Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

dynato

Members
  • Posts

    290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by dynato

  1. 7 minutes ago, homer said:

    Lol.  I don’t think anyone on here has said that.  Personal responsibility has been thrown out as most important many times.  You may want to reread this thread.  

    I know personal responsibility has been thrown out there. I've seen it, I've expressed that myself in this thread. I've also seen people say they would be more depressed if they lost their job vs close family members. The 74000 deaths model is called the do-nothing model for a reason. I am just pointing out that the 74,000 deaths is realistic given the assumptions used to make it. 

  2. 5 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

    You're smarter than that. 

    Manitoba could institute lockdown after lockdown until a safe vaccine is in play. They obviously value prolonging human life over their economy if they are locking down for a second time when having less than 1000 positive tests daily. This to me means that they may have a target to never let COVID spike out of control in their province. 

  3. Just now, Oxbow6 said:

    Cause you and I both know the probability of that happening is nil......even with this year's  version of the smallpox blanket. 

    That's like saying if an earthquake  dropped the entire state of California how many California's would die? 

    That's exactly what many of you have been proposing for a while, that we want to let the virus be virus, no precautions, no personal responsibility, no freedoms suppressed, let it spread to everyone willy nilly. That is the basis for the model you continually mock, yet it sounds like you agree that we would easily reach 74,000 deaths if those conditions were met.

  4. 9 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

    Osterholm still on the 74000 MN death model? He has zero credibility except with the doomsday lemmings.

    I take you to be a smart guy so I'll pose a simple math problem to you. There are 800,000 people 65+ in Minnesota. If we let them all get covid, how many of them will die based on current mortality rates? 

    https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/coronavirus/stats/covidweekly44.pdf

  5. 6 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:

    Andnits foolish to compare points in time with points of virus spiking.

    Virus gunna virus, eh.

    1 hour ago, TheFlop said:

    "At this point in time".......huh, it's almost like the virus takes longer to spread to more remote areas.  Manitoba is looking like ND did about a month or two ago.  If Manitoba was testing as much as ND, including routinely testing healthy young people like is getting pushed in ND, you know that the numbers would be even worse for Manitoba.

    Covid entered Manitoba within days of it entering North Dakota. Manitoba also a city which has a population equivalent to that of the entire population of North Dakota. COVID should have already been disastrous to their city. So what have they done up until this point in time to reduce spread and impact of COVID on their people if they started at the same time? 

    Yes it is fair to assume if they gave up on their preventative measures, the human spirit running dry on not seeing friends and family, abandoning their safety protocols, etc that their COVID cases per capita would skyrocket out of control and be worse than ND. But as it stands right now, that is not the case

     

    1 hour ago, UND1983 said:

    Manitoba has ran 296,000 tests.  ND has ran around 960,000 tests.  Do you lie to people to feel better about yourself?

    I was just going by the Worldometers Covid stats. Which tracks tests of individuals and not of tests total (which includes students who test multiple times). 
    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

    image.thumb.png.517aa32c1958ed22a222e5f833d603a2.png

  6. 13 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

    Thanks petey

    If I dare summarize what I think you think

    so no votes from Russia or China. No votes were changed. Not concerned about maybe a few cast by the dead. 
     

    question in Pennsylvania if the state Supreme Court or legislative prevails. I heard this is about 14,000 votes. Not enough.

    recounts in Wisconsin and Georgia are because of the closeness of the final count not because of fraud or cheating.

     I can understand your thinking 

    For the fraud lawsuit against Pennsylvania, Trumps lawyer were unable to provide any evidence of fraud nor any truthful allegations of fraud. Trump's lawyer was unwilling to perjure himself and lose his license, so the case was thrown out.

    https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/lawyers-litigating-for-trump-suddenly-remember-their-licenses-are-on-the-line-if-they-lie-to-a-judge/

    • Upvote 1
  7. Just now, TheFlop said:

    Wait, so now deaths are what matter?  The moving goalposts continue.  Canada and Manitoba did everything right?  The border is closed so can't blame it on big bad USA.  Yet cases are growing.  https://bing.com/covid/local/manitoba_canada?vert=graph

    Screenshot_20201111-234856~2.png

    Don't put words in my mouth. You framed the 9 deaths as a big deal, not me.

    Manitoba has twice the population of ND, one-fourth the deaths of ND, for roughly the same testing per capita. This means you are eight times more likely to die in ND from covid than you are in Manitoba at this point in time. 

  8. 2 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

    I want specifics on cheating and stealing. Proof?

    what do folks believe happened? Votes were changed? Extra ballots were cast.

    some have said that millions of votes were cast by Russia and China for Biden. How many believe this?

    do some not understand that some states counted mailed ballots after Election Day?

    One party deterred people from voting with some methods. The other party encouraged every eligible voter to vote with whatever voting method they had available to them in their state. The party that deterred a portion of the populace from voting lost the election. The only remaining path to victory for the party that deterred people from voting is to call widespread fraud. Regardless of any proof or evidence, it is now their only path to victory, so they must pursue it at all costs. 

    • Upvote 2
  9. 33 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

    Would someone define “rig an election “ for me?

    A rigged election is an election in which Trump does not win the electoral college or popular vote. Just look at the 2016 election, in which Trump called the election rigged and full of fraud even before a single vote was cast. And when he won the "rigged election", he stilled call the election rigged, but he called it rigged because he lost the popular vote. After winning, he even assembled a task force to launch an investigation into said voter fraud, which found no such evidence of massive voter fraud. 

    https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37673797

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/tweet-flurry-president-elect-donald-trump-calls-recount-efforts-sad-n688761

    https://www.fox29.com/news/report-trump-commission-did-not-find-widespread-voter-fraud

     

    • Upvote 2
  10. 19 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

    Tuesday - where is the evidence of massive voter fraud? Did I miss it? Still to come?

    Dems spent hundreds of millions, if not billions on this years election cycle, only to lose seats in the house and maintain a minority in the senate. To me this means fraud didn't happen and that people overwhelming voted against the man and not the party. Calling fraud will lead to scrutiny of these house/senate results too, which is probably why many are distancing themselves from that message.

  11. 2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

    Even when the word appears everywhere in just one overnight news cycle.

    Good demographics must spread fast in the overnight news rooms. 

    I didn't see any dates or timestamps in the video you posted that would indicate they were posted within 24 hours of one another. That would change what I think. But then again, we live in a digital age. If they have access to ratings and a recent article featuring the word gravitas had 25% more shares/click than similar messages, it is a single word that would be easy to adopt and slip into a message to improve your clicks/shares.

  12. 1 minute ago, The Sicatoka said:

    But the same word ends up on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, et al? 

    Hint: The NYT more than likely first used the word and the rest glommed on — orchestras follow conductors. 

    If an engineer puts out a best practice that is proven to work, be reliable, and lower costs, it will likely end up being adopted by majority of engineers. If the word gravitas was shown to have major positive pull for most demographics, I would not doubt it being over used by any and every outlet that paid to have access to that information.

  13. 2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

    @dynato — A singular corporate vision/mission statement from all branches and divisions of a single media outlet (Sinclair) is ... well ... expected. You walk into an Ace Hardware and you seem the same red vests, signage, and product lines in every one wherever, don’t you? 

    Now when all the various outlets, not under a single ownership umbrella, sound alike (gravitas, grifter) please explain that. 

    I know media outlets and commercial television shows have always used focus groups to gauge how to best present their content to gain the largest audience. My guess would be a focus group likely found the word gravitas to be associated with a higher form of prestige and deemed those who used the word as much more trustworthy compared to other words. That or the illuminati stepped in. 

  14. 5 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

    For sure.  When the Daily Show was entertaining, Jon Stewart would often juxtapose dozens of short clips of media talking heads uttering the exact same, although unique, phrases.  (Wish I had a clip).  Those unique phrases would then become part of our daily lexicon.

    As you say, its as if someone in the shadows is literally setting a narrative.  Kind of scary that hardly anyone realizes it.

     

    • Like 1
  15. 1 minute ago, Bison06 said:

    After watching the conventions and the polling responses and market trends. I have to say I agree. Not sure on the landslide, but becoming quite confident he’ll win.

    It's very difficult to win an election vs an incumbent president. The conditions under which Trump has been elected haven't really changed, ie Trump hasn't gotten marginally worse since taking the presidency. He's the same old unconventional loud dude. So I don't expect the election results to change by much unless voters mobilize. I'm hoping for historical voter turnouts, no matter which party wins 

×
×
  • Create New...