What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Politicizing Coronavirus. Agree Or Disagree? (1 Viewer)

Agree or Disagree With The Quote?

  • Totally Agree

    Votes: 60 42.9%
  • Mostly Agree

    Votes: 37 26.4%
  • On The Fence

    Votes: 5 3.6%
  • Mostly Disagree

    Votes: 18 12.9%
  • Totally Disagree

    Votes: 20 14.3%

  • Total voters
    140
honestly, who cares?

all i care about is getting our country back on firm footing, controlling the spread of the disease and alleviating peoples concerns.   Anyone involved in financial markets (most of us have a 401K so most of us are involved at arms length) cares more about the above than which side can spin it for politics.   What a stupid thing, if you really think about it, to politicize a potentially catastrophic worldwide virus.   If ever there's a moment where you would think politics don't matter, this would be it.  

 
for the record, I'm not advocating taking anything to an extreme.  My general thesis is that incomplete data is better than no data, and that for this case, overreaction is better than underreaction.  
Hahaha.....but when dealing with the general public, extreme is very possible

 
kutta said:
This is what’s strange to me. Anyone who says they think things are overblown and people are overreacting are suddenly linked to Trump. That’s politicizing the issue.
I was  specifically referring to his calling it fake news and the statistics he threw out were very similar to Trump.  His rhetoric very specifically reflected things Trump has said.  

 
Hahaha.....but when dealing with the general public, extreme is very possible
well, the only extreme we are seeing right now is stocks getting crushed (Saudi Arabia not helping), and demand disruptions for some consumer goods.  I suppose from the context  of "it's just the flu," that's pretty extreme.  From the context of China and Italy (i.e. completely quarantined), it's quite benign.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The lack of testing in this country should be politicized.  It's enabling poor decisions and delays.  In Texas we can manage perhaps 150 tests a day.  That's not right.  

I don't believe this act was intentional on the CDC behalf, but it allows some the ammunition to both downplay this and delay action while promoting unneeded panic if the situation is not warranting of such a response.  There were 2+ months to at least prep for testing.  

 
honestly, who cares?

all i care about is getting our country back on firm footing, controlling the spread of the disease and alleviating peoples concerns.   Anyone involved in financial markets (most of us have a 401K so most of us are involved at arms length) cares more about the above than which side can spin it for politics.   What a stupid thing, if you really think about it, to politicize a potentially catastrophic worldwide virus.   If ever there's a moment where you would think politics don't matter, this would be it.  
On the flip side, isn't crisis management and the ability for a government to keep its populace safe and secure on of the most important calculations in terms of who we want leading us? At all levels of government, but certainly those in executive positions.

That doesn't excuse using this for political gain, especially not when we should be wholly focused on health and safety, but it absolutely is fair game in terms of whether someone has earned our truth that they can lead and manage when stakes are most high.

 
Also, I see no real evidence of anyone using this to stump for Medicare for all or even how that would solve such a crisis.  Anyone doing that has as little understanding of this issue as one who thinks tax cuts will fix it. 

 
Also, I see no real evidence of anyone using this to stump for Medicare for all or even how that would solve such a crisis.  Anyone doing that has as little understanding of this issue as one who thinks tax cuts will fix it. 
Umm.  The President of the United States and the radical right Republican party ALL think tax cuts will fix this.  Side bar - they run the show.

 
On the flip side, isn't crisis management and the ability for a government to keep its populace safe and secure on of the most important calculations in terms of who we want leading us? At all levels of government, but certainly those in executive positions.

That doesn't excuse using this for political gain, especially not when we should be wholly focused on health and safety, but it absolutely is fair game in terms of whether someone has earned our truth that they can lead and manage when stakes are most high.
yes-  and the proof will be in the pudding.   This is like a slow moving 9/11 so we don't have the shock of waking up and seeing carnage the next day, but the potential for slow developing carnage is real and on a much greater scale than one day in September many years ago.   If that doesn't take you out of your political bubble, i don't know what to say  (royal you, not YOU personally)

 
It's impossible to remove politics from the situation.  It would be nice if it were less, but that's not the world we live in.

 
I hate how everything has a political/taking sides slant. I was listening to the SiriusXM coronavirus channel for a few minutes yesterday and there was a doctor talking about the South Korea testing - 190k results and 0.6 mortality rate. He was comparing it to the flu and talked about a past outbreak (bird flu?) where the initial mortality rate was over 3 but ended up being around 0.1. 

I hadn't seen those South Korea numbers before, so I thought great! Maybe with high level testing and reaction this can be contained with less damage than the larger mortality rate the WHO released. But then a quick google search shows the doctor was a Fox News guy who was probably just following the Trump party line. And then I thought about how many people wouldn't do any research and just take what he said as gospel- after all he's a doctor on a dedicated coronavirus channel. And then I thought how people end up watching fox news in the first place and sure, this guy said something I wanted to hear with a version of evidence to support it. Anyway, I guess I'm making this political here but has had me thinking the past 24 hours. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate how everything has a political/taking sides slant. I was listening to the SiriusXM coronavirus channel for a few minutes yesterday and there was a doctor talking about the South Korea testing - 190k results and 0.6 mortality rate. He was comparing it to the flu and talked about a past outbreak (bird flu?) where the initial mortality rate was over 3 but ended up being around 0.1. 

I hadn't seen those South Korea numbers before, so I thought great! Maybe with high level testing and reaction this can be contained with less damage than the larger mortality rate the WHO released. But then a quick google search shows the doctor was a Fox News guy who was probably just following the Trump party line. And then I thought about how many people wouldn't do any research and just take what he said as gospel- after all he's a doctor on a dedicated coronavirus channel. And then I thought how people end up watching fox news in the first place and sure, this guy said something I wanted to hear with a version of evidence to support it. Anyway, I guess I'm making this political here but has had me thinking the past 24 hours. 
So are the results true or false?  You seem to be dismissing them just because you believe it's a party line thing because the "doctor was a Fox News guy".  I don't see where you came up with evidence one way or the other. 

I have no idea as I haven't looked into it but aren't you doing the exact same thing you are commenting against in this post?

 
well, the only extreme we are seeing right now is stocks getting crushed (Saudi Arabia not helping), and demand disruptions for some consumer goods.  I suppose from the context  of "it's just the flu," that's pretty extreme.  From the context of China and Italy (i.e. completely quarantined), it's quite benign.
There’s a lot more than that. Concerts being cancelled, flights being cancelled, sporting events being played with no fans. Heck, a big Army conference that I attend every year was just cancelled (AUSA), and they may cancel a really big one in Nashville next month (AAAA).

This affects hotel workers, stadium workers, convention workers, businesses that attend conventions, airline employees,  thousands and thousands of people. 
 

It’s way more than the stock market and consumer goods.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Saw this today:

Do you Agree or Disagree with what's quoted above?
In no order:

- The media is over-hyping this story, and, too often, it appears to be mainly in reaction to the President's comments or actions. Some of this is fair game. In a time of crisis, the President is expected to lead. I think it's fair to say that this President doesn't present himself as a leader especially when compared to past leaders. In addition, is the administration's reaction showing the urgency, importance and seriousness of the situation? All very valid points. It would probably appear less partisan if CNN, FOX and others didn't have partisans answering these questions vs. medical experts. It's fairly easy to predict what any pundit is going to say and you can learn more listening to a health expert.

- Trump created a task force with Pence leading and several medical experts. That is a good move. From what I've seen, Pence appears to be letting the medical experts answer the medical questions and there doesn't appear to be any obstacles to them getting their messaging out. The task force team though needs to do more - they haven't been able to answer how many tests have been conducted, plans for the cruise ship on the West Coast seemed unprepared, and there has been valid criticism of some of their other responses. The President should let the task force do their jobs, and not undermine them with tweets and/or conflicting statements.

- I do think the President's decision to restrict travel from China was a smart move. However, the administration did not use the time it bought to prepare the country (i.e. ensuring testing kits were present). How they were so unprepared, and still catching up, is completely unacceptable.

- Hopefully the task force will help with this, but be transparent. As testing ramps up and community spread increases, the number of people infected will likely spike to frightening numbers. Don't downplay, under-report, etc. Get it out there and be honest. The virus isn't political. The President could actually look like a leader by being honest, letting the American people know that cases are likely to spike, as we have seen in other countries, for the next few months. Don't talk about a vaccine that isn't coming for another year as if it's about to be released.

- Politicians need to avoid unnecessary fighting. If a stimulus bill is needed, and both sides agree, get in a room and figure it out without the days of partisan bickering. This is not likely to happen in an election year with the country divided on most issues so don't expect this to not drive most of the coverage on CNN, etc.

 
So are the results true or false?  You seem to be dismissing them just because you believe it's a party line thing because the "doctor was a Fox News guy".  I don't see where you came up with evidence one way or the other. 

I have no idea as I haven't looked into it but aren't you doing the exact same thing you are commenting against in this post?
They're true (though still understated) for that specific South Korea data point but they're false/misleading in terms of using them as a global predictor which is what the doctor was doing. I want the whole picture and I'll make decisions, not one small part of the picture used to support a biased position, which is what I got in this instance (and I'd argue is basically Fox News in summary).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They're true (though still understated) for that specific South Korea data point but they're false/misleading in terms of using them as a global predictor which is what the doctor was doing. I want the whole picture and I'll make decisions, not one small part of the picture used to support a biased position, which is what I got in this instance (and I'd argue is basically Fox News in summary).
Why is it necessarily false using it as a global predictor?  Data is data and without other data it could be used as a global predictor (I am not saying it should or shouldn't......just that it could be).  Seems like  you are using your bias against Fox News to disregard the data or dismiss it as a possible global predictor.  Would you do the same if the exact data was presented by someone else?

 
Why is it necessarily false using it as a global predictor?  Data is data and without other data it could be used as a global predictor (I am not saying it should or shouldn't......just that it could be).  Seems like  you are using your bias against Fox News to disregard the data or dismiss it as a possible global predictor.  Would you do the same if the exact data was presented by someone else?
It can't be used as a predictor because we have many more data points and the one he chose to highlight is an outlier. 

I didn't know he was a Fox News guy when I was listening to him so I did take it as face value... but then I looked for more information, because that's what I do, and saw that what he was saying didn't line up with the majority of doctors, researchers, scientists, mathematicians. That's when I looked up who he was.

He was presenting "facts", but they were selected to spin things a certain way. I'm not disregarding the South Korea data at all but it's irresponsible of him to use that data to project globally when we have data from many more countries that contradicts it/shows it as a global outlier at present time. 

 
There’s a lot more than that. Concerts being cancelled, flights being cancelled, sporting events being played with no fans. Heck, a big Army conference that I attend every year was just cancelled (AUSA), and they may cancel a really big one in Nashville next month (AAAA).

This affects hotel workers, stadium workers, convention workers, businesses that attend conventions, airline employees,  thousands and thousands of people. 
 

It’s way more than the stock market and consumer goods.
small potatoes, in the grand scheme of things.

If you feel these are overreaction, consider the Biogen conference in boston a couple of weeks ago - at least 70 people from that conference now have the COVID.  

 
I think there is a logical intersection between concerns related to pandemics and politics. There needs to be policy and execution at multiple levels of government to address these kinds of things, which does enter the realm of politics. I think we definitely over-politicize these kinds of things to score points however, and I'd like to see less of that. That said, when government is ineffectual at handling crises like these, it merits criticism and consideration of the political beliefs and approaches that produced sub-optimal results.

 
Agreed. What's your take on the thought?
Citizens have every right to be upset when governments fail to properly address potential health crisis. SEE Italy, UK, USA, et al.

In the U.S. we have seen straight up gaslighting (nothing new) from 45, directly contracting health officials comments from moments before. He’s more concerned about his image and November than he is in protecting the public.

Its shameful and disgusting.

 
For the foreseeable future, everything will be politicized and slanted every which way for profit and power. I don’t see a way out of that tornado right now.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Saw this today:

Do you Agree or Disagree with what's quoted above?
I'm more worried that the guy in charge of our country is disregarding big shots and professional health care people when it comes to this simple because of ego and trying to appease to his people. Like some have said this will be Trump's Chernobyl. The dude put Sick Patients with the Virus on a public plan how dumb can you be. There's a ton of inconsistency's as well between the federal and State Governments too. 

However at the same time people are going overboard with it. Those at risk are the usually young kids/infants, the elderly and those with bad immune systems.  China 78% of their cases have now been released with full health. Compared to the SARS Virus in 04 SARS was a level 4 compared to COVID-19 a level 2. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought a forum was created for this exact kind of discussion. So what are we now determining is fair game to post in the FFA? 

 
typo, think you meant 69% Joe

To me, the original post misses the mark on what the primary issue is, because in general Western countries have been reactive (& in America, the strategy is denial.) Its pretty crazy because we have several successful social experiments demonstrating the benefits of being proactive: China, Singapore, Hong Kong, ROK, Vietnam.

Its not about politicization at all, that’s just a smoke screen.

COVID-19 Testing per capita:

Country/Province - Pop. - # Tests - /million

ROK - 51.3M - 189,236 - 3,692

Guangdong - 113.5M - 320K - 2,820

Italy - 60.5M - 49,937 - 826

Israel - 8.6M - 3,451 - 401

Netherlands - 17.1M - 6K - 350

UK - 67.8M - 23,513 - 347

USA - 329M - 1,707 (3/8) - 5

 
typo, think you meant 69% Joe

To me, the original post misses the mark on what the primary issue is, because in general Western countries have been reactive (& in America, the strategy is denial.) Its pretty crazy because we have several successful social experiments demonstrating the benefits of being proactive: China, Singapore, Hong Kong, ROK, Vietnam.

Its not about politicization at all, that’s just a smoke screen.

COVID-19 Testing per capita:

Country/Province - Pop. - # Tests - /million

ROK - 51.3M - 189,236 - 3,692

Guangdong - 113.5M - 320K - 2,820

Italy - 60.5M - 49,937 - 826

Israel - 8.6M - 3,451 - 401

Netherlands - 17.1M - 6K - 350

UK - 67.8M - 23,513 - 347

USA - 329M - 1,707 (3/8) - 5
Couldn't ignorance, egotistical and arrogance be a part of this too with denial? 

 
@Gally and @matuski: do you think China overreacted?  Is Italy overreacting right now?
Probably, yes.

I am far more concerned about the crazy individuals than what countries do, because countries have to react/account for individual crazies.

eta - which is why you see Trump desperately trying to keep down the crazy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For the foreseeable future, everything will be politicized and slanted every which way for profit and power. I don’t see a way out of that tornado right now.
Agreed.   This is why I don’t watch much news programming these days.   Politics are inserted into every topic and extremely annoying.  

 
I hate how everything has a political/taking sides slant. I was listening to the SiriusXM coronavirus channel for a few minutes yesterday and there was a doctor talking about the South Korea testing - 190k results and 0.6 mortality rate. He was comparing it to the flu and talked about a past outbreak (bird flu?) where the initial mortality rate was over 3 but ended up being around 0.1. 

I hadn't seen those South Korea numbers before, so I thought great! Maybe with high level testing and reaction this can be contained with less damage than the larger mortality rate the WHO released. But then a quick google search shows the doctor was a Fox News guy who was probably just following the Trump party line. And then I thought about how many people wouldn't do any research and just take what he said as gospel- after all he's a doctor on a dedicated coronavirus channel. And then I thought how people end up watching fox news in the first place and sure, this guy said something I wanted to hear with a version of evidence to support it. Anyway, I guess I'm making this political here but has had me thinking the past 24 hours. 
i don't know who you are talking about, but Sam Harris had on Amish ______ from Johns Hopkins who felt that the .6% number was the upper bound based on his history researching global infectious disease and the face that SK has the most reliable data set.

 
i don't know who you are talking about, but Sam Harris had on Amish ______ from Johns Hopkins who felt that the .6% number was the upper bound based on his history researching global infectious disease and the face that SK has the most reliable data set.
0.6% assumes that our heath care system is not overrun.  I don't think Italy or Iran will see numbers like that.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top