Say goodbye to Michigan, Donald.
I wonder if he’s given up on Michigan and even Pennsylvania.
That means everything would rest on him keeping Wisconsin and also Arizona.
There are so many paths for him to lose and so few to win.
I still can’t see a single Hillary state that he can flip.
Hitler never ran for re-election, either lol.
Btw trump’s not my president, but he is my favorite mass-murderer.
Because the others are all dead.
Yosinglerct wrote:
P wrote:
Is Rural America Safe?
Here I present the same types of numbers for a set of relatively rural American states as I have been posting for the US, the world, Italy, etc. Note that I only started looking at this question a few days ago so the numbers begin on March 23.
///
The numbers below are totals for the following states:
Alaska
Arkansas
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Mississippi
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Mexico
North Dakota
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Utah
West Virginia
Wyoming
///
Rural State Cumulative Cases (#), Daily Increase in Cases(%):
Mar 23: 1,575, N/A
Mar 24: 1,894, 20.3
Mar 25: 2,287, 20.7
Mar 26: 2,900, 26.8
Mar 27: 3,645, 25.7
Rural State Cumulative Deaths (#), Daily Increase in Deaths (%):
Mar 23: 11, N/A
Mar 24: 14, 27.3
Mar 25: 22, 57.1
Mar 26: 31, 40.9
Mar 27: 47, 51.6
Rural State Fatality Rate (Cumulative deaths/cases)
Mar 23: 0.70%
Mar 24: 0.74%
Mar 25: 0.96%
Mar 26: 1.07%
Mar 27: 1.25%
///
Back in January, the world looked on in horror at what was happening in Wuhan and said, "That could never happen here!"
Then in early March the US looked on in horror at what was happening in Italy and said, "That could never happen here! That's just a hot spot!"
Now rural America is looking on in horror at what is happening in NYC and saying, "That could never happen here!"
Guess what happens next.
smh You're better than this (I think).
First, your list of 16 "rural" states excluded the two states with the highest rural population (ME and VT). It also excluded 6 of the most rural states as defined in the latest census. Hell, you listed Nevada as a rural state and 94% of their population lives in urban areas - the state with the 3rd HIGHEST urban population???? And Utah is on your list - 91% of population in urban areas, the 8th HIGHEST.
Second, most (12) of the rural states (the real list, not yours) have the majority of their population living in urban areas - all are between ~40% and 65%. A much better analysis would be comparing a sample of actual urban areas with rural areas. Not large swaths of states, but perhaps on a county level. The data is out there. Your conclusion is likely to be true, but your work is faulty.
As I stated before, if you want to present a valid model you just can't eye-ball things. You need to actually do research and then provide a valid statistical or mathematical analysis. You've said some good things over the weeks and are at least on the right track, but you have provided far more poor data analysis and your interpretations of the data have little to no basis.
I'll send you on your way with this little spanking and I'll stop critiquing your work. You presented yourself as and "expert" and someone who does this for a living, but it is apparent now that it was a fabrication. But please, if you are going to continue to do this, "work the work."
Yup - still ahead on points.
P wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
According to my memory, P did say "FACT" several times in all caps. However, he did say that these were based on some "if's". That is, these these things will happen "if" we don't do what is needed to gets us off our current trajectory.
The accuracy of P's models are less important than his overall conclusions. P is absolutely correct that we need to shut down the whole country now. We should have shut it down two weeks ago.
Like all exponential threats, the longer you wait, the harder it will be to mitigate the problem. This is true for coronavirus. It is true for the climate crisis.
The questions we need to ask about coronavirus response are:
"Do we want 100,000 dead Americans or do we want 1,000,000 dead Americans?"
"Do we want a recession from shutting down or do we want a depression from not shutting down?"
Looks like Fat Hurts has a very good memory.
Also, spot on in his analysis.
Shutting down the entire economy would likely trigger a depression (at least by National Bureau of Economic Research standards : 10% reduction in GDP or a recession lasting longer than 2 years). The Federal Reserve has already indicated a recession has begun and there's approximately 4 million more unemployed people just in the last month.
I'm not saying we should or shouldn't shut down, but our level of preparedness and response to this has guaranteed severe economic bruising.
What will be more interesting is if China's shadow banking system can be sustained. If you think it was bad in January, just wait until you see there export numbers this quarters after the Western world cancels all manufacturing orders over this
Racket wrote:
P wrote:
Looks like Fat Hurts has a very good memory.
Also, spot on in his analysis.
Shutting down the entire economy would likely trigger a depression (at least by National Bureau of Economic Research standards : 10% reduction in GDP or a recession lasting longer than 2 years). The Federal Reserve has already indicated a recession has begun and there's approximately 4 million more unemployed people just in the last month.
I'm not saying we should or shouldn't shut down, but our level of preparedness and response to this has guaranteed severe economic bruising.
What will be more interesting is if China's shadow banking system can be sustained. If you think it was bad in January, just wait until you see there export numbers this quarters after the Western world cancels all manufacturing orders over this
Yeah, people can pay significantly higher prices for products. That will show those bastards a thing or two.
Racket wrote:
I'm not saying we should or shouldn't shut down, but our level of preparedness and response to this has guaranteed severe economic bruising.
Sadly, this has been evident from the beginning and that will extend this entire crisis (health & economic) far into the future.
Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative.
This is a disgrace, if true there is NO defending this at all.
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-gretchen-whitmer-michigan-coronavirus-feud-032411002.html
So much for America First.
Trump has also quietly told vendors not to send stuff to New York and California. They share something in common with Michigan. Hmmm ..... ???
Don’t forget Europe, racket. That’s a fairly significant economic block west of putin.
far man wrote:
Trump has also quietly told vendors not to send stuff to New York and California. They share something in common with Michigan. Hmmm ..... ???
I won't believe that without proof.
I'm not saying Tiny would never do that. Obviously, he would. It's just that it's too politically risky, even for him.
Trump doesn't want confuse his followers by using "out of context":
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1243755076214231040?s=20
L L wrote:
Highest rural population?
There seems to be a contradiction in there.
Likely being deliberately obtuse, but I'll bite anyway.
Read as "states with the highest/lowest percentage of their population living in rural/urban areas." For example, if you are going to label a state as "rural" in your model, perhaps you shouldn't choose include one that ranks 3rd in the nation in terms of the percent of the population that lives in urban areas. Or maybe you shouldn't omit the two states with the highest percentage of population living in rural areas. Mea culpa if unclear.
Again, the conclusion may be true, but how you get there is just poor math/stats.
Silver Linings
Personal anecdote: My wife is a nurse who works in one of the larger hospitals in the SF Bay Area. She has been working half of her shifts in the COVID-19 unit but sees other units as well. With her latest daily report she says that the ED (Emergency Department) has been almost completely empty recently. The reason seems to be two-fold; 1) Nobody wants to go to the ED and risk exposure to COVID-19 and 2) Nobody is doing anything while this "shelter in place" order is in place. So, no car accidents, no bike accidents, no skateboard accidents, . . . nobody is getting hurt while we're all sitting around the house. :-( :-)
How could you forget shootings? Hmm
Fat hurts wrote:
far man wrote:
Trump has also quietly told vendors not to send stuff to New York and California. They share something in common with Michigan. Hmmm ..... ???
I won't believe that without proof.
I'm not saying Tiny would never do that. Obviously, he would. It's just that it's too politically risky, even for him.
The proof is in the cancelled/delayed medical supply orders from states. Redirected to the federal government to decide how to distribute the "stuff" based on Trump's gut feel. Trump to governors: "Respirators, ventilators, all of the equipment — try getting it yourselves." The states can't.
[quote}
“Well, we’ve entered into a number of contracts, and as we get closer to the date when shipments are supposed to come in, they are getting canceled — getting delayed,” Whitmer told Blitzer.
Whitmer said her state was notified that shipments of protective equipment such as face masks are going “first to the federal government” ahead of the states.
“I know Michigan is not alone. I saw Gov. Charlie Baker, Republican from Massachusetts, essentially say the same thing. Same thing with Mayor Garcetti out in Los Angeles. This is an issue we are confronting as a nation, where we are bidding against one another, where we are struggling to grab every PPE (personal protective equipment) we can get our hands on,” she added.
Whitmer’s comments came after she said in a local radio interview earlier on Friday that the federal government has been told not to send medical supplies to Michigan.
[/quote}
https://ktvz.com/politics/2020/03/27/michigan-governor-says-shipments-of-medical-supplies-canceled-or-delayed-and-sent-to-federal-government/https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-jared-kushner-companies-rent-east-village-building-20200327-d6z3guksdfdvxiud4lhyr5n7by-story.htmlDonald and Ivanka's idiot children wrote:
Trump doesn't want confuse his followers by using "out of context":
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1243755076214231040?s=20
Trump would never take a political risk like that, or selling out to putin, or building concentration camps on the Mexican border, or praising Nazis, or demanding bribes from other countries, or starting a doomed trade war with China right before we needed all the medical supplies they make for us, etc etc etc...
Trump will become medical supplies distributor in chief. Just like having the $1200 checks will feature his signature, he wants everyone to know he is the one who sent the supplies. It is all about him.
Yeah, Bush jr tried to flash the cash in ‘08, too. It worked wonders...for Obama.