Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
magpiemaniac

Covid 19 virus inpacts sports, NHL,Season Tix other impacts

Recommended Posts

Rem I still think that social distancing works. Yes people still go to the supermarkets and to the offices but there is no crowded confined spaces like bars and restaurants where a lot of different people spend time on closed proximity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just call the season over and start planning for next year.  If they just want to award The Cup, it's going to be with an asterisk anyway. With no fans in attendance, I don't see how it is going to make a lot of sense financially.  

 

Say they decide to start in one month.  No way they could start play without a couple of weeks of camp.  That puts the stat of play about a week into June.  Teams have played about 70 games.  If they finish the season, that will take at least 3 weeks, which would put playoffs starting in July.  Last year the playoffs took 2 months exactly, which would be all of July and August.  Do they go right into the next season?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bonivan said:

Rem I still think that social distancing works. Yes people still go to the supermarkets and to the offices but there is no crowded confined spaces like bars and restaurants where a lot of different people spend time on closed proximity. 

I think it has an effect too. It would have to. The question is how big of an effect and how long to stay with it even if it is working given the costs.

 

Here I'm going to expand and not really responding to you directly...

 

The idea was to flatten the curve so as not to overwhelm the system. That has been done. All eyes are on NYC, and maybe Boston, Providence, etc. but 95% of other places flattened it way more than probably needed. As I type I'm starting my night shift in about the 8th busiest ED in the state in the highest covid county per capita and at 11:25 on a Saturday night I have zero patients to see. This is unheard of. The only other time we see this is in the middle of a hurricane or a massive snow storm. And this is probably near peak covid. 

 

I'm not saying that social distancing isn't part of why, just that we can distance less already and certainly by June. That's just my opinion, but I do stand a lot to lose in terms of personal risk if I'm wrong. 

 

The thing is, assuming a vaccine is a year off (I think it's less, but months at least),. then ultimately a lot of people are going to end up getting this and it's really more a matter of when. If we flatten it out too much, we have to stay in full precautions for much longer, but also we kill the economy. Further, there is pent up routine health demand building up as people are putting off things they need, but are not deemed emergent. There is a cost to just printing money and sending it out too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, remkin said:

I'm not saying that social distancing isn't part of why, just that we can distance less already and certainly by June.

Rem, I think I heard your sentiments are along the lines of what I heard someone on the news say, " Social distancing isn't going to stop the spread of Covid-19, but it can help us to slow it down and make it manageable" or something like that.

The great thing about social distancing is we can continue to practice it while starting to move toward normal and it will still work.  The stay at home theory requires everything to remain on hold until we have a vaccine circulated to the general public, I don't think the world can wait for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DevildogKodi said:

Rem, I think I heard your sentiments are along the lines of what I heard someone on the news say, " Social distancing isn't going to stop the spread of Covid-19, but it can help us to slow it down and make it manageable" or something like that.

The great thing about social distancing is we can continue to practice it while starting to move toward normal and it will still work.  The stay at home theory requires everything to remain on hold until we have a vaccine circulated to the general public, I don't think the world can wait for that.

I agree with a phased approach. I'm not advocating we all run back to hockey games (dang). Practicing some social distancing and wearing masks and easing restrictions rather than removing them all at once makes sense to me. 

 

I fully bought into the flattening the curve thing. Heck, I'm a guy who would be flattened by it if we didn't. And I still think it was the correct thing to do early when we really didn't know much. But increasingly I'm seeing that the curve was flattened a lot in most places that don't make the news, probably too much. But I'm good with us doing it. We needed to take a worst case approach. But we also have to be able to flex with new data. 

 

I'm not even saying right this second, but in the next couple of weeks for sure.

 

I also think that these $2 Trillion spending bouts are not without consequences, and the more of them, the more the consequences. As the consequences of the virus drop, other things become more potent and the cure can absolutely become worse than the disease. 

 

Again, not saying we're there yet, but that we're getting close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, remkin said:

Again, not saying we're there yet, but that we're getting close.

From the AP (full story here)...

 

Quote

In short, the return of any sports, no matter how innovative the plan, will be risky and uncertain for the rest of this year and into 2021.

 

 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some data: source USA Today. 

41. North Carolina

• COVID-19 confirmed cases as of 4/13/2020:46.4 per 100,000 people (total: 4,815)

• Rank on April 7: 42

• COVID-19 related deaths as of 4/13/2020:0.9 per 100,000 people – 8th lowest (total: 91)

• Total tests completed as of 4/13/2020: 6 per 1,000 people – 14th lowest (total: 62,159)

• Positive test rate as of 4/13/2020: 7.3% – 13th lowest

• Date of first case: March 3, 2020

• Population density: 192.9 per sq. mi. – 14th highest

 

Source: NCDHHS

 

image.thumb.jpeg.53b04f03f10d730d09dc64155bdd5580.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

From the AP (full story here)...

 

 

 

When I say "we're not there yet, but getting close" I'm saying that we are close to the top and will start going down. Not that we're close to playing hockey in empty arenas. There will still be too many cases at the top of the downward curve (top of the backside) to even think about hockey until the trend pushes past at least the halfway down point.  I'm projecting past that. This is a risky proposition because the curves still appear to be trending up, and calling the top is tricky. But most of the graphs people look at daily are cumulative cases or total cases. New cases are going down in many places. Since there is a 14 day or longer duration of disease and 5 day average incubation, the total cases will keep building for a couple of weeks after the new cases start dropping. So, say we are peaking now in new cases.

 

1. The number of really sick patients will build for about 2 weeks as the "cytokine storm" tends to kick in around day 7 of symptoms, or day 12 after contact. 

2. The death rate will keep going up during that time at least.

3. The total cases will keep going up since testing is ramping up and generally only the symptomatic are being tested, so people need to get past the incubation and then some to be tested. 

 

This total process could take up to 3 weeks, but seems to be quicker than that and quicker than people expected. 

 

I'm going to add some more thoughts in a separate email. But as always, I'm speculating here. My speculations are based on curves bending down in many areas (again have to look at graphs of NEW cases), and new data suggesting more and more that we are passed the peak, and data suggesting there is a sizable population of immune people who never knew they were exposed.

 

One more word on experts predictions and media predictions. Media predictions are useless. They are just repeating things and almost always go for the attention grabbing headline. They are so far from science they can't even see it. But the experts in modeling use equations, and there is no phrase that better describes what they tend to arrive at early in things than "garbage in, garbage out".  The experts at U Washington, much smarter than us mere mortals were stunningly wrong for a long time. Way way wrong. The funny thing is that they are now revising their models, but it is taking a while for many leaders to adjust their brains around the new models. 

 

But as always, time will tell if I'm right, or not. I hope I am though, not just for my pride, but also for the best outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing this thing has shown us is that many "experts" and that does not include most journalists who are much worse, can't help but predict things based on the data they can overtly see, rather than clear underlying trends not immediately obvious in a cumulative case curve. One example is that of the possibility of low or no symptom patients. That they might exist is patently obvious by how fast this thing spread across the globe. There aren't enough proven cases to allow it. It's pretty obvious that a pretty large subset of patients have gotten this disease but not been tested. They either thought they had the flu or even just a cold or even no symptoms. These patients are a massive shadow stat that is no where reflected in any CDC or John Hopkins graph (at least on their public website). 

 

But since experts had no way to know how big this group of low or asymptomatic non tested patients is, they mostly ignored them. As did the genius modelers. It's amazing how smart these people are mathematically, yet challenged in the big picture. But more and more data is suggesting that this group is in fact huge. (I brought this up in one of my first posts on here). 

 

Sweden's health minister is now predicting Stockholm will achieve herd immunity next month. They are a very interesting case study since they've handled this much differently than most countries (more on that below).

 

In addition to the Neuse Correctional data, the US Navy tested everyone on board the Theodore Roosevelt and found that 60% of the positive patients had NO symptoms. 

 

Kids. In addition to the data I shared on the extraordinarily low death rate in people the age of hockey players, it's lowest in people under 25 including kids. But these people are the most social in many ways. Yet almost none of them have been tested. So here's another prediction: when someone finally tests a big screening of kids in high density Covid areas, they're going to find that a lot of them have been exposed and have immunity. Further, they had been passing this around unknown. Covid is now thought to be passed most to people in some sustained fairly close contact (under 6 feet, more than 6 minutes). That is people's kids giving it to them. 

 

So my guess is that there is a large population of mostly young people who passed this thing around without knowing it, but who are also immune.

 

None of this means we're over this in a few weeks. No way. But it is starting to trend down faster than any expert model predicted until just very recently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two more posts. First,

 

It is very very hard to get one's mind out of the recent past enough to consider the present. But it is even harder to project a mindset that will predominate in the future that is markedly different than the one that predominates now. 

 

My predictions about hockey in empty stadiums include projecting the mind-set that could predominate 6 weeks from now. That is massively different (potentially) than trying to project hockey onto our current mindset. Also, our current mindset is an echo chamber from the media of things that mostly happened in the past few weeks. So even that can be misleading for the mindset in just a week or two. 

 

Right now, the consensus seems to be that the NHL is "preparing for all alternatives" with a heaping dose of cynicism that it will ever happen. We look around at 95% of the country in some level of lockdown, to absurdity in some states (see Michigan), and think, yeah right, hockey. 

 

But IF the disease follows the curves already there to see from South Korea, Germany, Italy, France, and even NYC, in other words the actual facts, then the only certainty is that  our mindset half way down the back of the curve is going to be entirely different than it is right now, when the cumulative case curve is still going up, and "lock down" is still mostly in vogue. 

 

If, however, new cases drop from 35K to 17K to 9K....being locked down will lose popularity fast. (It's already starting to lose popularity). 

 

Basically people's mindset and assumptions will be very different 4-6 weeks from now. Things that seem nuts or dangerous now will quickly turn to "why didn't this happen sooner?". I'm pushing my mindset to then, not now. 

 

As that curve drops and it's more obvious that massive numbers of young, hockey player aged people have had the disease and not even known it, fears will ease (as they should) and economic factors will grow in people's mindset. I think this will happen pretty fast (as in weeks). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, remkin said:

When I say "we're not there yet, but getting close" I'm saying that we are close to the top and will start going down.

Thanks for clarifying. Because on my first read it sounded like you think we are getting close to the point where (you believe) the cure is worse than the disease.

 

That point will never come, because it rests on a false equivalency: Specifically, that a strong economy and x number of people dying is "better" (or even acceptable) to a recession (or a depression) in which far more people live.

 

The funniest thing I've heard since this all began is that whole "cure is worse than the disease" claim. That is true for exactly one group: the very rich, who are able to run their companies from the safety of their home offices, and are talking about effects of severely reduced economic activity being worse--on their own balance sheets.

 

For the rest of us--most notably those that these self-important captains of industry want to order back to work, and thereby expose to a much higher risk of infection and death than they are willing to take themselves--the "cure" of staying home and alive and worrying about rebuilding the economy our bosses stock portfolios when the threat has passed is exponentially better.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further remkin, your whole projection theory is questionable because it tries to compare the assumptions/fears we have now to one that you've constructed and that we might make six weeks from now, rather than all the possibilities. 

 

No one knows what will happen in six weeks, but a strong argument can be made that this country knows even less than others, thanks to how it botched testing. You can't cite Germany and Korea in the same breath as Italy, Spain, and NYC, because of all those, only Germany and Korea had ample testing... accurate mass testing in fact, because they accepted and used the WHO test right out of the gate. Meanwhile we still don't have adequate testing, which by definition is the ability to test anyone, regardless of their condition. Add to that the fact that the best available information right now suggests a 50-50 chance that as countries reopen, there will be new waves of infections. 

 

I get wanting to hope for the best, and I do, every day: An effective vaccine. That would be best. That would remove all need for speculation. The year of severely reduced economic activity it will take to get it, while painful, would be seen as more than worth it (speaking of looking back on and questioning past beliefs) by every single person gleefully marching to their hospital for inoculation--when compared to the idea of rolling the dice on the chance that there may have been, at some point during that year, sufficient immunity, in a country that never got its testing where it needed to be in order to positively confirm that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The  year of severely reduced economic activity it will take to get it, while painful, would be seen as more than worth it .    “.   disclaimer: this is my opinion but others experts are of the same,         This would likely put us into a depression that might take 5 to 10 years to recover from.    The suicides and other healthcare related deaths would far outweigh the numbers from this virus during this time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Further remkin, your whole projection theory is questionable because it tries to compare the assumptions/fears we have now to one that you've constructed and that we might make six weeks from now, rather than all the possibilities. 

 

No one knows what will happen in six weeks, but a strong argument can be made that this country knows even less than others, thanks to how it botched testing. You can't cite Germany and Korea in the same breath as Italy, Spain, and NYC, because of all those, only Germany and Korea had ample testing... accurate mass testing in fact, because they accepted and used the WHO test right out of the gate. Meanwhile we still don't have adequate testing, which by definition is the ability to test anyone, regardless of their condition. Add to that the fact that the best available information right now suggests a 50-50 chance that as countries reopen, there will be new waves of infections. 

 

I get wanting to hope for the best, and I do, every day: An effective vaccine. That would be best. That would remove all need for speculation. The year of severely reduced economic activity it will take to get it, while painful, would be seen as more than worth it (speaking of looking back on and questioning past beliefs) by every single person gleefully marching to their hospital for inoculation--when compared to the idea of rolling the dice on the chance that there may have been, at some point during that year, sufficient immunity, in a country that never got its testing where it needed to be in order to positively confirm that.

 

My projections ARE questionable. They are projections. They are speculations. But then the projections of the experts were not only questionable, they were demonstrably wrong and by huge factors. And as recently as 2 weeks ago at my hospital they were off by a factor of 30. So I'm offering a different take. I think I'll be more right than the experts have been, though that's not saying much. But I could be wrong. The beauty of it is that we'll see. And the other beauty of it, is that for the sake of this board, I really don't mind being wrong. I hope I'm right though because I'm seeing some better things than some.

 

I will agree that we were slow on the draw with testing (the CDC would not allow outside tests), but we've caught up, and will shortly forge ahead. In some ways that's a big part of my point: the new data is changing things. But it's too new for most to realize it (IMO). In terms of further indications of large groups of immune people who never knew it, this data is as recent in some cases as yesterday. 

 

On the other countries though, outside of China who has lied serially, we do know the data from them. Those countries though did not do mass testing outside of South Korea, but even there, they tested the symptomatic. No one did mass screening early. Screening is defined as testing asymptomatic people. No one did that in big numbers. But even then, nearly every country is seeing a trend down in new cases. No vaccine, just trending down somehow.

 

Of course we want a safe effective vaccine. That is the hope for a cure. And that's the one cure that will be unarguably better than the disease (assuming the save and effective part). But if that is going to take a year? We can't and won't wait for it to open most of the economy up. If we do that? The cure will not be worse it will be catastrophically worse. But that degree won't happen. I may be wrong about empty arena hockey, but as this disease goes down the backside a massive majority will flip their anger to the recession and preventing depression. That I'd bet big money on. 

 

In the end, I just remind people that the entire stated point of flattening the curve through measures from social distancing to lockdowns, was always about not losing lives due to an overwhelmed ICU system. That was it. Since a vaccine is reportedly a year out, and even a flat curve is mostly over by then, this has not been about anything else. The peak of every curve was above the line that the ICU system could handle. If the ICU system could handle a peak, then it wouldn't matter. The area under both curves, flat or not, is about the same. So long as the ICU can handle it, and there is no cure on the immediate horizon, the same total number of people will eventually die. No one mentions that in the media because no matter one's political bent, both sides want to think that it isn't true. Both want to think lock down saves lives beyond the medical capacity issue. But even with a flattened curve this is hitting faster than any cure or vaccine, so there is little difference between the curves except that the flat one lasts a lot longer to get to the same place.

 

So here's the thing. Let's assume that the curve flattening worked the way it was envisioned. OK, good. But now that issue is over. There are and will be, plenty of ICU beds and ventilators from this point forward. The whole point of flattening the curve is done. It worked. So if the threat of exceeded capacity is over, then ANY cost of the cure will be worse than the disease by definition. And THAT is where we are moving IMO. 

 

I will add this. While I firmly believe that outside of NYC it is not proven that we needed to flatten the curve, and the cost of doing it was and continues to be big, I do think that it had to be done. This is the opposite of my point about predicting the future. You can't fairly malign the past decision with new information from the future. One can say in the future that in retrospect we shouldn't have locked it down. But not that it was a poor decision. We have to look at it with the eyes of the information available at the time, and even what the deeply flawed models were telling us because we had less reason to realize those models were wrong. This thing hit so fast and is so new, that protecting us from an Italian style overrun of ICU capacity was the right decision at the time IMO. But that was then, this is now. That is no longer an issue. 

 

But it's my opinion. It is questionable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing I'll throw out there is this: Sweden. 

 

It is going to be fascinating to watch Sweden, especially their total per capita death rate when this ends, and their economy in a few months. Sweden approached this very differently than most of the world, including their neighbor Norway. Sweden closed mass events, and a few other things, but kept most of their economy including schools, restaurants, etc open. 

 

They now claim that they are close to achieving herd immunity in Stockholm and other areas of the country. 

 

They never overwhelmed their ICU system, but they did have more deaths so far. If their approach bears out, their new cases should plummet, along with their death rate while other countries (here I mean ones that did not peak past capacity (read don't use Italy to compare)) will keep on rolling with more cases and deaths piling up over the next couple of months or more.

 

Too soon to tell, but worth watching. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cc said:

this is my opinion but others experts are of the same,

News for ya: Sean Hannity, not an expert.

 

Neither you nor anyone else has any idea of suicide mortality as a result of a prolonged down economy, let alone that the decline would be prolonged. So as long as we're into sheer speculation, how about the chance that the development of a vaccine and the excitement generated by the ability to SAFELY get the economy humming again would reduce suicide? 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

News for ya: Sean Hannity, not an expert.

 

Neither you nor anyone else has any idea of suicide mortality as a result of a prolonged down economy, let alone that the decline would be prolonged. So as long as we're into sheer speculation, how about the chance that the development of a vaccine and the excitement generated by the ability to SAFELY get the economy humming again would reduce suicide? 

Hannity,lol.Might as well follow Rush.https://www.nydailynews.com/coronavirus/ny-rush-limbaugh-coronavirus-covid-19-thinks-nineteen-20200313-7rpnlxvaljhyribh6sxgg5f6ja-story.html 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Red_Storm said:

Interesting look at the data, hitting play on the the graph for “Total Tests for COVID-19” is pretty dramatic in showing the late start for the US, but forging way, way ahead in total tests worldwide as of today and gaining on the per 100k basis in line with Remkin’s post:  https://ourworldindata.org/covid-testing

 

The problem is that total tests, and even tests per x amount of population, are of little value. The valuable metric, as stated further down the same page, is the number of tests per confirmed case, where the U.S. remains near the bottom. See the graph at the heading, "The number of tests per confirmed case" about a fifth of the way down the page. Here's the reason that is the key number, as explained in the next section, "What can we learn from these measures about the pandemic?":

Quote

A country that performs very few tests for each case it confirms is not testing widely enough for the number of confirmed cases to paint a reliable picture of the true spread of the virus. Whilst those people with the most severe symptoms may have been tested in such countries, there are likely to be many times more people with mild or no symptoms that were never tested.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People working and putting money in and then out of their pockets to the economy will reduce despair and feelings of helplessness. Not sitting around waiting for someone else to save you.  Totally an opinion. That goes for government and scientific experts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

That article says Trump is wrong to say that the governors aren't using available testing. I have no position on that and it isn't germane to my statement you call patently false. At the outset of this the CDC would not approve testing that it didn't control. That was the initial bottle neck. That was fixed, but not before a delay. That's what happened. It's widely documented. Still, it was not the best we could have possibly done. But imagine if we'd have left the CDC in charge. 

 

We've tested 3.7 million people. The next most tested country is Italy at 1.3 million. That's more than caught up (my statement). But look at the graph below. Our testing is shooting up exponentially. Because we went public-private we have multiple tests coming on line making that graph continue to skyrocket. Anyone who clicks that link and looks at the graph will be able to make up their minds on it:

 

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/full-list-total-tests-for-covid-19

 

But wait! We have more people inside our borders than most! Therefore we need more tests. Therefore we've failed. 

 

Saying that because we have more people in our country we should therefore be able to create more tests makes no sense. Lots of people does not create the base to manufacture lots of tests. Making tests has to do with making tests, not the number of people that are waiting to be tested. India has 1.35 billion people and has done 355K tests to our 3.7 million tests. Yes, it is an indicator of the challenge a much larger country faces, but not an indicator of how well it made tests, you still have to make tens of millions of tests more than the little guy. If the little guy has a way to make the tests, they'll rock. Looking at Iceland, who has tested more per capita than anyone, they have a tech company backed by Amgen. The total population of Iceland is 365K. They tested 10% of the country. If they used our tests, they could have tested their entire population 10X each. And that's based on right now. Check back in a couple fo weeks. 

 

Again, looking at the now and the near future (which was my statement), not a wishlist of wants is what I'm saying. It would be nice to test every man woman and child in the US. But why stop there? We will need to test the negative's twice since there are false negatives. Then test the negatives for IGM too. 331M people...cary the 2...getting close to a billion tests at that point.

 

We need more tests. But we have done 3X more than anywhere else on Earth and our capacity is growing exponentially. We already have tests for IGM, we have a saliva test, we have a 15 minute test. Could have been better, but my statements were not patently false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, remkin said:

We need more tests. But we have done 3X more than anywhere else on Earth and our capacity is growing exponentially. We already have tests for IGM, we have a saliva test, we have a 15 minute test. Could have been better, but my statements were not patently false.

I await your reply to my later post, Remkin, because it explains, when you read further down the exact same reference that Red Storm posted and that you reference above, WHY the number of tests alone does not matter, and cannot provide an accurate picture of the virus's spread.

 

Comparing total tests in one country to total tests in another is meaningless, because it includes no control; it is just a raw number. The control is the thing you are testing for: confirmed cases. Getting that accurate picture of the virus's spread requires comparing the number tested to the number of confirmed cases in your country, THEN comparing your country's number to the same number in countries that have succeeded in suppressing the virus. Right now, today, the U.S. is testing 10 times less people per confirmed case (about 5) than the countries that have been most successful at suppressing the virus (over 50).

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 1:34 PM, remkin said:

Just found out my county is now #1 in the state in covid cases/population, and #4 in the state. Charlotte, Raleigh, Durham, Goldsboro. This is what my impressions about that are growing to be. Unless you are in a very large metropolitan area, not only can the medical system handle the volume, but the untold story is the unintended consequences of the whole shutdown thing. I bought the flattening of the curve, and I do think it had to be done, but like so many things, once a thing is done, fear and weird anterior motives can start to take over. We are the #4 county in the state for Covid. My shifts have never been slower. My days are about try to dodge catching covid amoung the few patients we see. We also run an urgent care. Our volumes in the ED are about 1/3 as is our volumes at our urgent care. People are staying away. 

 

Welp that's 3 regions I've heard that for. Buddies an ER doc but he works with a group that staffs hospitals in a 50 mile radius from Akron to outside to Cleveland so the closer he gets to Cleveland the "busier" it gets but he still wouldn't call it busy. In his hometown it's outright dead, he watched 2 movies in his hometown ER last week.

 

Cousin is an ER doc in Gainesville Florida, at least when I last spoke to him 2 weeks ago it was also a ghost town.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things are really getting desperate in my area. I just got a robo call and a text from my moronic congressional representative. He wanted to tell me to follow the social distancing and government restrictions. Sorry Skippy, too little and too late. But I guess he wanted to make sure I knew he still needs my vote. I guess need to show him how much I care for him next election.

Edited by winger52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...