advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 16, 2020 07:39PM
... and sure enough, someone already wrote an article about it:

[www.csmonitor.com]

As visual proof, I offer this:






Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: rgG
Date: May 16, 2020 09:31PM
Lol. I am not going to wear red for a while.





Roswell, GA (Atlanta suburb)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 16, 2020 09:57PM
... the point being, the red and blue's vastly different perceptions of, attitudes toward, and responses to the virus have resulted in a ideological chasm which will likely have real-world consequences.

While it's predominantly the blue cities that have gotten the hardest hit so far, the blue folks are also the ones who are more likely to take the virus seriously... and so if there is a second, third, fourth wave due to dropping of restrictions, it's likely it'll be the redshirts who die first. Just like in Trek. Fewer redshirts could have a consequence come November.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/16/2020 09:58PM by PeterB.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: samintx
Date: May 17, 2020 07:43AM
Will all this tribalism be a a turn on or turn off to citizens? To vote.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: May 17, 2020 12:58PM
Quote
PeterB
While it's predominantly the blue cities that have gotten the hardest hit so far, the blue folks are also the ones who are more likely to take the virus seriously... and so if there is a second, third, fourth wave due to dropping of restrictions, it's likely it'll be the redshirts who die first.

I have to question your assumptions here. In San Francisco (one of the bluest cities in America), as soon as restrictions were lifted people were out in public in crowds, same as in Madison...


I don't think that it's possible to separate out cleanly the self-centeredness that drives some folks to brunch and the desperation that drives other folks to work, commute, and care for others despite increased risks. The virus doesn't care who transmits it or what their politics are. I worry that imagining that being a supporter of the president will make you more at risk of covid-19 elides some really important factors, especially ones that drive the working poor into necessary hazards.

I know that I harbor desires to foist the most responsibility for the continued pandemic on right-wingers, and some of that is well-deserved. But, if we can't figure out how to let people both eat and stay safe, the problem won't go away because we solve the rhetoric.



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 17, 2020 03:10PM
Quote
rjmacs
Quote
PeterB
While it's predominantly the blue cities that have gotten the hardest hit so far, the blue folks are also the ones who are more likely to take the virus seriously... and so if there is a second, third, fourth wave due to dropping of restrictions, it's likely it'll be the redshirts who die first.

I have to question your assumptions here. In San Francisco (one of the bluest cities in America), as soon as restrictions were lifted people were out in public in crowds, same as in Madison...


I don't think that it's possible to separate out cleanly the self-centeredness that drives some folks to brunch and the desperation that drives other folks to work, commute, and care for others despite increased risks. The virus doesn't care who transmits it or what their politics are. I worry that imagining that being a supporter of the president will make you more at risk of covid-19 elides some really important factors, especially ones that drive the working poor into necessary hazards.

I know that I harbor desires to foist the most responsibility for the continued pandemic on right-wingers, and some of that is well-deserved. But, if we can't figure out how to let people both eat and stay safe, the problem won't go away because we solve the rhetoric.

I'm speaking in relative terms, not absolutes, of course. People in blue cities or "blue people" (if you want to call them that) can be just as stupid or uninformed as those in red. They're just (apparently) less likely to behave in that way, if you believe the data mentioned in the CS Monitor article.

Example:



... more data here: [fivethirtyeight.com]




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/17/2020 03:22PM by PeterB.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: May 18, 2020 10:08AM
Quote
PeterB
I'm speaking in relative terms, not absolutes, of course. People in blue cities or "blue people" (if you want to call them that) can be just as stupid or uninformed as those in red. They're just (apparently) less likely to behave in that way, if you believe the data mentioned in the CS Monitor article.

...

... more data here: [fivethirtyeight.com]

But the highlighted quote at the beginning of the linked 538 articles says:

Quote
FiveThirtyEight

Republicans are less likely to support public health measures due to the coronavirus, but they are just as likely as Democrats and independents to obey them. In other words, Republicans might grumble about some of the preventive measures more, but they’re still taking the same precautions as everyone else.

huh smiley



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 18, 2020 02:35PM
Quote
rjmacs
Quote
PeterB
I'm speaking in relative terms, not absolutes, of course. People in blue cities or "blue people" (if you want to call them that) can be just as stupid or uninformed as those in red. They're just (apparently) less likely to behave in that way, if you believe the data mentioned in the CS Monitor article.

...

... more data here: [fivethirtyeight.com]

But the highlighted quote at the beginning of the linked 538 articles says:

Quote
FiveThirtyEight

Republicans are less likely to support public health measures due to the coronavirus, but they are just as likely as Democrats and independents to obey them. In other words, Republicans might grumble about some of the preventive measures more, but they’re still taking the same precautions as everyone else.

huh smiley

Yeah, that doesn't quite make sense to me either, and doesn't seem to be supported by the published data.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: May 18, 2020 03:26PM
Quote
PeterB
Quote
rjmacs
Quote
PeterB
I'm speaking in relative terms, not absolutes, of course. People in blue cities or "blue people" (if you want to call them that) can be just as stupid or uninformed as those in red. They're just (apparently) less likely to behave in that way, if you believe the data mentioned in the CS Monitor article.

...

... more data here: [fivethirtyeight.com]

But the highlighted quote at the beginning of the linked 538 articles says:

Quote
FiveThirtyEight

Republicans are less likely to support public health measures due to the coronavirus, but they are just as likely as Democrats and independents to obey them. In other words, Republicans might grumble about some of the preventive measures more, but they’re still taking the same precautions as everyone else.

huh smiley

Yeah, that doesn't quite make sense to me either, and doesn't seem to be supported by the published data.

It doesn't seem to be supported by one study (based on data collected in late March, so a bit out of date at this point). It certainly seems to be supported by some studies referenced on 538's page, but though the evidence is more recent it's also mixed. It seems like partisan differences have some effect on mitigation behaviors, but the disparities in behavior remain much smaller than the disparities in attitudes.

Here's one graphic cited on 538:



This is complicated stuff, and on this point I think it might be a little too dynamic to draw clear conclusions.....



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 18, 2020 04:55PM
Quote
rjmacs
Quote
PeterB
Quote
rjmacs
Quote
PeterB
I'm speaking in relative terms, not absolutes, of course. People in blue cities or "blue people" (if you want to call them that) can be just as stupid or uninformed as those in red. They're just (apparently) less likely to behave in that way, if you believe the data mentioned in the CS Monitor article.

...

... more data here: [fivethirtyeight.com]

But the highlighted quote at the beginning of the linked 538 articles says:

Quote
FiveThirtyEight

Republicans are less likely to support public health measures due to the coronavirus, but they are just as likely as Democrats and independents to obey them. In other words, Republicans might grumble about some of the preventive measures more, but they’re still taking the same precautions as everyone else.

huh smiley

Yeah, that doesn't quite make sense to me either, and doesn't seem to be supported by the published data.

It doesn't seem to be supported by one study (based on data collected in late March, so a bit out of date at this point). It certainly seems to be supported by some studies referenced on 538's page, but though the evidence is more recent it's also mixed. It seems like partisan differences have some effect on mitigation behaviors, but the disparities in behavior remain much smaller than the disparities in attitudes.

Here's one graphic cited on 538:



This is complicated stuff, and on this point I think it might be a little too dynamic to draw clear conclusions.....

I'd been digging through the Navigator website, and there's all sorts of interesting data there, but you're right that unfortunately it's maybe a bit too dynamic to draw clear conclusions. I'd like to see data on mask usage, but that's probably asking too much -- and anyway, you'd have to question how honest people are going to be on self-reporting.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: rgG's post below gave me a thought...
Posted by: Speedy
Date: May 18, 2020 11:28PM
Quote

Republicans are less likely to support public health measures due to the coronavirus, but they are just as likely as Democrats and independents to obey them. In other words, Republicans might grumble about some of the preventive measures more, but they’re still taking the same precautions as everyone else.

Uh, they make a lot of noise about their rights and so forth but they aren’t taking any chances that they might catch the virus - except for a relatively small number of idiots.



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 211
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020