Now predicting 81,000 U.S. deaths, down from 93,000 just a few days ago.

These projections are just about useless. Like your posts.

I would have bet on Laffy but even you manged to beat him to it.

Why do you consider these projections useless? I really would like you to explain your reasoning here. To me it’s good news and I would hope that everyone posting on this board would look at it that way also.  
I certainly hope that no one would be “rooting” for higher casualties so as to make Trump look bad. There are (or should be) certain things that transcend politics.

I hope it goes lower and we can open up this economy. I'm getting killed so the sooner the better.
Keep up the good fight Jack.

I hope this thing turns around for you, and for all of us, quickly.

And, of course, you also distort cuz it's what you do. I don't only dismiss these results, I dismiss the ones from the CDC even though I like Fauci. And for the same reason. They are based on assumptions about how many people actually will "shelter in place." And most of them are based on the assumption that EVERYONE will. When we know that's bullshit.
That's not politics, that's reality and simple human nature. But even simple is too complicated for you, Hack.

ALL the most optimistic projections are based on EVERYONE observing a self quarantine. And so far not everyone is. So the most basic underlying assumption supporting the numbers -- whether they are Bill Gates' or Dr. Fauci's -- is WRONG. And Fauci has acknowledged this. But I guess you missed that.
I do agree no one should be "rooting" for high casualties for ANY reason. Besides Trump does more than enough to make himself look bad without the worst-case scenario proving true. I'm glad we agree on that.

-- Modified on 4/6/2020 3:48:45 PM

...on Mayor Bill de Blasio’s comments of mid March where he downplayed the seriousness of the problem and was putting nothing into place to address it?

To be fair, this is great news.  Though the best interpretation is that all the mitigation we've been doing is having an effect.  This is what Fauci means says the models aren't set in stone, and that they change based how society behaves.    

...when he was told in 2015 he would be 16,000 short in the case of a severe pandemic? He bought a grand total of zero afterwards.

He was wrong.  Just like Pelosi was wrong to tell people to come on down to Chinatown.  Just like the Kemp in Georgia was wrong it saying that we just found out about asymptomatic spread a few days ago, and DeSantis in Florida was wrong not to close the beaches down for spring break.

I agree with you in general but we’re not talking about national power here. We’re talking about those who have the power to implement local policies such as social distancing, restaurant closures, etc. . I only brought up the post to see if Laffy could address the obvious- namely that there are others in government who bear some responsibility. Wearing blinders and constantly ignoring facts while blaming Trump for 100% of the problem seems to be his style. That’s not cheering; that’s just spreading falsehoods. And while I appreciate your input, I still would like to hear a response from his own lips so to speak.

Go back and look at my OP AND my link again. I INTENTIONALLY did NOT use the MOST optimistic projection dummy.

a lot of the problem is Trump has been leading from behind. It's well documented that he ignored and downplayed the severity of the problem. This gave state and local officials cover to do nothing and most of the Republican officials are scared shitless of Trump. So they did nothing. In many cases until it was too late.
Even so, I don't blame Trump for "100% of the problem." I don't think a numerical percentage is helpful here but he's responsible for at least 75% of it.

Kind of like your posts. Also, I never claimed I "know better" than either Gates or Fauci. I know MUCH better than HACK. But that is so easy virtually anyone can do it. You are now free to go ram your head back up Wu's Chink ass again.

As the data comes in, and it does NOT back what they were saying just a few days ago, they are forced to admit NOW it isn't all Trumps fault as they are starting to cast blame on Dems too.  

Are you willing to give Trump SOME credit for this great news?  

I am pretty confident ALL the predictions over-predict.  It would be political suicide to under-predict.  You are just setting yourself up to be judged a failure.  So if you take your best science and then over-predict based on that, you are setting yourself up to look like heroes if you can bring it under that high number.   This is just the way it is played, regardless of which party is in power.
.
The FDA actually does something similar with regard to drug approvals  ... it holds them off the market for ages because it doesn't want any drugs to kill anyone and then they'd get the blame.  But this is actually bad policy that has costs millions of lives over the decades.  Many  drugs save more than they kill.  So delaying them from the market means people will die.    No one gets blamed for those "natural" deaths.  Yet they could have saved more lives than were lost.

First of all, "they" aren't saying "deaths per capita" needs to be placed in proper context.  I am.  Don't put my words in someone else's post.

He whines constantly about why Dems keep blaming his Lord and Master, never letting up. But there's a good reason. First of all, Trump never stops lying blatantly. And he also NEVER accepts blame for anything, totally supported by Hack. So if Hack wants us to, finally, shut up maybe he should try to at long last admit that Trump isn't always right.
Don't hold your breath.
Then again, don't be surprised if he makes a tactical admission just so he can later come back and point out to us how "reasonable" and "even handed" he is.
He's tried such hypocrisy in the past so I wouldn't put it past him to do it again.
So crank up your bullshit detector.

those humanitarian incoming flights from Wuhan.  People were fleeing for their lives, and Trump wouldn't let them in.   I totally agree with the Dems at that time that said he was racist, a xenophobe and that he was overreacting.  Then he did it again with Europe.  Is he prejudiced against Italians, too?  We should have had open borders, and our country would have been much less crowded when this is over than it will be.  

I wouldn't put it past him.  But I hope you don't let him pay you by check. Take cash only. He's a known welsher.

I was referring to YOU when I made the "deaths per capita" comment that needs to be placed in proper context comment. You were the first to use "per capita", a moving of the goal posts from what the libs were saying BEFORE you weighed in.  

Hey genius...I already told you I saw where you screwed up your math.  I can do basic fractions.  No duh if you take the rate of infection Italy had 2 days ago and applied it to the USA, we would have 660,000 cases instead of 273,000.  You're the one that needs the refresher course since that's NOT what you said in your original post.  You're the dumbass that tried to apply the US infection rate to Italy and came up with a number that is 1300% wrong.  But please...continue backtracking.  Or next time go down to an elementary school to find someone to do the math correctly for you.

I am talking about the PRESENT as I use numbers from the PRESENT. Duh.

But the old Nick would be ashamed to show his face in public ever again if he were to have been caught with his tongue up Laffy's ass like you've been doing for months now.  

As I demonstrated only yesterday, you and Hack post in support of each other FAR more than I do with Laffy. But keep on lying. I know it comes naturally to you.
You wouldn't know the truth if it shoved its dick up your Chink ass. But you would enjoy it. Until then, enjoy fellating Hack.

You know.  I'm beginning to think you must be the world's greatest troll.  Because it's hard for me to imagine someone can continuing being so clueless about their own stupidity without doing it on purpose.  Granted, I've only been posting for a few days but you're just a mind boggling example of nonsense.

Had you done so, you would have noticed that the COVID 19 projections assume “full social distancing” though May 2020, and, somewhat confusingly, in another section states that the projections assume social distancing through the end of the modeled period in August 2020.

They are LOWERING their numbers because of the positive affect of social distancing.  The more data that comes in, the more they can hone their prediction.

Nick was not criticizing your post because the foundation’s LOWERING of the numbers is meaningless. The problem is that ALL of the projections they have made – including the 93,000 - assume FULL social distancing which they define as including three different measures (but not a travel ban).  But we all know only an unknown percentage of people will honor the social distancing and that is what renders their mortality projection useless in the real world except as an aspirational goal.

to keep it and tip the next provider he sees.      (Sorry Jack, Nick teed it up, and I couldn't resist.  LOL)

That's the part you are not getting. When they say "full social distancing", they aren't saying every man, women and child, 24/7, as they know it is impossible to get it to 100%. They have factored that in and they are still high.

So now we can no longer compare U.S. vs Euro, its U.S. now vs  South Korea and Taiwan. Oh, ok. LOL