I thought that scoff kind of landed because of the context (if we are talking about the same thing). It was based on Biden moving away from China subject to giving a scripted message ... very classic politician like and insincere.
If the political parties and the states could get onboard (doubtful), it would be nice to have people wanting to run for President to file their intentions between Sept. 1 and Dec. 1, 2023. Primary season begins toward the end of March and finishes by Memorial Day. Hold 7 or 8 regional primaries over the two month period and rotate them for each cycle so dinky little places like Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, or Nevada don't always hog the start of primary season and provide enough skewed results to taint the entire electoral process.
Three post-debate snap polls: Who the debate?CNN: Biden 53, Trump 39Data Progress: Biden 52, Trump 41US Politics: Biden 52, Trump 39And the unscientific CNN North Carolina "undecided voter" panel which with Biden 9, Trump 0, a Draw 2.— The Darkest Timeline Numbersmuncher (@NumbersMuncher) October 23, 2020
Yeah - he makes this bullshit claim all the time. The 2m projection is what could happen if no counter measures were taken. It was the infamous Imperial college projection. But it isn't like the CDC was saying this. No one knew back in March what might happen, beyond the horrific scenes in Italy https://www.cato.org/blog/how-one-model-simulated-22-million-us-deaths-covid-19 The New York Times quickly ran the hot news about this new COVID-19 estimate: The report, which warned that an uncontrolled spread of the disease could cause as many as 510,000 deaths in Britain, triggered a sudden shift in the government’s comparatively relaxed response to the virus. American officials said the report, which projected up to 2.2 million deaths in the United States from such a spread, also influenced the White House to strengthen its measures to isolate members of the public. A month later that 2.2 million estimate was still being used (without revealing the source) by President Trump and Doctors Fauci and Birx to imply that up to two million lives had been saved by state lockdowns and business closings and/or by federal travel bans. The following summary of the Ferguson/Imperial College report provides clues about how the model came to generate such dramatic conclusions: In the (unlikely) absence of any control measures or spontaneous changes in individual behavior, we would expect a peak in mortality (daily deaths) to occur after approximately 3 months. In such scenarios, given an estimated R0 of 2.4, we predict 81% of the G.B. and U.S. populations would be infected over the course of the epidemic. . . In total, in an unmitigated epidemic, we would predict approximately 510,000 deaths in G.B. and 2.2 million in the U.S., not accounting for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed on mortality. This worst-case simulation came up with 2.2 million deaths by simply assuming that 81% of the population gets infected –268 million people– and that 0.9% of them die. It did not assume health systems would have to be overwhelmed to result in so many deaths, though it did make that prediction.
Trump and Birx have been lying about this since March. Even Bojo doesn't go round saying he saved 500,000 britons because that would be obvious bullshit.
Whatever this dude is using, it must be some pretty powerful shit.... Listenimfineokayheresthethingnoididnthavetoomuchcoffeewhyareyouevenaskingmethatthisisatotallynormalwayofspeakingplusijustdidashitloadofcoke. pic.twitter.com/OIqbeikWTc— The Hoarse Whisperer (@TheRealHoarse) October 23, 2020
He interrupted Chris Wallace many times. He also cuts off male journalists all the time in press confs.
Perhaps the CNN got it wrong, but CDC saying early model projected 2m is stated here. Early coronavirus models run by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed as many as 2.4 million Americans could be dead from the virus by October, CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield told the Journal of the American Medical Association Thursday. https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news...21-20-intl/h_6f8ce2cf0a4ff534fc8bbf48f4374250 If the model is incorrect, then the fact check should state that. They shouldn't state it's a lie just because the model stipulated those deaths only if nothing was done. That's the whole point of that model I thought. X number of deaths if we don't do anything. A President can make a claim he kept death count lower if his measures lead to a lower death count. Now, we know that part is BS because Trump did very little to control the virus except for what's in his head. But that's another point.
That's the thing...the #1 saver of lives was probably individual Americans saying, nah, ******** that. I'm staying home or wearing a mask. #2 was the actions of state and local governments. The federal response was really poor...I wonder if it's a net negative, since the feds were the main vector of disinformation and happy talk that led to more deaths than if they had just shut the ******** up and not convince people to be cavalier about this.
Well, yeah, but a lot of them would be like "Grog like Trump. Trump put bitch in place. Go Trump. Grog like Trump."
I came in late, watches about half, then couldn't take any more. I think if someone just dropped in from another planet, they might think Mango did OK. But those of us from Earth can recognize that 99% of what he said was complete bullshit. Biden, I thought was OK. The malapropisms like "minimum mandatories" made me wince. Surprising Cheeto didn't make fun of them, but I suppose it's possible he didn't even notice.
I didn’t watch the debate and took my time to see how it went as Biden makes me nervous. In the end, Joe exceeded my not very high expectations for the “debates”. Biden campaign has managed Joe well and kept it appropriately simple.
Undoubtedly, there will be many like us who do. Sadly, there are not going to be enough form whom that makes much of a difference. Of course, for the women who find it important, by now it probably doesn't make all that much difference, either.
I couldn't bring myself to watch any of the debates, though I did see what would normally be called "highlights." Anyway, I think it is much, much more challenging than it might seem to "debate" a world class bullshitter. What they're capable of saying is so remarkable. So beyond the pale. So impossible to respond to in a normal, fact-based manner, precisely because the bullshitter has no interest in debating the truth, doesn't fear (or even bother to know) the facts (unlike a thief or a liar, who fears the truth), because he'll already be 3-4 lies ahead of you and will just claim he never said what he clearly just said. You can't catch out someone in a lie when their character, the way they've lived their life for decades, is completely untethered from the truth. My dad was a bullshitter, which meant that I repeatedly just wanted to punch him in the face because of the BS he would spout. Trump, of course, has perfected a far more advanced skillset in bullshitting than Dear Old Dad (who'd have been a big fan). Still, he generates within me a visceral hatred. Just the sound of his asinine voice, spewing lie after lie. Were I on stage, I'd ********ing snap and, at best, let loose with a stream of expletives. So, yeah, Biden's performance. He seemed somehow to walk the line between showing flashes of anger at what most people see as truly dysfunctional, rude, crude and hateful behavior, and still managed to "talk to the camera" in an attempt to get a real message across. You now, during a pandemic, when there's really no crowd to play to, connect with. A few months ago, there was a lot of handwringing in here about "Biden's debate performances" and how he was "gaffe machine." He flubs on his words every now and then. But the old guy knows a helluva lot more than he's given credit for, and based every metric I've seen, defeated Trump in both debates and in their head-to-head-on-two-networks town hall thingy. I think it was a pretty masterful performance (you know, from what I've read and those "highlights").
One of the things I take away from last night, as well as the first debate, is with his malaprops, inadequate recollection of facts, and, well, just being Joe Biden, it is pretty clear that Joe Biden is a poor debater. In the "town hall" format, he is okay. Speaking in small groups, he can be quite effective. He is not, however, "quick on the draw" in a debate format. He is pretty fortunate that he was matched up with Trump. Trump's bluster, lying and overall obnoxiousness really made Biden look great and "presidential." Trump sucks the air out of everything around him and debating Biden was no difference. I have been pleasantly surprised by Biden this campaign, as he has not made any major blunders. I think his campaign staff (and, to be honest, the Pandemic) have done a good job allowing the best of Joe Biden to shine through, without the worst of Joe Biden to appear. However, "not making any major blunders" is not the standard I wish to which I prefer to hold politicians. I want more from them.