Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like my point about lionizing Cuomo and Whitmer too early to stand, though. Their actions during the outbreak WILL be scrutinized, and it seems Whitmer's been a smidge more arbitrary about what is and isn't allowed during her states's shutdown (don't get me wrong, there's been some conservatives trying to make her look bad, but there is enough there there.)

No. Whitmer hasn’t been extra arbitrary or strict. Ohio has been possibly more restrictive, but you didn’t see LIBERATE OHIO on Trump’s Twitter feed.
Her state exploded, and she did what was needed. They need to stop whining about boats and seeds. It’s not even the time of year for that stuff.
- Ohioan

She was very arbitrary.
Requiring that items within a store that is open remain off-limits for purchase?
Not allowing residents to travel within the state between homes?

Where is the science in any of that?

The only science we have is social distancing and locking down.
Infected people traveling to other locations and spreading infection isn’t a controversial idea. If DeWine had been staring down similar numbers, he would have tightened up even more. It’s the only tool they have.

People going from one home to another home? This is not exactly "other locations."
Then, there is the whole, "You can go kayaking or canoeing but no motor boats." What is that rationale?
And, why cordon off areas in stores that are open?
Yes, it's arbitrary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like my point about lionizing Cuomo and Whitmer too early to stand, though. Their actions during the outbreak WILL be scrutinized, and it seems Whitmer's been a smidge more arbitrary about what is and isn't allowed during her states's shutdown (don't get me wrong, there's been some conservatives trying to make her look bad, but there is enough there there.)

No. Whitmer hasn’t been extra arbitrary or strict. Ohio has been possibly more restrictive, but you didn’t see LIBERATE OHIO on Trump’s Twitter feed.
Her state exploded, and she did what was needed. They need to stop whining about boats and seeds. It’s not even the time of year for that stuff.
- Ohioan

She was very arbitrary.
Requiring that items within a store that is open remain off-limits for purchase?
Not allowing residents to travel within the state between homes?

Where is the science in any of that?

The only science we have is social distancing and locking down.
Infected people traveling to other locations and spreading infection isn’t a controversial idea. If DeWine had been staring down similar numbers, he would have tightened up even more. It’s the only tool they have.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that Kemp wants to re-open to force a choice on the employees: (1) get your butt back to work or (2) don't come into work which will be recorded as quitting your job and therefore you don't get unemployment benefits.

He's a sneaky bastard. Always follow the money.

And, my guess is that Kemp wants to reopen because he is listening to his constituency who want to return to work.

There’s zero polling In Georgia on this, so no.

“There is no polling specific to Kemp's moves in Georgia, but Atlanta-based Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz told The Hill that his sense is that national polls are in line with where most Georgians are, and that the move is "pretty unpopular right now."

"The public seems to be prioritizing health and safety over reopening," Abramowitz said. "Most people think it's too soon to be reopening and that we need to really ramp up testing and contact tracing first. I think that's almost certainly true for Georgia as well. ... This move seems very likely to backfire to me. Not only is it being heavily criticized by public health experts, but it seems likely to produce a new spike in infections and eventually deaths and force another lockdown."
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/493971-georgia-faces-pressure-to-reconsider-its-reopening

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like my point about lionizing Cuomo and Whitmer too early to stand, though. Their actions during the outbreak WILL be scrutinized, and it seems Whitmer's been a smidge more arbitrary about what is and isn't allowed during her states's shutdown (don't get me wrong, there's been some conservatives trying to make her look bad, but there is enough there there.)

No. Whitmer hasn’t been extra arbitrary or strict. Ohio has been possibly more restrictive, but you didn’t see LIBERATE OHIO on Trump’s Twitter feed.
Her state exploded, and she did what was needed. They need to stop whining about boats and seeds. It’s not even the time of year for that stuff.
- Ohioan

She was very arbitrary.
Requiring that items within a store that is open remain off-limits for purchase?
Not allowing residents to travel within the state between homes?

Where is the science in any of that?

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Find a chart showing testing rates. Almost invariably, the states with lower infection rates also have lower testing rates. They likely have much wider infections than they understand but prefer to keep their heads in the sand.

Correct. Texas is number 48 in the country for testing at 7 per 1000. Rhode Island is number while testing 37 people per 1000. Virginia is below Texas at number 49. I admit to my bias, but I expected better from Virginia. Oh well

And, some states with low infection rates have done quite a bit of testing. Infection rates still low.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testing-by-state-chart-of-new-cases/

Anonymous wrote:I would like my point about lionizing Cuomo and Whitmer too early to stand, though. Their actions during the outbreak WILL be scrutinized, and it seems Whitmer's been a smidge more arbitrary about what is and isn't allowed during her states's shutdown (don't get me wrong, there's been some conservatives trying to make her look bad, but there is enough there there.)

No. Whitmer hasn’t been extra arbitrary or strict. Ohio has been possibly more restrictive, but you didn’t see LIBERATE OHIO on Trump’s Twitter feed.
Her state exploded, and she did what was needed. They need to stop whining about boats and seeds. It’s not even the time of year for that stuff.
- Ohioan

The data is flawed.

jsteele wrote:Find a chart showing testing rates. Almost invariably, the states with lower infection rates also have lower testing rates. They likely have much wider infections than they understand but prefer to keep their heads in the sand.

Correct. Texas is number 48 in the country for testing at 7 per 1000. Rhode Island is number while testing 37 people per 1000. Virginia is below Texas at number 49. I admit to my bias, but I expected better from Virginia. Oh well

Anonymous wrote:The states that are doing “better” according to OP, may also be impacted by warmer temperatures helping suppress the virus.

Singapore would like to disagree with you, and within the US, Louisiana and Mississippi would like to differ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Find a chart showing testing rates. Almost invariably, the states with lower infection rates also have lower testing rates. They likely have much wider infections than they understand but prefer to keep their heads in the sand.

While testing rates are a good metric to assess a state's vigilance, it would seem to me that infection rate is determined by number of positive results/number of tests given. This is the best indicator as to how a state is faring wrt infections, especially since those that are showing symptoms are the most likely to be tested.

Infection rate I was using as "rate of infection per 100k people."

But positive test rate is a useful metric as well. Two nations with 10 million people - one has 100 positive cases and 10,000 tests, the other has 10,000 positive cases and 50,000 tests. Which do you think is ahead of the virus?

TX has had some isolated rural breakouts. Even a dozen Rapid City sized outbreaks would make it up to 27,000 or so and barely be noticed as long as Austin/Dallas/San Antonio/Houston remain relatively virus-free. Now enough food plant outbreaks and we will have some problems.

Agreed. Given the amount of tests that have been administered to date, I think that using positive test rate is a good metric, because it is basically a "worse case scenario"....those that are/have been tested are the ones that are more likely to be positive. If you tested an entire state at one time, my guess is that the positive rate goes way down, even though there are others that may be positive but not showing any symptoms.

The states that are doing “better” according to OP, may also be impacted by warmer temperatures helping suppress the virus.

I would like my point about lionizing Cuomo and Whitmer too early to stand, though. Their actions during the outbreak WILL be scrutinized, and it seems Whitmer's been a smidge more arbitrary about what is and isn't allowed during her states's shutdown (don't get me wrong, there's been some conservatives trying to make her look bad, but there is enough there there.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MI and PA are not solid red.

GA is purple.

Georgia is Red, Red and blood Red. Two republican US senators. A republican governor, and the general assembly in both the house and senate are republicans controlled. Georgia has been solidly red since, well forever.

It's in play this year. Not sure if it is Virginia 2004 levels of in play (where Biden will abandon it in late September) or Virginia 2008 levels of play, though.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Find a chart showing testing rates. Almost invariably, the states with lower infection rates also have lower testing rates. They likely have much wider infections than they understand but prefer to keep their heads in the sand.

While testing rates are a good metric to assess a state's vigilance, it would seem to me that infection rate is determined by number of positive results/number of tests given. This is the best indicator as to how a state is faring wrt infections, especially since those that are showing symptoms are the most likely to be tested.

Infection rate I was using as "rate of infection per 100k people."

But positive test rate is a useful metric as well. Two nations with 10 million people - one has 100 positive cases and 10,000 tests, the other has 10,000 positive cases and 50,000 tests. Which do you think is ahead of the virus?

TX has had some isolated rural breakouts. Even a dozen Rapid City sized outbreaks would make it up to 27,000 or so and barely be noticed as long as Austin/Dallas/San Antonio/Houston remain relatively virus-free. Now enough food plant outbreaks and we will have some problems.

Anonymous wrote:MI and PA are not solid red.

GA is purple.

Georgia is Red, Red and blood Red. Two republican US senators. A republican governor, and the general assembly in both the house and senate are republicans controlled. Georgia has been solidly red since, well forever.