A New Stanford Study Links 30,000 Cases of COVID-19 to Trump Rallies
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
Rallies are the lifeblood of the Trump campaign. Without them, the president would be a shell of himself. They give him energy. But unfortunately, they give his supporters coronavirus. A study by Stanford University economists, released on Friday, concluded that Trump rallies might have caused 30,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 700 deaths. “The communities in which Trump rallies took place paid a high price in terms of disease and death,” wrote the study’s authors.
The study wasn’t based on individual cases that were traced back to particular rallies. Rather, the researchers compared the spread of the virus in areas surrounding the location of 18 rallies that were held between June 20th and September 30th to the spread of the virus in demographically similar locations throughout the country that didn’t host rallies. According to the New York Times, the researchers determined through statistical analysis that the 18 events, “produced increases in confirmed cases of more than 250 per 100,000 residents.” And by “extrapolating that figure to the 18 rallies” they were able to conclude that the events resulted in at least 30,000 cases of COVID-19.
When multiple outlets asked the campaign about the study, Judd Deere, a White House spokesman, dismissed it as “a politically driven model based on flawed assumptions and meant to shame Trump supporters.” Trump campaign spokesperson Courtney Parella added that rally attendees are provided masks and instructed to wear them. “Americans have the right to gather under the First Amendment to hear from the President of the United States, and we take strong precautions for our campaign events,” Parella said. Of course, Trump rarely wears a mask himself, despite contracting COVID-19 earlier this month.
As for whether or not the study is political, the researchers insist it isn’t. Speaking to the New York Times, lead author and chair of Stanford’s economics department B. Douglas Bernheim said, “The motivation for this paper is that there is a debate that is raging about the trade-off between the economic consequences of restrictions and the health consequences of transmission. And as an economist, I take that debate to be both important and appropriate.”
Across the country, local government officials have expressed similar concerns and questions, and previous events have proven their feelings to be warranted. Back in June, Trump held his first rally since suspending his campaign due to the coronavirus in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Within a month of the event, 206 people reported positive COVID-19 results— a record high. The Tulsa rally is now considered by many public health experts to have been a so-called superspreader event. The September nominating ceremony for Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett is another notable source of virus spread. Following that event, at least eight people in attendance tested positive for COVID-19.
Despite the trail of COVID-19 cases they leave in their wake, Trump is still holding rallies. In fact, he’s scheduled to hold five more on Monday in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan before flying back to D.C. to watch the results come in at a party at the White House which 400 people have reportedly been invited to.
You Might Also Like
