Such total bunk on so many levels. Disappointed in Tucker lately.
1) He claims it’s never been done: Lie. During the Spanish flu some cities locked down and some didn't, the ones that didn’t had many many thousands more people dying.
Here’s a chart showing the FINAL difference between St. Louis and Philadelphia, after St. Louis locked down and Philly didn’t.
2) He claims there’s no long term evidence that social distancing will work here: There is a preponderance of evidence from any country that locked down early so far that they managed to lower the number of deaths big time. True there’s no longer term statistics on what ends up happening but that’s one of the dumbest things to say, of course there’s no long term proof- THERE IS NO LONG TERM, THIS THING JUST GOT INVENTED
3) Proving from states that didn’t lock down yet because they weren’t hit as hard yet, vs. states that locked down late BECAUSE they were already hit hard like NY, then making it like it was the social distancing that caused it/didn’t help

4) Saying things like Italy got hit hard despite being locked down. What a dunce. Italy had thousands already dead before they started their lockdown BECAUSE of how bad it was. That’s when it started falling. Same with New York. Only California locked down early and look how well they’re doing despite double the population of NY and earlier cases.
And there’s the rub. If too few die, the virus was overhyped. If too many die, social distancing doesn’t work. What final number, pray tell, would be the satisfactory number for people to agree it’s a real threat AND social distancing helped?