ggait wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 4:56 pm
i guess 100 days is the number. i would be interested to know how they came up with the number, how we're doing things. i was cynical of politicians in the early 90s. needless to say, i still am.
Every incoming US president talks about his top priorities in terms of the first hundred days. Maybe FDR was the one who started it.
So asking citizens to suck it up for the first hundred days is something (rhetorically) that is quite common/familiar/expected around transition/inauguration time.
TBH, the 100 days of masks (April 20) will very likely need to be extended further. But the most impactful thing is for people to hunker down in Dec/Jan/Feb/March.
So pretty good stuff coming from Joe. Maybe he's not so stupid and demented after all?
everybody has takes. i'm familiar with the 100 day plan. yes, they're priorities that a prez wants to address (check), but they're also typically addressing issues legislative or exec order or policy that carry not so much precision and sciencey on actual time and date done. and if it will "very likely need to be extended', putting the limited time on it would seem counterproductive in some corners?
anyway, my post in toto was on several things i noted. no doubt biden and co. will do a number of positive things on covid. they will make missteps.
what i'm more interested in than any marginal benefit or detriment to a mask ask at this point is the vaccine rollout and how it's executed. joe's played some politics with that already, but that also matters little if they can simply take a large task and help execute it fairly well. i see joe hasn't brought up the covax agreement again recently to move our vaccine lineup out to other countries earlier.
still waiting on whether astrazeneca can be the big early producer. they're the key to moving timelines up for us in the first part of the year. delays and them not getting their story straight hasn't been helping them throughout. including now.
https://www.reuters.com/article/health- ... SL8N2II4TS