Lurker > pistachio12

Antifar posted...

Nah, this is tactics, not money.

Nah its both.

The Buttigieg campaign sunk most of their money into Iowa and New Hampshire to try and get wins. They wanted those wins to help propel him into a strong Super Tuesday. It helped for Nevada, but the results in South Carolina show that he cannot garner any black support. Despite all the Super PACs talk about Buttigieg, he really didn't have the money to spend it on massive ad campaigns in Super Tuesday states. He could never compete with Biden's or Bloomberg's money there, so he hoped media coverage would be good enough for him. I also think those that invested in Buttigieg see these results and have no reason to invest money into his campaign anymore and are instead putting those funds into a Biden campaign.

I honestly think his campaign is out of money and they are trying to look good to the Biden campaign by backing out now.

Josiah_Is_Back posted...

Part of the issue here is semantics. If you verbally asked someone "What is negative four squared?" that question implies, or is typically interpreted as, what mathematically would be symbolized as (-4)^2.

That's not -4^2.

It's even more than that.

People see the expression "-4^2" and they think it verbally states "negative 4 squared" when it in fact does not. Unfortunately people are not fully taught carefully how to read mathematical expressions out loud, which then causes confusion for questions like this.

KobeSystem posted...

Being pedantic matters in math tbh

People would rather be stupid than precise it seems.

toyota posted...

Well being objective here, its not exactly the same thing is it? despite it often being treated as such

Some facts, Auschwitz was initially estimated as a 4 million death count. But is widely accepted to be 1.1-1.3 million deaths now. Thats a near 3 million discrepancy. Doesnt make the whole holocaust any less despicable and horrific.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_concentration_camp

Let's just continue with your Wikipedia sources:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Holocaust_denial

A much-quoted instance of disputing the toll is the "Breitbard Document" (actually a paper by Aaron Breitbart),[73] which describes a commemorative plaque at Auschwitz to the victims that died there, which reads: "Four million people suffered and died here at the hands of the Nazi murderers between the years 1940 and 1945." In 1990, a new plaque replaced the old one. It now says, "May this place where the Nazis assassinated 1,500,000 men, women and children, a majority of them Jews from diverse European countries, be forever for mankind a cry of despair and of warning." The lower numbers are due to the fact that the Soviets "purposely overstated the number of non-Jewish casualties at Auschwitz-Birkenau," according to the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Holocaust deniers insist that the number of Jews killed therefore be lowered by at least 2.5 million. However, the plaque had never been used as an accurate historical source by mainstream historians.[74][75][76] As early as the 1950s, Raul Hillberg estimated 1.1 million Jewish deaths in Auschwitz.[77]

Keith_Valentine posted...

Were in good, strong, large hands.

Glad to see Keith starting to finally change his tune. We were under stronger hands with Obama before we got Trump.

There is no doubt that Bloomberg hired people to cheer for him in the crowd. Somebody really needs to call him out on this publicly and ask those people in the crowd what they're getting paid.

Rimmer_Dall posted...

So you want to make people watch gay sexual acts until they are so desensitized to it they no longer find it disgusting. That is quite disturbing.

What a stupid comment, as are most in this topic.

Most gay people don't have a visceral reaction to watching straight people in real life or film have a physical encounter with someone. I could even watch straight or lesbian porn in a non-sexual context and be perfectly okay with it.

Yet many people go out of their way to say they wouldn't watch a movie like Call Me By Your Name or Brokeback Mountain because it depicts gay sex or a gay relationship and they find it gross. Exposure to those things should make you more comfortable with the acts in the long run - probably why most people are not affected by straight sexual acts.

Despite how confrontational TC is being in this topic, his/her point still stands.

PatrickMahomes posted...

EDIT: AAaaand he blocked me. Wow.

He blocked me on page 2 after I mentioned his alarmism.

Continued:

9. What is the probability that this will be contained and eradicated or will it be endemic in the human population?

If it is like SARS it will not be endemic. It most likely will be a hit and run just like SARS. People talk about mutation but what we found with SARS was that there was no mutation and we have been tracking MERS and we have not seen any severe mutation. This is unlike the common coronavirus which when they replicate they dont have a spell check so they mutate. So if this virus follows the same path as SARS or MERS it wont mutate. This will not be endemic. I think it will burn itself out in about 6 months.

10. Does mortality rate typically increase over time? That was apparently the case with SARS.

With SARS we didnt know how long the virus was alive for. So with SARS in the later stages people were not dying of SARS but of the complications of SARS which is why the mortality rate increased. But now people are much more aware of the dangers of over immunosuppression. So the death rate shouldnt be more severe.

In Hubei, the milder cases are not making it to the hospital. Because they are so overwhelmed that milder cases are being sent away. So thats why its important not to look at the mortality rate in Wuhan but to look at the mortality rate in Shanghai or Shenzhen or outside of Wuhan. Its very important to dissect it out.

No crazy conspiracies. Just probable under-reporting in Wuhan/Hubei due to logistics and the increased load of cases causing a higher mortality rate than elsewhere.

Here's something I got on my WeChat:

CLSA Conference call with Coronavirus expert

Overnight in Asia, we hosted a call with professor John Nicholls a clinical professor in pathology at the University of Hong Kong and expert on coronaviruses. He was a key member of the research team at the University of Hong Kong which isolated and characterized the novel SARS coronavirus in 2003. Hes been studying coronaviruses for 25 years.

Below is an abstract for the laymen.

*Quick summary*: look at the fatality rate outside of Wuhan - its below 1%. The correct comparison is not SARS or MERS but a bad cold which kills people who already have other health issues. This virus will burn itself out in May when temperatures rise. Wash your hands.

1. What is the actual scale of the outbreak? How much larger is it compared to the official confirmed cases?

People are saying a 2.2 to 2.4% fatality rate total. However recent information is very worthy - if you look at the cases outside of China the mortality rate is <1%. [Only 2 fatalities outside of mainland China]. 2 potential reasons 1) either chinas healthcare isnt as good thats probably not the case 2) What is probably right is that just as with SARS theres probably much stricter guidelines in mainland China for a case to be considered positive. So the 20,000 cases in China is probably only the severe cases; the folks that actually went to the hospital and got tested.

The Chinese healthcare system is very overwhelmed with all the tests going through. So my thinking is this is actually not as severe a disease as is being suggested. The fatality rate is probably only 0.8%-1%. Basically, this is a severe form of the cold.

2. Your colleague at HKU estimated that the size of the infected population on Jan 25th was 75K with a doubling time of 6.4 days. So by 1 Feb we would have 150k infected. How accurate do you think these models are and how accurate have they been in the past?

Those figures did not take into account restriction on travel, quarantine etc These reports are likely on the high side. This is not taking into account social distancing. Historically these models have not been all that accurate.

3. When do you think this thing will peak?

*Three things the virus does not like 1) sunlight 2) temperature and 3) humidity.*

Sunlight is really good at killing viruses. Thats why I believe that Australia and the southern hemisphere will not see any great infection rates because they have lots of sunlight and they are in the middle of summer. And Wuhan and Beijing is still cold which is why theres high infection rate.

As regards temperature, the virus can remain intact at 4 or 10 degrees for a longer period of time. But at 30 degrees then you get inactivation.

The virus doesnt like high humidity either. Thats why I think Sars stopped around May and June in 2003. The environment will be unfavourable for growth around May. The evidence is to look at the common cold its always during winter. So the natural environment will not be favourable in Asia in about May.

*The second factor is that of personal contact.*

With Sars *once it was discovered that the virus spread through the fecal oral route there was much less emphasis on the masks and far more emphasis on disinfection and washing hands*. HK has far more cleanliness (than China) and they are very aware of social hygiene. And other countries will be more aware of the social hygiene (than China). So in those countries you should see less outbreaks and spreading.

A couple days ago the fecal-oral route of transmission was confirmed in Shenzhen. In China, most of the latrines are open- theres more chance of the virus being spread.

4. Have we seen any super spreaders? We saw that with Sars and Mers.

Theres talk about that but the epidemiologists are still overwhelmed so no clear answer. But I dont think there are any super spreaders.

5. What is the percentage of people transmitting the virus while being asymptomatic?

Patients were symptomatic at about day 5, some of these cases may be asymptomatic until about day 7. Thats based on the first publications. Asymptomatic is probably the first 5 days.

Theres a paper published looking at a familial cluster with a boy who was shedding the virus and he was asymptomatic.

Thats something about kids and we saw with Sars. Very few kids had very severe disease. We are trying to determine if this is a virus which we call low (unintelligible) kind of inducer or high (unintelligible) kind of inducer. SARS is high [unintelligible] kind of inducer. This means that when it infects the lower part of the lung, the body develops a very severe reaction against it and leads to lots of inflammation and scarring. In SARS what we found is that after the first 10 to 15 days it wasnt the virus killing the patients it was the bodys reaction.

We are doing testing on this now. Is this virus in the MERS or SARS kind picture or is this the other type of virus which is a milder coronavirus like the NL63 or the 229. I think this will be a mild (unintelligible) kind inducer.

6. Are you seeing any difference among the young population and older population in terms of mortality rate?

SARS went really for people in their 30 or 50 years. And MERS on the other hand basically people who have co-morbidity.

The data coming out of China seems to indicate that its those with co-morbidity are most at risk. For the seasonal influenza thats also what we find. Its the people with co-morbidity that have a higher mortality rate.

This looks more like the seasonal influenza where those who die have co-morbidity. Now that we have better case control definitions outside of mainland China, we will get a true assessment of the fatality rate. I would now put it at about 0.8% to 1% when you look at all the death reports.

At this stage its a really bad cold which can cause problems in people. People are talking about the lethal virus but seasonal influenza can cause deaths in elderly but we dont call that the lethal influenza

7. Theres news reports that antivirals are being used and that its working what are your thoughts on that?

With SARS it didnt seem to work at all with the commercially available antivirals. But there seems to be good effects with the case in Washington with the Gilead agent. And it sounds like China will be using it.

Interferon works and it has quite a bit of benefit.

8. The recovery rate now is higher than the deaths rate? What does it mean for a patient to have recovered?

What we found is that in HK with SARS we didnt know how long to treat a patient for. Now in C

DundiesAward posted...

Democrats do this all the time.

Actually Republicans are more notorious for doing this. Despite the fact they claim they're a party of principles, most just conform to whatever Republican they have in front of them to beat back those dirty Democrats. There are far more divisions in the Democratic party and certainly enough people that wouldn't vote for a specific Democratic candidate if there's is not nominated.

D E E G S posted...

I'll vote Trump every time because Bernie has nothing to offer me.

Besides healthcare, a safer future, greater stability, etc.

foreverzero212 posted...

I just checked *ahem* (that certain site) to make sure I remembered correctly and I did. Discussions have proven to be a waste of time with you so I'll leave that to others that are still willing and I'll bow out. Good night yall

What are you even on about? You haven't even engaged in a conversation - just accusations.

foreverzero212 posted...

No one actually thinks like this. Especially not to defend what's going down in Iowa. You can't have the most niche perspective in the world and expect not get it sniffed out on multiple accounts.

It's not that this specific instance bothers me. Iowa was clearly a cluster fuck and there is definitely a lot to complain about it. I'm just more annoyed with other conspiracy theories floating around like Buttigieg intentionally gave money to design the app to not work so that he can claim victory, despite the fact they will have back-up paper records of all the votes. I also hate the need for people to call Buttigieg a rat and Warren a snake - it steals directly from Trump giving his political opponents dumb nicknames and it reeks of lacking the ability to counter arguments.

Now if you want to actually engage in a conversation rather than calling me an alt (although I guess Broseph would be my alt but whatever), let's go for it.

foreverzero212 posted...

Everyone knows broseph is pistachio so what's the purpose of waffling between accounts.

If you say so. I'm pretty sure Broseph doesn't support Sanders will I actually do. I just hate the online contingent of his supporters that will find any thing to complain about it.

Omnislasher posted...

The discussion is about what has been caused by the bungling and shady shit around Iowa, not the technical results insofar as we even have them.

The most basic effect of this fiasco has been to obscure the results of Iowa. The whole story now and all that anyone who isn't following the absurd minutiae of this fucking mess is taking away from it is that the Democrats botched their caucus in Iowa, it's unclear who won, we don't know yet, there were technical problems, etc etc. That being the case, what the average person ISN'T taking away from this, or at least as much as they would have been, is "holy shit the presumed front-runner just came in a distant FOURTH (might actually be fifth) in the first contest!?"
So that's how it helps Biden.

Bernie won. We know well that he won more votes on both initial count and after realignment. When(if?) they finally figure this shit out he'll probably end up with the most SDEs as well but that point barely matters. In Buttigieg's own words, he believes "the person who gets the most votes ought to be the winner". Nevertheless, because of the delays and the specific and seemingly arbitrary but actually probably purposeful manner in which they rolled out the results, the gutless rat Buttigieg was able to be the one to go out on stage Monday night and baselessly claim that he was "victorious" moving on to N.H. Meaning that was the only real headline that the media had to go with and Buttigieg benefited from that phony media narrative in the following few days.
Sanders, on the other hand, was denied the opportunity to come out of Iowa with the major boost that was hard earned by the campaign.

There was also a major debacle before the caucus even started. Buttigieg's campaign managed to get the major CNN Iowa poll that was to come out the day before the caucus withdrawn on a very minor technical complaint. That poll showed Bernie in 1st, Warren in 2nd, Buttigieg in 3rd, and Biden in 4th. They were going to do a whole special on it. It was canceled; people didn't see it. That helps both Buttigieg and Biden and hurts Bernie and Warren.

I agree with your assessment about Biden actually and just had that in my most recent post.

I also think we're evaluating too much into the minutiae. Buttigieg did get the media boost because he claimed victory right away. That's politics. But if Sanders does end up winning, we might get to see if Buttigieg's early victory claim will overall help or hurt him.

I am also aware of the poll results that got pulled. My main point here is that people are reading this as a crazy conspiracy against Sanders and/or bad news for sanders but I'm not sure we can safely say that yet. Sanders now has the best odds on 538 even with this whole mess.

UnfairRepresent posted...

erm

Post #14 explains that pretty well.

You didn't read the explanation then asked what the explanation is?...

Conspiracy theories are not explanations. Buttigieg declared victory because internal metrics said he might win and he wanted to capitalize with media coverage for New Hampshire.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Biden was literally destroyed by Buttigieg. This was a campaign ender for him. He's going to stay until super Tuesday and that's when he will pull out.

I am speaking specifically to the terrible rollout of these results, not the actual results themselves. If there should be any conspiracy theory, it should be the Iowa DNC slow-stepping the results to protect Biden.

How does this negatively impact Sanders but benefit everyone else?

Sanders was already surging and seemed to have a strong New Hampshire coming up. After Iowa and Biden's seemingly poor showing, Sanders is now tracking for wins in more states and is clearly the front runner.

Buttigieg would want a more definite win here because this miasma surrounding a potential win here gives him less of a bump than actual definite win would.

Warren would like to have results shown because it's clear she came in third but the question was how close was her showing. With the vague results we have, her campaign is scrambling.

Biden is probably the least affected here.

Unless Sanders was 100% the definite winner on all accounts, these shenanigans have actually helped Sanders and his campaign the most.

solosnake posted...

You wont find news reporters on site. That is the benefit of social media.

The people who are getting these videos out are risking their well being by doing so.

I will say again, there are features built into this site to hide topics and ignore users

Use it if you dont like being informed.

I think it's important for there to be people calling you out for your idiotic fear-mongering posts.

There is no evidence any of these videos related to Wuhan and not just random videos from China reposted now to make some false narrative. For instance, trucks drive around China streets all the time spraying things. But that one video must mean they are spraying some chemicals to protect against the virus! Stupid.

solosnake posted...

https://twitter.com/howroute/status/1224916416509480960

See you're posting Twitter links from a guy in Hollywood who is reposting Twitter accounts from random accounts that have no discernible credibility. Stick with news articles please.

Awesome posted...

theres also new videos of doctors dancing and people walking the streets saying theres nothing wrong, its called disinformation which is being used by their government. And theres a lot of information and sites i wont post for obvious reasons.

If you think all the wechat articles and posts are dancing doctors and sunshine, you're even more naive than I initially thought. Good luck with your paranoia.

Awesome posted...

yeah they are, citizens can only use vpns for social media, twitter is banned over there and only savvy and risk takers people are getting by. They are deleting a lot of information and confiscating phones.

why are people so defensive of the chinese government right now?

That's always the case with social media. There were reports that detailed how in late December and early January, China was restricting information about the disease. Where's the proof of that now?

China's head medical official just gave a press conference where information was released about the spread of the disease during the incubation period. If they were in a blackout, they surely wouldn't have done that would they? If you go on their social media WeChat, there are numerous articles being shared and posted about the virus and information both from the government and people in Wuhan. When I look back at them now, they're still there even multiple days later.

You exclusively seem to get your information from Twitter. Don't confuse your intake of information with the rest of people.

Awesome posted...

china is in a media blackout.

It's not.

Omnislasher posted...

normally you aren't a person worth responding to but since a lot of people will say/think this:
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/dont-fall-for-it-the-nader-myth-and-your-2016-vote/

The Democratic Party has been blaming others for their own failures for a long time now.

That article doesn't debunk anything. In fact their claim that if Nader didn't run Bush would have won Florida by more votes is absurd. It's not right to put the full blame of 2000 and 2016 on third party candidates playing spoiler, but the argument they present (and then the sources they use) don't actually provide support for their own argument.

MuayThai85 posted...

with it mutating, that can change at any time. I'm not saying that it will, but if this isn't contained, it has the potential to not only kill a ridiculous amount of people (if it becomes a global pandemic and saying 20% of people contract it globally and it has a 2% mortality, that is potentially 28 million dead), but also destroy the economies of countries in the process via overwhelming the medical industry, mass shutdowns of manufacturing jobs, etc.

Not even 20% of Wuhan's population have cottages the disease. Not even 0.2%. Let's not get absurd with these wild estimates based on pure speculation.

MuayThai85 posted...

Just ordered a bunch of masks. They might not be 100% effective but it's better to have them. Ordered 60 adult ones and 20 children ones. The shop on taobao I ordered from sold over 20,000 of them this month (likely most in the last few days) and they are a good price. They are the kind with the filter.

They say you should cut up your old masks and dispose of them in the hazardous trash so people don't reuse or try to sell old masks.

Smashingpmkns posted...

There's a huge difference between innocuous endorsements from B-list celebrities and receiving money from billionaires that are actively destroying the world.

From what I can tell, six billionaires or spouses of billionaires have donated $2,800 to Warren's campaign. And this point would be more substantial if the target were only billionaires, but many Bernie supporters take the upper middle class supporting Warren as signs of her elite status.

Bernie team: "Elizabeth Warren is the candidate of the elites!"

Also Bernie team: "Joe Rogan has endorsed us!"

Of course you can swap out Joe Rogan for any other celebrity that has endorsed him. I still really like and support Bernie but his loudest supporters and campaign people are starting to swing back into that 2016, "us against everyone", vibe.

Awesome posted...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1220353202291453952

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1220225957459460096

Can we trust these tweets? That guy is clearly not in China let alone Wuhan and seems to be reposting other videos.

nemu posted...

Yeah, I've never understood why having that at the table is a thing in so many places. Just cut off all the meat and leave it in the kitchen where it belongs.

Defacing meat is one thing that contributed to Americans (and other cultures) eating so much meat. It also does remove the idea that other parts of the animal can be eaten and are healthy too.

ssjevot posted...

I still live and work there (there being Japan). I used to live and work in the USA through 2017.

Interesting. Everyone I know that has worked in Japan has hated it - even those who were obsessed with Japan and still really do like it. What do you do for work?

ssjevot posted...

It sure does, but I never find myself wanting to return to the USA.

Did you visit there or work there?

The Trent posted...

Soy soy = I am soy?

Soy I am. More enlightened.