As Coronavirus Cases Plunge Across Nation, Blue States Lift Mask Mandates
Preference cascade claims New Jersey and Massachusetts; Pennsylvania and California have June dates slated for end of mask mandates.
As the number of COVID cases nosedives, the preference cascade for mask-free personal liberty continues to sweep the nation.
Data compiled by Johns Hopkins University shows that the average daily Covid case counts in the U.S. are at less than half of the level recorded at the start of May.
The country is seeing an average of 23,407 new infections per day over the past week, down from about 49,600 on May 1, a 53% drop.
Federal data shows the U.S. is reporting an average of 1.7 million daily vaccinations, and nearly 50% of the U.S. population has received one dose or more.
The seven-day average of daily U.S. Covid cases is 23,407 as of Wednesday, according to Johns Hopkins data, down 23% from a week ago and 53% from the start of the month.
Public health professionals assert that some areas of this country are on the cusp of herd immunity.
Susan Hassig, an epidemiology professor at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, pointed to states in the Northeast as “places where we are very, very close [to herd immunity]…because we see very few cases and hospitalizations occurring there.”
Connecticut, for example, reported only 88 new COVID-19 cases on Wednesday and seven hospitalizations. Massachusetts reported 211 new cases and 253 hospitalizations. The states have fully vaccinated 52% and 51% of their entire population, respectively.
The percentage of immunity in those states increases when the number of COVID-19 infections is included: 339,100 in Connecticut and 660,298 in Massachusetts. However, it is not a simple matter of adding the confirmed number of cases. The actual number of cases are likely two to four times higher given the number of people with asymptomatic infections or mild symptoms who were never tested. There is also some overlap among people who have been infected and vaccinated.
Assuming that actual cases are three times higher than confirmed cases and that half of those have also been vaccinated, about 66% of the population in Connecticut may be immune and 65% in Massachusetts.
Legal Insurrection readers will note that the reproduction number, which I have been following as my marker as to when the pandemic should be declared at an end, has now been below one nationally for six weeks.
Finally, some blue states are relenting on their ponderous pandemic policies that include social distancing and masks, masks, masks.
New Jersey has just lifted its mask mandate under most circumstances.
Starting today — for the first time in 14 months — New Jerseyans will be allowed to go into restaurants, stores and other public places without the government requiring that they wear a mask to reduce transmission of COVID-19.
Gov. Phil Murphy signed an order on Monday that drops the NJ mask mandate, one of the biggest steps toward a return to normalcy.
Massachusetts is ending all COVID-19 restrictions.
All COVID-19 restrictions in Massachusetts, including the mask mandate, will be lifted Saturday — just in time for Memorial Day weekend — as state enters what officials call a “new normal” amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
This means, effective at midnight, all businesses will be able to reopen without restrictions and the face covering order will be replaced by the CDC’s new guidance over the holiday weekend and beyond.
Pennsylvania will end its mask mandate June 28.
The mask order will be lifted by June 28, or when 70% of adults are fully vaccinated, whichever comes first, announced state Acting Health Secretary Alison Beam during a news conference Thursday.
It comes a day after the state hit a milestone of 70% of adults getting at least one dose of the vaccine. About 53% of Pennsylvanians 18 and older are fully vaccinated, as of Thursday.
My home state of California will jettison the mask mandates along with other COVID-restricitions on June 15th.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
But be sure to continue wearing your masks anyway, or risk being mistaken for a Republican! Wear then for the rest of your lives. Nay, be buried in them.
Coronabros will never let it go.
Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: a controlled study
Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses
‘Cases’ is the single most idiotic measurement possible for an ACTUAL pandemic. ‘Cases’ is totally dependent upon BEING TESTED, and will fall dramatically when people simply stop being tested.
The second the media switched from ‘deaths’ to ‘cases’ – LAST YEAR – to push their bullshit fearmongering, the so-called ‘pandemic’ was over.
Pandemic by definition is defined by a large number of cases. That’s what’s a pandemic is.
“‘Cases’ is totally dependent upon BEING TESTED, and will fall dramatically when people simply stop being tested.”
No shit Sherlock, what’s your point?
With regard to death/cases these have typically been reported side by side. Again I’m not really what your point is here.
mark
A large number of cases is the definition of an Epidemic or possibly an Outbreak. A Pandemic is an Epidemic that is world wide, so the key characteristic of a Pandemic is geographic spread/presence not severity.
An R of one is the baseline level to be defined as an epidemic. Less than one might be in some specific instances with a particular virus due to ease of transmission/onset of symptoms.
R is defined by case count. That count is a function of testing. No test = no case even where the individual has contracted the virus.
Prior to widespread availability of tests lots of people contracted the virus. They ones we don’t know about didn’t seek treatment due to mild or no symptoms complications. No test or hospital record to count their case.
From that fact we can infer that the number of official cases or the ‘case count’ is below the actual number of true cases. The mortality rate is derived by using the official ‘case count’ and the number of deaths.
Since we know that the case count numbers are under counting the true number of cases then the mortality rate numbers are inflated.
Additionally the uncounted cases have delivered naturally acquired immunity to those individuals. These numbers + vaccinated individuals have pushed the population much closer to herd immunity levels than is being admitted.
Thanks CommoChief. That’s the best explanation I’ve seen.
Meh…..I have my moments but a broken clock is correct twice a day. At least that’s what my Father told me when I started getting arrogant with my opinions. Which used to be often, though much less so now believe it or not.
@commochief
The understanding that we can be wrong leads us to much better answers, I appreciate your honesty and thoughtfulness
Pandemic
Yes I realise , again that’s fundamentally a product of the number of cases
R number
Interesting, I’m aware of this but thanks still.
Mortality rate
This is based on the actual number of deaths Vs the total population not the number of cases. What you might be refering to is the case fatality rate which is a statistical risk of death from a particular illness. This can be sensitive to errors in knowing how many cases there are but the reality is there has been a lot of testing allowing reasonable estimates of this figure. I don’t really see what your point is here. The death rate is the death rate.
Herd immunity
The specific claim from the link is that certain population centres and in particular care homes in some locations might have reached herd immunity. In context that’s a failing in that the virus has been so poorly controlled. The article doesn’t indicate wide spread herd immunity at all and specifically states that judging or overall isn’t really possible
Thank you for the response commochief it was interesting and appreciate that.
@fuzzy slippers
I was debating dealing with your issues one by one but I’ve realised there isn’t any point. You aren’t honest about our conversations nor are you honest about your own shortcomings. You consistently straw man, ad hominem and to a lesser extent commit what about ism. Its pretty clear that you are intellectually dishonest and I would opine actually don’t have a strong knowledge of either critical thinking or logic. I don’t think you really understand argumentation at all. I’m not really clear it’s worth responding to you because you have virtually no substance. In other words you are pointless.
Thus I’ve decided to only respond to you if you say something that actually relates to an argument.
In terms of Zach, it seems like you don’t appreciate anyone who points out the flaws in your thinking. I don’t feel it necessary to talk about other commenters. Some of them have the decency to engage in a courteous manner unlike you
Slight quibble. Lets stipulate that the number of Rona deaths is accurate. We know the number of cases is an under count. We don’t know by how much, but likely huge.
The point here is that media reports Rona lethality as a % of the case number. This clearly inflates the truth. That distortion, which the public health community didn’t aggressively correct, has created a level of fear bordering on paranoia.
As for.herd immunity. Unless we test 100% of population for antibodies we can’t know how much natural immunity. We can infer that immunity exists in much larger % of population than the official case count.
If true that greater than half of adult US population has been vaccinated then combined with natural immunity numbers we are into herd immunity levels. This is something the public health community consistently downplays.
Bottom line is we don’t know for certain but we can infer and adapt our guidelines but for some reason our public health community refuses to do this. Which, IMO, under cuts their credibility yet again.
@ commochief
Well in the UK it’s typically reported as number of cases per 7 days and number of deaths per 7 days (as a rolling average) is that different in the US?
I think your later point really relates to risk and how you manage it. From a practical point of view the sooner you ease restrictions the greater the chance of the virus returning. Its balancing the risk of it returning and causing issues down the line. That’s a difficult choice to make, it seems like the gov/medical community in the US are starting to reach the point where they consider the risk sufficiently low in order to allow an easing of restrictions. The worst case scenario is easing too soon and allowing the virus to return that mistake is costly because of the time lag, plenty of places have paid the price for that so I think that on that basis it’s entirely reasonable to be cautious.
mark,
That’s the kind of misleading data that I am referring to.
The reported cases this week are, with minor exceptions unrelated to deaths this week. So when the public heath community puts out the data and media report that it confuses people.
Even if they tied the current weeks deaths back to the week of infection all that ratio shows is deaths per ‘official case’. It doesn’t include the ‘unreported’ cases.
That makes any attempt to state that x % of cases result in death or x % of cases result in hospitalization false.
The stubborn refusal by public health community and most media to acknowledge that their data doesn’t include the large numbers of unreported cases and the naturally acquired immunity from those cases creates the narrative that the ‘Rona’ is worse than it actually is in terms of lethality and in terms of reaching herd immunity.
IMO, this is a deliberate decision. The consequence is that many have lost faith that
the public health community will tell the truth.
Going forward that means the public will not accept ‘experts’ making pronouncements or politicians using their pronouncements at face value. If in two years another novel virus shows up the resistance to lock downs or quarantine will be swift and unwavering as a direct result of the current dishonesty. At least in my opinion.
@commochief
The numbers are straight figures they aren’t percentages. It just a number of deaths or cases per week. It’s an average becuase its a collation of figures from a week.
How exactly is anyone supposed to report unreported cases? By definition that’s not possible. Plenty of media outlets talk of estimates of those who might have been infected but not tested. It’s one of the reasons everyone was so critical of Trump when the administration did such a poor job of carrying out sufficient testing of Covid. It’s a much more accurate picture now that testing is a norm.
Mark,
Umm the problem is how the data is framed or presented. Some people don’t understand that if the data say 100 new cases of Rona this week and 5 new deaths this week that does not mean those deaths have jack to do with the this weeks cases.
The people I am referring to are those who won’t analyze the data for what it says and doesn’t say along with those who are attempting to analyze the data but don’t understand the methodology of statistical analysis.
Under counted cases are an unknown variable. Well yeah in absolute terms. We can reasonably look at the various population subsets, review their infection rate from testing and hospitalization. Then look at medical outcomes.
Taken together that would tell us a pretty damn good estimate for the number, geographic locations of the ‘unknown’ cases.
If males age 50- 60 with zero co morbidity in county x of state y on average have reported/official case rate of z %, then we simply apply that z % across the remaining population subset. ECT ECT.
That gives a very good estimate of naturally acquired immunity. Add in data for vaccination rates of that population subset and we have an even better more refined estimate.
This would then tell us how far off we are from herd immunity via vaccination + natural immunity. That would be a much better place to be in terms of setting and adjusting public health policy recommendations.
Economists do this sort of thing all the time. Our governments base all sorts of policy recommendations off this type of estimates. None are perfect but it’s pretty damn close to the true picture. That we are not attempting to answer the question of how many and where with natural immunity seems foolish. IMO.
@commo chief
The stats are pretty straightforward. It’s simply a representation of new cases and new deaths. That’s realistic and accurate. What statistical analysis , it’s a straight reporting of figures people can see pretty clearly whether cases are going up or down, its usually sat along side a graph showing the trend. The graphs showing the case and mortality rates are pretty obvious.
I’m not really clear on what you are trying to say? I’m not clear what analysis you are implying is needed?
@mark311, you wrote, “With regard to death/cases these have typically been reported side by side.”
Well, no, they haven’t been. There are plenty of people, like myself, who had WuFlu and never went to the hospital or saw a doctor. We just rolled with it, and after a couple weeks, it went away. I was never a “case” because no data type had access to my WuFlu infection. Further, a lot of “cases” of hospitalization have been proved to be cases that “also” include WuFlu (i.e. someone is hospitalized for a heart attack or a motor vehicle accident, tested for WuFlu, and then deemed to be a “case” when the WuFlu “case” may be asymptomatic and have nothing to do with the actual reason someone is hospitalized).
Deaths “from” WuFlu and deaths “with” WuFlu were mostly counted as deaths “from” (i.e. caused by) . . . do you not see a problem with this? Critical thinking is really important, you should try it sometime.
Mark311 is waste of time.
Though it is fun to mock his ridiculous thoughts. And great straightmen are hard to come by.
Heh, I know! I waver between thinking him beneath a response and then thinking it’s really really fun to point out what a waste of space he is. He’s fun to play with, anyway.
Apart from his constant and sole reliance on logical fallacy, his ‘I’ve been here forever’ schtick is perhaps my favorite. He’s been commenting here since December 8, 2020, not even six months, yet he pretends he’s a long-time commenter with any credibility at all. And to make it even better, he imagines he can wedge himself between us, when we’ve all been here for a decade or at least for several years. Hilarious!
He is ridiculous, though, I’ll grant you that. What amazes me is that he seems to honestly believe he’s clever or that he has ever, in his whole not-quite six months here, actually “won” an argument. So deluded. /smh
@fuzzy slippers
Wow logical fallacys 😂😂😂
It’s funny how you’ve never once mentioned a logical fallacy when replying to me and yet I’ve pointed out your use of them on a persistent basis.
I’ve never claimed to be clever, I’ve just tried to be honest which is a whole lot more than you can say. When did I claim I’ve been here forever?
You even try and ascribe motive to me when I’ve specifically pointed out all I do is call out BS. Driving a wedge eh, that’s never been my motive.
You are one of the most ignorant , arrogant humans I’ve ever come across. To be honest I find it comical.
@finereport
For someone who can’t even present an argument, I’m not even clear you know how to insult someone. It’s pretty bland the things you say. Maybe you can string a coherent thought together I’ll take you seriously.
Bwahaha! When have you pointed out that I used a logical fallacy? Seriously, when? Link me to it because I have not seen any such thing and suspect you are lying. Again. As usual.
You clearly had no idea what a logical fallacy even was until I pointed out that you only rarely formulate a single sentence that is not steeped in one logical fallacy or another, and then, like magic, you pretended to know about them in your comments to our readers. I’ll give you credit for actually looking them up, but you so seriously fail on reading comprehension because your childish attempts to discuss them are . . . sad.
I am definitely ignorant on a broad range of subjects that I have not studied or taken the time to master, so I’ll give you that one.
And I do think you have a point about my being arrogant when it comes to dealing with intellectually-deficient leftie trolls like you. In my defense, I’m not alone. Everyone here is a better thinker, better debater, better person than you are. It’s hard not to feel superior to you, I admit, and I also know that every single person who comments on LI, including our other leftie trolls, are superior to you in every conceivable way.
@mark311, you dismiss my premise as your motive: “that’s never been my motive.”
The obvious question is what is your motive for commenting here? You are not a conservative, not right-leaning, and our readers loathe you (except the two who see you as a fun pet project or a funny funny foil–look it up, I’ll wait.).
So why are you here? What is your motive? You must have one since you said I got your motive wrong, fill us in. What exactly do you hope to accomplish here by lying (about driving 50k miles a year, about posting at LI “for ages”) and by functioning as an illustrative case study for our resident “how to be a leftie troll” many Zachs workshop in what NOT to do in formulating arguments for thinking adults.
Sneak Peek: Lesson 101: Avoid logical fallacy like the plague.
Step one: know what logical fallacies are.
Mark311 is like a wimpy little pajama boy riding his tiny motor scooter to a Harley Davidson Rally and trying to convince the big tough bikers of the superiority of his 80 cc Yamaha.
Iron Law: You can always tell a “progressive,” but you can never tell a “progressive” a single thing. They think they know it all.
I was commenting on the reporting not the analysis of those who haven’t been counted..
Deaths from wuflu. Yeah now you are talking rubbish. The statistics for covid deaths are reasonably accurate and like many on the right show considerable ignorance of death certificates and a desperate attempt to try and reduce the overall impact of Covid. The overall mortality as a result of Covid can be clearly seen when compared to mortality from previous years. Citing cases of motorbike accidents which if I recall was maybe 7 people which incidentally was corrected doesnt have any impact on the overall stats.
WuFlu deaths have been greatly exaggerated. Remember how you scoffed at the Chinese concocting the WuFlu virus in their own labs? And then it was proved this was likely true? Get back to me when the actual deaths FROM/as a direct result of WuFLu (not those who tested positive for it–oftentimes, after they already died of other causes–or had antibodies from contracting it earlier) are revised. And they will be. Because they are wrong.
You’d know this already if the left didn’t suppress non-narrative supporting factual data because it’s inconvenient or fails to support their narrative (the narrative you have internalized as fact like some sort of bizarre pod person sponge). At some point, they will double back on this, like they did on Cuomo’s monumental error of forcing WuFlu-positive patients back into nursing home, like they did on reversing post-vaccine mask mandates, like they did on the origins of the WuFlu in the first place, and like they did on every other point that we have all known for a year (only properly, clinically-used N95 masks have a chance of protecting from this or any other virus).
Studies are already surfacing that show what we all know and have said since early data came out that masking did next to nothing to stop the spread of the virus.
You keep wearing your three masks while driving 50k miles a year in your personal vehicle and commenting here at LI “for ages” (i.e. less than six months). In the meantime, we live in the real world.
@ fuzzy slippers
Covid deaths haven’t been exaggerated. You have zero evidence they have been and no means of supporting that statement. Why am I so certain of that becuase a) I know you have discussed this previously and demonstrate your lack of understanding and b) we know the mortality figures from the years prior to Covid and during a simple comparison illustrates that the official death tolls are accurate. Do you seriously expect the 500k plus death toll to be revised in any significant manner? Also actually those figures are revised anyways, not sure about the US but in the UK corrections are made quarterly to the stats to account for any mistakes. I’d imagine it’s similar in the US.
Ooh a fallacy now lovely. Tuo quoque. What relevance does the origins of Covid have on the aforementioned position. None. I’m not actually sure I’ve ever commented on the origins or not, could be wrong about that I don’t recall.
You make a specific claim about data that’s been suppressed what is this data?
It’s ironic that that you mentioned Cuomo on the basis that according to Trump the virus would have been long gone by when was it summer 2020? I’m not really clear how Cuomo’s fraud and fuck up helps your case given that I’ve never supported him and it shows how deadly the virus is.
The link you provide is an excellent example of why you are not able to argue. Did you actually read it? It’s a study that states in low transmission periods mask use is justified and in high transmission periods it might not be as effective. That is to say it works as part of a package of measures which has always been the argument. No one has claimed that it’s the sole precaution to take. Indeed there have been other studies that suggest that mask use has been beneficial and again thats part of a package of measures. Again no one is claiming they are effective or even working in the same way as n95 masks. You clearly aren’t understanding the argument for masks since you keep refering back to that trip. The point is to reduce transmission or block the distance particles travel to infect another.
Dear me fuzzy, talk about proving my point.
Reasonably accurate, says the brain-dead communist, ignoring the fact that deaths from covid alone are a small fraction of the total lie from the CDC. But then, mark311 and his fellow travelers never met a lie they wouldn’t tell.
@random crank
” ignoring the fact that deaths from covid alone are a small fraction of the total lie from the CDC”
That’s not fact that’s an assertion by you, one which you don’t have nay evidence for. Do you actually have anything to support your position?
.
The point is that the government can run the artificial “uh-oh” number up or down at any time, as it chooses, by their control of the frequency and mandate for testing. But most importantly, by changing the test at will — such as when the required PCR cycle count was significantly reduced by WHO on the very day of Biden’s inauguration (what a coincidence)… and then reduced again for tests on people who had received the magic vaccine (behold our incredible success!)
That’s the point.
Greetings from the other long thin state, the one where hurricanes are a concern, not earthquakes. I live in a Gulf Coast county where fully 1/3rd of the residents are 65+. It is estimated the 90% of 65+ are vaccinated and according to the FL chicom virus dashboard, we have had no deaths the last week that was reported. Florida overall isn’t as fortunate
Of course, this might mean only that people in your area who fall off ladders or die in car crashes are no longer being tested for COVID and added to that pool instead.
“There is also some overlap among people who have been infected and vaccinated.”
My son had COVID-19, and later donated plasma for antibody treatments, nonetheless, he was vaccinated. It seems that is what UC Davis teaches in their epidemiology classes.
I explained to him that, because he had the viral infection, he had already been exposed to all of the authentically presented viral antigens. That statement did not penetrate.
The California University system is not teaching science, any more.
“The California University system is not teaching science, any more.”
True – they now teach “The Science,” which is far superior because it can say what ever you want it to say and you get to rule everyone’s life with it.
Wow! The “the Scientists” that teach “the Science” rule the world.
When he gets older and people begin suffering from the effects of the vaccine that he – as a young man should not have gotten – he’ll change his tune.
And being an indoctrinated liberal, you can be sure he’ll be mad at YOU for ‘allowing’ him to get the vaccine.
“If you are not free to make mistakes, you are not free.”
“My home state of California will jettison the mask mandates along with other COVID-restricitions on June 15th.”
Don’t hold your breath. The Fake Doctor Ferrer was making it conditional on what signal Governor Hair Gel gets from OSHA while focusing on the social injustice of POCs having a lower rate of vaccination than whites. I’m giving it 50/50 odds that the target will be moved to July 4 and then rescinded again when, as we did last year, we light up the skies with fireworks reminiscent of Faluja during “shock and awe”.
Ferrer looks like she is among the walking dead. She gets paid nearly a half million dollars per year.
Contest: can anyone here come up with ANY rational reason why anyone in charge of a county health department – who, like Ferrer is NOT even a medical doctor – should be paid nearly a half million dollars a year?
Follow the money, and you’ll find Ferrar is in someone’s pocket, and is doing their bidding, no matter what the damage to society.
The Fake Doctor gets paid about $560,000 per year, more than Flip Flop Fauxci. She also looks like someone who gets by on a diet of one salt-free cracker per day. It would help if those who are health “experts” didn’t look like the Grim Reaper.
Because anyone who is in charge of “public health” owns the root password to the American constitution. Or so the progressives believe, but so far nobody has corrected them.
There are experiments showing that a near-starvation diet will prolong the life span of mice. The applicability of this to humans is dubious – but in any case, anyone who thinks that a few more years of respiration is worth starving herself to the point of lacking energy and being unable to enjoy life has seriously warped values, and should not be in charge of a hamster, let alone humans.
A mask vendor has been setting up on the street not far from my home every day for the last year plus, selling some really beautiful masks; if I were someone who wore masks routinely I’d have probably bought some. In a sign of the times, a few days ago he had a sign up, “all masks 50% off”. Evidently trying to get sell down stock before masks disappear altogether.
In my mind, the collecting and reporting of all the important stats is about as trustworthy as our elections. Not promoting any conspiracy, but between issues with MSM and political agendas,,, my head is spinning.
Precedent.. that is a legal thing, and that terrifies me. I don’t want to go through this again with covid-20. Sadly, I have lost faith in our Judicial system as well.
But, there is a light at the end of this tunnel for many, many people, if they have not been too brain washed to see it.
Considering the blood bath that will be wreaked on the Uniparty scoundrels next year as they are forced to seek other employment, the damage they caused was so severe that although they caused great harm to Western civilization, they failed on establishing a precedent that will allow them to do this again. The majority of us will recover from this and hopefully be more united to rid ourselves of these Marxist “one-percenters” once and for all.
The first thing will be to cast off the shackles of their new vocabulary and go back to speaking plain English. Life is nowhere near as complicated when we do not allow these people to control what we say, how we say it and whether we can say it all.
I also hope that people stop the knee-jerk value signaling as an automatic preamble to every statement they make. No one cares how “tolerant” or “open-minded” you are. Opening on the defense means automatic surrender. Make your points boldly and unapologetically. We mustn’t tolerate their idiocy and perversions of everything we hold dear.
It is important that we establish the limits of our tolerance. We have allowed ourselves to be dragged into an upside down world because we failed to draw the lines. We have become victims of our own moral squishiness.
“Those who don’t believe in nothing will believe anything.”
At what price “tolerance”? We need to drive these people and their ideas completely out of acceptable public discourse. The sooner the better. We outnumber them and hold the high ground on what makes a free society.
Correction:
“Those who believe in nothing will believe anything.”
You assume the (will of the people) will overcome the (will of the people who run the voting machines). I, for one, don’t see that mechanism yet.
You must not be paying attention to the various audits going on in AZ, NH, MI, and elsewhere. Their findings will result in the expansion of these audits statewide. We are heading for a very interesting place where it could very well happen that the 2020 election will have been proven to be stolen. We should be talking about what happens after that. Are Biden/Harris removed? Is Trump instated? What does the constitution suggest would be the solution?
Right now, it looks like Dem plans to nationalize the vote redistribution system is going to fail big in Congress. And with the results of these audits, I expect the voter redistribution machines will be ditched. In other words, I think your conclusion is wrong. The Uniparty is going to be cut to pieces next year and this will open it all up for Trump.
I guess everyone forgot that the cold and flu season ended sometime back as well. Their definition of science isn’t the same as mine, being a scientist and all IRL.
WA State will end it in about a month, but the governor of Oregon is requiring every restaurant in the state to set up vaccinated sections, admittance to which will require a vaccine passport. Democrats hate this country’s guts, along with science.