Surprised Pikachu

Haha

I made a good template for this the other day

then again, we dont follow trump blindly, unlike biden supporters

Right, the party who had 30 people go to the ER due to hypothermia after a rally because Trump didn't call any buses for them.

Or the party who rushed the airport like lemmings with no masks or social distancing... Study shows 700 have died as a result of the rallies...

Nope. No blind following here.
No repeating Trump talking points like covenant here.

Actually you havent read the study you cite have you, just repeating talking points.
If you had read the study I would like to know where it states definitively that 700 people have died as a result of peaceful protests aka Trump Rallys. You see it just says something in the study to make a political point without being able to quantify the statement.
So you are as blind as those you accuse hypocrite.

That's funny, coming from the party that just repeats Trump talking points on Twitter. I mean, could it be taken as a politically charged study? Sure. But the purpose was purely academic in studying the increased spread of the virus in events where social distancing and masks weren't used. Some rallies, held indoors no less. I mean, you can call it repeating points, being politically charged all you want, but the data doesn't lie. No matter how much you want it to.

Data does lie and data modelling is in fact what we are talking about in the study. Models for climate change seem to be quite easily debunked as invaild and they involve a great deal more information input into the model than the limited information still available on covid 19 etc.
So a non peer reviewed article with an as yet unreplicated model tells you next to nothing. The study at this stage tells us nothing meaningful it could be true but the pointlessness or rather point of conducting a study like it is so you can fudge the figures. As Contact tracing would have been able to provide an accurate data set which this exercise in modelling cannot. People in their same department at Stanford have also suggested the study cannot be relied upon until replication and peer review of the parameters.
Facts is facts.

Peer review simply means that someone of their expertise has not officially conducted the same study. I followed their data and checked the public information on the pandemic myself in correlation to places DJT has viisted and also saw the same spikes in COVID cases.

I am welcome to other suggestions as to what could cause the spikes in cases that follow Trumps rallies.

I like how you mention contact tracing... Something that the Trump admin still hasn't implemented. In fact, his admin has repeatedly spoken against testing for COVID and other testing methods such as contact tracing. Why? Because "if there were fewer tests conducted, the number of infections would be lower." So, if I never test my wife for pregnancy, she'll never be pregnant. Aight. Good to know. You know, if Trump had stopped testing for COVID he would have never had it. Ever.

Without continuing to go back and forth because that won't get anywhere.
I mainly deride the study because of the points I have made but because supposedly all other events loaded with people somehow produce no new cases which of course is not possible. It's clearly visible at all the events that some are wearing and some are not wearing masks and therefore all the events must produce cases. Hence the political motivated nature I speak of.

I have done basic research when at University so I have some clue about how to do research and what peer reviewed means. Peer review is the standard test though of whether your results are robust so without it. It is just numbers even if later accurate.

As to contact tracing yes it should have begun or at least been implemented somewhere but the states are in charge of getting that on the road. I would say that the cost is another reason why they haven't chosen that route.they should maybe have reduced the amount given to hospitals for corona cases and directed that money towards tracing.

On a secondary thing, Do you think you might have had Corona?
Myself and a few others think so in the early days by symptoms which we later learnt fit with the disease.

I have not had it. I've been locked up Since March. Going out only when needed.

Anecdotal observation though... Did you notice how it wasn't until Trump got Corona that his rallies did not wear masks at all? (there might have been one or two, but reports suggest that they got dirty looks for wearing masks.

'I have not had it. I've been locked up Since March. Going out only when needed.'
That's good and if you've been staying away from things that will reduce your chances. We had our something in late January into February. But haven't really limited our travels. I and my friends haven't worn masks unless required but kept distance and hand clean/sanitised regularly. Much of the precautions for flu etc will serve to keep you safe. None of us are in high risk groups either.

As to the rallies, I possibly saw more of them than yourself but I would say it depended on where he was. Some places they were wearing like 4 to 1 and other places the reverse as well as somewhere in between. I don't recall seeing everyone in any scene wearing one nor everyone not wearing one.
A Bit of a mixed bag would be how I would sum it up, as you know some people take masks more seriously than others and so they will wear a mask regardless of what anyone says.
oh and on the last bit, I didn't go to any rally I only watched on tv.