'So responsibility for those 190,000 deaths in the US would ultimately rest with, perhaps, the President'

actually I would say China first Joe but then again your tds would not allow you to consider that. Secondly I would say the New York Mayors whose tds also led to masses of deaths. The Republican run States seem to have done much better. Anything outside of Trump's fault is conspiracy theory eh Joe! But you can carry on your silly little campaign. Hatred does that to you. It seems you are less confident of the coming election as you continue to leave off the number of days in contrast to previous rants.

Hi Runner,

Thank you so much for reminding me: here in Australia, we are now only 61 days away from the Presidential election on Nov 3 (US time) when the vUS wakes up and ditches Trumpf.

Currently, around 900-1,000 people are dying each day from the virus which Trumpf said would be gone by Easter. About 187,000 have now died - or the equivalent of all of the deaths of about 62 9/11s. Sixty two 9/11s.

At that rate, of 900 dying each day for the next 62 days, or another 56,000 Americans dying before their time thanks to Trumpf's incompetence and callousness, that will total at least 240,000 people, and possibly a quarter of a million. I could be very wrong, but that may well be more deaths than all of the American troops killed during the Second world War.

A total of eighty 9/11s. So how do you think history will judge Trumpf ?

Thanks again for reminding me to keep up with Trumpf's rapidly-changing death toll.

Cheers,

Joe

A total of eighty 9/11s. So how do you think history will judge Trumpf ?

as someone who is a regressive and suffering tds Joe , I am sure you will join the lying swamp, the lying liberal media and simply rewrite history to your lying narrative. I mean you have even praised Obama recently. If you can rewrite history regarding such a recent corrupt regime nothing would surprise me.

Not only governments impose restrictions because of the virus, allowed to run rampant the virus itself would cause its own panic and the populace would react with a self imposed "lockdown". The difference between the two is the government response is based on medical evidence and is generally an efficiently controlled reaction which minimises deaths, by minimising the spread of the virus and therefore the human and economic impact. Some people will suffer mental anguish because of restrictions, although as Joe has rightly pointed out there is little evidence of that. Governments have recognised there is an economic cost as well, but to their credit our governments have acted to minimise the economic fall out. The notation that allowing the virus to run free, people would simply carry on regardless is nonsense.

What motivates some on the conservative side of politics to be anti restriction is not the human cost of the virus but the death of the almighty dollar. They are not concerned that mostly redundant economic units in the form of worn out old people die, but the fact their bottom line is being impacted. I have news for them, allow the virus to run rampant and there will be no bottom line, just a cardboard coffin in its place.

When the usual crackpots can't think of a good argument, they always say, in their childish manner, "But, it's not as bad as such and such", as if that excuses the disaster caused by Morrison and the unconstitutional 'national cabinet'.

In this discussion, the "such and such" is America and Donald Trump. Well, Trump's polling on the way up again, and Morrison's is on the way down. Suck it up, crackpots.

The irresponsible state governments are bringing about the end of Australia as it has been since 1901. Morrison should work up the courage to put a stop to it, starting with the ridiculous and unconstitutional national "cabinet". The Federal government has the money, therefore the power. Daggy, amateurish state governments need to be brought to heel - preferably abolished.