Yeah, but now there's an exclusive rights' deal it seems...like, no one bothers even presenting their own team's case any longer because that leaves you exposed to get holes poked in your garbage team's garbage points. It's better to sit back and let them make the mistake (of saying anything, mindless tweet, critical thought, or otherwise)...basically politics has opted to go second in chess, defer on both kickoffs, play the neutral zone trap...
Agreed. I think that's where we get into those "why do we care what some rando on twitter or some fox news host is saying.
If you are using my posts as an example of this, I am trying to convey that I believe there is a push to prematurely end social distancing.
There's no one singularly responsible...everyone has blood on their hands for being a DickFace Von Cockenstein in this thread, myself included, obviously...it's a dumb thread with no hope...by design. It's fulfilling its purpose.
Yes, we are going to make that mistake. But also, there's virtually no time (pre-"vaccine", though, more likely just a largely-successful treatment...as viruses aren't really a vaccine solution usually) where we won't unleash a second wave of problems...
It's been said, but if we (read: "leadership", where applicable) read the downward trend of positive cases/deaths as "the fog/mist has been lifted, we're free to go" ...we're going to get steamrolled again. That's not how this kind of thing works. If we're determined to get things rolling again - which I don't think is universally bad - it should be a softer roll-out...this way we can ration the medical resources we have as new cases crop up...and then early on in that cycle, we should develop a somewhat-effective treatment and then the soft opening grows slowly over time and eats up the idleness in the pie chart and over the span of several months things work themselves back towards normal or a new normal...