Trump: ‘Wouldn’t it be great to have all of the churches full’ on Easter?

The Sphinx

Freshman
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
1,027
I wasn’t justifying or not justifying an Easter release date. You’re just assuming that. I’m saying that there are other models out there by reputable, extremely reputable, scientists and that we need to look at all possibilities. It’s worth the discussion. I know one thing, the country cannot remain closed indefinitely.

Also, I can head out of my home anytime I want.
Ok. Then the best thing to do is to not even put a cot damn date out there, yet. Just wait. Gather the facts. Do the analysis. Listen to the experts THEN speak on aspirational dates. We're not there, yet. Not even close. Under promise and over deliver.

Totally agree the country can't remain closed indefinitely. 1000% agree with you on that. My investment portfolio has been sh*t-canned, so I completely agree.

But he needs to hold off on any date predictions for now. Resist temptation, and just tell the public that we are assessing all factors involved to determine viable re-opening dates which will be disclosed at the appropriate time.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
3,510
Politics aside (I couldn't give two f*cks about either party, just to be clear), anyone who honestly believes this country will have turned the corner and be in position to remove the 'stay at home' restrictions by Easter is a complete homer. That's worse than someone on this board spouting how our Canes can win the Natty next season.

It's nice to dream, but that's just not reality. Had Trump more realistically said 'by Memorial Day', I'd be onboard. Easter... LOL!
The worst part is some foolish people will flock to church on Easter regarless of whether the country opens up or not now that Trump has put a firm date out to the public. Let me be clear. Going to church is not foolish. Doing so in the height of this outbreak is.

To be clear, I don't even know what the president is talking about opening up the country given we don't have a national policy on social distancing or shelter in place. He can order the states to lift their orders, but he can't enforce it. They will just ignore him as several Democrat and Republican governors have extended their distancing polcies this week even after the president's return to work rhetoric.
 
Last edited:

NJshoreCane

Senior
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
3,789
The worst part is some foolish people will flock to church on Easter regarless of whether the country opens up or not now that Trump has put a firm date out to the public. Let me be clear. Going to church is not foolish. Doing so in the height of this outbreak is.

To be clear, I don't even know what the president is talking about opening up the country given we don't have a national policy on social distancing or shelter in place. He can't order the states to lift their orders.
Listen, I'm not a Trump fan, but,
If you think "Wouldn’t it be great to have all of the churches full’ on Easter? means "Trump has put a firm date out to the public", I know now where how/why we differ in opinion.

I'd like to hear the entire question as posed to him.
Regarding his response, he could have prefaced his statement by saying, It's not likely , but...
 

NJshoreCane

Senior
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
3,789
As many as it takes to educate you fools that Trump is a clueless clown. You deserve him.
You know the old joke....
Patient says to the doctor," Doctor, my arm hurts every time i raise it."
Doctor says, "Well, don't raise it."

Why do you do this to yourself?
That clueless clown has gotten to you.
What does that say about you?
 

Go Canes!!

All ACC
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
6,155
The worst part is some foolish people will flock to church on Easter regarless of whether the country opens up or not now that Trump has put a firm date out to the public. Let me be clear. Going to church is not foolish. Doing so in the height of this outbreak is.

To be clear, I don't even know what the president is talking about opening up the country given we don't have a national policy on social distancing or shelter in place. He can't order the states to lift their orders.
Please show us where Trump has put out a firm date out to the public.
 

Poptimus

Senior
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
3,175
Please show us where Trump has put out a firm date out to the public.
He hasn’t. He said at the end of the 15 day period we would assess where we’re at. That 15 days ends early next week, well in advance of Easter.

Some people would love if Trump said we’re targeting for December, once the Dow dips below 5,000.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
3,510
Listen, I'm not a Trump fan, but,
If you think "Wouldn’t it be great to have all of the churches full’ on Easter? means "Trump has put a firm date out to the public", I know now where how/why we differ in opinion.

I'd like to hear the entire question as posed to him.
Regarding his response, he could have prefaced his statement by saying, It's not likely , but...
He shouldn't have put any date especially saying Easter. It creates an expectation. People will start thinking the worst is past us when the crazy thing is at the time he's planning to open up the country is that many states (including Florida) will be going thru their peak in the virus where the healthcare system will probably be overwhelmed.

At best, he should have said he's optimistic that if everyone does their part we can all get thru this pandemic as quickly as possible. However, this president always goes for the headlines regardless of whether it hurts people. Just like he said the Malaria drug was working successfully and would be coming out soon. Then you had foolish people taking the drug and dying. That is reckless.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
3,510
Please show us where Trump has put out a firm date out to the public.
He's said Easter a thousand times. Yes, he said hopes, but that creates an expectation of a firm date that people will falsely think the worst of the pandemic is over. They hear it over and and over. The don't hear hope, might, maybe. What he's doing is reckless. There will be people that get infected and die simply because they heard his words and ignore what the scientist are saying. Just like hum saying the Malaria drug was successful at treating the virus and would be out soon. Then you have foolish people taking the drug and died.

This is so far beyond reckless because many states will be peaking in the outbreak just when he plans to tell everyone to go nack to work.
 

svenben

Freshman
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
706
small businesses can maybe weather a week or two closed down.. you get to 3-4 then millions are on the street.

This virus targets people on deaths door and with weak imune systems... have them on quarantine. let us work and provide for our families.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
3,510
Abraham Lincoln would disagree.
Actually, you are right. He can order it. However, most states would ignore him. Some states have already extended their shutdown and will ignore the order until they feel they are in a safe enough place to do so. These includes both Democratic and Republican governors.
 
Last edited:

brcane1

Sophomore
Banned
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
1,641
You realize that NOT every single pandemic expert believes that this is necessary. There are different models out there from reputable sources. It’s certainly worth having the discussion. Unless you think the scientists and Oxford are full of shlt also.

Thank you for actually posting the article! Is there a non-draft version available?

This model they provide shows the radical difference in where the UK could have been when they ran the numbers based on a key input. ρ = proportion of population at risk of severe disease. Basically if it turns out that is 1% instead of 10%, then this thing is much further along then we thought. Duh.

It doesn't really support where that number should be between the two, just referencing a few sources which have begun to try to figure it out. This is a calibration study to make sure they can adequately model the behavior once they figure out that crucial variable. The money paragraph is a plea on the on the bottom of page 1 to get more accurate and voluminous testing on both the infected and immune percentages.
 

305to954

All ACC
Joined
Jul 25, 2018
Messages
8,596
He hasn’t. He said at the end of the 15 day period we would assess where we’re at. That 15 days ends early next week, well in advance of Easter.

Some people would love if Trump said we’re targeting for December, once the Dow dips below 5,000.
yes, he did say that. Multiple times. He’s said it. IDK his motivation for throwing that date out. It was random asf. As though he was told by someone of this idea and was tryna feed the ppl a false hood of hope. And that’s the thing that’s dangerous. you do have ppl who go on his very word.




 

305to954

All ACC
Joined
Jul 25, 2018
Messages
8,596
The same ones the entire civilized world has. Man you’re making this too easy.
..and what are those. Hey maybe in my area we aren’t as “civilized” as yours..so maybe you can outline the problems your “civilized world” has with almost 25% of the world’s population..what exact problem do u have with 1.8 billion ppl?..do your problems extend to the Current and past players who put on for the U?
 
Last edited:

Go Canes!!

All ACC
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
6,155
He's said Easter a thousand times. Yes, he said hopes, but that creates an expectation of a firm date that people will falsely think the worst of the pandemic is over. They hear it over and and over. The don't hear hope, might, maybe. What he's doing is reckless. There will be people that get infected and die simply because they heard his words and ignore what the scientist are saying. Just like hum saying the Malaria drug was successful at treating the virus and would be out soon. Then you have foolish people taking the drug and died.

This is so far beyond reckless because many states will be peaking in the outbreak just when he plans to tell everyone to go nack to work.

So he didn't say firm date at all then.

And you are calling him incredibly reckless for even mentioning it because for example. two lunatics drank fish bowl cleaner from a container that had "Do not consume" in bright red letters written on it?


Yeah that's a super well thought out, factually accurate point of view with no bias in it whatsoever.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
17,698
Thank you for actually posting the article! Is there a non-draft version available?

This model they provide shows the radical difference in where the UK could have been when they ran the numbers based on a key input. ρ = proportion of population at risk of severe disease. Basically if it turns out that is 1% instead of 10%, then this thing is much further along then we thought. Duh.

It doesn't really support where that number should be between the two, just referencing a few sources which have begun to try to figure it out. This is a calibration study to make sure they can adequately model the behavior once they figure out that crucial variable. The money paragraph is a plea on the on the bottom of page 1 to get more accurate and voluminous testing on both the infected and immune percentages.
That is the draft version from Oxford university. There’s been enough time for other epidemiologist to study it, including those from imperial College, and I have yet to hear of any objections or at least would be interested in hearing their comments. As is customary, peer review is essential.

Being further along than what was previously inferred from other models is a HUGE deal. It changes the entire nature of many of the assumptions about the pandemic. Duh. The key assumptive difference being a baseline ρ value that is orders of magnitude lower.

There is no model that initially had strong support for a discrete value between range extremes.

Any model, not just this one, needs more accurate and voluminous data on both immune and infected to retrospectively verify assumptions and actual accuracy.

The takeaway is what I originally posited: there are different models from extremely reputable sources... and they don’t all agree.

The discussion needs to continue as to which is the best public policy solution and to,question this current orthodoxy.
 
Last edited:
Top