TAPPER: Do you think lives could have been saved if social distancing, physical distancing, stay-at-home measures had started third week of February, instead of mid-March?Trump himself poured fuel on the controversy when he retweeted this thing that happened to have #FireFauci at the end of it.
FAUCI: You know, Jake, again, it's the what would have, what could have. It's -- it's very difficult to go back and say that. I mean, obviously, you could logically say, that if you had a process that was ongoing, and you started mitigation earlier, you could have saved lives. Obviously, no one is going to deny that. But what goes into those kinds of decisions is -- is complicated. But you're right. I mean, obviously, if we had, right from the very beginning, shut everything down, it may have been a little bit different. But there was a lot of pushback about shutting things down back then.
Sorry Fake News, it’s all on tape. I banned China long before people spoke up. Thank you @OANN https://t.co/d40JQkUZg5— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 12, 2020
I blogged that yesterday, here, but didn't feel like saying anything about it. I was in my resistant mode.
Later in the day, I watched the press briefing, and then I wanted to talk about it, but I'm only getting around to it now.
Anyway — to the transcript of the Task Force press briefing:
Dr. Fauci: I had an interview yesterday that I was asked a hypothetical question. And hypothetical questions sometimes can get you into some difficulty, because it’s what would have, or could have. The nature of the hypothetical question was if in fact we had mitigated earlier, could lives have been saved? And the answer to my question was as I always do and I’m doing right now perfectly honestly say, “Yes.” Obviously, mitigation helps. I’ve been up here many times telling you that mitigation works. So if mitigation works and you instigate it and you initiate it earlier, you will probably have saved more lives. If you initiated it later, you probably would have lost more lives. You initiate it at a certain time. That was taken as a way that may be somehow something was at fault here. So let me tell you from my experience, and I can only speak from my own experience, is that we had been talking before any meetings that we had, about the pros and the cons, the effectiveness, or not of strong mitigations. So discussions were going on mostly among the medical people about what that would mean. The first and only time that Dr. Birx, I went in and formally made a recommendation to the president to actually have a “shutdown”, in the sense of not really shut down, but to really have strong mitigation. We discussed it. Obviously, there would be concern by some that in fact that might have some negative consequences. Nonetheless, the president listened to the recommendation and went to the mitigation. The next second time that I went with Dr. Birx into the president and said, “15 days are not enough. We need to go 30 days.” Obviously, there were people who had a problem with that because of the potential secondary effects. Nonetheless, at that time, the president went with the health recommendations, and we extended it another 30 days. So I can only tell you what I know and what my recommendations were. But clearly as happens all the time, there were interpretations of that response to a hypothetical question that I just thought it would be very nice for me to clarify because I didn’t have the chance to clarify. ...Fauci was questioned about the expression of "concern by some that in fact that might have some negative consequences." The questioner paraphrased that as "pushback": "Where did that pushback come from?" Fauci had not said "pushback" at the briefing, though he had said it on "State of the Union." He answered:
Dr. Fauci: That was the wrong choice of words. You know what it was when people discuss, not necessarily in front of the president, when people discuss, they say, “Well, this is going to have maybe a harmful effect on this, or on that.” So it was a poor choice of words. There wasn’t anybody saying, “No, you shouldn’t do that.”Then he got a question that set him on fire: "Are you doing this voluntarily, or did the president...?" The questioner didn't finish, because Fauci angrily crushed him:
Dr. Fauci: No, I’m doing it…. Everything I do is voluntarily. Please. Don’t even imply that.The text doesn't convey how strongly he expressed outrage there, and I suspect that Trump was impressed by the doctor's vigor in counterpunching a journalist, which is what Trump himself insists on doing over and over.
And Trump steps to the microphone. He goes on at length about all the steps he took and when he took them. He stresses that he wrote it down and "It’s all documented because we have so much fake news, I like to document things." It's like: I know you're going to lie about me, so I'm going to barrage you with facts. Excerpts from this part of the transcript:
Donald Trump: On January 17th to CDC began implementing public health entry screenings at three major U.S. Airports that received the greatest volume of passengers from Wuhan, at my instructions. There was not a single case of the coronavirus in the United States. So on January 17th, there wasn’t a case. And the fake news is saying, “Oh, he didn’t act fast enough.” Well, you remember what happened, because when I did act, I was criticized by Nancy Pelosi, by sleepy Joe Biden. I was criticized by everybody. In fact, I was called xenophobic... Now, on January 21st this is long before the time we’re talking, because when Tony’s talking, I believe he’s talking about the end of February. On January 21st, it was still early, there was one case of the virus at that time. We called it the Wuhan virus. Wuhan. There was one case in the whole United States. We had one case... There was just one case, one person.... I’m supposed to shut down the government, the biggest economy in the history of the world, shut it down. We have one case..... But CDC reported, January 31st not one person has died. And I issued a travel restriction from China. Think of it. So nobody died. And I issued, you can’t get earlier than that. So we have, nobody died. And I said, “China, you can’t come in. I’m sorry”, because I saw what was going on. Wasn’t so much what I was told, it was that I saw what was going on and I didn’t like it. But I didn’t speak to Tony about, didn’t speak to very many people about it. I didn’t like it... and I got brutalized over it by the press, because I was way too early. I shouldn’t have done it. Brutalized by the press, but I’ve been brutalized for the last four years. I used to do well before I decided to run for politics, but I guess I’m doing okay, because to the best of my knowledge, I’m the president of the United States despite the things that are said....That last line was delivered with humor.
Later the #FireFauci retweet came up:
Donald Trump: I think Anthony would be the first one to say when I closed the country to China... Anthony said I saved a lot of lives by doing that. I mean, am I correct? I don’t want to put words in Anthony’s mouth, by the way, and I like him. Today I walk in, I hear I’m going to fire him. I’m not firing him. I think he’s a wonderful guy.The transcript notes "crosstalk," and it prompts Trump to say: "I retweeted somebody, I don’t know. They said fire, doesn’t matter."
That is the "#FireFauci" part of the tweet wasn't important to him. He's asked, "Did you notice that when you retweeted it?" and he doesn't fall into that trap. Imperiously (or sarcastically), he says, "Yeah, I notice everything."
The next question is: "So you retweeted it even though it said time to fire Fauci?" Again, he declines to jump into the trap: "Well, no, that’s somebody’s opinion. All that is is an opinion."
The speaker persists: "But you read it, and you elevated it." The predictable answer to that is to diminish the meaning of retweeting — it's just a way to pass something along — and I'll just boldface where he's more or less saying that:
Donald Trump: Well, I was called about that. I said, “I’m not firing.” In fact, if you ask your friends in the public relations office, I was immediately called up on that, and I said, “No, I like him. I think he’s terrific.” Because this was a person’s view. Not everybody’s happy with Anthony. Not everybody’s happy with everybody, but I will tell you, we have done a job the likes of which nobody has ever done....Dot dot dot because that's the shift to his preferred topic — the barrage of facts about what a great job so many people have done. The next question drags him back to FireFaucigate: Are he and Dr. Fauci "on the same page"?
Donald Trump: Yeah, we have been from the beginning. I don’t know what it is exactly, but if I put somebody’s opinion up, I don’t mind controversy. I think controversy is a good thing, not a bad thing, but I want it to be honest controversy. Now, when I got a call, I got a call not very quickly, and nobody saw that as being any big deal. They said, “How are you doing with Dr. Fauci?” I said, “I’m doing great,” and I didn’t talk to Dr. Fauci even until we just got here. Dr. Fauci asked one of the people if he could get up and speak, and he did. [crosstalk] And they totally misinterpreted him. I saw what they did.I agree that Fauci was totally misinterpreted. I don't know if it's true that Fauci, completely on his own, decided he wanted to address the controversy at the top of the presentation and that nobody leaned on him at all, but Fauci has earned a lot of respect, so I'd like to take him at his word. He doesn't need Trump to back him up on that assertion, but Trump does back him up.
As for the #FireFauci in the retweet, that's a strange thing. Was it an intentional prompt to Fauci — telling him to get out there and support Trump and don't let yourself be used in the production of anti-Trump material? I wouldn't put that past Trump.
Who knows what tricks Trump is reeling out? He is a media genius. I begin with that presumption. I certainly believe he noticed #FireFauci in that tweet, and he had to know that his antagonists would run wild with it.
Maybe he explained his thinking to Fauci, and maybe Fauci accepts that public political speech is something that happens outside of his purview. I'm sure Fauci knew that — as Trump said — "Not everybody’s happy with Anthony." And maybe he understands that politics is complicated and Trump threw a bone to the anti-Fauci faction that's out there.
I suspect that Trump likes some chaos. It makes a better show, he performs well in it, and he thinks he'll rise to the top in the end, and I guess he's right, because to the best of my knowledge, he's the President of the United States despite the things that are said....
Posts
195 comments:
Anti-Trump hatred has no limits.
Tapper: "Trump is insane"
thanks, Tapper. Your opinion is revealing.
Do you think lives could have been saved if social distancing, physical distancing, stay-at-home measures had started third week of February, instead of mid-March?
That's such an idiotic, leading question. It's like asking a person who was in a car crash if they think things would have turned out differently if they didn't drive a car that day.
Who knows what tricks Trump is reeling out? He is a media genius.
He's undoing the news media business model. He's not great as far as listening to him goes - it's for the soap opera audience, to make them uncomfortable with what they're choosing to be entertained with.
The media will double down, which makes it entertaining for the right.
This was spreading while the Democrats/media were trying to impeach trump.
They are only interested in this for the power. They hope people die. They hope for the economy to tank. They are going to try to blame the coming famine and loss of living standards on everyone that opposes them.
They are just pieces of shit.
You freekers give them power.
they provide no context, he admitted he had misgauged the communicability of this bug, well you have to read between the lines,
That's why Trump played all the media clips where they were all insistent that this virus was NO BIG DEAL.
The media hate it when you throw their own words in their faces. They call it "propaganda"
I wish he would have said, 'No, no lives at all', just to watch the smoke come out of Jako's ears.
"Do you think lives could have been saved if social distancing, physical distancing, stay-at-home measures had started third week of February, instead of mid-March?"
The same question can be aimed at every governor and mayor. The disease began at specific places. Why didn't these place stop it before it spread?
The idea of shutting down the WHOLE country, imposed top down... how could that have happened? That had to come later. The great failing that Tapper points to has got to be aimed at the governor of Washington and the mayor of New York City and so forth.
I find the re-tween fuss interesting. The media is attempting to pin someone elses opinion on President Trump. "He elevated" the tweet, therefore it becomes his words.
Let's go back to the circle jerk that is the media. The NYT, does an entire story, based on a story from politico. A day later the story is a lie supported by zero evidence. NYT just shrugs and claims to have no responsibility, they were just repeating the work of another news agency.
President Trump is a media genius. It's like martial arts. The President is constantly using the medias power and momentum against itself. Yesterdays presser was epic.
Here's Dr. Fallaci, shucking and jiving, as usual.
"Although one of the original models projected 100- to 200,000 deaths, as we're getting more data and seeing the positive effect of mitigation, those numbers are going to be downgraded," Fauci said Wednesday on Fox News. "I don't know exactly what the numbers are going to be, but right now it looks like it's going to be less than the original projection."
The guy is such a bullshit artist. At the time, we knew the 2.2 Million death estimate was total bullshit. At the time, we knew the 100,000 - 200,000 deaths was closer, but still too high.
Do you think lives could have been saved if social distancing, physical distancing, stay-at-home measures had started third week of February, instead of mid-March?
Do you think a decision should be made the very second an idea pops into your head? What if it's a bad idea?
as the Julie Kelly piece pointed out, the notion that social distancing has any real aggregate impact, is poorly sourced, it stems from the h1n1 outbreak that claimed 16k lives,
There was an interesting comment on Facebook about that briefing. The CBS woman in red was very aggressive in "questioning" Trump. I thought he spent too much time sparring with her but the comment I saw pointed out that her husband is a China lobbyist.
I don't even know her name so cannot research it. I wonder if anyone does know about this? It would fit a pattern of filing those briefings with China agents, or at least spouses of them. I think Trump spends too much time on the Q&A part.
"Do you think lives could have been saved if social distancing, physical distancing, stay-at-home measures had started third week of February, instead of mid-March?"
I would totally say YES (with my fingers crossed behind my back), if it expedites a re-opening of several states and counties.
Indeed, if the re-opening mandates the use of gloves, Darth Vader masks, and the abolishment of handshakes and sex I will still say YES and comply.
Need to return blue collar/small business folks back to work, asap.
Fauci has been around the media forever. I have a hard time thinking he got tripped up by Tapper. Wading into hypotheticals about past history is a no win situation. Fauci knew what the result of his remarks could materialize.
To be fair, Fauci did good job on Sunday of saying, and I paraphrase. Sure could have saved lives, but lots of other factors play into those decisions.
The media, as always did not report the facts of Fauci's interview, and instead crafted the tired narrative, orangemanbad.
Nanopod: "Do you think lives could have been saved if social distancing, physical distancing, stay-at-home measures had started third week of February, instead of mid-March?"
That's such an idiotic, leading question.
And the reason you gave isn't the only reason it is idiotic.
SFAIK, not one person sufficiently suffering from Mao Tse Lung (MTL19) failed to receive all the care modern medicine has available. And everyone else who needed the full panoply of hospital care for whatever reason also got it.
Those who died were going to die in any event; Viruses are a force of nature, and mitigation measures were ever only going to limit rate, not extent.
Had we gone into lockdown earlier, it would only have meant even more excess capacity, not fewer lives lost.
Which is most predominant among journalists — intellectual lassitude, or drooling stupidity?
BTW, here in Idaho, where we remain locked down, case counts are down by at least 90% from their peak. We have 135 MTL19 hospitalizations. Not today, total.
Thirty-three have died either of, or with, MTL19.
All those numbers are a fraction of IHME predictions a week ago.
This spotlight by the press on the "friction" between Trump and his team is such a load!
Is there friction between Trump & the members of his team? You betcha! Behind close doors they probably go at each other hammer & tongs. But, ya know what -- it's like that in every administration, because these guys all have yuuuuge egos & think that God speaks to him/her alone with The Right Answers.
The press knows this. They know that Bill Clinton & Janet Reno detested each other. They know that the Kennedy brothers & Johnson loathed each other. The list goes on & on. I'm sure they covered up all sorts of squabbles during the Lightworker's administration.
But, it's different now because ORANGE MAN BAD.
Remember the Old Days? back when our Government told us it was CRAZY to think the WIV had anything to do with the Wuhan Flu? Now it turns out; THEY KNEW ALL ALONG
the state dept knew, TWO YEARS AGO, about inadequate safety at the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab and passed on information about scientists conducting risky research on coronavirus from bats, The Washington Post reported Tuesday
The press room is filled with snotty, condescending mean girls sounding like they're trying to start a fight with their boyfriend because all he said was "sorry" after leaving the toilet seat up.
So all the crap about "Sources familiar with the white house say" turns out to be Fake - as usual.
Trump would never fire Fauci. And yes, some people are upset with him. BTW, go read the MSM headlines about the tweet, then go read the tweet. They were deliberately lying about Trump. Reading who sent the Reweeted tweet, then jumping to the conclusion that means Trump endorsed the fire Fauci position, then PRESENTING ASSUMPTION AS FACT.
Then they have the gall to question Trump and act like there was only one possible interpretation of what Trump didn't say. Its well known that if you retweet or quote someone on a particular matter, that DOES NOT mean you agree with EVERYTHING they say. But the DNC-MSM constantly pretends it does - when they can hurt people they dislike.
Ann Althouse said...
The idea of shutting down the WHOLE country, imposed top down... how could that have happened? That had to come later. The great failing that Tapper points to has got to be aimed at the governor of Washington and the mayor of New York City and so forth.
4/14/20, 11:14 AM
Don't forget the governor of New York, who the mayor of NYC "theoretically" answers to. I love how Cuomo is throwing de Blasio under the bus, but it's not that easy. There are some mongoloid chuckservatives insisting that governors don't have staff agreements with the useless WHO (what?) and daily intelligence briefings (what?!). But that's completely irrelevant, given the WHO's China-sucking and slow-rolling of their entire coronavirus response. If certain governors had done the smart thing and listened to the task force briefings, along with heeding the President's bans on travel from China and Europe, they'd be doing far better. Instead, Cuomo dithered while supporting the Democrat efforts to reverse the travel bans, and that's why New York is affected far worse than California is right now.
For all of us who have waited decades for a counter punching GOP President, yesterday's briefing was the highlight of Trump's Presidency. I think Trump put Fauci in line behind closed doors and set him straight, and let him know who was President.
Updates:
1. Austria and Italy -- easing the lockdown.
2. Texas -- "Texas governor set to unveil executive order for re-opening businesses in a 'safe economic revitalization
3. Even California pretty boy,
Gavin Newsome is singing from the same sheet of music -- "California plots a coronavirus reopening. Trump insists it’s up to him"
Where are the geniuses yapping about exponential death rates?
"So if mitigation works and you instigate it and you initiate it earlier, you will probably have saved more lives."
Depends on what you mean by "work."
Mitigation in the sense of stricter isolation of risk groups could have saved lives, and still can.
But the jury is out on whether it is true that mitigation in the sense of general social distancing saves lives. Distancing does not save young, healthy lives, since the Wuhan virus poses little risk to them in the first place. As Knut Wittkowski has explained, in several places the curve flattened before distancing could take effect, so the actual impact of distancing on the course of the epidemic is also in question. As he notes, distancing slows down herd immunity which actually is important for the protection of vulnerable groups--whether and how much that increased the threat to vulnerable groups is not clear to me, but the delay in achieving herd immunity did not help. One prime benefit of distancing via shutdowns was supposed to be guaranteeing the availability of health care facilities, but since projections of demand were grossly overstated, few if any facilities were overburdened and the net benefit of "mitigation" in that regard is unclear.
BTW, if you go back to the Feb 28th Demcorat Debate - there was only ONE question on the Cornavirus. ONE. And of course, it was about the Trump travel ban - which all the D's refused to endorse or praise. Instead, they all - incorrectly - attacked Trump for cutting funds to the CDC. That's it.
Almost no one had died of the virus by march 1st in the USA. And almost no one was talking about shutting down the USA. This is just the DNC narrative being pushed by the MSM.
As Limbaugh states, once we do re-open there will still be CV deaths - and the DNC-Meida will blame Trump for re-opening TOO early. This is as certain as night follows day.
Let's say Fauci is sincere and wants the Task Force to succeed. It is impossible to succeed if the press can create a rift between team members. Especially between its members and its leader. Fauci has made some bad calls, and they are recorded, and dated.
He knows if he starts Monday morning quarterbacking Trump on Jan and Feb, Trump will turn him into Rosie O'Donnell. This is the highlight / spotlight moment of his entire career, and his recent ignorance of the press has hurt the effort.
Trump has done better dealing with this situation than what reasonable expectations of an average President would be. When the actions of the administration are looked at in the context of having to deal with the "resistance", and impeachment, and the media actively working against his actions, it has been an exceptional job.
"I suspect that Trump likes some chaos. It makes a better show ..."
Do ya'll remember what Joe Biden said yesterday? Yeah, nobody else remembers either.
Because Donald J. Trump knows how to suck all the oxygen out of Creepy Joe's moist basement.
Well, i learn something every day, every single day
It turns Out; that President Trump was NOT Impeached! It was BULLSHIT to say he was!!!
Do you Know, how we KNOW that it was BULLSHIT? 'cause President Trump went Golfing
That's right! President Trump was NOT impeached!! BECAUSE he went GOLFING!
Still Not convinced that President Trump was NOT impeached? He held RALLIES!!
I know this sounds kinda weird, but i heard it from a KNOWN ALCOHOLIC, so it MUST BE true
"BTW, if you go back to the Feb 28th Demcorat Debate - there was only ONE question on the Cornavirus. ONE. And of course, it was about the Trump travel ban - which all the D's refused to endorse or praise."
Interesting.
Jason reid of water stream partners, a veteran of the imf and the American chamber of commerce in china, I included the link of where he went to school, there, so it's business, as well as personal,
I agree that Fauci was totally misinterpreted.
He wasn't misinterpreted. He was set up.
Trump's extemporaneous word choice notwithstanding, we should all see it clearly for what it was.
No Demcorat or the great intellects at the NYT or Wapo was praising Trump's travel bands in February 2020. Instead, they were questioning whether it was necessary or calling Trump a raciss/bigot.
Now, these same people are attacking Trump for acting too late. And they'll soon be blaming Trump for re-opening too early
This is the same media that was rewriting the Biden story to make the DNC happy as they were trying to drive a wedge between Fauci and Trump.
Well, it's from those ninnies at National Review, so consider the source. But, U.S. Diplomats Warned about Safety Risks in Wuhan Labs Studying Bats Two Years before Coronavirus Outbreak"
U.S. officials warned in January 2018 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s work on “SARS-like coronaviruses in bats,” combined with “a serious shortage” of proper safety procedures, could result in human transmission and the possibility of a “future emerging coronavirus outbreak.”
In a series of diplomatic cables, one of which was obtained by The Washington Post’s Josh Rogin, U.S. Embassy officials warned their superiors that the lab, which they had visited several times, posed a serious health risk that warranted U.S. intervention. The officials were concerned enough about their findings to categorize the communications as “Sensitive But Unclassified,” in order to keep them out of the public eye.
To the Batcave, Robin!
Chuck Todd has said "trump has blood on his hands". Why is this man on TV posing as an objective journalist, when he's a DNC propagandist?
correction
I don't know why they stopped there.
Chuck Todd: Would Trump have been less responsible for these deaths if he had never been elected President?
Fauci: Of course.
Media Chorus: Well there you have it. This is all Trump's fault.
because you need a program, to tell the players,
Yeah, so what if someone was warning about the situation in Wuhan? what has that to do with the price of potatoes. Trump saw things were bad in Wuhan and the CDC issued a travel advisory in early January, and later shut China down in late January.
Are you insinuating Trump should have shut down the USA in january because of bat eating in Wuhan?
just like the Washington post piece about the Smithfield farms plant, how exactly do you practice social distancing there,
Gusty Winds said...
Let's say Fauci is sincere and wants the Task Force to succeed. It is impossible to succeed if the press can create a rift between team members. Especially between its members and its leader. Fauci has made some bad calls, and they are recorded, and dated.
He knows if he starts Monday morning quarterbacking Trump on Jan and Feb, Trump will turn him into Rosie O'Donnell. This is the highlight / spotlight moment of his entire career, and his recent ignorance of the press has hurt the effort.
4/14/20, 11:36 AM
Exactly. Dr. Fauci, whatever his other flaws, has been working for decades, and could make insane amounts of money wherever he chose. His actual record of dealing with the media has holes Trump could drive a truck through, but as long as he (correctly) blames Chinese deceptions and backs the government's response he'll be fine. The only ones disappointed will be the lugenpresse and the chuckservatives, BIRM. Clearly the doctor, whatever his prior loyalties, has decided to tear the press a new asshole for their typically venal lies. It's going to get to the point that someone, probably Dr. Fauci himself, is going to openly say that it is impossible to navigate such a crisis when the media systematically lies about the government's response and blocks all opposing viewpoints. At that point, the President should step in and mitigate this unprecedented abuse of the public airwaves.
Relevant to judging whether "mitigation" made any difference:
"On April 13, Israeli Space Agency chairman Isaac Ben-Israel told Israeli media outlet Arutz Sheva that he thinks Israel is close to getting through the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ben-Israel, who also heads the Ministry of Science and Technology’s National Council for Research and Development and the Security Studies program at Tel Aviv University, argued that global data shows the coronavirus has a six- to eight-week life cycle and this appears to be the case in Israel, too.
“As of the sixth week, the increase in the number of patients has been moderate, peaking in the sixth week at 700 patients per day,” he said. “Since then, it has been declining, and today, there are only 300 new patients.”
Ben-Israel added, “This is how it is all over the world. Both in countries where they have taken closure steps, like Italy, and in countries that have not had closures, like Taiwan or Singapore. In such and such countries, there is an increase until the fourth to sixth week, and immediately thereafter, moderation until during the eighth week, it disappears.”"
If I remember correctly, Wittkowski made a similar point about the natural history of epidemics.
So far we have: similar patterns of epidemic spread under different policies; no lives saved among the young and healthy, cuz no risk in the first place; pressure on health system grossly overpredicted, hence no benefit from preserving capacity.
Which raises the question: did the shutdowns produce any health benefit at all?
Chuck said...As long as Trump thinks that Presidential power has no limits, I think unlimited Trump-hatred is a good balance.
Two weeks ago: Trump is a dictator
Last week: Trump is weak and needs to take more control
This week: Trump is a dictator
Nice to see we've already started returning to normal
Chuck said: " Trump's administration had information that was peculiarly available to them, as opposed to the governors."
January 29: Trump organizes the Caronavirus Task Force.
January 30: WHO declares a public health emergency.
February 26: Nancy Pelosi holds a live news conference in San Francisco's Chinatown. Tells people not to worry. Come on down to Chinatown and enjoy the great restaurants.
March 15: Trump urging socail distancing for all Americans - CNN
March 16: New York Mayor Bill de Blasio went to a local gym Monday morning despite increasing calls from public health officials urging social distancing to limit the spread of coronavirus. - CNN
March 18: NY Governor Mario Cuomo refuses to implement a shelter-in-place order for New York City, despite pleading from the now concerned de Blasio
Trump was WAY ahead of these guys. The Democrat governors had ample warning from Trump, and from the CDC and the WHO.
They fiddled while their cities burnt.
Trump knows that firing Fauci would instantly turn Fauci into martyr. He also knew the press would run wild with the hashtag. If he were unhappy with Fauci or Birx, or he believed they were doing more harm than good, he'd stop including them in press conferences. I get the sense he has a very professional relationship with those two advisors and he believes they are a tremendous asset to him.
Reporter: Would more lives, treasure, and government credibility have been saved if we had had all the knowledge of COVID-19 we have today, on January 8th?
Narr
Would the South have won with AK-47s?
So the rule now is that if you like the text of the tweet you can't retweet it if it has a hashtag that someone might interpret as being disparaging, that you have to agree completely with everything related to the tweet and, in fact, with everything else the original tweeter has ever tweeted?
@Sebastian asks:
Which raises the question: did the shutdowns produce any health benefit at all?
The short answer is YES (with fingers politely crossed behind our backs, until the reopening gets revved up, and we can give a more comprehensive answer....)
No, Althouse; that is an unfair comparison.
The governors do not have active staff cooperation agreements with the World Health Organization. Governors do not have international intelligence services. Governors do not daily intel briefings that include information coming out of discrete Chinese provinces, and then Europe.
That's the difference. Trump's administration had information that was peculiarly available to them, as opposed to the governors.
But the governor of NY and Mayor of NYC should not have needed active staff cooperation with WHO - they had actual, first-hand evidence of the effects of the virus, plus events in Italy, Iran and Spain were well-publicized (as was China by then). Hell, my daughter's school shut down before the governor here issued an order. It is so much bullshit to think everyone can sit on their hands and wait for the President to act.
The reporters treat Twitter like it has religious status, and tweets are sacred communications.
Buckwheathikes said...
4/14/20, 11:50 AM
February 26th: Donald Trump and the CTF hold a press conference in which the CDC and NIH stress that while the risk is low to most Americans, it's time to start taking precautions and ramping up their aggressive health measures. Nancy Pelosi took the exact opposite approach, as seen above.
March 11th: WHO declares a pandemic. In response, Donald Trump bans all travel from the Schengen area. Multiple liberals and chuckservatives denounce the President for leaving travel up from the UK, allegedly due to the presence of Trump golf courses. These are Serious People.
NY Governor Andrew Cuomo still has not banned travel from New York to "summer homes" where his worthless citizens are free to spread the epidemic. I'm only surprised cars with NY license plates aren't on fire.
Serious question - if Trump had issued a lockdown order or a social distancing order any earlier than mid-March, would anyone (state governments, citizens) have complied? Plenty of evidence suggests not - Mardi Gras taking place, NYC Mayor advocating partying like its 1999, Pelosi inviting all of SF to come on down to Chinatown, Boston bars full to the brim the weekend before St. Patrick's day, etc. Please provide evidence if you say an earlier shutdown would not have been ignored.
Hey Chuck ARM etc.... What if Napoleon had B52s at Waterloo. Eh?
more grist for the mill
"Let’s Visualize State-by-State Shutdown Effectiveness on COVID-19
Many are wondering when we should begin to loosen social distancing measures and which ones should we loosen first?"
"One would expect that the faster a State shut down, the less deaths it would incur, but that’s surprisingly not what we find. There is virtually zero correlation between speed of shut down and expected death totals."
https://medium.com/@yinonweiss/lets-visualize-state-by-state-shutdown-effectiveness-on-covid-19-e13a5cdb50ad
Our media is only interested in what can be turned into a political weapon. Now they like to pretend this is due to Trump. But remember journalists thought of Katie Couric as a lightweight semi-celebrity until she got Sarah Palin to give her a quote they could use to discredit her. Suddenly she was a hero to the cause.
Media has always been this way, but Ezra Klein was a milestone. He successfully convinced media members they could be more openly partisan in their coverage. While this made him rich it was a direct path to the low(er) esteem media is held in today. Before Klein media members would be chagrined to realize their political motivations recognizably drove their coverage, largely because this would be considered disqualifying for certain positions. But in the Klein model these positions are considered resume enhancers. When money and fame go to the most outrageous we shouldn't be surprised that's what we get more of.
The way I read it, you are avoiding the big story, which is that Trump, after deciding that he had no power to order the states to shut down, now asserts that the has plenary power to open them up.
One possibility is that Trump has actually changed his mind on the underlying constitutional issues.
Another possibility is that Trump wanted to pass the buck for the economic downside of necessary public health restrictions but now wants to claim full credit for any economic upside of loosening those restrictions.
Which do folks think is more plausible? And how would the Fauci story fit into that larger narrative of buck passing and credit grabbing?
ah yes turtledove, guns of the south, which created his branch reality,
the national emergency declaration was signed by trump, the draconian additions is the governors deal,
Excellent analysis Anne. I'll note that based on my twitter feed, yesterday's press conference is a textbook example of the "2 movies" filter.
The "Mutiny on the Bounty" tweet today is another.
Let's add some additional data points:
January 31 - Trump bans all foreign nationals from China entering the US
January 31 - California Democrat Ami Bera blasts Trump travel ban. "We can't create prejudices and harbor anxieties toward one population." - Politico
January 31 - World Health Organization chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said Tuesday that widespread travel bans and restrictions weren’t needed. - Politico
January 31 - Republican Tom Cotton praises Trump's travel ban saying the government is "erring on the side of caution."
January 31 - Yale Institute of Global Health director Saad Omer: "A more sober approach is to convey messages that make people feel they’re part of the solution."
January 31: The American Civil Liberties Union has warned that the administration's measures infringe on civil rights.- Politico
March 11: California Democrat Judy Chu introduces the "No Ban Act" into Congress. It was co-sponsored by 219 Democrats attempting to reverse Trump's January 31 travel ban.
Trump has been fighting Democrats TOOTH AND NAIL to implement no-nonsense common sense policies to reduce the spread of Caronavirus. Democrats had to be dragged screaming and kicking into the scientific community and killed many of their citizens in the process.
Trump has done better dealing with this situation than what reasonable expectations of an average President would be. When the actions of the administration are looked at in the context of having to deal with the "resistance", and impeachment, and the media actively working against his actions, it has been an exceptional job.
If he can pull off reopening the economy with a decent recovery it will be a most incredible feat.
To that end, I question the wisdom of his claim to have power over the states to make decisions on how and when to do it. The downside risk of getting blamed if things don’t go well seems too high, and he could easily fall back on a federalist mindset to let the governors take the fall for problems with the restart. But Trump is and always will be a gambler and it usually works for him.
Ann said..
The same question can be aimed at every governor and mayor. The disease began at specific places. Why didn't these place stop it before it spread?
Also - EU leaders.
Indeed.
I read that Cuomo promised to track down all the people on a particular flight - a flight carrying a person with WUHAN-covid from another county.
NEVER. HAPPENED.
iowan2 said, "Fauci has been around the media forever."
Anthony Fauci has been director of NIAID for about 36 years, under six presidents. I suspect he has a pretty good understanding of politics.
Ann Althouse at 11:14 AM
The same question can be aimed at every governor and mayor.
The problem is that
* many of those governors and mayors are Democrats.
* Jake Tapper works for CNN, which is Democrat Party's public advocate.
@Stephen
doesnt Trump have the temporary power when declaring all 50 states in emercency?
U.S.C. § 1601 –1651)
The re-election ads are writing themselves. Trump is also a media whiz who is leading these English majors around the corral by the nose. English/journalism major aka non-essential workers.
At some point we will see that if you were not fat or very old with health problems and didn't live in NY or NJ you really didn't have a problem.
I watched that briefing. We have to have the dumbest set of reporters of anywhere in the world.
I think by expressing support for the idea that he has the power to re-open the economy he is pushing the governors to do so sooner than they would have otherwise. And that appears to be working (see: Cuomo and the others in the Northeast). Sort of a "whatever you do Brer Fox, don't throw me in that briar patch" tactic.
As for Fauci I think it is best to look at this simply, don't imply or ascribe to Trump things he hasn't said or done. He says he likes Fauci, thinks he is very smart and well informed on the issue, and appreciates & often follows his advise. That's it.
Trump is doing what Trump does: manipulating the media dopes to get his message across.
Chuck said, "Trump's administration had [MIS]information that was peculiarly available to them..."
From China. Per Dr Birx.
Corrected for you.
flight came from iran? via doha, one of jugurthan type allies, who have bought their share of influence,
Tucker Carlson did a segment demonstrating the dem/Ivy League strategy of admitting the offspring of these progs. Entry into the high paying role of corporate influencers guaranteed
These "mean girls" are in the vanguard.
Ray - SoCal: "Agree, I just see him as desperately trying to get a response - trolling. It reduces the quality of the thread a lot.
I guess Drago is not up yet..."
Au contraire! I was up quite early this morning but lets face it, LLR-lefty Chuck has so completely discredited himself with his Fake Conservative Pro-Dem shenanigans, particularly Chuck's recent Way Over The Top passionate defense and boosting of far left democrat Michigan Gov Whitmer's lunatic leftist policy decisions, requires no comment on my part.
Its now quite undeniable LLR-lefty Chuck is as far left as ALL the dems/leftists he defends and fights for.
Yeah, Iran to New York City. Let that sink in. Never fired a shot.
Stephen said...
Another possibility is that Trump wanted to pass the buck for the economic downside of necessary public health restrictions but now wants to claim full credit for any economic upside of loosening those restrictions.
Which do folks think is more plausible? And how would the Fauci story fit into that larger narrative of buck passing and credit grabbing?
4/14/20, 11:59 AM
The President doesn't have the constitutional power to shut down the economy. Neither do state governors, especially against medical evidence. However, if New York/ New Jersey did decide to keep American ports shut down despite relaxed federal guidelines, the federal government could potentially declare them in a state of insurrection. Then the President could send troops under the precedent of Mobile Bay, 1864. I doubt New York understands exactly how much leverage they would lose if Newark Bay fell under federal control, and I doubt President Trump would ever give back that power once seized.
"March 11: California Democrat Judy Chu introduces the "No Ban Act" into Congress. It was co-sponsored by 219 Democrats attempting to reverse Trump's January 31 travel ban."
This is all you need to know about this bullshit topic.
LLR-lefty Chuck: "Trump's administration had [MIS]information that was peculiarly available to them..."
Bob: "From China. Per Dr Birx.
Corrected for you."
Correct.
It appears LLR-lefty Chuck and ARM are alternating responsibility for pushing Beijing's talking points on Althouse blog.
Brian said...
yesterday's press conference is a textbook example of the "2 movies" filter
One movie and a bunch of people tripping.
for Chuck at 11:20 who wrote "...The governors do not have active staff cooperation agreements with the World Health Organization. Governors do not have international intelligence services. Governors do not daily intel briefings that include information coming out of discrete Chinese provinces, and then Europe.
That's the difference. Trump's administration had information that was peculiarly available to them, as opposed to the governors..."
I am a 74 year old gramma in Oakland, California and I was alerted to this virus in late February (by my son, an ER doc, who suggested we have a plan for the coming pandemic), surely governors and mayors had access to this data.
Our son also suggested we listen to John Campbell (English nurse and public health professional) who has daily you tube updates on the virus worldwide. Campbell started January 1st and was seriously concerned that WHO was holding off for so long before calling it a pandemic. Campbell should be knighted at the end of this.
More proof the Governors and Mayors had access to this data? OUR California governor DID see what was happening early, and acted early. Our 6 Bay Area county public health authorities put us on "shelter in place" mid March. They worked in concert with each other, obviously informed. They, Gov. Newsome, and Trump have worked well together, something I never thought I'd see. I believe Gov. Newsome is honest when he says he's pleased with his working relationship with Trump vis a vis Covid-19. Why the democrats don't check him out as a last minute sub for their presidential candidate is a mystery to me. (not that he would accept)
Retweeting does not equal endorsement. All of these dorks' twitter accounts state that.
narciso said...
ah yes turtledove, guns of the south, which created his branch reality,
4/14/20, 12:04 PM
Guns of the South was a self-contained reality that lasted for one book. The Southern Victory series was based on a very different branching incident, zero time travel needed.
The governors do not have active staff cooperation agreements with the World Health Organization. Governors do not have international intelligence services. Governors do not daily intel briefings that include information coming out of discrete Chinese provinces, and then Europe.
Chuck, assumes facts not in evidence. Namely that daily intel briefings include information coming out of China provinces detailing a need to do anything! It's wholly possible that intel agencies were telling the president this was no big deal. In order to ensure that Trump wouldn't be harsh on China in ongoing trade negotiations and in doing what he did do in January. Namely closing the border with China.
If you tell me that intel agencies never get anything wrong, I'll just point to the Iraq war.
Shorter Chuck. It's Hillary's fault because she didn't go to Wisconsin.
why do you think schumer wants to restrict private data mining technology
Any rational person hearing Dr. Fauci's answer to the "gotcha" question would understand that it was a hypothetical. Perhaps it would have been better had he prefaced his answer by stating "in a perfect world...".
But the media in this country are far from rational.
Was Aristotle really Chinese?
Trump retweeted a tweet that said "Time to FireFauci". And, Trump said he notices everything. Doesn't leave a lot of wriggle room there.
no obviously he was Belgian, yes Michael fumento, has logged fauci's category of error, over his long bureaucratic term in office,
Yesterday, Jonathon Karl of ABC democrat news, the current head of the White House Correspondents Association, accused Trump of pushing political propaganda in the White House briefing room.....
"Propaganda"...comprised solely of clips of US media reports downplaying the ChiCom Bat Soup Flu at the very time Trump was acting.....
....just days after Jonathon Karl alliwed a LITERAL Chinese Communist Propaganda actor into the press room to question the President of the US.
CStanley said: "I question the wisdom of his claim to have power over the states."
Here's how Trump is going to exert his power over the states.
Step 1 (Probably May 1): Re-open the country. Trump is going to announce that we have flattened the curve successfully. He's going to authorize businesses to re-open in all 50 states unless their governors prevent it.
Step 2 (May 1): Quarantine. Any state that isn't ready to re-open will be quarantined. No travel in or out, to prevent the spread of the disease. Roads will be manned by US soldiers. Only food and medicine allowed in. All federal ports of entry (airports, seaports, etc.) into these places are closed until the state is ready to re-open - as certified by each state's governor. The TSA will not operate in these places; nor will the State Department.
Step 3: (May 2) All 50 governors certify their states are re-opened.
"There is virtually zero correlation between speed of shut down and expected death totals."
Right. And we are beginning to see the same pattern cross-nationally.
So, BAG, if across states and across countries the epidemic shows a similar pattern regardless of policy regime, how would we identify the health benefit of shutdowns? (Not trying to pick a fight with you, of course -- I think we're basically on the same side.)
Hypothesis: in a proper statistical model assessing policy effects across jurisdictions, controlling for relevant variables like age distribution, prior health conditions, perhaps quality of health care facilities, the effect of shutdowns would not be significant -- whether taking cases, hospitalizations, or deaths as outcomes. (Analysis faces technical problems, of course --e.g., positive cases depend on testing procedures. But I'll leave that to the statisticians, and you catch my drift.)
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
One movie and a bunch of people tripping.
One movie. Two different sides.
China, Democrats and media on one side.
American people on the other.
Have fun with the blow back on that impeachment hoax and shilling for the Chinese government you traitorous shits.
ARM: "Trump retweeted a tweet that said "Time to FireFauci". And, Trump said he notices everything. Doesn't leave a lot of wriggle room there."
Not to worry.
Right about January 30, 2021, Dr Fauci will "decide" that he wishes to retire to spend more time with his family and President Trump, with Great Regret, will accept Tony's resignation letter and then Trump will offer fulsome praise for Fauci's service to our country.
a sampling
Drago said ...It appears LLR-lefty Chuck and ARM are alternating responsibility for pushing Beijing's talking points on Althouse blog.
I find those two both dull and annoying, like a headache that won't go away, but isn't bad enough to worry about.
Their goal has always been to preempt intelligent conversation among the Althouse fans.
While the vulnerable should stay at home longer, as well as local hotspots, I dearly hope Trump calls for the country to reopen at 12:01 a.m. this Sunday. He should declare it a National Day of Thanksgiving, as President Lincoln often did after Union victories. America can start by opening the church and synagogue doors. I'm not religious at all but it would be a great moment.
BTW, my friend and comrade Steve B. will have a half-hour eulogy this Saturday morning on the community radio station that serves Salem and the three counties around it.
The media are arm-chair quarterbacks, and left-partisan ones at that. It really is that simple. You can absolutely 100% sure that were Hillary Clinton the president, the media would be writing hagiographies about how super-intelligently Clinton acted to get the exact same outcome.
I stand by what I wrote yesterday- Fauci would like to knife Trump in the back, but Fauci is, unfortunately for the Left, trapped by his own public statements and the ridiculously wrong models that were used to shut everything down in early March. Trump eagerly embraced that 240,000 dead number a couple weeks ago, and some of the commenters here mocked him for doing so, but you can note the sudden change in tone once they realized that it isn't likely to even reach 100,000 dead. I warned such commenters that day that Trump did that because it would become the marker for success/failure. If the number comes in under 60,000 like Fauci is now predicting, Trump is going to say his actions saved 180,000 lives.
I think Trump should have embraced the earlier numbers, but I now realize that he was waiting for a less ridiculous number from the models that wouldn't induce further panic than was already extant. Trump is more politically savvy than I am- my cynicism is too high.
Trump knows that firing Fauci would instantly turn Fauci into martyr. He also knew the press would run wild with the hashtag. If he were unhappy with Fauci or Birx, or he believed they were doing more harm than good, he'd stop including them in press conferences. I get the sense he has a very professional relationship with those two advisors and he believes they are a tremendous asset to him.
Agreed. It's one of the reasons why Birx has such a prominent role now too. Trump needs a fallback expert. Fauci can't be the only expert standing up there. Then Trump rises and falls on Fauci. By bringing Birx in place he can better control the narrative. And he does control it. Watch how he directs questions requiring medical information to Birx or Fauci.
Birx also provides good optics. Shes the country's Mom telling us to eat our chicken soup and wear masks and our raincoats.
While Daddy Trump is going to get us back to work. Mom needs us to be careful because she worries. But Trump doesn't show worry. He's not supposed to. He can't. It wouldn't do us any good.
In one movie we're going to get through this, through action and reasonable risk management. In the other, anything that happens well is due to accident.
I will also say that Trump is setting this up as the real winner being the American people. We sacrificed. We came through for our neighbors and our families.And the media second guessed and nitpicked and promoted first ignorance and then fear.
It will be Morning in America all over again. This time the bear is the dragon. And we survived the first attack stronger and with eyes wide open.
My leftier friends used to crow about how Single-Payer Healthcare was A CONSERVATIVE IDEA so how could anyone calling themselves conservative or Republican possibly oppose it?
They honestly (I have to give them credit) seemed not to understand that houses like Heritage (on all sides) are paid to dream up solutions that look good on paper and give the Deciders ready ammo for whatever they decide. I don't doubt Heritage could do up a facile policy proposal against single payer with equal weight.
The same with the historic terrible budget of 200? whatever it was--the line was that it was so godawful because of the Republicans who did not vote for it. Really, it was "we put all the bad shit they wanted in the bill and they still wouldn't vote for it!"
Narr
Ecce homo politicus
Stephen @ 11:59:
"The way I read it, you are avoiding the big story, which is that Trump, after deciding that he had no power to order the states to shut down, now asserts that the has plenary power to open them up.
One possibility is that Trump has actually changed his mind on the underlying constitutional issues.
Another possibility is that Trump wanted to pass the buck for the economic downside of necessary public health restrictions but now wants to claim full credit for any economic upside of loosening those restrictions.
Which do folks think is more plausible? And how would the Fauci story fit into that larger narrative of buck passing and credit grabbing?"
OK, I'll play. I think he is taking this move from Negotiating With Children. There's a chapter in there called "Getting To Yes By Saying No." If you want your two-year-old to go to bed (or eat his peas, or whatever), you ferociously prohibit them from doing so. And the reverse psychology kicks in, and they will move heaven and earth to do exactly what you forbid.
See also Tom Sawyer, fence, whitewash; some assembly required.
As for the Constitutionality vel non of such a claim, I defer to experts, but I think in an emergency the President does have plenary powers. But in practice the linkage between his intention and the actual facts on the ground --that local cop setting up a checkpoint or writing you a ticket, whatever-- is simply too long and awkward for him to be cutting detailed orders. He will jawbone the governors and Congress and they will act in turn. Which is what I think has been happening. Unfortunately the governors are very keen to score political points here, and the governors (D) are keen to score those points at Trump's expense. Ugly.
Sorry to keep pounding this drum, but one more thing:
Since shutdowns constituted massive mitigating interventions, the most massive in recent history, you would expect the effect in any proper statistical models to be massive as well. If it proves difficult to show such massive effects, as early comparative analysis appears to suggest, that itself raises a big question about the validity of claims made for its health benefits. I say if -- obviously, "more research is needed." But so far indications are that the data are unlikely to show the massive effects you'd expect.
>>The same question can be aimed at every governor and mayor.
The same question will never be asked of any governor or mayor.
Unless they too are R's.
I think Trump should have embraced the earlier numbers, but I now realize that he was waiting for a less ridiculous number from the models that wouldn't induce further panic than was already extant.
Exactly Yancey. Trump couldn't promote panic. Even if intel people were telling him this was real bad back in February and everybody should wear masks, etc, we didn't have enough! He needed to ramp up preparations. Daddy Trump can't be telling the kids that the flood that is coming will take the family house, even if he knows it's likely. He just needs us to be playing in the sand by filling sandbags.
YW: "I stand by what I wrote yesterday- Fauci would like to knife Trump in the back, but Fauci is, unfortunately for the Left, trapped by his own public statements and the ridiculously wrong models that were used to shut everything down in early March."
Correct. Fauci is a huge Hillary fanboy, Gates and Soros suckup while Birx-y's husband was an advance man for Bill Clinton.
But I believe they now understand something rather fundamental: given their (Fauci's and Birx's) public statements over the past months, the only way for the Democrat Media to take out Trump requires Fauci and Birx to become collateral damage...and Tony and Birx have clearly decided they dont want to sacrifice themselves for their team.
Thus, yesterday Fauci and the video at the press room obliterated the dems/LLR/media strategy to taje out Trump.
And the dem/media/LLR types are very angry.....
"The great failing that Tapper points to has got to be aimed at the governor of Washington and the mayor of New York City and so forth."
Yes, if you are going to arm-chair quarterback, then it has to be done without regard to political label here because the actual power to shut down a state or part of a state isn't in Trump's hands- all he can do is shut down the borders and those parts of the states that are federal bureaucracies and land holdings.
All that said, though, I don't blame either Inslee or DeBlasio (he isn't even the governor of New York). I can't think of any real reason to criticize Inslee at all. New York City was just unlucky to have such dependence on mass transit and high density housing. We can, perhaps, blame the real pandemic expert for not suggesting the mass transit be shut down in early March, but then that is also arm-chair quarterbacking.
Fox News as gone into a panic mode asserting that the Constitution is not overridden by State Governors who use their Emergency Powers that Nullify the President's authority granted to him by Statutory Emergency Powers for the entire country.
If Trump cannot be trapped and impeached, the country will soon be reopened.
HI @Sebastian,
I plaud your yeoman work on this complex issue.
So, BAG, if across states and across countries the epidemic shows a similar pattern regardless of policy regime, how would we identify the health benefit of shutdowns? (Not trying to pick a fight with you, of course -- I think we're basically on the same side.)
Just defer. Sidestep. Dance around. There is no reason to get into it, until after we stabilize the ship of state.
But, Yes, from June to November, there will be a lot of work to answer your valid question to blunt a potential similar viral freak-out and shut down, next winter.
I think he is taking this move from Negotiating With Children. There's a chapter in there called "Getting To Yes By Saying No."
I thought the same thing.
Convesely, every time there's a story about hydroxychloroquinine in the media today, my wife and I comment about how it would have been different if he hadn't touted it as a potential good news drug. They'd be talking about how great it was. And Trump is downplaying a potential miracle drug.
But Daddy Trump can't do negative news and he needs to promote positive news so we don't panic. 300 million people panicking is worse than any pandemic, and would claim a lot more lives.
"plaud" is a combo of "applaud" and "laud"
Here's how Trump is going to exert his power over the states.
Step 1 (Probably May 1): Re-open the country. Trump is going to announce that we have flattened the curve successfully. He's going to authorize businesses to re-open in all 50 states unless their governors prevent it.
Step 2 (May 1): Quarantine. Any state that isn't ready to re-open will be quarantined. No travel in or out, to prevent the spread of the disease. Roads will be manned by US soldiers. Only food and medicine allowed in. All federal ports of entry (airports, seaports, etc.) into these places are closed until the state is ready to re-open - as certified by each state's governor. The TSA will not operate in these places; nor will the State Department.
Step 3: (May 2) All 50 governors certify their states are re-opened.
4/14/20, 12:26 PM
I doubt President Trump can leave more than 2/3 of America's ports closed if he wants to re-open the country. The Democrats have made the Double-Down their go-to move, even when it leads them to utter bankruptcy like the Mueller inquiry did. Things won't be fixed that quickly. I'm not even sure Trump should let Manhattan just "open for business." Insist on that quarantine while the city is methodically tested. New York was a uniquely terrible center for the pandemic and should be treated as such.
Germany's had more than 113,000 coronavirus cases, but fewer than 3,000 deaths. Scientists are hoping to unlock why.
Instead, claims Streeck, his study found that: "There is no significant risk of catching the disease when you go shopping. Severe outbreaks of the infection were always a result of people being closer together over a longer period of time."
Irony alert!
@Yancey Ward:
Yes, if you are going to arm-chair quarterback, then it has to be done without regard to political label here because the actual power to shut down a state or part of a state isn't in Trump's hands
Correction -- "arm-couch Epidemiologist"
"I doubt President Trump can leave more than 2/3 of America's ports closed if he wants to re-open the country."
That's the beauty here. Trump isn't closing the ports. The governors have closed them. He's going to give the governor's the opportunity to keep them closed, or re-open them. Up to each governor. If say, the governor of New York wants to keep his state closed, no problem. Then it's on him.
The governor's will immediately certify their states are re-opened, or they'll be cordoned off. And you saw them flip out when he suggested a few weeks ago he might quarantine New York.
"The way I read it, you are avoiding the big story, which is that Trump, after deciding that he had no power to order the states to shut down, now asserts that the has plenary power to open them up.
One possibility is that Trump has actually changed his mind on the underlying constitutional issues.
Another possibility is that Trump wanted to pass the buck for the economic downside of necessary public health restrictions but now wants to claim full credit for any economic upside of loosening those restrictions"
Trump is playing politics here, but you just don't get what the game actually is, Stephen. Trump has bought the IMHE models- he can see the endgame here- probably has seen it since about March 20th or so. The media will, on a dime, try to pivot to blaming Trump for the bad economy that is sure to be on the other side of this 1st wave. Trump is just ensured that the governors can't try to hamstring the economy further than the middle or the end of May. The only way to do this is to claim exactly that sort of plenary power, unconstitutional or not, so that, if the governors openly resist as was rumored yesterday, he can blame the Democratic governors the day the media starts trying the big pivot. Cuomo, to his credit, sees the trap Trump was setting, and neatly evaded it today by getting on the side of reopening the economy.
In short, Trump was threatening to open up space between himself and the Democratic governors in regards to reopening the economy. The only politically practical reply of the Democratic governors is to reclose that space. The political risk for both sides is a big jump in new cases between the start of the reopening and the election. I suspect the Democrat are not willing to take that bet just yet.
The way I read it, you are avoiding the big story, which is that Trump, after deciding that he had no power to order the states to shut down, now asserts that the has plenary power to open them up.
Since preventing some departments in a few hospitals from being overloaded isn't anywhere close to a national emergency, he and DOJ could charge the various governors and mayors with violating citizens' rights under color of law, be he won't.
See, Buckwheat gets it, Stephen.
I want to qualify my remarks at 12:36 on Constitutionality of Trump's claim to plenary power. It is far too complex (for me, anyway) to summarize in a few words. And having read Andy McCarthy's column, I think he explains things very well. Bottom line, however, I think it is not wrong to say that in practice this stuff has to be hammered among the branches and across the states, with at least grudging cooperation. And that process involves a LOT of psychology. Thus, Trump is setting these people up to do what he sees the country needs.
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/492548-wholl-decide-when-we-can-reopen-its-not-who-you-might-think
Trump saying he decides when the states will open up for business again: is that a clever way of getting the Democrats and the media to switch from demanding a longer shutdown to wanting to reopen things? Or is that ascribing too much cleverness to him? If that was his strategy it looks like it may be working.
Tony and Birx have clearly decided they dont want to sacrifice themselves for their team
I don't know that they are Team Hillary as much as political animals and operate in a government that is very dependent on politics.
Fauci's email to Hillary for example read like someone who is smart enough to try and ingratiate himself to a potential new head of state early and often.
By those standards Trump is on team Hillary. He invited her to his wedding after all!
Fauci and Birx do know now that this is the issue that will define their careers. For better or for worse they are on board. I do think Fauci is trying to skate between Trump on one side and still being invited to cocktail parties after this is over.
Buckwheathikes said...
That's the beauty here. Trump isn't closing the ports. The governors have closed them. He's going to give the governor's the opportunity to keep them closed, or re-open them. Up to each governor. If say, the governor of New York wants to keep his state closed, no problem. Then it's on him.
The governor's will immediately certify their states are re-opened, or they'll be cordoned off. And you saw them flip out when he suggested a few weeks ago he might quarantine New York.
4/14/20, 12:53 PM\
I disagree that the governors will have to immediately certify any such thing. The regional compact Andrew Cuomo devised will certainly take their cues from New York, and if he says No then their ports remain closed. I don't think President Trump will permit that, and I don't think cordoning the compact off is something he can plausibly do. I imagine you think they'll back down and break before the threat of a quarantine. I guess we will see.
We know enough about this virus to reopen for work this Monday. Period.
And governors should keep their hotspots on lockdown longer.
if the governors openly resist as was rumored yesterday, he can blame the Democratic governors the day the media starts trying the big pivot. Cuomo, to his credit, sees the trap Trump was setting, and neatly evaded it today by getting on the side of reopening the economy.
I agree. I thought he was wrong to assume that authority but the foil of the Democrat governors, like that idiot in Michigan, is too tempting.
The reporter was Paula Reid of CBS. Her husband, Jason Kolsevich was educated in China and is a lobbyist in Washington with substantial connection to China. Whether he actually lobbies for China or for Chinese companies or lobbies for American companies with China, he is a part of what we could now call the "China Lobby" - something very different than what the phrase used to mean fifty years ago.
Tom Hanks wife tells their Covid story as 8-9 days getting steadily worse and worse and then taking the Trump Cocktail and getting well the next day, BUT she thinks that her fever breaking could have just been a coincidence and she says the bad drug made her nauseous.
"Democrat governors, like that idiot in Michigan, "
Careful, you'll hurt Chuck's feelings.
BAG: "Just defer. Sidestep. Dance around."
I understand, but if we cannot even answer the basic question whether "mitigation" in the form of shutdowns had any demonstrable health effect at all, then we cannot decide whether any actions taken in that direction were too early or too late, or too little or too much.
If my hypothesis is correct, then the start of "mitigation" is a moot point, since it made little difference, and the entire debate about timing and Trump's responsibility for x or y is beside the point.
As long as the notion lingers that shutdowns produce big heath benefits, and if that notion is false, then reopening gets needlessly delayed. If my hypothesis is correct, there is no justification for any delay. I don't think we should "defer."
Don't get me wrong: I am open to evidence that shutdowns saved more lives. One mechanism would be that they encompassed some isolation of some risk groups which on balance was beneficial to them. But the further question would still have to be whether they produced more, much more, of such benefits than jurisdictions that did less or did something very different.
The issue will be settled in the coming months, empirically. But if I am right, it will confirm what many here have argued all along: that the draconian shutdowns were an insane overreaction.
It appears LLR-lefty Chuck and ARM are alternating responsibility for pushing Beijing's talking points on Althouse blog.
Yeah, Inga is not on the ChiCom pipeline and is harmless but I wonder about these two.
The reporter was Paula Reid of CBS. Her husband, Jason Kolsevich was educated in China and is a lobbyist in Washington with substantial connection to China.
Thanks. I was wondering how to check that. The WH Corespondents group seems to be quite attached to the ChiComs.
The Tenth Amendment is a one way check valve?
"The issue will be settled in the coming months, empirically."
My prediction: No one will ever admit to being wrong.
"Thanks. I was wondering how to check that. The WH Corespondents group seems to be quite attached to the ChiComs."
The Chinese aren't stupid- they know how to get the best bang for their bribes to Americans.
"not really shut down, but to really have strong mitigation. We discussed it. Obviously, there would be concern by some that in fact that might have some negative consequences. Nonetheless, the president listened to the recommendation and went to the mitigation. The next second time that I went with Dr. Birx into the president and said, “15 days are not enough. We need to go 30 days.” Obviously, there were people who had a problem with that because of the potential secondary effects."
--
Hopefully a lengthy conversation about those "potential secondary effects"...or "inconvenience" as he referred to it previously.
"I disagree that the governors will have to immediately certify any such thing."
The governors won't have to, agreed. That's the beauty of this plan. They can keep their state closed if they want. Then it's on them.
But Trump and all the Republican governors are going to reopen for business.
I guarantee you that as soon as Donald Trump says New York is closed, they'll open it.
what am I chopped liver, for providing the link this morning?
Nah, maybe a panreas, or gall bladder.
If social distancing is helping to reduce the number of deaths, it is not showing up in the data.
See Flattening the curve by Willis Eschenbach.
This is the second time I've referenced this. And it's probably not the last because it's a really big deal.
I suggest reading the essay but I will also attempt to summarize briefly the argument.
(a) Eschenbach notes that the IHME model predicts that deaths in any given region will follow a bell curve and that in particular deaths will be symmetric about the peak;
(b) Eschenbach verifies from a short list that this does indeed seem to be what is happening;
(c) Eschenbach notes that if social distancing actually has a positive impact then it should change the shape of the curve and in particular should reduce the number of deaths;
(d) Eschenbach notes that the 50 United States vary quite a lot in their projected peaks and when or even if they imposed stay at home orders, educational facilities closed orders, and non-essential services closed orders;
(e) Eschenbach notes that we should be able to see the positive impact of these three orders if we assume that the IHME model is correctly predicting peaks, or in the absence of that, in the variation from symmetrical deaths around the peak that we would expect in the absence of social distancing;
(f) Eschenbach then demonstrates that in all three cases these orders seem to be having the opposite impact, that is actual deaths increase above what the model predicts and above what symmetry would predict after these orders occur.
(g) Still only in the case of the closing of non-essential services order is this negative relationship actually statistically significant.
(h) But still none of three orders have a positive relationship with death and that means that for all three of these restrictions, the resulting reduction in deaths is at best extremely limited, or in the worst case actually killing more people.
(I) And therefore if we take into account the extraordinary negative economic impact of these orders, which is usually not being considered at all by the people advocating them, even if they claim to be doing so, then we should reverse these orders as soon as possible. Or in other words, tomorrow.
Howard said...
The Tenth Amendment is a one way check valve?
Howard, even you know the Civil War ended the 10th amendment.
Careful, you'll hurt Chuck's feelings.
I live in Michigan, and Mike K is right. She's got no political skills whatsoever.
Did you sign the recall petition?
Anyone remember Al Haig? “I'm in charge here, in the White House.”
Trump went full Al Haig.
Original Mike said...
Did you sign the recall petition?
I keep seeing this, and it carries as much weight as an on-line survey. So long as that witch keeps us locked in our house you can't do a legit recall.
When that does happen, I'll run, not walk, to the first person I see holding a clipboard.
Bryan @ 12:44: “... 300 million people panicking is worse than any pandemic, and would claim a lot more lives.”
Did you forget the sarc tag? The country HAS panicked. Or at least that is the devout hope and object of the Prog media, commentariat and politicians
Maybe one of these reporters can skip one of their "What's the worst thing about having to work with an idiot for a President" and ask Fauci or Brix to cite the actual science behind the 6 ft. social distancing policy.
"Then he got a question that set him on fire: "Are you doing this voluntarily, or did the president...?" The questioner didn't finish, because Fauci angrily crushed him:"
Crushed her, it was Paula Reid.
OT a bit, but a question for Ann. Who does have the power to regulate the opening of commerce after the CCP virus? The Commerce clause certainly gives that power to the Feds for interstate commerce, but an awful lot of business is not interstate. Do the governors have the power there? It seems to me that local business closure/opening depends on the "policing" power which is local.
It seems to me that we have a two tiered process coming. I am interested in what you legal beagles have to say on this.
mandrewa said... [hush][hide comment]
If social distancing is helping to reduce the number of deaths, it is not showing up in the data.
See Flattening the curve by Willis Eschenbach.
This is the second time I've referenced this. And it's probably not the last because it's a really big deal.
Repetition is helpful. So many comments and threads, some important things get overlooked.
Not only your comment, but many other serious and informative comments are worth reposting
Hi @Mandrewa,
I stumbled onto Willis E - I can't recall if you or someone else lead me to him. If you did, thanks!
The fellow is a stud with numbers. And he has a good insight into infectious disease --a dangerous combo.
His website (or guest appearance) is well-worth the time. Lotta great stuff.
Ken B: "Anyone remember Al Haig? “I'm in charge here, in the White House.”
Trump went full Al Haig."
Well, not exactly.
Same language....but the Presidential Seal counts for something. But I get your point. And yes, even at that moment, Haig was amusing. Talk about a political animal Senior military officer. That cat was calculating every single move throughout his entire career.
I do wish to make note of and salute his courage and performance under fire in Vietnam.
Browndog
I lived in Michigan until 2 years ago. My guess is she would win a recall election. I am very negative about Michigan voters!
Dr. Fauci: (18:04)
No. The travel restriction is separate. That was whether or not we wanted to go into a mitigation stage of 15 days of mitigation. The travel was another recommendation when we went in and said, “We probably should be doing that.” And the answer was yes. And then another time was, “We should do it with Europe.” And the answer was yes. And the next time, “We should do it with the UK.” And the answer was yes.
<
Donald Trump: (22:46)
This is reported by CDC, confirmed by the news, which doesn’t mean anything to me, because they don’t tell the truth. But CDC reported, January 31st not one person has died. And I issued a travel restriction from China. Think of it. So nobody died. And I issued, you can’t get earlier than that. So we have, nobody died. And I said, “China, you can’t come in. I’m sorry”, because I saw what was going on. Wasn’t so much what I was told, it was that I saw what was going on and I didn’t like it. But I didn’t speak to Tony about, didn’t speak to very many people about it. I didn’t like it. So what did I do?
I agree with our hostess than Trump is a media genius. And the media and their allies are in such a bubble they can't see it. They think they are "baiting" Trump and giving each high-fives for getting him to respond to loaded questions, when in reality he has them dancing to his tune. That doesn't mean I like his penchant for keeping his government - his administration, with his people - in chaos. That's why I would never work for his administration in any capacity. But I tip my hat to those folks who love this country enough to put up with Trump's chaos and propensity to throw his employees under the bus.
The liberal media's hissy fit continues to the enjoyment of Trump and all of us ignorant redneck Trump voters. Sounds like a plan.
In 1918 the world was threatened with the Spanish Flu. The key strategy for mitigation was stay at home.
Here we are, one hundred and two years later and the key mitigation strategy is stay at home.
Are you freakin' kidding me? We've walked on the moon, developed a vaccine for polio, and virtually eliminated smallpox, and that's the best you got? C'mon man!
Trying to stave it off (let’s not shake hands, let’s shelter in place for the next ten years) and then thinking that every little thing is eventually going to be alright is just plain stupid.
The notion that it will be a year until a vaccine is available is total merde. CHANGE THE PROCESS! The oft-stated definition of insanity is doing what you’ve always been doing and expecting a different result. These folks at the CDC [Hey Fauci, I'm talking 'bout you] and in Washington are insane.
Pathetic … and once again [JUST LIKE WITH 9-11 ! ], highly paid, firmly entrenched swampdwellers screw up, ruin the country by not doing their jobs well, and then get off with zero accountability. Try that in the private sector, buckyboy. Can you spell Boeing??
Makes me sick.
The questions about pushback are interesting. What's wrong with a little pushback? There should be some pushback. Fauci isn't some omnipotent being. He has his area of expertise and his blind spots like everyone else. His recommendations should be examined and pushed against. Some might call it cruel neutrality.
Why would anything have been shut down the third week of February? The first death in Washington state was announced on February 29th!
William said...
In 1918 the world was threatened with the Spanish Flu. The key strategy for mitigation was stay at home.
Here we are, one hundred and two years later and the key mitigation strategy is stay at home.
This article in American Greatness makes that exact point.
Six Feet Under
There will be plenty of soul searching after this crisis abates: demanding to know the scientific rationale for keeping us six feet apart when people needed each other most should be at the top of the list.
Crushed her, it was Paula Reid.
The one with the ChiCom husband. She keeps turning up.
I think Trump put Fauci in line behind closed doors and set him straight, and let him know who was President.
I think Fauci realized that not listening to VP Pence's advice on staying off the networks, especially CNN, was a mistake once he saw the press constructing a narrative that Trump was to blame for people dying because he didn't act "soon enough."
And I think Fauci realized that the very next day's daily press conference was going to uselessly descend into a "what did the president know, and when did he know it" feeding frenzy by a rabidly partisan and Trump-hating press.
That's why I think Fauci tried to get out in front of it at the start of the press conference.
Did you forget the sarc tag? The country HAS panicked. Or at least that is the devout hope and object of the Prog media, commentariat and politicians
It's the hope of the media yes, but it hasn't happened yet. True panic would involve riots and food shortages. Workers are still showing up to the grocery stores. Truck drivers are still driving trucks. Cops are still answering burglary calls. Firefighters are still putting out fires.
We are past that stage though. The media can't push the "we're all going to die" narrative anymore. Soon they will stop publishing daily deaths and instead hype the total case numbers. Another week and everybody will be itching to get back to normal.
That's why the questions yesterday were about blame shifting. What should Trump have done sooner to avoid deaths. The narrative they are trying is that any death is too much. He cant account for his actions in February!, etc. etc.
We're back to work by May 1. And likely back in restaurants by June 1. Sorry kids, school resumes August.
The real test will be the first Trump rally. My guess is that it will be past the convention, but that will the start of "Morning in America".
"That's why the questions yesterday were about blame shifting. What should Trump have done sooner to avoid deaths. The narrative they are trying is that any death is too much. He cant account for his actions in February!, etc. etc."
As per our own LLR, who I see has been deleted.
As much as governors may enjoy their elevated powers, they need revenue.
I tend to listen to Pritzger's daily updates since his kingdom is just across the border. He mentioned the promise of..Remedisavir, clearly avoiding any mention of HCQ.
It's impossible to imagine Evers ("Euchre and bobblehead enthusiast")fielding questions like that live.
Lets just imagine what they would have said if Trump did shut down businesses before anybody died. They would still be saying it right now about how he destroyed jobs and impoverished people.
They're kinda fucked now, becuase it happened anyway, and they can't blame him for the bad economy they were hoping for, because now they have to bitch about his doing it too late.
Man, the Dems have screwed up everything they have tried on this guy, but now they have the super weapon locked and loaded, the kryptonite, the tip of the spear: Sleepy Joe, the undecipherable.
My guess is she would win a recall election. I am very negative about Michigan voters!
If they were to do it right now, it'd be close. But I think you're right - there are a LOT of Karens in my FB feed right now...
President-Mom-Jeans said...
I took am sad to see that fake lawyers, pretend conservative, and banned commenter, the one and only dickless Chuck is back. It would have been nice that at least one good thing had come out of the Commie Flu, that Lifelong Cuck had drowned in his own lungs. It's not to late Chuck, I'm sure there are some doorknobs out there for you to lick.
Haha! Always appreciate the subtlety of your all too rare comments. One need only read between the lines to get the meaning..
MSM "reporters" have become "Disinformation Specialists."
Ah Trump...A chaos candidate who makes boomers tingle with his little reality TV show tricks. Here's the deal: Let him be the president on TV for the next 10 years. He'll be like the queen, he won't have any real power but will be a figurehead for life. We'll have a camera follow him around most of the day and have that content streamed to the homes of Trumpkins and other bored Althouse readers 24/7. We'll even have never-Trumpers, never-never-Trumpers, and an assortment of other side characters on TV and the internet for you to yell at.
But please, please, just let the rest of us elect a boring technocrat to office so we can go on with our lives being productive, not having to worry about this guy ruining everything.
"Sleepy Joe, the undecipherable."
-snort!- That's a good one Bagoh! Though I recommend capitalizing Undecipherable, along the lines on Pliny the Elder and other similar monikers.
there are a LOT of Karens in my FB feed right now...
Me too, this time in Tucson. I call the local paper the Red Star.
Interesting community., Retired, military and college, plus lots of illegals. 60 miles to the border.
I recently asked a friend in Sweden about their 'relaxed' precautions and it sounds like they are under pretty much the same restrictions we are. The only exception is that elementary schools are open. High schools and universities are closed.
mandrewa on Eschenbach: "(h) But still none of three orders have a positive relationship with death and that means that for all three of these restrictions, the resulting reduction in deaths is at best extremely limited, or in the worst case actually killing more people.
(I) And therefore if we take into account the extraordinary negative economic impact of these orders, which is usually not being considered at all by the people advocating them, even if they claim to be doing so, then we should reverse these orders as soon as possible. Or in other words, tomorrow."
Of course. No effect is my hypothesis, but Eschenbach raises the disturbing possibility that even in terms of health outcomes maximum shutdown mitigation was actually harmful. Considering that you would expect the most massive interventions to have the most massive positive effects, even the difficulty of finding any is telling.
Comparative analysis across states and across countries so far supports the same kind of conclusion. Of course, I am open to refutation.
When all is said and done, will there be anything left of the alarmist case, besides the devastation it caused?
But please, please, just let the rest of us elect a boring technocrat to office so we can go on with our lives being productive, not having to worry about this guy ruining everything.
4/14/20, 4:00 PM
You don't have a boring technocrat running though, do you?
Only Senile Joe Badfinger, who needs assistance to tie his shoes.
And he's the guy who beat all your other candidates.
"Soon they will stop publishing daily deaths and instead hype the total case numbers."
No new cases reported in NY State yesterday. Media hardest hit.
Exiled, my sources say that NY state had 6240 new cases yesterday with 671 deaths. So far, today, 6553 new cases and 778 new deaths. These numbers are from Worldometer. My other source shows 6484 new cases today, same number of new deaths, 778.
Today's task force news conference is being held outside. My guess, today the press is going to challenge Trump's claims of being able to lift the restrictions and open the states back up for coommerce.
Also, Wisconsin had 127 new cases reported today. Brown County increased by 20 today, and 9 yesterday - someone is spreading it around up near Green Bay. And Milwaukee had 52 new cases.
Fauci has ended up being Trump's best promoter. Fauci is smart enough to recognize the stupid gotcha questions for what they are. And his description of the Trump administration decision process makes it sound like an excellent process. Fauci has consistently made the argument that Trump listens to and properly absorbs his (Fauci's) opinions and advice. And Fauci has also explicitly made the point that when he gives Trump advice and recommendations about public health outcomes, he expects Trump to also listen to other points of view, such as those from economists about the impact of shut-downs, etc. Fauci doesn't expect, or even want, Trump to always take his (Fauci's) advice. And these kinds of judgments and tradeoffs are exactly what all of us should want from a President. (We may not agree with the ultimate judgments, but if we had a President who said, "I'm just going to blindly follow the advice of the public health experts," that would be a pretty bad President.)
Trump Order:
1. All businesses that operate in interstate commerce are hereby deemed essential services, and
2. All essential services and the businesses that provide them shall, at their discretion, require face masks to prevent viral spread, and
3. Whosoever shall interfere with the proper function of essential businesses shall be prosecuted under any applicable law, and
4. Private enforcement of federal law for purposes of this executive order are allowed, and
5. Businesses that rely on this executive order to open will have protections under federal law if employees fall ill to Winnie Xi Flu, and
6. Do NOT make me big ball you dumb asses.
Under the current constitutional regime, Trump has this power.
I have long argued that the federal government should not have this power.
I still believe that.
Replying to Michael the Magnificent. I can't understand your comment without further context. Is 127 new cases a lot of new cases or a few new cases? Here's the number of new cases from the official Louisiana state numbers:
April 4 2199 new cases
...
April 9 1253 new cases
...
April 12 581 new cases
April 13 421 new cases
April 14 502 new cases.
So you might say, "things are a whole lot worse in Louisiana than in Wisconsin." But I would say, "things are getting better quickly in Louisiana". (and I wonder: Is it the warm weather? Or is the Mardi Gras Feb 25 effect dying out?)
Good points, Molly. For instance, Fauci has consistently said that 'controlled trials' are needed to prove the efficacy of the drugs but he knows that a controlled trial would require half the tested patients to get only a placebo. So, yes, as a scientist, he must defend his standards but he also realizes that they aren't always realistic standards in the face of a health crisis.
New York has over 10,000 deaths.
Over 2200 deaths nationally today.
Replying to Ken B. I write not so much to dispute your arguments ("over 2200 deaths nationally today") as to express my continuing dismay about the inconsistency and quality of data. The CDC reported (nationally) 21,942 deaths on April 13, and 22,252 deaths on April 14 -- so 310 deaths "today". That is so different from the "over 2200 deaths" you report. I don't really want to argue that "I'm right and you're wrong." I want to argue that we still have really crap data. And I'm worried that in a few months time people will begin to draw "serious conclusions" from really crap data.
Molly,
Here are Wisconsin, total cases thus far: 3555, total deaths: 170.
We had a peak of new cases per day on 4/1/2020 of 199 new cases - in other words, we have been on a downward slope since then:
4/1: 199
4/2: 180
4/3: 186
4/4: 196
4/5: 155
4/6: 173
4/7: 138
4/8: 178
4/9: 129
4/10: 183
4/11: 145
4/12: 128
4/13: 87
4/14: 127
It's not a very smooth curve, but it is trending downwards. I hope this helps put the numbers in context.
From the NYT today:
"...New York City, already a world epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, sharply increased its death toll by more than 3,700 victims on Tuesday, after officials said they were now including people who had never tested positive for the virus but were presumed to have died of it.
The new figures, released by the city’s Health Department, drove up the number of people killed in New York City to more than 10,000, and appeared to increase the overall United States death count by 17 percent to more than 26,000....."
Hanging chads.
I am Laslo.
""...New York City, already a world epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, sharply increased its death toll by more than 3,700 victims on Tuesday, after officials said they were now including people who had never tested positive for the virus but were presumed to have died of it."
Well, that explains that. This site has been reporting 6,000 new deaths today.
Over 15,000 sick enough to be tested in Santa Clara County Ca.
Less than 1/2 percent dead.
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/covid19/Pages/dashboard.aspx
We need more tests.
"they were now including people who had never tested positive for the virus but were presumed to have died of it."
Looks like the "expanded definition" is coming into play.
h
Yes, fog of war and you get inexact data. But some, Tim for instance, have been noting that we are probably undercounting deaths. That appears to have been the case.
I have been consistently using worldometer. The CDC site is always a day behind due to their timing cut off.
OK.
"...New York City, already a world epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, sharply increased its death toll by more than 3,700 victims on Tuesday, after officials said they were now including people who had never tested positive for the virus but were presumed to have died of it.
The new figures, released by the city’s Health Department, drove up the number of people killed in New York City to more than 10,000, and appeared to increase the overall United States death count by 17 percent to more than 26,000....."
..............................................
. But some, Tim for instance, have been noting that we are probably undercounting deaths.
"I wanted to talk about it, but I'm only getting around to it now."
...
"it's the what would have, what could have. It's -- it's very difficult to go back and say that. I mean, obviously, you could logically say, that if you had a process that was ongoing, and you started mitigation earlier"
1. A reminder: FROM THE BEGINNING we were told by the advocates of "social distancing" that it would NOT reduce the number of infections, but would spread them out over a longer period of time. That COULD reduce deaths if it prevented the cases from overwhelming the available medical resources. So delaying the imposition of "social distancing" could not have resulted in increased deaths unless those deaths resulted from medical resources being overwhelmed. I don't know of any evidence of deaths resulting from medical resources being overwhelmed, even in NYC. DO YOU?
2. Sure, Trump could cobble together various federal and presidential powers to coerce States into ending their restrictions on businesses and other activities, but why should he? If he does that, he will be blamed for every Chinese virus death that occurs after a forced reopening (even though, for the reasons given in Para. 1, there shouldn't be any "excess" deaths if the medical resources are adequate). On the other hand, many States will welcome a Presidental INVITATION to begin reopening, and others that are initially reluctant will be forced by popular demand to follow suit. That would leave it to each State to decide whether, and how much, reopening is prudent, and the President wouldn't be solely responsible for each "excess" death. Yet he would achieve his objective of an expeditious return toward normal economic activity.
Post a Comment