I feel that Andrew Cuomo’s speech (Governor of New York State) should be ‘going viral’ right now, but isn’t really getting the traction it deserves.

So I’m doing my part, here at the Holiday Forum. Please watch, and recommend to whatever dens of scum and villainy you inhabit online…

https://youtu.be/ZnTppNjC1Js
Wake up America

Cuomo has been a beacon of rationality and reason, even as his State got fucked up the arse by SARS-CoV-2. It’s a great speech. If you haven’t watched it, you should.

https://www.propublica.org/article/two-coasts-one-virus-how-new-york-suffered-nearly-10-times-the-number-of-deaths-as-california

He makes reasonable points but Cuomo was also a bit slow off the mark.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/andrew-cuomo-new-york-coronavirus-catastrophe

It reminded me a bit of how governor Kathleen Blanco aimed the blamethrower square at Bush due to the Hurricane Katrina response, whereas there was plenty of fault to be found in her own performance.

I’m very much of the opinion that blame does not become diluted by being shared.

SCIENCE said:

https://www.propublica.org/article/two-coasts-one-virus-how-new-york-suffered-nearly-10-times-the-number-of-deaths-as-california

I think it’s fair to criticize Cuomo for lack of inaction in the early days, as this will lead to a more decisive and useful early action from his successors if events in the future should mirror the events of 2020.

But we should recognize that hindsight is 20/20.

Cuomo has consistently and constantly recognized the reality of the COVID situation, beyond partisan politics, and has conveyed that through his press briefings each and every day.

His approach to this crisis sits in stark contrast to the US Federal Governments’ approach. It’s a contrast which he lays out in exquisite detail in this speech.

Facts. Data. Science. And a humble understanding that facts, data and science will always win out in the end; that we can not fight these things…. Reality reigns supreme. Always. Whatever we would wish, fairy God-mothers are not real and wishes are not granted simply because they exist.

I think I have watched almost all the Andrew Cuomo press briefings over the last 110 days. He may not have been perfect, but he was impressive.

Indeed, don’t get us wrong, changing one’s mind or correcting one’s wrongs, even if late, is better than never. Good evidenced decisions are still good evidenced decisions; bad ones are bad; and we respect current good.

SCIENCE said:

Indeed, don’t get us wrong, changing one’s mind or correcting one’s wrongs, even if late, is better than never. Good evidenced decisions are still good evidenced decisions; bad ones are bad; and we respect current good.

No, you shall be forever judged on your previous bad decisions, no matter how you have reformed yourself…

furious said:

SCIENCE said:

Indeed, don’t get us wrong, changing one’s mind or correcting one’s wrongs, even if late, is better than never. Good evidenced decisions are still good evidenced decisions; bad ones are bad; and we respect current good.

No, you shall be forever judged on your previous bad decisions, no matter how you have reformed yourself…

Well look, we also agree with maintaining some kind of awareness or record of historical good or bad, but we don’t believe it needs to be put on a pedestal forever either way.

dv said:

He makes reasonable points but Cuomo was also a bit slow off the mark.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/andrew-cuomo-new-york-coronavirus-catastrophe

It reminded me a bit of how governor Kathleen Blanco aimed the blamethrower square at Bush due to the Hurricane Katrina response, whereas there was plenty of fault to be found in her own performance.

I’m very much of the opinion that blame does not become diluted by being shared.

This post is entirely disingenuous on your part.

20th of May? You’d link an article from May 20th?

From article – “New York with the outbreak in California. By mid-May, New York City alone had almost 20,000 deaths, while in San Francisco there had been only 35, and New York state as a whole suffered 10 times as many deaths as California.” – from this article

As of today (or maybe yesterday) California has 5,400 deaths… New York State has 31,000 deaths. Not ten times as many any more.

And NYC had 800 new cases yesterday. Their number is consistently falling. It has been falling for the last 60 days. California… 5,400 yesterday. Consistently rising since early March….

One of these states has made great progress to controlling the spread of the virus, the other is just getting started on it’s exponential growth case and still has to grapple with the difficulties of controlling it. Surely you can see the difference here?

Furthermore, we consider that just because other people do the wrong thing later, and / or other people may do things that are more wrong, does not mean that the wrong that one did, is unwrong.

esselte said:

dv said:

He makes reasonable points but Cuomo was also a bit slow off the mark.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/andrew-cuomo-new-york-coronavirus-catastrophe

It reminded me a bit of how governor Kathleen Blanco aimed the blamethrower square at Bush due to the Hurricane Katrina response, whereas there was plenty of fault to be found in her own performance.

I’m very much of the opinion that blame does not become diluted by being shared.

This post is entirely disingenuous on your part.

No.

20th of May? You’d link an article from May 20th?

Well yes. Caseloads have changed but the concrete criticisms of Cuomo’s errors remains.

dv said:

esselte said:

dv said:

He makes reasonable points but Cuomo was also a bit slow off the mark.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/andrew-cuomo-new-york-coronavirus-catastrophe

It reminded me a bit of how governor Kathleen Blanco aimed the blamethrower square at Bush due to the Hurricane Katrina response, whereas there was plenty of fault to be found in her own performance.

I’m very much of the opinion that blame does not become diluted by being shared.

This post is entirely disingenuous on your part.

No.

20th of May? You’d link an article from May 20th?

Well yes. Caseloads have changed but the concrete criticisms of Cuomo’s errors remains.

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

SCIENCE said:

furious said:

SCIENCE said:

Indeed, don’t get us wrong, changing one’s mind or correcting one’s wrongs, even if late, is better than never. Good evidenced decisions are still good evidenced decisions; bad ones are bad; and we respect current good.

No, you shall be forever judged on your previous bad decisions, no matter how you have reformed yourself…

Well look, we also agree with maintaining some kind of awareness or record of historical good or bad, but we don’t believe it needs to be put on a pedestal forever either way.

Why not put it on a pedestal?

esselte said:

dv said:

esselte said:

No.

20th of May? You’d link an article from May 20th?

Well yes. Caseloads have changed but the concrete criticisms of Cuomo’s errors remains.

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

https://www.instagram.com/jacindaardern/

mostly serious

In Cuomo’s favour is that the virus was probably circulating in New York weeks before it was noticed as was the case in Italy’s north.

esselte said:

dv said:

esselte said:

No.

20th of May? You’d link an article from May 20th?

Well yes. Caseloads have changed but the concrete criticisms of Cuomo’s errors remains.

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

Surely Saint Jacinda the Benevolent & Munificent would be that person.

esselte said:

Why not put it on a pedestal?

You can if you like. Other people can if they like. You can take it down if you like. Others can take it down if they like. There’s no need, regardless of like.

sibeen said:

esselte said:

dv said:

Well yes. Caseloads have changed but the concrete criticisms of Cuomo’s errors remains.

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

Surely Saint Jacinda the Benevolent & Munificent would be that person.

why mock her then?

Witty Rejoinder said:

In Cuomo’s favour is that the virus was probably circulating in New York weeks before it was noticed as was the case in Italy’s north.

Cuomo is bad at maths…

JudgeMental said:

sibeen said:

esselte said:

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

Surely Saint Jacinda the Benevolent & Munificent would be that person.

why mock her then?

Jacinda the unmockable…

anyway rather than argue further here’s the ar’gen’tran’i’

so we get the infection rate down and then because other states are high we could have a problem this country has to wake up wake up and smell the coffee right and let’s realize the facts that are going on as we sit here this morning because my father’s great speech Tale of Two Cities you now have a tale of two countries going on you have two very different situations happening in states across this country some states the numbers are going down some states the numbers are going up why same country same virus why the federal government’s attitude is an undeniable mistake when it has come to dealing with call it their guidance their doctrine is an undeniable mistake it is a political theory a public relations theory versus a science-based fact-based theory the White House from the day one has been operating in a pure political ideology we should reopen get the economy going government shouldn’t be slowing down the economy it was all political it was all public relations based on what fact based on what science none I was all political ideology we said here in New York this is not about politics virus never said to me it’s a Democrat virus never said it’s a Republican no test ever said that dealing with a virus is a matter of science it’s a matter of fact that’s how you deal with a disease you don’t deal with it politically and you now see states that have dealt with it politically versus states that have dealt with it on a science fact basis and you see the virus spreading in states that have an unmanaged reopening well because they always have an excuse it’s not really increasing the number of tests are increasing I don’t even know what that means more testing does not mean the viral spread is increasing you know how you know that they’re being disingenuous the number of people in those states who are getting sick is increasing forget the numbers more people are walking into hospitals they’re not walking into hospitals because they’re feeling well you walk into a hospital when you’re sick and the number of people who are getting infected and getting sick and walking into a hospital is going up in these states undeniably and you can go state-by-state it’s Arizona it’s Texas it’s Florida it’s North Carolina it’s South Carolina it’s Utah it’s Montana it’s Alaska it’s 20 states are on the increase and then compare that to New York where we are on the decrease day after day after day we’ve been on the decrease for the past 60 days two months of decline they’re going up now how do you explain that what happened with this virus what happened with this pandemic from the get-go was always going to be dependent on what we did there was no preordained path there was no preordained curve nobody knew I spoke to every expert on the globe nobody knew second myth listening to them last night all the projection models were wrong no the projection models weren’t wrong because the projection models were never projection models the projection models were really extrapolation models what does that mean the projection models never said this is what’s going to happen in New York the projection model said if this is what you do this is what will happen it’s not really a projection if this is what you do this is what will happen that’s what the models did if you tell me you are losing one pound per day they say I will tell you you’re going to lose seven pounds per week if you tell me you’re going to lose two pounds per day I’ll tell you you’re going to lose 14 pounds per week yeah thank you but it’s all based on what we said we were going to do the White House knew this March 31st their White House coronavirus task force what’s going to happen with a covert virus Oh two options depending on what you do option one best-case scenario with mitigation what is mitigation closed-down social distancing wear a mask hand sanitizer all those mitigation efforts that the states without reopening plans without a managed reopening they have no mitigation the White House says with mitigation 100 to 240 thousand deaths if this nation uses mitigation if you don’t use mitigation oh one point five to two point two million deaths the White House said it the White House said it to the extent the White House let’s science speak ever to the extent they have science in the White House they said if you mitigate 150 100 to 240 if you don’t one point five to two point two and then they’re reopening plans don’t provide for mitigation well then by your own projection what did you think was going to happen that’s why the CDC and doctor foul Chi are in such a difficult position because they said without mitigation you’re going to kill a million more people they said that and now they’re part of a federal government that is telling States just reopened just reopened just reopened contrary to their own science because they abandoned it the model that they rely on which is the gates funded I hme model last week they projected 169 thousand deaths by October last week this week the projection changed 200,000 deaths why did the projection change they’ll say on Fox TV not to pick any particular network the model was wrong no the model wasn’t wrong the model is in a model it’s an extrapolation they’re saying by this number of deaths last week which is now increasing we extrapolate to tell you more people are going to die based on what you did and what you’re doing and the rate of death you’re causing factor that out factor out what you are doing more people are dying because of what you are doing more people are dying this is the model the White House relies on that model says because of what you are doing the number of people who are going to die by October increased 18% 30,000 more people are going to die because of what you’re doing that’s what they say to you and then the question is what do you say America when they tell you 30,000 more people are going to die because of what you’re doing do you keep doing it do you keep doing it or do you say I don’t want 30,000 more people to die I’m going to change what we’re doing that’s why I say wake up America look at what they’re telling you this is not rhetorical conceptual hyperbolic they told you based on what you’re doing last week 30,000 more people are going to die this is New York I want someone to put this up in my eulogy PowerPoint eulogy make her know you’re gonna be there be it first time rob smiles I think these were the projections in New York gates fund that I HMA said 73,000 people would be hospitalized Columbia said one hundred thirty six thousand people just in New York City just Columbia University we’re not talking about a mail away matchbook University here McKinsey 110,000 McKenzie moderate with mitigation 55,000 what actually happened 18,000 they were all wrong no we changed what we were doing we changed what we were doing what they were saying is if you keep doing what you’re doing and that transmission rate continues you’re gonna have you factor it out you extrapolate out 73 136 110 that’s what’s going to happen we said in New York that’s what’s going to happen then we’re going to change what we’re doing we’re gonna change we don’t want that to happen we don’t want those people to die we changed it to 18,000 a fraction because we changed what we did you’re talking about tens of thousands of lives tens of thousands of lives what are you going to do America they’re telling you based on what you’re doing you’re killing more Americans thirty thousand more projection in one week this is what we did we changed we changed what we were doing and we saved tens of thousands of lives and that’s what America should do there are two different visions that we’re talking about one is based on science in fact one is based on political ideology and public relations and politics and the results are in New York it’s working we’re saving lives the virus is down the rest of the nation it’s going up the end of the day New York tough works

poikilotherm said:

JudgeMental said:

sibeen said:

Surely Saint Jacinda the Benevolent & Munificent would be that person.

why mock her then?

Jacinda the unmockable…

how funny.

tldr

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

dv said:

Well yes. Caseloads have changed but the concrete criticisms of Cuomo’s errors remains.

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

https://www.instagram.com/jacindaardern/

mostly serious

You may feel that you are being serious, but this is a ridiculous comparison.

New York State… New York City… compared to New Zealand?

Just dumb, SCIENCE.

Ardern’s mistakes (or astuteness) were immaterial in terms of spread rates and total cases/deaths to the outcomes in comparison to those made by the governor of NYS.

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

https://www.instagram.com/jacindaardern/

mostly serious

You may feel that you are being serious, but this is a ridiculous comparison.

New York State… New York City… compared to New Zealand?

Just dumb, SCIENCE.

Ardern’s mistakes (or astuteness) were immaterial in terms of spread rates and total cases/deaths to the outcomes in comparison to those made by the governor of NYS.

New York Shitty?

poikilotherm said:

JudgeMental said:

sibeen said:

Surely Saint Jacinda the Benevolent & Munificent would be that person.

why mock her then?

Jacinda the unmockable…

ROFL

Witty Rejoinder said:

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

https://www.instagram.com/jacindaardern/

mostly serious

You may feel that you are being serious, but this is a ridiculous comparison.

New York State… New York City… compared to New Zealand?

Just dumb, SCIENCE.

Ardern’s mistakes (or astuteness) were immaterial in terms of spread rates and total cases/deaths to the outcomes in comparison to those made by the governor of NYS.

New York Shitty?

Sorry my bad. New York State.

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

I’m not denying he made mistakes. I’m saying his performance has been impressive. Very impressive.

Point me to the person who would not have made mistakes regarding this crisis, and I might be less impressed with Cuomo.

https://www.instagram.com/jacindaardern/

mostly serious

You may feel that you are being serious, but this is a ridiculous comparison.

New York State… New York City… compared to New Zealand?

Just dumb, SCIENCE.

Ardern’s mistakes (or astuteness) were immaterial in terms of spread rates and total cases/deaths to the outcomes in comparison to those made by the governor of NYS.

we weren’t offering comparisons, we were answering the question, sorry about that

sibeen said:

poikilotherm said:

JudgeMental said:

why mock her then?

Jacinda the unmockable…

ROFL

See Boris, it IS funny….

maybe it’s because she is female. dunno. she seems to have done a decent job of running the country. maybe she just has to be sooooo much better than if she were male.

Witty Rejoinder said:

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

https://www.instagram.com/jacindaardern/

mostly serious

You may feel that you are being serious, but this is a ridiculous comparison.

New York State… New York City… compared to New Zealand?

Just dumb, SCIENCE.

Ardern’s mistakes (or astuteness) were immaterial in terms of spread rates and total cases/deaths to the outcomes in comparison to those made by the governor of NYS.

New York Shitty?

New York State (which Cuomo is governor of)

JudgeMental said:

maybe it’s because she is female. dunno. she seems to have done a decent job of running the country. maybe she just has to be sooooo much better than if she were male.

She’s not perfect but she seems to do alright…

esselte said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

esselte said:

You may feel that you are being serious, but this is a ridiculous comparison.

New York State… New York City… compared to New Zealand?

Just dumb, SCIENCE.

Ardern’s mistakes (or astuteness) were immaterial in terms of spread rates and total cases/deaths to the outcomes in comparison to those made by the governor of NYS.

New York Shitty?

New York State (which Cuomo is governor of)

NY would suffice to refer to the state but then I am quibbling here.

furious said:

JudgeMental said:

maybe it’s because she is female. dunno. she seems to have done a decent job of running the country. maybe she just has to be sooooo much better than if she were male.

She’s not perfect but she seems to do alright…

It’s obvious to everyone here that New Zealand should be considered a statistical outlier regarding COVID-19?

Right?

Like, we are not seriously comparing the NZ to the USA, or India to Italy, or…. anything….

esselte said:

furious said:

JudgeMental said:

maybe it’s because she is female. dunno. she seems to have done a decent job of running the country. maybe she just has to be sooooo much better than if she were male.

She’s not perfect but she seems to do alright…

It’s obvious to everyone here that New Zealand should be considered a statistical outlier regarding COVID-19?

Right?

Like, we are not seriously comparing the NZ to the USA, or India to Italy, or…. anything….

I wasn’t referring to just covid…

furious said:

esselte said:

furious said:

She’s not perfect but she seems to do alright…

It’s obvious to everyone here that New Zealand should be considered a statistical outlier regarding COVID-19?

Right?

Like, we are not seriously comparing the NZ to the USA, or India to Italy, or…. anything….

I wasn’t referring to just covid…

You want the not-COVID thread then…

JudgeMental said:

maybe it’s because she is female. dunno. she seems to have done a decent job of running the country. maybe she just has to be sooooo much better than if she were male.

Up until a few months ago there was a fair to middling chance that she was going to lose the election which is to be held later this year. That’s not going to happen now. The fawning over her during this has been something to behold though. The ‘declare war on NZ’ petition in the UK as a case in point. Why not declare war on Australia? Same covid figures basically.

Just to be clear we are not considering any country an outlier or intruther anywhere here, and we advance the idea that {the situation that a country finds itself in} is metaphorically a consequence of {the hand it is dealt} and {the way that hand is played}.

The Rev Dodgson said:

tldr

SCIENCE said:

Just to be clear we are not considering any country an outlier or intruther anywhere here, and we advance the idea that {the situation that a country finds itself in} is metaphorically a consequence of {the hand it is dealt} and {the way that hand is played}.

I couldn’t be further from discussing metaphor here. WTF are you talking about?

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

esselte said:

It’s obvious to everyone here that New Zealand should be considered a statistical outlier regarding COVID-19?

Right?

Like, we are not seriously comparing the NZ to the USA, or India to Italy, or…. anything….

I wasn’t referring to just covid…

You want the not-COVID thread then…

could compare NZ with Sweden say…or Denmark…Finland?

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

tldr

tsdr

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

Just to be clear we are not considering any country an outlier or intruther anywhere here, and we advance the idea that {the situation that a country finds itself in} is metaphorically a consequence of {the hand it is dealt} and {the way that hand is played}.

I couldn’t be further from discussing metaphor here. WTF are you talking about?

we are not considering any country an outlier

JudgeMental said:

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

tldr

tsdr

maybe he meant the speech in which case more appropriately it might be trdl

SCIENCE said:

Just to be clear we are not considering any country an outlier or intruther anywhere here, and we advance the idea that {the situation that a country finds itself in} is metaphorically a consequence of {the hand it is dealt} and {the way that hand is played}.

That pretty well sums up life.

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

Just to be clear we are not considering any country an outlier or intruther anywhere here, and we advance the idea that {the situation that a country finds itself in} is metaphorically a consequence of {the hand it is dealt} and {the way that hand is played}.

I couldn’t be further from discussing metaphor here. WTF are you talking about?

we are not considering any country an outlier

Why not? Do you think outliers do not exist in statistical analysis?

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

Just to be clear we are not considering any country an outlier or intruther anywhere here, and we advance the idea that {the situation that a country finds itself in} is metaphorically a consequence of {the hand it is dealt} and {the way that hand is played}.

I couldn’t be further from discussing metaphor here. WTF are you talking about?

we are not considering any country an outlier

I actually agree with that. There’s going to work ahead for years and scientific papers out the whazoo on trying to work out why some countries had high rates of infection, high rates of death etc compared to other countries where they did basically the same and had widely different results.

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

I couldn’t be further from discussing metaphor here. WTF are you talking about?

we are not considering any country an outlier

Why not? Do you think outliers do not exist in statistical analysis?

Because we really believe countries are performing the way they are performing. It’s not a statistical analysis, it’s “we had X, we did Y, we got Z”.

Too wrong, didn’t lead

• Why not? Do you think outliers do not exist in statistical analysis?

Outliers do not exist in this statistical analysis, do they?

No, sensei!

Nguyễn Phú Trọng seems to have done pretty good as well but some days it seems like nobody wants to learn from Asian Communists.

SCIENCE said:

Nguyễn Phú Trọng seems to have done pretty good as well but some days it seems like nobody wants to learn from Asian Communists.

Singapore is going to have a fake election in a few weeks. If only they were communist too!

SCIENCE said:

Nguyễn Phú Trọng seems to have done pretty good as well but some days it seems like nobody wants to learn from Asian Communists.

I was going to mention them in my “declare war” rant but thought better of it.

:)

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

Nguyễn Phú Trọng seems to have done pretty good as well but some days it seems like nobody wants to learn from Asian Communists.

Singapore is going to have a fake election in a few weeks. If only they were communist too!

What’s curious is how they’re segregating their migrant worker community, how they’re actually going the swede immunity path there, but we don’t hear much excoriation though possibly that’s through the Australens.

sibeen said:

SCIENCE said:

Nguyễn Phú Trọng seems to have done pretty good as well but some days it seems like nobody wants to learn from Asian Communists.

I was going to mention them in my “declare war” rant but thought better of it.

:)

Some nights I stay up cashing in my bad luck
Some nights I call it a draw
Some nights I wish that my lips could build a castle
Some nights I wish they’d just fall off

This is it, boys, this is war, what are we waiting for?
Why don’t we break the rules already?
I was never one to believe the hype
Save that for the black and white

SCIENCE said:

Because we really believe countries are performing the way they are performing.

I’m… I….

We…

what?

okay esselte I will think on whether I’m being too harsh on Cuomo

Meanwhile we will consider whether continuing to PTBNTM is the appropriate course of action, and most likely consider it appropriate.

dv said:

okay esselte I will think on whether I’m being too harsh on Cuomo

I don’t even care about Cuomo.

I do remember, following 9/11, Giuliani was a national hero and much admired around the world. These days he’s asking idiotic questions like “Why don’t we do contact tracing for cancer or obesity?” in support of the Trump executive branch poo-pooing of anti-COVID measures.

Forget about Cuomo, just listen to what he is saying and evaluate that on its own merits. That is what I’m promoting here.

Good point, a better title may have been “consider this speech on its merits”.

esselte said:

dv said:

okay esselte I will think on whether I’m being too harsh on Cuomo

I don’t even care about Cuomo.

I do remember, following 9/11, Giuliani was a national hero and much admired around the world. These days he’s asking idiotic questions like “Why don’t we do contact tracing for cancer or obesity?” in support of the Trump executive branch poo-pooing of anti-COVID measures.

Forget about Cuomo, just listen to what he is saying and evaluate that on its own merits. That is what I’m promoting here.

it’s a good message

SCIENCE said:

Good point, a better title may have been “consider this speech on its merits”.

I’m trying to do my little bit to get the speech heard by as many people as possible. If just one person reading this thread thinks, “hey, that was pretty good” and links it to their facebook friends then I have achieved my objective. R naught=>1 Beyond that, I don’t care what the people here think of the speech… I’m not interested in a discussion of its merits in this thread… that was never my objective.

This is not to say that the speech can’t be analyzed objectively or critically. Just that my purpose with this thread and its title has nothing to do with objective or critical analysis of the merits of the speech.

esselte said:

SCIENCE said:

Good point, a better title may have been “consider this speech on its merits”.

I’m trying to do my little bit to get the speech heard by as many people as possible. If just one person reading this thread thinks, “hey, that was pretty good” and links it to their facebook friends then I have achieved my objective. R naught=>1 Beyond that, I don’t care what the people here think of the speech… I’m not interested in a discussion of its merits in this thread… that was never my objective.

This is not to say that the speech can’t be analyzed objectively or critically. Just that my purpose with this thread and its title has nothing to do with objective or critical analysis of the merits of the speech.

Well we don’t own this place so we won’t bother the others with discourse about our position regarding the use of this forum as an advertising platform.

On the other hand we guess you’re thankful that we have increased the exposure of this line of comment so you’re welcome.

sibeen said:

SCIENCE said:

esselte said:

I couldn’t be further from discussing metaphor here. WTF are you talking about?

we are not considering any country an outlier

I actually agree with that. There’s going to work ahead for years and scientific papers out the whazoo on trying to work out why some countries had high rates of infection, high rates of death etc compared to other countries where they did basically the same and had widely different results.

I’ll do the thinking now….let me see….density of living conditions. I think that just about sums it up. But I suppose academicals will need to publish it.