Google is not working with the US government in building a nationwide website to help people determine whether and how to get a novel coronavirus test, despite what President Donald Trump said in the course of issuing an emergency declaration for the coronavirus pandemic. Instead, a much smaller trial website made by another division of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, is going up. It will only be able to direct people to testing facilities in the Bay Area.
People are dying, and the administration of the most powerful and important country in the world is lying to its citizens left, right, and centre.
What a joke.
That is what you get, when electing someone like that. Nobody is shocked that he have it all in his mouth. All he is good for, is nothing.
There’s not been many 1-term presidents, however Trump will be one of them.
It might still be too early to see the impact of coronavirus fully, but by the time Americans go to the polls, it will have taken full grip of the nation, and people will realise what joke their president is.
The123king,
He wouldn’t even have been a 1-term president if not for the electoral college. That’s the thing we have to really watch out for because it regularly gives red states voters more influence in elections. Furthermore, the other thing to take note of is that young people don’t vote in significant numbers, even now in the hyper politicized climate. Bernie Sanders has the young person vote by a wide margin, but unfortunately for his campaign they aren’t voting.
I personally don’t feel Joe Biden is progressive on the issues, but at least his winning would end the authoritarian tendencies of the current administration. It should be easy to beat trump considering his base has never gone higher than ~30% nationwide, which is historically low…but never discount the electoral college amplification. Hypothetically under the rules that govern US elections, trump could afford to get 0% of blue states and only 51% of red states and still win with a mere quarter of the electorate voting for him.
This is sobering to anyone who believes leaders should be elected democratically (and we haven’t even covered gerrymandering). But on the positive side, I’d expect Biden to be more popular in red states than Clinton was.
Upon re-reading I said “51% of red states”, but I meant “51% of red state voters”.
Mind you it’s there to balance state population against city population.
Illinois is a good example. A RED state with a tiny little blue corner with such a large population it outweighs the majority of the state.
New York has the same issue with NYC suffocating the state. Etc. It’s not as A or B as you make it out to be.
lostinlodos,
I personally feel having voters counted differently is unethical. Obviously my opinion will not enough to convince someone like you who disagrees, and I get why someone would prefer to have their state’s votes count for more in elections, especially if they want the republican party to win. However there’s an irony here, which is that even those in less populated red states where votes count for more suffer from a real lack of choice and representation caused by the negative effects of the electoral college reducing diversity in our US elections. Who hasn’t heard the saying in the US that you’re throwing away your vote if you vote for a third party, this is unfortunately true. Why would you waste your vote on a 3rd party when you know they won’t get your state’s delegates anyways? This is a serious conundrum for millions of people in all states who’s votes won’t even register on the electoral college map if they vote for a 3rd party candidate. The electoral college inhibits the organic growth of 3rd parties, which is another reason I protest it.
Alas, most of the meaningful choice is gone by the time the two incumbent parties have ended their primaries. Having a two party system is awful for choice and it fractures society along superficial divisions. We’re often forced to vote between two candidates even when neither candidate is any good for us. Sound familiar? One of the uglier characteristics of our voting system in the US is that mathematically speaking, marginalized groups can actually hurt their own interests by voting for someone who represents their cause. It is a travesty that voters aren’t motivated to pick the candidate who best represents them, but to pick the candidate with the best chances of making it through the entire voting process, which is an incumbent party. There would be ways to fix this if we tried, but you’ve got people who are too stubborn to change and others would rather keep a flawed system as long as it benefits them. In some of the more dire cases some politicians will go so far as to deliberately make elections less democratic. Suffice it to say, I’m not particularly optimistic about the future.
This is wrong, Trump will be a two-term president. If you could remove yourself from the echo-chamber, you might be able to tell that most people support Trump.
As for the electoral college, it would be interesting to see why the Democrats are against it while praising it when it works in their favor.
Biden won’t win because he has early stages of dementia, and Sanders won’t win because Americans, in general, reject socialism. I enjoyed it when I was younger, but as I grew up I realized I would rather live in my own suffering than live in the suffering set upon me by a governing body.
Also, why did it say I was blocked from posting to this blog, by the way?
roracle,
Untrue. “Most people” do not support trump, he lost the popular vote when he was elected and I haven’t seen any national polls show him becoming more popular. If he wins it will almost certainly be another unpopular victory.
Facepalm
https://imgur.com/kxVKpSy
The electoral college only hurts democrats to say nothing of the third parties who get the shaft.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elections_in_which_the_winner_lost_the_popular_vote#/media/File:Electoral_college_win_popular_vote_lost_US_Presidents.png
It’s wordpress, I see it too every now and then.
We don’t go by popular vote for a very good reason. Electoral votes ensure each state gets a say instead of the four biggest cities always electing the president. The Electoral College allows everyone’s vote to go to a state vote, otherwise, our vote really wouldn’t count at all.
It is interesting to see people’s opinions of this, the various reasons Trump was elected.
The rules are the rules, and the Electoral College is the rules. As a result, when you count the number of signage throughout the country, you could easily tell that Trump was going to win in 2016. The dispersment of the signage showed that he would get the greater electoral votes very early on.
This idea that we should be a direct democracy is against the fairness between state votes, which I know many people don’t realize that it’s often the little guy who has historically gotten the shaft. In this day and age, we have established a system that prevents a majority from bowling over the minority voice.
I know people think “majority” and “minority” is group/identity based, but what it TRULY is references the minority of the population throughout the individual counties (or similar) in their respective states.
Big cities tend to be far more left-leaning, and this is a historical fact. When you live with that many people, it’s easy to sway a large population to a more “liberal” belief. (I use the word liberal very loosely here).
Think of it this way: there are three states. StateA has 3 people, StateB has 5 people, and StateC has 10 people. StateA and StateB vote Blue, but StateC votes Red. Does StateC win simply because they have more people? NO! The point is to allow the STATES an equal say in who is elected to the national stage.
If you’re not a nationalist, there’s no reason to support direct democracy on the presidential election. Nationalists would prefer direct democracy for national elections because they would sooner see a state as a region as opposed to an individual entity.
Now in your state, you’ll find more direct democracy, getting more direct the smaller your area gets. State elections are based on county say, county elections based on districts, districts managed by directly elected officials from the cities in that district.
It baffles me how many people do not comprehend this extremely fair system we’ve developed over time. Human history can eat its heart out.
roracle
The electoral college, much like gerrymandering, gives a subset of the population greater influence over the election and this is why many of us are against such things. Everyone’s vote counting the same is more democratic and generally makes the most sense to those who believe in democracy. Granted, not everyone will agree, but counting people’s votes differently remains highly problematic for democracy.
You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine, however the reason I replied to your post is because you were factually wrong. Feel free to share your opinion, whatever it may be, but don’t expect it to trump the facts.
Except that it isn’t fair to constantly be pressing the scales to one side.
Not that it will matter to you, but as more of an independent myself, the electoral college in combination with winner takes all has annihilated 3rd party representation in US national elections. The result is mathematically less representation for marginalized groups. It’s the truth, many voters are not getting any representation under the current system and feel compelled to vote for the two leading parties because the republican and democratic parties have a 100% duopoly on elections.
“It baffles me how many people do not comprehend this extremely fair system we’ve developed over time.”
Is that meant as a joke? Our system was intentionally designed to be bias, and has proven repeatedly to be over-bias. It’s a system that is easily manipulated through gerrymandering to control votes and pre-determine election outcomes. It’s a system that allows for easy suppression of votes. It’s a system that consistently allows for a small minority to maintain control over the majority. There is *nothing* about our system that is fair. Like I said, it was never designed to be fair.
In your 3 state scenario. Let’s say StateA has 3 people, StateB has 5 people, but StateC has 100 people. How fair is it that 8 people decide the fate of 100? In what way is that fair?
The electoral college is trash and antiquated for modern society. We can make laws that guarantee small populations don’t get ignored or left out in the cold. But the idea that those small populations should have the power they do over vastly larger populations is one that will ultimately fail. While it’s unlikely we’ll amend our constitution to throw the electoral college in the garbage, there’s a loophole in getting rid of it. Several states have passed legislation that says their electors have to vote for whomever wins the popular vote. We only need a small handful more to get on board to render the electoral college useless. Progressive change might not be here today or tomorrow but it is coming whether you like it or not and there’s nothing you can do to stop it. If you want to live in a pre-60’s America, you’re going to have to invent a time machine.
Trump won in 2016 because of a perfect storm. Hillary was hugely unpopular as a candidate, far more than Biden, far more than Bernie, and far more than the next 10 in line who have since left the race. Trump only won by a *total* of 77,000 votes across 3 states that Hillary neglected. Republicans didn’t put Trump into office, two distinct groups did – Independents who were ignored and Bernie supporters who revenge-voted for Trump because they felt the DNC stole the nomination from him. He’s already lost the majority of both of those groups, nearly all of whom say they regret their 2016 vote.
He is NOT a popular president. The majority of Americans despise him and the majority of republicans despise what he has done to their party. It’s not impossible for Trump to win but it’s going to be much harder. That perfect storm is over. The main group of voters who went Trump regret it. He isn’t `something new` or `something different` anymore, he has a horrible track record as president now. About the only thing he has going for him is the number of judges he’s been able to appoint and that’s 100% thanks to Moscow Mitch.
Anyone that thinks Trump has re-election in the bag probably also believes that he’s worth $10Billion and is a “master businessman” while ignoring the fact that every business *he started* has failed. He’s toxic to every bank in the world except one, and only because he’s used for money laundering. He stole money from his own foundation, which has since been disbanded and he is no longer legally allowed to hold a position at a non-profit. It’s ironic that what he’s best known for – successful real estate development – was handed to him. Without a father to give him an already successful business, nobody would know who Donald Trump is.
Are you dense, Thom? Did you read the article?
Here’s how this works: fewer people know of Verily than they do Alphabet, and more people know of Google than Alphabet.
Verily is an Alphabet owned business, and so is Google. If you don’t think Google is helpping with Verily’s goal, you’d be wrong.
Verily is the one behind the technology, and it’s for triage procedures, which is going to be used throughout the nation.
The only one lying here is YOU, Thom. Trump might have fudged the truth of it so people wouldn’t worry as much, but you’re just a lost little puppy. Get over your anti-Trump bullshit, it’s seriously old. I’m not saying be pro-Trump, but what I am saying is stop playing into your own biases for Christ’s sake.
The Verge is rated as “left of center” in their media bias, so I’m not surprised they present it this way. Don’t be a fool, man.
I’m sorry, but claiming something is nationwide when its only being developed in the Bay Area (and isn’t even ready for testing there) is just a lie. Aside from being non-functional, that is a massive difference in scope, resources, and–most importantly–lines of communication with local health agencies. They don’t even have something that can coordinate in the State of California, just a tiny subset of it.
Moreover, it’s a dangerous lie given that faulty information about how to find out about testing delays or in some cases eliminates people seeking treatment. Furthermore it fuels the perception that the administration has no idea what it’s talking about and can’t be bothered to get facts straight and supply reliable information when our lives depend upon it.
Add that to his administration shooting itself in the foot time and again in this matter on everything from firing the whitehouse team that handles pandemics, to faulty tests, to repeatedly raising the expectations of American readiness only to fall short over and over.
One would not be remiss at concluding that, policies and morals aside, Trump is terrible at basic administration.
Is that left of center in the US, or left of centre in the rest of the world? Because the US seems to have a pretty right-leaning idea of where the center actually is relative to the rest of the developed world.
The majority of Americans are progressive. Unfortunately we suffer from a right-biased electoral system that gives a minority far too much power. We’re forced to carry their dead-weight around. Any impression that Americans are generally right-leaning from center relative to the rest of the developed world is false. Most of us are disgusted by what our politicians & courts do. I have yet to find a single person who agrees with the supreme court that corporations are “people” and therefore have the same rights. I have yet to find a single person who doesn’t believe health care is a human right. But, our system is rigged, money&power (re)write the rules in their favor and aren’t going to give anything up without a vicious fight. We want to be a part of the developed & civilized world, it’s just really really hard to rid ourselves of the cancers that hold us back.
He said it would be available nation wide, not that it’s being developed nation wide… And nice rhetoric, by the way, subsider. Too bad it’s not effective to someone like me who doesn’t care about haughty words.
daedalus, mediabiasfactcheck.com is where I got this information. But you can’t deny the left has had a very “orange man bad” attitude the last 3+ years since elected.
He should have run as a Democrat, he would be praised highly right now and not have to deal with all the hate.
I’m a Libertarian, so I have the benefit of seeing both sides as the same beast, while people on either side would think they were completely different. Corportism is just socialism for buisnesses, and socialism is just corporatism for individual people. “Who will we bail out today?” They’re both fools, but I don’t doubt they both truly believe they’re doing what’s right for the USA.
As for me, it’s all about keeping both of their greedy hands out of the lives of everyone else. I don’t believe in theft, even if it’s legal. Taxation IS theft, and taxing the rich or taxing the poor…both theft. And I do mean to toot this horn, but being against theft gives me and other Libertarians a moral high ground neither Democrats or Republicans can lay claim to.
I think the best thing all the big tech companies could do would be to make their remote desktop solutions temporarily free to everyone, MS Terminal Server, Parallels, etc., etc., Google, FB and Amazon as monolithic hosting services have a role to play in this regard.
Let the people who can isolate, isolate themselves without destroying the economy of most modern societies.
They keep telling us they are good global citizens, here is the test!
Linux keeps beating into us how great Open Source is, and how good it is for the community. Why not offer up ready made solutions to assist!
I’m a Linux user and there’s plenty of free remote desktop options for the Linux desktop.
I too have some Linux workstations, but suggesting that as a solution is in ignorance of the commercial applications that might only run on a Windows or MacOS host server.
Thom I love this site but don’t use the verge they are clearly nitpicking in this article they even clearly state that Alphabet (google’s parent company) is in fact working on the site.
Nice. In the middle of an epic pandemic you can take the time to play fake news politics.
To the general public all of Alphabet is Google. So be it a mistake on his part (or his writer) or intentional the Google statement isn’t wrong as much as inaccurate.
Second they fully intend for a full national rollout as early as testing and stability allows for!
So where is the “lie”?
Interesting slant. Now that they’ve created the site, what say you? https://www.blog.google/products/search/connecting-people-covid-19-information-and-resources/