQ5vp5Cw Originally Posted by bambino

This Virus does what it's told, lol.

Youre wrong on so much of your post I won’t even bother to address it. The only thing you wrote that was correct is the last sentence. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Denial,deflection, obstruction



'I won't even bother' - Means - I am incapable of a reasoned response with supporting evidence to quote.

Thank u - please see ted Cruz for an education in debate.

So we will get back to our civil debate. I’m on board. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

the HMS DPST Titanic!

So we will get back to our civil debate. I’m on board. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Count me in. I know it doesn't make a lot of sense to some people but I have been into debating ( whether I do it well is debatable ) since I first found Crossfire on CNN in 1982. I was fascinated and I was hooked, been doing this for almost 40 years now. I had friends who would not come to my apartment at that time because they hated that I watched "that crap" in their words. I'm literally addicted to news and especially political news.



I relate it to playing a game of chess or as they say on the TV series Survivor, "out-wit, out play and outlast the other guy". As with everything I do in my life, I try to do it the best I can. Obviously to different people with different opinions, it may not look that way but it is what it is, can't change others perceptions so easily.


Now WTF is Joe Biden doing, cancelling America's energy independence as part of his national policy by shutting down pipelines and I just watched a campaign clip of him telling a crowd, "we should put some of these oil and gas executives in jail" with his "No, I'm not kidding, I'm not kidding".


And now that gas prices are going up, he is calling on OPEC to pump more oil WTF?


https://www.huffpost.com/entry/biden...b0a3256ab03193


Biden Asked OPEC To Pump More Oil. Is That Climate Denial?

On Wednesday, the White House asked the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to pump more oil in hopes of stemming the rise in gas prices in the United States.

President Joe Biden administration’s request to increase production of a major source of planet-heating pollution came just days after the United Nations issued a dire new report on climate change, which begs the question: Is the president denying the reality of the global emissions crisis?


Biden’s seven-month tenure abounds with climate contradictions. On the one hand, the Democrat has blocked a major pipeline project, revived U.S. carbon diplomacy, and requested unprecedented levels of climate spending from Congress. On the other, he’s charged ahead with other pipelines, approved more than 2,000 permits to drill for oil and gas on public lands, cut a coal company’s royalty payments, and asked Congress for significantly less money than experts say is needed to rapidly cut emissions. In short, he’s doing more than ever before on climate, and still very far from enough.

While asking OPEC for more oil may look like a softer version of climate change denial than the last four years of U.S. leadership, what it really demonstrates is two far more pernicious forces preventing policymakers from taking rational steps to avoid disaster: inertia and inequality.

In a country where a surprise $500 expense would thrust 57% of adults into debt, major fluctuations in commodities like gas prices pinch the most vulnerable first. The national average for gas prices has climbed over the past year, crossing the $3-per-gallon mark in May for the first time since 2014. The price for regular blend fuel hit $3.185 this week, up from $3.144 a month ago, according to AAA.

Those cents add up for the vast majority of Americans who rely on a gas-powered automobile to get around. The price flux can also affect the cost of various household goods, which become more expensive to ship as fuel prices increase.

They also make it difficult for the average person to think about the long-term potential advantages of short-term suffering, like paying more for gas to avoid disastrous climate effects in the future, especially when the policy causing that pain isn’t even designed specifically to deliver those benefits. In an economy where the price of basic needs like health care and housing is subject to investor speculation, it’s easier for most people to see a choice between real, immediate expenses and modest potential climate benefits in the long term, and decide that, on the latter, it’s better to roll the dice.
Or is Joe Biden just the idiot I believe him to be? Can we start with a consenus on this or not?

I I’mpersonally an all in on all energy guy so I can’t say what his plan is all about. I also believe we need to stop subsidizing oil companies.

If they are making profits and we are subsidizing them either through tax incentives or direct payments something is very wrong.

I wish Republicans were as against corporate welfare as they are against safety net programs.