hotair--2020-03-10--de Blasio: Good Lord, you realize Biden's never really been vetted, right?

Lots and lots of people dunked on Bill de Blasio over this claim on social media , which on its face does sound ridiculous .
Joe Biden has been in Washington DC for nearly fifty years and went through two successful presidential elections with Barack Obama .
How can Biden not have been “ vetted , ” as de Blasio claimed earlier today on MSNBC ’ s Morning Joe ?
Joe Scarborough sounds just as skeptical as the chattering class did afterward , but de Blasio actually has a valid point : “ Joe Biden hasn ’ t been vetted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Early front-runner and then everyone thought he wasn ’ t gon na make it , turned their attention to [ Mike Bloomberg ] , Bernie [ Sanders ] , even to [ Elizabeth ] Warren for a while , ” the mayor told MSNBC ’ s Joe Scarborough in an interview on “ Morning Joe.
” “ Joe Biden has a lot of issues he needs to speak to .
If we don ’ t deal with it now , in the family , and have that blunt discussion , Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeached because he was so desperate to dig up dirt on Joe Biden , ” Scarborough said .
“ Do you really think that Americans are going to believe that Joe Biden hasn ’ t been vetted enough ?
” “ I do , ” de Blasio said , citing Biden ’ s more conservative positions on Social Security , criminal justice and the Iraq war .
Biden ’ s vetting as a running mate was sufficient for its purpose , which was to answer the most important question : “ will he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that less than one would perhaps have predicted , given his repeated attempts to stuff his foot into his mouth on the presidential campaign trail .
It didn ’ t matter much anyway , because voters don ’ t cast ballots for running mates — they vote for presidential candidates .
What de Blasio means here is that Biden hasn ’ t really been tested as a presidential candidate — and he ’ s absolutely right .
Except for Kamala Harris , no one went hard after Biden in the primaries , preferring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at first over who was the most electable progressive .
Later , they started competing against each other for the moderate lane when Bernie Sanders soared , but still mostly gave Biden a pass .
As I noted in my previous post , Biden ’ s not in position to win the nomination now so much because of his own skills , but because Sanders self-imploded .
His communists apologias came late enough in the cycle to scare Democrats back into Biden ’ s column , despite all of his apparent baggage .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is gone , however , or that Biden has much improved from his status as a candidate who damn near let it all slip away to a useful idiot in the first place .
He ’ s just extraordinarily lucky .
And that luck will run out just as soon as the convention is over .

Lots and lots of people dunked on Bill de Blasio over this claim on social media, which on its face does sound ridiculous. Joe Biden has been in Washington DC for nearly fifty years and went through two successful presidential elections with Barack Obama. How can Biden not have been “vetted,” as de Blasio claimed earlier today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe?
Joe Scarborough sounds just as skeptical as the chattering class did afterward, but de Blasio actually has a valid point:
MSNBC – 3/10/2020 – #MorningJoe – @BilldeBlasio doing a great job as an "Elite Whisper" communicating progressive values and #BernieSanders to them 1/4 pic.twitter.com/Q4w4cRo2Ga — CaseStudyQB – #RankedChoiceVoting (@CaseStudyQB) March 10, 2020
“Joe Biden hasn’t been vetted. He was in a perfect position: Early front-runner and then everyone thought he wasn’t gonna make it, turned their attention to [Mike Bloomberg], Bernie [Sanders], even to [Elizabeth] Warren for a while,” the mayor told MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough in an interview on “Morning Joe.” “Joe Biden has a lot of issues he needs to speak to. If we don’t deal with it now, in the family, and have that blunt discussion, Donald Trump will.” … “Donald Trump got impeached because he was so desperate to dig up dirt on Joe Biden,” Scarborough said. “Do you really think that Americans are going to believe that Joe Biden hasn’t been vetted enough?” “I do,” de Blasio said, citing Biden’s more conservative positions on Social Security, criminal justice and the Iraq war.
Biden’s vetting as a running mate was sufficient for its purpose, which was to answer the most important question: “will he embarrass Barack Obama?” Biden did that less than one would perhaps have predicted, given his repeated attempts to stuff his foot into his mouth on the presidential campaign trail. It didn’t matter much anyway, because voters don’t cast ballots for running mates — they vote for presidential candidates.
What de Blasio means here is that Biden hasn’t really been tested as a presidential candidate — and he’s absolutely right. Except for Kamala Harris, no one went hard after Biden in the primaries, preferring to duke it out with each other at first over who was the most electable progressive. Later, they started competing against each other for the moderate lane when Bernie Sanders soared, but still mostly gave Biden a pass.
As I noted in my previous post, Biden’s not in position to win the nomination now so much because of his own skills, but because Sanders self-imploded. His communists apologias came late enough in the cycle to scare Democrats back into Biden’s column, despite all of his apparent baggage. That doesn’t mean the baggage is gone, however, or that Biden has much improved from his status as a candidate who damn near let it all slip away to a useful idiot in the first place. He’s just extraordinarily lucky. And that luck will run out just as soon as the convention is over.


hotair--2020-03-10--Putin sets himself up to be president of Russia for life

When Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and his entire cabinet resigned en masse in January , it was clear something significant was happening .
President Vladimir Putin had suggested it was time to make changes to the constitution just hour earlier .
The Russian constitution allows the president to serve two consecutive terms .
Putin reached that limit long ago in 2008 .
He then swapped jobs with Medvedev and became Prime Minister for four years from 2008-2012 .
Then Putin returned to the presidency in 2012 for a six-year term .
He won re-election again in 2018 which meant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another constitutional term limit .
The sudden shuffle in January was clearly about getting around that obstacle but it wasn ’ t clear at the time how Putin would do it .
It appeared he might return to the Prime Minister position for four years , but some other , more esoteric possibilities ( such as becoming head of the ruling party ) were considered possible .
Today we learned that Putin doesn ’ t plan to do any of that tiresome job shuffling .
Instead , he ’ s removing the term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms in office : The Kremlin ’ s carefully choreographed operation to install Mr Putin as president-for-life unfolded at breathtaking speed .
It began at about 1.45pm Moscow time when Valentina Tereshkova , 83 , the first woman to fly in space , who is now an MP with the ruling United Russia party , suggested that Mr Putin be allowed to run for two more six-year terms as part of a package of constitutional reforms… Ms Tereshkova said that allowing Mr Putin to stand for president again would be “ a stabilising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Putin said that he would support the proposal to allow him to seek an extension to his presidency as long as the constitutional court ruled that it was legal .
Analysts said there was almost no chance that the Kremlin-controlled court would rule against the proposal .
Within three hours of Ms Tereshkova ’ s initial comments , the State Duma had approved the move .
MPs had been given only 20 minutes to study the text of the amendment .
If Putin remains in office for the rest of his current term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s been given , he would finally leave office in 2036 at the age of 83 , assuming he lives that long .
That would mean he ’ d spent more years in power that Stalin .
Officially , Putin would still have to stand for election to win those two additional terms , but no one believes Putin can ’ t manage to stuff enough ballot boxes to ensure the appearance of democracy remains even as the substance is gone .
Putin , for his part , sounded a bit philosophical about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m sure the time will come when the highest , presidential authority in Russia will not be , as they say , so personified — not so bound up in a single person , ” Mr. Putin said .
“ But that is how all of our past history came together and we can not , of course , disregard this.
” Putin ’ s take sounds like a paraphrase of Saint Augustine : ‘ Lord give me democracy and term limits , just not yet.
’ Putin ’ s opponents are already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leonid Volkov , the chief aide to Alexei Navalny , Mr Putin ’ s most prominent domestic opponent , said : “ March 10 , 2020 , will go down in the history books as the date of a coup attempt.
” Mr Navalny , 43 , said that Mr Putin had been “ appointed tsar ” .
Opposition groups announced a series of protests , including one to be held outside parliament this Friday .
Some opposition figures said that they would rally near the Kremlin this evening .
Here ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit of what Putin said today .

When Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and his entire cabinet resigned en masse in January, it was clear something significant was happening. President Vladimir Putin had suggested it was time to make changes to the constitution just hour earlier.
The Russian constitution allows the president to serve two consecutive terms. Putin reached that limit long ago in 2008. He then swapped jobs with Medvedev and became Prime Minister for four years from 2008-2012. Then Putin returned to the presidency in 2012 for a six-year term. He won re-election again in 2018 which meant he had until 2024 before he faced another constitutional term limit.
The sudden shuffle in January was clearly about getting around that obstacle but it wasn’t clear at the time how Putin would do it. It appeared he might return to the Prime Minister position for four years, but some other, more esoteric possibilities (such as becoming head of the ruling party) were considered possible. Today we learned that Putin doesn’t plan to do any of that tiresome job shuffling. Instead, he’s removing the term limit to allow himself another possible two terms in office:
The Kremlin’s carefully choreographed operation to install Mr Putin as president-for-life unfolded at breathtaking speed. It began at about 1.45pm Moscow time when Valentina Tereshkova, 83, the first woman to fly in space, who is now an MP with the ruling United Russia party, suggested that Mr Putin be allowed to run for two more six-year terms as part of a package of constitutional reforms… Ms Tereshkova said that allowing Mr Putin to stand for president again would be “a stabilising factor for our society”… Mr Putin said that he would support the proposal to allow him to seek an extension to his presidency as long as the constitutional court ruled that it was legal. Analysts said there was almost no chance that the Kremlin-controlled court would rule against the proposal. Within three hours of Ms Tereshkova’s initial comments, the State Duma had approved the move. MPs had been given only 20 minutes to study the text of the amendment.
If Putin remains in office for the rest of his current term plus the two additional terms he’s been given, he would finally leave office in 2036 at the age of 83, assuming he lives that long. That would mean he’d spent more years in power that Stalin.
Officially, Putin would still have to stand for election to win those two additional terms, but no one believes Putin can’t manage to stuff enough ballot boxes to ensure the appearance of democracy remains even as the substance is gone. Putin, for his part, sounded a bit philosophical about the whole thing:
“I’m sure the time will come when the highest, presidential authority in Russia will not be, as they say, so personified — not so bound up in a single person,” Mr. Putin said. “But that is how all of our past history came together and we cannot, of course, disregard this.”
Putin’s take sounds like a paraphrase of Saint Augustine: ‘Lord give me democracy and term limits, just not yet.’ Putin’s opponents are already calling this a “coup attempt.”
Leonid Volkov, the chief aide to Alexei Navalny, Mr Putin’s most prominent domestic opponent, said: “March 10, 2020, will go down in the history books as the date of a coup attempt.” Mr Navalny, 43, said that Mr Putin had been “appointed tsar”. Opposition groups announced a series of protests, including one to be held outside parliament this Friday. Some opposition figures said that they would rally near the Kremlin this evening.
Here’s a news report on the situation including a bit of what Putin said today.


hotair--2020-03-10--More "squeegee kid" violence in Baltimore

It ’ s amazing that the press in Baltimore finds time to report on this sort of thing considering all of the murders and government corruption they have to keep tabs on .
But still , they persevere .
There ’ s been another instance of violence with one of the so-called “ squeegee kids ” that prowl the city ’ s intersections trying to shake down drivers for money .
And when you refuse their “ services ” you run the risk of verbal abuse at a minimum and possibly much more .
That ’ s what happened to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away after some of these “ workers ” approached her minivan .
One of the men smashed the back window of her vehicle and when she got out to attempt to capture the extortionists on film , he hopped on a scooter and ran her over , sending her to the hospital .
( Baltimore Sun ) The woman told police the squeegee worker broke the window when she attempted to drive away after being approached by a group cleaning windshields .
According to the report from Baltimore police , she got out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the group , but the suspect got on a scooter and ran into her , knocking her to the ground .
Police said they used the city ’ s surveillance cameras to confirm the suspect shattered the rear window using his squeegee and then hit the woman with the scooter .
She was taken to a hospital with a scrape and large contusion on her left leg .
Add this to the growing pile of police reports that put the lie to the commonly stated claim that these are just “ kids ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They are extortionists looking to shake people down using credible threats of violence .
To start with , this was no “ kid.
” The police were able to identify him using surveillance camera footage and later apprehend him .
He ’ s 21 years old and already has a record of criminal activity .
That ’ s typical of many of these squeegee people if you keep track of the police reports .
And his willingness to immediately resort to violence when he doesn ’ t get what he wants speaks volumes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jobs ” in any sense of the word .
The woman did not solicit a temporary employee to wash the windows of her van .
She was approached without an invitation by a group of intimidating men and had her vehicle vandalized and suffered injuries requiring hospital treatment when she failed to comply with their demands .
This is not an isolated incident .
It ’ s a repeating pattern .
The police have been dispatched to the most common squeegee activity areas to keep an eye on things , but they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Not to mention that they have better things to be doing with their time , what with all the gangs running wild in Charm City . )
The interim mayor and his police chief need to be cracking down on this activity rather than coddling these thugs .
There have already been several people assaulted and numerous vehicles damaged in just the first two months of the current year .
And as long as these hoodlums know that the police won ’ t take their activities seriously they ’ ll keep on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learned from the successful broken windows policies in New York City in the 90s , ignoring smaller crimes creates a fertile breeding ground for bigger , more serious crimes .
And it needs to come to an end .

It’s amazing that the press in Baltimore finds time to report on this sort of thing considering all of the murders and government corruption they have to keep tabs on. But still, they persevere. There’s been another instance of violence with one of the so-called “squeegee kids” that prowl the city’s intersections trying to shake down drivers for money. And when you refuse their “services” you run the risk of verbal abuse at a minimum and possibly much more. That’s what happened to one unnamed woman who attempted to drive away after some of these “workers” approached her minivan. One of the men smashed the back window of her vehicle and when she got out to attempt to capture the extortionists on film, he hopped on a scooter and ran her over, sending her to the hospital. (Baltimore Sun)
The woman told police the squeegee worker broke the window when she attempted to drive away after being approached by a group cleaning windshields. According to the report from Baltimore police, she got out of her minivan to take photographs of the group, but the suspect got on a scooter and ran into her, knocking her to the ground. Police said they used the city’s surveillance cameras to confirm the suspect shattered the rear window using his squeegee and then hit the woman with the scooter. She was taken to a hospital with a scrape and large contusion on her left leg.
Add this to the growing pile of police reports that put the lie to the commonly stated claim that these are just “kids” trying to earn an honest living. They are extortionists looking to shake people down using credible threats of violence.
To start with, this was no “kid.” The police were able to identify him using surveillance camera footage and later apprehend him. He’s 21 years old and already has a record of criminal activity. That’s typical of many of these squeegee people if you keep track of the police reports. And his willingness to immediately resort to violence when he doesn’t get what he wants speaks volumes.
Also, these are not “jobs” in any sense of the word. The woman did not solicit a temporary employee to wash the windows of her van. She was approached without an invitation by a group of intimidating men and had her vehicle vandalized and suffered injuries requiring hospital treatment when she failed to comply with their demands.
This is not an isolated incident. It’s a repeating pattern. The police have been dispatched to the most common squeegee activity areas to keep an eye on things, but they can’t be everywhere at once. (Not to mention that they have better things to be doing with their time, what with all the gangs running wild in Charm City.)
The interim mayor and his police chief need to be cracking down on this activity rather than coddling these thugs. There have already been several people assaulted and numerous vehicles damaged in just the first two months of the current year. And as long as these hoodlums know that the police won’t take their activities seriously they’ll keep on doing it. Also, as we learned from the successful broken windows policies in New York City in the 90s, ignoring smaller crimes creates a fertile breeding ground for bigger, more serious crimes. And it needs to come to an end.


hotair--2020-03-10--Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Rep. Dan Lipinksi, coronavirus update, Hyde Amendment and the

Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Rep. Dan Lipinksi, coronavirus update, Hyde Amendment and the election, mandatory vaccinations, primary preview, and more!

Once again , I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today !
The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air , as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows .
• Dr. Robert Tiballi on the latest developments in the COVID-19 outbreak and response • Dr. Anne Hendershott on whether traditional marriages can learn from same-sex marriages • Rep. Dan Lipinski ( D-IL ) on abortion and the upcoming election • Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I will discuss tonight ’ s upcoming primaries and their impact on the rest of the election cycle .
• And more to come … stay tuned !
We may add more before the show starts today , plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour .
We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149 .
You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world , so download it now .
I ’ ll look forward to talking with @ @

Once again, I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today! The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air, as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows.
Today’s Relevant Radio® show includes:
Dr. Robert Tiballi on the latest developments in the COVID-19 outbreak and response
Dr. Anne Hendershott on whether traditional marriages can learn from same-sex marriages
Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) on abortion and the upcoming election
Fr. Tad Pacholczyk on mandatory vaccinations
Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew! The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss tonight’s upcoming primaries and their impact on the rest of the election cycle.
And more to come … stay tuned!
We may add more before the show starts today, plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour. We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149. You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world, so download it now. I’ll look forward to talking with you!


hotair--2020-03-10--Mitt Romney now more popular among Democrats than Republicans

The bad news : His favorable rating among Republicans today is a point lower than it was among Democrats on the eve of the 2012 election .
Think of that .
Righties are entirely correct when they point how fickle the left has been in its esteem for Romney but even the left never disliked him as much as his own party currently does because of his impeachment vote .
And the overall shift in opinion of him among Republicans since 2012 is about twice as large as it is among Democrats .
The good news : If he can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he could always move back to Massachusetts and try to get elected as a Democrat there .
This graph is presented through the lens of “ partisanship , ” which makes the result feel weird , but that ’ s only if you think of America ’ s parties through the traditional frame of “ Republican ” and “ Democrat.
” If instead you think of them as the “ Trump Party ” and the “ Anti-Trump Party , ” it makes perfect sense .
Pretty clear what happened .
He was naturally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2012 election , slipped a bit after he ’ d acquired the stench of “ loser ” following the result , then slipped a lot after he was harshly critical of Trump during the 2016 primaries .
The vote to remove during Trump ’ s Senate trial was the last straw .
For Democrats , I think Romney ’ s slow , slight climb from 2012 until last year was a pure function of being able to appreciate his personal decency a bit more once he was no longer an electoral threat .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same dynamic . )
Then , once he voted to remove their least favorite Republican , he became their most favorite Republican .
The one quirk in the data is that Romney didn ’ t gain anything among Dems in 2016 despite lambasting Trump in public comments that year .
Presumably that ’ s because the left was too busy with its own competitive primary to pay attention to the finer details on the Republican side .
Anyway , at last check his polling in Utah was a little different from his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not , in fact , censured for his removal vote by the Utah state legislature , as was initially threatened , and his visit to the state capitol 10 days ago went off without a hitch .
That doesn ’ t mean he won ’ t have trouble in a primary in 2024 , but clearly he ’ ll have less trouble in his home state than he would in most other red states , where he ’ d be unelectable .
For the time being , the worst punishment Romney has suffered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being spared from exposure to coronavirus .
Speaking of Republicans who have fallen out of favor with Trump and , thus , the wider Republican base : A week after Super Tuesday , former Auburn Tigers football coach Tommy Tuberville has a commanding lead in the Alabama primary runoff for U.S. Senate against former Senator and Attorney General Jeff Sessions , according to a new poll released today by Cygnal .
The Cygnal survey , conducted March 6 – 8 , with 645 likely GOP primary election voters , shows Sessions ( 40 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) by 12 points .
The runoff election will take place on March 31… “ Jeff Sessions ’ unfavorability has continued to increase among GOP Primary voters over the course of the primary season , ” said Brent Buchanan , Cygnal ’ s CEO & Founder .
“ Now that Trump has gotten involved , it ’ s unlikely the former attorney general will be able to overcome the gap in how voters see Tuberville ’ s as more strongly favorable .
Trump may not be able to pull a candidate across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep a candidate from getting there first.
” It was a bad sign for Sessions that he finished behind Tuberville ( albeit narrowly ) in the first round of the Alabama primary last week .
Given his universal name recognition in the state , if Republicans were prepared to send him back to the Senate you would have expected him to lead the field at a minimum , if not approach 50 percent .
As it is , this Trump tweet from the day after the election might have been the dagger : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the primary , which I ’ m guessing was a favor to McConnell and other Senate Republicans who are friends with Sessions and who may have been nervous about a Roy Moore resurgence .
Once Moore was safely eliminated , though , and Trump was given a binary choice between his old AG and a Republican who ’ s bent over backwards to signal “ loyalty ” towards him and who can certainly beat Doug Jones in the fall , that was the end of the president ’ s ceasefire .
Jeff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reward for his fateful decision to support Trump during the 2016 primaries : First came the end of his Senate tenure , then came daily public humiliations as Attorney General , and now finally the end of his political career in a humiliating defeat to a football coach turned politician being cheerled by the president .
Should have backed Cruz instead , Jeff .
Enjoy retirement .

The bad news: His favorable rating among Republicans today is a point lower than it was among Democrats on the eve of the 2012 election. Think of that. Righties are entirely correct when they point how fickle the left has been in its esteem for Romney but even the left never disliked him as much as his own party currently does because of his impeachment vote. And the overall shift in opinion of him among Republicans since 2012 is about twice as large as it is among Democrats.
The good news: If he can’t get reelected in Utah, he could always move back to Massachusetts and try to get elected as a Democrat there.
This graph is presented through the lens of “partisanship,” which makes the result feel weird, but that’s only if you think of America’s parties through the traditional frame of “Republican” and “Democrat.” If instead you think of them as the “Trump Party” and the “Anti-Trump Party,” it makes perfect sense.
Pretty clear what happened. He was naturally very popular with the GOP before the 2012 election, slipped a bit after he’d acquired the stench of “loser” following the result, then slipped a lot after he was harshly critical of Trump during the 2016 primaries. The vote to remove during Trump’s Senate trial was the last straw. For Democrats, I think Romney’s slow, slight climb from 2012 until last year was a pure function of being able to appreciate his personal decency a bit more once he was no longer an electoral threat. (George W. Bush has benefited from the same dynamic.) Then, once he voted to remove their least favorite Republican, he became their most favorite Republican.
The one quirk in the data is that Romney didn’t gain anything among Dems in 2016 despite lambasting Trump in public comments that year. Presumably that’s because the left was too busy with its own competitive primary to pay attention to the finer details on the Republican side.
Anyway, at last check his polling in Utah was a little different from his polling with Republicans nationally. He was not, in fact, censured for his removal vote by the Utah state legislature, as was initially threatened, and his visit to the state capitol 10 days ago went off without a hitch. That doesn’t mean he won’t have trouble in a primary in 2024, but clearly he’ll have less trouble in his home state than he would in most other red states, where he’d be unelectable. For the time being, the worst punishment Romney has suffered is being disinvited from CPAC and therefore being spared from exposure to coronavirus.
Speaking of Republicans who have fallen out of favor with Trump and, thus, the wider Republican base:
A week after Super Tuesday, former Auburn Tigers football coach Tommy Tuberville has a commanding lead in the Alabama primary runoff for U.S. Senate against former Senator and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, according to a new poll released today by Cygnal. The Cygnal survey, conducted March 6 – 8, with 645 likely GOP primary election voters, shows Sessions (40%) trailing Tuberville (52%) by 12 points. The runoff election will take place on March 31… “Jeff Sessions’ unfavorability has continued to increase among GOP Primary voters over the course of the primary season,” said Brent Buchanan, Cygnal’s CEO & Founder. “Now that Trump has gotten involved, it’s unlikely the former attorney general will be able to overcome the gap in how voters see Tuberville’s as more strongly favorable. Trump may not be able to pull a candidate across the finish line, but he sure can keep a candidate from getting there first.”
It was a bad sign for Sessions that he finished behind Tuberville (albeit narrowly) in the first round of the Alabama primary last week. Given his universal name recognition in the state, if Republicans were prepared to send him back to the Senate you would have expected him to lead the field at a minimum, if not approach 50 percent. As it is, this Trump tweet from the day after the election might have been the dagger:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1235181043881299969
Trump had stayed conspicuously quiet about Sessions during the primary, which I’m guessing was a favor to McConnell and other Senate Republicans who are friends with Sessions and who may have been nervous about a Roy Moore resurgence. Once Moore was safely eliminated, though, and Trump was given a binary choice between his old AG and a Republican who’s bent over backwards to signal “loyalty” towards him and who can certainly beat Doug Jones in the fall, that was the end of the president’s ceasefire. Jeff Sessions is about to get his final reward for his fateful decision to support Trump during the 2016 primaries: First came the end of his Senate tenure, then came daily public humiliations as Attorney General, and now finally the end of his political career in a humiliating defeat to a football coach turned politician being cheerled by the president. Should have backed Cruz instead, Jeff. Enjoy retirement.


hotair--2020-03-10--Sanders: I regret nothing in my praise for Fidel's literacy program

Sanders: I regret nothing in my praise for Fidel's literacy program -- and China's anti-poverty efforts, too

It hardly matters any more , but Bernie Sanders won ’ t back down from what Bret Baier accurately called a “ turning point ” in the 2020 Democratic primaries .
Appearing on a Fox News town hall last night , Baier asks Sanders whether he regrets going out of his way on a 60 Minutes interview to praise Fidel Castro and his literacy program .
“ No , ” Sanders says , doubling down on the praise for Castro and once again insisting that China has made great strides in reducing inequality and poverty : Fox News anchor Bret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ praise of Castro ’ s “ literacy program ” in an interview on 60 Minutes , since it appears those comments hurt him in subsequent primaries .
Sanders replied , “ No.
” “ Look , I have spent my entire life fighting for working people and fighting for democracy , ” Sanders said .
“ If you check my record , I have condemned authoritarianism , whether it is in the Soviet Union , whether it is in Cuba , whether it is in Saudi Arabia.
” Sanders , who has fallen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the race for the Democratic presidential nomination , attempted to blame the media for the backlash he received for praising Castro .
“ I know it ’ s hard given ‘ gotcha ’ questions , ” Sanders said .
“ Given the media that we deal with and everything else , you say something and people can beat up on you .
I think you ’ ve got to tell the truth .
So , if in China they ’ ve reduced extreme poverty , does that make me a communist who supports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just telling you a simple fact.
” Actually , if you can stand up and credit China with reducing poverty without mentioning that they starved 45 million people to death in four years , then it pretty much makes you a communist apologist .
Or at the very least , a “ useful idiot.
” But of course , we already know that about Sanders .
And Sanders knows we know it , too .
There ’ s not much point in attempting to walk these arguments back now ; the damage has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s going to believe that Sanders has had a change of heart on these issues .
Sanders is about to complete one of the most embarrassing collapses in presidential-primary history because he couldn ’ t keep his communist apologias to himself for just a few weeks while victory was in his grasp .
Make no mistake — Joe Biden didn ’ t stage a massive comeback , but instead happened to be the one guy in position to reap the benefits of a party staring in horror at the prospect of handing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To his credit , Biden ’ s at least not blowing up his own campaign like Sanders is .
Democrats had better be aware , though , that Donald Trump isn ’ t going to make the same mistake that Bernie is .
They ’ ll need a lot more than luck to win in November , and given that Biden nearly gave the nomination away in the first place to this useful idiot , they should still be worried about their prospects for victory in a general election .

It hardly matters any more, but Bernie Sanders won’t back down from what Bret Baier accurately called a “turning point” in the 2020 Democratic primaries. Appearing on a Fox News town hall last night, Baier asks Sanders whether he regrets going out of his way on a 60 Minutes interview to praise Fidel Castro and his literacy program. “No,” Sanders says, doubling down on the praise for Castro and once again insisting that China has made great strides in reducing inequality and poverty:
Fox News anchor Bret Baier asked Sanders whether he regretted his praise of Castro’s “literacy program” in an interview on 60 Minutes, since it appears those comments hurt him in subsequent primaries. Sanders replied, “No.” “Look, I have spent my entire life fighting for working people and fighting for democracy,” Sanders said. “If you check my record, I have condemned authoritarianism, whether it is in the Soviet Union, whether it is in Cuba, whether it is in Saudi Arabia.” Sanders, who has fallen behind former vice president Joe Biden in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, attempted to blame the media for the backlash he received for praising Castro. “I know it’s hard given ‘gotcha’ questions,” Sanders said. “Given the media that we deal with and everything else, you say something and people can beat up on you. I think you’ve got to tell the truth. So, if in China they’ve reduced extreme poverty, does that make me a communist who supports China? No, I’m just telling you a simple fact.”
Actually, if you can stand up and credit China with reducing poverty without mentioning that they starved 45 million people to death in four years, then it pretty much makes you a communist apologist. Or at the very least, a “useful idiot.”
But of course, we already know that about Sanders. And Sanders knows we know it, too. There’s not much point in attempting to walk these arguments back now; the damage has already been done, and no one’s going to believe that Sanders has had a change of heart on these issues. Sanders is about to complete one of the most embarrassing collapses in presidential-primary history because he couldn’t keep his communist apologias to himself for just a few weeks while victory was in his grasp. Make no mistake — Joe Biden didn’t stage a massive comeback, but instead happened to be the one guy in position to reap the benefits of a party staring in horror at the prospect of handing their nomination to an unreconstructed Marxist fool.
To his credit, Biden’s at least not blowing up his own campaign like Sanders is. Democrats had better be aware, though, that Donald Trump isn’t going to make the same mistake that Bernie is. They’ll need a lot more than luck to win in November, and given that Biden nearly gave the nomination away in the first place to this useful idiot, they should still be worried about their prospects for victory in a general election.


hotair--2020-03-10--Gallup: Republicans top Dems in approval ratings

Gallup has been running this congressional approval poll of the two parties since 1999 .
For most of that time Democrats have had a slightly higher approval rate .
The last time the parties were tied was nine years ago .
But it appears that the response to impeachment has been positive for Republicans .
More Americans approve of the job congressional Republicans are doing than of congressional Democrats ’ performance — 40 % vs. 35 % .
The rating for Republicans in Congress has risen six percentage points since late October , before the impeachment of President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Over the same period , congressional Democrats ’ approval rating has edged down three points and disapproval has climbed five points , from 57 % to 62 % … Republicans ’ approval of congressional Republicans has jumped 13 points to 76 % since October , but Democrats ’ 65 % approval of congressional Democrats is virtually unchanged from October .
Gallup points out that this rise in GOP numbers matches with a similar bump in Trump ’ s approval .
He had his personal best approval of 49 % in January and February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the same post-impeachment bump .
Like Trump , he is now at his highest approval ever , a couple of points above Chuck Schumer : So what impeachment managed to do was solidify Republican support for the party as a whole one year before an election .
Given that the outcome was a foregone conclusion , that doesn ’ t seem particularly smart .
In fact , some Republicans predicted precisely this outcome .
Here ’ s CNBC from last December : “ It ’ s fairly obvious that this will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything , if Democrats meant to diminish the strength of the president , I think the opposite is probably going to happen , ” the former White House aide to President George H.W .
Bush said on “ The Exchange.
” … “ I think at the end of the day , this is probably not going to hurt the president and will probably strengthen him in his bid to run for re-election , ” Watkins said .
But not everyone saw it coming .
This Washington Post analysis piece from last December @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political boost : I am not so sure that impeachment of Trump by the House followed by acquittal in the Senate ( the likeliest scenario now ) means Trump gets a big political boost going into his reelection .
While President Bill Clinton was popular during his impeachment and benefited from a groundswell of sympathy afterward , Trump is not a particularly popular president , with approval ratings hovering in the 40s .
Reuters offered a similar outlook at the time , suggesting there was no indication Trump would get a bump from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say that the bump for Trump hasn ’ t been as significant as it was for Clinton , who came out of impeachment with a 65 % approval rating from Gallup .
But the difference doesn ’ t surprise me .
Clinton had the entire media on his side in a time before social media and blogs existed .
By the time impeachment was over , they had painted him as a victim and Ken Starr as a pervert .
None of that looks too good in retrospect , especially in light of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definitely benefited Clinton at the time .
Donald Trump has had a very different experience with the media , so his 49 % approval is pretty good under the circumstances .

Gallup has been running this congressional approval poll of the two parties since 1999. For most of that time Democrats have had a slightly higher approval rate. The last time the parties were tied was nine years ago. But it appears that the response to impeachment has been positive for Republicans.
More Americans approve of the job congressional Republicans are doing than of congressional Democrats’ performance — 40% vs. 35%. The rating for Republicans in Congress has risen six percentage points since late October, before the impeachment of President Donald Trump in the U.S. House of Representatives. Over the same period, congressional Democrats’ approval rating has edged down three points and disapproval has climbed five points, from 57% to 62%… Republicans’ approval of congressional Republicans has jumped 13 points to 76% since October, but Democrats’ 65% approval of congressional Democrats is virtually unchanged from October.
Gallup points out that this rise in GOP numbers matches with a similar bump in Trump’s approval. He had his personal best approval of 49% in January and February. Sen. Mitch McConnell is also benefiting from the same post-impeachment bump. Like Trump, he is now at his highest approval ever, a couple of points above Chuck Schumer:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s image has also improved after impeachment. McConnell’s favorability rating has increased by six points since October to 33% now, because of a 15-point jump to 62% among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents.
So what impeachment managed to do was solidify Republican support for the party as a whole one year before an election. Given that the outcome was a foregone conclusion, that doesn’t seem particularly smart. In fact, some Republicans predicted precisely this outcome. Here’s CNBC from last December:
“It’s fairly obvious that this will be done along party lines, and if anything, if Democrats meant to diminish the strength of the president, I think the opposite is probably going to happen,” the former White House aide to President George H.W. Bush said on “The Exchange.”… “I think at the end of the day, this is probably not going to hurt the president and will probably strengthen him in his bid to run for re-election,” Watkins said.
But not everyone saw it coming. This Washington Post analysis piece from last December suggested Trump wouldn’t get a political boost:
I am not so sure that impeachment of Trump by the House followed by acquittal in the Senate (the likeliest scenario now) means Trump gets a big political boost going into his reelection. While President Bill Clinton was popular during his impeachment and benefited from a groundswell of sympathy afterward, Trump is not a particularly popular president, with approval ratings hovering in the 40s.
Reuters offered a similar outlook at the time, suggesting there was no indication Trump would get a bump from impeachment.
It’s fair to say that the bump for Trump hasn’t been as significant as it was for Clinton, who came out of impeachment with a 65% approval rating from Gallup. But the difference doesn’t surprise me. Clinton had the entire media on his side in a time before social media and blogs existed. By the time impeachment was over, they had painted him as a victim and Ken Starr as a pervert. None of that looks too good in retrospect, especially in light of the #MeToo movement, but it definitely benefited Clinton at the time.
Donald Trump has had a very different experience with the media, so his 49% approval is pretty good under the circumstances.


hotair--2020-03-10--"You're full of s***": Biden's 2nd Amendment voter outreach in Detroit going as well as you'd imagin

"You're full of s***": Biden's 2nd Amendment voter outreach in Detroit going as well as you'd imagine

Say what you want about the inevitable Joe Biden presidential nomination , but at least it will be entertaining .
At least , it will be as entertaining as arrogant ignorance ever gets , a combination that Biden has mastered over long decades in the public eye .
Biden went stumping for votes in a Detroit auto plant today , a natural venue for campaigning thanks to the Obama administration ’ s rescue of GM and Chrysler .
Instead , Biden got caught up in a gun-control argument with a worker who accused him of “ actively trying to end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pungent reply — “ You ’ re full of shit !
” — and then things got really testy : Biden denies in this clip that he wants to confiscate anyone ’ s guns .
One week ago , though , Biden publicly proclaimed that he would put Robert Francis “ Beto ” O ’ Rourke in charge of his gun policy , a former presidential aspirant who explicitly called for gun confiscations by law enforcement following an assault rifle ban : Someone ’ s full of s*** here , and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at one point mentions “ AR-14s ” as an example of firearms Americans don ’ t need , which is good because they don ’ t exist .
Later in the conversation , after the voter ( correctly ) points out that long-barrel firearms are barely a statistical blip in homicides , Biden gets enraged , yelling “ DO YOU NEED A HUNDRED BULLETS ?
” twice at the man .
Presumably this is his argument on magazine capacity rather than taking an order for stocking up for target practice , but if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spit it out before stomping off angrily .
On the plus side , this is about as animated as Biden ever gets these days .
It is , unfortunately , also as coherent as Biden gets these days .

Say what you want about the inevitable Joe Biden presidential nomination, but at least it will be entertaining. At least, it will be as entertaining as arrogant ignorance ever gets, a combination that Biden has mastered over long decades in the public eye. Biden went stumping for votes in a Detroit auto plant today, a natural venue for campaigning thanks to the Obama administration’s rescue of GM and Chrysler.
Instead, Biden got caught up in a gun-control argument with a worker who accused him of “actively trying to end our Second Amendment right.” Biden offered a pungent reply — “You’re full of shit!” — and then things got really testy:
WATCH: "You’re full of sh*t," @JoeBiden tells a man who accused him of "actively trying to end our Second Amendment right." "I support the Second Amendment," Biden adds while vising under-construction auto plant in Detroit. @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/sueOSBaY9P — Bo Erickson CBS (@BoKnowsNews) March 10, 2020
Biden denies in this clip that he wants to confiscate anyone’s guns. One week ago, though, Biden publicly proclaimed that he would put Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke in charge of his gun policy, a former presidential aspirant who explicitly called for gun confiscations by law enforcement following an assault rifle ban:
Beto O’Rourke championed eliminating your #2A rights, confiscating your guns, & punishing law-abiding Americans Joe Biden just promised to put Beto in charge of “the gun problem” to “lead this effort” Joe wants to take away Americans’ guns just as badly as Beto! WATCH👇 pic.twitter.com/G9T4MFuoPB — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) March 3, 2020
Beto O’Rourke pledged to destroy the 2nd Amendment and take away guns from law-abiding Americans by force. Now Beto is endorsing Joe Biden because he knows Joe has become just as extreme as he is.pic.twitter.com/KCfqghnWFU — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) March 3, 2020
Someone’s full of s*** here, and it’s not the voter. Biden at one point mentions “AR-14s” as an example of firearms Americans don’t need, which is good because they don’t exist. Later in the conversation, after the voter (correctly) points out that long-barrel firearms are barely a statistical blip in homicides, Biden gets enraged, yelling “DO YOU NEED A HUNDRED BULLETS?” twice at the man. Presumably this is his argument on magazine capacity rather than taking an order for stocking up for target practice, but if so, Biden’s unable to spit it out before stomping off angrily.
On the plus side, this is about as animated as Biden ever gets these days. It is, unfortunately, also as coherent as Biden gets these days.


hotair--2020-03-10--Tucker Carlson subtweets Trump: Coronavirus is much more serious than the flu

I ’ m fascinated to know how this segment came about , especially since the coronavirus message coming from other Fox hosts like Hannity and Trish Regan ranges from “ I ’ m worried that we ’ re overreacting ” to full-on rants about how the media is trying to impeach Trump again or something .
Carlson never utters the word “ Trump ” here but it ’ s clear as day who he means when he says that some on the left — and right — are focused on the wrong things , even nudging viewers by noting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they voted for .
It may be that partisan bubbles are now so tightly sealed that nothing short of a Fox primetime host declaring that yes , coronavirus is a crisis , stands a chance of convincing some Trump-loving righties that yes , coronavirus is a crisis .
Tucker had three possible motives and they ’ re not mutually exclusive .
1 .
Basic civic duty .
He reads the papers .
He knows what the testing numbers look like .
He ’ s genuinely worried , as he should be , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves before it ’ s too late .
2 .
Nationalist agenda .
It ’ s a testament to how intense modern hyperpartisanship is , said Ross Douthat last week , that Republicans have been handed a golden political opportunity to promote lesser economic dependence on China and instead many instinctively spend their time covering for Trump by insisting that the virus is no big deal .
If given a choice between promoting nationalism and reassuring the president that his farts smell terrific , some will take the latter every time .
Not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his nationalism .
Watch to the end of the clip below and you ’ ll find him making the case for severing America ’ s medical supply chain from China .
The more serious Republicans take coronavirus , the stronger his argument becomes .
3 .
Someone asked him to do it in order to get through to Trump .
We may have arrived at a state of such dysfunction in terms of how the president processes information that having people like Anthony Fauci and the head of the CDC assure him daily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the flu simply can ’ t get through to him .
To really penetrate his consciousness , they need to appeal to a higher authority : Fox News primetime hosts .
Maybe someone from the White House dialed up Tucker and told him that , in our modern game-show dystopia , only he ( or Hannity ) has the power to convince Trump that coronavirus isn ’ t just going to burn itself out .
According to WaPo , people in the building are worried .
Coincidentally , or maybe not coincidentally , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with an op-ed today stressing that it ’ s now or never to stop an Italy-style catastrophe in the U.S. before it gets rolling : Community-based interventions are needed to delay the outbreak peak .
On this , the 1918 flu taught us a lot .
The difference between the steps taken in Philadelphia , which waited too long back then , and St. Louis , which acted quickly , is staggering .
Aggressive interventions put off and ease the peak burden on hospitals and other health-care infrastructure .
Ultimately , these measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases and health impacts .
Consider the actions taken in Italy .
On Feb. 20 , Italy reported three instances of infection and no known deaths .
On Feb. 21 , Italy had 20 cases and its first attributed death .
Officials implemented interventions , including school closures , the following day and instituted a cordon sanitaire affecting 50,000 people .
That ’ s aggressive , but it was too late .
On Feb. 22 , Italy reported 63 cases and a second death .
A little more than a week later , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients in serious condition and 52 deaths .
Today , the numbers continue to climb , with more than 9,100 cases and 460 dead , and on Monday the government expanded travel restrictions to the entire country .
Here ’ s a visualization of the Philadelphia/St .
Louis 1918 comparison he cites .
One line shows what happens when large events are allowed to proceed as scheduled , leading to rapid exponential contagion .
The other shows what happens when local officials don ’ t have their heads up their asses .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves with the thought that the disease is chiefly dangerous to old and infirm people .
Laying aside the fact that there are fully 23 million people in the U.S. who are 80+ or immunocompromised , the “ it ’ s only old people ” argument continues to ignore the core threat here .
If infection spreads exponentially and hospitals can ’ t handle the glut , people who are ill with something other than coronavirus will also struggle to get treatment .
The rate of death from things like heart disease and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctors are preoccupied with fighting COVID-19 — or are too sick themselves to even tend to the ill. And as Carlson rightly says , the worst-case scenarios can no longer be dismissed as something likely to happen in a less developed country like Iran .
The reports from northern Italy on social media and elsewhere about desperately ill people being left untreated because the hospitals just can ’ t handle any more patients are horrifying : [ I ] n the rest of hard-hit northern Italy , the virus ’ spread was growing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to war-time triage medics deciding who lives , who dies and who gets access to the limited number of ICU beds .
“ It ’ s a reasoning that our colleagues make , ” Dr. Guido Giustetto , head of the association of doctors in northern Piedmont , said Monday .
“ It becomes dramatic if , rather than doing it under normal situations , they do it because the beds are so scarce that someone might not have access to medical care.
” The Italian society of anesthesiology and intensive care published @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on ICU admissions during the virus crisis and the ICU shortage .
The criteria include the age of the patient and the probability of survival , and not just “ first come first served.
” They ’ re already rationing treatment .
We have no defense against this happening right here , within a few weeks , except to start shutting down all large gatherings of people immediately .
Slow the spread and everyone who needs emergency treatment can get it .
Don ’ t slow the spread and old people are going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waiting for a ventilator that just isn ’ t available in time .
And then other , younger people with unrelated conditions who can ’ t get to see a doctor anymore will start dying of their own maladies .
If the gut reaction to all of that is to say , “ Well , fine , but it ’ s too early to start shutting things down , ” it isn ’ t .
That ’ s Bossert ’ s point .
It ’ s late .
Because the CDC screwed up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still aren ’ t anywhere near testing capacity , we have no realistic idea just how far coronavirus has spread here .
Clearly it ’ s spreading , and clearly it hasn ’ t reached the stage yet where any hospitals are overwhelmed .
We ’ re somewhere between “ basically fine ” and “ Italy ” at the moment , but with no clue as to which of those two poles we ’ re closer to .
The only prudent move is to assume we ’ re closer to “ Italy ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gatherings ( as some districts are now doing ) , including parades and crowds at sporting events .
You would think the NBA might take a hint from their Chinese masters and start treating coronavirus as a grave threat by closing its doors to fans for awhile , but nope , not yet .
Big crowds at game after game , just passin ’ that virus around .
And even if , with the benefit of hindsight , it appears that now was too early for draconian “ social distancing ” measures , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early is , by definition , ‘ not too late , ” wrote Michael Brendan Dougherty today in a piece confessing his anxiety about coronavirus .
If we had an effective federal government that was on the ball in identifying cases and isolating patients , the story on crowd control would be different .
But we don ’ t , so it isn ’ t .
We ’ re forced to fend for ourselves for the time being , which means avoiding others to minimize the disease ’ s spread .
Update : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospitals getting creamed , ” says Bossert to NBC .

I’m fascinated to know how this segment came about, especially since the coronavirus message coming from other Fox hosts like Hannity and Trish Regan ranges from “I’m worried that we’re overreacting” to full-on rants about how the media is trying to impeach Trump again or something. Carlson never utters the word “Trump” here but it’s clear as day who he means when he says that some on the left — and right — are focused on the wrong things, even nudging viewers by noting that he’s referring to people whom they voted for. It may be that partisan bubbles are now so tightly sealed that nothing short of a Fox primetime host declaring that yes, coronavirus is a crisis, stands a chance of convincing some Trump-loving righties that yes, coronavirus is a crisis.
Tucker had three possible motives and they’re not mutually exclusive.
1. Basic civic duty. He reads the papers. He knows what the testing numbers look like. He’s genuinely worried, as he should be, and trying to convince Fox fans to protect themselves before it’s too late.
2. Nationalist agenda. It’s a testament to how intense modern hyperpartisanship is, said Ross Douthat last week, that Republicans have been handed a golden political opportunity to promote lesser economic dependence on China and instead many instinctively spend their time covering for Trump by insisting that the virus is no big deal. If given a choice between promoting nationalism and reassuring the president that his farts smell terrific, some will take the latter every time. Not Carlson. He’s serious about his nationalism. Watch to the end of the clip below and you’ll find him making the case for severing America’s medical supply chain from China. The more serious Republicans take coronavirus, the stronger his argument becomes.
3. Someone asked him to do it in order to get through to Trump. We may have arrived at a state of such dysfunction in terms of how the president processes information that having people like Anthony Fauci and the head of the CDC assure him daily that this is much more threatening than the flu simply can’t get through to him. To really penetrate his consciousness, they need to appeal to a higher authority: Fox News primetime hosts. Maybe someone from the White House dialed up Tucker and told him that, in our modern game-show dystopia, only he (or Hannity) has the power to convince Trump that coronavirus isn’t just going to burn itself out. According to WaPo, people in the building are worried.
Trump’s overall handling of the converging crises — while spreading misinformation and blaming others — has unsettled many of his Republican allies on Capitol Hill and even inside the White House, where some aides acknowledged that the president is compounding problems with his grievances and conspiratorial mind-set… Inside the White House, some officials privately acknowledged Monday that Trump has exacerbated the problem with his misleading and false statements, as well as his callous comments — such as saying last Friday that he hoped infected cruise passengers would stay aboard the Grand Princess at sea because he didn’t want domestic coronavirus case numbers to rise.
Coincidentally, or maybe not coincidentally, former Trump advisor Tom Bossert is out with an op-ed today stressing that it’s now or never to stop an Italy-style catastrophe in the U.S. before it gets rolling:
Community-based interventions are needed to delay the outbreak peak. On this, the 1918 flu taught us a lot. The difference between the steps taken in Philadelphia, which waited too long back then, and St. Louis, which acted quickly, is staggering. Aggressive interventions put off and ease the peak burden on hospitals and other health-care infrastructure. Ultimately, these measures can also diminish the overall number of cases and health impacts. Consider the actions taken in Italy. On Feb. 20, Italy reported three instances of infection and no known deaths. On Feb. 21, Italy had 20 cases and its first attributed death. Officials implemented interventions, including school closures, the following day and instituted a cordon sanitaire affecting 50,000 people. That’s aggressive, but it was too late. On Feb. 22, Italy reported 63 cases and a second death. A little more than a week later, there were 2,036 cases, with 140 patients in serious condition and 52 deaths. Today, the numbers continue to climb, with more than 9,100 cases and 460 dead, and on Monday the government expanded travel restrictions to the entire country.
Here’s a visualization of the Philadelphia/St. Louis 1918 comparison he cites. One line shows what happens when large events are allowed to proceed as scheduled, leading to rapid exponential contagion. The other shows what happens when local officials don’t have their heads up their asses.
Some, including Hannity last night, reassure themselves with the thought that the disease is chiefly dangerous to old and infirm people. Laying aside the fact that there are fully 23 million people in the U.S. who are 80+ or immunocompromised, the “it’s only old people” argument continues to ignore the core threat here. If infection spreads exponentially and hospitals can’t handle the glut, people who are ill with something other than coronavirus will also struggle to get treatment. The rate of death from things like heart disease and cancer won’t hold steady if doctors are preoccupied with fighting COVID-19 — or are too sick themselves to even tend to the ill.
And as Carlson rightly says, the worst-case scenarios can no longer be dismissed as something likely to happen in a less developed country like Iran. The reports from northern Italy on social media and elsewhere about desperately ill people being left untreated because the hospitals just can’t handle any more patients are horrifying:
[I]n the rest of hard-hit northern Italy, the virus’ spread was growing so exponentially that doctors were making comparisons to war-time triage medics deciding who lives, who dies and who gets access to the limited number of ICU beds. “It’s a reasoning that our colleagues make,” Dr. Guido Giustetto, head of the association of doctors in northern Piedmont, said Monday. “It becomes dramatic if, rather than doing it under normal situations, they do it because the beds are so scarce that someone might not have access to medical care.” The Italian society of anesthesiology and intensive care published 15 ethical recommendations to consider when deciding on ICU admissions during the virus crisis and the ICU shortage. The criteria include the age of the patient and the probability of survival, and not just “first come first served.”
They’re already rationing treatment. We have no defense against this happening right here, within a few weeks, except to start shutting down all large gatherings of people immediately. Slow the spread and everyone who needs emergency treatment can get it. Don’t slow the spread and old people are going to die on gurneys in hospital corridors waiting for a ventilator that just isn’t available in time. And then other, younger people with unrelated conditions who can’t get to see a doctor anymore will start dying of their own maladies.
If the gut reaction to all of that is to say, “Well, fine, but it’s too early to start shutting things down,” it isn’t. That’s Bossert’s point. It’s late. Because the CDC screwed up the testing, and because American labs still aren’t anywhere near testing capacity, we have no realistic idea just how far coronavirus has spread here. Clearly it’s spreading, and clearly it hasn’t reached the stage yet where any hospitals are overwhelmed. We’re somewhere between “basically fine” and “Italy” at the moment, but with no clue as to which of those two poles we’re closer to.
Italy has 9,172 confirmed cases as of today. The U.S. has just 708 confirmed so far. That’s how many Italy had 11 days ago — 655 on February 27. — Ari Schulman (@AriSchulman) March 10, 2020
The only prudent move is to assume we’re closer to “Italy” than we think and start banning large gatherings (as some districts are now doing), including parades and crowds at sporting events. You would think the NBA might take a hint from their Chinese masters and start treating coronavirus as a grave threat by closing its doors to fans for awhile, but nope, not yet. Big crowds at game after game, just passin’ that virus around.
And even if, with the benefit of hindsight, it appears that now was too early for draconian “social distancing” measures, better safe than sorry. “Too early is, by definition, ‘not too late,” wrote Michael Brendan Dougherty today in a piece confessing his anxiety about coronavirus. If we had an effective federal government that was on the ball in identifying cases and isolating patients, the story on crowd control would be different. But we don’t, so it isn’t. We’re forced to fend for ourselves for the time being, which means avoiding others to minimize the disease’s spread.
Update: “We are 10 days from our hospitals getting creamed,” says Bossert to NBC.


hotair--2020-03-10--Is the entertainment industry feeling the pinch of COVID-19? You may be surprised.

Out of an abundance of caution , Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy will tape shows without a live audience due to the continued spread of COVID-19 .
The two are the most popular of the game shows on television , each with over 9 million viewers .
Both shows tape in a studio in Culver City , California .
Both of them film well in advance so the viewing audience will not notice a difference right away .
This was the latest of the announcements coming from the entertainment industry as adjustments are being made to control unnecessary exposure to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced that The Amazing Race – a reality-style show with contestants literally racing around the world for a prize of $ 1 million – has suspended production .
In the case of Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy , the decision is likely a nod to the game show hosts .
Jeopardy host Alex Trebek , 79 years old , is battling pancreatic cancer .
In November , Wheel of Fortune host Pat Sajak , 73 years old , underwent emergency surgery for an intestinal blockage in November .
Even the lovely Vanna White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Can you believe she is that age ?
All three are in the age group that is more susceptible – the over 60 age group – and Trebek ’ s cancer fight weakens his immune system .
The trend is to limit audiences or to do away with them for the immediate future as the COVID-19 epidemic spreads .
You would think that people would not be going out to movies , for example , but apparently that is not the case .
Cineworld , the world ’ s second-largest theater chain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a drop in ticket sales so far .
Ushers in movie theatres are wearing latex gloves and museums are making hand sanitizer available for its patrons .
Anyone currently having problems with a cough or sneezing is asked to change their ticket for another performance .
The entertainment industry is heavily unionized and worker protections come into play both in the U.S. and overseas .
Labor tensions are possible , too .
Unions say they will work to ensure their members have protections on the job and are paid even if they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Louvre closed for more than two days for negotiations between workers and officials .
One agreement to come out of the talks is that guards will no longer have to circulate in the packed room where the Mona Lisa hangs .
“ Everyone is exploring what to do if things get worse , ” said Jennifer Bielstein , the president of the League of Resident Theaters , a national organization .
Most institutions are familiar with what happens if a storm or strike interrupts their operations , but a viral epidemic is new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director of the National Coalition for Arts ’ Preparedness and Emergency Response , has advised organizations on how to survive hurricanes , tornadoes and fires , but never an epidemic .
That means many museums , theaters , music venues and dance companies are having to educate themselves on what a viral outbreak will mean for their businesses .
Do their insurance policies cover infectious diseases ?
If performances are canceled , will artists be paid ?
For how long ?
Special precautions are being taken by performers , too .
For example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employs visiting artists from Italy .
Last week they were asked to isolate themselves .
Broadway producers are “ cautiously optimistic ” that attendance numbers will not slump .
Charlotte St. Martin , president of the Broadway League trade organization representing producers and theater owners , said in a conference call with reporters this afternoon that she was “ even a bit surprised ” with today ’ s box office figures indicating an increase in total Broadway attendance last week over the previous week .
“ I look very carefully at the year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , “ and history says last week and the week before are two of the traditionally worst weeks we have every year ” partially due to winter weather and families gearing up for spring break .
She indicated last week ’ s figures were encouraging , “ but we know it could possibly not be [ like ] this every week.
” Just imagine paying the high ticket prices of a Broadway show and sitting next to someone who is coughing or sneezing next to you .
People schedule vacations to New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 is changing our everyday lives in all kinds of ways .
Broadway theatres are boosting hygiene practices with extra scrubbings and sanitizing , as are movie theatres .
Some sports leagues are playing games without spectators .
Even the NBA is bracing its players for the possibility of playing without fans present .
Most locker rooms and clubhouses are now off-limits to the press and media .
Special areas are being designated outside of the locker rooms .
The social distancing between media and players is being enforced – a six foot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All sporting events in Italy ( an entire country currently in lockdown ) are canceled until at least April 3 .
The suspension includes everything from professional teams to local recreational teams .
COVID-19 is changing how we live our lives , which in some cases may not be a bad thing .
Shouldn ’ t everyone be washing their hands and taking care of sanitizing their own environments on a regular basis anyway ?
Avoiding large crowds until the coronavirus wanes isn ’ t too much to ask for those most susceptible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this boils down to practicing common sense .
Economic repercussions do not need to be exaggerated and media reporting on the virus should take a breath and stop fearmongering .
There is a ghoulish hope among many on the left that COVID-19 will be “ Trump ’ s Katrina ” and bring on a recession .
The economy is taking a hit , that can ’ t be denied , but to cheer it on in some circles just to affect Trump ’ s re-election in November is wrong .
So far the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with it .

Out of an abundance of caution, Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy will tape shows without a live audience due to the continued spread of COVID-19. The two are the most popular of the game shows on television, each with over 9 million viewers. Both shows tape in a studio in Culver City, California.
Both of them film well in advance so the viewing audience will not notice a difference right away. This was the latest of the announcements coming from the entertainment industry as adjustments are being made to control unnecessary exposure to the coronavirus. Last week, CBS announced that The Amazing Race – a reality-style show with contestants literally racing around the world for a prize of $1 million – has suspended production.
In the case of Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy, the decision is likely a nod to the game show hosts. Jeopardy host Alex Trebek, 79 years old, is battling pancreatic cancer. In November, Wheel of Fortune host Pat Sajak, 73 years old, underwent emergency surgery for an intestinal blockage in November. Even the lovely Vanna White is 63 years old. I know. Can you believe she is that age? All three are in the age group that is more susceptible – the over 60 age group – and Trebek’s cancer fight weakens his immune system.
The trend is to limit audiences or to do away with them for the immediate future as the COVID-19 epidemic spreads. You would think that people would not be going out to movies, for example, but apparently that is not the case. Cineworld, the world’s second-largest theater chain, says it hasn’t noticed a drop in ticket sales so far.
“Thus far, we have not observed any material impact on our movie theatre admissions due to COVID-19,” it said in a statement Friday morning, “We continue to see good levels of admissions in all our territories, despite the reported spread of COVID-19.”
Ushers in movie theatres are wearing latex gloves and museums are making hand sanitizer available for its patrons. Anyone currently having problems with a cough or sneezing is asked to change their ticket for another performance. The entertainment industry is heavily unionized and worker protections come into play both in the U.S. and overseas.
Labor tensions are possible, too. Unions say they will work to ensure their members have protections on the job and are paid even if they cannot work. In Paris, the Louvre closed for more than two days for negotiations between workers and officials. One agreement to come out of the talks is that guards will no longer have to circulate in the packed room where the Mona Lisa hangs. “Everyone is exploring what to do if things get worse,” said Jennifer Bielstein, the president of the League of Resident Theaters, a national organization. Most institutions are familiar with what happens if a storm or strike interrupts their operations, but a viral epidemic is new territory. Jan Newcomb, the executive director of the National Coalition for Arts’ Preparedness and Emergency Response, has advised organizations on how to survive hurricanes, tornadoes and fires, but never an epidemic. That means many museums, theaters, music venues and dance companies are having to educate themselves on what a viral outbreak will mean for their businesses. Do their insurance policies cover infectious diseases? If performances are canceled, will artists be paid? For how long?
Special precautions are being taken by performers, too. For example, the Metropolitan Opera in New York employs visiting artists from Italy. Last week they were asked to isolate themselves.
For the Metropolitan Opera — which relies heavily on singers, directors and other artists who live and work around the world — the coronavirus crisis poses special challenges. The company issued new guidelines this week telling both employees and visiting artists who have recently been to a country flagged for coronavirus outbreaks by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention not to come to work at the Met for 14 days. That includes people who visited Italy, an opera capital. (On Thursday, the city asked all New Yorkers who had been to those countries to isolate themselves.)
Broadway producers are “cautiously optimistic” that attendance numbers will not slump.
Charlotte St. Martin, president of the Broadway League trade organization representing producers and theater owners, said in a conference call with reporters this afternoon that she was “even a bit surprised” with today’s box office figures indicating an increase in total Broadway attendance last week over the previous week. “I look very carefully at the year over year” figures, St. Martin said, “and history says last week and the week before are two of the traditionally worst weeks we have every year” partially due to winter weather and families gearing up for spring break. She indicated last week’s figures were encouraging, “but we know it could possibly not be [like] this every week.”
Just imagine paying the high ticket prices of a Broadway show and sitting next to someone who is coughing or sneezing next to you. People schedule vacations to New York City around Broadway show tickets. COVID-19 is changing our everyday lives in all kinds of ways. Broadway theatres are boosting hygiene practices with extra scrubbings and sanitizing, as are movie theatres.
Some sports leagues are playing games without spectators. Even the NBA is bracing its players for the possibility of playing without fans present. Most locker rooms and clubhouses are now off-limits to the press and media. Special areas are being designated outside of the locker rooms. The social distancing between media and players is being enforced – a six foot distance is the guideline being followed. All sporting events in Italy (an entire country currently in lockdown) are canceled until at least April 3. The suspension includes everything from professional teams to local recreational teams.
COVID-19 is changing how we live our lives, which in some cases may not be a bad thing. Shouldn’t everyone be washing their hands and taking care of sanitizing their own environments on a regular basis anyway? Avoiding large crowds until the coronavirus wanes isn’t too much to ask for those most susceptible to becoming ill. Mostly, all of this boils down to practicing common sense. Economic repercussions do not need to be exaggerated and media reporting on the virus should take a breath and stop fearmongering. There is a ghoulish hope among many on the left that COVID-19 will be “Trump’s Katrina” and bring on a recession. The economy is taking a hit, that can’t be denied, but to cheer it on in some circles just to affect Trump’s re-election in November is wrong. So far the entertainment industry is finding ways to deal with it.


hotair--2020-03-10--Massive majority of Latinx voters don't like the term Latinx

Have you been chastized online yet for using the terms Latina or Latino ?
I have .
It hasn ’ t happened a lot , but I ’ ve been seeing increasing use of the term LatinX and critics attempting to correct those who fail to use it .
The traditional terms are now apparently some bizarre combination of racism and sexism simultaneously according to the Woke Patrol .
But how do actual Hispanic citizens feel about it ?
The Free Beacon dug up a recent survey that sampled voters in Florida as well as nationally .
The results weren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of balanced split .
Hispanic voters widely prefer the term Hispanic and “ LatinX ” was the first choice for almost nobody .
Just 1 percent of Hispanic Democratic voters in Florida prefer the term “ Latinx , ” the gender-free alternative to “ Latino ” and “ Latina ” that has been embraced by several liberal groups and top Democratic politicians , according to a new poll .
The poll , shared Monday by Politico ‘ s Marc Caputo , surveyed 800 Hispanic Democrats in Florida and found the preferred label is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice of 69 percent of respondents .
Twenty-three percent said they preferred “ Latino , ” 9 percent said they had no preference , and 1 percent said they preferred “ Latinx , ” an attempt to remove the gender forms inherent in the Spanish language .
Support for “ Latinx ” among Hispanic Florida Democrats is even lower than its support among Hispanics nationally—just 2 percent of respondents to a nationwide poll conducted last November identified “ Latinx ” as their preferred term .
This push to remove the concept of gender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ popular one for the most part , but it ’ s particularly significant for Spanish speakers .
The idea crosses cultural and linguistic lines .
I still recall taking Spanish in high school and struggling with the concept that virtually everything has a gender associated with it , not just people or animals .
A shoe store is la zapatería because it ’ s feminine .
A traditional hat is el sombrero because it ’ s male .
And you had to learn the gender of all the things in the language instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Attempting to strip gender out of the Spanish language is a cultural affront .
Small wonder then that only one to two percent of Hispanic people are excited about being referred to as “ LatinX ” to avoid making any assumptions about their gender .
This isn ’ t much different than the somewhat more successful efforts of our Woke Betters to try to force everyone to use a “ singular they ” to refer to people rather than he or she .
They ’ ve been so intrusive on this point that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ” in the dictionary and went on to declare it their word of the year .
English famously lacks a gender-neutral singular pronoun to correspond neatly with singular pronouns like everyone or someone , and as a consequence they has been used for this purpose for over 600 years .
More recently , though , they has also been used to refer to one person whose gender identity is nonbinary , a sense that is increasingly common in published , edited text , as well as social media and in daily personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s no doubt that its use is established in the English language , which is why it was added to the Merriam-Webster.com dictionary this past September .
Feel free to make your language as woke as you please , but don ’ t bother trying to force it on everyone else .
The use of “ they ” as a third-person pronoun is simply stupid and makes you sound illiterate .
I have no plans to start using it at this point in my life and the same goes for LatinX .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you probably shouldn ’ t try to force the people “ LatinX ” describes to use it either .
You might find yourself on the receiving and of a puñetazo in la nariz .

Have you been chastized online yet for using the terms Latina or Latino? I have. It hasn’t happened a lot, but I’ve been seeing increasing use of the term LatinX and critics attempting to correct those who fail to use it. The traditional terms are now apparently some bizarre combination of racism and sexism simultaneously according to the Woke Patrol. But how do actual Hispanic citizens feel about it? The Free Beacon dug up a recent survey that sampled voters in Florida as well as nationally. The results weren’t even close to any sort of balanced split. Hispanic voters widely prefer the term Hispanic and “LatinX” was the first choice for almost nobody.
Just 1 percent of Hispanic Democratic voters in Florida prefer the term “Latinx,” the gender-free alternative to “Latino” and “Latina” that has been embraced by several liberal groups and top Democratic politicians, according to a new poll. The poll, shared Monday by Politico‘s Marc Caputo, surveyed 800 Hispanic Democrats in Florida and found the preferred label is still “Hispanic,” the primary choice of 69 percent of respondents. Twenty-three percent said they preferred “Latino,” 9 percent said they had no preference, and 1 percent said they preferred “Latinx,” an attempt to remove the gender forms inherent in the Spanish language. Support for “Latinx” among Hispanic Florida Democrats is even lower than its support among Hispanics nationally—just 2 percent of respondents to a nationwide poll conducted last November identified “Latinx” as their preferred term.
This push to remove the concept of gender from all speech isn’t a popular one for the most part, but it’s particularly significant for Spanish speakers. The idea crosses cultural and linguistic lines. I still recall taking Spanish in high school and struggling with the concept that virtually everything has a gender associated with it, not just people or animals. A shoe store is la zapatería because it’s feminine. A traditional hat is el sombrero because it’s male. And you had to learn the gender of all the things in the language instead of just memorizing the base words.
Attempting to strip gender out of the Spanish language is a cultural affront. Small wonder then that only one to two percent of Hispanic people are excited about being referred to as “LatinX” to avoid making any assumptions about their gender.
This isn’t much different than the somewhat more successful efforts of our Woke Betters to try to force everyone to use a “singular they” to refer to people rather than he or she. They’ve been so intrusive on this point that Merriam-Webster caved in and put “singular they” in the dictionary and went on to declare it their word of the year.
English famously lacks a gender-neutral singular pronoun to correspond neatly with singular pronouns like everyone or someone, and as a consequence they has been used for this purpose for over 600 years. More recently, though, they has also been used to refer to one person whose gender identity is nonbinary, a sense that is increasingly common in published, edited text, as well as social media and in daily personal interactions between English speakers. There’s no doubt that its use is established in the English language, which is why it was added to the Merriam-Webster.com dictionary this past September.
Feel free to make your language as woke as you please, but don’t bother trying to force it on everyone else. The use of “they” as a third-person pronoun is simply stupid and makes you sound illiterate. I have no plans to start using it at this point in my life and the same goes for LatinX. And based on the results of this survey, you probably shouldn’t try to force the people “LatinX” describes to use it either. You might find yourself on the receiving and of a puñetazo in la nariz.


hotair--2020-03-10--COVID collision: Dow rallies as Trump, Democrats battle over stimulus package to shore up economy

In its way , this pitched battle over economic stimuli seems like a refreshing return to normalcy .
Both Republicans and Democrats recognize that the economic shocks of the coronavirus outbreak will require some buffering , but the debate over the means and approach to do so has fallen mainly into a comfortable and perhaps even comforting pattern .
Donald Trump and his advisers will meet today with Senate Republicans to pitch a package of tax holidays and paid leave to goose consumption and quell panic in the markets : President Donald Trump and top economic officials will pitch wary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other policy proposals meant to ease the economic fallout of coronavirus during a closed-door lunch on Tuesday , two people briefed on the matter told CNN .
White House economic officials plan to lay out additional measures to try and arrest the economic pain stemming from the spread of the virus , including proposals to implement paid sick leave , deferral on tax collection on specific industries including airlines , cruise lines and hotels , and specific proposals to make small business loans more available and with flexible repayment options , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain disagreements inside the White House over specific proposals — most notably the scope and scale of the payroll tax proposal , the people said .
But while Trump has made the payroll tax cut a focal point of the White House economic response , the administration ’ s top economic policy officials have started to focus more on the small and medium business loan elements of any proposal , as they have become keenly aware of the lack of demand that could lead to a credit crunch in the days and weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Normally , Democrats prefer the payroll-tax cut or holiday approach .
This time , the Washington Post reports , they ’ re balking .
Instead of tax cuts , they want paid leave and indemnification for insurers and health care providers : “ I don ’ t think we think that the payroll tax cut is what we need right now , ” Hoyer said .
“ What the economy needs right now is some stability and confidence that we are addressing the issue that is undermining the economy .
And I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for almost everything is a tax cut .
We think we need to make sure that people in health facilities and insurance companies and others have confidence that they ’ re not going to be bankrupted by this and they ’ ll have some support of the government.
” Later in the day , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) went into more detail about the Democrats ’ planned proposal .
They said they would pursue legislation that provided free coronavirus testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those affected by the epidemic , expanded food subsidies and an expansion of the federal unemployment insurance program .
Still , other senior Democrats said it was inevitable that Washington will have to step in with measures to stimulate the economy .
“ We ’ re going to reach that point , ” said Sen. Richard J. Durbin ( D-Ill. ) .
“ If we ’ re serious about this , we have to put all the cards on the table.
” There did appear to be growing common ground between the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers .
Vice President Pence , who is leading the administration ’ s coronavirus task force , said the administration would work with Congress to make sure people who contract the coronavirus do not lose paychecks as a result , although details of such a plan were unclear .
I ’ m not the only one finding some comfort in partisan normalcy , by the way : As an emergency measure , paid leave makes sense — but only as an emergency measure .
The trick for stopping the spread of an epidemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease ) is “ social distancing , ” or the encouragement of self-isolation .
In the US especially , it ’ s tough to do as we are a mobile and gregarious people used to free association and social engagements .
We are especially addicted to working through colds and other ailments , however , mindful of the penalties for missing too much work .
Businesses run on small margins can ’ t afford to be much more generous with paid time off than they already are , which incentivizes employees to come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In an epidemiological emergency , it would make sense for the US government to intervene to fund some social isolation directly , or to offer it as a tax incentive and make it less direct .
That could slow the transmission of the disease and allow people to lessen their personal risks , which could have a salutary effect on market psychology as well .
If that ’ s what they want to do , though , they ’ d better do it fast .
If it takes a month to fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it will probably be too late for it to do much good .
By that time , the disease will have progressed through to the point where transmissions flatten out on their own , and when warm weather will likely slow the transmission even further .
The money for paid leave would arrive at about the time when it ’ s no longer an emergency to supply it .
The payroll tax cut might make for a nice temporary boost for consumption , and it might even be necessary if retailers continue to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For the most part , though , that kind of policy is simply a way to shift demand up rather than actually create an economic boost .
It just gooses the economy rather than build in long-lasting support for expansion .
It also limits the flexibility for later interventions by complicating matters unduly .
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin pointed out that these kinds of complications could end up making things worse in the long run , especially in an economy that was otherwise operating on all cylinders before the WuFlu : The paid-leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next crisis , even if it doesn ’ t get done in time for this one .
There will be another epidemic , and having that tool in the box for emergencies might make a lot of sense .
If we ’ d had it deployed a couple of weeks ago , the markets might not be as panicked as they are this week .

In its way, this pitched battle over economic stimuli seems like a refreshing return to normalcy. Both Republicans and Democrats recognize that the economic shocks of the coronavirus outbreak will require some buffering, but the debate over the means and approach to do so has fallen mainly into a comfortable and perhaps even comforting pattern. Donald Trump and his advisers will meet today with Senate Republicans to pitch a package of tax holidays and paid leave to goose consumption and quell panic in the markets:
President Donald Trump and top economic officials will pitch wary Senate Republicans on a payroll tax cut and other policy proposals meant to ease the economic fallout of coronavirus during a closed-door lunch on Tuesday, two people briefed on the matter told CNN. White House economic officials plan to lay out additional measures to try and arrest the economic pain stemming from the spread of the virus, including proposals to implement paid sick leave, deferral on tax collection on specific industries including airlines, cruise lines and hotels, and specific proposals to make small business loans more available and with flexible repayment options, according to the two people. … There remain disagreements inside the White House over specific proposals — most notably the scope and scale of the payroll tax proposal, the people said. But while Trump has made the payroll tax cut a focal point of the White House economic response, the administration’s top economic policy officials have started to focus more on the small and medium business loan elements of any proposal, as they have become keenly aware of the lack of demand that could lead to a credit crunch in the days and weeks ahead, one of the people said.
Normally, Democrats prefer the payroll-tax cut or holiday approach. This time, the Washington Post reports, they’re balking. Instead of tax cuts, they want paid leave and indemnification for insurers and health care providers:
“I don’t think we think that the payroll tax cut is what we need right now,” Hoyer said. “What the economy needs right now is some stability and confidence that we are addressing the issue that is undermining the economy. And I mean, the president’s answer for almost everything is a tax cut. We think we need to make sure that people in health facilities and insurance companies and others have confidence that they’re not going to be bankrupted by this and they’ll have some support of the government.” Later in the day, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) went into more detail about the Democrats’ planned proposal. They said they would pursue legislation that provided free coronavirus testing for all Americans, paid leave for those affected by the epidemic, expanded food subsidies and an expansion of the federal unemployment insurance program. Still, other senior Democrats said it was inevitable that Washington will have to step in with measures to stimulate the economy. “We’re going to reach that point,” said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). “If we’re serious about this, we have to put all the cards on the table.” There did appear to be growing common ground between the White House and Democrats over paid leave for workers. Vice President Pence, who is leading the administration’s coronavirus task force, said the administration would work with Congress to make sure people who contract the coronavirus do not lose paychecks as a result, although details of such a plan were unclear.
I’m not the only one finding some comfort in partisan normalcy, by the way:
JUST IN: Dow jumps more than 800 points after President Trump said he will take "major" steps to ease concerns about the economy in light of the coronavirus outbreak. https://t.co/ra3502Qcka — NBC News (@NBCNews) March 10, 2020
As an emergency measure, paid leave makes sense — but only as an emergency measure. The trick for stopping the spread of an epidemic like COVID-19 (or any other respiratory disease) is “social distancing,” or the encouragement of self-isolation. In the US especially, it’s tough to do as we are a mobile and gregarious people used to free association and social engagements.
We are especially addicted to working through colds and other ailments, however, mindful of the penalties for missing too much work. Businesses run on small margins can’t afford to be much more generous with paid time off than they already are, which incentivizes employees to come to work with their coughs and fevers. In an epidemiological emergency, it would make sense for the US government to intervene to fund some social isolation directly, or to offer it as a tax incentive and make it less direct. That could slow the transmission of the disease and allow people to lessen their personal risks, which could have a salutary effect on market psychology as well.
If that’s what they want to do, though, they’d better do it fast. If it takes a month to fund and roll out such a program, it will probably be too late for it to do much good. By that time, the disease will have progressed through to the point where transmissions flatten out on their own, and when warm weather will likely slow the transmission even further. The money for paid leave would arrive at about the time when it’s no longer an emergency to supply it.
The payroll tax cut might make for a nice temporary boost for consumption, and it might even be necessary if retailers continue to see a big drop in demand. For the most part, though, that kind of policy is simply a way to shift demand up rather than actually create an economic boost. It just gooses the economy rather than build in long-lasting support for expansion. It also limits the flexibility for later interventions by complicating matters unduly.
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin pointed out that these kinds of complications could end up making things worse in the long run, especially in an economy that was otherwise operating on all cylinders before the WuFlu:
“This is not like the financial crisis where we don’t know the end in sight. This is about providing proper tools and liquidity to get through the next few months,” Mnuchin said. “The economy will be in very good shape a year from now.”
The paid-leave incentives should be kept in mind for the next crisis, even if it doesn’t get done in time for this one. There will be another epidemic, and having that tool in the box for emergencies might make a lot of sense. If we’d had it deployed a couple of weeks ago, the markets might not be as panicked as they are this week.