> skepticism that resulted from the lies

Let's be honest, please. The skepticism preceded the lies. The lies, in as much as they actually exist, are just being used as post-hoc rationalization.

The first vocal skeptics were Kamala Harris and Joe Biden back when they were referred to as the Trump vaccines.

Probably from when Trump said he was going to get the vaccine out early, a couple days before the election:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/30/white-house-aide-sa...

I think you'd have a better point if you blamed skepticism on something Fauci said (though I'd like to see context on that, too). I've not once relied on a politician of any kind for medical advice. If the only person telling me to get the vaccine was Joe Biden, I'd be very skeptical indeed.

But again, this is cherry picking. The consensus opinion amongst medical experts is heavily in favor of the vaccine, and they have data to back up their judgement. The contrarian advice from skeptics is decidedly lacking in evidence and relies almost entirely on hearsay and non-scientific anecdotes.

Harris: If doctors say I should take it I'll be the first in line but if Donald Trumps says I should take it I won't take it.

What she wanted is what everyone should want is for the vaccine to be vetted. When it was she took it. She expressed doubt not in medical science, not in the vaccine, but in the claims of Donald Trump.

That would maybe be a passing defense if you legitimately thought Donald Trump created the vaccines by himself and they weren't a product from Pfizer etc.

With the history that Trump had for firing people who did follow unreasonable orders (e.g. Rod Rosenstein), it becomes entirely plausible that he would fire any FDA head who did not support a vaccine, regardless of the science behind them. As things turned out, the studies did support the vaccine, but it was not unreasonable to draw a distinction between unbiased experts and experts under threat of firing.

The vaccines didn't exist at that point; We didn't know how effective or safe they would turn out to be (at least in their first iteration), so obviously it would have been ridiculous to commit blindly to taking them.

Once trial results were released, we learned that they're highly effective and that risks of bad reactions are exceedingly rare (especially when compared to the effects of the virus itself).

Vaccination rates were equal between democrats and Republicans as late as the end of April.

> end of April

What's so special about vaccination rates in April? By late August this NBC poll shows a huge gap. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/nbc-news-pol...

Already vaccinated:

- Democrats: 88 percent

- Republicans: 55 percent

- Biden voters in 2020 general election: 91 percent

- Trump voters in 2020 general election: 50 percent

Another analysis from September comparing electoral results and vaccination rates by county shows the same trend. https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/the-red-blue-divide-in-covi...

This is as false at it can get: https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/poll-finds-startli...

Comment dated April, article dated July.

Yes: https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/the-red-blue-divide-in-covi...

As of April 22, the vaccination rates between the parties was almost identical.

The differential in vaccination rates is largely about people under 65. If you look at over 65 rates red states and blue states are much closer. 88.4% of people over 65 in Kansas are fully vaccinated. That’s higher than California, Illinois, and New York.

I've noticed that as the risk becomes too high to ignore, people do finally put their politics aside when they have a reasonable expectation that their life actually does ride on the decision.

I would probably frame that the opposite way. People under 65 have a pretty low risk of COVID. Less than 20% of COVID deaths are for people under 65, and only 3% are people under 45. Liberal politics might convince a young, healthy 35 year old to get vaccinated out of concern for others. Geography also matters. There is a visceral awareness of being exposed to others’ germs in a place like NYC that’s simply absent in Iowa or Utah. A guy who takes a bus to work every day is going to be acutely aware of transmission risks in a way that a guy who drives to work every day won’t.

The 65-115 year old category is too big to compare with other age deciles.

For representative comparison deaths in 65-75 age group is 144K and 50-65 age group is 106K, they are a comparable risk group[1]. In my urban county of 2M whites in 50-64 have the lowest vaccination rate in the 60s. Asians have a 95% vaccination rate in the same age group.

The simple fact that Republican dominated counties have their beds and ICUs overflowing[2] after wide vaccine availability while congested New York does not paints a very clear picture that it is not liberal politics that is causing pandemic issues, but conservative politics.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/19/us/alabama-icu-shortage.h...

The lies have been coming for decades, these are just new lies.