Data from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) showed that of 165 patients treated in critical care in England, Wales and Northern Ireland since the end of February, 79 died, while 86 survived and were discharged. The figures were taken from an audit of 775 people who have been or are in critical care with the disease, across 285 intensive care units. The remaining 610 patients continue to receive intensive care.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/28/coronavirus-intensive-care-uk-patients-50-per-cent-survival-rate

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8181293/NHS-data-shows-66-coronavirus-patients-hooked-ventilators-die.html

2 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

For those who think that being age 55 means he'll be fine ...

 

It is not one's age that dictates the likely outcome. What counts is the underlying health issues if any, issues that tend to increase with age (blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, lung problems, overweight). Even then, it's a matter of 'more' or 'less' likely. There is no certainty in any of this, for anyone. 

Actually, age is the overriding factor in deaths. But that risk is compounded by various pre-existing conditions and lessened by the lack of them:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

7 minutes ago, Dexlowe said:

NZ is heading that way as well. In just over 5 weeks since the first recorded case of covid-19, there has been only 1 death and 1100-odd infections. Pretty impressive, though no one is being complacent. Our tourism sector, which is a big part of our GDP, has taken a severe blow, and no one knows whether it will recover to the extent it was before. But anyway, physical distancing does work best by the looks of things.

It certainly slows and even reverses the spread in the short term. And helps keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed. But there is strong evidence that once controls are eased, the virus can make a resurgence. Singapore and Hong Kong have experienced that. So it's to be hoped that a highly effective therapy in the shorter term can be arrived at with an effective vaccine to follow.

8 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Jingthing made the claim, not me.

It's not like you exactly disagree with him, is it? Rather the opposite...

"Yet you think a moron like Joe Biden can beat him. Tell us specifically about what Biden is good at that he can beat one of the world's best political propagandists."

4 hours ago, Xavnel said:

You obviously have no clue as to the purpose of Electorals or how the system works.

It was set up do that every state counts.  If not for Electoral College,  then the President would be chosen ONLY by California and New York. No other state would matter. That is not a Democracy.

 

As far as the mail in votes....  WAY too much voter fraud. I could feasibly mail in my vote card, my wife's,  my daughter and my 2 sons without them even seeing it.... take it a step further...  I could feasibly mail in my neighbor's,  and his wife's... 

The  what happens when they go down to vote? Do they get busted for "trying to vote twice"  ?? Or does someone need to go find the mail in Vote Card and uncounted it ? .....  

Let's say, for example, the Mail Person is a Devote Republican, but his/her Route is in a very heavy Democrat area.... feasibly he/she could "accidentally"  misplace all those voter cards into the nearest dumpster fire?

Take only those 3 situations,   and multiple that by 5 million, 10 million, 20 million voters.... 

WAY , WAY  too much chance for Voter Fraud.

Which is why Trump used it?

10 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Major experience doing what? What has Biden been successful at? He'd never registered a blip in multiple previous attempts to run for president. Obama only chose him for a running mate because he's a complete idiot- much like the Bush/Quayle ticket. He's been right there as debt has skyrocketed, a massive, failed health care plan rolled out, lined his pockets with bankster money for decades, voted to shaft consumers to benefit banksters. Experience doing what exactly? What are his accomplishments? What has he done to make America a better place? Heck, he's done more apologizing during this campaign than telling us what his accomplishments are.

 

Summer of recovery, baby!

Again with the failed health care nonsense? What don't you understand about the fact that even many Republican states adopted the medicaid provisions of Obamacare? Some by referenda? Do you think if you keep on repeating a falsehood, you're going to make it true? Ya think healthcare isn't going to be powerfully on the minds of voters in the wake of a pandemic? Ya think that Republican led efforts to abolish it are going to be viewed favorably by a majority of the electorate? That the lack of a Republican plan - despite Trump's claims that he had one - is going to play in Trump's favor?

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Could be, but Trump promised to make healthcare related to Covid 19 free for all uninsured Americans and Obamacare people will be forced to pay thousands in deductibles, assuming they still have itafter losing their jobs, in which case Trump's $100 Billion to hospitals covers them. It looks like the Democrats are being outflanked AGAIN, while Nancy Pelosi is fighting tooth and nail to get SALT rollback in the next stimulus bill, A provision that only helps the rich.  And yeah, he's got a lot of blood on his hands but the numbers will come in lower than projections. Old Wall St. ploy of managing expectations.

Nonsense. If healthcare concerns were only about Covid19 you'd have a better point. But do you think that this pandemic has only increased concern about Covid-19 or pandemics? Or about more general concerns? And who do you think is going to be held responsible for making Obamacare more expensive rather than less? And members owhat party is now trying to get rid of Obamacare altogether and replace it with exactly nothing? And why did the genius Trump have the justice dept join a lawsuit to invalidate Obamacare? Ya really think Americans trust Republicans more on healthcare?

And as I've pointed out earlier, Salt rollback actually helps those states that do most to protect their citizens. And as usual, you ignore the fact that Republicans exploited the tax bill of 2017 to give real wealthy estate owners another huge break on top of the ones they already got in the last tax bill. Quick! Name me one chief executive of the USA who stands to benefit from this?

43 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

My state went exclusively to vote by mail almost 20 years ago. Little to none evidence of voter fraud. What is evident is that voter participation is much higher than other states and that scares the hell out of some monied interests and the stooges they would have stand for office..

And which party is it that has overwhelming opposed broadening participation in elections?

24 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Indeed... but what happened to those "shovel-ready" jobs? Even Obama himself later joked about that not being so true. The only thing that was "shovel-ready" was the steaming pile sold to Americans. But I will promise you this: if Trump's plan is anything like Obama's promises, I will be right there with you protesting.

What does it matter if they weren't shovel ready at the time?  There was no chance that Republicans would have supported any infrastructure plan. Or cooperated in creating an infrastructure plan. As you may recall, the Republicans and the Tea Party were calling for austerity.  In the midst of the greatest financial collapse since the Great Depression. You don't see many or any Democrats calling for austerity in this present crisis. . And this certainly gives the lie to Trump supporters who claim that whatever Trump proposes Democrats will automatically oppose it because it comes from Trump. 

7 hours ago, riclag said:

 The greatest economy President  besides FDR. Infrastructure,Infrastructure, Infrastructure,Infrastructure !  It creates manufacturing and jobs jobs jobs!

 Mr. Trump can do it again! Hopefully the radical  socialist dems  and their propaganda machine will comply!  

https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2019/12/30/the_cost_of_the_msms_anti-trump_crusade_111343.html

And I'm sure you were equally supportive of a big infrastructure program in the wake of the Great Recession when Obama was in office.

5 hours ago, riclag said:

 The greatest economy President  besides FDR. Infrastructure,Infrastructure, Infrastructure,Infrastructure !  It creates manufacturing and jobs jobs jobs!

 Mr. Trump can do it again! Hopefully the radical  socialist dems  and their propaganda machine will comply!  

https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2019/12/30/the_cost_of_the_msms_anti-trump_crusade_111343.html

The fact is that it's not the Democrats or as you call them the "radical socialist dems" who are in opposition to a 2 trillion dollar plan. 

Nancy Pelosi cheers Trump’s call for infrastructure bill as she unveils Democrats’ plan

• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she wants to move forward with an infrastructure proposal after the House’s planned return on April 20. 
• Democrats outlined an infrastructure plan that would include health funding, expanded broadband access, and improvements to roads, bridges and public transit systems. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/01/coronavirus-update-nancy-pelosi-proposes-infrastructure-bill.html

It's the Republicans:

Trump Calls for New $2 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

Whether chambers of Congress take up a fourth round of legislation is unclear, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said Tuesday morning he wasn’t sure it would be necessary to craft another bill.

“I think, first, we need to see what the effect of the current bill is,” Mr. McConnell said on “The Hugh Hewitt Show.” “Let’s see how things are going and respond accordingly.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-calls-for-new-2-trillion-infrastructure-bill-11585668373

And it seems truly bizarre that you would link to an article about how the mainstream press allegedly distorts the facts when it's clear that's what you've done here. 

17 hours ago, Logosone said:

No, but as soon as you step out the door again you will get the virus.

 

That's why social distancing does not work. In the end it has to be a temporary measure.

 

So those who have no immunity will have to step outside the door.

 

Where a very large number of asymptomatic carriers await.

 

 

Yes. It's a temporary measure. But it does help lessen the overload on hospitals while treatments are subjected to tests. With some luck, once effective therapies have been established, and then social distancing can be scaled back.

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

No, it's not "powerful data", it's survey by a company trying to sell its thermal scanners which has not been independently reviewed.

 

They just assume every fever is Covid19 related. It's laughable and worthless.

Nonsense. They don't assume every fever is Covid 19. In fact, you've got it exactly wrong. They're looking to see if there are declines in incidents and levels of fever and how that correlates with various steps taken in different regions to deal with coronavirus. The way you get this kind of data is through very basic statistical analysis. It's a very powerful tool.

11 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The last Seltzer-Grenell poll was couple of weeks back and his approval was indeed positive. As events moved day by day, I will like to see their latest poll. There just too many of his misleading messaging and poor coordination of medical supplies to meet the states needs; it will hurt his approving in handling the pandemic as the ABC poll review. 

It was released on April 1st

1 minute ago, Crazy Alex said:

Well yes, governors will react at the speed needed to handle the crisis. You don't like my "cherry picking"? Fine, take a look at a virus map.

 

Now... you say the reason Democrat areas got hit harder is denser population. That is true. That also points out the NEED for Democrats to have acted sooner, rather than telling them to party it up nine days after travel restrictions were in place, telling them to go have drinks at a bar on March 13. I have a feeling you'll be seeing some campaign ads on these matters, since the leftist media is obviously intent on blaming Trump for everything.

And what governor said that about partying. More chery picking. And all you have to do to condemn Trump is to show what he said before his big pivot in March. Trump may deny he said what's recorded on video. You may be blind to it. But it makes for very compelling viewing.

2 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yes, I'm observant of the year. I try to be observant of all the factors, including the power of the incumbency, the wild card of enthusiasm and health care.

 

You raise a good issue as to how health care plays out. I don't know how it will play out. It depends. A rational case can be made that Trump acted early on and was criticized by Democrats for doing so. The fact that Democrats encouraged stupid behavior in what later became high infection states can be demonstrated. Zooming out on the health care issue, why is it even an issue at all? Oh, that's right, because Obamacare was a failure on virtually every significant promise made. If you want to talk health care, be my guest. And if you want to talk health care in the context of the virus, be my guest. There are PLENTY of Democrat mistakes to point out.

 

As far as enthusiasm: Republicans have more money. Period. While you have the anti-Trump rage voting locked down, is it enough to beat an incumbent? We shall see.

Obamacare was a failure? Reallly" So you're saying that states that embraced Obamacare including medicaid don't have a significantly lower rate of the uninsured than do states that didn't? And you're claming that even in many strongly Republican states didn't have referenda in which the citizens voted to institute Medicaid? Really?

25 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Now, specifically with regards to your complaining about how Trump has handled the virus. I've read timelines from the left and right. I hope you don't have to learn the hard way just how many incredibly stupid things Democrats have said in done to jeopardize the American people. Rest assured there are reasons why blue states have been the biggest petri dishes for the virus to spread. The Republican party has far more money to get their message out than Democrats.

You can cherry pick all you look. The evidence shows overwhelmingly that Republican governors were and still are slower to react to the crisis than Democrats.

And the reasons why Democratic areas got hit harder at first are clear:

Denser population. Lots more foreigners visiting for business or pleasure.

And if the corona virus follows the way the flue propagates, rural stronghold will soon be getting hit hard. And the rural areas that most likely will have the highest fatality rates are those in the states that rejected the expansion of medicaid under Obamacare. Lots of rural hospitals had to close because of that. How do you think that's gonna play?

6 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Biden just got a helping hand from Trump’s mishandling and delay of the pandemic. 
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/majority-of-americans-now-disapprove-of-trumps-handling-of-the-coronavirus-outbreak/

To be fair, it's just one poll. Actually the Seltzer-Grenell poll which is an excellent poll had him at 49-47. The thing is, this is an extraordinarily small bump for a president to get in a time of crisis. And the same pollsters who show him with a bump in approval of his handling of the crisis, still show him losing the election. 

10 minutes ago, evadgib said:

I'm not sure a diamond bullet will be enough to stop him come November.

Because of his record on health care?

20 minutes ago, Walter Travolta said:

Oh so that means Corbyn won last year then, better hurry up and tell him bef..... oops, too late haha
Not sure how you come to the conclusion that the minority of votes wins an election but I guess that is the kind of lunacy Im dealing with here. 

Tell me, is it Bristol, Liverpool or Sheffield that is twinned with Portland Oregon? ????

 

Not sure about your basic grasp of math. What don't you understand about the fact that 43.6% of total votes is a minority of votes cast? You should look up the difference between "majority" and "plurality".

5 minutes ago, Walter Travolta said:

More to the point, the minority of votes NEVER won an election hahaha so yeah, dumb Labour cant see that even after a record thrashing. Life is great watching the left self implode constantly. The last 4 years have been the best in my political life. I would put the Thatcher years up there but I was only 11 when she was elected. Now, if there were more women like her in politics today, I wouldnt even be commenting, Id have another Thatcher before any man that has occupied number 10 since her

Actually, if you knew anything about the british electoral system, you'd know that the "minority of votes" nearly always wins the election. For example,Johnson got 43.6% of the votes.   And have you forgotten that Trump didn't get even a plurality of votes, much less a majority? Same goes for Bush vs. Gore.

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

I feel sorry for anyone who leans 100% on polls to inform themselves.

This poll is clear BS...the whole of America is being treated to the 

agony of watching Biden...a sad shell of a ex VP who, along with his

shady past, corrupt family members and sexual misconduct allegations,

is showing signs of advanced mental deterioration and hopelessly out

of touch with his own mind. Yes, his own mind.

 

A vote for this wastrel is a vote for a proxy president who will be run

by shadowy forces in the background.

What were your expectations for the 2018 midterms? Aligned with the polls or not?