09-15-2020, 04:23 PM
It’s almost as if you are hoping that Biden will want to “Build Back Better”
BC
BC
The CardBoard
/
Emergency
/
Covid-19
/
Per Woodward's recordings POTUS Knew Early That COVID19 Was Very Deadly
Per Woodward's recordings POTUS Knew Early That COVID19 Was Very Deadly
It’s almost as if you are hoping that Biden will want to “Build Back Better”
BC
BC
09-15-2020, 04:46 PM
FWIW - Most on this board live in the SF Bay Area bubble. Worse, most on this board are living successful lives in the SF Bay Area Bubble.
I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe. The swingy states have a lot of people that are closer to re-electing Donald Trump. I really don't get the Donald Trump appeal to those that did not attend college, but for some reason he has an appeal to that subset of our nation.
And in that group his disdain for science, physicians and high ranking government officials makes him even more popular.
It is as if voting for Trump is a big middle finger to technological advancements, potentially disruptive social progress, dynamic global trade, multi-lingual citizens and all similar things that seem to be required to for people and nations to succeed for the next few decades.
It is potentially bad for all of us that the rest of the world might just take notice and find economic partners a bit more open to, and ready for, the global challenges of 2020 and beyond.
I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe. The swingy states have a lot of people that are closer to re-electing Donald Trump. I really don't get the Donald Trump appeal to those that did not attend college, but for some reason he has an appeal to that subset of our nation.
And in that group his disdain for science, physicians and high ranking government officials makes him even more popular.
It is as if voting for Trump is a big middle finger to technological advancements, potentially disruptive social progress, dynamic global trade, multi-lingual citizens and all similar things that seem to be required to for people and nations to succeed for the next few decades.
It is potentially bad for all of us that the rest of the world might just take notice and find economic partners a bit more open to, and ready for, the global challenges of 2020 and beyond.
FWIW - Most on this board live in the SF Bay Area bubble. Worse, most on this board are living successful lives in the SF Bay Area Bubble.
I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe. The swingy states have a lot of people that are closer to re-electing Donald Trump. I really don't get the Donald Trump appeal to those that did not attend college, but for some reason he has an appeal to that subset of our nation.
And in that group his disdain for science, physicians and high ranking government officials makes him even more popular.
It is as if voting for Trump is a big middle finger to technological advancements, potentially disruptive social progress, dynamic global trade, multi-lingual citizens and all similar things that seem to be required to for people and nations to succeed for the next few decades.
It is potentially bad for all of us that the rest of the world might just take notice and find economic partners a bit more open to, and ready for, the global challenges of 2020 and beyond.
I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe. The swingy states have a lot of people that are closer to re-electing Donald Trump. I really don't get the Donald Trump appeal to those that did not attend college, but for some reason he has an appeal to that subset of our nation.
And in that group his disdain for science, physicians and high ranking government officials makes him even more popular.
It is as if voting for Trump is a big middle finger to technological advancements, potentially disruptive social progress, dynamic global trade, multi-lingual citizens and all similar things that seem to be required to for people and nations to succeed for the next few decades.
It is potentially bad for all of us that the rest of the world might just take notice and find economic partners a bit more open to, and ready for, the global challenges of 2020 and beyond.
09-15-2020, 06:16 PM
(09-15-2020, 04:23 PM)BostonCard Wrote: It’s almost as if you are hoping that Biden will want to “Build Back Better”
BC
I don't necessarily think we need a different view of what the government should be doing (change of philosophy), which as I understand it is part of "Build Back Better". The failures of our epidemic response were not caused by not having assigned responsibility to structures in the government to do so. It was a failure to execute by the people who were supposed to be managing/overseeing these departments (President and Congress). It was also a failure of the populace to pay attention and hold our representatives accountable. No matter what one's theory of government is, failure to execute will defeat it. There were plenty of people inside the government who knew we were completely unprepared for a pandemic. It wasn't a secret. It also wasn't a priority. No president came forth with the equivalent of a "missile gap" speech. The focus groups said the public wasn't worried, so why take on another problem if you don't have to?
(09-15-2020, 04:23 PM)BostonCard Wrote: It’s almost as if you are hoping that Biden will want to “Build Back Better”
BC
I don't necessarily think we need a different view of what the government should be doing (change of philosophy), which as I understand it is part of "Build Back Better". The failures of our epidemic response were not caused by not having assigned responsibility to structures in the government to do so. It was a failure to execute by the people who were supposed to be managing/overseeing these departments (President and Congress). It was also a failure of the populace to pay attention and hold our representatives accountable. No matter what one's theory of government is, failure to execute will defeat it. There were plenty of people inside the government who knew we were completely unprepared for a pandemic. It wasn't a secret. It also wasn't a priority. No president came forth with the equivalent of a "missile gap" speech. The focus groups said the public wasn't worried, so why take on another problem if you don't have to?
09-15-2020, 06:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-16-2020, 01:03 AM by CardinalSagehen.)
(09-15-2020, 04:46 PM)Farm93 Wrote: FWIW - Most on this board live in the SF Bay Area bubble. Worse, most on this board are living successful lives in the SF Bay Area Bubble.
I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe...
I agree completely that the race is closer than many people realize from the comfort of our cozy, coastal bubble. Here's the current forecast by FiveThirtyEight (created by Nate Silver, who's a good follow on Twitter for those that are interested): https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/202...-forecast/
Bear in mind that FiveThirtyEight's model gave Trump a 1/3 chance on Election Day vs. Hillary, and it wasn't based on any kind "hidden Trump votes" that didn't appear in polls. From what I understand, it's almost entirely based on an aggregate of state polls, with correct mathematical assumptions for margins of error, overlaid against the Electoral College. Silver is fond of pointing out that many people saw 2/3 vs. 1/3 and assumed that meant Hillary was a lock, or that the model was wrong, when in fact it literally meant that Trump had a decent 1-in-3 chance.
The polls themselves generally don't lie - people just read them incorrectly and often forget to apply the Electoral College. It's astonishing how many journalists continue to bother reporting national polling averages. Meaningless. It's like reporting only "yards gained", or some other stat, instead of the score itself.
In case you're wondering, FiveThirtyEight's model is currently giving Biden a 75% chance, Trump a 24% chance and a 269-269 tie a 1% chance (broken by a vote in the newly seated House by state, which would likely go to Biden Trump based on more states having a Republican majority - thanks to dabigv for the clarification.)
There are some nice visualizations on that site - especially the snake chart, which is something I haven't seen before.
(This post was last modified: 09-16-2020, 01:03 AM by CardinalSagehen.)
(09-15-2020, 04:46 PM)Farm93 Wrote: FWIW - Most on this board live in the SF Bay Area bubble. Worse, most on this board are living successful lives in the SF Bay Area Bubble.
I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe...
I agree completely that the race is closer than many people realize from the comfort of our cozy, coastal bubble. Here's the current forecast by FiveThirtyEight (created by Nate Silver, who's a good follow on Twitter for those that are interested): https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/202...-forecast/
Bear in mind that FiveThirtyEight's model gave Trump a 1/3 chance on Election Day vs. Hillary, and it wasn't based on any kind "hidden Trump votes" that didn't appear in polls. From what I understand, it's almost entirely based on an aggregate of state polls, with correct mathematical assumptions for margins of error, overlaid against the Electoral College. Silver is fond of pointing out that many people saw 2/3 vs. 1/3 and assumed that meant Hillary was a lock, or that the model was wrong, when in fact it literally meant that Trump had a decent 1-in-3 chance.
The polls themselves generally don't lie - people just read them incorrectly and often forget to apply the Electoral College. It's astonishing how many journalists continue to bother reporting national polling averages. Meaningless. It's like reporting only "yards gained", or some other stat, instead of the score itself.
In case you're wondering, FiveThirtyEight's model is currently giving Biden a 75% chance, Trump a 24% chance and a 269-269 tie a 1% chance (broken by a vote in the newly seated House by state, which would likely go to Biden Trump based on more states having a Republican majority - thanks to dabigv for the clarification.)
There are some nice visualizations on that site - especially the snake chart, which is something I haven't seen before.
09-15-2020, 06:39 PM
A tie would actually probably go to Trump, because it's not the house that decides by total numbers, but by state congressional delegations, and the GOP has a majority in more states.
09-15-2020, 10:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-15-2020, 10:08 PM by DocSavage87.)
(09-15-2020, 06:16 PM)Goose Wrote: I don't necessarily think we need a different view of what the government should be doing (change of philosophy), which as I understand it is part of "Build Back Better". The failures of our epidemic response were not caused by not having assigned responsibility to structures in the government to do so. It was a failure to execute by the people who were supposed to be managing/overseeing these departments (President and Congress).
I'm not sure if disbanding the WH NSC Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense caused a hole in the responsibilities or a lack of leadership at the WH level, as this op-ed implies:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/n...story.html
The counter to this op-ed was that not everybody on that team left but was transferred to another unit. I also heard that unit had a different emphasis, one that was focused more on biowarfare than something like pandemic response. In any case, if there was "another" unit, they failed miserably in doing things like coordinating PPE and other resource buying among the fed and state level, making sure there were parallel testing developments in the early days, etc.
I found another op-ed on the changes that may have impacted how responsibilities were assigned for US domestic readiness or large-scale pandemic response:
https://www.justsecurity.org/69197/lesso...readiness/
(This post was last modified: 09-15-2020, 10:08 PM by DocSavage87.)
(09-15-2020, 06:16 PM)Goose Wrote: I don't necessarily think we need a different view of what the government should be doing (change of philosophy), which as I understand it is part of "Build Back Better". The failures of our epidemic response were not caused by not having assigned responsibility to structures in the government to do so. It was a failure to execute by the people who were supposed to be managing/overseeing these departments (President and Congress).
I'm not sure if disbanding the WH NSC Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense caused a hole in the responsibilities or a lack of leadership at the WH level, as this op-ed implies:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/n...story.html
The counter to this op-ed was that not everybody on that team left but was transferred to another unit. I also heard that unit had a different emphasis, one that was focused more on biowarfare than something like pandemic response. In any case, if there was "another" unit, they failed miserably in doing things like coordinating PPE and other resource buying among the fed and state level, making sure there were parallel testing developments in the early days, etc.
I found another op-ed on the changes that may have impacted how responsibilities were assigned for US domestic readiness or large-scale pandemic response:
https://www.justsecurity.org/69197/lesso...readiness/
(09-15-2020, 04:46 PM)Farm93 Wrote: I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe. The swingy states have a lot of people that are closer to re-electing Donald Trump. I really don't get the Donald Trump appeal to those that did not attend college, but for some reason he has an appeal to that subset of our nation.
You can be an arrogant blow-hard and even delusional and a fabricator; but that's not as bad as being a condescending elitist, which is the real problem with those on the coasts (and one problem with Hilllary . . . but only one of many).
Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
(09-15-2020, 04:46 PM)Farm93 Wrote: I am not so sure the election is as much of a sure thing as those living in the SF Bay Area bubble might believe. The swingy states have a lot of people that are closer to re-electing Donald Trump. I really don't get the Donald Trump appeal to those that did not attend college, but for some reason he has an appeal to that subset of our nation.
You can be an arrogant blow-hard and even delusional and a fabricator; but that's not as bad as being a condescending elitist, which is the real problem with those on the coasts (and one problem with Hilllary . . . but only one of many).
Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
09-16-2020, 06:08 AM
Conservative pundit and columnist Mona Charen wrote a great piece last week about the parallels between 1980 and 2020. I was too young to be interested in that election and only really remember the Iran hostage crisis, so found it enlightening. She pointed out how Carter led Reagan by as many as 8% in polls at the beginning of October. This was in spite of the country facing a recession, high interest rates, inflation, and that Iran hostage crisis including the failed attempt to rescue the hostages by military force under his watch.
Her thesis is that unbeknownst to the pollsters at the time, Americans were ready to fire Carter but were reluctant to try the new guy in seemingly difficult times. All voters needed to see was Reagan look like someone they could see as a a credible POTUS. That happened in the debate, and was enough to completely change the election outcome into a Reagan landslide.
Charen believes the country is in a very similar position today. The electorate is ready to fire the incumbent - as evidenced by the fact he is already less popular than Carter was - and if they see a legit alternative in the debates, the challenger will win an electoral college route.
Her thesis is that unbeknownst to the pollsters at the time, Americans were ready to fire Carter but were reluctant to try the new guy in seemingly difficult times. All voters needed to see was Reagan look like someone they could see as a a credible POTUS. That happened in the debate, and was enough to completely change the election outcome into a Reagan landslide.
Charen believes the country is in a very similar position today. The electorate is ready to fire the incumbent - as evidenced by the fact he is already less popular than Carter was - and if they see a legit alternative in the debates, the challenger will win an electoral college route.
Conservative pundit and columnist Mona Charen wrote a great piece last week about the parallels between 1980 and 2020. I was too young to be interested in that election and only really remember the Iran hostage crisis, so found it enlightening. She pointed out how Carter led Reagan by as many as 8% in polls at the beginning of October. This was in spite of the country facing a recession, high interest rates, inflation, and that Iran hostage crisis including the failed attempt to rescue the hostages by military force under his watch.
Her thesis is that unbeknownst to the pollsters at the time, Americans were ready to fire Carter but were reluctant to try the new guy in seemingly difficult times. All voters needed to see was Reagan look like someone they could see as a a credible POTUS. That happened in the debate, and was enough to completely change the election outcome into a Reagan landslide.
Charen believes the country is in a very similar position today. The electorate is ready to fire the incumbent - as evidenced by the fact he is already less popular than Carter was - and if they see a legit alternative in the debates, the challenger will win an electoral college route.
Her thesis is that unbeknownst to the pollsters at the time, Americans were ready to fire Carter but were reluctant to try the new guy in seemingly difficult times. All voters needed to see was Reagan look like someone they could see as a a credible POTUS. That happened in the debate, and was enough to completely change the election outcome into a Reagan landslide.
Charen believes the country is in a very similar position today. The electorate is ready to fire the incumbent - as evidenced by the fact he is already less popular than Carter was - and if they see a legit alternative in the debates, the challenger will win an electoral college route.
09-16-2020, 06:59 AM
(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
09-16-2020, 10:44 AM
(09-16-2020, 06:59 AM)2006alum Wrote:(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
Fade to a remake of the scene in 'Taxi Driver' with a 70-year-old Robert DeNiro challenging "are you talking to me? Are you talking to me?" Thanks 06 for the chuckle.
(09-16-2020, 06:59 AM)2006alum Wrote:(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
Fade to a remake of the scene in 'Taxi Driver' with a 70-year-old Robert DeNiro challenging "are you talking to me? Are you talking to me?" Thanks 06 for the chuckle.
09-16-2020, 10:45 AM
(09-16-2020, 06:59 AM)2006alum Wrote:(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
Good. Then you'll be well acclimated to the New Guy come January.
(09-16-2020, 06:59 AM)2006alum Wrote:(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
Good. Then you'll be well acclimated to the New Guy come January.
(09-16-2020, 10:45 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-16-2020, 06:59 AM)2006alum Wrote:(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
Good. Then you'll be well acclimated to the New Guy come January.
Already very well acquainted after 2009-2017, and in different respects, 2017-present.
(09-16-2020, 10:45 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-16-2020, 06:59 AM)2006alum Wrote:(09-15-2020, 10:55 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Fortunately for those shocked by the Trump election, Joe Biden is more like the old coot uncle in the attic . . . the kind of family member that most of us all have, including those in the swingy states.
After spending a fair amount of time on this board, I've grown pretty familiar with the type... ;)
Good. Then you'll be well acclimated to the New Guy come January.
Already very well acquainted after 2009-2017, and in different respects, 2017-present.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »