• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Democratic Party National Convention 2020

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
8,013
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
Democratic Convention Moves to Smaller Venue, as Delegates Are Urged to Stay Away

It looks as if the Democratic Party isn't planning on much of a convention this year. Delegates email in their ballots, a screen shows the totals.

The Stated Reason is concerns over Covid. It is not even a given at this point that Biden will attend. Most of the official business (bylaws, platform, the formal counting of votes) will be done off site. Also cancelled will be all the parties that usually happen around convention time. It won't even be live televised, but will instead be taped and then released.

I suspect this is done in part to really shut up the Bernie Bros. They can't have their protest at the convention to get platform concessions. They can't have negotiations that put a few people from the Bernie camp into cabinet positions. And they can't go outside and burn cars if they don't get their way. Of course that might not be the Actual Reason, or the only Actual Reason, but I'm pretty sure it plays in.
 
Really? The Democrats aren't the anti-science party, I see no reason to doubt the stated purpose of these rules.
 
I don’t buy the story that this change “is to shut up the Bernie Bros”. There’s a pandemic on. No other reason makes any impat on the decisions that the pandemic dictates. You can’t take a 100% need for a certain course of action based on one input and say, “well they probably did it for this other reason, too,” when there was absolutley no chance that the first reason would result in any other thing than the chosen course of action.


Pandemic is 100% reason enough to go virtual.
No additional reason changes it, so no additional reason can be claimed to be “partly why” they went virtual.
 
Also, wouldn't taking the party largely online tend to benefit the Bernie Bros? Moderate Democratic politicians tend not to be very computer literate relative to their younger, smarter colleagues. Hard to plot a fascist blockade when you have to call your grandson over to help you re-set up your internet, because the phone cord you were using for your modem doesn't quite stretch from the kitchen jack to the "computer room" and it keeps coming loose..
 
Also, wouldn't taking the party largely online tend to benefit the Bernie Bros? Moderate Democratic politicians tend not to be very computer literate relative to their younger, smarter colleagues.

LOL, I see what you did there.
 
Democratic Convention Moves to Smaller Venue, as Delegates Are Urged to Stay Away

It looks as if the Democratic Party isn't planning on much of a convention this year. Delegates email in their ballots, a screen shows the totals.

The Stated Reason is concerns over Covid. It is not even a given at this point that Biden will attend. Most of the official business (bylaws, platform, the formal counting of votes) will be done off site. Also cancelled will be all the parties that usually happen around convention time. It won't even be live televised, but will instead be taped and then released.

I suspect this is done in part to really shut up the Bernie Bros. They can't have their protest at the convention to get platform concessions. They can't have negotiations that put a few people from the Bernie camp into cabinet positions. And they can't go outside and burn cars if they don't get their way. Of course that might not be the Actual Reason, or the only Actual Reason, but I'm pretty sure it plays in.

Yes, I'm sure that this would have been very true. Before the invention of the internet!
 
Really? The Democrats aren't the anti-science party, I see no reason to doubt the stated purpose of these rules.

They are so pro-science that their fear of Covid goes far beyond the scientific data available about the dangers of Covid.



You're now going to tell me I said Covid is completely safe and a hoax.
No need, as you have not really contradicted my point. Whether or not they are justified in their beliefs (in your insulting-adjectives-tactfully-deleted opinion), they have no political capital attached to refusing Covid-related precautions, so why wouldn't they? Self preservation is a historically powerful motivator.
 
I don’t buy the story that this change “is to shut up the Bernie Bros”. There’s a pandemic on. No other reason makes any impat on the decisions that the pandemic dictates. You can’t take a 100% need for a certain course of action based on one input and say, “well they probably did it for this other reason, too,” when there was absolutley no chance that the first reason would result in any other thing than the chosen course of action.


Pandemic is 100% reason enough to go virtual.
No additional reason changes it, so no additional reason can be claimed to be “partly why” they went virtual.

Exactly.

And, btw, several of the Republicans in the Senate have said that they aren't going to attend the Republican convention because of the virus. Too bad the rest of them are stupid enough to attend. Afterwards, they will come back home and spread more cases in their neighborhoods.
 
You're now going to tell me I said Covid is completely safe and a hoax.

No, not completely. Liberpublicans rarely commit to anything at all "completely".
But underselling the pandemic and the severity of its general health risks is standard fare. Of course you are ignoring the iceberg under the tip of the death stats:

'Posted by a friend:


"Chicken pox is a virus. Lots of people have had it, and probably don't think about it much once the initial illness has passed. But it stays in your body and lives there forever, and maybe when you're older, you have debilitatingly painful outbreaks of shingles. You don't just get over this virus in a few weeks, never to have another health effect. We know this because it's been around for years, and has been studied medically for years.

Herpes is also a virus. And once someone has it, it stays in your body and lives there forever, and anytime they get a little run down or stressed-out they're going to have an outbreak. Maybe every time you have a big event coming up (school pictures, job interview, big date) you're going to get a cold sore. For the rest of your life. You don't just get over it in a few weeks. We know this because it's been around for years, and been studied medically for years.

HIV is a virus. It attacks the immune system, and makes the carrier far more vulnerable to other illnesses. It has a list of symptoms and negative health impacts that goes on and on. It was decades before viable treatments were developed that allowed people to live with a reasonable quality of life. Once you have it, it lives in your body forever and there is no cure. Over time, that takes a toll on the body, putting people living with HIV at greater risk for health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, diabetes, bone disease, liver disease, cognitive disorders, and some types of cancer. We know this because it has been around for years, and had been studied medically for years.

Now with COVID-19, we have a novel virus that spreads rapidly and easily. The full spectrum of symptoms and health effects is only just beginning to be cataloged, much less understood.
So far the symptoms may include:
Fever
Fatigue
Coughing
Pneumonia
Chills/Trembling
Acute respiratory distress
Lung damage (potentially permanent)
Loss of taste (a neurological symptom)
Sore throat
Headaches
Difficulty breathing
Mental confusion
Diarrhea
Nausea or vomiting
Loss of appetite
Strokes have also been reported in some people who have COVID-19 (even in the relatively young)
Swollen eyes
Blood clots
Seizures
Liver damage
Kidney damage
Rash
COVID toes (weird, right?)

People testing positive for COVID-19 have been documented to be sick even after 60 days. Many people are sick for weeks, get better, and then experience a rapid and sudden flare up and get sick all over again. A man in Seattle was hospitalized for 62 days, and while well enough to be released, still has a long road of recovery ahead of him. Not to mention a $1.1 million medical bill.

Then there is MIS-C. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children is a condition where different body parts can become inflamed, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal organs. Children with MIS-C may have a fever and various symptoms, including abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, neck pain, rash, bloodshot eyes, or feeling extra tired. While rare, it has caused deaths.

This disease has not been around for years. It has basically been 6 months. No one knows yet the long-term health effects, or how it may present itself years down the road for people who have been exposed. We literally *do not know* what we do not know.

For those in our society who suggest that people being cautious are cowards, for people who refuse to take even the simplest of precautions to protect themselves and those around them, I want to ask, without hyperbole and in all sincerity:
How dare you?

How dare you risk the lives of others so cavalierly. How dare you decide for others that they should welcome exposure as "getting it over with", when literally no one knows who will be the lucky "mild symptoms" case, and who may fall ill and die. Because while we know that some people are more susceptible to suffering a more serious case, we also know that 20 and 30 year olds have died, marathon runners and fitness nuts have died, children and infants have died.

How dare you behave as though you know more than medical experts, when those same experts acknowledge that there is so much we don't yet know, but with what we DO know, are smart enough to be scared of how easily this is spread, and recommend baseline precautions such as:
Frequent hand-washing
Physical distancing
Reduced social/public contact or interaction
Mask wearing
Covering your cough or sneeze
Avoiding touching your face
Sanitizing frequently touched surfaces

The more things we can all do to mitigate our risk of exposure, the better off we all are, in my opinion. Not only does it flatten the curve and allow health care providers to maintain levels of service that aren't immediately and catastrophically overwhelmed; it also reduces unnecessary suffering and deaths, and buys time for the scientific community to study the virus in order to come to a more full understanding of the breadth of its impacts in both the short and long term.

I reject the notion that it's "just a virus" and we'll all get it eventually. What a careless, lazy, heartless stance.' "​

So yeah, you are basically siding (as usual) with Trump and his suckers.
 
Franklin Veaux provides a shorter course for you Jason, if the previous post tires you out:

F.V. said:
How can a disease with 1% mortality shut down the United States?

There are two problems with this question.

It neglects the law of large numbers; and
It assumes that one of two things happen: you die or you’re 100% fine.

The US has a population of 328,200,000. If one percent of the population dies, that’s 3,282,000 people dead.

Three million people dead would monkey wrench the economy no matter what. That more than doubles the number of annual deaths all at once.

The second bit is people keep talking about deaths. Deaths, deaths, deaths. Only one percent die! Just one percent! One is a small number! No big deal, right?

What about the people who survive?

For every one person who dies:

19 more require hospitalization.
18 of those will have permanent heart damage for the rest of their lives.
10 will have permanent lung damage.
3 will have strokes.
2 will have neurological damage that leads to chronic weakness and loss of coordination.
2 will have neurological damage that leads to loss of cognitive function.

So now all of a sudden, that “but it’s only 1% fatal!” becomes:

3,282,000 people dead.
62,358,000 hospitalized.
59,076,000 people with permanent heart damage.
32,820,000 people with permanent lung damage.
9,846,000 people with strokes.
6,564,000 people with muscle weakness.
6,564,000 people with loss of cognitive function.

That's the thing that the folks who keep going on about “only 1% dead, what’s the big deal?” don’t get.

The choice is not “ruin the economy to save 1%.” If we reopen the economy, it will be destroyed anyway. The US economy cannot survive everyone getting COVID-19.

ETA:
Wherethehell are they getting this "1% mortality" figure, anyhow?
In the US we have 3,410,381 cases and so far we have 137,759 dead. That's over 4%. (And even THAT neglects to consider the 15,380 active cases listed as currently 'serious/critical') The only reason to assume the 1% figure is to also assume that 75% of cases that have occurred have not been reported. I hope that the reality is at least that, and hopefully it's more like 90% of cases unreported, so the mortality rate is 0.4% rather than 4%.
Otherwise you have republitards saying "so what" about 13,128,000 Americans dead. And right now we don't know.
To revive an old conservative saw, regarding a nationwide lockdown:
"If it only saves one million lifes, wouldn't it be worth it?"
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom