Althouse: Why does our eagerness or hesitance about ending the coronavirus lockdown have anything to do with party affiliation?

May 14, 2020

Why does our eagerness or hesitance about ending the coronavirus lockdown have anything to do with party affiliation?

It is my observation — and maybe my observation is skewed — that people on the right are straining to get out from under this lockdown and people on the left want to hold back and be more careful. Why?!

I'm not in either group, and I want to understand the science about the disease and to consider the balancing factors — economic damage, psychological suffering, etc. — and make wise choices about returning to some improved version of normal. I don't think we should be over-eager to get back to normal or unduly hesitant, and I realize it's subjective and people have different ideas about what's too much eagerness or too much hesitance. I care about safety and freedom, and I'd like to see honest, well-meaning people discuss where to set the balance between the two. That is, I would like to be informed, intelligent, and reasonable about it.

But I look around at my fellow citizens — the ones who are speaking publicly — and I see a big partisan split. I could come up with some theories about why — if the decisions are going to be made as a matter of 2 political teams competing for dominance — the Republicans latched onto the eagerness side and the Democrats went with the careful hesitation, but why are people just going with their team?!

I'm not completely depressed about this. It might be a good sign that we're going with ordinary politics. If things were worse, we'd be more together, as we were a few weeks ago when we all understood and accepted the idea of "flattening the curve" so the medical facilities would not be overrun, before the lockdown turned into an idea of waiting until it's safe enough.

150 comments:

exhelodrvr1 said...: Because as a general rule, the right favors individual freedom and dislikes government involvement, believing that the government tends to make things worse, while the left is very willing to trade individual freedom for more government involvement, which they believe tends to make things better. And the sides of the "stay locked down vs open up sooner" discussion we are having pretty clearly fall into those right vs left belief systems; 5/14/20, 5:27 AM
RichAndSceptical said...: Liberals - victimhood
Conservatives - self reliance

I think it's really that simple.; 5/14/20, 5:27 AM
Unknown said...: The breakdown seems to be between those who trust individuals to make decisions (small “L” libertarians) and those who want the populace ruled by experts. Starting there makes the red/blue division very predictable.

This is tremendously reinforced, of course, by the libertarian side being led in the White House by a figure those on the other side despise and have been plotting to eliminate from office. Making the crisis worse—or at least look worse—supports their goal.

It’s not really that hard to figure out, Ann.; 5/14/20, 5:32 AM
rhhardin said...: It's drawing out the daily crisis until the election that makes it political.; 5/14/20, 5:36 AM
Kevin said...: America is also one country with two systems.

Except here the people of Hong Kong, in a stunning turn of events, chose the leader of China.

How do you think the Chinese Communist Party and the people dedicated to following its messages would respond?; 5/14/20, 5:40 AM
narciso said...: We read more widely than the blank pages who lavish praise on cuomo newsom and co, over more effective figures.; 5/14/20, 5:49 AM
Bart Hall said...: Much of the partisan divide comes, I believe, from the well-established tendency of Democrats to restrict freedoms, both constitutional and minor. Examples of the former are freedom of speech, school choice, gun control, medical insurance, lack of due process at universities, and so on. For the latter, things like bans on plastic bags, straws, soft-drinks that are "too large" and other such nonsense.

In short, the reason tens of millions of Americans outside the coastal enclaves, large cities, and academic islands have seen a Democrat party which -- to over-simplify -- attempts to mandate all things they don't prohibit. Furthermore, they have consistently demonstrated a rather intense dislike for America as founded. This has been the case for half a century, recently worsened by an effective takeover of the Democrats by avowed socialists and autocratic SJWs.

Those of us with conservative or libertarian political beliefs quite simply do not trust Democrats not to use what began as a legitimate public health crisis as yet another chance to ratchet down government control of private lives.

A "state of emergency" in America is meant to be short-term in the aftermath of things like storms and earthquake. *LONG* term "state of emergency" situations are what you find in places like Bolivia and Zimbabwe.; 5/14/20, 5:50 AM
lane ranger said...: Lockdown hurts the economy, and a bad economy makes it less likely that Trump will win reelection, which is all the left needs to know. In other words, the left is not proceeding in good faith, but is mostly pretending to be worried about the health impact of opening up the economy in order to hurt Trump as much as possible. While reopening the economy would tend to be supported by the right, I think most of the impetus is from ordinary, non-political people, who may tend to vote conservative but whose primary motivation is not related to Trump.; 5/14/20, 5:52 AM
Darrell said...: It's simple. Democrats go for everything that destroys the U.S.--like no borders and no walls. Here, they want to destroy the U.S. economy so that they can put out headlines like "U.S. Experiences Record Unemployment Under Trump." What can you do? Never vote for another Democrat again.; 5/14/20, 5:52 AM
Rusty said...: Why?Because most public sector employees tend to leftists. They get paid to stay at home. They aren't really essential. The rest of us, who actually do stuff, would like to get back to doing stuff.
I personally think that anyone who owns a business is essential and should get back to work as as soon as possible. After all they're the ones that make the rest of this-economy- possible.; 5/14/20, 5:53 AM
Rory said...: "the ones who are speaking publicly"

The only time that leftists from minority groups are heard is when diversity issues are front and center. Otherwise, the only leftists who get heard are people within two degrees of separation of someone who writes for the NYT or the Post. Those people have decided that they're going to be the upper class in America, and that they'll establish conformity and hierarchy on the great mass of regular Americans. Such a ruling group will always defer economic gains for consolidation of power. They're comfortable enough for the moment, they have connections in case things get really tough, They're willing to wait because once their opponents have been ground into dust, the ruling class gets first pick of everything in perpetuity.; 5/14/20, 5:55 AM
Kevin said...: There really are two questions here.

Why are the political leaders making this political?

And why are people continuing to choose to sort themselves politically?

The first answer is that Nancy Pelosi is trying not to let a good crisis go to waste.

The second is the incessant bullying, doxing and sorting for the last three years has turned TDS into a force stronger than gravity.; 5/14/20, 5:57 AM
John Borell said...: The right prefers freedom to security.

The left prefers security to freedom.; 5/14/20, 5:58 AM
Gahrie said...: if the decisions are going to be made as a matter of 2 political teams competing for dominance — the Republicans latched onto the eagerness side and the Democrats went with the careful hesitation, but why are people just going with their team?!

Or you could say the Republicans are defending individual freedom and the Democrats are defending the power of government.; 5/14/20, 5:59 AM
h said...: I'm with rhardin on this. I never ceased to be amazed at the degree to which the political life of Trump has made everything all about Trump. His opponents have contributed to, and even been the primary mover in this. Read the Washington Post comments section on anything: "Here's a recipe." "Trump's a russian." "Here's a family with a funny story to tell." "OMB" "A sports team made the following move." "Trump supporters will do anything." It is difficult to find a single article in which the comment thread does not devolve into Trump hatred. So there are a large number of Trump opponents who see the corona virus story only through the lens of anti-Trumpism. If there weren't an election in a few months, the narrative would be: "This is awful and Trump is responsible for all awful things; let's explore how." But with an election there is more compelling narrative: "This is a dominant issue in people's lives and is bound to influence how they vote; what can we do to make sure it influences most people to vote against Trump?"; 5/14/20, 6:00 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: It breaks along the lines of those who have had their lives turned upside-down and those who haven't.

Those who haven't -- they tend to lead comfortable lives in a safe cocoon of retirement, government work or well-positioned work-from-home.

This comfort includes having the time to fret about perfect timing and COVID racism and freeing criminals from prison while attempting to jail the small-business owners et all. This comfort lets them consider Biden a viable option, because how could he make it worse, really -- they don't feel the damage.

While those who are desperate to keep their businesses open or to pay their rent checks need relief now.

The latter aren't all Republicans, but many might be more inclined to Trump as this drags on, watching as the Pelosi-s get their wish lists into any bill meant to help the immediate situation.

The politicalization self-selects.

I am Laslo.; 5/14/20, 6:03 AM
Instugator said...: Even people who want to understand the science should be able to understand that there was a goal, "Two weeks to flatten the curve" and "Slow the spread so that our hospital system isn't overwhelmed".

That goal has been met and the implicit promise was that if the goal would be met the lockdown would end.

Party need not enter into it.; 5/14/20, 6:05 AM
stevew said...: To me the divide, such as it is, is most prominent and stark among those people that, as you say, speak publicly about the issue. Politicians, media people, community leaders, etc. The regular folks I talk to are much more aligned with your position as you describe it in this post. They supported the shut down regime early on, mostly because we didn't know much about the virus. Now as we've learned more, collected data on who is most at risk, seen that the measures taken do not consistently correlate with controlling the spread of the virus there is a growing call to release us from the shut down. Then the response by many of those speaking in public is to call for stronger and longer shut down measures (e.g. test, track, trace, and a vaccine) the divide grows. But the divide is not along partisan political lines, among the people I interact with daily.; 5/14/20, 6:06 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: Eliot's "Do I dare to eat a peach?" comes to mind.

I am Laslo.; 5/14/20, 6:11 AM
Breezy said...: So the Dems are being conservative and the Reps are pushing forward?; 5/14/20, 6:14 AM
Patrick Henry was right! said...: The left actually prefers the Venezuelan and the Cuban models of society and government.
The right thinks this concept is crazy.
That's your divide.; 5/14/20, 6:14 AM
Eleanor said...: This country began in the middle of a giant split- the Patriots vs. the Tories. It's not new, and the lines of demarcation may have changed geographically, but not philosophically. Because of how much we simplify US history for kids in school, people believe it was all of the colonists vs. the King's army, but that's not true. The people fighting to remove themselves from the jurisdiction of the King were fighting his army and lots of their own future countrymen at the same time. The Tories are still among us. They're not loyal to the queen, but given a choice to have a dictator, they wouldn't say "no" right away if they thought the dictator would do things their way.; 5/14/20, 6:16 AM
Some Seppo said...: In the 60's and 70's we called them bedwetting liberals for a reason.; 5/14/20, 6:19 AM
Todd said...: If things were worse, we'd be more together, as we were a few weeks ago when we all understood and accepted the idea of "flattening the curve" so the medical facilities would not be overrun, before the lockdown turned into an idea of waiting until it's safe enough.

This to me is the root of the issue and maybe why it appears to break along party lines.

This "process" has reached a point where those that want to DO and go back to creating, earning, rebuilding have had enough of "huddle in place until we let you do otherwise" compared to those that may have the same inclinations but also don't want to be the ones that take the risk. Those that would rather wait until they are told it is "safe enough" to get back to normal. Additionally a fair amount of the population that leans in a left way also tend to believe the media that has run china-virus porn for weeks now, to scare everyone (for fun and profit). Those that tend to lean right also tend to discredit mass media. Don't forget as well, if you are a government employee, you are likely left leaning. You have not missed a paycheck. You have actually been on a bit of an extended vacation.

There is a difference between being inconvenienced and being destroyed by "stay at home".; 5/14/20, 6:23 AM
JackWayne said...: The Left has always been emotional and irrational. The Right is mostly rational and less emotional. There’s your “split”.; 5/14/20, 6:31 AM
Jody said...: Why the Red vs Blue split?

Charitably, different experiences and different priors.

Experiences: Red areas are rural and more southern (Vitamin D, sun). Blue areas are urban and more northern. Thus red America sees cost and virtually no benefit and seeks to remove the cost. Blue sees both cost and benefit and comes to a different conclusion.

Priors: Partially, they're red and blue because they have different ways of interpreting the same set of facts (ignoring the role of media which may lead to divergent fact sets).

Of note to me, when Blue had the same relative experience as Red does now, Blue thought preventing the movement of foreigners (China restrictions) was unnecessary (no experience with Covid) and xenophobic (priors), while Red was more inclined towards it (different priors). Now with a different experience with COvid, Blue thinks it appropriate for everyone to bear the costs, though again the Red/Blue difference in the acceptability of universal application is a function of different priors.; 5/14/20, 6:34 AM
Shouting Thomas said...: My “eagerness” to get out from under the tyrant’s boot is about something called “freedom.”

Clearly, the Republican Party is far from perfect, but it seems to come out most often on the side of freedom.

The Democratic Party has turned pure communist. It is an enemy of freedom.; 5/14/20, 6:38 AM
Balfegor said...: I think part of it is that the states that fumbled their initial response to coronavirus the worst are overwhelmingly left wing. You look at cases per capita, deaths per capita -- the worst hit Republican-run state is Maryland (and the governor is really a liberal Republican). Partly this is an artifact of New York having screwed up worse than anywhere else in the world and taking down New Jersey, Connecticut, and most of New England with them. Other leftist states, like California, are actually middle of the pack or even better than average.

But the fact that the most conspicuous screw ups were by left-leaning state governments (and egged on by liberal papers like the Washington Post pooh-poohing the threat of coronavirus in February, or Vox telling people that masks don't protect you at all so don't wear them) has required those states to undertake the most draconian measures to compensate. For cities that completely fucked up, like New York City, opening up completely right now really would be madness -- they may be 80% below peak, but they're still recording hundreds of deaths and at least a thousand new cases a day. That's potentially a thousand new clusters every day until those cases were identified. So the environment that has become normative for the left is one in which draconian measures were and remain necessary to make up for earlier failures. They were chortling about how America needs to "get a grippe" and the flu is worse than coronavirus in February, but they were mugged by reality. Hard.

For the right, on the other hand, they've been hearing constant confident criticism: "just wait two more weeks and then you'll be sorry!" Florida? Two weeks and the explosion of cases hasn't come. Cases are down. Georgia? Same. Their public health authorities did poorly in comparison to, say Taiwan or Korea, but in comparison to New York or France, they have actually performed extremely well. So the environment that has become normative for the right is one in which experts repeatedly predicted New York-style disasters and were wrong, and in which coronavirus hasn't affected that many people directly. The main effect has instead been that everyone lost their jobs because of the lockdown.

I think the open everything voices on the Right are making a big mistake because I've been ignoring all the bullshit from the CDC from the very start and listening to authorities in Korea and Japan instead. But in an environment where the experts telling them so have been absolute garbage -- the 1984 about-face on masks is a great example of this -- it's not surprising that so many think the coronavirus is completely overblown.

That's what happens when experts forfeit their credibility.; 5/14/20, 6:41 AM
Jersey Fled said...: In my experience, those on the left have a psychological need for something to be scared to death of. And they need mommy and daddy to make it all better.

When my father in law was still alive, my wife and I used to have dinner with him every Thursday. He liked to watch the evening news during dinner. It was one of the three network broadcast networks, I forget which one.

Each night the broadcast would close with some new story about our impending doom. Global warming was a biggy of course. But some nights it was a pandemic, or how honey bees were dying from overuse of pesticides, or a meteor strike, or nuclear waste, or ... you get the picture.

And he would get all worked up, complain about the Republicans, and be ready for bed.

My wife and I used to joke in the car about whether we would even make it home or not.

That was fifteen years ago. Strangely, we are still alive. I guess that makes us survivors.

But in that 15 years since, I've seen it over and over again, pretty much non-stop.

It's going to kill us all! Mommy!; 5/14/20, 6:42 AM
JAORE said...: It breaks along the lines of those who have had their lives turned upside-down and those who haven't.

Not always, Laslo. Not always.

At Casa JAORE we are retired. We are comfortable in our financial situation. Of our four kids three remain employed as are their spouses. The fourth has had the business he works at shut down. But he reluctantly signed up for unemployment. He'll make MORE under the new system than before. But he's actively seeking jobs as I type.

If the world falls into a depression our income stream will suffer less than most. Hence we'd be more advantaged than most. Our cash position would allow accumulating things like land or houses that should do well long term.

But I'm firmly in the reopen as rapidly as prudent camp.

I find it abhorrent that we have had freedoms removed at this point in time. Flatten the curve? OK, maybe we realistically thought we needed that to avoid overwhelming the hospital systems.

But that time is past. our rights should not be infringed upon without clear and compelling reasons. And those reasons should not be diluted while our rights remain trampled upon.

Petty tyrants are running amok throughout this land. Governors, mayors and unelected health officials have a Hodge-podge set of limitations set upon us. Many have proven fruitless in halting the virus.

Stay indoors, no sunlight is good. Hey, I don't like guns so gun stores are not essential in jurisdiction A. Essential as hell in jurisdiction B. Home construction? No way that is essential. Public works (union) construction. Green light for you. Don't wear a mask, no EVERYONE MUST wear a mask. One way aisles in stores like that will keep people from ever being beside a stranger in the store. Liquor stores are OK, but garden centers are not. But Lotto tickets? Hell yeah those tax dollars are ESSENTIAL baby.

Feh.; 5/14/20, 6:48 AM
narciso said...: Has he lost the mandate of heaven

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/05/faucis_song_and_dance.html#.Xr0rW44Eiu0.facebook; 5/14/20, 6:48 AM
Temujin said...: I agree and this is entirely crazy that even this disease has gone down the red or blue path. I get emails/texts/calls from friends around the country giving various conservative or liberal links to statements about sheltering for months or going out and trying to get back to a somewhat normal life.

We can do both. It really should not be that hard. But...as usual. I think the media is the focal point for most of this. It is pounded on us daily: shelter in place is good. Wanting to save your business or get back to a somewhat normal life is reckless and endangers everyone. It's not that simple, obviously.

But why that cuts conservative or liberal is very bizarre and a symptom of where we are as a people. I have friends in Atlanta- one couple liberal, the other conservative. The liberal couple are hand-wringing, worried. They HATE their governor. Think he's a bumpkin. Want to move out of Georgia. Say it's too conservative. The conservative couple are very calm. Sound happy. Are working their business via video conferencing. Going out to patronize local restaurants and shops (carefully). As he said to me yesterday: "the best thing the government can do is to get out of our way. Remove regulations. Let the American people do what they are best at and we'll build this thing back up." They think their governor is doing a fine job. They are very happy people. Both couples have done well. One couple is happy and productive. The other is miserable and sitting on their hands.

There does not seem to be a happy medium in which the two sides can meet in the middle.; 5/14/20, 6:51 AM
BUMBLE BEE said...: An MD friend I've quoted in other threads here put it thus at the outset "It's a Corona Virus, a Flu and many will die. The old, the infirm and the unwell".
Just another one. Specially made? I dunno, however if it wasn't created as a bioweapon, it was used as one.; 5/14/20, 6:55 AM
Brian said...: Ann, I've noticed it to. It's the very definition of two movies. And it's scared me that maybe I'm the one in cognitive dissonance about the threat of this virus. But at this point I know the cure is worse than the disease.

I think the real answer is related to the media. This pandemic has been better than a hurricane to the media. It moves slower than a hurricane so the story will last longer. The virus is unseen, heightening fear. There is no story if we all go back to work. Pundits zooming from their mansions is a story in itself.

So there is an incentive for the media to keep the lockdown going. Their stories then drive politicians who trust in the media to follow their lead and keep the lockdown going. And the media protects the politicians by not questioning the lockdown and hyping the disease even further. Andrew Cuomo doesn't have to worry about getting into a fight with his brother on CNN.

There is no greater evidence than the issue of hydroxychloroquinine as a potential treatment. Instead of being treated as possible good news although untested. It was immediately treated as a hoax. To be battled as a conspiracy theory. They don't want it as a cure. They don't want good news. Good news leads to the story being over.

This issue has presented the worse journalism since the Superdome during Katrina. The framing from media outlets is literally killing people. It's evil.; 5/14/20, 7:04 AM
Paul Snively said...: The problem boils down, I believe, to the sense that we have neither enough information, nor even an adequate model, for making decisions in the informal, but nevertheless literal, sense of "decision theory." When that's the case, we rely on our priors. Ans as others upstream have remarked, in effect, our politics reflect our priors.; 5/14/20, 7:05 AM
whitney said...: How is this not been obvious to you from the beginning? The people on the left or willing to destroy the country to destroy Trump that's why they don't want to leave their house. Some of them maybe actually scared at this point but that's just because they want to be scared. The people on the right don't want the people on the left to destroy them as collateral damage and the left's quest to destroying Trump. Seriously this has been obvious from day one the fact that you can't see it is ridiculous. The same tentacles go out internationally; 5/14/20, 7:06 AM
Brian said...: There does not seem to be a happy medium in which the two sides can meet in the middle.

We used to have a media that would present both sides. Tim Russert is one example. Don't you think he'd have some pretty hard questions for Fauci and Cuomo? Alas, that type of Journalist doesn't exist anymore. They couldn't get hired anyplace if they wanted.; 5/14/20, 7:09 AM
TJM said...: Ann Althouse,

With all due respect, those on the left are not being more “careful,” but tyrannical. They want to bring President Trump down by any means necessary. Was the left being careful during this crisis when:

1) they screeched Trump was being racist when he banned flights to and from China?

2) Pelosi invited all to go to China Town because it’s safe?

3) De Blasio insisted subways were safe and New Yorkers should go about their business?

Do you care to re-think what you said?; 5/14/20, 7:11 AM
n.n said...: It is suspicious that progressive liberals are neo-conservative.

the right favors individual freedom and dislikes government involvement, believing that the government tends to make things worse, while the left is very willing to trade individual freedom for more government involvement

Libertarians on the right. And the center, conservatives, have their Declaration with a similar spirit.; 5/14/20, 7:15 AM
AllenS said...: Tags: cruel reasoning; 5/14/20, 7:16 AM
Quaestor said...: Liberals - victimhood
Conservatives - self-reliance

I think it's really that simple.

Perhaps. But it might be strategic. It wouldn't be the first time a "liberal" wished for universal hardship and suffering as a means to bring down President Donald John Trump.

A notable example.; 5/14/20, 7:17 AM
Big Mike said...: I could come up with some theories about why — if the decisions are going to be made as a matter of 2 political teams competing for dominance

@Althouse, I think you are asking the wrong question. If you’re feeling no economic pain from the lockdown then you care more about desperately (and IMHO futilely) trying to keep the disease at bay. If you are feeling serious economic pain, if you used to work for a business that is now closed down, or you own a small business that is now locked down, then you are obviously in favor of reopening the country. So the question for you, Professor, is why are all of the people who are feeling economic pain in the Republican Party and the related question of why don’t the Democrats represent working people anymore?; 5/14/20, 7:20 AM
Kai Akker said...: There are a lot of great answers on here already. One point to add -- to "balance" safety and freedom is a misleading formation, IMO. Freedom isn't divisible. Once you subtract from it, you don't have freedom any more.; 5/14/20, 7:22 AM
D 2 said...: Well said Balfegor about the dangers of when credibility is lost.

It’s ridiculously tragic. Take Person A. The lies you tell yourself has been keeping you from looking out, with unveiled eyes, and seeing why no one who you think should listen to you, is bothering much in trying anymore. I mean, you can keep saying what you say, but no one takes it at honest face value - because you lost that credit along the way. It would help if you admitted being wrong, about that thing, but of course you never did, because that would mean being wrong about other things. After enough instances, people can say: you’re stuck in a moment you can’t (or won’t) get out of.

What’s worse, is when, as a result of Person Bs own loss in trust in certain Person As due to their past bad faith actions, they start to take anything they say to be a lie, or wrong. A sad but well known human trait, since at least that old boy in the next village cried wolf.

Credibility is hard won. I admit I can still have a hard time still with what some parties say, given what they are on record saying during the Kavanaugh hearings, and who, in the time since, have shown no willingness to backtrack from that episode. It is like a little devil sitting on my shoulder, reminding me.... this guy, remember ....

Some mornings I think such fools may be right about what side of the road we are supposed to drive on, but you wouldn’t mind if I check with a third party, would you now .....; 5/14/20, 7:23 AM
rcocean said...: Its really quite simple. The MSM and the D's see this CV-19 crisis as an opportunity to push their agenda and damage Trump. Its as simple as that. Plus, the people who want to go back to work, or fret about what this is doing to the economy, tend to be conservative/Republicans. D's tend to be either Government employees, members of the chattering classes, and retired/unemployed who aren't hurt economically. And Pelosi is making sure plenty of those Trillions are ending up in the D's pockets.

And finally, the D voters are sheep who follow orders. They'd be rioting in the streets if they got the word from Pelosi/Schumer and the MSM. But that's not the party line, so the ACLU and antifa are nowhere to be seen. Just view this as coming attractions for the coming Climate Change slowdown.; 5/14/20, 7:31 AM
iowan2 said...: as we were a few weeks ago when we all understood and accepted the idea of "flattening the curve" so the medical facilities would not be overrun, before the lockdown turned into an idea of waiting until it's safe enough.

You have answered your own question.

The goal posts have been moved. We have flattened the curve. Now politicians, is seems by political party, have declared a new standard "until its safe enough".
That's the lie. "safe enough" is not a definable standard.

We lived our lives for centuries fending off viral events. Yes there have been some devastating events. science and medicine have come a long way. What we are getting now is science that while accurate, is meaningless and do not, or actually, should not inform our decisions. Knowing saliva droplets are suspended in the air for 8 minutes is meaningless information, because it does nothing to inform us, and actually leads to the wrong conclusions.
Still waiting for some person to define THE goal. What metric are we attempting to achieve?

I can't figure out a plan until you tell me the goal.; 5/14/20, 7:33 AM
rcocean said...: One big reason the D's behave in such an extremely partisan manner, is they know the sainted "moderates" will always find a way to blame both sides. That's their shtick, being "the only adults in the room" the men in the center, even if its the center between good and evil.; 5/14/20, 7:33 AM
jaydub said...: Because, for the most part, the shutdown fanatics are a) economic idiots or b)people with government jobs, hence immune to the pain, or c) people on pensions, mostly government pensions, hence immune to the pain, or d) TDS infected people who will do anything to create the worst situation for Trump leading up to the election, or e) big Democrat states who see the shutdown as an opportunity to force a bailout from the feds (as if the feds weren’t also going broke.) These fanatics are incapable of seeing any option other than complete shutdown or complete opening. They can't fathom other options like sending the kids back to school since school age kids are not threatened by the disease at all, or letting healthy people in the 18 - 50 group go back to work because they aren't dying from the disease and are mostly asymptomatic, or only isolating vulnerable and old people who are in nursing homes and continuing care facilities because they make up around 40 - 50% of the deaths. They know nothing of the ultimate outcomes of events like the end result of the two aircraft carrier crew infections, one US and one French. The US one was everywhere in the news while it was being used as a club to beat on Trump, but disappeared when out of 4800 sailors, only around a quarter became infected, only seven were hospitalized and only one died. Moreover, almost the entire infected population was asymptomatic, which doesn't really sound like it was especially threatening to people in that demographic (18 - 50.) Identical results on the French ship. Somewhat similar results on the Diamond Princess cruise ship, except of the 712 out of 2200 mostly older and more vulnerable passengers who were infected, there were only 13 deaths. In essence, these events which were conducted in a virtual petri dish on a ship, hence imminently observable, had outcomes that were not severe enough to advance the media/democrat narrative, hence had to be ignored by the press. And more importantly, the entire country of Sweden is now completing a successful experiment wherein the disease has been largely neutralized by modified social distancing and herd immunity while keeping its economy functioning and realizing a death rate lower than many of the European hard lockdown countries. That’s a threat to the fanatics that has to continue to be ignored by the press if this effort to slip a demented old fool into the White House is to succeed.
The Althouse cruel neutrality regarding this situation is partly facilitated by one of those government pensions and partly because her work is her avocation and can be done regardless any pandemic. Or maybe she’s also an economic idiot or because she would welcome Trump’s demise. Her neutrality will become less important as her pension is first cut, then eliminated because it is not funded with unicorn farts but requires fresh cash inputs from students, state government and investment returns. None of those funding sources are likely to be available when the country is driven into a deep depression, the manufacturing and food supply chains are broken in multiple places and there is no money to pay pensions or social security or fund Medicare. This fact leads me to another, more nefarious reason for the zeal of the shutdown fanatics: when the economy is destroyed and the population is totally dependent on bread lines, then it will be much easier to convert our economy to one based on Marxism, which is the left’s ultimate goal. Regardless, I hope everyone enjoys the fruits of the Covid circus. For myself, I’ll be in Sweden by then.; 5/14/20, 7:36 AM
The Minnow Wrangler said...: I don't know why the disagreement seems to be along partisan lines. I don't object to wearing a mask or social distancing. But many of the so called leftists that I converse with seem to think that if you want to go to a bar or get a haircut you want to kill grandma. It's like they think people are too dumb to evaluate their own risk factors and we need the almighty government to keep us at home.

We have already "flattened the curve" in most states but now the goalposts have been moved to prevent every death no matter how destructive the lockdown policies are to the economy and to individuals that just want to make a living.; 5/14/20, 7:41 AM
rastajenk said...: Orange Man Bad. Dems wanted an economic downturn to help defeat Trump, and they got one. They're not going to give it up easily. The amount of pain and suffering to any given individual, or group of individuals, does not matter, as long as it can be pinned on Trump.; 5/14/20, 7:43 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: TJM:

Yes, liberals and leftists were overwhelmingly dismissive of the coronavirus threat into February and even early March. The current push to rewrite history and pretend it was all just Fox News and rightwing media who were downplaying the threat is disgusting but also somewhat sad. Because in March, harsh reality intruded. The gods of the copybook headings and all that. And now tens of thousands of people are dead. And so they're left casting about for some way to make it someone else's fault.

It's a natural, understandable, human impulse.; 5/14/20, 7:55 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "that people on the right are straining to get out from under this lockdown and people on the left want to hold back and be more careful."

-- You can end the lockdown carefully. Given what we're seeing comparing places to New York and other heavily locked down places to those that didn't, you can even end the lockdown carefully and save more lives than insisting on the lockdown. I think it is falling into a logical trap to assume keeping the lockdown means being more careful.; 5/14/20, 7:57 AM
iowan2 said...: So there is an incentive for the media to keep the lockdown going. Their stories then drive politicians who trust in the media to follow their lead and keep the lockdown going

I'd ask we consider the opposite is true. DNC script writers and script readers are the overlords of politicians.
Pay attention to a live breaking event. Something no one saw on the horizon. It takes the politicians at the least 12 hours,(overnight hours) to 24 hours( if the news breaks by noon) for the politicians get aboard a narrative the media settles in on.

Hat tip to Rush; 5/14/20, 7:57 AM
ga6 said...: If you accept the bell curve and then factor in the persuasive affects of almost all of the media and add in the greed and power seeking of the "experts and leaders" the result is a great number of people living in fear.; 5/14/20, 8:01 AM
RNB said...: "...the Republicans latched onto the eagerness side and the Democrats went with the careful hesitation..." Why the adjective?; 5/14/20, 8:03 AM
RNB said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 5/14/20, 8:04 AM
mandrewa said...: I think I would have had more or less the same position regardless of the current politics.

There have been times where on past issues where I wonder in retrospect whether I let myself be pushed into a position because I was against the other side. But I really don't think this is one of them.

I have a powerful subjective impression that this lockdown is doing extraordinary harm. I don't think there is any balance at all in what we are doing. I think the lockdown is at least a 100 times more harmful than losing the lives that would have been lost if the lockdown hadn't happened. I even think it's possible that the lockdown is killing more people than are being saved.

But this is subjective because I don't know how to quantify or to count the spiritual and economic cost of the lockdown in terms of lives. If I knew a way to be objective about this, believe me, I would have been pushing that message a long time ago.

I have trouble appreciating the arguments of the other side. (Of course that is usually the case!) It seems to me that we have unleashed fear and we are letting ourselves be ruled by fear and this is both irrational and very dangerous.

Here's an example that I stumbled across the other day: I'm still processing it.... I have difficulty making myself watch that. And understand, I don't think this is a bad person. I'm pretty sure she has strengths that I don't have.

But still this is so wrong. And it's all over something that is no worse than the flu. (Now I say that with a little hesitance. I'm not totally certain that this is no worse than the flu. I feel there may be new bad dimensions to this disease that we have still not yet discovered. But from a mortality perspective it certainly appears to be quite similar.) And prior to now we have accepted that level of danger all of our lives.

But even if this were ten times more deadly than the flu I think I would still be arguing against the lockdown!; 5/14/20, 8:04 AM
Jaq said...: "But I look around at my fellow citizens — the ones who are speaking publicly — and I see a big partisan split.”

Maybe because the people on both sides who see this as one more nail for whatever hammer they have embraced are driving everybody else out of what has turned into a pointless but nevertheless nasty debate.; 5/14/20, 8:05 AM
rehajm said...: Upthread is doing a good job defining the personal freedom/reliance vs comfortable with government dependence/control argument. The left also loathes economics and fails to recognize the consequences of tradeoffs from shutting down.

There's also the difference in style when there's a need for decisions with imperfect information, the right relying on what is known and lefts desire to not cat until all unknowns are known. There's more of a gender difference with this but so with left/right politics as well...; 5/14/20, 8:05 AM
MayBee said...: This is what our governor has to say about people protesting her policies:

“These are political rallies, make no mistake. — They bring confederate flags, which is not something you see very often in Michigan. They bring swastikas and long guns. They bring their anti-choice propaganda.” "

So you can see she isn't really interested in saying, maybe I should consider what they have to say.
And by the way, it would be super if she could get the unemployment system working correctly.; 5/14/20, 8:08 AM
Jamie said...: My husband's friends from his former work in the Mid-Atlantic region are all on the left - deep blue, hard-left progressives. They believe to their core that anyone who wants to open anything is (all together now) a Science Denier, and an idiot to boot. They are all either getting paid as much for their work as they were when they worked in an office (I can't say "working just as much" because some very clearly aren't, and make no bones about posting pictures of the huge load of mulch they just had delivered on a Wednesday with the caption, "today's project"), or are comfortably retired. One, whose mom has contacted the virus, now says "Anyone who goes anywhere without a mask and gloves is criminal! Everything needs to stay closed!" - but her mom is in a NE nursing home, of course, not out in the world. Does she question the governor of that state? Nope. She somehow blames the governor of Texas for her mother's illness, in Massachusetts.

This is not "caution." This is the precautionary principle, deployed by people with little immediate stake in a normally functioning economy, who believe deeply that Republicans are knuckle-dragging snaggletoothed troglodytes. They would be shocked to find that my husband is one, and even more shocked to find that I am (that second X of mine was supposed to inoculate me against such a pass).

They're the Eloi, and they think that's a good thing to be.; 5/14/20, 8:13 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Yes we were all in it together when collectively we did as asked and “slowed the spread.” But the weird tyrannical and arbitrary nature of the lockdown struck me as fundamentally flawed and unfair. Various authorities picked groups of ten as the limit for gatherings. Others picked 50. Almost all states closed churches and singled them out for enforcement. So the lack of clarity and scientific basis for the sudden new rules and the strangely anti-religious fervor turned me off. That the metrics chosen by media such as “new cases” and “number hospitalized” are meaningless for measuring and evaluating the danger was frustrating. Obviously leaders avoid talking about death, but the most critical “curve” we could observe is deaths as measured daily and overall. That reluctance to analyze the rate of death prevented Media from pointing to it as good news mid-April as we started down the slope to May.

Good news! But here a month later we still aren’t celebrating flattening the curve. The goals have changed. Now we want to be from risk? No. Our “leaders“ want to avoid hard decisions. Now we have hazy objectives, and Media avoid revealing ANY good news anywhere, although we successfully avoided “overwhelming” our medical system. Good News! Ignored. Unreported. Instead the Media focus in distinct acts other countries “did better” or “faster” than the USA. The WSJ literally ran a headline in the print version yesterday that said “US tests mite now; Seoul did it sooner.” A relentless focus on fear and failure is the hallmark of our chattering class.

So as a conservative I think all this deception and fuzzy goal-shifting indicates bad intent on the people who are trying to imprison their fellow Americans. It’s immoral to deny healthy people the right to work and feed their families. It is unscientific to quarantine the healthy to protect the vulnerable. It illustrates the blunt force power government has to destroy, though the government relies on its citizens to create and build. This tension is out of balance and conservatives want the power to devolve back to the individual because the scope of the emergency no longer justifies the draconian restrictions we live under now. Government OWES US A BETTER EXPLANATION. As the Texas Supreme Court said today:

“ Any government that has made the grave decision to suspend the liberties of a free people during a health emergency should welcome the opportunity to demonstrate—both to its citizens and to the courts—that its chosen measures are absolutely necessary to combat a threat of overwhelming severity. The government should also be expected to demonstrate that less restrictive measures cannot adequately address the threat. Whether it is strict scrutiny or some other rigorous form of review, courts must identify and apply a legal standard by which to judge the constitutional validity of the government’s anti-virus actions. When the present crisis began, perhaps not enough was known about the virus to second-guess the worst-case projections motivating the lockdowns. As more becomes known about the threat and about the less restrictive, more targeted ways to respond to it, continued burdens on constitutional liberties may not survive judicial scrutiny.”

Generally the Left wants Daddy to keep us safe and the Right says hey we're grown-ups and we can take responsibility for our own safety. This tension is turning deadly as we sit on the precipice of a Great Depression hole we will need each other to dig out of.; 5/14/20, 8:13 AM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: Maybe it has something to do with the left’s penchant for not letting a good crisis go to waste.; 5/14/20, 8:14 AM
Francisco D said...: Jersey Fled said... In my experience, those on the left have a psychological need for something to be scared to death of. And they need mommy and daddy to make it all better.

Perhaps that explains why there are so many "hate" hoaxes, especially on college campuses.

I have often thought that the two dozen neo-Nazi and right wing paramilitary types (mostly hiding in Idaho) served the bogeyman purpose for the Left. If they did not exist, they would have to be invented.

Jussy Smollett could not be reached for comment.; 5/14/20, 8:18 AM
Jim Gust said...: The right believes in personal responsibility and freedom. The left does not, they believe in government and regulation. And rules that apply to everyone but themselves.

This is not news.; 5/14/20, 8:22 AM
tim maguire said...: As is usually the case, I think the people on the left and right who are driven primarily by partisanship (the left--never let a crisis go to waste; the right--nerivous about the upcoming election) is a quite small group, but those people are shouting the loudest.

The much more common, if quieter, divide is between those prioritizing safety from a known danger over a vague freedom they can't quite articulate anyway against those who see the costs of the lockdown as outweighing the benefits.; 5/14/20, 8:27 AM
Pookie Number 2 said...: I try to assume that the left is sincere, but (as a gross generalization, to be sure), it seems unable to evaluate less-obvious costs. It’s relatively easy to track people that die of COVID, but much harder to track the people that die because of a constrained economy. I don’t know how to balance the two, but ignoring the latter group almost automatically implies bad decision-making.; 5/14/20, 8:33 AM
Allison said...: Haidt's The Righteous Mind explained this very well.

Conservatives have more axes that they use to evaluate a moral position. They have a larger set of virtues/values for moral reasoning.

In his book, he posits his moral foundations theory --the vast majority of moral reasoning rests on six foundations:

Care/Harm
Fairness/Cheating
Liberty/Oppression
Loyalty/Betrayal
Authority/Subversion
Sanctity/Degradation

The first two are what liberals use to determine the morality of a choice. More accurately, if you use the first two axes overwhelmingly and largely ignore the other 4, you're a modern liberal. But if you tend to weight ALL six axes, then you're not liberal, and the more you weight you give to the items listed further down, the more conservative you are. Conservatives routinely consider all 6 axes.

the Caring-harm axis is being distorted by the news media. You cannot claim it as yours right now unless it is solely about Saving People from getting sick. This is to people using only those first 2 axes, obvious.

The harm caused in the future by these actions now (poverty, illiteracy, future illness not caught or prevented now) is not visible now from the media and is not being brought into the calculus.

Conservatives can see those issues, but also see the others now.; 5/14/20, 8:33 AM
Wince said...: For conservatives, freedom is the highest societal value, realizing that freedom necessarily entails risk. They are comfortable admitting that trade-off exists in exchange for a free society.

The highest value for the left is control, and that the state can and should to the maximum extent control who dies and when and by what means. Maintaining that level of control over society means never admitting that don't have the ability to exercise that control. Hence the overreach.; 5/14/20, 8:38 AM
Pookie Number 2 said...: I try to assume that the left is sincere, but (as a gross generalization, to be sure), it seems unable to evaluate less-obvious costs. It’s relatively easy to track people that die of COVID, but much harder to track the people that die because of a constrained economy. I don’t know how to balance the two, but ignoring the latter group almost automatically implies bad decision-making.; 5/14/20, 8:41 AM
tcrosse said...: It's similar to the way the efficacy (or not) of hydroxychloroquine was politicized.; 5/14/20, 8:42 AM
Michael K said...: Lockdown hurts the economy, and a bad economy makes it less likely that Trump will win reelection, which is all the left needs to know. In other words, the left is not proceeding in good faith,

I think this is a lot of it, especially with the Democrat Governors.

Also, lots of the left are government employees who are getting paid and are spectators of the economic pain.; 5/14/20, 8:48 AM
Night Owl said...: Does it really surprise you that this crisis would be politicized, especially in an election year??; 5/14/20, 8:50 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: Safety vs. Enterprise--that is one way to look at the split.
Do what your told vs. I'm the boss of me.
City vs. country.
Authority vs. freedom.
I'm scared vs. I'm concerned.

Which side are you on?; 5/14/20, 8:54 AM
tommyesq said...: But I look around at my fellow citizens — the ones who are speaking publicly — and I see a big partisan split

It is important to recognize that the (small) percentage of people who speak publicly are not necessarily representative of the public as a whole, and perhaps are disproportionately non-representative (e.g., those who have access to being published in the Times or the Post likely skew left).; 5/14/20, 8:55 AM
Sebastian said...: "the Democrats went with the careful hesitation"

They didn't hesitate and they weren't careful.; 5/14/20, 8:55 AM
Ambrose said...: Everything has become politicized - people look for guidance on what to think. "I am progressive, what should I think about this. Is this joke funny? Is this book good? Let me check the Times." It may be my bias, but I think this is more prevalent on the left though not absent on the right.; 5/14/20, 8:57 AM
Birkel said...: Democratics want power. That is all they want. It explains their position.

Many Republicans want that too, but perhaps with different end states in mind.

Conservatives believe individuals acting with the best information available will make good choices. And that government power will distort the positive effects of individuals making their own best decisions.

---

You are a Democratic but would allow yourself the ability to make good decisions, like a conservative, but untrusting if the rest of humanity. Or that's how it looks from here.; 5/14/20, 8:59 AM
Dave Begley said...: Reluctantly I've come to the conclusion that the Dems want to crush the economy so that Trump loses. I say that because the *science and data* are clear. It is safe to open up except in NYC, NJ and CT. It is irrational to keep the economy closed; arbitrary and capricious.

Look at the death rates and other relevant stats in MN, WI and CA. There is no rational reason not to open up NOW. GA and FL are doing find.

I've very, very disappointed in the NE governor.

The Dems pitch this as "safety" but it is really about defeating Trump.

The Dems will do anything to get rid of Trump. They spied on his campaign and them impeached him over nothing. And look at the Kavanaugh lynching. The Dems are BAD PEOPLE who are only interested in their personal power and money.; 5/14/20, 9:04 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: You know, that Andrew Cuomo is really impressive. He is articulate and speaks with authority tempered by a sense of his own fallibility.

Too bad he killed all those old people in nursing homes.; 5/14/20, 9:05 AM
brylun said...: To quote Andrew Cuomo: America was never that great; 5/14/20, 9:07 AM
Dave Begley said...: Another thing. Look at Pelosi's latest bill. It has nothing to do with covid19. It is just a payoff to liberal interest groups like the states that have bungled their own budgets. She's found a crisis and what's to take advantage of it. She's shameless. Her and her $50k frigs full of $12 ice cream. Bad person!; 5/14/20, 9:09 AM
Ken B said...: Meh. The real problem is that a part of the Right is under a delusion. We had years of Russia delusions on the Left, now we are seeing the reaction: the Right (justifiably) mistrusts the press and everyone else who contributed to the Russia hoax, and have reacted by simply denying what they say now, regardless of the evidence.; 5/14/20, 9:11 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: That should be "you're" not "your" above.

Sheesh.; 5/14/20, 9:17 AM
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...: Jamie said...

They are all either getting paid as much for their work as they were when they worked in an office (I can't say "working just as much" because some very clearly aren't, and make no bones about posting pictures of the huge load of mulch they just had delivered on a Wednesday with the caption, "today's project"), or are comfortably retired.

This. It is largely those who work for a living vs. those with guaranteed income. Any political overtones come from activist and the media.; 5/14/20, 9:18 AM
Martin said...: If we had some data on partisan affiliation of people who have been laid off, it might be a clue...; 5/14/20, 9:30 AM
RichardJohnson said...: One reason that I left the Democrats had to do with my being a numbers person more than a word person.Having worked in Latin America, I have more interest in Latin America than does the average bear. In the 1980s, I noticed that a lot of liberals thought the Sandinistas were just great. I noticed that per capita agricultural production had dropped 40% in Nicaragua AFTER the Sandinistas took power and before the Contra war started. I noticed a similar, albeit smaller, drop in Chile's per capita agricultural production during the Allende years. Regarding those who shouted Pinochet-bad and Castro-good, I noticed that Pinochet had a better results than Castro in reducing Infant Mortality. Not the accepted narrative at all.

Regarding numbers and COVID-19. a.k.a Winnie the Flu, I have been looking at the numbers for over a month. I soon saw that while daily deaths fluctuated a lot through the week, that daily results based on a 7-day average gave much less fluctuation. The 7-day average showed increases through about April 15.From 17-23 April, the 7-day average didn't change much- around 2170. The 7-day average peaked at 2199 for 15-21 April. and then showed a falling trend. The 7-day average has fallen nearly a third (32.6%), from 2199 to 1483 in 22 days. Those numbers tell me it is time to ease up on the shutdown.

7-Day Average Daily Deaths (Winnie the Flu)

15-21 April 2199
16-22 April 2162
23-29 April 1966
30 April- 6 May 1877
7-13 May 1483

Note the drastic fall in the last week.

I call it "Winnie the Flu" in an attempt to personalize the situation. Fearless leader Xi, often satirized as Winnie the Pooh, is the person most responsible for the extent of the pandemic. First, by arresting/repressing those in Wuhan who sought to bring the public's attention to the situation, he is responsible for the spread in Wuhan. Second, by permitting flights from Wuhan to outside China, while shutting down Wuhan from the rest of China, he is responsible for the spread of the virus throughout the world.; 5/14/20, 9:32 AM
RichardJohnson said...: Allison on Haidt's Righteous Mind:

In his book, he posits his moral foundations theory --the vast majority of moral reasoning rests on six foundations:

Care/Harm
Fairness/Cheating
Liberty/Oppression
Loyalty/Betrayal
Authority/Subversion
Sanctity/Degradation

The first two are what liberals use to determine the morality of a choice. More accurately, if you use the first two axes overwhelmingly and largely ignore the other 4, you're a modern liberal.

Liberals use the Sanctity/Degradation axis quite a bit. Consider liberal views about the environment or AGW. Mother Earth shall not be defiled. Thee shall not participate in carbon-emitting activities. Their views on the environment or AGW positively reek of Sanctity/Degradation. Consider also the liberal tendency to label their opponents as Nazis/racists/Deplorables. Liberals see themselves as the holy people, the tolerant people, in contrast with those yucky people who have the effrontery to disagree with them.That is more Sanctity/Degradation.; 5/14/20, 9:43 AM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: The way I see it the virus isn't going away, ever, and we can either continue inflicting economic pain on ourselves or get back to work. If the lockdowns continue for a week or a month it makes no difference because eventually they'll be lifted and the virus will spread. It's just a question of getting sick now or later.

This equation is different if we have a vaccine. But we don't, and we can't stay locked down until March of next year when one will be available (hopefully).

At this point, we're adding the misery of mass unemployment to the misery of the plague. It's not accomplishing anything anymore.

I agree that if/when the layoffs hit the work-at-homes we'll see a change in attitude.; 5/14/20, 9:47 AM
Be like a tree said...: Because if the good intentions of lock-down policies cause economic collapse, we may not have the time or liberty to enjoy posting on Althouse's good blog.; 5/14/20, 9:47 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Regarding Karen B saying the Right is “denying what [the Media says] now, regardless of the evidence.”

1. Poor sentence structure.
2. Cites nonexistent evidence.
3. Assumes “evidence” (if cited) would support his (weak) argument.
4. Inspires the question, where has the Media ever written about scientific matters with anything above kindergarten intelligence?
5. Makes vague unsupported allusion to something the Right is doing that Karen disapproves of.

WTF was Karen trying to say?; 5/14/20, 9:51 AM
ColoradoDude said...: Democrats tend to live in center cities over suburbs or small town rural places.
Most blacks and Hispanics tend to be Democrats.

This pandemic has really hit harder in center cities (but not in all of them).
This pandemic has hit blacks and Hispanics harder than Anglos.

It’s possible that our views on reopening or staying locked down stem from personal experience. Do you personally know somebody who caught this disease? You probably think it’s a very serious problem, if you know no one who’s caught it, you may well think the problem may be overblown.

So... knee jerk partisanship OR who do you believe, media hype or what your own eyes tell you?; 5/14/20, 10:00 AM
Bilwick said...: Golly-gee, why WOULD people on the Left favor a continued lockdown and submission to Der Staat? That sure is a tough question. . . .; 5/14/20, 10:18 AM
LA_Bob said...: The attitude on the left is derived from the smarmy tendency to make everyone feel "included". As in, "everybody has won, and all must have prizes". No one must feel they've failed or been left out or lost or couldn't "measure up". Everyone is just as "good" as everyone else.

So, if you belong to the small demographic most susceptible to suffering and death from COVID-19, you are a de facto minority group member. You must not be "discriminated against" with focused quarantine based on your personal traits or behavior.

If you belong to the vast majority who mostly blow off COVID-19 with barely a notice, you are "privileged" and must pay by taking extra steps to compensate the vulnerable. You, too, must shelter in place, because "we are all in this together".

On the right, the attitude is more like, Yes, protect the weak if possible. The rest take their chances and get on with life.

Oversimplifies, but I think it's a driver of the right / left split.; 5/14/20, 10:27 AM
bagoh20 said...: "I'm not in either group"

Sorry, I don't buy that. Real beliefs are expressed in actions. Words are just sprayed around like deodorant.; 5/14/20, 10:34 AM
Chris Moein said...: I think your splitting the baby, middle ground position betrays an "embarrassed" conservative sentiment. Virtually nobody on the right is arguing to open everything up, science be damned. The leading lights on the left are repeatedly arguing one death is too many, and health is the overwhelming consideration. I hate to break it to you, but your point of view is the "right wing" point of view - to balance all factors, health and economic. The health factors to a large degree are unknown and thus should be viewed with a scientific skepticism. The economic factors are empirical and known, and thus accorded more weight in the balancing of the equation. This is the EXACT same argument that occurs over the response to global warming.; 5/14/20, 10:37 AM
Balfegor said...: Adding to my comments above, I think a lot of people who are in cities where a full-on apocalyptic lockdown has been necessary find it deeply unfair that other places have been able to mitigate the spread of the virus without extreme measures. For example, there are a lot of people online who were heavily invested in the idea that Tokyo was going to get hammered because they weren't testing huge numbers, and all they were doing was closing schools and large public gatherings and wearing masks. Now there's a little more (a voluntary request to avoid going out unless you really need to, and businesses pressured to close temporarily or switch to telework) but no compulsory stay at home order. Now we've had less than 40 cases per day for the past week (down from a one day peak of 201), and the end is in sight.

The frustration on r/coronavirus is palpable. Since February, commenters have been predicting a huge number of hidden cases due to the lack of mass testing, but the deaths just don't seem to be there. For people who have convinced themselves that mass testing + lockdown (or fancy compulsory quarantine like Korea) is the only way forward, it probably feels like Japan is cheating. Now they're reduced to claiming Japan is just covering up a huge death toll. But they can't accept the alternative.; 5/14/20, 10:41 AM
bagoh20 said...: If a Democrat President could be blamed for the effects of the shutdown, it would be over by now, and the Right would still agree with ending it.

The Right cares about economic prosperity and uses politics to that end. The Left cares about politics and will use the economy to that end. That's why we heard people on the left admit that they would accept a recession to get rid of Trump. It's also why Leftist governments have such a record of destroying their own nations' economies to hold power. China was smarter, and adopted capitalism in order to hold on to power, but nobody thinks they really prefer capitalism for it's own sake.; 5/14/20, 10:46 AM
Dude1394 said...: I am quite sure that you would feel very much on the opening side if you were not receiving a paycheck, savings, etc. and you were having a tough time feeding your children. The divide here is comfortable people versus the most vulnerable people in our society.
The comfortable people think the most vulnerable should continue to be destroyed to keep themselves safe. It just so happens the vast majority of media, government, high tech people are democrats. Showing as usual how little they really care about our most vulnerable.; 5/14/20, 10:49 AM
Hey Skipper said...: But I look around at my fellow citizens — the ones who are speaking publicly — and I see a big partisan split. I could come up with some theories about why — if the decisions are going to be made as a matter of 2 political teams competing for dominance — the Republicans latched onto the eagerness side and the Democrats went with the careful hesitation, but why are people just going with their team?!

Ideology, occupation, gender and opinions on at least theoretically verifiable facts are not functionally related. For instance, there is no reason to expect why an occupational characteristic should be correlated with gender.

First, a couple terms. Instead of Right/Left, I will use individualist/collectivist. And the occupational characteristic I think is meaningful is the degree to which the occupation is Reality Refereed (RR); that is, how critical specific knowledge and skill are to creating a successful outcome. Surgery is strictly RR, Family Medicine not so much. All the trades are very reality refereed; Sociologists and journalists, not at all.

For the most part, RR fields are equally open to both men and women, but skew overwhelmingly male.

Those in RR fields skew individualist. Those not in RR fields skew collectivist.

Those in RR fields are more adept at mathematical concepts and analytical thinking.

Women skew collectivist.

Those in RR fields strongly tend to reject alarmist predictions about the Wuhan virus and climate; those who aren't accept both.

Because all these concepts have no externally imposed linkage, there should be no reason to expect that a venn diagram of, say, pilots and acceptance of ACC, or reluctance to exit from Wuhan lockdown, or ideology, or gender should be other than a 50% overlap.

But, based upon personal experience, the vast majority of pilots think ACC overblown, the Wuhan reaction excessive, are individualist, and are overwhelmingly male. And I'd bet that Michael K's experience with surgeons is similar, or DBQ's with those providing water system design and installation.

Therefore, that the split is partisan not a cause, but rather an effect of underlying, unalterable, mental characteristics.

Of course, there is no reason to expect that when it comes to correctly predicting the outcomes of physical facts that themselves have nothing to do with either individualists or collectivists, that one or the other should be predominantly correct.

Yet that doesn't seem to be the case. With regard to Wuhan predictions, individualists have so far been far closer to what reality will likely turn out to be than collectivists. Similarly with ACC — for those predications which have reached their sell-by date, individualists have carried the day.

So, the theory is that the degree to which one is inclined towards, or away from RR fields is very predictive of many other, seemingly unrelated things.

Partisanship with regard to getting out from under Wuhan Weestwictions is an effect, not a cause.; 5/14/20, 11:07 AM
Birches said...: I'm very cautious in my day to day interactions, but I understand why people want to get back to work. I also understand why some commentary is extreme... it's trying to shift the Overton window. At first, everyone was pretty compliant with stay at home orders. It was only after the goalposts moved from slow the spread to wait for a vaccine that open up efforts really ramped up. And only after the Congress dithered around for weeks before passing a relief bill.; 5/14/20, 11:08 AM
Michael K said...: The Dems will do anything to get rid of Trump. They spied on his campaign and them impeached him over nothing. And look at the Kavanaugh lynching. The Dems are BAD PEOPLE who are only interested in their personal power and money.

What interests me is why they are so desperate to get rid of him. Some of it is the "experts" commitment to the Administrative State, but it is more than that. There is real hate. Does he represent the Emperor's lack of clothes ? We see failure after failure in foreign policy, the "Intelligence Community" which allowed all our agents in China and Iran to be rolled up and massacred. Where has the administrative state had a success ? The CDC botched the epidemic. The FDA and the lawyers have driven much of our manufacturing overseas. Especially pharmaceuticals. The Left is always complaining about "Big Pharma profits." Which profits ?

The Deep State seems like a wounded monster thrashing around with grifters like the Clintons in charge,; 5/14/20, 11:15 AM
mandrewa said...: RichardJohnson, reinforcing what you said, Willis Eschenbach did a Complete Empirical Mode Decomposition of the daily coronavirus death numbers for the United States, and based on the extracted Complete Empirical Mode Decomposition Residual, also found that deaths peaked back in the middle of April. Although he notes the real peak may have been earlier since during the middle of this the CDC expanded the definition of coronavirus deaths to include probable cases.

See Covid-19, through a glass weekly; 5/14/20, 11:16 AM
Big Mike said...: Lockdown hurts the economy, and a bad economy makes it less likely that Trump will win reelection, which is all the left needs to know.

That’s the conventional wisdom, but is it right? If Trump nationalizes the coming election and blames the Democrats for refusing to permit the economy to be resuscitated at a time when we could be recovering, I think he could get 55% (or more) of the electorate right there. He would be running not merely against Slow Joe, but also Pelosi, Newsom, Cuomo, Evers, Northam, and Whitmer, among others. And, in addition, that could give him coattails in November. Very long and strong coattails. Gonna be fascinating to watch if he does that, and if the Dumbocrats play into his hands.; 5/14/20, 11:28 AM
bagoh20 said...: If you were given the option back in March to stay home in relative safety but lose your current income, maybe your life's work, or even a few year's work, would you opt to stay home to avoid an incredibly minuscule risk? Or, would you opt to go to work, but maybe take some precautions? The difference in the risk between those two options extremely small. Staying home does not guarantee safety, but it does guarantee significant losses, and for some of us it guarantee those losses for other people as well.; 5/14/20, 11:33 AM
Sam L. said...: The Left is authoritarian, BIG TIME. The right,muchhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh less.; 5/14/20, 11:46 AM
Maillard Reactionary said...: I don't know whether Our Hostess's intellectual straining at gnats in connection with topics like this is pathetic, ludicrous, or simply disingenuous.

Consider (if you would, as Rod Serling used to say) the possibility that many people affiliate with the Democrat party (and Leftism) because (1) they like telling people what to do, or wish they could, or (2) like being told what to do, so that they can offload the responsibility for their actions onto others. Many prefer the (illusory) promise of security over liberty and act accordingly.

Conversely, conservatives and Republicans (the sets intersect but are not identical) hate being told what to do, believe in live and let live, expect people to take responsibility for their actions, and prize liberty over the illusion of security.

In other words, individual propensity is the antecedent of political beliefs.; 5/14/20, 11:47 AM
bagoh20 said...: I'm sure there are some out there, but I haven't seen anybody who is losing their ass from this shutdown out telling everyone to stay home as long as it takes. It's pretty clear delineation between those sacrificing something and those not.; 5/14/20, 11:54 AM
DD said...: Just throwing this out there … everyone’s brain is wired differently. Very broadly, one way of categorizing is control. Some seek to impose more control over external stuff (can’t think of a good word here) and others want less control affecting them. Keeping this in mind, it seems like party affiliation is more of a symptom of how our brains are wired and less a conscious choice. It is no surprise then to observe how the reaction to the pandemic plays out, yes it seems to align with party affiliation but may really be aligned with how our brain is wired.; 5/14/20, 12:02 PM
Drago said...: This divide is on full display this morning in DC as the democratics Sham-peachment III hearings kicked off just like the Schiff-ty Shams on hoax collusion and hoax ukraine lies:

Rick Bright, another non-whistleblower "whistleblower" deep-stater was alllowed to testify NOT UNDER OATH.

AND, he was allowed to have an attorney sit at the table with him....with a microphone in front of the attorney!!

Both extraordinary for a witness.

On top of that, guess who the attorney was?

If you guessed Christine Blasey Ford's attorney, well, you would be spot on. The Katz is back.

The democratics are systematically dismantling every institution right before our eyes. If they ever get power again they will be going Full Venezuela.; 5/14/20, 12:08 PM
Kyzer SoSay said...: If this virus was anywhere near as deadly as the experts told us, or if they'd done better with their immediate follow-up predictions, you'd be seeing fewer protests. But the more we test and measure, the more we see this is a slightly nastier flu. And maybe not even that, if one views the death count with a gimlet eye.

OR

If lockdowns had been applied smartly, not ruthlessly, and counties had been given latitude on what to do, you'd also probably see fewer protests. I'm fine with keeping NYC locked down for a decade or so. But I'm pretty sure it's okay for Peoria to open on up.

Our experts and our government, concentrated as always with Democrats and Blue-voting areas, failed us spectacularly. Again.; 5/14/20, 12:19 PM
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...: Michael K said...

What interests me is why they are so desperate to get rid of him. Some of it is the "experts" commitment to the Administrative State, but it is more than that. There is real hate. Does he represent the Emperor's lack of clothes ?

Globalism (their preferred model) hasn't been achieved and won't be achieved until the Left can force it down the Deplorables throats. Trump is actively encouraging the Deplorables to fight back. They don't like that because, as usual, the Left wants to rule the world, but doesn't want to have to work for it.

Also, Trump isn't a Beltway insider and isn't particularly afraid of the press. That removes two powerful tools that they've always had at their disposal in the past. Combine that with Pelosi, Schiff, Fat Jerry, and Mueller fumbling the ball on the impeachment scam and the truly bright boys at the top can likely see the American Left is soon going to be facing at least a decade or two in the Wilderness.; 5/14/20, 12:30 PM
Jim at said...: With rare exception, Collectivists vs individualists are pretty clearly drawn along party lines.

I thought this was understood.; 5/14/20, 12:33 PM
Birkel said...: Don't be a Ken B.
Lady parts deserve better.

People began to take reasonable self-protective steps without government commands. Does anybody question that this response was reasonable and without partisan inclination? No. Of course not.

However, then the government got involved and destroyed the economy. The economy was already going to be impacted but it would have bounced back more quickly as people needed to work and earn a living. So the economic recovery was retarded. And it was government action that caused that. Does anybody deny that? Yes, of course. Partisan Democratics deny this obvious truth.

That is why Democratics cannot argue in good faith. That is why the cvnts like Ken B must lie. They must lie. It is not optional.

And then they act surprised that there is gambling at Rick's.; 5/14/20, 12:35 PM
Jupiter said...: Notice what they are saying. They are saying that YOU must do what THEY say, or else YOU are harming THEM (over there). That is what they always say. We must control YOU for the benefit of THEM. And they are always lying. They couldn't tell the truth with a gun to their heads, though I would like to watch them try.; 5/14/20, 12:52 PM
Calypso Facto said...: “Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” Robert A. Heinlein; 5/14/20, 12:58 PM
daskol said...: I don't think the meaningful divisions are between those speaking publicly on one side or the other of the extended lockdown. The lockdown is over: those speaking publicly about phasing back to life are speaking about what is, and those speaking about some indefinite continuation of a lockdown are revealing their inner neuroses or inner petty tyrant or perhaps most of all that they are out of touch with what's actually happening. So the speakers can speak, but the people have spoken with their feet, via their mobile phones, as aggregated data points in the various mobility analyses.; 5/14/20, 1:04 PM
Robert Cook said...: "Liberals - victimhood
"Conservatives - self reliance

"I think it's really that simple."

Simple-minded, more like.; 5/14/20, 1:10 PM
Shouting Thomas said...: "Liberals - victimhood
"Conservatives - self reliance

"I think it's really that simple."

Simple-minded, more like.

Commies like Cook: eat the zoo animals.; 5/14/20, 1:17 PM
Robert Cook said...: "A 'state of emergency' in America is meant to be short-term in the aftermath of things like storms and earthquake.

The duration of a state of emergency has to do with the nature of the emergency. The time in which the USA has been in a state of emergency over COVID-19 has been very brief, given the nature of this particular emergency. The economic damage of this so far brief shut-down is so great that we must find a way out of it, but simply throwing aside all emergency measures willy-nilly is a very perilous way to go. Great problems are not solved by simply ignoring them or wishing them away, but through careful consideration and cautious action.; 5/14/20, 1:24 PM
Tyrone Slothrop said...: I like to think of myself is right-libertarian. Want to marry your brother? Smoke mushrooms? Subsist on fresh air and spring water? Whatever, as long as you don't bother me with it.

I'm also a member of virtually every Covid-19 high risk group. I admit this colors my thinking.

I think what the self-reliance folks are missing is that even their casual activities may constitute life-and-death outcomes for many, many others. Put it this way-- you can be drunk, an alcoholic, shit-faced, sitting on your sofa at home and I don't care, but once you start to drive a car even right-libertarians should object. Simply ending the lockdowns and trying to live as you did prior to February 2020 is like letting everyone drive drunk.

Like a lot of sixties kids, I grew up with great faith in science. Jenner, Pasteur, Fleming, Salk all were heroes to me. I believe that the scientists advocating lockdowns give their opinions in good faith. I also believe, as Dr. Fauci says, that they don't give much consideration to economic forces because that isn't their area of expertise.

Democrat politicians are clearly pushing the limits of their authority just to see how far they can go. LA supervisors have shut the county down until August. This will not hold. Call it civil disobedience, but even the congenitally liberal citizens of Los Angeles County will not put up with this. You won't see mass protests, but you will see barber shops, burrito stands and cannabis stores quietly doing business because they must. The LA County supes might have seen this coming and promulgated common-sense rules for reopening, Instead they chose the most draconian alternative, and thus created an entire cohort of scofflaws.

Lockdown can't continue. This is obvious. But conservatives have to acknowledge that they can't just wish the consequences of this pandemic away. Parading in Lansing with AR-15's and no masks makes you, and by association, me, look like idiots. Push for reopening, sure, but for God's sake, at least take Dr. Fauci's opinions into consideration.; 5/14/20, 1:29 PM
Bilwick said...: "Liberals - victimhood
"Conservatives - self reliance

"I think it's really that simple."

Robert Cook adds: "Simple-minded, more like."

Actually, although the original comment has an essential truth to it, it is a little more complicated than that. I previously referenced a comment from the IMAO blog that "liberals" (i.e., "tax-happy, coercion-addicted, power-tripping government humpers and State fellators") generally fall into two categories, represented by two cartoon characters: Baby Huey and Bluto. Baby Huey represents the victimhood side of the coin, while Bluto represents the bullying, do-what-I-say-or-I'll-clobber-you side, which has become increasingly the Face of "Liberalism" during the pandemic.; 5/14/20, 1:41 PM
Robert Cook said...: "I am quite sure that you would feel very much on the opening side if you were not receiving a paycheck, savings, etc. and you were having a tough time feeding your children. The divide here is comfortable people versus the most vulnerable people in our society."

This is certainly correct.

But...there is a difference between what individuals and business owners want (or need, as in continuing to receive income), and what is good or bad for the society as a whole. If all workers continued working, all businesses stayed open, and all social activities continued as normal, COVID-19 (or any new virus) could spread far wider, much faster, potentially causing greater loss of life or serious, long-lasting damaged health in many of the survivors.

It is too simplistic by far to characterize those who advocate strict emergency measures as being mostly concerned with "controlling" others. There is real debate and no simple answer as to how to best deal with a pandemic in such a way that will cause the least damage to the most people.

We do not have the balance right, as yet, (or the most effective means to mitigate economic damage to the extent some degree of shut down must persist).; 5/14/20, 1:44 PM
Char Char Binks, Esq. said...: Dems wanted the lockdown to bring on Trump’s recession, and get him out of office, but they’re finding that they like the idea of prohibiting things for its own sake, and the power of prior approval for almost anything they decide people should or shouldn’t do. A few months ago I thought such a characterization was exaggerated, or even a parody.; 5/14/20, 1:45 PM
I'm Not Sure said...: "What interests me is why they are so desperate to get rid of him."

He stole Hillary's prize, so he's a Bad Man.; 5/14/20, 1:54 PM
Rance Fasoldt said...: I remember when Democrats were Red and Republicans were Blue in election TV reports, like in 1984. But Democrats complained that it was smearing them as being soft on socialism, since Communist countries had red prominent in their flags, and Commies were called Reds. Now we see that the original color choice was, indeed, accurate.; 5/14/20, 2:21 PM
Pookie Number 2 said...: He stole Hillary's prize, so he's a Bad Man.

It’s probably a little more complicated than that. I think a lot of decent (albeit misled) folks on the left thought that it was worth sacrificing their integrity because it would achieve what they assert is the greater good. Instead, they sacrificed their integrity and got nothing. I think that frustration explains a lot of the last few years’ lunatic fury.; 5/14/20, 2:25 PM
Michael K said...: If all workers continued working, all businesses stayed open, and all social activities continued as normal, COVID-19 (or any new virus) could spread far wider, much faster, potentially causing greater loss of life or serious, long-lasting damaged health in many of the survivors.

Another amateur epidemiologist. On the left, of course, where the rest of them are.; 5/14/20, 3:01 PM
Shouting Thomas said...: It is too simplistic by far to characterize those who advocate strict emergency measures as being mostly concerned with "controlling" others.

Sometimes simple and direct is truth.

Controlling others is your political objective, Cook. You are a communist. Your goal is absolute tyranny.

We’ll be eating the dogs and cats and roasting the zoo animals if you get your way.; 5/14/20, 4:02 PM
Mark said...: Some are people of hope. Others are people who are inclined to despair.; 5/14/20, 4:28 PM
Flagar said...: Could it be the rural/urban divide? Larger cities seem to be affected more than rural areas, which tend to be more conservative.; 5/14/20, 4:58 PM
Krumhorn said...: There is real debate and no simple answer as to how to best deal with a pandemic in such a way that will cause the least damage to the most people.

I agree with this from Cookie. That said, there is a clear difference between how leftie politicians and conservative politicians have weighed the balance, and I cannot avoid the obvious explanations.

Scratch a leftie, and you'll find a tyrant screaming to get out. The California lefties are certainly enjoying their exercise of power. Even as the rest of the country is trying to get back on track, Mayor YogaPants in LA announced last night the requirement that anyone in public must wear a mask. This is a leftie full to the snout with his assurance of moral superiority and fully relishing that he has the whip hand.

It's clear to me, as it must be clear to most others, that the panic-demic has been far overblown. The emergency rooms have not been overrun. While the lefties will say that this is because everyone stayed home in obedience to their orders, I don't buy it except at the margins.

The problem here is that the next time, when something potentially far more dangerous is circulating, folks will yawn and do as they please since we've heard it all before.

And let's not forget the leftie mantra: resist by any means necessary. We ignore at our peril that they damn well mean it.

- Krumhorn; 5/14/20, 4:59 PM
Birkel said...: Tyrone Slothrop,
But high risk people are being asked not to drive while the drunkards who have to make your country run are out piling up the risk.

Nobody is suggesting high risk groups take chances with their own lives. We want you to stay safe.

But when the pensioners lose their pensions, and when the poor are destitute and starving, and when third world countries suffer widespread deprivation -- all because the healthy were told not to work -- then what good will that have done for vulnerable populations?

Stay safe and let the rest of us keep those worst case scenarios from obtaining.; 5/14/20, 5:03 PM
Birkel said...: Robert Cook: "If all workers continued working, all businesses stayed open, and all social activities continued as normal..."

This was never an option as reasonable people took reasonable precautions before the government ordered us into BK.

Commies are fucking stupid.; 5/14/20, 5:06 PM
Josephbleau said...: "Great problems are not solved by simply ignoring them or wishing them away, but through careful consideration and cautious action."

Great problems are not solved when a political party uses a true crisis to grab money for pet projects out of the taxpayers treasury pretending that it will do one damn thing to help the people suffering from that crisis.; 5/14/20, 5:24 PM
Tyrone Slothrop said...: @Birkel

I get your point, but self-isolation for the at-risk would never be enough if huge numbers of the population at large are carriers. I can take all necessary precautions, but I still need to pick up my mail and go to the grocery store. I'd prefer it if mailmen and grocery clerks had taken measures not to get sick.; 5/14/20, 5:40 PM
hombre said...: This is seriously naive. People on the right choose work over welfare and freedom over despotism. Also, the lockdown promotes economic collapse which Democrats prefer to Trump’s re-election.; 5/14/20, 6:21 PM
Birkel said...: But then, Tyrone Slothrop, you want an impossible thing to happen. A thing, that if not impossible, would impoverish everybody around you. The mailman and the grocer will not provide the services you require in such circumstances. In short, that is no protection whatsoever.

If you can gather mail and have groceries delivered, everybody will be better off.; 5/14/20, 6:37 PM
Birkel said...: P.S.
Washing hands thoroughly and repeatedly is - so far - the only scientifically proven method to control the spread of this disease. Wearing a mask doesn't seem to do much in either direction but it makes many people feel good, so WTF?

Also, probably best not to touch your face a whole heck of a lot.; 5/14/20, 6:40 PM
Greg the class traitor said...: Well, there's two basic splits here:
1: Democrats are more likely to live in high population density places where it's not safe to open up
2: Online Democrats are more likely to have their income come from sources that can pay them while they "work from home"

So Democrats aren't paying the costs of the shutdown, and won't be able to safely go out as quickly as the rest of us
And since Democrats are selfish bastards utterly lacking in empathy, they don't care about the harm being done to America (in fact, they like it, since they think it will make it more likely that Trump loses re-election), all they care about is that no one else gets to go out, until THEY can go out; 5/14/20, 6:52 PM
Greg the class traitor said...: Tyrone Slothrop said...
I can take all necessary precautions, but I still need to pick up my mail and go to the grocery store.

So?

I wear a mask, goggles, and gloves when I go to the grocery store. When I get home, I put the groceries in quarantine, put my clothes in a bag and wash them, and go take a shower before I do anything else.

Get the mail, put it in a quarantine box. Don't touch it for another 72 hours. If something has to be dealt with quickly, I use gloves / clean it.

So no, if you're threatened by the groceries / mail, it's because you are NOT "taking all necessary precautions."

Your desire not to have to inconvenience yourself with the actual necessary precautions does not justify putting 30% of the country out of work; 5/14/20, 6:58 PM
rcocean said...: BTW, I skip over any comments that begins:

"As a Libertarian"
"As a Right-libertarian"
"As a Right-winger who leans..."
"As a centrist, who sometimes..."; 5/14/20, 7:13 PM
Qwinn said...: "Push for reopening, sure, but for God's sake, at least take Dr. Fauci's opinions into consideration."

Why? I mean, has he ever been proven *correct* about any prediction he has ever made? I know of several cases (AIDS, for one) where he was proven hilariously wrong.

** Dr. Fauci claimed that AIDS might be transmissible by “routine close contact.” (May 5, 1983, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association). (Michael Fumento, The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, p. 237).

** Dr. Fauci claimed that ten percent of the HIV/AIDS infected would be heterosexual—more than two and half times the rate – four percent – it actually was.

** On February 15, 1987, then conservative columnist George Will said to Dr. Fauci that HIV/AIDS was principally a homosexual affliction and that it was not exploding and Fauci quickly replied, “That’s not correct. The percentage of individuals who have gotten AIDS by heterosexual transmission is about four percent now. It is projected that that number will be up in 1991 to about 10 percent.”; 5/14/20, 7:42 PM
Qwinn said...: Oh, and -

Is there a single government job, anywhere in any of the 50 states, that has been deemed "non-essential"?

Because almost EVERY government employee I know... is still working. The very few who aren't - are still getting paid as if they were working.

And of course, virtually all of them are leftists. So keeping the lockdown is painless for them, and hurts people in the private sector, which they assume all support Trump.; 5/14/20, 7:50 PM
I'm Not Sure said...: "It’s probably a little more complicated than that.

Yes, I'd agree.; 5/14/20, 7:51 PM
Kyzer SoSay said...: "Your desire not to have to inconvenience yourself with the actual necessary precautions does not justify putting 30% of the country out of work"

And there's the pot of truth at the end of gravity's rainbow.

Sorry Tyrone, but just because you're loaded with comorbidities doesn't mean I need to change my lifestyle, or the barber down the street from me shouldn't be allowed to work. "Quarantine" is not for the healthy. It is for the sick and frail, and apparently you've self identified as the latter.

Douse yourself in Lysol, double up yer mask, and wear a pair of safety glasses. ORRR, find a grocery delivery service and ask a friendly neighbor to venture out to get your mail. Douse them with Lysol when they come to your door. It is incumbent upon YOU to take the necessary precautions.; 5/14/20, 8:33 PM
Terry Ott said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 5/14/20, 9:17 PM
Terry Ott said...: Especially in troubled times like these, Republicans and Democrats tend to think and feel differently about the roles of government. Democrats think it’s up to them, via government, to “make things better” for those who are victima of this and that aspect of the real world. The more people who are convinced that they are in one or more of the victom categories, the better for the self professed helpers, aka meddlers. More prospective voters to whom to appeal. Fear is their friend. Republicans tend to be more “whole society” thinkers, seeing their calling being to keep government out of the way as much as is practicable, putting reasonable boundaries on the private sector and then letting the chips fall where they may. Confidence in individuals and groups are their friends.

Democratic party leaders thrive on being the alleged “protectors” and “rescuers” of the those who look for officialdom to “fight for them”. Republican party leaders thrive on being the catalysts for motivated and self-confident individuals’ achievements, including contributions to the predicted “ever-rising tide”.

As for the leftists’ tendency toward providing and welcoming protection and “assistance”, a pandemic and lowered barriers against state overreaching is fertile ground. But the Republican adherents chafe at the restrictions as they aspire to “do their thing“ again, confident in their and our collective ability to win the day through old-fashioned common sense and adjusting on the fly as circumstances dictate.

Of course this is oversimplification writ large; guilty as charged. The only way I can think of to break out of this apparent tug of war rationally is: get more people to see this from a “whole field” perspective, meaning to recognize there are costs and benefits, positives and negatives, known and unknown risks and potential advantages to be considered for each possible “solution set”. Put the known facts out on the table, realizing they WILL change over time, and be clear about the assumptions used, which also might need to be changed. Then make the best possible informed guess as to the optimal way forward in specific jurisdictions. Problem is, with all the fear and rampant speculation, coupled with time pressure, “rationality” will suffer. We can ONLY hope that people of good will be inclined to do the right thing for the overall good — health wise, economy-wise, and with consideration of our collective emotions and wishes.; 5/14/20, 9:19 PM
RigelDog said...: Robert Cook said: The economic damage of this so far brief shut-down is so great that we must find a way out of it, but simply throwing aside all emergency measures willy-nilly is a very perilous way to go.}}}

First, it is very refreshing to see the acknowledgement that the economic damage we have already suffered is extensive and unsustainable--"we must find a way out of it." I appreciate the measured comments.
Secondly, and I ask this in all sincerity because it is the heart of our current predicament: What peril, specifically, do we risk if we throw aside all emergency measures? (Not that anyone is advocating throwing aside every last measure, but let's say the vast majority of government orders). What is the peril, and have you seen good data from your authorities showing exactly how we know this peril is certain, and exactly how we know that (specific) actions X, Y, and Z which continue to restrict freedom and destroy livelihoods and businesses will avert the peril?; 5/14/20, 10:37 PM
Tom Grey said...: The Democrat leaders & elite are mostly college educated - who can work by internet, order by internet, live by internet. Without dealing so much with people. Altho many do often deal with many others, zoom meetings etc. can have them almost as effective. Dem voters who are unemployed would just as soon have UBI (Universal Basic Income) and not work; and continue to get UBI for not working. A more comfy poverty.

The Republican voters much more often work with customers, and can NOT do their work by internet. Tho they can blog & comment & many are retired (like me).

So there's a big work by internet, or not, divide.; 5/15/20, 9:43 AM