(10-23-2020 05:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I wholeheartedly disagree that another leader couldn’t have done better in managing the pandemic - saying otherwise amounts to a cop out from doing any critical evaluation of Trump, actions taken by states, and actions taken by foreign countries.

So what could another leader have done better?

I've posted my own comments on this several times, and I'm pretty sure they are about 180 degrees out from anything that Biden or any other democrat would have done.

(10-22-2020 11:13 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  July 2020, National Geographic magazine:
Article titled "Why weren't we ready for this virus?"
Clearly, the short answer for some, is "Trump".

The reason why we weren't ready for this virus is the same reason why we weren't ready for Katrina or Maria or the BP blowout. We don't have an emergency response capability. So we just hope that it won't be too bad, and that we can put together an effective response ad hoc.

We have a bunch of bureaucrats that we turn to when emergencies happen. But none of them are emergency responders. They know how to bureaucrat but not how to respond. And once again that was painfully obvious.The much ballyhooed "Pandemic Response Roadmap" was about bureaucratic maneuvering, not about response. It's online, you can read it, if you want to tell me it was about response, then read it and tell me what parts had anything to do with actual response.

That's not Donald Trump's fault any more than it's JFK's or Bill Clinton's or any other president. We simply have never addressed this issue, and until we do we will struggle with emergency response.

(10-23-2020 07:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 05:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I wholeheartedly disagree that another leader couldn’t have done better in managing the pandemic - saying otherwise amounts to a cop out from doing any critical evaluation of Trump, actions taken by states, and actions taken by foreign countries.

So what could another leader have done better?

I've posted my own comments on this several times, and I'm pretty sure they are about 180 degrees out from anything that Biden or any other democrat would have done.

"This is a serious disease however we have devoted all possible resources and harnessed American ingenuity towards finding a vaccine and a cure. In the meantime we will be able to get through this without crippling our economy if we make smart choices. It has become clear that wearing a mask is critically important when it comes to limiting the spread of this virus. We should all be using masks when outside the home and encouraging others to do the same."

Instead we get a mealymouthed... "well... mask wear is a personal choice" while NOT wearing a mask and having his family/administration/supporters continue to congregate while maskless.

This is an easy thing that would make a huge difference but he can't bring himself to do it. It's frankly pathetic.

Do you disagree?

(10-23-2020 07:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 05:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I wholeheartedly disagree that another leader couldn’t have done better in managing the pandemic - saying otherwise amounts to a cop out from doing any critical evaluation of Trump, actions taken by states, and actions taken by foreign countries.

So what could another leader have done better?

I've posted my own comments on this several times, and I'm pretty sure they are about 180 degrees out from anything that Biden or any other democrat would have done.

We've had this discussion multiple times over the past few months...

Everything from not mocking mask wearing, to more quickly using the DPA (and using it more broadly) for PPE production, to not employing 20-somethings with no government experience to manage PPE procurement, to using the federal government as a central repository for PPE procurement and not having states fight each other for it, to working more quickly with Congress to pass relief funding for individuals and businesses, to providing and sticking to a national strategy for testing/tracing that states could follow or use as a template, to dealing with his disagreements with federal public health experts internally so as not to erode public trust and further politicize the virus, and on, and on.

(10-23-2020 07:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 07:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 05:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I wholeheartedly disagree that another leader couldn’t have done better in managing the pandemic - saying otherwise amounts to a cop out from doing any critical evaluation of Trump, actions taken by states, and actions taken by foreign countries.

So what could another leader have done better?

I've posted my own comments on this several times, and I'm pretty sure they are about 180 degrees out from anything that Biden or any other democrat would have done.

"This is a serious disease however we have devoted all possible resources and harnessed American ingenuity towards finding a vaccine and a cure. In the meantime we will be able to get through this without crippling our economy if we make smart choices. It has become clear that wearing a mask is critically important when it comes to limiting the spread of this virus. We should all be using masks when outside the home and encouraging others to do the same."

Instead we get a mealymouthed... "well... mask wear is a personal choice" while NOT wearing a mask and having his family/administration/supporters continue to congregate while maskless.

This is an easy thing that would make a huge difference but he can't bring himself to do it. It's frankly pathetic.

Do you disagree?

This argument, about how no one else could have done better, falls apart so quickly when you look at case loads and deaths on a state-by-state basis. You can pretty clearly see that public policy makes a difference in the rate of spread and thus hospitalizations and deaths.

If Trump was truly unable to do no better, we could easily expect to apply the same logic to each state.

(10-23-2020 07:50 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Everything from not mocking mask wearing,

I tend to agree here. What I would have done is to provide an incentive for mask wearing--had a very brief shutdown to get our bearings, then allowed places to reopen provided they required masks and distancing (you require them you can reopen, you don't you can't).

Quote:to more quickly using the DPA (and using it more broadly) for PPE production,

The DPA, like any federal procurement program, is an administrative nightmare. I'm fairly certain he got far more, far faster, by getting voluntary cooperation, and using the threat of DPA as a bargaining tool.

Quote:to not employing 20-somethings with no government experience to manage PPE procurement,

Who else would you use? This is the problem. We don't have an emergency response capability, so when an emergency happens, we kinda have to use whoever shows up.

Quote:to using the federal government as a central repository for PPE procurement and not having states fight each other for it,

I think you start to run into some legal and constitutional problems there. Plus you think having a central repository would eliminate states fighting for it? Really? How naive.

Quote:to working more quickly with Congress to pass relief funding for individuals and businesses,

Congress wouldn't work with him. The democrats have been in full blown "never let a crisis go to waste" on this one since the beginning. We'll use this as leverage to pass every radical change that has no chance of getting through in normal times.

Quote:to providing and sticking to a national strategy for testing/tracing that states could follow or use as a template,

Again, I think you run into legal and constitutional problems here. Moreover, what has been produced as a national strategy sucked. We had bureaucrats designing strategy, not responders.

Quote:to dealing with his disagreements with federal public health experts internally so as not to erode public trust and further politicize the virus

Those "public health experts" have reversed themselves time after time, mostly because they have been wrong at every turn. That's the problem when you turn things over to bureaucrats. They always get it wrong, but they always know why it's somebody else's fault.

The criticisms of Trump handling this come from those who think big government is the solution to everything. And the alternative proposals are basically ways to make big government bigger. I tend to agree with Ronald Reagan, "Government is not the solution, because government is the problem."

(10-23-2020 08:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 07:50 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Everything from not mocking mask wearing,

I tend to agree here. What I would have done is to provide an incentive for mask wearing--had a very brief shutdown to get our bearings, then allowed places to reopen provided they required masks and distancing (you require them you can reopen, you don't you can't).

Quote:to more quickly using the DPA (and using it more broadly) for PPE production,

The DPA, like any federal procurement program, is an administrative nightmare. I'm fairly certain he got far more, far faster, by getting voluntary cooperation, and using the threat of DPA as a bargaining tool.

Quote:to not employing 20-somethings with no government experience to manage PPE procurement,

Who else would you use? This is the problem. We don't have an emergency response capability, so when an emergency happens, we kinda have to use whoever shows up.

Quote:to using the federal government as a central repository for PPE procurement and not having states fight each other for it,

I think you start to run into some legal and constitutional problems there. Plus you think having a central repository would eliminate states fighting for it? Really? How naive.

Quote:to working more quickly with Congress to pass relief funding for individuals and businesses,

Congress wouldn't work with him. The democrats have been in full blown "never let a crisis go to waste" on this one since the beginning. We'll use this as leverage to pass every radical change that has no chance of getting through in normal times.

Quote:to providing and sticking to a national strategy for testing/tracing that states could follow or use as a template,

Again, I think you run into legal and constitutional problems here. Moreover, what has been produced as a national strategy sucked. We had bureaucrats designing strategy, not responders.

Quote:to dealing with his disagreements with federal public health experts internally so as not to erode public trust and further politicize the virus

Those "public health experts" have reversed themselves time after time, mostly because they have been wrong at every turn. That's the problem when you turn things over to bureaucrats. They always get it wrong, but they always know why it's somebody else's fault.

The criticisms of Trump handling this come from those who think big government is the solution to everything. And the alternative proposals are basically ways to make big government bigger. I tend to agree with Ronald Reagan, "Government is not the solution, because government is the problem."

You don't run into legal/constitutional issues with having the fed procure and distribute goods. The DPA is how this is legal, as it does more than just give POTUS the ability to mandate production.

Quote:Section 101 of the DPA authorizes the President to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders and to allocate materials, services, and facilities to promote the national defense or to maximize domestic energy supplies.

And what sort of legal and constitutional issues are related to, say, the CDC providing detailed guidance and support for states wanting to implement testing/tracing protocols?

(10-23-2020 08:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 07:50 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Everything from not mocking mask wearing,

I tend to agree here. What I would have done is to provide an incentive for mask wearing--had a very brief shutdown to get our bearings, then allowed places to reopen provided they required masks and distancing (you require them you can reopen, you don't you can't).

Quote:to more quickly using the DPA (and using it more broadly) for PPE production,

The DPA, like any federal procurement program, is an administrative nightmare. I'm fairly certain he got far more, far faster, by getting voluntary cooperation, and using the threat of DPA as a bargaining tool.

Quote:to not employing 20-somethings with no government experience to manage PPE procurement,

Who else would you use? This is the problem. We don't have an emergency response capability, so when an emergency happens, we kinda have to use whoever shows up.

Quote:to using the federal government as a central repository for PPE procurement and not having states fight each other for it,

I think you start to run into some legal and constitutional problems there. Plus you think having a central repository would eliminate states fighting for it? Really? How naive.

Quote:to working more quickly with Congress to pass relief funding for individuals and businesses,

Congress wouldn't work with him. The democrats have been in full blown "never let a crisis go to waste" on this one since the beginning. We'll use this as leverage to pass every radical change that has no chance of getting through in normal times.

Quote:to providing and sticking to a national strategy for testing/tracing that states could follow or use as a template,

Again, I think you run into legal and constitutional problems here. Moreover, what has been produced as a national strategy sucked. We had bureaucrats designing strategy, not responders.

Quote:to dealing with his disagreements with federal public health experts internally so as not to erode public trust and further politicize the virus

Those "public health experts" have reversed themselves time after time, mostly because they have been wrong at every turn. That's the problem when you turn things over to bureaucrats. They always get it wrong, but they always know why it's somebody else's fault.

This sounds like something that Trump says. Like Lad pointed out, this type of talk erodes public trust and makes the public less likely to follow recommendations. I hardly think that the public health experts "have been wrong at every turn".

Obviously when you are dealing with a brand new disease the messaging will be work-in-progress as details of this novel virus are worked out. Especially when you have to walk that fine line between encouraging the public to take this seriously and freaking everybody out into a full-blown panic.

But "wrong at every turn"? Hyperbole.

(10-22-2020 11:37 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 10:13 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 09:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 08:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We could have video of Joe accepting a bribe and/or molesting a kid and they would not be fazed at all. It's all about beating Donald Trump. Period.

OO, what is wrong with you tonight? This is way over-the-top for you.

I am just tired of hearing the excuses for supporting Biden (or anybody else that the Dems might have nominated) no matter what.

For me, that's not an valid excuse for putting forth something so offensive.

Yet, when Trump said complimentary things about Ivanka, the Democratic rumor mill was running full speed and loudly.

It was just meant to illustrate that nothing, and I mean nothing, can sway those who want to vote for Biden as a means to get rid of Trump. That no matter how flawed the Dem candidate may be, they will still support him. Because, either (a) he is a Democrat or (b) he i8s not Trump, or © both.

I find it a little disconcerting that you think these over the top comments, which were NOT accusations, are worse than Biden selling influence, a situation for which there is some evidence.

(10-23-2020 08:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  You don't run into legal/constitutional issues with having the fed procure and distribute goods. The DPA is how this is legal, as it does more than just give POTUS the ability to mandate production.

But DPA is a bureaucratic nightmare. Having to jump through all the legal and administrative hoops would have slowed things down. Using DPA as a jawbone to get voluntary compliance is far more effective. "You can do it voluntarily and we will get you paid, or we can use DPA and you'll have a bunch of inspections before you can do anything and you'll have to fill out about 40,00 pages of paperwork to get paid," is a pretty effective argument. We used it to acquire all sorts of things during Desert Storm.

Quote:And what sort of legal and constitutional issues are related to, say, the CDC providing detailed guidance and support for states wanting to implement testing/tracing protocols?

But what does that accomplish? We didn't need detailed guidance. Those are smart people who can figure that out. What we needed was answers to three questions:
Who gives the tests?
Where?
With what tests?
And CDC and FDA and NIH and all the other alphabet soup bureaucratic agencies combined provided no testers, no places, and virtually no tests.

(10-23-2020 07:52 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 07:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 07:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 05:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I wholeheartedly disagree that another leader couldn’t have done better in managing the pandemic - saying otherwise amounts to a cop out from doing any critical evaluation of Trump, actions taken by states, and actions taken by foreign countries.

So what could another leader have done better?

I've posted my own comments on this several times, and I'm pretty sure they are about 180 degrees out from anything that Biden or any other democrat would have done.

"This is a serious disease however we have devoted all possible resources and harnessed American ingenuity towards finding a vaccine and a cure. In the meantime we will be able to get through this without crippling our economy if we make smart choices. It has become clear that wearing a mask is critically important when it comes to limiting the spread of this virus. We should all be using masks when outside the home and encouraging others to do the same."

Instead we get a mealymouthed... "well... mask wear is a personal choice" while NOT wearing a mask and having his family/administration/supporters continue to congregate while maskless.

This is an easy thing that would make a huge difference but he can't bring himself to do it. It's frankly pathetic.

Do you disagree?

This argument, about how no one else could have done better, falls apart so quickly when you look at case loads and deaths on a state-by-state basis. You can pretty clearly see that public policy makes a difference in the rate of spread and thus hospitalizations and deaths.

If Trump was truly unable to do no better, we could easily expect to apply the same logic to each state.

Now that is a complete misstatement of our positions. If Trump said something similar to it, it would be added to his list of "lies".

First off, which someone do you think would have done better, and secondly, why, and thirdly, how? In some quarters there is an effort to lay every single US death at his feet.

Near as I remember, the election was between Trump and clinton. So apparently you think Clinton would have done better. Again, why, and again, how? What you and 93 have done is compare a real world action to a hypothetical, but you present it as fact. You might as well say Wyatt Earp would have done better. I cannot refute a hypothetical. Maybe Wyatt Earp would have handled it better. But we will never know, will we? Except for you, and 93, and the rest of the Bidenites, who DO know, deep in their hearts, that nothing Trump did or will ever do can possibly be right.

It is this biased fantasy world I disagree with.

(10-23-2020 08:18 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  But "wrong at every turn"? Hyperbole.

Not really.

Identify one issue where the public health bureaucrats have had a consistent position throughout and have been right.

You cannot flip-flop back and forth on any issue without admitting that your prior position was wrong.

To me the poster girl (not sexist, just can't really say "poster boy" for a woman, and I don't know of a better term, good grief why am I even having to explain this?) for this whole process is Dr. Chu in Washington, who developed and implemented a testing protocol that identified the first problems in the Seattle area, and for her efforts she received a "cease and desist" letter from CDC. IMO she should have been running the program instead of Fauci.

I laugh when Democrats complain about Republicans using hyperbole. While not specifically saying THIS crowd has done so... you guys have willingly gobbled up years of the press doing this to bad-mouth Trump and not said a word... in fact defended complaints about it.

In this very thread recently, you guys have defended the press and left politicians saying Trump would take away their PEC protections and there is nothing in place to replace it as if that isn't hyperbole.

A few of these complaints are valid... a few are uninformed... many are just partisan crap.

Yes, a lot of people followed Trump's lead on masks.... but by and large the people complaining about him are the ones who wouldn't if their life depended on it. A few of you have admitted this yourselves on here. Trump got the disease. It wasn't remotely a death sentence, and THAT is a big part of what has to be balanced against the shut down. Most of those who would follow his lead on masks are STILL not wearing them and won't. Welcome to America, Comrades.

Some of you act like COVID is Ebola. You get it, you die. That's not remotely the truth. Nationally the rate is about 2%, IF you get it. When you compare the risk factors of confinement, isolation, depression, loss of jobs, cramped spaces (my son and his GF in Manhattan is CRAZY), people with anger issues who now can't go to gyms or a coffee shop, shelters are much more limited, winter is going to be a ***** for them, lack of access to care because you can't travel or wait in waiting rooms etc etc etc... MOST of the 'greater' actions proposed by the left are at least ARGUABLY unreasonable and more dangerous.

The state of NY's initial request for ventilators was greater than the entire national stockpile. SInce they had a serious problem very early, one might be tempted to have given them most of the stockpile... then when that failed, what would the rest of the country do?? For people to act like there IS a correct answer is just nuts... and guess what?? NY didn't REMOTELY need anywhere near what they asked for... in fact, I saw one report that said they already had all they needed.

A big part of the reason for shortfalls in some places of PPE was the stockpiling in OTHER places of PPE. We caught up. Same thing happened in WWII, and thousands of times in our history when unexpected things happen.... especially when a pandemic disease comes from one of our major sources of PPE (China). Guess we ALL should accept some blame for THAT one... though making PPE isn't a particular high skilled manufacturing job. Its the sort the left seemed willing to let go overseas under Obama... and the sort Trump had tried to bring back with SOME success. This too is a balance.... some of you act like this is 1950 and we can just do everything ourselves.

Trump should have worked more with COngress on stimulus?? That is a complete and total joke, ignoring what actually happened. Trump was right there in the middle of the first go-round. The parties argued, so what else is new? Between the first and the second, they did nothing... so HE did what he could which was SIGNIFICANT... replacing 300 of the 400 for individuals that had expired... and instead of a pat on the back and pointing fingers at a do-nothing Congress, you guys complained about that. When the House and Senate failed to agree on a second round... He put his own people in the middle of negotiations. When that failed, he suggested they pass those pieces they agree on... like the second $1200 etc... and THAT failed.

People like YOU guys (really almost ALL Democrats) gave Senate Republicans 'cover' by blaming all the delays on Trump... and of course by letting Pelosi play 'my way or nothing' because defying Trump has been what this is all about.

No, 'experts' have not been wrong at every single turn, but they have certainly reversed almost every meaningful position they have taken... and directly contrary to what all of you seem to thing, there are FEW 'facts' about most of these things. There are scientific counter-points to almost every point... including social distancing and masks and everything else. There are certainly more and less popular positions, but almost never are there universal scientific proofs. Healthcare is personal. Every person is different. You can't run a test on hundreds of people and extrapolate that to hundreds of millions... which is why we have thousands of studies going on globally at the same time... because this isn't a poll on opinions with primarily two choices. This is a disease with an infinite number of choices, including quite literally jumping the shark (or in this case, a bat).... Not to mention that people doing disease research don't have to consider a lot of things like the economy or national security or crime that a politician must.... So A LOT of these times when you guys claim Trump ignores science... he's not... even if his position ends up being wrong or unpopular, there has most often been science at the time that supported his position. There is science today that says masks are a bad idea... A LOT of it depends on context and the situation.

As to contract tracing... Thats the job of the CDC, spread to state health agencies... and such policies existed prior to COVID and has been updated since. Feds have no power to enforce... its up to the states. Its the same process for Swine and everything else... What was it during swine? Do you know? Of course not, because Obama never articulated it because it wasn't his plan or place. Its a minor conspiracy, but i think that some of this 'coin shortage' has been a happy accident to encourage the use of cashless transactions which greatly increases the ability to trace people. S. Korea uses vastly less cash than we and this was identified early as a massive difference maker for them... Though had the President come out and said... Hey everyone, use cash so we can track you!! The off-grid right and much of the left would have lost their minds and you know it.

What's funny is that you give the CDC, experts in JUST ONE THING a pass on their messaging on that ONE THING (controlling diseases) but you hold Trump, who has to balance a number of priorities and be responsible for a number of things of which he (and every other politician on the planet) are NOT experts, accountable for every word... plus a number that he never said, but you guys assigned to him... like him claiming that plaquenil worked as opposed to merely stating the truth... that there were some promising signs that COULD be game-changing etc and that its use had few risks. All facts at the time.

I could do more line by line but that's really pointless. Minds have been made up on who did what wrong, even though most of you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.... just what you read.

We all know that flu shots (according to the CDC) are a good idea... and they are free with almost every insurance... and many insurers, especially for low income people actually offer CASH incentives for people to get them... yet fewer than 50% of the population gets them. How many people walk into a Doctors office and INSIST on getting a z-pac for their viral infections? Seriously... do you know that despite numerous financial incentives to keep doctors from prescribing them and flyers coming out of our EARS telling people why they don't need them... only about 1/3 of people who come in to doctors with URI symptoms but a negative bacterial test don't leave with a prescription for an antibiotic? Breast Cancer Screening has an advertising budget that rivals beer companies... and outlet numbers that rival Starbucks. EVERYONE IN THIS COUNTRY knows how important this is... yet despite spending billions to reach them (physically... free rides, we come to you etc) barely half of Medicaid members in the denominator for that measure (CDC recommends they get one) get their free and often mobile services.... and only about 2/3rd of everyone else? In addition to advertising, money for rides and mobile imaging, we also offer financial incentives directly to people to get them in an effort to boost compliance.

A lot of those people are the same Democrats now treating the CDC like they are infallible Gods.... yet they are STILL ignoring their advice when it doesn't have political implications attached.



Any Democrat bitching about Trump's handling of the Virus relative to CDC guidance who has ONE SINGLE care gap is a complete hypocrite.

(10-23-2020 09:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 11:37 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 10:13 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 09:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 08:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We could have video of Joe accepting a bribe and/or molesting a kid and they would not be fazed at all. It's all about beating Donald Trump. Period.

OO, what is wrong with you tonight? This is way over-the-top for you.

I am just tired of hearing the excuses for supporting Biden (or anybody else that the Dems might have nominated) no matter what.

For me, that's not an valid excuse for putting forth something so offensive.

Yet, when Trump said complimentary things about Ivanka, the Democratic rumor mill was running full speed and loudly.

It was just meant to illustrate that nothing, and I mean nothing, can sway those who want to vote for Biden as a means to get rid of Trump. That no matter how flawed the Dem candidate may be, they will still support him. Because, either (a) he is a Democrat or (b) he i8s not Trump, or © both.

I find it a little disconcerting that you think these over the top comments, which were NOT accusations, are worse than Biden selling influence, a situation for which there is some evidence.

I never said that. It's completely apples and oranges. I'm not commenting on Biden influence peddling until there is more credible information out there. I'm watching the story though.

Here are my words from post #844:

What I have never heard is that "he made my life worse".


93, from post #877:

"My financial position is roughly on the same track than it was on 1/20/17."

Lad from post #878:

"The trajectory of my financial well being has not changed since Trump took office."

So, to an anti-Trumper, "about the same" is equal to worse.

But, to take a common Democratic tack, I want to see the tax returns.

(10-23-2020 09:43 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 09:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 11:37 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 10:13 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 09:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  OO, what is wrong with you tonight? This is way over-the-top for you.

I am just tired of hearing the excuses for supporting Biden (or anybody else that the Dems might have nominated) no matter what.

For me, that's not an valid excuse for putting forth something so offensive.

Yet, when Trump said complimentary things about Ivanka, the Democratic rumor mill was running full speed and loudly.

It was just meant to illustrate that nothing, and I mean nothing, can sway those who want to vote for Biden as a means to get rid of Trump. That no matter how flawed the Dem candidate may be, they will still support him. Because, either (a) he is a Democrat or (b) he i8s not Trump, or © both.

I find it a little disconcerting that you think these over the top comments, which were NOT accusations, are worse than Biden selling influence, a situation for which there is some evidence.

I never said that. It's completely apples and oranges. I'm not commenting on Biden influence peddling until there is more credible information out there. I'm watching the story though.

There were two things mentioned as examples. You picked one.

But since you are 'watching the story", if it is revealed that Biden peddled his influence and has been lying about it, would that change your vote?

My feeling is that nothing could change the vote of a dedicated antiTrumper. THAT is what my examples were advanced to show.

(10-23-2020 09:47 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Here are my words from post #844:

What I have never heard is that "he made my life worse".


93, from post #877:

"My financial position is roughly on the same track than it was on 1/20/17."

Lad from post #878:

"The trajectory of my financial well being has not changed since Trump took office."

So, to an anti-Trumper, "about the same" is equal to worse.

But, to take a common Democratic tack, I want to see the tax returns.

You were the one who only later clarified your statement to specifically addressing financial well-being. It was asked open-ended initially and I answered it as such. I never said I was worse off financially. Are you being intentionally dense here? Geez.

You're missing something else OO

All they have to do is 'believe' that Trump did a bad job or that Biden would have done a better one. Those sorts of things aren't quantifiable. As I write that, I see them preparing to say '8.5mm cases and rising... 225k deaths and rising'... yet those numbers have no context. If this had been 1918 Swine, they would be a miracle. 2009 Swine, a disaster. Even if you compare them to other nations of remotely similar qualities where you find us in the middle of the pack... they aren't really direct comparisons because no two nations are ever really that much alike when it comes to diseases. How many Chinese people or goods travel to Germany and vice versa, directly with no stops... just as a simple example.

With Biden selling influence/access, the case for BELIEF is obvious. I mean even most Democrats would say its not a good look (which means almost directly that it creates the opportunity for belief)... so they demand PROOF. Not inference, but proof... and even emails saying... hey Hunter, whom I recently paid 500k to... Thanks for introducing me to your dad... I look forward to working with him... isn't PROOF to some of them (not saying the guys on here, just Democrats)

Completely different hurdles

(10-23-2020 09:55 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(10-23-2020 09:47 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Here are my words from post #844:

What I have never heard is that "he made my life worse".


93, from post #877:

"My financial position is roughly on the same track than it was on 1/20/17."

Lad from post #878:

"The trajectory of my financial well being has not changed since Trump took office."

So, to an anti-Trumper, "about the same" is equal to worse.

But, to take a common Democratic tack, I want to see the tax returns.

You were the one who only later clarified your statement to specifically addressing financial well-being. It was asked open-ended initially and I answered it as such. I never said I was worse off financially. Are you being intentionally dense here? Geez.

I didn't change the question. You just did not understand it.

I was asking the Ronald Reagan question, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" It never occurred to me that anybody would take it as anything but financial. I wasn't asking if your gout was better.

But to answer within your broadened concept, yes I am better off than four years ago. My health is better, and my situation with my sister is (temporarily) better. I have lost weight. None of this is due to Trump, though. I, like you, choose not to go to places I used to like to go to, but that also, IMO, is not due to Trump. It is one of those things that happen in life, like the floods I endured as a boy or the deadly disease I caught when I was 7 (curse you Harry Truman, it's all your fault), all of which impaired my ability to go certain places. Stuff happens.

Was Trump's response(s) the best it could possibly have been? Probably not, but in any case, it is a matter of opinion. Kind of like armchair quarterbacks dissecting yesterday's game plan and execution. Could somebody else have done better, assuming they were president instead of him? Maybe, but again, a matter of opinion. Mu guess is that if President Hillary acted in exactly the same way and we were in exactly the same position now, you would be touting her for a good job and working for her re-election. Like the hypotheticals that somebody(anybody) could have done better, just an unprovable opinion. We cannot compare what X did with what Y may have done.

Was my life worse off when the 55 MPH speed limit was passed, or the Selective Service System called me up? Was it worse When the Russians were sending missiles to Cuba? yes, but that is not the question either I or RR was asking.

(10-23-2020 09:43 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I never said that. It's completely apples and oranges. I'm not commenting on Biden influence peddling until there is more credible information out there. I'm watching the story though.

And, of course, you can keep saying there's no "credible information" forever. Although that didn't seem to stop you with the, "Trump! Russia! Impeach!" or, "Trump! Ukraine! Impeach!" hysteria.