General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsScientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history--until now.
Scientific American @sciam
Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in our 175-year historyuntil now. The 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death. We urge you to vote for health, science and Joe Biden for President.
8:01 AM · Sep 15, 2020
Link to tweet
Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientific-american-endorses-joe-biden/
Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in its 175-year history. This year we are compelled to do so. We do not do this lightly.
The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its peoplebecause he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September. He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous and more equitable future.
The pandemic would strain any nation and system, but Trump's rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines. Testing people for the virus, and tracing those they may have infected, is how countries in Europe and Asia have gained control over their outbreaks, saved lives, and successfully reopened businesses and schools. But in the U.S., Trump claimed, falsely, that anybody that wants a test can get a test. That was untrue in March and remained untrue through the summer. Trump opposed $25 billion for increased testing and tracing that was in a pandemic relief bill as late as July. These lapses accelerated the spread of disease through the countryparticularly in highly vulnerable communities that include people of color, where deaths climbed disproportionately to those in the rest of the population.
It wasn't just a testing problem: if almost everyone in the U.S. wore masks in public, it could save about 66,000 lives by the beginning of December, according to projections from the University of Washington School of Medicine. Such a strategy would hurt no one. It would close no business. It would cost next to nothing. But Trump and his vice president flouted local mask rules, making it a point not to wear masks themselves in public appearances. Trump has openly supported people who ignored governors in Michigan and California and elsewhere as they tried to impose social distancing and restrict public activities to control the virus. He encouraged governors in Florida, Arizona and Texas who resisted these public health measures, saying in Aprilagain, falselythat the worst days of the pandemic are behind us and ignoring infectious disease experts who warned at the time of a dangerous rebound if safety measures were loosened.
Spazito
(50,182 posts)cayugafalls
(5,639 posts)calimary
(81,139 posts)The very survival of our planet is at stake.
Upthevibe
(8,018 posts)Thank you for the post. It was a straight-forward assessment.
Sympthsical
(9,041 posts)That's significant, because they try to be as apolitical as possible.
llmart
(15,534 posts)I doubt it would sway anyone that is still on the fence. GOP'ers don't "do" science and have probably never even seen a copy of Scientific American, and trump supporters don't read.
However, every little bit helps.
DFW
(54,302 posts)It's not going to sway anyone because it comes from a publication that Republicans don't even know exists.
Thank you
JDC
(10,117 posts)Javaman
(62,504 posts)Expect a new kind of dark ages in science.
The nut jobs will reject anything that doesnt immediately benefit them. Only later will they realize their fuck up, but like everything they do, it will be too late. For example: virus is a hoax then they themselves get it and die
rkleinberger
(155 posts)Jim__
(14,063 posts)fleur-de-lisa
(14,624 posts)And good likeness!
demmiblue
(36,824 posts)malaise
(268,724 posts)but I won't hold my breath
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Cha
(296,893 posts)warmfeet
(3,321 posts)Without science, many of us would not be here on this forum, nor anywhere else.
tandem5
(2,072 posts)Buckeye_Democrat
(14,852 posts)It looks like it's up to the scientists to save us again!
3catwoman3
(23,952 posts)We dont need no steenkin science.
bdamomma
(63,803 posts)all for health and science.
Death cult can go to hell. Really.
MyMission
(1,849 posts)Thanks for sharing this.
IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)TigressDem
(5,125 posts)It's like Dump is putting America's brain in a wood chipper and calling it "good".
burrowowl
(17,632 posts)Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,529 posts)because I don't recall ever seeing their name involved in politics.
There are so many hundreds of "major" scientific journals out there now, with even more online-only. SA used to be the most well known - the gold standard - and one of the old stalwarts, which until now, seemed to have faded in the background.