More deaths than China!!

Yes that is quite revealing.

If the Chinese are being truthful about their figures, then we are seeing a situation where a western country who has only been really hit by this for a few weeks, now has more total deaths than a country that has had this for several months and has a considerably bigger population.

Why?

It could be that the Chinese went radical with their response early on - major lockdowns (much easier of course in a surveillance society with a compliant population) and so despite being initially overwhelmed in Wuhan, China has got a measure of control over the disease. Meanwhile Italy has been caught on the back foot playing catch up, which is a warning to the rest of the western countries.

This is going to sound bonkers but could this be temperature related - Northern Italy can be very cold at this time of year - it seems to be concentrated in the North?

Quote ="Sal Paradise"This is going to sound bonkers but could this be temperature related - Northern Italy can be very cold at this time of year - it seems to be concentrated in the North?'" Surely northern Italy is not the coldest place at the moment....how come it hasn't ravaged Scotland, Russia, Scandinavia etc. This has some stuff about viruses and seasonality: https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/sc ... s-outbreak Basically says there are factors with warmer temperatures which make it harder for viruses to spread (fewer people clustering indoors; droplets hang in cold air for longer; sunlight breaks down viruses on outdoor surfaces so they don't survive as long).

Quote ="Sal Paradise"This is going to sound bonkers but could this be temperature related - Northern Italy can be very cold at this time of year - it seems to be concentrated in the North?'" Surely northern Italy is not the coldest place at the moment....how come it hasn't ravaged Scotland, Russia, Scandinavia etc. This has some stuff about viruses and seasonality: https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/sc ... s-outbreak Basically says there are factors with warmer temperatures which make it harder for viruses to spread (fewer people clustering indoors; droplets hang in cold air for longer; sunlight breaks down viruses on outdoor surfaces so they don't survive as long).

Quote ="sally cinnamon"Surely northern Italy is not the coldest place at the moment....how come it hasn't ravaged Scotland, Russia, Scandinavia etc. This has some stuff about viruses and seasonality: https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/sc ... s-outbreak Basically says there are factors with warmer temperatures which make it harder for viruses to spread (fewer people clustering indoors; droplets hang in cold air for longer; sunlight breaks down viruses on outdoor surfaces so they don't survive as long).'" Population density for one thing - Milan is approx. 8m - its the 4th largest in Europe - which is greater than the whole of Scotland, Norway, Finland, Denmark not much smaller than Sweden. Turin is c2m - Russia simply wont be reporting.

Quote ="sally cinnamon"Surely northern Italy is not the coldest place at the moment....how come it hasn't ravaged Scotland, Russia, Scandinavia etc. This has some stuff about viruses and seasonality: https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/sc ... s-outbreak Basically says there are factors with warmer temperatures which make it harder for viruses to spread (fewer people clustering indoors; droplets hang in cold air for longer; sunlight breaks down viruses on outdoor surfaces so they don't survive as long).'" Population density for one thing - Milan is approx. 8m - its the 4th largest in Europe - which is greater than the whole of Scotland, Norway, Finland, Denmark not much smaller than Sweden. Turin is c2m - Russia simply wont be reporting.

Brazil is seeing a surge in cases, and it's in the high 20s this time of year. Humidity may be a factor there, though?

Random variations as well - you wouldn’t expect it to be very uniform early on.

I did think along the same lines but from a warmer temperature perspective, with Italy and Spain on the same latitudes.

Looks like The Democrat establishment have coalesced around Biden to deny Bernie the Candidicy.
But will the Bernie supporters be interested in swopping one set establishment for another, I don’t think so

No but I think the Bernie supporters will turn out to vote for Biden (whilst making it clear they disapprove) because they would rather have a Democrat in the White House taking the Presidential powers over judicial appointments out of the hands of the Republicans, and they will fight Biden through the progressives v establishment battle within the Democrat party.

Biden will be a short-term bridge, do relatively little other than "not be a Republican". But Bernie would also only be a short-term bridge even if he won, he would not be able to achieve much of his agenda within 4 years. What Bernie has really done is brought the progressive left into mainstream US politics, especially within the Democrat party, they were on the fringes before. Unlike Corbyn, he hasn't been tainted with electoral disaster.

Since Sanders' support level is about 30% then nobody is denying him anything other than the majority of voters. His strategy was always to win in a heavily splintered field. That has cleared now and he consequently has no chance.

Superblue's point was correct though in that the Democrat establishment coalesced around Biden to make sure the centrists had a single candidate. Biden had done very badly in Iowa and New Hampshire. He won South Carolina and then the others dropped out. Before that point, Pete Buttegieg was doing better than Biden.

What would have been interesting, is if Buttegieg had still been ahead of Biden after South Carolina. Would Biden have dropped out and got behind Buttegieg...I doubt it.

I think Biden's win there gave a justification for the Democrat establishment to say to Buttegieg, Klobuchar and co - look Joe's been around a while, he's old and probably won't do two terms - get behind him, let him be the nominee this time and you will be rewarded with senior positions in his administration. Then you can position to be the Democrat nominee in 2024. Bernie and Warren probably won't run then, and the other candidates of the left (Abrams, Gillum) won't have the same profile, AOC will still be under the age threshold to be eligible, so the centrist Democrats can secure their succession for the next decade if they can get Biden elected and then have a cabal of Buttegieg, Klobuchar, Harris, Booker, O'Rourke in senior positions.

Buttegieg, much as I quite like him, had failed to build up support outside Iowa and New Hampshire. He was never ahead of Biden in national polls. Once outside the first few states, and with no discerbible bounce or expansion of support, his campaign was no longer viable.

I've no doubt there was pressure for the various moderate candidates with no chance to pull out. But that winnowing would have happened pretty quickly anyway, it always does when they start running out of money as donors see the lack of serious prospects.

Bernie's hope of winning the nomination when his support has a ceiling of around 30-35% of the vote was dependent on the split field. The biggest failure isn't some conspiracy against him, it's in his failure to capture the minds of significant blocks of the Democratic electorate. He's lost about 20% of the vote from 2016, there's no-one to blame there but his own failings or underlying lack of appeal.

“When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and carrying a Bible.”

With orange skin and questionable hair.

Do you think that DT was trying to appeal to his core voters



You have to say that he looks way out of his depth (again) but, there seems to be enough voters over there that still think he's great and this is the most scary aspect of the recent goings on.
From utter denial about the covid19 to wanting to send in the army against his own people.
He'll probably try and get an order through to prevent "blacks" voting, you know, like it was in the good old days - the guy is a butty (or two) short of a picnic.

Trump's strength is in appealing to single issue voters; religious extremists, evangelicals, gun lovers, supremacists and hard-line Republicans. This crisis is the perfect opportunity for him to push their buttons. He'll be reminding them of the up and coming reelection campaign any day soon. My guess is that he'll run with the old 'Make America Great Again' again, as silly as that sounds right now. But it will work among his base. They'll lap it up.

And they will be right, playing to strengths, weeding out the hangers on and free loaders, doing what needs to be done. Not based on colour, creed, religion but simple fact, the world is full of idiots (is your mirror working)?

Do you "help" weeding them out by kneeling on their neck until they can no longer breathe

Only you could make a giant leap from what I posted to condoning the murder of an innocent man...

Would hardly say he was innocent. He had an extensive rap sheet with convictions for armed robbery, drugs and assault and had served 6 years for armed robbery*. The woman he robbed at gunpoint in her own home probably isn't too upset he's dead.

*Which does not justify his death.**

**Which does not justify the rioting.

Either way, this is playing right into the hands of Trump. His diehard supporters will want a display of strength and probably have little sympathy for Floyd or the protesters, never mind the rioters. They hate the media and every criticism of Trump justifies their views. 'Murica.

What Trump does is pretty irrelevant. Biden is even worse than Hilary and Trump will eat him for breakfast.

I thought you didn’t read the Daily Mail in any of its forms. What has his history got to do with anything, was he armed, did they know he was possibly guilty of nothing more that trying to pass a forge $20. I was under the impression that if correct he served his time and like everywhere else including the U.K. he is a free man.
It will appeal to his base but that is not big enough to win the election and Trump is not exactly endearing himself to the rest of the American population. He needs white suburban women to vote for him apparently but that is not going too well.

I don't. His criminal record is out there. There are screenshots of his criminal convictions all over the place if you care to look for them.

Floyd may have 'only' been trying to pass off a forged $20 note on this occasion, but he was a lifelong thug and criminal who - in the way of these things - will have got away with a damn sight more than he was ever convicted of. Do I think the manner of his death was unacceptable? Yes. Absolutely. Do I feel empathy with his family? Yes. Absolutely. But a better father wouldn't have been out committing crime.

Do I care that a violent career criminal is dead? Not in the slightest. Same as Mark Duggan. Good riddance to scum.

I'm sure to you he's a noble martyr akin to Martin Luther King. I'm sure to you the protesters and rioters (note the differentiation) are gallant heroes although a week or two ago they would have been considered plague rats. Just as I'm sure you're happy at the US police and others killed and injured by rioters and looters in the last few days.

As for Trump, beware the silent majority who will be vehemently opposed to these riots and will want them crushed. Many tens of millions will be thrilled by the sight of the 82nd in DC and will hope they get the chance to crack a few skulls. The liberal media often do not reflect majority public opinion, as we know.

Agree with both of Crous' posts. What I don't understand why "blacklives matter" any more than white, asian, chinese.... or the thousands killed in the Middle East, where are those 'protests'?