A lot of people on the left rightfully point out that Trump spent months priming the 2020 excuse of a stolen elections by discouraging mail voting among supporters and then citing the disparity to claim fraud.
Now the Democrats are likely headed for a massive ass-whooping in November and their entire focus seems to be on creating an excuse by undermining faith in the electoral system, with the media's help.
It's not going to matter that turnout will almost assuredly be higher in 2022 than 2018. Democrats are preparing to cite state laws and redistricting to explain the wave despite those clearly having little impact. It's the only reason for the current propaganda effort.
Dems know these bills aren't going to pass so why are they spending all their time on them and having the media target their own members?
Simply to have that built-in excuse in November. And it's being created at the expense of faith in our elections.
I mean if you say "GA passed a law that expanded voter access relative to any pre-pandemic election, but we think it should go further," no one is going to attribute a coming loss to that law. But when you say it's Jim Crow 2.0, now Dem voters assume it's making some huge impact.
They need their base to believe the conspiracy because it's easier than to admit that the Party has become increasingly unpopular and keeps alienating most voters due to their focus on appeasing far-left activists on Twitter and in the press.
P.S. If we had a somewhat responsible and objective press, they'd be holding Dem claims to the same standard they held Trump & co for their voter fraud claims.
"How is this like Jim Crow?"
"Who specifically is prevented from voting under this law?"
"These claims are false" etc
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I hope people learn a lesson from this, but seems doubtful.
Fwiw it seemed rather obvious that it was false to me from the start, but the consistent pattern is that people in the press are very gullible when it comes to things that make those they don’t like look bad.
Never mind. I now see they are instead doubling down because they already fell for a narrative and can’t help themselves.
Ps there is 0 reason for a vaccinated, boosted, and regularly tested Justice to wear a mask. Especially around others that are similarly protected.
Lol they will literally keep doubling down and getting embarrassed. It would be funny if it wasn’t for the fact that these people have large platforms and so many rely on them for accurate information.
Not to pick on this, but this is just based on misinformation and bad risk analysis. The hospitalization rate for vaccinated adults isn't anywhere near 1%. Even under Delta, it was 3.9 out of 100K cases or .0039%.
If Omicron is even 25% milder, you're down to under 3 per 100K. Mask is going to do little to slow down the spread among vaccinated. Even if cases are 2-3X (probably) w Omicron, that's not driving hospitalizations except for people taking up waiting rooms demanding to be tested.
The hospitalizations with this Omicron peak once you remove the large increase in incidental hospitalizations are not exceeding what they were during last winter's Delta-peak. Vaccinated people wearing masks might make some people feel better, but not going to help hospitals.
Weird for a NYT writer to reference “the truth of the matter” and then just invent a fact. The substance also isn’t comparable. And lastly, even more embarrassing for this reference, that vote required 2/3 majorities and got it.
In fact, the House originally failed to pass it because they couldn’t get to the 2/3rds threshold.
About a month ago, Imperial College's Neil Ferguson (also known as Professor Lockdown) projected UK would reach 5K deaths per day in this wave without major restrictions.
The UK tested that theory. Cases have peaked and are crashing. Current 7 day-average of deaths is 246.
At the time, the media also extensively spread claims from Ferguson's team that there is no evidence that Omicron was milder than Delta. That was indisputably wrong.
The point is that it's about time we start holding people who want to influence public policy accountable for the inputs based on which they make their recommendations. The UK has based a lot of policy on projections and recommendations made by that team. That should stop.
A lot of the vaccine-skeptics don't have any skepticism for the people they get information from. Ex: A common reply I get re Vax efficacy is that they know people who have gotten vaccinated and then gotten Covid-19. Clearly true and proves vax have less than 100% efficacy. (1/)
But they don't apply same logic to claims by people they are taking info from. Ex: A central claim from Dr. Peter McCullough, one of the most prominent anti-vax people, is actually getting Covid-19 gives you permanent immunity.
Here he is saying it on Rogan's podcast recently:
But we know there are tens of thousands of people right now getting re-infected. I personally know 2 people that have had Covid-19 3 times. He's claiming 100% efficacy for natural illness. Easily checkable, but no one holds him to that claim.
Problem here is that Berenson relies on people being easily manipulated/bad at math.
Ex of how this works: If there are 400 vaccinated adults and 100 unvaccinated and 20% get exposed to Covid-19. If vaccines are 50% effective, 40 vaccinated and 20 unvaccinated get Covid-19.
Berenson will then say "See? twice as many people that are vaccinated got Covid!. Vaccines actually hurt you" when truth is that data shows you're half as likely to get Covid-19 with the vaccines.
Obviously wrong but bc people are frustrated w 0-Covid side, they buy into it.