Sturgis COVID now in 3 states (and North Dakota isn't answering the phone)

[Mongidig]

oh, a Trump voter posting that is just too perfect.

I'm not voting for Trump and I'm not gonna tell you again!

 

[CaughtInThe]

I'm not voting for Trump and I'm not gonna tell you again!

yeah. not buying it. hell, i'm to the point where i just assume every Trump defender/supporter lies a lot.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Minnesota links 7 more COVID-19 cases to Sturgis - StarTribune.com


"Health officials say a total of 22 Minnesotans with infections attended motorcycle rally."

 

[Fiddytree]

come on. people in North Dakota should be just as likely to get COVID as a dude in NY City.

Population density does play a role, however, generally speaking, what works in New York would work in the plains states.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Moderate Right]

South Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska

One would think it's in North Dakota too.


Coronavirus cases linked to Sturgis Motorcycle Rally now found in Minnesota, 2 other states

On June 18th, California started a mask mandate with over 4,000 new daily cases and over 100 deaths daily. Two months later, California has over 4,000 new daily cases and over 100 deaths daily. Why doesn't that make the news and yet a rally with 250,000 attendees and only around 25 positive cases is what makes the news? Why aren't you calling out California for their failed mask mandate?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Population density does play a role, however, generally speaking, what works in New York would work in the plains states.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Indeed "population density" DOES play a role. Those people who live within 100' of other people in "State 1" are likely to require the same preventive/ameliorative measures as those people who live within 100' of other people in "State 2" and those people who live more than 1,000' of other people in "State 1" are likely to require the same preventive/ameliorative measures as those people who live more than 1,000' of other people in "State 2".

Not only that, but the preventive/ameliorative measures required for those people who live within 100' of other people are likely to be more stringent than the preventive/ameliorative measures required for people who live more than 1,000' of other people REGARDLESS of whether they are living in "State 1" or "State 2".

Unfortunately they haven't quite worked the bugs out of the legislation to provide "Graduated by Residential Separation Distance" preventive/ameliorative measures.

Of course, should they ever actually work the bugs out of the legislation to provide "Graduated by Residential Separation Distance" preventive/ameliorative measures, you can count on a plethora of lawsuits based on the legislation's "violation of the equal protection and treatment" provisions of the US constitution (which would mean that the legislation would be stayed until after the US Supreme Court has made its final ruling on the matter).

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

On June 18th, California started a mask mandate with over 4,000 new daily cases and over 100 deaths daily. Two months later, California has over 4,000 new daily cases and over 100 deaths daily. Why doesn't that make the news and yet a rally with 250,000 attendees and only around 25 positive cases is what makes the news? Why aren't you calling out California for their failed mask mandate?

Did you know that there is a difference between "trying something that should work but ends up not working as well as you had hoped it would" and "not trying at all"?

 

[Moderate Right]

Did you know that there is a difference between "trying something that should work but ends up not working as well as you had hoped it would" and "not trying at all"?

Did you know that when you try something that doesn't work you should admit that it didn't work instead of continuing to spread the lie everywhere that it did work?

 

[CaughtInThe]

Did you know that when you try something that doesn't work you should admit that it didn't work instead of continuing to spread the lie everywhere that it did work?

Why bring Trump branded miracle elixirs into this?

 

[Luce]

You know, since there's no stopping this sort of thing, I am contenting myself with laughing at it.

 

[Moderate Right]

Why bring Trump branded miracle elixirs into this?

Will you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

 

[Luce]

Will you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

Hmm. How about that extract of oleander? How's that working out?

 

[Moderate Right]

Hmm. How about that extract of oleander? How's that working out?

Will you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

 

[Fledermaus]

Will you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

Only because of stupid people doing stupid things in a stupid way.

 

[Moderate Right]

Only because of stupid people doing stupid things in a stupid way.

ill you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

 

[Luce]

Will you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

I just want to watch MAGA voters consume oleander. Is that so wrong?

 

[Moderate Right]

I just want to watch MAGA voters consume oleander. Is that so wrong?

So, you can't admit that mask mandates don't work.

 

[Fledermaus]

ill you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

It would work if people weren't stupid.

I live here. I see stupid everyday.

 

[Moderate Right]

It would work if people weren't stupid.

I live here. I see stupid everyday.

So, you are admitting that mask mandates don't work.

 

[Fledermaus]

ill you admit that the mask mandate in California doesn't work?

I did for those who followed instructions.

 

[Fledermaus]

So, you are admitting that mask mandates don't work.

It does for those who use them....

But there are idiots. I saw a COVID Karen today.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Did you know that when you try something that doesn't work you should admit that it didn't work instead of continuing to spread the lie everywhere that it did work?

Since what you are referring to HAS worked in every other country but the US, possibly you might want to look at whether the US was actually trying to make it work.

​

 

[CaughtInThe]

Since what you are referring to HAS worked in every other country but the US, possibly you might want to look at whether the US was actually trying to make it work.

View attachment 67292898

View attachment 67292899

View attachment 67292900

View attachment 67292901

View attachment 67292902​

don't **** up his argument with math. they're not good at math.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

don't **** up his argument with math. they're not good at math.

I know that it isn't polite to actually use facts in an Internet "debate" but you might find



(which is an appendix [that I do not post routinely since I only started generating it recently and the data run is still too short for my liking] to the "Death Chance vs. USA" table in my previous post) interesting.

That chart projects the date (the "BLUE DATE") when Italy and the UK will have a chance that a person selected at random in them will have LESS THAN a 105% chance of dying from COVID-19 than will a person selected at random in the US (under the conditions on the specified date).

When that happens that will mean that people in every single G-8 country, China, and the (aggregated) World will have a LOWER chance of dying from COVID-19 that will people in the United States of America.