Why Is Mr. Trump Saying 70% Power Outage on Eve of Hurricane Maria Strike?

Following up on yesterday’s tweets on estimates of excess mortality, official statement on twitter:

“They say all these people died in the storm in Puerto Rico, yet 70% of the power was out before the storm. So when did people start dying? At what point do you recognize that what they are doing is a political agenda couched in the nice language of journalism?” @GeraldoRivera

The WSJ does note 70% temporary outage after Hurricane Irma “sideswiped” Puerto Rico, but also notes rapid recovery thereafter. Moreover, the power utility reports only 3.9% outage on 9/19, the day before Hurricane Maria struck.

In addition, estimates based on light generation reported in Shermeyer indicate 27.9-41.0% outage on 9/16.

Source: Shermeyer (2018).

As noted in this post, post-Maria electricity outages correlates very well with estimated excess deaths, I have estimated.

8 thoughts on “Why Is Mr. Trump Saying 70% Power Outage on Eve of Hurricane Maria Strike?

  1. pgl

    Trump is victim shaming which the Usual Suspects do here as well. You see – the victims were too lazy and incompetent to take care of themselves per Trump which is a theme we see here from the Usual Suspects. Of course Trump is a racist who cannot grasp that Hispanics are Americans. I would say the Usual Suspects are echoing these pathetic themes but then they get all offended for some reason.

  2. pgl

    BTW – every electrical line man would know whether or not the grid was temporarily down before Maria wiped out the lines, the time to restore those lines would not be increased by the need to get the grid operating again. For Trump to make this excuse shows he has no clue what providing electricity is about. And yet the clueless Usual Suspects thinks this stupid and pathetic excuse is a game changer.

  3. SecondLook

    Congenital liar along with a narcissistic personality disorder.
    We’ve had worse in the White House, although they usually had some modicum of ability to offset their character flaws.

  4. Moses Herzog

    So, what do you guys think?? Would/Could Peggy Noonan and Heather McDonald be allowed to comment/post about “racial characteristics” on this blog??

    Of course, I’m sure that Noonan and McDonald could discuss “racial characteristics” in a very “hygienic” way (as Noonan has exhibited multiple times in her columns) that wouldn’t leave Prof Hamilton feeling dirty or icky or scummy. Heaven forbid.

    Because white academics who travel in predominantly white social circles are largely masters of this disallowed topic on Prof Hamilton’s blog. What the hell else other reason would there be?? Everyone knows the best way to prove you’re not racist is to refuse any discussion/dialogue on “racial characteristics” which “don’t exist”. The best way to make progress in any topic is just not to allow discussion of it, everyone knows that as well.

    1. Menzie Chinn Post author

      Moses Herzog: Let me stress the decision to censor comments about race when not germane to the topic is a joint decision. If you wish to discuss environmental racism (which personally I think occurs), or the assertion that Mr. Trump has a higher weighting scheme attributed to individuals of a certain race, or that Democrats are more racist than Republicans (believe it or not, that comment has been made and published on this blog), comment away.

    2. pgl

      “It is late afternoon in Manhattan on the Fourth of July, and I’m walking along on Lexington and 59th, in front of Bloomingdale’s. Suddenly in my sight there’s a young woman standing on a street grate. She is short, about 5 feet tall, and stocky, with a broad brown face. She is, I think, Latin American, maybe of Indian blood.”

      Bloomy’s on the Uppity East Side and they let someone other than an uppity white person shop there? The horror!

Comments are closed.