Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Jeff Buchanan]

I'd be fine with that, but there's enough folks in the gathering that insist on a 14-day quarantine that it wouldn't work.

You already know you won't convince the folks in the gathering that the CDC has just recently reduced both quarantine and isolation to 10d. There's consideration to bring it down to as low as 5d and that number is emerging in Europe although PH authorities there are going for 7d. The basis for these lower number of days is that studies are finding that most infected individuals stop shedding virus after 5d from initial exposure/infection.

The other factor bearing on these official reductions in time spent isolating or quarantining is that it's believed infected people won't comply with 2 weeks of being locked down and start venturing out right away when they are still infectious, shedding virus but feeling nothing more than cold symptoms. The prospect of less time spent locked up would probably precipitate better initial compliance with isolating - that being the most important time to do it.

WRT 14d or even 10d of quarantine, that entire approach is being questioned. Initially, it was thought that it can take up to 14d for symptoms to appear after infection and meanwhile, a mildly infected and asymptomatic person is unknowingly shedding virus. Now it is commonly believed by virologists that regardless of the degree of infection (viral load), symptoms appear within 3d and at most 5d. Outliers are rare.

[AlabamAlum]

Yeah, he can't press that though, Jeff. If he argued them into giving in (and he probably could), he and his family would be -in their minds- the causative agent and pariahs if anyone gets Covid-19 in the next 6 months. "Only concerned about themselves and trying to kill his mom and dad!'

[AlabamAlum]

Speaking of Covid, this next week will be rough, I believe. I will we will see significant growth in case load between now and the end of next week.

[iam416]

All of that is true, Jeff, but the lowest risk threshold wins out on this one. And, btw, I'm fine with that. I've said all along that I think individuals should deal with the risk as they best see fit. If DSL wants to bark at the moon/PDJT from his basement for 2 years to protect his elderly parents, then godspeed.

What I've argued repeatedly is that a variety of factors inflated that perceived risk well beyond the actual risk and that it's not an area the government should tread w/o extremely good cause (I was fine with the initial 6-8 weeks b/c at that point the risks weren't as well-known).

So, it is what it is. My parents have come down to visit me and my brother (we're both in the area) and sit outside. So, I've seen them 3 or 4 times this fall.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Speaking of Covid, this next week will be rough, I believe. I will we will see significant growth in case load between now and the end of next week.

Correct ....... it's going to suck and naysayers and COVIDKarens are going to bath in the light of, "I told you so you stupid people that didn't lock yourselves in your basements." Now, bend over and take all the moronic rules I'm going to impose on you in the ass.

By the end of January, praise will issue forth claiming that the curves have flattened or are down trending because we locked your asses down. Trump will claim responsibility for it and that if he'd been reelected nobody would have spent time in their basements and businesses wouldn't have gone bankrupt.

[Hannibal]

My mom is 80, so at best, she is going to come to my house and have coffee/hot chocolate with us one morning. That's all of the extended family that we'll be seeing this year. No brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, etc.

[AlabamAlum]

Yeah. Have a friend who us an epidemiologist. He’s concerned. Exponential growth is expected over the next few weeks. They’ll blame Christmas, and to be honest, there will be some truth in that accusation.

[Hannibal]

15 days to flatten the curve will soon be 15 months to flatten the curve, and it's going to gradually morph into "15 years to flatten the curve" and finally end up at "Build back better", which is the International Great Reset slogan that Joe Biden adopted.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Roy Moore (yes, that Roy Moore) has submitted his own brief in the Texas case and unless I'm reading it wrong, he suggests all early voting is unconstitutional because it doesn't take place on the individual date chosen for the election by Congress.

Unclear why that would only invalidate votes in 4 critical states to Donald Trump's reelection, and not everywhere, but there it is.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...us%20Brief.pdf

BTW, I did see that Utah's outgoing Governor and the incoming Governor have both denounced the lawsuit. The AG of Utah signed on without their involvement. Like I mentioned, the lawsuit implies that PA's vote-by-mail system is unconstitutional without mentioning why the mail-in systems of, say, Utah, are not equally unconstitutional.

https://www.abc4.com/news/governor-g...ction-lawsuit/

[CGVT]

It’ll be gone in 15 days has turned into 15 months...

[Hannibal]

The lawsuit says that the systems in PA, WI, GA, MI, and AZ are unconstitutional because they violate those own states' laws, which violates Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution. The complaint of the lawsuit lays out about a dozen ways in which the election rules were materially changed in those states, by either executive action or court order.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The lawsuit says that the systems in PA, WI, GA, MI, and AZ are unconstitutional because they violate those own states' laws.

And the State Supreme Court in each of those states has already said otherwise. State Supreme Courts are usually regarded as the final authority when it comes to interpreting a state's constitution, but the AG of Texas considers himself to be above them. I'm sure he reached that conclusion after a careful study of all 50 state constitutions and discovered that only those 4 were in violation.

BTW, this was pointed out by Andy McCarthy in that National Review article I posted last night: the Soliciter General of Texas' name doesn't appear anywhere in that document. That's who would normally represent the State of Texas in a suit brought to the Supreme Court, yet he apparently has nothing to with it.

AG Paxton was indicted for securities fraud 5 years ago and is currently under investigation for bribery by the FBI. He's dragged out his fraud case through endless delays. Exactly what we might call a Trump Man.

[Hannibal]

And the State Supreme Court in each of those states has already said otherwise.

Which is why I don't expect the Texas lawsuit to go anywhere, because I don't see the USSC wanting to override those decisions, but they are hearing the case.

I'm only familiar with the PA case, which was decided by a clearly partisan Democrat majority on the bench. I don't know if there are cases in other states that challenged the election rules as having been materially changed by court order or executive action. Maybe there are new arguments being made that the state courts did not hear, but I don't know.

I don't see this as some kind of dangerous precedent since there is a section of the Constitution specifically devoted to this issue.

If Democrats want to argue that Trump won Ohio and Florida because of material changes to the election process that occurred by court order or executive action, then feel free.

[CGVT]

They don’t need to.

the election is over. Trump lost

[Hannibal]

Here is a very good refutation of the Cicchetti "analysis"

https://reason.com/volokh/2020/12/09...ity-at-scotus/

To arrive at Cicchetti's numbers requires you to make 2 hugely wrong assumptions:

1) Voters in 2020 had the EXACT same voting preferences as in 2016.

2) Voters who voted in-person have the EXACT same voting preferences as people who voted by mail.

As the author points out, you could have created an equally eye-popping statistic showing it's a statistical impossibility that Trump could win PA or WI in 2016 if you start on the assumption the final numbers "ought" to look identical to 2012.

Why are you anti-science?