talk show host dan patrick doubling down on his false attacks on African Americans... Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick doubles down after blaming unvaccinated Black community for COVID surge "Not surprisingly, Democrat social media trolls were up late misstating the facts and fanning the flames of their lies," Patrick in response to the backlash. https://www.khou.com/article/news/h...urge/285-7d5d4bad-675c-43ee-9587-2d101fe7d083
Poll answers are one thing. But what do the vaccination numbers actually show at this point? What is the current vaccination rate of Republican Trump voting bloc versus Democratic black voting bloc? Do we have even a rough estimate of this?
There are % and raw #. Black vaccinate at a lower %. Black makes up the least # of un-vaccinated. There is also want to vaccinate and actual vaccination. Black wants to vaccinate more than being vaccinated. There is some other issue there. This shed some light into it: Black and Latino communities often have low vaccination rates – but blaming vaccine hesitancy misses the mark | PBS NewsHour Then there is who is to blame for the covid vaccine hesitancy and being outright against it. That squarely belongs to the right-wing media, talking heads and politicians in talking down covid and something about freedom to be silly. Lt Gov Patrick is a doucebag trying to put the blame on black and on Democrats. But that's pretty typical of him and as someone predicted, it was just a matter of time before that happens. With that all said, we should be spending our energy and focus on getting people vaccinated that want to be vaccinated, have some hesitancy but is not outright against vaccination, and forget about the crazies. Things such as community outreach (which right-wing and some on here immediately attack as communism or some scary thing), education, restriction, requirements... both push and pull to get it done. Nudge them over the line even if that means paying them to vaccinate.
The vaccination data from Galveston county was posted on the previous page of this discussion topic. Here's national data: Latest Data on COVID-19 Vaccinations by Race/Ethnicity Black people have received smaller shares of vaccinations compared to their shares of cases and the total population in about half of states reporting data. In the remaining reporting states, the share of vaccinations they have received is similar to their shares of cases and the total population. However, in most reporting states, the share of vaccinations received by Black people is smaller than their share of deaths. For example, in the District of Columbia, Black people have received 43% of vaccinations, while they make up 56% of cases, 71% of deaths, and 46% of the total population. These current patterns reflect growing shares of vaccinations going to Hispanic and Black people over time. Between March 1 and August 16, the share of vaccinations going to Hispanic people increased in all states reporting data for both periods and increased for Black people in most reporting states. In a few cases, these increases were large. For example, the share of vaccinations going to Black people increased from 26% to 43% in DC and from 25% to 38% in Mississippi. Similarly, the share of vaccinations going to Hispanic people increased by at least 10 percentage points in six states, including Florida (17% to 31%), Nevada (13% to 26%), California (19% to 30%), Texas (23% to 35%), https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-cov...data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-race-ethnicity/
Thanks. I think the argument that Dan Patrick and the like are trying to make is that if you look at the voting blocs constituting the unvaccinated populations in most states, Democratic-voting Black Americans make up a larger portion compared to Republican-voting White Americans. It is questionable whether this is even true. In many of the bigger cities it probably is, but state-wide I kind of doubt it. The other thing is that it obscures other factors like how easy or hard it is to get the vaccines, age distribution (Black Americans skew younger -- https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/30/most-common-age-among-us-racial-ethnic-groups/), chances that you have a PCP, etc.
"Questionable if it is even true?" You give patrick an out, trying to apply a "reasonable" justification ("I think the argument patrick is trying to make..."). Just as he blames illegal immigrants for COVID-19 increases, patrick is trying to deflect blame for the current increases while targeting republican boogeymen (immigrants, minorities, Democrats). Meanwhile he holds the second most powerful position in the state (and many believe the most powerful position). He speaks out against mandatory masking. He speaks out against efforts to require vaccinations. And yes, one issue contributing to lower vaccination rates for African Americans and other minorities is access. Again, something the state government can and should address. What is patrick doing?
I think we give these people an out by not addressing their claims head on and instead focusing on what we think is their underlying motivation.
But then, you can’t really “address the claims” with a group willing to abandon facts and reason at the alter of team allegiance, can you? How many times were lies refuted between 2016-2020, and to what effect?
Which is exactly what politicians like patrick is counting on... say something that aligns with your partisan objective, with no basis of truth, and count on people with the same partisan objective to hear, agree, and repeat it.
It is not true. I mean, I wish it was true because it would mean Democratic supermajorities even in our red-rigged system, but no. Time and time again the #1 predictor of vaccine hesitancy/antivax is "Trump supporter" - it's a pretty well documented at this point.
Their tunnel vision is mostly binary and plastered on a scoreboard for uhh simple maths. One unrefuted fact is six points to them and a Clinton/Barack reference is a field goal attempt. Unrefuted half truths are repeatable and used as a chant. Say it enough and start a wave. Sounds like gawds werk to me.
It looks to me like the article takes anecdotes of vaccine hesitancy and renames them as vaccine impeded or vaccine indifferent or vaccine ambivalent. I think their work is worthwhile because we need to understand why people are hesitant, but I find it annoying and not helpful to say 'these people are not "vaccine hesitant."' Every anecdote is an example of someone rationalizing a bad decision. Can't I find anecdotes and new names for every white Trumper's decision to not be vaccinated and reduce 'vaccine hesitant' to an empty set?
The NIH track vaccine hesitancy and the various reason why. Their number is always much lower than the general number published by other popular polls. I wonder why there is that difference and I think it’s likely because there are indeed other factors that contribute to it other than true hesitancy when you dig down to it. So the general question of have you been vaccinated will miss. The do you want to be vaccinated will account for that differences. The want vs already gap is the population that isn’t vaccine hesitant but due to some other factors. The NIH has recognized this but do not have very good breakdown of it. Here is a statement from them: Importantly, these lower vaccination rates are not attributable fully to vaccine hesitancy. Structural factors such as limitations in the cold-supply chain of vaccines, inadequate access to vaccine distribution clinics in underserved geographic areas, the digital divide (i.e., access to the internet to schedule appointments) and digital inequalities (i.e., internet use skills), and competition for limited appointments are contributors. Moreover, the potential subsequent vaccine reactions that could require missing work, the need to return for a second dose, and the unique concerns of undocumented immigrant patients represent structural barriers. Additionally, there are specific populations with greater vulnerability that our health care system needs to target in order to vaccinate such as older adults living alone, isolated rural communities, and persons living with severe mental illness. Research is needed to identify and address these and other structural inequities. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33754319/
This will not be a scientific take but my crotchety old man take. I'd define vaccine hesitant as anyone who has access to the vaccine (which is practically everyone in the US), has not declared an ideological opposition to taking it (that's an anti-vaxxer), but hasn't gotten it. A lot of the barriers I see listed are things that will reduce uptake and need to be addressed and broken down as much as possible, but they are not things that provide a moral excuse to those who don't clear the hurdle. Getting the vaccine is like making time for things -- you don't ever lack the time for a thing, you only choose to not make it a priority. The vaccine hesitant haven't made getting vaccinated a priority. I drove a hundred miles with a slipped disc in my back to get my first shot because it was a priority (really, getting my wife off my back was the priority, but still). Not being able to make an online appointment, or take time off of work, or make a long drive are all issues of priority. Again, I don't just want people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and absolutely public health officials should be thinking of ways to make the shot as easy to get as possible for everyone, but I'm not going to call those folks vaccine impeded. They should get the shot and haven't made it a priority to see it done.
Mostly agree with this post.... Also the top-down you-better-listen-to-me-because-you're-a-moron approach isn't helping.
