The Wuhan virus—how are we doing? - Page 43 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15124663
Sivad's Telegraph link wrote:Britain is in the grip of a curious psychological phenomenon. Predictably, we are on the brink of yet another populist lockdown. But here’s the thing: nobody really believes in it this time. Not our libertarian PM who can’t quite muster the energy to memorise his own rules. Perhaps not even the politicians lobbying in favour of lockdowns. And certainly not the millions of closet individualists who are lying to the pollsters.

This is all I have access to without paying.

Could you maybe supply a bit more of this opinion piece so that all readers can benefit from it?
#15124703
Some news the MSM(D) isn’t likely to cover properly, good new for anyone out of Michigan for anyone that supports civil rights:

Gretchen Whitmer exceeded powers during pandemic, Michigan Supreme Court rules
A 1945 law repeatedly used by Gov. Gretcher Whitmer to respond to the coronavirus pandemic was declared unconstitutional Friday by the Michigan Supreme Court, a striking decision that puts months of restrictions in jeopardy while COVID-19 continues to flare up around the state.

The opinion is an extraordinary development in a monthslong conflict between Whitmer, a Democrat, and Republicans who control the Legislature and have complained that they’ve been shut out of major orders that have impacted education, the economy and health care.

Coincidentally, the court’s action emerged on the same day that Whitmer’s foes submitted more than 539,000 signatures in a bid to repeal the 1945 law.

The governor said the 4-3 decision, with Republican-nominated justices in the majority, was “deeply disappointing.” But Whitmer didn’t signal that she was giving up. She said her emergency declaration and related orders still can remain in place for 21 days, and then many of them will continue “under alternative sources” of law.

Whitmer didn’t elaborate, but it’s possible that her administration will act under public health statutes.

“Every state and the federal government have some form of declared emergency,” she said. “With this decision, Michigan will become the sole outlier at a time when the Upper Peninsula is experiencing rates of COVID infection not seen in our state since April.”

For nearly seven months, Whitmer has imposed - and sometimes eased - restrictions on Michigan’s economy, K-12 school system, health care and even visits to state parks, all in an attempt to reduce the risk of the highly contagious virus, which has infected 126,000 residents and killed more than 6,700.

Masks are required in enclosed public spaces and in crowded outdoor places. Restaurant capacity is limited to 50%. People must work remotely if they can, and indoor residential gatherings are capped at no more than 10 people.

Republican officials said Whitmer should have continued to use a 1976 law, which gives lawmakers a say in any emergency declarations after 28 days.

The Supreme Court said the ‘45 public safety law used by Whitmer granted Michigan governors unchecked authority.

“That act is an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution,” Justice Stephen Markman wrote. “Accordingly, the executive orders issued by the governor in response to the COVID-19 pandemic now lack any basis under Michigan law.”

In a dissent, Chief Justice Bridget McCormack said she would have let the law stand, even if it gives a governor sole authority to “exercise the whole of the state’s police power in some emergencies.”

Lawmakers could repeal the law or amend it, and frustrated residents could sue if they don’t agree with specific orders, McCormack said.

“The majority needlessly inserts the court into what has become an emotionally charged political dispute,” McCormack wrote, joined by justices Richard Bernstein and Megan Cavanagh.

The case reached the Supreme Court in an uncommon way. A federal judge overseeing a lawsuit that makes state and federal claims about Whitmer’s powers asked for an opinion on the constitutionality of the Michigan laws.

In a footnote to his opinion, Markman offered an optimistic message.

“Our decision leaves open many avenues for the governor and Legislature to work together to address this challenge and we hope that this will take place,” he said.
#15124721
@Pants-of-dog, “ ... the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Though in this case, the court ruled on Whitmer’s assumption of legislative powers unconstitutionally granted to the state’s governors generations ago—the US has never adopted—in either the federal or state constitutions—the later Roman Republic office of a dictator without an expiration date. Note that the court could have ruled that Governor Whitmer improperly used the 1945 law when she should have used the superseding 1976 law, but instead chose to declare the 1945 law unconstitutional to begin with. That actually may call into question the 1976 law as well, I’d have to see the opinion to be sure.
#15124724
Doug64 wrote:@Pants-of-dog, “ ... the right of the people peaceably to assemble,


They can still do this. They just have to wear a mask.

and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”


...which people can also still do or else this court case would have never happened.

So, can you mention a civil right that was actually taken away?
#15125064
Here's the latest weekly update:

Image

For Red State/Blue State:

US ave. deaths per million (increase, change in rate)
  • Red States 577.5 (21.1, -1.7)
  • Purple States 431.2 (16.2, -0.6)
  • Blue States 767.8 (9.7, +0 )

If they were included on my weekly chart above, Blue States would rank 11th out of 90 (+0), Red States 26th (+0), and Purple States 34rd (+0). And the rate for Red and Purple states, at least, has continued to drop.

Pants-of-dog wrote:They can still do this. They just have to wear a mask.

Amazing how you completely ignored the way Whitmer had banned public assemblies and condemned the protests that were held in violation of her orders protesting her public restrictions. And then not only didn't condemn the BLM marches that violated her orders but joined them--apparently she believes the Wuhan virus shows favoritism based on politics.
#15125110
Doug is incapable of understanding just how stupid his so-called statistics are. But then he posts them for an audience just as incapable as he is.

Trump supporters can't possibly understand public health.

Meanwhile in real news Trump tried to kill two secret service agents because he wanted a sound bite.
#15125122
Meanwhile, in real news, two secret service agents were at less than 0.02% risk of death due to driving the president around. (That 0.02% requires that they actually pick up the Wuhan virus, and presumably lumps the healthy with those with preexisting conditions, which the agents presumably don’t have.)

Pants-of-dog wrote:@Doug64

Your “article” makes no mention of banning public assemblies.

The article is about the constitutionality of the law itself, not what Whitmer did with it.
#15125127
Doug64 wrote:Meanwhile, in real news, two secret service agents were at less than 0.02% risk of death due to driving the president around. (That 0.02% requires that they actually pick up the Wuhan virus, and presumably lumps the healthy with those with preexisting conditions, which the agents presumably don’t have.)


Cool. They also must be isolated for two weeks now, which means they cannot see their families for the Columbus day long weekend. But getting Trump a photo op is more important than spending time with family.

This is assuming that you have no problems with deliberately exposing others to a potentially deadly disease for no benefit.

The article is about the constitutionality of the law itself, not what Whitmer did with it.


Yes, I understand that. That is why it does not support your claim.
#15125152
Meanwhile, in real news, two secret service agents were at less than 0.02% risk of death due to driving the president around. (That 0.02% requires that they actually pick up the Wuhan virus, and presumably lumps the healthy with those with preexisting conditions, which the agents presumably don’t have.)


Just :lol:


Fun how utterly stupid Trump supporters can be. They can rationalize anything he does even resorting to bogus statistics.
#15125225
Rancid wrote:The WHO say's that they think about 10% of the global population has been infected already.


holy macromolly, that's a lot fuckers that got the covid. The WHO really revised their IFR way down then, remember when they were claiming 3.4% ?
#15125226
Drlee wrote:Just :lol: Fun how utterly stupid Trump supporters can be. They can rationalize anything he does even resorting to bogus statistics.


Yea those dumb secret service agents will jump in front of a bullet to save even a Democrat president.
Last edited by Finfinder on 06 Oct 2020 00:07, edited 1 time in total.
#15125242
Sivad wrote:holy macromolly, that's a lot fuckers that got the covid. The WHO really revised their IFR way down then, remember when they were claiming 3.4% ?


Yea, I don't know what they are saying the new death rate is though. IF it's a 10% infection rate then the death rate must be much lower, and I"m assuming that 10% include asymptomatic.

I'm also very curious as to what is the difference between people that are asymptomatic and not.
Last edited by Rancid on 06 Oct 2020 00:53, edited 1 time in total.
#15125243
Rancid wrote:Yea, I don't know what they are saying the new death rate is though. IF it's 10% then that rate must be much lower, and I"m assuming that 10% include asymptomatic.

I'm also very curious as to what is the difference between people that are asymptomatic and not.


I noticed the only place we get any false positive test headlines is in the NFL.
#15125261
Doug64 wrote:Here's the latest weekly update:

Image

For Red State/Blue State:

US ave. deaths per million (increase, change in rate)
  • Red States 577.5 (21.1, -1.7)
  • Purple States 431.2 (16.2, -0.6)
  • Blue States 767.8 (9.7, +0 )

If they were included on my weekly chart above, Blue States would rank 11th out of 90 (+0), Red States 26th (+0), and Purple States 34rd (+0). And the rate for Red and Purple states, at least, has continued to drop.


Amazing how you completely ignored the way Whitmer had banned public assemblies and condemned the protests that were held in violation of her orders protesting her public restrictions. And then not only didn't condemn the BLM marches that violated her orders but joined them--apparently she believes the Wuhan virus shows favoritism based on politics.


This isn't good news for those who support fear porn.

Andrew Bostom

50 major colleges 70,000 positive tests 3 hospitalizations and no deaths.

1/ Campus C19 update, 10/5/20: Despite ~70K C19+ tests at 50 major universities, barely any reported hospitalizations (i.e., 3), & no deaths. (Tabulated below, with explanation, & more refs following tweet thread)

#15125272
Fake news.

But I do understand that you support the needless deaths of older people because you want to go to a water park with your mommy.

Trump is not home. He is still in a hospital. He has more staff and better equipment than any patient in any hospital in the country. Right in the white house.
#15125302
To think how many people chip in to pay for President Trump 's world class at home health care are about to lose theirs, thanks to President Trump. Sad, really
  • 1
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 69

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Friday[…]

Election 2020

If he had said that 3 weeks ago, he wouldn't have[…]

You also stalk me on the forum... Quite right. […]

@Unthinking Majority You are spot on. In the U[…]