On the @SWAtlasHoover front, there’s a fascinating story to be told that @Stanford and particularly the @HooverInst has been a hot spot of covid misinformation from basically the beginning of the pandemic. It’s not just Atlas.
2/ Remember those early and largely discredited antibodies studies out of Santa Clara and LA counties. Again folks at @HooverInst. There were real questions of ethics violations on this one, not just shoddy work. theguardian.com/world/2020/apr…
3/ Then there’s the pompously entitled Great Barrington Declaration, basically a brief for letting everyone get sick and getting herd immunity. Again, Stanford/Hoover, Jay Bhattacharya, the one with the discredited antibodies studies.
4/ Most of these folks like Atlas are doctors but have no expertise in epidemics or even infectious disease. But there’s also John Ioannidis, a legit expert on epidemics who’s basically been pushing covid denialism since the beginning. Again, Stanford/Hoover.
5/ For true hackdown there’s Richard Epstein, a law and economics hack at Hoover. He was the one who had the much cited article predicting 500 deaths from covid for the entire epidemic. One of his many theories was that the virus wld quickly weaken because that’s ...
6/ what nonsensical theories developed in the law and economics bubble world told him. nymag.com/intelligencer/…
7/ Seriously the list goes on and on. Most of the people who have fancy titles and degrees and have been either constantly wrong about covid or often peddling misinformation are associated with Stanford.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Josh Marshall

Josh Marshall Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @joshtpm

11 Nov
One thing to keep in mind. Reporters snd TV hosts keep repeating that there is no evidence of “widespread” vote or “substantial” vote fraud. This is better that accepting Trumps lies. But it’s wrong snd dangerous. There is in fact no evidence of ANY fraud.
2/ Certainly there will be isolated instances of someone somewhere who did something wrong. The only case so far in Pennsylvania is one where a Trump supporter tried to vote in the name of his dead mother. But this is meaningless and well meaning journalists are muddying ...
3/ the water by saying no “widespread fraud”. That suggests that there has been fraud or evidence of fraud but it’s not widespread, not enough to effect the outcome of the election. Again, false.
Read 6 tweets
10 Nov
Remember this too. It's not even that the GOP claims are unsubstantiated. They don't actually have any claims. They amount to just saying it just doesn't look right and mail in voting seems weird. Those aren't claims. The closest they come is this charge that GOP ...
2/ election observers were removed from the counting area. But that charge is one the campaign's lawyers have admitted in court is not true. There's no argument to have because they're not actually making any claims. Indeed, in their pressers they kept asking for "patience" ...
3/ so they can come up with some explanation of why they're not accepting that the President lost.
Read 4 tweets
9 Nov
To expand on exchange with @MattGrossmann, first yes, this is a uphill. This is absolutely true. I want to be cleat I'm not disputing that at all. Also, it will be nationalized. Again, that's obvious. There are key advantages GOPs have. One of the biggest is that suburban ...
2/ crossover has been driven by Trump. This will be a first test of the durability of that shift. Additionally, GOPs will now be able to play on voters' desire for balance. Can say, sure you voted for Biden. But don't you want a check on Biden too? Well, vote for the GOP, etc.
3/ On the other hand, it's clear that Trump turned out a lot of people for him, a lot of fairly occasional voters. It's an open question to me how many of those voters still turn out now that he's not on the ballot and (as will become clear) and that he lost.
Read 8 tweets
9 Nov
President Trump's extended tantrum is a complicated thing to get a hold of. On the one hand it's basically criminal in any civic sense. I'm pretty confident it will result in at least some people getting killed - hopefully not many. It also leaves at least some of his ...
2/ opponents with some lingering fear that somehow he'll cheat the system and stay. And yet at the same time it has created a sort of schadenfreude time dilation event. Politics is a contact sport with a lot of heartache and jubilation at critical moments. Normally ...
3/ Trump's diehard opponents would have had one press conference or evening where they savored the reality of his defeat. But here, he basically keeps losing each day. His own furious impotence keeps driving headlong into the same wall each day we move forward.
Read 10 tweets
8 Nov
Oh dear. I was just checking out this new fusillade from Glenn Greenwald which I had heard announces that Donald Trump's presidency was far more lawful and benign than President Obama's. This seems entirely in character and provides some helpful context to his generally ...
2/ loyal defenses of Donald Trump. I will say this. Given the particulars of the blow up last month, someone really does need an editor pretty badly. But then I noticed there's actually a dig at me! I may have gotten under Glenn's skin.
3/
Read 6 tweets
8 Nov
Let me explain something about this "faithless electors" issue because I keep getting asked about it. This is the idea that the election could be overturned by Trump convincing electors in the electoral college to switch their votes. This will absolutely not happen. Here's why.
2/ The electors aren't random people or government bureaucrats. Each candidate has a slate of electors in each state chosen by the candidate, by the campaign. These are hardcore party loyalists and hardcore supporters of the candidate. They're going to think it over again ...
3/ and cast their vote for Trump? I don't think so. One might as well imagine that members of Biden's own campaign leadership are going to vote for Trump. The whole idea is absurd. The only case where the 'faithless elector' issue can come up is if there's some staggering ...
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!