Democratic caucuses and primaries

Delphic Oracle said:
We're 0.02% of the way into this.

People cannot wrap their heads around the scope of it.
Click to expand...

Sorry no. SARS-CoV-2 has a 5-12 day incubation period before symptoms of Covid-19 become apparent. Covod-19 runs its course in 14-21 days and with a 14 day period for no symptoms to call it clear then the US could be clear of it in 60 days if it was dealt with by shutting down all non-essential travel and business and denying SARS-CoV-2 any ability to spread further.

Sure this is happening on a State by State and City by City level as Mayors and State Governors ignore the White House and go ahead with sensible measures, but that piecemeal won't work well. Trump just need to bite the bullet and do it, because if he doesn't he might just find that the body count is the number one political story.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
Sorry no. SARS-CoV-2 has a 5-12 day incubation period before symptoms of Covid-19 become apparent. Covod-19 runs its course in 14-21 days and with a 14 day period for no symptoms to call it clear then the US could be clear of it in 60 days if it was dealt with by shutting down all non-essential travel and business and denying SARS-CoV-2 any ability to spread further.

Sure this is happening on a State by State and City by City level as Mayors and State Governors ignore the White House and go ahead with sensible measures, but that piecemeal won't work well. Trump just need to bite the bullet and do it, because if he doesn't he might just find that the body count is the number one political story.
Click to expand...

I would be shocked to see (at least in the U.S.) total eradication.

Knocking it down significantly is only half the response plan. We have to remain watchful for flare-ups and implement measures again where they occur.

Probably for years.

Or else become a very different kind of society (I'm not against this :9).
 
Cabbage said:
I ain't no miracle worker. I believe it to be true that "if the states act now, it won't be a problem". Honestly, the problem I have with your presentation is I get the feeling that you seem to think you're scoring points for your position simply by asking questions I have no answer for, yet ignoring the relevant answer I have already provided. You can only "What If" it so far before you come across as trolling, to be honest.

For an analogous (in my mind) example, suppose someones asks how to protect themselves from covid-19. I tell them to limit their exposure, wash hands frequently, avoid touching their face. Then you come along and present me with a case: "This person went to a gathering of 5000 people, shook the hand of everyone they met and then chewed their fingernails and rubbed their eyes (without washing their hands first). What would you tell them to do to protect themselves from covid-19?" And I would tell them it's too goddamn late. Maybe they'll get lucky, but listening to my advice is evidently something they refuse to do, why keep asking me?

If a state is unprepared for the election, they can either manage as best as they can, or sit and watch while the rest of us vote. That's my answer. And their electoral votes should be ignored; 270 is no longer need to win, the winner will be whoever wins a majority of the electoral college of the states that actually participated.

Constitutionally, I don't think there is any requirement for a state to hold an election for the population. They can choose their electoral college representatives however they like. That's an option, but I expect that any state doing that is going to have a hell of a lot of protests (quite possibly violent) if that's the path they choose.

I have given you the most reasonable answer "States should prepare now". Is that unacceptable to you?

I want to add one more thing: I don't just keep saying "It's not my job" to dismiss the question. I mean that sincerely. Specifically, I do not have experience in these matters. I expect that many states have various contingency plans for such occasions. I do not know the details of such plans. I do not know what other plans have been adopted in the past for similar situations. Holding no power of my own to decide these things, it is not important for me to learn these contingency plans (or previous solutions) either. I've got my own life to deal with right now, you know. Like I said, it truly feels to me like you're giving me the "Yeah, but what if.....Yeah, but what if.....Yeah, but what if.....Yeah, but what if.....Yeah, but what if.....Yeah, but what if....." treatment indefinitely as a method of deflection, as if you somehow think you can win the argument simply by demonstrating I do not know the precise position and velocity of every entity in the equation.

And I think it is important for me to call you out on that.



I think he might float the idea. Since, as has been mentioned repeatedly, states control their own elections, I don't think it will hold much sway, but if he does I think a decent portion of his sycophants might back him up.

Will you stop supporting him if he does?
Click to expand...


No answer, huh? You know, for someone who expects me to answer so many of your questions, you certainly don't reciprocate.

That's rather rude of you.

:rolleyes:
 
Delphic Oracle said:
I would be shocked to see (at least in the U.S.) total eradication.

Knocking it down significantly is only half the response plan. We have to remain watchful for flare-ups and implement measures again where they occur.

Probably for years.

Or else become a very different kind of society (I'm not against this :9).
Click to expand...

Only if the response to it is a failure. We aren't talking about a virus that can hide in a population for long periods of time before showing symptoms. Yes it's slightly longer than other corona and influenza viruses, but it's still in days and not years. It's also not a virus that can survive in the environment, with current testing showing that it is below infectious levels on surfaces within a few days of contamination.

Because of that, the only way for the virus to survive is by person-to-person spread, so by starving it of that mechanism, it should be possible to burn it out in several weeks if there is the political will power to do it. Currently some State Governors are doing it, but others aren't and the Whitehouse is talking about forcing the country back to work before any isolation will have finished working.

Yeah it's going to hurt economically, and yeah, once the country is clear incoming travellers will still have to isolate for 2 weeks to prevent further outbreaks, but it is possible to stop it, if the Executive can get its act together and start working with the rest of the country instead of having confusion and all the States fighting each other and the federal departments for supplies to combat it in hospitals.
 
Last edited:
It's not just governors issuing the order.

It isn't being enforced and every day I have more and more bored browsers in my store.

Here comes Saturday, in fact. I'll be in there today, hissing at everyone in my mind.

(It occurs to me this has become a derail. I will compromise and say "CoVID remains likely to be an issue at election time")
 
Last edited:
Babbylonian said:
Any state government doing otherwise (e.g., just opening up the usual polling places for people to gather together and share viruses) should be considered criminally negligent.
Click to expand...

Are you counting the Super Tuesday states?

If not, when precisely should we (or jurors) say voting in person went from a routine election year procedure to an act of (criminal) negligence?
 
Last edited:
Babbylonian said:
For simplicity's sake, I'd count any state since the declaration of a national emergency.
Click to expand...

I'm not about to concede that the Federal Government is the authority on what constitutes an actual emergency, at least not since the National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United StatesWP, but I suppose it really would make things simpler if we could trust their judgement on such matters.
 
d4m10n said:
I'm not about to concede that the Federal Government is the authority on what constitutes an actual emergency, at least not since the National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United StatesWP, but I suppose it really would make things simpler if we could trust their judgement on such matters.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: I think we can judge it on a case-by-case basis. :rolleyes:
 
I'm sort of amazed that the Wisconsin primary is going forward as planned, in person.

Wisconsin is holding firm to its April 7 primary date, but Gov. Tony Evers has requested that absentee ballots be sent to every one of the state’s 3.3 million registered voters.

Mr. Evers, a Democrat, cannot send the ballots on his own; he asked the Republican-controlled Legislature to convene and approve a measure to do so. But the request represents a significant change of course by the governor, who had repeatedly said in recent weeks that the primary and other elections in the state should go ahead as planned, even as local officials begged for a delay.
Click to expand...

I'd've thought that by now they'd've had enough time to prepare for balloting entirely by mail, as Alaska and Hawaii have done.
 
Last edited:
Interesting article about the timing of the upcoming primaries.

In light of these rules, most states rescheduling their primaries set new dates just ahead of this June 9 cutoff. Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and Ohio, for example, joined a growing list of states holding primaries on June 2. Other places, like Puerto Rico, cut things a little closer: Its primary will be on June 7.

It is not yet clear whether these rules will be enforced, particularly now that the most delegate-rich state left on the calendar, New York, has chosen a delay.
Click to expand...
 
Stacyhs said:
Hopefully, people will see that it was the Republicans who chose to put their lives in danger rather than postpone the election.
Click to expand...
Or better yet, hopefully the democrats will remind people that it is Trump and the Republicans who want to put people's lives in danger instead of allowing more widespread vote-by-mail in the general election.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
 
Segnosaur said:
Or better yet, hopefully the democrats will remind people that it is Trump and the Republicans who want to put people's lives in danger instead of allowing more widespread vote-by-mail in the general election.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Don't let SCOTUS off the hook here either.
 
"Former Clinton Staffers Invited To “Bye, Bye Bernard” Zoom Call "

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-staffers

“Invitation: Bye, bye Bernard (HFA celebration toast),” the email to former Hillary Clinton staffers read on early Wednesday afternoon, according to screenshots provided by two people.

“He’s finally gone (again!). Join for a celebratory toast if you can! And yes, you can loop :)”
Click to expand...

Tell me again about toxic bernie bros.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom