The Wuhan virus—how are we doing? - Page 65 - 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.
#15136614
And some more of the usual "do as we say, not as we do":

Gavin Newsom attends Napa party despite lecturing citizens who 'get together outside' during virus
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is raising eyebrows with his attendance at a Napa County birthday party, given his criticism of citizens who “get together outside of their household cohorts” during the coronavirus pandemic.

The Democrat chastised Californians on Monday for “letting their guard down on Monday” despite attending the posh French Laundry restaurant on Nov. 6.

“Is this a major breach by Newsom? No. But it’s not the best judgment. He has to be the grownup in the room. And he has to be the one that people model. That’s what comes with the responsibility of being a leader,” John Swartzberg, an infectious disease expert and a clinical professor emeritus at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health, told the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday.

The newspaper noted that “at least 12 people” gathered at the Napa event for a friend and adviser to Mr. Newsom.

Nathan Click, communications director for Newsom, defended Mr. Newsom‘s decision as “in line with the state’s rules for restaurant operation.”

Mr. Swartzberg wasn’t swayed by the rationale.

“The idea that it’s OK to do that because it’s at a restaurant is upside down,” Mr. Swartzberg told the newspaper. “Whether or not it abides the letter of the guidance, I think it’s not a good idea.”

Reporter Alexi Koseff noted that California Department of Public Health issued guidelines Oct. 9 prohibiting private gatherings that include more than three households.

“The state also requires that gatherings be held outside, where virus transmission is less likely, and recommends that they be kept to two hours or less,” Mr. Koseff reported.


Chicago mayor denies virus hypocrisy claim over joining pro-Biden street party: 'Relief' was needed
Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot says her recent attendance at a street party celebrating presumptive President-elect Joseph R. Biden’s victory doesn’t make her guilty of coronavirus hypocrisy because the event brought “relief” to so many people.

The Democrat’s comments come less than 24 hours after she announced a stay-at-home advisory for the Windy City starting Monday.

Citizens are urged to “stop having guests over — including family members you do not live with” and to “cancel traditional Thanksgiving plans” to “bend the curve” of new COVID-19 cases.

“What do you say to those who are criticizing you where less than a week ago, you went out and stood before a massive crowd who was celebrating Joe Biden’s victory, and now you’re saying your city has to shut down? How do you have one and not the other?” MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle asked the mayor Friday morning.

“I will tell you, in that big crowd a week ago, we had — everybody was wearing masks,” Ms. Lightfoot replied. “Mask compliance in our city is actually up very, very high. But yes, there are times when we actually do need to have a relief and come together. And I felt like that was one of those times. That crowd was gathered whether I was there or not. But this has been a super hard year on everyone.”

Ms. Lightfoot told constituents that Chicago is expected to have 1,000 new coronavirus-related deaths by the end of the year.

The city is also experiencing roughly 1,900 new cases per day.

Apparently, it hasn't occurred to Lightfoot that people might "need to have a relief and come together" with family for Thanksgiving. It has, after all, "been a super hard year on everyone."
#15136876
There have previously been individual reports of Covid-19 cases in France and Italy during December or even November, but these cases have not been confirmed by blood tests.

The current finding of 15 cases with Covid antibodies in Italy during September is harder to dismiss.

It's unlikely that the source of the virus is not Wuhan since the outbreak in Wuhan predates the outbreak in Lombardy by about one month; however, the presence of the virus in Italy during September does pose questions.

Anyways, the fact that Italy failed to detect the virus for 5 months and Italian hospitals continued to misdiagnose Covid cases as pneumonia even after China detected the virus and made the genetic code public shows that the blame leveled at China is misguided.

Coronavirus has been circulating in Italy since September last year, researchers say

Coronavirus was present in Italy months before its outbreak is known to have started, according to new research.

Scientists have found Covid-19 antibodies in blood samples from as early as September last year.


The findings “may reshape the history of the pandemic”, they said.

Italy reported its first coronavirus cases in late January, after which an outbreak swept through the country, hitting northern areas such as the Lombardy region particularly hard.

Traces of coronavirus have also shown up in Italy’s water from December last year – suggesting the virus was circulating more than a month before the country’s first confirmed infection.

However, new findings have suggested the virus was present in the country even earlier.
Scientists analysed blood samples of nearly 1,000 people – all asymptomatic – who had taken part in a lung cancer screening trial running from September 2019 to the following March.

Covid-19 antibodies were discovered in around 11 per cent of those studied, according to the research published in Tumori Journal. Fourteen per cent of those detected were from September last year, and around 30 per cent were from the second week of February, the group of scientists – including several from Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, a leading cancer research centre – said.

“This study shows an unexpected very early circulation of SARS-CoV-2 among asymptomatic individuals in Italy several months before the first patient was identified,” the researchers wrote.

They said it “clarifies the onset and spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic”.

Elsewhere in Europe, other studies have found coronavirus to have been present before an outbreak was confirmed.

In May, a hospital in France said it had treated someone with Covid-19 around a month before the first cases were officially reported in Europe.

They discovered they had looked after a man who was positive for coronavirus in late December after retesting old samples from pneumonia patients.
#15136882
Could explain why Italy was hit particularly hard at the beginning of the pandemic. A lot of travel between Italy and China going both ways.

Round 2! Ding ding ding!
The global death toll climbed above 1.3 million and more than 53 million have been infected worldwide by Covid-19, as the virus runs rampant through America and Europe.

UN food agency warned 2021 will be worse than 2020. The head of the World Food Program says the Nobel Peace Prize has given the U.N. agency a spotlight and megaphone to warn world leaders that next year is going to be worse than this year, and without billions of dollars “we are going to have famines of biblical proportions in 2021.”

Record high case numbers were recorded in Russia and Ukraine. Russia reported 22,702 new infections and 391 deaths. Ukraine registered 12,524 new cases. Poland recorded a record new 548 deaths and 25,571 cases. The record number of deaths takes Poland’s toll above 10,000.

Iran has announced strict new lockdown restrictions from next Saturday., after recording 452 deaths, a near record. President Hassan Rouhani said non-essential businesses and services will be shut and cars will not be allowed to leave or enter Tehran and 100 other towns and cities

Greece and Austria have set out plans to tighten lockdown restrictions. Austria is planning to impose a full lockdown from Tuesday. Greece has announced the closure of nurseries and primary schools until the end of November as its death toll surpassed 1,000.


Here in Sweden we are being hit with a big uptick in detected cases (testing is far more extensive today than in March/April). Few deaths but it is early days.
#15136892
Here's the latest weekly update:

Image

For Red State/Blue State:

US ave. deaths per million (increase, change in rate)
  • Red States 718.9 (28.6, +0.4)
  • Purple States 561.5 (27.2, +1.8 )
  • Blue States 842.1 (18.4, +4.7)

If they were included on my weekly chart above, Blue States would rank 15th out of 90 (-1), Red States 26th (-1), and Purple States 40th (-3).
#15136914
HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-229E are documented to cause common cold. Human “common cold” coronaviruses (HCoVs) such as HCoV-OC43, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-NL63, and HCoV-229E share partial sequence homology with SARS-CoV-2. Those patients who had been previously exposed to common cold coronaviruses have some kind of immunity to Covid-19, which is actually much less severe in those patients who had documented common cold coronavirus infections. 20 to 50% of people do have signs of T cell immune memory in blood samples and the rate is higher in Asia where human coronaviruses are more prevalent than Europe. The Great Russian Flu of the early 1890s was caused by the human coronavirus OC43, a frequent cause of the common cold.

Abstract
Many unknowns exist about human immune responses to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. SARS-CoV-2–reactive CD4+ T cells have been reported in unexposed individuals, suggesting preexisting cross-reactive T cell memory in 20 to 50% of people. However, the source of those T cells has been speculative. Using human blood samples derived before the SARS-CoV-2 virus was discovered in 2019, we mapped 142 T cell epitopes across the SARS-CoV-2 genome to facilitate precise interrogation of the SARS-CoV-2–specific CD4+ T cell repertoire. We demonstrate a range of preexisting memory CD4+ T cells that are cross-reactive with comparable affinity to SARS-CoV-2 and the common cold coronaviruses human coronavirus (HCoV)-OC43, HCoV-229E, HCoV-NL63, and HCoV-HKU1. Thus, variegated T cell memory to coronaviruses that cause the common cold may underlie at least some of the extensive heterogeneity observed in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6512/89.full
#15137853
Dr. Roger Hodkinson, ex-Chairman of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons Examination Committee in General Pathology in Ottawa, former Assistant Professor and now the CEO of a biotech company that manufactures Covid tests, tells Government officials in Alberta (on the Community and Public Services Committee) that the current coronavirus crisis is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public”.
#15137906
And the Resistance continues:

Upstate N.Y. Sheriffs Refuse to Enforce Cuomo’s Ten-Person Gathering Limit
Several sheriffs in upstate New York say they will refuse to enforce Governor Andrew Cuomo’s new order limiting gatherings in private residences to ten people, which comes just as families are preparing to gather with extended family for Thanksgiving.

Fulton County Sheriff Richard Giardino said in a Saturday Facebook post that he will not be enforcing the order and questioned whether it was even constitutional, saying, “who and how many people you invite in to your home is your business.”

“Frankly, I am not sure it could sustain a Constitutional challenge in Court for several reasons including your house is your castle. And as a Sheriff with a law degree I couldn’t in good faith attempt to defend it Court, so I won’t,” Giardino said.

“We have limited resources and we have to set priorities, so obtaining a Search Warrant to enter your home to see how many Turkey or Tofu eaters are present is not a priority. We won’t be doing that,” the sheriff wrote. “I trust people in Fulton County to use their own judgement on who and how many people they invite. Obviously if you have high risk family members you will weigh the risks to your loved ones versus the reward.”

Cuomo announced new lockdown and social distancing restrictions for New York on Wednesday as coronavirus numbers in the state continue to trend upward. Under the new statewide restrictions, indoor gatherings at private residences across the state must be capped at ten people. In addition, all bars and restaurants with state liquor licenses as well as gyms must close at 10p.m., starting on Friday. Cuomo called such locations “main spreaders” of the coronavirus.

Washington County Sheriff Jeff Murphy and Warren County Sheriff Jim LaFarr also both said they will not enforce the ten-person cap on parties in their counties.

“We can’t enter people’s homes — there’s very limited circumstances,” LaFarr remarked. “We don’t know how to enforce this.

Saratoga County Sheriff Michael Zurlo issued a statement to the same effect, saying officers will not be policing Thanksgiving gatherings.

“I can’t see how devoting our resources to counting cars in citizens’ driveways or investigating how much turkey and dressing they’ve purchased is for the public good,” Zurlo said.

New York, which became the epicenter of the U.S. coronavirus outbreak in the spring, is seeing coronavirus cases increase again, especially in certain hotspots in New York City including Staten Island. The state’s positivity rate was 2.8 percent as of Sunday.

I disagree with Giardino on the constitutional question—the 1st Amendment’s recognition of the right to peaceably assemble is in the context of political speech, which a Thanksgiving dinner isn’t—but otherwise, yeah, it’s stupid. Consider this a law enforcement version of prosecutorial discretion.
#15138096
America is doing horribly with the Trump Virus. To deny this is to deny reality.

On Nov 13, 2020, USA had 177,222 new infections from Covid-19. This is the most cases in a single day, in the USA.

252,419 Americans have died of Covid-19 since March 12, 2020, with almost 1,800 dying every day.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html


Arguing about semantics of lockdown enforcement is brilliantly stupid, at this point, @Doug64. :knife:
#15138139
Is it part of the Resistance if it is carried out by a government?

Gov. Ron DeSantis 'will not lock down' Florida as coronavirus crackdowns sweep country
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has vowed not to lock down the state again despite the widespread uptick in coronavirus cases that has spurred multiple states across the country to tighten restrictions on residents and businesses.

“The governor will not lockdown and hurt families who can’t afford to shelter in place for 6 weeks. Especially not for a virus that has a 99.8% survival rate,” a spokesperson for Mr. DeSantis told CBS 12 News Monday. “One area of concern is Assisted Living Facilities. Since those over 70 face the greatest threat from [COVID-19,] the governor is monitoring those numbers daily and is prepared to move therapeutic and prophylactic assets to those facilities as needed.”

The statement comes after Florida reported more than 10,000 positive coronavirus cases on Sunday, a number the state hasn’t seen since the summer surge.

“Today we are back down to 4,500 [cases] and a 7.3% positivity rate,” the governor’s spokesperson said. “We believe yesterday’s high number was due to a large submission file and skewed the numbers for that day.”

Mr. DeSantis reluctantly shut down the state for one month in April but he has largely left mitigation efforts up to mayors and individual counties, and he has so far resisted instituting a state-wide mask mandate.

Meanwhile, dozens of mayors and governors across the country are reinstituting stay-at-home orders, curfews and mandates after seeing a steady increase in COVID-19 cases.


As for the Democrats' mantra of "Follow the Science":

Study questioning mask effectiveness sparks backlash, counters CDC recommendations
Those calling on President Trump and others to listen to the scientists on the coronavirus may not necessarily mean all the science, as the release of a highly anticipated Danish trial on the efficacy of masks suggests.

Debate is raging over the randomized study published Wednesday in the Annals of Internal Medicine that found that coronavirus infection rates were nearly the same among those who were told to wear masks and those who were not.

At the same time, researchers did not examine whether the masks protected others from catching the virus, and stressed that the findings should not be construed as concluding that mask-wearing recommendations are ineffective in reducing the spread of COVID-19.

“Our trial of more than 6,000 participants here in Denmark found similar rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection in those who did and those who did not receive a recommendation to wear a surgical face mask when outside the home,” said Henning Bundgaard, the study’s lead author and University of Copenhagen, in a video.

He cautioned that “our study does not address the effectiveness of widespread mask use for preventing the spread of infection from those infected with SARS-CoV-2.”

Such warnings did little to squelch the enthusiasm of the critics of economic lockdowns, school closures and mask mandates — in other words, those frequently derided as “anti-science” — who trumpeted the findings in a “take-that” moment.

“What we should take away is that masks are basically useless as a protective measure,” said Alex Berenson, author of “Unreported Truths About COVID-19 and Lockdowns,” and a leader of the so-called Covid contrarian camp.

“There’s just no evidence that masks protect the wearer,” Mr. Berenson said on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle.” “Now, we can discuss this other issue of source control, we can discuss ‘my mask protects you’ — there’s not very good evidence for that, but that’s much harder to test in a big randomized trial.”

The results also flew in the face of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which said for the first time in a scientific bulletin posted Nov. 10 that wearing masks may protect the wearers as well as those with whom they come into contact.

“Studies demonstrate that cloth mask materials can also reduce wearers’ exposure to infectious droplets through filtration, including filtration of fine droplets and particles less than 10 microns,” said the CDC bulletin.

Mr. Berenson said that “the CDC said last week masks may protect the wearer, and they should just stop saying that. There’s no evidence for that.”

Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, cited the study Thursday as he took aim at recently enacted shutdown orders in his state and Michigan.

“The edicts that are coming from the governor and from the governor of Michigan — they’re completely arbitrary,” Mr. Paul, a physician by trade, said on Fox Business. “They’re not based in any kind of science. There’s really very little objective science to prove that any of this works. In fact, the Danish study on mask shows that objectively, guess what, the cloth masks don’t work, they’re theater.”

Rep. Andy Biggs, Arizona Republican, greeted the study’s appearance by tweeting: “THIS JUST IN. Masks don’t do what the ‘experts’ have been telling you that they do.”

Worst fears

Fears that the study would be used to boost facial-covering opponents may have been why it took until November for the study to appear. According to the Danish newspaper Berlingske, at least three major journals declined to publish the research.

Not everyone was happy to see the study featured in a prominent scientific publication.

“Some have turned to social media to ask why a trial that may diminish enthusiasm for masks and may be misinterpreted was published in a top medical journal,” said Dr. Vijay Prasad on MedPage Today. “Woah! First, of all, I am prepared to die on the hill that science means publishing the results of truthful experiments no matter what they show.”

Christine Laine, editor-in-chief of Annals of Internal Medicine, defended the decision to publish the trial.

“The Annals of Internal Medicine published this carefully designed randomized trial because it informs our understanding of the role of masks in mitigating the pandemic,” Ms. Laine said in a video. “It would be irresponsible to squelch the findings because they did not show what we hoped to see as advocates of mask wearing.”

Some major media outlets ignored the story, while others that covered it were quick to stress that masks should still be viewed as de rigueur.

The New York Times emphasized that the findings were “not likely to alter public health recommendations in the United States” in an article headlined, “A New Study Questions Whether Masks Protect Wearers. You Need to Wear Them Anyway.”

The Associated Press mentioned the story in an “explainer,” saying that the research had “a number of flaws,” including participant compliance.

In the trial conducted in April and May, when mask use was uncommon in Denmark, half the participants were told to wear masks outside their homes, and were provided with surgical masks, while the other half were told not to cover their faces.

“During the study period, authorities did not recommend face mask use outside hospital settings and mask use was rare in community settings,” said the study. “This means that study participants’ exposure was overwhelmingly to persons not wearing masks.”

After a month, 1.8% of those who were told to wear masks had tested positive for COVID-19 while 2.1% of those in the control group had developed the infection.

The trial was conducted early on in the pandemic, when detected cases of the virus were not as widespread, and not everyone who was told to wear a mask always did so. Of course, neither do some Americans, even in states and cities with mask-wearing orders.

“Among participants, 46% wore the mask as recommended and 47% wore it “predominantly as recommended,” for a total of 93%,” said Dr. Prasad. “Anyone who has walked around any city or store in America can attest: that is actually pretty good! To my eye, one in four noses are seen protruding, and one in eight masks are worn as a chin strap.”

Ms. Laine concluded that the findings “do not mean that mask wearing during the pandemic is ineffective.”

“Rather, this trial shows that people wearing masks among others who are not wearing masks remain vulnerable to infection,” she said. “Other studies suggest lower spread of infection in settings where most people wear masks. What we know from those studies plus the current trial should motivate widespread mask wearing to protect everyone.”
#15138188
At the same time, researchers did not examine whether the masks protected others from catching the virus, and stressed that the findings should not be construed as concluding that mask-wearing recommendations are ineffective in reducing the spread of COVID-19.

“Our trial of more than 6,000 participants here in Denmark found similar rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection in those who did and those who did not receive a recommendation to wear a surgical face mask when outside the home,” said Henning Bundgaard, the study’s lead author and University of Copenhagen, in a video.

He cautioned that “our study does not address the effectiveness of widespread mask use for preventing the spread of infection from those infected with SARS-CoV-2.”

So this was not a study about the main point of masks - to prevent the spread of infection.

Such warnings did little to squelch the enthusiasm of the critics of economic lockdowns, school closures and mask mandates — in other words, those frequently derided as “anti-science” — who trumpeted the findings in a “take-that” moment.

As we see by the trumpeting of it here. "The Resistance"! :lol: Capitaliszed and everything. This is not Red Dawn, let alone WW2.

“What we should take away is that masks are basically useless as a protective measure,” said Alex Berenson, author of “Unreported Truths About COVID-19 and Lockdowns,” and a leader of the so-called Covid contrarian camp.

What we see is that Alex Berenson is a brain-dead moron who cannot read or comprehend basic information; or a lying toerag who actively wants more people to die by spreading deadly lies. Take your pick.
#15138218
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:So this was not a study about the main point of masks - to prevent the spread of infection.

The study was of whether masks worn by those that haven’t caught the Wuhan virus make a difference, and its result indicated that the difference is not significant. What Bungaard meant is that the study wasn’t structured to measure how many people someone infected with the virus might infect while wearing a mask versus not wearing a mask. True enough, as Berenson commented that’s much harder to test in a big randomized trial. That would require allowing a large number of people that are infectious to wander freely, some with masks and some without—not exactly an ethical study. The only ethical large randomized studies for this are from the other direction, prevention. Such as this study.

What was scary is this:

    Fears that the study would be used to boost facial-covering opponents may have been why it took until November for the study to appear. According to the Danish newspaper Berlingske, at least three major journals declined to publish the research.

    Not everyone was happy to see the study featured in a prominent scientific publication.

    “Some have turned to social media to ask why a trial that may diminish enthusiasm for masks and may be misinterpreted was published in a top medical journal,” said Dr. Vijay Prasad on MedPage Today. “Woah! First, of all, I am prepared to die on the hill that science means publishing the results of truthful experiments no matter what they show.”
First, it’s hard to misinterpret the results—for those that don’t have the virus, masks provided little to no protection. No more, no less. The study doesn’t cover how much masks protect others when worn by those that have the virus and don’t know it. Of course, the evidence is that those that are asymptomatic aren’t as infectious as those that develop symptoms (as opposed to those in the early stages and/or with only mild symptoms). How less infectious, I don’t know if anyone really knows.

Second, what those that don’t think the study should have been published are calling for is the suppression of facts that they consider dangerous for the public to know. Not a good thing for scientists to be pushing.
#15138253
So the study does not say that masks are ineffective when worn by an infected person.

And the authors correctly predicted it would be used incorrectly by anti-mask who have politicised this pandemic.
#15138301
Rancid wrote:Jesus, we're still on the anti-mask shit?

What is “anti-mask” about publishing and reporting on an honest and properly enacted study that found that masks worn by those without the Wuhan virus provide little to no protection? Rather, it seems to me that the refusal to publish and report on the study is anti-science.
#15138321
I knew you weren't going to permanently leave POFO. But, yes, people who engage in anti-mask hysteria deserve no respect.


Yea. I had to take a break. The ignoramuses who were accusing politicians of pedophilia was just to much. I am staying away from the election thread because it is almost entirely two or three really smart people trying to fend off trolls and mouth breathers.

POD is correct. Posting this study as some justification for not wearing a mask is dangerous. Moreover it is not reflective of what the study says. AND this study is not supported by meta analysis of a considerable number of other studies.

The problem is FAR more complicated than this thread series would indicate. For example. There is considerable evidence that viral load determines not only who gets the disease but how serious the progression is. The type of mask matters. That is why I wear an unvalved N95 exclusively. (I know this is not an option for many but the reputable Chinese KN95s are far superior to a bandana over the nose. So are correctly worn 3 layer surgical masks not to put to fine a point on it.)

So here is what smart and well informed people know.

Mask use protects others. There is nothing ambiguous about this. I understand why people like Doug64 don't consider this important. Why worry about others?

So for the home schooled out there here is the simple version. Mask wearing is important. You should always do it. You should wear the best mask you can get (without a valve). People far more knowledgeable about this shit than the average person is, wear masks. Doctors wear masks. Health care workers wear masks. Wear a fucking mask. Stop whining like little bitches and wear a fucking mask. This is all about personal rights. The right not to be killed by some self-important, right wing asshat.
#15138329
Drlee wrote:Yea. I had to take a break. The ignoramuses who were accusing politicians of pedophilia was just to much. I am staying away from the election thread because it is almost entirely two or three really smart people trying to fend off trolls and mouth breathers.

POD is correct. Posting this study as some justification for not wearing a mask is dangerous. Moreover it is not reflective of what the study says. AND this study is not supported by meta analysis of a considerable number of other studies.

The problem is FAR more complicated than this thread series would indicate. For example. There is considerable evidence that viral load determines not only who gets the disease but how serious the progression is. The type of mask matters. That is why I wear an unvalved N95 exclusively. (I know this is not an option for many but the reputable Chinese KN95s are far superior to a bandana over the nose. So are correctly worn 3 layer surgical masks not to put to fine a point on it.)

So here is what smart and well informed people know.

Mask use protects others. There is nothing ambiguous about this. I understand why people like Doug64 don't consider this important. Why worry about others?

So for the home schooled out there here is the simple version. Mask wearing is important. You should always do it. You should wear the best mask you can get (without a valve). People far more knowledgeable about this shit than the average person is, wear masks. Doctors wear masks. Health care workers wear masks. Wear a fucking mask. Stop whining like little bitches and wear a fucking mask. This is all about personal rights. The right not to be killed by some self-important, right wing asshat.


The line for or against mask wearing is essentially (in America) not even a political divide, so much as it is a divide between a cult of personality and those outside that cult. Interestingly, a significant portion of white working class males who make less than 100K a year, who voted for Trump decided not to in 2020 because he did not deliver on the promises he made on their reasonable expectations, and went instead after voters who were never going to vote for him in sufficient numbers to make up that loss.

White evangelical Israel firsters who make over 100k per annum aren't a large enough or strong enough foundation for the GOP, or for the good of this country getting through this health crisis and other problems.
  • 1
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 79
Election 2020

Yesterday on social media, there was this fake po[…]

So the leaders in major western newspapers this w[…]

Trump = 312 some odd days playing golf. :lol: G[…]

Drug legalisation

Pretty much tells your political views when you[…]