MoCo vaccination rate is #1 (Hancock: home, gated, income)

[The Very Man Himself]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

Why would it be inevitable that the most crime ridden places in our country by rate, not raw numbers, are Democrat controlled?

Midbrow political analysis that relies on correlation is what it is, whether it comes from NPR or a minor newspaper.

Oh, Puh-leeze! Cities = more people = more opportunity = higher rate.

You're engaging in decidedly low-brow analysis here.

[The Very Man Himself]

What is true nationally about vax rates and incidence also holds true in Md.
Scroll to the rates by county here.

https://www.marylandmatters.org/covid-19-in-maryland-2/

Sort the population column at the link and Md. is 19th. By cases per 1M, it's 46th, and by deaths per 1M, it's 36th.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself

Oh, Puh-leeze! Cities = more people = more opportunity = higher rate.

You're engaging in decidedly low-brow analysis here.

What does any of that have to do with political affiliation or voting habits? You said it was "inevitable" that high crime rate areas would all be Democratically controlled, yet your answer doesn't address politics at all.

It's almost like...............there is another variable in play that is more important and politics is only mentioned by the Star as a correlational partisan "gotcha!"

This game is the same whether played by the mid-brow right or the mid-brow left. It only works because your partisan types aren't always aware that this type of thinking is not only child's play, but can be used very much to the detriment of any demographic group. You point your arrow at rural Trump supporters. I have to assume you would be 100% not OK if this same correlational logic was used to accuse and indict the demographic groups that live in these "inevitably Democratic" highest crime areas.

Picking up on the inherent problem with using correlational data about voting habits to single out demographic groups yet?

[The Very Man Himself]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

What does any of that have to do with political affiliation or voting habits? You said it was "inevitable" that high crime rate areas would all be Democratically controlled, yet your answer doesn't address politics at all.

It's almost like...............there is another variable in play that is more important and politics is only mentioned by the Star as a correlational partisan "gotcha!"

This game is the same whether played by the mid-brow right or the mid-brow left. It only works because your partisan types aren't always aware that this type of thinking is not only child's play, but can be used very much to the detriment of any demographic group. You point your arrow at rural Trump supporters. I have to assume you would be 100% not OK if this same correlational logic was used to accuse and indict the demographic groups that live in these "inevitably Democratic" highest crime areas.

Picking up on the inherent problem with using correlational data about voting habits to single out demographic groups yet?

Given the voting record of large US cities, it has everything to do with political affiliation.
I said almost inevitable, check it.
I've not claimed that the D's are immune from a similar type of criticism, and I'm well aware that the tables can and have been turned.
I understand well that correlation is not causation. One of the NPR excerpts I provided, explicitly dealt with that issue.

Of the 50 largest cities in the US, 11 have R mayors. Their combined population is 6.4M, less than NYC, 8.8M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself

Given the voting record of large US cities, it has everything to do with political affiliation.
I said almost inevitable, check it.
I've not claimed that the D's are immune from a similar type of criticism, and I'm well aware that the tables can and have been turned.
I understand well that correlation is not causation. One of the NPR excerpts I provided, explicitly dealt with that issue.

Of the 50 largest cities in the US, 11 have R mayors. Their combined population is 6.4M, less than NYC, 8.8M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

I'm glad you recognize that. I was afraid there for a moment you weren't aware you had already stepped in the snare.

Why defend correlational conclusions if you know better? That is my main thrust here. At any given point you have the choice to stop defending partisan correlation and discuss the causal agent here, vaccination rate.

Voting for Trump and being vaccinated provides equivalent protection from COVID to voting for Biden and being vaccinated.......because vaccination is the causal variable.

[The Very Man Himself]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

I'm glad you recognize that. I was afraid there for a moment you weren't aware you had already stepped in the snare.

Why defend correlational conclusions if you know better? That is my main thrust here. At any given point you have the choice to stop defending partisan correlation and discuss the causal agent here, vaccination rate.

Voting for Trump and being vaccinated provides equivalent protection from COVID to voting for Biden and being vaccinated.......because vaccination is the causal variable.

Just because correlation is not causation, doesn't mean that correlation is not interesting or newsworthy.
You'd need to have been living in a cave not to know that vax was the causal variable. That there is also the correlation is itself newsworthy.

Saw on CNN last night a stat from Michigan that says the percentages of people in hospital/ICU/on oxygen, all vary between 80-90% unvaccinated. The unvaxxed are the biggest (and maybe only) spreaders. Understanding why they remain unvaxxed in face of the evidence is a legitimate inquiry.
You're being tiresome and supercilious. I'm done with this.

[Pinkvelvet87]

The vaccine doesn’t work.

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself

Just because correlation is not causation, doesn't mean that correlation is not interesting or newsworthy.
You'd need to have been living in a cave not to know that vax was the causal variable. That there is also the correlation is itself newsworthy.

Saw on CNN last night a stat from Michigan that says the percentages of people in hospital/ICU/on oxygen, all vary between 80-90% unvaccinated. The unvaxxed are the biggest (and maybe only) spreaders. Understanding why they remain unvaxxed in face of the evidence is a legitimate inquiry.
You're being tiresome and supercilious. I'm done with this.

Do you really thing the answer to that question is "because they live in a place that voted overwhelmingly for Trump?"

I don't, and I live among these folks. Sadly, many are my family and friends. The factors that lead one to reject sound medical advice are much deeper than political habits and affiliation. There is a correlation, but it is intellectually lazy to not analyze what leads to that correlation. Education, access to medical care, skepticism of the media and science, faith, attitudes towards self-sufficiency, and closeness and importance of social networks, herd mentality, all factor in.

People want easy answers, easy correlations to latch on to, easy ways to villainize the "other" who they feel is threatening them, or letting down society, in some way. Not only is this answer not easy to pin down, turning into a partisan talk point is counter productive. We are divided enough as a country, we don't need more fuel on the fire.

I guarantee it doesn't raise the vaccination rate, the end goal anyone who really cares about this issue should be working towards.

[The Very Man Himself]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

Do you really thing the answer to that question is "because they live in a place that voted overwhelmingly for Trump?"

I don't, and I live among these folks. Sadly, many are my family and friends. The factors that lead one to reject sound medical advice are much deeper than political habits and affiliation. There is a correlation, but it is intellectually lazy to not analyze what leads to that correlation. Education, access to medical care, skepticism of the media and science, faith, attitudes towards self-sufficiency, and closeness and importance of social networks, herd mentality, all factor in.

People want easy answers, easy correlations to latch on to, easy ways to villainize the "other" who they feel is threatening them, or letting down society, in some way. Not only is this answer not easy to pin down, turning into a partisan talk point is counter productive. We are divided enough as a country, we don't need more fuel on the fire.

I guarantee it doesn't raise the vaccination rate, the end goal anyone who really cares about this issue should be working towards.

Democrats are no more insulated from any of those conditions than Republicans.
What's your point?

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself

Democrats are no more insulated from any of those conditions than Republicans.
What's your point?

Well, check out the following poor, rural counties that overwhelmingly supported Biden (70%+ except where indicated)

Coahoma County, Mississippi
Tunica County, Mississippi
Greene County, Alabama
Lowndes County, Alabama
Hancock County, Georgia
Dougherty County, Georgia (69.6% Biden)

If you plug these counties into the tool bar on your link

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-...vid-death-rate

you will find all of these counties have lower vaccination rates than the Dem average and higher deaths. Many have vaccination rates lower than the GOP average and death rates much higher; indistinguishable from Trump 60%+ counties on these variables or faring even worse. I picked ones I could easily find, but if you look at the chart on your link, you will see many other small circles in high death rate/low vaxx/Pro-Biden areas of the chart showing the same thing.

The difference on its face is that most communities that share these similar conditions (rural, poor) are majority white and thus supported Trump, while there are fewer POC communities that fit this criteria because black and Hispanic poverty are more concentrated in urban areas.

So, this where NBP's comments about deaggregating the data set is important. Poor, rural America is both vaccinated at lower rates and dying at higher rates than America as a whole. This is true for both heavy Trump supporting, and heavy Biden supporting counties. I do think if you ran a regression analysis on all of these variables (that math is out of my league) you would find something Trump specific that explains why the 200 death rate per 100k section of the chart are almost exclusively Trump counties, but taken as a whole these counties are a fraction of the total number of US counties and an even lower fraction of the total population. In short, they are outliers.