Don't Be Shocked Trump Lied About COVID On Tape. Be Horrified That It Won't Matter

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  john-russell  •  one week ago  •  209 comments

Don't Be Shocked Trump Lied About COVID On Tape. Be Horrified That It Won't Matter
What matters isn’t this reality, but the fact that a rabid minority of our citizens have become inoculated against it. They live in a cultish bubble of partisan propaganda filled with protective buzz words and talking points, a hivemind fueled by rage, paranoia and shame. For decades, right-wing media demagogues have made billions of dollars exploiting their anguish. This is why the president of the United States can lie — without consequence — to Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson and Geraldo...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



.....The shock here isn’t that Trump was lying. Nor that Woodward   refused to disclose   the truth in real-time. Nor even that the president’s lies contributed to the spread of COVID, which has now killed nearly 200,000 Americans, infected more than six million, and sent the nation spiraling into economic and social chaos.

The shock is that Trump’s support will barely budge.

This story will rage for a few days, as did   the news   that our commander in chief calls our troops as "losers" and "suckers." As did the news that he attempted to extort Ukraine for dirt on Joe Biden. As did the news that he considers white supremacists “very fine people.” And so on.

Every week — sometimes every day — new revelations emerge that affirm what we already know: Trump is a lazy, inept, bigot with a wounded ego where his heart should be, and a cash register for a conscience.

What matters isn’t this reality, but the fact that a rabid minority of our citizens have become inoculated against it. They live in a cultish bubble of partisan propaganda filled with protective buzz words and talking points, a hivemind fueled by rage, paranoia and shame. For decades, right-wing media demagogues have made billions of dollars exploiting their anguish.

This is why the president of the United States can lie — without consequence — to Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson and Geraldo Rivera, even about a virus that could kill their viewers. Trump didn’t lead a movement in 2016. He merely inherited an audience that had been vaccinated against unwelcome truths years ago.

On days like this, when we come face to face (yet again) with the catastrophic iniquity of Trump, my mind turns to the description of Kurtz that Joseph Conrad offers in "Heart of Darkness": “I saw the inconceivable mystery of a soul that knew no restraint, no faith, and no fear, yet struggling blindly with itself.”

More than that, I think about the forces that led us to award so much power to such an empty man, and have induced so many of our public servants to ignore his abuses, and sanction his lethal efforts to set us against one another.

Conrad was wise to that peril as well. “Your strength,” he observed, “is just an accident arising from the weakness of others.”

Every citizen of good faith will have to stand against that weakness in the weeks to come, or America will become something far more savage and dangerous than a democracy.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    one week ago

Claire McCaskill, a former prosecutor before she became a senator,  absolutely eviscerated Trump over this on tv this afternoon. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

I'm looking for the video, but can't find it.  Older eviscerations are everywhere, but I want to see this latest one.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1    one week ago

try raw story or crooks and liars or mediaite. they all post a lot of videos from cable news

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @1.1.2    one week ago

That is strong stuff. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.1.4  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Dulay @1.1.2    one week ago

Holy shitndiddles.  I wish I could fit all of that on a t-shirt.  Thanks for finding it, Dulay.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.5  Dulay  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.4    one week ago

I saw it live. Clair was in rare form. I love when they just go with it and let it fly and Clair sure did. 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
1.1.6  Raven Wing  replied to  Dulay @1.1.5    one week ago

Clair is one of the few politicians who has never been afraid to speak the truth. It is something that I so wish other politicians would practice.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2  Paula Bartholomew    one week ago

So what else is new.  He lied about it in public too.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2    one week ago

I agree, this article is more about his followers though.  They are ruining our country. If Perrie doesnt like me saying so she can ban me. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one week ago

the country will be fine. 

no need to panic  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.1    one week ago
the country will be fine. 

as soon as we end MAGA , yes.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    one week ago

so no sense in panicking

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    one week ago

do you want America to be great?

 
 
 
MonsterMash
2.1.5  MonsterMash  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one week ago
If Perrie doesnt like me saying so she can ban me. 

You've said many times Perrie is a good friend of yours why would she ban you?

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
2.1.6  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one week ago
I agree, this article is more about his followers though.

His supporters are indeed normalizing his disgusting behavior. 

If Perrie doesnt like me saying so she can ban me. 

What do you mean by 'ban'?  You can't be banned, or even called out, for opening a dialogue about the normalization of Trump's disgusting behavior.  We see examples of it every day, all day.  One can't simply unhear it or unread it.  It even happens here on NT on a daily basis.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.1.7  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one week ago

Nah.   We need you and she knows that my friend.

 
 
 
MonsterMash
2.1.8  MonsterMash  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.1.7    one week ago
Nah.   We need you

Speak for yourself.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.9  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.4    one week ago
do you want America to be great?

what does that have to do with Donald Trump?

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.9    one week ago
what does that have to do with Donald Trump?

Well, gee, JR.

Let's see if we can figure it out together, shall we?

I replied to YOUR post, which stated:

as soon as we end MAGA , yes.

Then, I replied thusly:

do you want America to be great?

You don't see ANY connection there? Nothing? Nothing AT ALL?

Are you for real, dude?

 
 
 
Raven Wing
2.1.11  Raven Wing  replied to  MonsterMash @2.1.5    one week ago
You've said many times Perrie is a good friend of yours

There are a good many people here on NT that are Friends with Perrie. However, that does not preclude Perrie from Banning anyone, including a Friend, if they have committed a violation that would warrant being banned, including myself. 

Not everyone goes by Trumps playbook.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.12  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.10    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.12    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2    one week ago

He lied.  How does that make him any different than any other politician like Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Schiff...

 
 
 
Gsquared
2.2.1  Gsquared  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    one week ago

Or like Xi Jinping...

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.2  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    one week ago

How many thousands of people died when they lied? 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
2.2.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Dulay @2.2.2    one week ago

If you do the math between say Germany with 9300 dead from Covid and the US with 190,000 dead, and adjust for the difference in population, Trump and his supporters are responsible for 150,000 dead because of Trump's lies.

If memory serves me right Jeremy, you were one frothing at the mouth regarding the four deaths due to Benghazi attack, and these deaths at the hand of your savior can't even get you to blink once or twice....      

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.2.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    one week ago

Uh....the amount and type of lies?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @2.2.2    one week ago

With Iraq and Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria we are looking at possibly hundreds of thousands.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.6  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.5    one week ago
With Iraq and Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria we are looking at possibly hundreds of thousands.

America FIRST!

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.4    one week ago
the amount and type of lies?

Yeah, nice try.  They lied.  Period.  But for some reason, it's only when the current POTUS does it, it's wrong.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.2.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.7    one week ago
it's only when the current POTUS does it, it's wrong.

Huh....imagine that....

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.9  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.8    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.10  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.9    6 days ago

Split Personality,

And the idiots on the left don't see their hypocrisy. Sweeping Generalization 

So what's the "Sweeping Generalization", "the idiots on the left" or calling out their hypocrisy?  

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2.2.11  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.10    6 days ago
So what's the "Sweeping Generalization", "the idiots on the left" or calling out their hypocrisy?  

alling out those without ability to C first, what they still refuse to admittedly obtain a permission slip to be admitted, to not admitting,'

THEY FUCKED UP

We get it, and have long since accepted that some cannot or choose not, but tied in knots are tongues, for those who cannot do without, defending the indefensible offences that no know bounds, as leaped, are  those bound and tied to where Trump , AGAIN LIED'

CAUSING AMERICANS TO DIE ?

eVen H e does not deny, what you continue to...be continuing too...defending a LYING 'man' who is no leader, he's an American Bleeding cause, cause he cares not of OUR AMERICAN CAUSES, causes it allows him to STILL NOT SAY A FCKN WORD TO PUTIN, as Bounties were placed and paid, while NOT a Word was SAID, NOTHING DEFENDS THAT,

NOTHING 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.2.11    5 days ago
defending a LYING 'man'

Which "lying man"?  Biden? Schiff? Trump?  Obama?  McConnell, Tillis?  Graham?  The list is actually pretty long.

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
2.2.13  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    5 days ago

Jeremy Retired in NC, not every politician lies. Not everyone is corrupt, except Trump.

Al Capone was a murderous thug, not everyone with the name of Capone is a murderer.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.2.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.10    5 days ago

I see mine quite clearly. I'm not afraid to admit it.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.15  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Eat The Press Do Not Read It @2.2.13    4 days ago
not every politician lies.

I put this challenge out a few years ago...Name ONE that doesn't.  Over 5 years now and not a single person can name one politician that doesn't lie.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.16  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.15    4 days ago

I guess that depends on the threshold you establish for lying.   Are you asking to name a politician who has never lied in life?   Or a politician who has never lied to the public?   Or a politician who predominantly tells the truth to the public?

Ron Paul always struck me as predominantly honest but of course he has lied to the public.   Bernie Sanders is considered very honest to many, but again he has lied to the public.   No doubt there are plenty of others in that category, but I doubt we would find a politician who has never lied to the public.   So they are all liars, right?

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.2.17  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.15    4 days ago

But every fucking word out of trumpturds' mouth is a lie.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.16    4 days ago
Ron Paul always struck me as predominantly honest but of course he has lied to the public.  Bernie Sanders is considered very honest to many, but again he has lied to the public. 

So they're disqualified.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.19  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.17    4 days ago
trumpturds' 

And you expect to be taken seriously because......

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.20  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.18    4 days ago

Okay, then by your implicit standards, someone would have to name a politician who has never lied to the public.    With such high standards, the challenge degenerates into a non-point.    Similar to:  name me a politician who has never made a mistake.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.21  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.20    3 days ago

[deleted.]  You want to stomp your feet, cry, whine and throw tantrums about one politician who lies, you should have no problem naming one who doesn't.  So far nobody has been able to do it.  But for some reason, this particular liar has your panties in a wad.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.22  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.21    3 days ago
You want to stomp your feet, cry, whine and throw tantrums about one politician who lies, you should have no problem naming one who doesn't.  So far nobody has been able to do it. 

Perhaps YOU can explain why your particular whataboutism is any more relevant than any other? 

But for some reason, this particular liar has your panties in a wad.

Yes and that reason for me is that it is so overtly malevolent. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.2.23  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.21    3 days ago

I don't know whose comments you're reading but I don't see TiG whining, crying, or stomping his feet.

I think the point he's trying to make as I tried to earlier, there are degrees and numbers of lies. Do all politicians lie? Of course they do, it's the nature of the beast. But most politicians (IMO) don't stand up on a stage day after day after day telling lies that would make the Father of Lies blush.

Your boy does that. Admit it

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2.2.24  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.15    3 days ago

How about, you name ONE PERSON, that has NEVER TOLD A LIE...?

Ya Know Y, cause you'd  be LYING

N i only LIE when I'm sittin up in bed.

Trump, TRUMPS ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS !

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.25  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.21    3 days ago
You want to stomp your feet, cry, whine and throw tantrums about one politician who lies, you should have no problem naming one who doesn't.  So far nobody has been able to do it.  But for some reason, this particular liar has your panties in a wad.

Excuse me?   Where do you find me emoting as you have described?  

You put forth an impossible challenge.   I pointed that out to you and noted that an impossible challenge does not prove anything.   In response you go fully personal on me and toss out ridiculous allegations.

Or maybe you meant to reply to someone else?    I don't know, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and let you clear this up.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.26  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @2.2.22    3 days ago

Don't try to deflect.  Just admit that you cannot name a single politician that has not lied.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.27  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.2.24    3 days ago
How about, you name ONE PERSON, that has NEVER TOLD A LIE...?

Unlike many here on NT.  I KNOW there isn't a single politician that hasn't lied.  They all do.  I also don't single out one and ignore all others.  It is hypocritical to do.    

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.28  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.27    3 days ago
I KNOW there isn't a single politician that hasn't lied.  They all do. 

Of course all politicians have lied.   It is a near certainty that all adults with at least average intelligence and the means to communicate have lied.   As I noted, your statement is no more information bearing than all politicians have made mistakes.  

So the question of politicians lying is one of degree, not of absolutes.   Some politicians are predominantly truthful when speaking to the public.   Others lie so often that they probably cannot tell the difference between reality and the fantasy conceived in their minds.  

Are you indirectly trying to imply that all politicians lie to the same degree?    Are you implying they are all equivalent liars in terms of frequency and magnitude?

Unlike many here on NT.

There are many on NT who hold that there are USA politicians who have never lied??

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.2.29  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.28    3 days ago
Of course all politicians have lied.

Then don't focus on one while giving the others a pass.

Are you indirectly trying to imply that all politicians lie to the same degree?

I'm saying they lie.  Period.  End of sentence.  To break it down to degrees of lies is giving one a pass or make one seem less while condemning another is hypocritical.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.30  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.29    3 days ago
Then don't focus on one while giving the others a pass.

Where do you find me claiming one politician lies and another does not?   

I'm saying they lie.  Period.  End of sentence. 

Yeah, no kidding, all politicians lie.   The sky is blue.   Water is wet.   All politicians make mistakes.   And, finally, 1+1=2.

To break it down to degrees of lies is giving one a pass or make one seem less while condemning another is hypocritical.  

I noted the obvious continuum and the extremes:

Politicians who seldom lie img_71308.png Politicians who routinely lie

There is nothing hypocritical about noting the obvious.   If you find me writing something hypocritical then quote me.    Simply claiming hypocrisy from your imagination is a pretty crappy way to operate.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.31  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.26    3 days ago

Don't deflect, just admit that your whataboutism is irrelevant. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
2.2.32  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.29    2 days ago
"Then don't focus on one while giving the others a pass."

I just happened to notice this discussion, and would like to offer my thoughts. 

I think what the lie is about can make a difference.  If a woman politician were to say she was only 39 when in fact she was 48, how much damage can that lie cause?

If the mayor of Buffalo, New York, lies about something - how many people can it affect?, but if the POTUS lies about something it can affect every citizen of the USA. 

It is a matter of degree, and lying about the seriousness of the virus, pooh-poohing it, and setting no example about mask-wearing can cause life-time sickness and death.  

You cannot excuse what Trump has done to the people of the USA because other politicians lie as well. 

 
 
 
TOM PA
3  TOM PA    one week ago

My only question is, was anyone else informed about this.  The gang of 8, house/senate security panels, the vice president?  

 
 
 
Dulay
3.1  Dulay  replied to  TOM PA @3    one week ago
My only question is, was anyone else informed about this.

Well a couple of Senators in the Intelligence Committee traded stocks based on a Covid briefing, Sen. Burr, the Chairman of the Intel Committee is one of them. 

The problem with the gang of 8 briefings is that they are sworn to secrecy. That cannot divulge anything they learn in those briefings, they can't take note or bring staff with them. In the past some of the members have gotten really pissed off by Agency officials lying about what the gang of 8 was briefed about. 

 
 
 
TOM PA
3.1.1  TOM PA  replied to  Dulay @3.1    one week ago

Since it's now out and no longer a secret we should ask those that may have been told when they were informed and how much they knew.  

 
 
 
Dulay
3.1.2  Dulay  replied to  TOM PA @3.1.1    one week ago

I don't know that the gang of 8 or the intel committee members are released to speak about it by Woodward's book. There have been calls from some circles for Sen. Warner to read some of the documents that his committee has into the Congressional record since Burr is releasing things selectively. That's how the Pentagon papers became record. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4  Tacos!    one week ago

Over and over we see the accusation that Trump lied about the virus, but no lie is actually demonstrated. You need a little more than trying to fact-check an outlook (impossible). You need a little more than just throwing up a couple of statements and implying without logic that they contradict one another.

Ever since this fact-checking fad started and ever since the campaign of exaggerating Trump's statements began, we have seen non-facts (i.e. opinions) represented as facts and we have seen disconnected statements represented as connected. Fiction is now truth, and solely because of the obsessively partisan need to oppose Trump.

You want lies? Look at the lies they tell about Trump. For example: 

As did the news that he considers white supremacists “very fine people.”

He never said that. It's a lie. He never said white supremacists were very fine people. It didn't happen. I challenge anyone to produce the quote of Trump saying "white supremacists are very fine people." You can't. It's a lie. In fact, he distinctly said he wasn't talking about white supremacists. He specifically said they should be condemned. But his critics won't admit this simple truth. If you want people to agree with criticism of Trump, try telling the truth. That would be a new tactic, though.

Here is another lie in this story:

Two days after that, to the delight of his supporters, he was branding COVID as a “new hoax” peddled by the Democrats.

No he didn't. That's not what he was trying to say at all, and he made that clear right away when the comment became news. He said that Democrats would use his response as their new hoax. "Hoax" to Trump clearly means a way of falsely attacking him. Other than this not actually very ambiguous statement, he has never said anything else or acted as if the virus itself wasn't a real thing.

“The Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus,” Trump said. “They’re politicizing it. One of my people came up to me and said: ‘Mr President, they tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia.’ That did not work out too well. They could not do it. They tried the impeachment hoax. “This is their new hoax.”

The language makes clear that he thinks the virus is real and that he thinks Democrats will politicize it (they have). He calls that effort a hoax - not the virus itself.

But if like Biden, you prefer your "truth over facts," then you'll ignore these facts.

 
 
 
pat wilson
4.1  pat wilson  replied to  Tacos! @4    one week ago
He never said white supremacists were very fine people.

Referring to the demonstrations he said "there are very fine people on both sides. One side was marching with tiki torches chanting "Jews will not replace us". If they weren't white supremacists what were they ?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  pat wilson @4.1    one week ago

Don't you love it when there is proof and they still will deny it happened.

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.2  Tacos!  replied to  pat wilson @4.1    one week ago
Referring to the demonstrations he said "there are very fine people on both sides.

The purpose of all of the protests and demonstrations was not to promote white supremacy or hate on Jews. Undoubtedly some people there did fit that description, but not all. The demonstrations arose out of a debate over civil war statues, not white supremacy, and not anti-semitism. There probably do exist good people, who aren't white supremacists, who would like to see those statues remain. Trump has denounced white supremacists and anti-semites multiple times.

If they weren't white supremacists what were they ?

Other people who aren't white supremacists. What makes you think every single solitary person on the other side was a white supremacist? Somebody tell you that? Did you talk to them all?

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.1.1    one week ago
Don't you love it when there is proof and they still will deny it happened.

You are welcome to supply proof, but I think you will find that the evidence you find out there doesn't actually prove what people say it does. 

You might take note that I did supply evidence supporting my criticisms of the article. I notice you don't address any of it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.2    one week ago
The demonstrations arose out of a debate over civil war statues, not white supremacy, and not anti-semitism.

Are you aware of what that rally was advertised as by white supremacist organizations ? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.4    one week ago

This is from the wikipedia entry on the event`

The  Unite the Right rally [4]  was a  white supremacist  and  neo-Nazi [5] [6] [7] [8]  rally that took place in  Charlottesville, Virginia , from August 11 to 12, 2017. [9] [10]  Protesters were members of the  far-right  and included self-identified members of the  alt-right , [11]   neo-Confederates , [12]   neo-fascists , [13]   white nationalists , [14]  neo-Nazis, [15]   Klansmen , [16]  and various right-wing  militias . [17]  The marchers chanted  racist  and  antisemitic  slogans and carried weapons,  Nazi and neo-Nazi symbols , the  Valknut Confederate battle flags Deus Vult  crosses, flags, and other symbols of various past and present  anti-Muslim  and antisemitic groups. [8] [9] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]  The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement [11]  and opposing the proposed removal of the  statue of General Robert E. Lee  from Charlottesville's former  Lee Park . [21] [23]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.6  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.5    one week ago

The evidence is so overwhelming that this was a white supremacist rally it's almost embarrassing to show because it looks like overkill. 

Jason Kessler is the name of the person who organized the rally Trump was referring to

Here is info on Jason Kessler

Jason Eric Kessler (born September 22, 1983) is an American  neo-Nazi white supremacist  and  anti-semitic conspiracy theorist . [ 1] [2] [3] [4]   Kessler organized the   Unite the Right rally   held in   Charlottesville, Virginia   on August 11–12, 2017 [5] [6] [7]   and the   Unite the Right 2   rally held on August 12, 2018.

Kessler is a supporter of   Neo-Nazism , [8] [9] [10]   far-right politics , [11] [12] [13] [14]   and the   alt-right .

===========================================================

It would be "fair" to say that not every white person attending that rally was a white supremacist, I'm sure there were a few that came out of sympathy for Robert E Lee. 

But the march was planned and executed as a show of solidarity by white nationalist and anti-semitic racists, and Donald Trump damn well should have known that. 

I would go so far as to say he did know it, and said what he said about fine people on both sides in order to pander to and dog whistle his white supremacist voters. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.7  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.4    one week ago
Are you aware of what that rally was advertised as by white supremacist organizations ?

I am aware of the larger context surrounding the event and I also acknowledge what the president himself said, which was that those people should be condemned totally. Will you acknowledge that as well?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.8  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.7    one week ago

The rally was organized by a white supremacist.  Do you think the president of the United States should have known that before he made a statement about the event?  Or is whatever Trump does fine with you?

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.9  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.8    one week ago
Or is whatever Trump does fine with you?

Every time you do this, it engenders disrespect.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.10  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.9    one week ago

I really don't care what Trump supporters think of me.  I am telling them the truth and they dont want to hear it. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
4.1.11  pat wilson  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.2    one week ago

There probably do exist good people, who aren't white supremacists, who would like to see those statues remain.

I've stated a very simple fact. There is video. But you're twisting yourself up like a balloon animal to excuse the obvious white supremacists acting out.

If there were very fine people in that group they must have been hiding somewhere, maybe in the shrubs, like Sean Spicer was wont to do.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.13  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to    one week ago

That rally and the fight had been on cable news all morning. Trump watched it for hours before he made his statement. He knew that one side was filled with white racists and anti semitics. He knew that Tacos. 

Parsing his sentences to paint him on the good side is disingenuous. He said there were fine people on both sides so he wouldnt have to disappoint the racist whites that support him, knowing that there were a few people who actually went there to protest the removal of the statue. 

That event was ORGANIZED by white supremacists, they didnt just show up on the fringes of it.  Trump knew that too. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.13    one week ago

Have you actually read Trump's entire statement that day regarding it, or just parroting what CNN and MSNBC tell you is "news"?

If you have read it, what part confuses you so this long time after?

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  pat wilson @4.1.11    one week ago

I am really curious to one thing.

Why is is so hard to believe that there WERE some good people who support not taking a statue down mixed in with the bad folks?

Isn't that what people are asking us to do with the protesters now---differentiate between them and the rioters?

Why is it so hard to believe that both groups could have nice people AND bad people in them?

Not everyone who wants to see statues remain is a neo-Nazi or white supremacist.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.20  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.16    one week ago

Slap fight removed. It will stop or points will be handed out.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.21  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.16    one week ago
Why is is so hard to believe that there WERE some good people who support not taking a statue down mixed in with the bad folks?

As someone who has participated in many protests/marches over the years, I know that by being part of a protest/march, I am bolstering the impact of the groups message writ large.

If I went to the assembly area of a 'Pit Bulls are AWESOME' march and I saw that most of the signs promoting dog fighting, I would NOT participate in that march.

If I DID, it would be LOGICAL that I would be viewed as someone who supported dog fighting AND I would rightly be grouped with those 'bad folks'. I had the choice to voice my abhorrence of their message by turning my back on them yet I chose instead to march with them shoulder to shoulder and I would have allowing them to hijack MY message and substitute theirs. 

If my belief that 'Pit Bulls are AWESOME' leads me to march with assholes that promote dog fighting, I'm either a coward or a moron. 

THAT is why I do NOT believe that there were 'very fine people' on both sides. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.21    one week ago

well. believe what you want.

if you can't even acknowledge the fact that some good people on both sides, in Charlotte or Portland, then that's all on you, and we have nothing to discuss

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.23  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.22    one week ago
well. believe what you want.

I intend to. 

Oh and Portland has nothing to do with our discussion Tex. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.24  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.23    one week ago

I am sorry you see no relation but that isn't my problem.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.25  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.8    one week ago
"Or is whatever Trump does fine with you?"

Of course.  Everything trumpturd DOES AND DOESN'T DO.

 
 
 
MAGA
4.1.26  MAGA  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.24    one week ago

Dem’s Minions – A.F. Branco Cartoon

A.F. Branco September 9, 2020 Leave a comment

Democrats have no problem with riots and protest spreading the coronavirus but they’re outraged over Trump Rallies. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.27  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.24    one week ago

It doesn't matter whether I see a relation or not Tex. It wasn't a part of our discussion. Just stop. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.29  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.27    one week ago

like I stated earlier. not MY problem, dude.

I don't care if you figure it out or not.

and if I choose to continue, I certainly will. nothing you can do about it either

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.30  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.29    one week ago
like I stated earlier. not MY problem, dude. I don't care if you figure it out or not.

The first time that Portland was mentioned in this seed was in your 4.1. 22 post. Perhaps YOU should try to figure out why you felt the need to deflect. 

and if I choose to continue, I certainly will. nothing you can do about it either

Yes, I know, no matter how obtusely. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.31  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.30    one week ago

AGAIN, NOT MY PROBLEM if you can't see it.

Now, kindly take your insults and go bother someone who cares.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.32  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.31    one week ago
AGAIN, NOT MY PROBLEM if you can't see it.

As I pointed out, I saw your deflection quite clearly. 

Now, kindly take your insults and go bother someone who cares.

If I choose to continue, and I certainly will there is nothing you can do about it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.33  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.32    one week ago

no deflection at all. and it isn't my problem you can't understand.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.34  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.33    one week ago
no deflection at all.

Portland sure as hell is a distraction in a conversation about Charlottesville. 

and it isn't my problem you can't understand.

What IS your problem is all you have is the pretense that I can't understand after I have already demonstrated that I can and do. 

But hey, please proceed. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.35  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.34    one week ago

like I keep telling you, this is a you problem. not a me problem.

figure it out or not, I don't care, I am not playing this stupid game with you.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
4.1.36  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.35    one week ago

In a nutshell.........................

384

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.37  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.36    one week ago

that's great!

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.38  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.35    one week ago
I am not playing this stupid game with you.

Yes Tex, everyone can see that you're playing a solitary game. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.39  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.38    one week ago

oh, geez, what part if I am not playing your stupid little game don't you get?

run along now. you are both bothersome and boring

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Tacos! @4    one week ago
You need a little more than trying to fact-check an outlook (impossible)

When you have recordings of Trump effectively saying "Virus very bad, very contagious, 5 times death rate" then you have tape of him telling the American people the next day "All good, nothing to see here, will just miraculously disappear" I think it's reasonable to conclude he's lying. Or perhaps is your excuse that he had the mini-strokes in between knowing how bad it was and lying about it to the public?

He said that Democrats would use his response as their new hoax.

How exactly is someones opinion of a Presidents response to a national emergency a "hoax"? You are right, Trump was calling what he saw as the politicization of his response to Covid a "hoax", but that makes no sense considering reporting the facts about his response and being critical of them cannot be a "hoax".

Hoax: noun - a humorous or malicious deception.

If the facts were flawed, if there haven't been over 190,000 deaths from the virus, then you could call those claims a "hoax". But the facts are there, and what Trump called a hoax was simply peoples opinion about his handling, or should I say bungling of it.

Now we have actual tape of him in his own words in February as well as the tape of his public press conferences. The only one who has pushed a malicious deception is dishonest Donald who lied to the American people costing tens of thousands of lives. It has gone beyond just being an embarrassment, this is a total dereliction of duty. Trump has also insulted the majority of Americans intelligence by claiming he was "downplaying so he didn't create a panic", it's just sad that many of his supporters are apparently too ill-equipped to notice the insult or so stubbornly defiant as to not care. They are exactly who Trump knew they would be when he started his campaign and effectively called his supporters lawless morons when he said "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK? It's, like, incredible." - DJT

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.2    one week ago
When you have recordings of Trump effectively saying "Virus very bad, very contagious, 5 times death rate" then you have tape of him telling the American people the next day "All good, nothing to see here, will just miraculously disappear" I think it's reasonable to conclude he's lying.

Where is the lie in that? They aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, both are opinions. One is a prediction. Many diseases are bad and then they fade. Heck, that's probably most diseases. That's really not even controversial - or it shouldn't be, anyway.

that makes no sense considering reporting the facts about his response and being critical of them cannot be a "hoax".

It is if you unreasonably exaggerate and warp the meaning and significance of the effort - which is exactly what we see in this story.

what Trump called a hoax was simply peoples opinion about his handling, or should I say bungling of it.

Exactly. He did not say the virus itself was a hoax, which is what has been alleged.

The only one who has pushed a malicious deception is dishonest Donald who lied to the American people costing tens of thousands of lives.

Which specific lie and how can you prove he cost that number of lives that would otherwise have lived?

Trump has also insulted the majority of Americans intelligence by claiming he was "downplaying so he didn't create a panic"

I see. So what was Bill de Blasio doing?

 
 
 
Fireryone
4.2.2  Fireryone  replied to  Tacos! @4.2.1    one week ago
Where is the lie in that? They aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, both are opinions. One is a prediction. Many diseases are bad and then they fade. Heck, that's probably most diseases. That's really not even controversial - or it shouldn't be, anyway.

are you dizzy yet?

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Fireryone @4.2.2    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4    one week ago
no lie is actually demonstrated

Here you go:

"I never called John McCain a loser" 

“If we stopped testing right now, we'd have very few cases, if any.”

“We’ve tested more than every country combined.”

"The Governor of California is sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there, will get one. That will be followed up with professionals telling all of these people, many of whom have never even thought of voting before, how, and for whom, to vote. This will be a Rigged Election."

"Breaking: Michigan sends absentee ballots to 7.7 million people ahead of Primaries and the General Election.This was done illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State. I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!" 

"We have to get our country back, we have to start moving again, we have to start working again. Now, they’re doing tests on airlines — very strong tests — for getting on, getting off. They’re doing tests on trains — getting on, getting off. But when you start closing up entire transportation systems and then opening them up, that’s a very tough thing to do."

There's more but you get the gist. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.1  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @4.3    one week ago

Are your examples from this story? No. I didn't say the guy never lies. I said he is often accused of lying when he hasn't. As I have said several times on this site, there are many perfectly valid reasons to criticize Trump. I have also said many times that the guy is full of shit. My point is it's not necessary to lie and exaggerate to criticize him, but when people do, it damages their credibility generally and poisons the whole conversation about him.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.3.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.1    one week ago

Your desire for complete precision seems to always come down on Trump's side.  It is not our duty to explain why you are like that, it is yours. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.3  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @4.3.2    one week ago
Your desire for complete precision seems to always come down on Trump's side.

I'll bet if we were talking about you, you'd value precision a lot.

You don't see a lot of seeds exaggerating the good stuff he might have done, so there we are.

It is not our duty to explain why you are like that, it is yours. 

I explain myself just fine. I don't owe you anything in that regard. If you cared about manners, you might stop attacking me for having an opinion.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.3.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.1    one week ago
My point is it's not necessary to lie and exaggerate to criticize him, but when people do, it damages their credibility generally and poisons the whole conversation about him.

He's not fit for office. He is the worst president in the history of this country. When in hell is that going to dawn on you? 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
4.3.5  Raven Wing  replied to  Dulay @4.3    one week ago
This will be a Rigged Election."

Trump said several months ago, that the only way he could lose is a rigged election. So he was already setting up the people to believe that the only way he could not win is if the election was rigged. 

By encouraging voters in some states to vote twice he is deliberately trying to set up rigged election, as he knows that his supporters will do anything he says, even when they know voting more than once is against the law, ans if they are found to have done so, they could face Federal prosecution.

However, Trump does not care what happens to them, he is only interested in his desperate need for re-election. He has already got someone to recommend his for Peace Prize, which in no way does he qualify for one, and for him to be given one would sorely taint and negate the honor completely. But, well, Obama was given one, so Trump feels he better deserves one.

Like many other things that have been rigged, including the 2016 election, Trump will leave no pebble unturned to be re-elected. Even threatening a civil war if he doesn't.

Yeah.....he really cares about America and it's people. But, only for what they can do for HIM. Otherwise, they can all drop dead by the thousands and he could care less. 

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.6  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.1    one week ago
Are your examples from this story? 

You've spent the last 4 fucking hours talking about a lie that wasn't from this story and YOU brought it into this thread. 

You want lies? Look at the lies they tell about Trump. For example:         As did the news that he considers white supremacists “very fine people.”

So please spare me the bullshit for once. 

 I said he is often accused of lying when he hasn't.

Oh please. You said a hell of a lot but it didn't include that. You implied that people are confusing expressing an opinion with expressing a fact in order to diss Trump. 

As I have said several times on this site, there are many perfectly valid reasons to criticize Trump. I have also said many times that the guy is full of shit.

Irrelevant. 

My point is it's not necessary to lie and exaggerate to criticize him, but when people do, it damages their credibility generally and poisons the whole conversation about him.

That looks like after the fact editorial since you sure didn't make that point in your prior post. 

I demonstrated that Trump LIED about the virus. Trump lies about most everything. That statement is a fact and it does NOT damage my credibility nor poison the whole conversation about Trump.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.7  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @4.3.6    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
4.3.8  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.7    one week ago

At least 150,000 dead from the virus because of Trump's decision to lie to Americans about the virus Tacos.....yet you and others still lend your voices to defend the man in a desire to keep him in the WH.  It is beyond comprehension why you would continue the support/defend Trump all while knowing even more that shouldn't die are going to.

It is impossible to shame a Trump supporter. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.9  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.3.8    one week ago
At least 150,000 dead from the virus because of Trump's decision

We await your link to the scientific study backing up your wild claim, but I think we'll all be dead from old age before it happens.

because of Trump's decision to lie to Americans about the virus

Is that a fact, now? If Trump had called for all hands on deck, ordered immediate lock downs all over the country and told Americans this was going to be the worst thing since the 1919 Spanish Flu, how would you have reacted? Would you have believed him or mocked him?

Keep in mind, Democrats accused him of xenophobia when he restricted travel from China. Nancy Pelosi walked the streets of Chinatown weeks after that telling people there was nothing to worry about. Bill de Blasio told people they couldn't catch the disease on the subway and they should go about their normal lives.

So again what if Trump had been ringing all the emergency bells and given America a full-throated call for alarm and emergency response? Would you have applauded his prudence or would you have attacked him for panic-mongering? Would you have endorsed the many wise restrictions you maybe think now that he should have imposed or would you have accused him of seizing power like a dictator? How would Democrats in Washington and around the country have reacted?

I think we know the honest answers to those questions. The real question is will you be honest enough to admit them? Will you even attempt to answer them at all?

By the way: any theories on why millions of people got the disease in every other country on the planet? Or are those also Trump's fault?

yet you and others still lend your voices to defend the man in a desire to keep him in the WH.

Only because you keep bringing the lynching mentality. You'll hang the man whether the facts support it or not. Your naked partisanship is showing.

It is beyond comprehension

I'm not surprised concepts like nuance or proof are beyond your comprehension, but I am disappointed in our education system if this is the blind partisanship it's churning out. Try going with facts instead of blind anger and maybe we'll have a conversation you can understand.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.3.10  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.9    one week ago
If Trump had called for all hands on deck, ordered immediate lock downs all over the country and told Americans this was going to be the worst thing since the 1919 Spanish Flu, how would you have reacted? Would you have believed him or mocked him?

Here's the problem as I see it. This country is so divisive that of course 1/2 the people would have mocked him and accused him of being a dictator. The other 1/2 would do as he said and then mocked the 1/2 that wouldn't do as he said.

America is a house divided.

And I am not going to lay the blame at anyone's feet. The rest of you can do that

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.11  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.9    one week ago
Try going with facts instead of blind anger and maybe we'll have a conversation you can understand.

Wow, after your 4.3.7 post, the hypocrisy of that comment is galactic. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.3.12  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Dulay @4.3.11    one week ago

Dulay and Tacos (I am going in alphabetical order)

Knock it off with the not so vague jabs. I will start to hand out points next time. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.3.13  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.3.10    one week ago

Geeze, neither him or Trump know when the Spanish Flu began.....1918.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.3.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.3.13    one week ago

I didn't notice that. It's probably a typo. I know Tacos knows his history

 
 
 
Fireryone
4.3.15  Fireryone  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.9    one week ago

You don't think his supporters would have altered their behavior if they knew he believed it to be much worse than the flu? Don't you imagine if he had been straight about the dangers, more people would be wearing masks and social distancing? 

His supporters believed him and as a result they're largely not wearing masks. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.3.16  TᵢG  replied to  Fireryone @4.3.15    one week ago

Hi firery!   

Trump, IMO, was focused on preserving the economy (and on keeping the market high) since the economy was the heart and soul of his campaign.   I think he (correctly) deemed that a COVID-19 panic would negatively affect the economy and with that his chances for reelection.   Thus he tried to keep things calm in the hope that the COVID-19 infections would be low and life would return to normal.

That miscalculation resulted in early missteps by Trump in handling the pandemic and likely exacerbated the negative effects of the virus on the electorate.   Now he is faced with an electorate that is no longer comfortable and is in fact on the edge.   Uncomfortable electorate's tend to vote for change.  

 
 
 
Fireryone
4.3.17  Fireryone  replied to  TᵢG @4.3.16    one week ago

Nice to see you TiG. Its stunning that he would say one thing to a reporter on tape no less, and the next day tell the public that it's not a big deal.

So many people have lost loved ones...many more will.  I see no hope for a strengthening of the covid response under this administration. How many more will die is unknown.  Frankly he should do the right thing and resign, but even that won't be enough.

I hope the election is fair and not rigged in trumps favor. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.3.18  TᵢG  replied to  Fireryone @4.3.17    one week ago
Its stunning that he would say one thing to a reporter on tape no less, and the next day tell the public that it's not a big deal.

Quintessential Trump.   He has learned in his con-man life that lying is an easy way to get what you want.    Of course the practice of lying to the current audience is not limited to Trump, politicians have turned that into an art form.

I hope the election is fair and not rigged in trumps favor. 

That does not concern me at all.   The election will have the normal level of illegality (minor) and Biden will be elected.    (Unless something spectacular happens between now and Nov 3rd.)

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.3.19  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.3.14    one week ago

I can accept that.  Who of us here has not done typos, especially me.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.20  Dulay  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.3.12    one week ago

I will endeavor to be less vague. 

jrSmiley_54_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.21  Tacos!  replied to  Fireryone @4.3.15    one week ago
You don't think his supporters would have altered their behavior if they knew he believed it to be much worse than the flu? Don't you imagine if he had been straight about the dangers, more people would be wearing masks and social distancing? 

Very possibly, yes. However, I expect that if he had, the people who don't like him would have said he was panicking and overreacting. They probably would have refused to wear masks if he had come out in favor of them. In fact, early on, that would have been contrary to the scientific guidance. So Democrats would have had strong grounds for resisting any effort he made to get people to wear masks.

On January 31, he restricted travel from China. The next day, Joe Biden tweeted

“We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus. We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency.”

The World Health Organization said travel bans were not needed. The Chinese government accused Trump of overreacting.

A few weeks later, Nancy Pelosi took to the streets of Chinatown to declare that everything was fine. A few days after that, the mayor of New York City told people to live their normal lives and that they couldn't get the virus on the subway.

So could Trump have done things differently or better? Of course! That's true for anyone. But it's clear he would have been publicly mocked for it if he had tried. Democrats have been having it both way on this for six months, simultaneously accusing trump of fear-mongering, and also of downplaying the virus.

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.22  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.3.12    one week ago
Knock it off with the not so vague jabs.

For what it's worth, I believe that I only counterpunch.

 
 
 
Fireryone
4.3.23  Fireryone  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.21    one week ago
So Democrats would have had strong grounds for resisting any effort he made to get people to wear masks.

Good grief.  Democrats were saying from the get, that we needed to listen to the science.   

I don't care about the petty insignificant things they said early on. The fact is that both Biden and Pelosi changed their minds early on and supported the recommendations from CDC. 

Trump never has and still will not. 

But it's clear he would have been publicly mocked for it if he had tried. Democrats have been having it both way on this for six months, simultaneously accusing trump of fear-mongering, and also of downplaying the virus.

I disagree.  He didn't want to deal with it so he withheld information that could actually have saved lives and prevented cases.  HE is the potus, not Nancy or Biden.  What trump said is what mattered and had he embraced the recommendations of Fauci and told the truth, maybe those super spreader events wouldn't have occurred. 

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.24  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.21    one week ago
Very possibly, yes. However, I expect that if he had, the people who don't like him would have said he was panicking and overreacting. They probably would have refused to wear masks if he had come out in favor of them.

All speculation and BTW, deflecting from the simple fact that Trump COULD have STFU, put a mask on and let the CDC, NIH and NIAID speak to Americans and be truthful with them about the SCIENCE and the sacrifices that needed to be made to save lives. 

In fact, early on, that would have been contrary to the scientific guidance. So Democrats would have had strong grounds for resisting any effort he made to get people to wear masks.

The CDC started recommending masks for asymptomatic people in early April. Trump is STILL, 5 MONTHS LATER, demanding that people take off their masks. 

A few weeks later, Nancy Pelosi took to the streets of Chinatown to declare that everything was fine.

That is false. Nancy Pelosi was attempting to curb the xenophobia that was becoming rampant in SF Chinatown. That was also before there was any shut down in California. Just stop. 

A few days after that, the mayor of New York City told people to live their normal lives and that they couldn't get the virus on the subway.

Again, there was STILL no evidence that the virus could be transmitted by asymptomatic people until March. Both of the events you cited were in FEBRUARY. 

But it's clear he would have been publicly mocked for it if he had tried.

OMG, you mean people might have been mean to him? The HORROR. 

What the actual FUCK. Trump is supposed to be the leader of the free world and your saying that he should be excused for not doing the right thing because he might have been mocked! 

Seriously, a trench had to be dug to set the bar that low Tacos!.

Democrats have been having it both way on this for six months, simultaneously accusing trump of fear-mongering, and also of downplaying the virus.

What Democrats accused Trump of fear mongering about the virus? Name them. 

Trump DID downplay the virus and he admitted that he did it intentionally on tape. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.25  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @4.3.24    one week ago
Just stop.

You are free to disagree with me, but you do not get to tell me to stop expressing myself.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.26  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.25    one week ago

We don't have a disagreement. You posted bullshit and I refuted it with facts. 

[deleted]

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.27  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.25    one week ago

Still waiting for the answer to this question. 

What Democrats accused Trump of fear mongering about the virus? Name them. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.28  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @4.3.27    one week ago

Article is dated 2/1/2020. On 1/31/2020, the day the Trump administration declared a public health emergency in relation to the Coronavirus:

Biden slams Trump response to coronavirus epidemic: This is no time for "fearmongering"

“We have, right now, a crisis with the coronavirus,” Biden  said  in Iowa Friday. “This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia - hysterical xenophobia - and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science.”
 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.29  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.28    one week ago

On 1/31/2020 Trump issued this proclamation:

Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus

He did NOT declare a state of emergency until March 13th. 

Biden isn't accusing Trump of fearmongering about the virus, that is Biden accusing Trump of fearmongering about 'all aliens who were physically present within the People’s Republic of China' being somehow MORE communicable that 'non aliens'. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.30  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @4.3.29    one week ago
He did NOT declare a state of emergency until March 13th. 

I said the "Trump Administration" made the declaration on January 31st. That is true.

Trump administration declares coronavirus emergency, orders first quarantine in 50 years

Biden isn't accusing Trump of fearmongering about the virus, that is Biden accusing Trump of fearmongering about 'all aliens  who were physically present within the People’s Republic of China' being somehow MORE communicable that 'non aliens'. 

If you want to see it that way, that's your privilege. The story I linked for you made no mention of that and neither did Biden in his statement. Biden mentioned the virus specifically, but not Trump's opinion about aliens.

But believe what you like. You asked for something and I supplied it. I think we're done.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.31  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.30    6 days ago
I said the "Trump Administration" made the declaration on January 31st. That is true.

Then you rely on headlines to support your statement. 

Trump administration declares coronavirus emergency, orders first quarantine in 50 years

Yet it's Trump's 1/31/2020 Proclamation that orders the quarantine and the whole article is about the travel ban and quarantine, NOT any declaration of a public health emergency. 

I ALREADY cited the title of the 1/31/2020 Proclamation, here is a link: 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/

It cites the FACT that the WHO did so on 1/30/2020, but AGAIN, it DOES NOT do so here in the US. 

If you want to see it that way, that's your privilege. The story I linked for you made no mention of that and neither did Biden in his statement. 

Biden didn't mention any issue with declaring a public health emergency either, DID he?

Biden mentioned the virus specifically, but not Trump's opinion about aliens.

If not Trump's opinion about aliens, what then is this statement is referring to:

“This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia - hysterical xenophobia - and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science.”

Seriously, your comment is obtuse. 

But believe what you like. You asked for something and I supplied it. I think we're done.

Yes, you supplied 'something' but nothing that proved your claim. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.3.32  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @4.3.31    6 days ago
Seriously, your comment is obtuse. 

We're done, Dulay. Even if moderators ignore your comments, I am done.

I have tried to be patient and civil with you, but you insist on being insulting and incendiary. You might think you're cleverly skirting around the CoC by calling my comment obtuse, instead of me personally, but I think we can all see what you're doing. Perrie warned you about vague jabs and you mocked her for it. I am trying to respect the intent of her warning but it does no good if only one person is even trying to be civil.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.3.33  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.3.32    6 days ago
We're done, Dulay.

Thanks.

Even if moderators ignore your comments, I am done.

If you have a meta issue, contact the RA. 

I have tried to be patient and civil with you, but you insist on being insulting and incendiary.

Isn't that what you and yours call 'virtue signalling'? 

You might think you're cleverly skirting around the CoC by calling my comment obtuse, instead of me personally, but I think we can all see what you're doing.

Addressing and/or characterizing a comment is well within the CoC. 

Perrie warned you about vague jabs and you mocked her for it.

I'm not surprised that you misrepresent ANOTHER of my comments, it's your MO. 

If Perrie felt mocked, I assure you, I would have heard about it. 

I am trying to respect the intent of her warning but it does no good if only one person is even trying to be civil.

This IS me being civil. 

 
 
 
Fireryone
4.4  Fireryone  replied to  Tacos! @4    one week ago

That's spin, not facts. 

 
 
 
PJ
5  PJ    one week ago

What other information does he know that he has decided not to share with us for whatever BS reason? 

The truth is none of us should be surprised because we've already caught him in lies time after time.  We keep wondering which lie will finally open up the eyes of his supporters.  It's not our soldiers and the bounties Russia has put on their heads, it's not our children because he demanded that all schools reopen, it's not his supporters because he has discouraged social distancing and wearing a mask while simultaneously holding in-person rallies.

The fact is NOTHING is going to open their eyes and we just need to accept it. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6  Tacos!    one week ago

Was Nancy Pelosi lying when she encouraged people to go walking through Chinatown in late February? She said

"That’s what we’re trying to do today is to say everything is fine here,"

and

"Come because precautions have been taken. The city is on top of the situation."

Was Bill de Blasio lying in March when he said "the capacity we have right now is outstanding?" How about when he said "go about your lives; go about your business?" How about when he said "this is not something you get through casual contact?" How about when he said it had to be the kind of contact you wouldn't get on the subway? How about when he said mass school closures was "not on the menu here?"

How about when medical experts said wearing masks did little or nothing to prevent the spread of the virus. And then they they said they were so useful they should be mandatory? And then cloth masks did nothing. And then they did.

There is more, but you get the idea.

But yeah, Trump is the big liar. jrSmiley_103_smiley_image.jpg

In reality, it's natural for political leaders to try to tamp down panic that could do more harm than good, especially since no one in America has seen anything like this in a hundred years.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6    one week ago
But yeah, Trump is the big liar.

Your undying desire to defend every idiotic thing Trump does is sometimes laughable , and sometimes irritating.  You can spend your time here any way you want but I would never make myself look ridiculous for Donald Trump's sake. He does not remotely deserve it. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    one week ago
Your undying desire to defend every idiotic thing Trump does is sometimes laughable

I see it is necessary for you to make wild attacks on me so that you don't have to engage with me thoughtfully. I criticize Trump all the time and you never acknowledge it. The world is more nuanced and complicated than you seem to think it is.

sometimes irritating

You should reflect a little on whether or not it is healthy - or even your right - to be irritated by the fact that someone else sees something differently than you. Do you think you deserve to have everyone agree with you all the time?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6.1.1    one week ago

I do not recall seeing you criticizing Trump on anything of significance. Everyone here knows you bend over backwards to supply a positive (for Trump) spin on some of his most egregious conduct. The question is why? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.2    one week ago
I do not recall seeing you criticizing Trump on anything of significance.

Then you either don't pay attention or you intentionally disregard it to maintain your image of me. I have criticized Trump multiple times on this site. It never gets a thumbs up or acknowledgment from you.

Everyone here knows 

You don't know what "everyone knows." However, it's a common conceit to assume that "everyone" agrees with you. Lots of people do it, but I won't go so far as to say "everyone" does it.

you bend over backwards to supply a positive (for Trump) spin on some of his most egregious conduct. The question is why? 

You don't know what you think you know. It's very easy to pick apart dishonest accusations. It requires no bending at all, either forward or backward.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.4  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.2    one week ago
I do not recall seeing you criticizing Trump on anything of significance.

Here is an example from one of your own seeds only 5 days ago. I wrote:

I am aware that Trump disrespected McCain for being captured. I think that is below the belt, frankly. Trump was out of line and I don’t mind saying so. 

You didn't give it a thumbs up or acknowledge it in any way. And it was a reply to a comment you made. So don't tell me to don't see me criticizing Trump.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
6.1.5  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @6.1.1    one week ago

Bullshit..... you've been carrying Trump's water for years [now deleted]

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.6  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @6.1.5    one week ago

Don't say bullshit when I supplied a link. You denying a simple fact right in front of your face is what's bullshit.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  Tacos! @6.1.6    one week ago

I have interpreted your position on Trump to be one of supporting him for reelection while being critical of him as a person.  

On the issue of the WWI vets (losers and suckers) and on Trump's condescending comments on Evangelicals, I suspect you would believe Trump capable of such comments but that you are not convinced he actually said them (nor are you convinced he did not say them).

I suspect you think Trump is faking his devout Christianity and, for the most part, is playing his crowd to get their votes.  

But, ultimately, you find Trump's policies to be preferable to those that might manifest under a president Biden which you expect will have far too much influence from statist factions in the D ranks (e.g. the Sanders supporters).

Is that close?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.8  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.7    one week ago
I have interpreted your position on Trump to be one of supporting him for reelection while being critical of him as a person. 

Oh that really helps. Are people actually going to inflict this asshole on the nation for four more years? It is unthinkable. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.8    one week ago

Not sure how 'helps' applies.   I have offered my reading of Tacos! position.    And, yes, JR, there are quite a few people who are planning to vote for Trump.   And I suspect it has not escaped their attention that he is an asshole and a liar but this will not dissuade them.

You know this is true, why make a comment that reads as though this is a surprise to you?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.10  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.9    one week ago
I have offered my reading of Tacos! position.    And, yes, JR, there are quite a few people who are planning to vote for Trump.   And I suspect it has not escaped their attention that he is an asshole and a liar but this will not dissuade them. You know this is true, why make a comment that reads as though this is a surprise to you?

I have "fought" with Perrie for 4 years about the right to criticize Trump supporters on this forum. She thinks it is impolite or whatever, and I think it is necessary. I have had comments criticizing Trump supporters deleted more times than I could count.  Now the election is at hand, and we have people who are going to vote for someone who is a KNOWN liar crook bigot moron and cheat  (and more) .  We cant just object to the atrocious Trump himself. We have to object to those who empower and enable him. His supporters are a far bigger issue and problem in this country than Trump himself is. The fact that he was the king birther should have in and of itself disqualified him in everyones minds for elected office. So should have many other aspects of his past . Yet people voted for him, out of ignorance or malice, or for some, a belief that a tv reality show host who claimed to be a billionaire was the right person to lead our country. 

There is no excuse for all this. If he gets re-elected it will be time for all of to drop down and pray for our country.  The idea that nothing could permanently harm the US is a fantasy. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.11  Tacos!  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.7    one week ago
I have interpreted your position on Trump to be one of supporting him for reelection while being critical of him as a person.

I support several of his positions. For example, trying to bring more troops home (the fact that Democrats resist this just blows my mind), improving foreign trade deals, more peaceful relations with historically obnoxious countries (again, what happened to peace-loving Democrats?), security for Israel, prison reform, increased economic growth (who doesn't support that?), discourage US companies from moving production overseas, reducing dependence on opioids, cutting regulations (where sensible) to free up business. There are more, of course.

I also disagree with him on things, too. That list is just as long. More fundamentally, I think he's bad at being presidential. I find his manners embarrassing. I think he's largely incompetent in matters of government and law. I see no evidence that he can bring together different factions in Washington, which makes him a poor leader in my mind. I can think of a lot of people I would prefer to see as president.

I can think all those negative things and still point out when a criticism of him is devoid of logic, unfair, or just plain stupid.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.10    one week ago

Nothing you write on a social forum is going to make an iota of difference in the election.

No amount of negative opinions of Trump is going to change the mind of those who support him (at this stage).   The only thing that might influence them are negative facts (e.g. if it can be shown that he does indeed view vets KIA as losers and suckers).

Forums such as NT can be used to exchange ideas, debate, learn, teach, etc.     If someone is voting for Trump, I am interested in why.   I might debate them on their reasons, but I have no expectation that they will change their mind nor would I spend my time simply trying to change their mind.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.13  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.7    one week ago
Is that close?

Yes but the target will be moved in 3,2,1. 

 
 
 
MUVA
6.1.14  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.12    one week ago

Some don’t want to change minds they want to insult their fellow citizens. I can’t post my opinions on tax policies without being personally attacked there aren’t any discussions on policies it mostly virtue signaling from leftist. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @6.1.14    one week ago

Ironically I just saw (and then moved on without comment) a post from you to Fly that did not respond to his content but rather demeaned him personally as merely virtual signalling.

Seems as though any disagreement on content will immediately or eventually degrade into personal animosity on social forums, comment sections, etc.   I suppose it is the nature of the beast, but I see no reason why NT members cannot disagree without always making things personal or stooping to intellectually dishonest tactics.   After all, this community has a general understanding of the various personalities.   It is not strictly anonymous and disjoint such as forums where comments are made to individuals one will never likely encounter again.

As for changing minds, I doubt that one can change the mind of one's interlocutor.   However, a decent debate (one that is thoughtful and not personal) could give others who are not so dogmatic some food for thought.  

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.1.16  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.15    one week ago
As for changing minds, I doubt that one can change the mind of one's interlocutor.   However, a decent debate (one that is thoughtful and not personal) could give others who are not so dogmatic some food for thought.  

That is exactly it! Most of the electorate are independents (over 40%) and not partisans. There vote are far more flexible with a good argument than partisans. That is the point of these discussions. 

You know I found out last night while chatting with a friend here, that I actually caused them to vote a specific way, and it in response to something I said. The outcome was against what I said. So one never knows how these discussions will play out, but they do matter. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.17  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.16    one week ago
That is exactly it! Most of the electorate are independents (over 40%) and not partisans. There vote are far more flexible with a good argument than partisans. That is the point of these discussions. 

It is well known that there are relatively few true independents. There are independents that almost always vote Democrat and there are independents  that almost always vote Republican. Look it up. There are a smaller number that are more flexible. 

There vote are far more flexible with a good argument than partisans. That is the point of these discussions. 

Anyone who needs any more facts to realize that Trump is utterly unfit to hold office needs their head examined. 

Now is not the time or place to talk about "both sides". That can wait til next year. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.18  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.17    one week ago
Now is not the time or place to talk about "both sides".

You write that as if people are saying that both Biden and Trump are equal.   Who is suggesting that?    The 'both sides' rebuttals typically are refuting a one-sided perspective that deems their side 'all good' and the other side 'all bad'.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.19  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.12    one week ago
Nothing you write on a social forum is going to make an iota of difference in the election.

No amount of negative opinions of Trump is going to change the mind of those who support him (at this stage).   The only thing that might influence them are negative facts (e.g. if it can be shown that he does indeed view vets KIA as losers and suckers).

Forums such as NT can be used to exchange ideas, debate, learn, teach, etc.     If someone is voting for Trump, I am interested in why.   I might debate them on their reasons, but I have no expectation that they will change their mind nor would I spend my time simply trying to change their mind.

What makes you think I am interested in trying to change any of these people's minds?  I want to give them what they deserve for ruining this country. 

Newstalkers is a tiny bit of the internet of course, but tiny bits add up to something.  The same way our one individual vote doesn't matter, but they all do. 

Donald Trump is not fit to hold office. People who say they will vote for him anyway will destroy this country. People who argue that both sides are at fault, this year, are carrying water for Trump. 

The only thing that might influence them are negative facts (e.g. if it can be shown that he does indeed view vets KIA as losers and suckers).

How many negative facts about Trump do you need? Thousands?  I'm sure that could be arranged. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.19    one week ago
What makes you think I am interested in trying to change any of these people's minds?  I want to give them what they deserve for ruining this country. 

I just gave you the benefit of the doubt.   It is a shame then that your objective is to merely give people hell for supporting Trump.

Newstalkers is a tiny bit of the internet of course, but tiny bits add up to something. 

I explicitly stated 'you' in my comment.   What you do here on NT will make no difference in the election.   I was suggesting that if all this effort you put forth on this site is done to influence the election, then you are wasting your time.

People who argue that both sides are at fault, this year, are carrying water for Trump. 

That is irrational and myopic.   No way can you claim that Biden is without his own set of unappealing factors.   One can make the case that one choice is better than the other, but it is irrational, unfair and silly to claim that those who recognize the flaws of candidate Biden are ipso facto carrying water for Trump.

How many negative facts about Trump do you need? Thousands?  I'm sure that could be arranged. 

I do not need any more than what I have observed.   Ask a Trump supporter what they need.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
6.1.21  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.19    one week ago
I want to give them what they deserve for ruining this country. 

What gives you the right to be judge and jury when you don't really know the people or person in which you're speaking?

I'm just honestly curious. What do you believe "they" deserve?

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.22  Dulay  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.16    one week ago
So one never knows how these discussions will play out, but they do matter. 

That is why I disagree with those that often tell me quite often that I am wasting my time providing links and arguing for facts. I know that there are a host of members that don't care about the facts but I post for those who actually take the time to read these discussions and are open to ideas and/or facts  that they may not have considered before. 

When debating with an 'adversary' I have followed their links and learned something I didn't know. I'm not saying that it caused me to change my POV but I have always believed that the more viewpoints that you are exposed to, the more cogent your position. It also helps to understand were your 'adversary' is coming from, though I have to say that I have followed some links from members that have taken me to places I NEVER want to revisit...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.23  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.20    one week ago
That is irrational and myopic.   No way can you claim that Biden is without his own set of unappealing factors.   One can make the case that one choice is better than the other, but it is irrational, unfair and silly to claim that those who recognize the flaws of candidate Biden are ipso facto carrying water for Trump.

If it was entirely up to your sway, we would end up with Trump for four more years. There is no "choice' . One guy is completely and irreversibly unfit to hold office, any office, and the other guy is fit.  There is no "choice". You support the guy that is fit for office.  Jesus Christ. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.24  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @6.1.21    one week ago
What gives you the right to be judge and jury when you don't really know the people or person in which you're speaking? I'm just honestly curious. What do you believe "they" deserve?

I don't have to "know" them.  We are talking about our country, not a social club. I have watched people make excuses for the worst president in the history of this nation for four or five years. They deserve whatever grief they get on an internet forum. 

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
6.1.25  Release The Kraken  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.24    one week ago
I have watched people make excuses for the worst president in the history of this nation for four or five years. They deserve whatever grief they get on an internet forum. 

You are the reason why Trump will be re-elected.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.26  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Release The Kraken @6.1.25    one week ago

Dont you have some fake news on behalf of Trump you need to assemble? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.27  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.23    one week ago
If it was entirely up to your sway, we would end up with Trump for four more years.

Are you back to deeming me a Trump supporter? 

 
 
 
MUVA
6.1.28  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.15    one week ago

I’m not letting A holes walk all over me and say stuff the wouldn’t say to my face in a million years I will not be bullied by pussies.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.29  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @6.1.28    one week ago

Nor should you.    Of course if people did not make things personal in the first place and instead focused on rebutting the content then exchanges might even be information-bearing.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.1.30  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.29    one week ago

Yes i agree if you could see my post when I first became a member you would see I did try to have debate but you can see on this very article discussion  that a good portion of people want to tell you how they care more and are better people I don’t buy it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1.31  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @6.1.30    one week ago

Keep trying.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.1.32  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.31    one week ago

I have discussed topics with you before  and agreed with you.I know I can be snarky but really would like to see actual policy’s debates and stop all the virtue signaling.One’s actions determine their character not their dogma or in most cases high opinion of themselves.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
6.1.33  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @6.1.5    one week ago

Some here deserve to be taunted.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.34  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.26    one week ago

"Dont you have some fake news on behalf of Trump you need to assemble?"

Or a meme of President Obama as a woman or Michelle Obama as a man?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.1.35  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.17    one week ago
It is well known that there are relatively few true independents. There are independents that almost always vote Democrat and there are independents  that almost always vote Republican. Look it up. There are a smaller number that are more flexible. 

I have looked it up and even the Pew says that indies cross party lines regularly. I know I have. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1.36  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.35    one week ago
We tend to think of  the  American electorate as being made up of three parts: Democrats, Republicans and  independents Most   independents , about 30 percent of  the  country, usually vote with one  party  or  the   other . Only about 11 percent of  the  electorate doesn't lean to one of  the  major  parties , according to August Gallup data.
original
www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/09/13/independent-leaners-h…
 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @6    one week ago

Pelosi and DeBlasio were wrong, IMO. All foreign travel should have been suspended immediately and anyone who just had to come back to the states would have been quarantined for however long it took.

As for masks...that's a tough one. There wasn't a lot known about this virus back in February, even March. Masks might have helped even back then. Social distancing definitely would have helped. But I honestly don't know about lockdowns. People have to go out to find food, so so much for staying home.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2    one week ago

I would say that stopping travel was spot on.   Shutting down (lock-downs) immediately would have been correct.   Immediate use of masks and social distancing would have been correct (the supply of masks was limited so people would have to make their own).

The lock-downs cannot be designed to stop people from necessary actions (e.g. taking people to the hospital, getting groceries, going to their essential jobs).   They should be used to mitigate all unnecessary interactions for two weeks and then start opening up based upon the efficacy of the measures.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.1    one week ago

Most people have a bandana or two they could use. Mr Giggles has a couple of face masks that you pull over your head that he uses for mowing the grass. Even a simple cut up t-shirt would have worked.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2.3  Tacos!  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2    one week ago

I think there is only so much you can impose on the American public. We are a society that greatly values individual liberty and we don't take kindly to being told we can't go where we want, see who we want, and so on.

We're also a little immature, arrogant, and privileged, so we think nothing bad will ever happen to us. Bad things only happen to other people (or if they do happen to us, it must be the fault of government).

We think viruses only happen to those dirty people in the Far East who eat bugs (just restating what I see as a common American prejudice).

But I think we could have learned something from those people. They have been all over the mask thing since the original SARS outbreak. Just imagine if we had embraced that practice the way they do! I think that would have had a much bigger impact than anything anyone in government did or did not do.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @6.2.3    one week ago

You may be right about the masks.

As for the rest of the comment...I found myself laughing and nodding my head at the same time because you are so spot on.

Thanks for the pleasant conversation, Tacos

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.5  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.2    one week ago

I agree.   I have seen all sorts of creative masks.   My wife created some for us early on before we could buy them.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.6  TᵢG  replied to  Tacos! @6.2.3    one week ago

Eastern cultures see the wearing of a mask to be common courtesy.   When you see individuals of that culture wearing a mask (prior to COVID-19) in airports, etc. it is typically because they have a cold and do not want to infect others.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.5    one week ago

I thought about buying some more fashionable or creative mask...but I get them for nothing at work so why bother

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.8  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.7    one week ago

I was not speaking of fashion but rather efficacy.   My wife's mask looked fine, it just was not made of a material designed to trap viral particulate.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.8    one week ago

I'm sorry, you're right. The cloth masks I get at work (surgical masks) are the only thing I need. I just see really cool ones and I'm wearing the dull, blue one

 
 
 
Dulay
6.2.10  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @6.2.3    one week ago
I think there is only so much you can impose on the American public. We are a society that greatly values individual liberty and we don't take kindly to being told we can't go where we want, see who we want, and so on. We're also a little immature, arrogant, and privileged, so we think nothing bad will ever happen to us. Bad things only happen to other people (or if they do happen to us, it must be the fault of government).

THAT is where competent leadership could have and would have [IMHO] made a difference. 

I think back to what I have read and seen of WWII and all of the restrictions and rationing that the American people accepted as the price of victory. Air raid wardens enforced the law and there were penalties but peer pressure had a big effect on people complying. Though grudgingly, Americans accepted that the government was instituting those restrictions and rationing for a greater good. 

Based on comments here and elsewhere, the consensus seems to be that today, Americans wouldn't comply when called upon to make sacrifices for the good of the country. Judging from what I see in my community on a regular basis, sadly that is true. The fact that Trump has not only encouraged Americans NOT to comply but to actively oppose calls for sacrifice makes it all the more sad. 

Trump gave lip service to being a "war time president' but never actually followed through. 

We think viruses only happen to those dirty people in the Far East who eat bugs (just restating what I see as a common American prejudice).

Being Filipino, I've experienced that form of prejudice. 

But I think we could have learned something from those people. They have been all over the mask thing since the original SARS outbreak. Just imagine if we had embraced that practice the way they do! I think that would have had a much bigger impact than anything anyone in government did or did not do.

They also integrated an 'early warning system' in their health care system that could be set into action at the first sign of trouble that includes reporting and tracing. We would do well to review those systems and emulate them. After 7 months, we're rely on private entities to collect data and we still haven't put such a system into action country wide. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.11  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.9    one week ago

So I have to make a pitch for the Gap.

They are selling really comfortable and colorful masks at a very reasonable price, 3 for $15. That would be the cost of the fabric alone!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.12  Trout Giggles  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.11    one week ago

That is reasonable...but I hate to part with money. I'll just keep grabbing the free ones at work

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.13  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.6    one week ago

I thought it was because of the pollution like you see in Beijing or Hong Kong. I didn't know it was to protect other people.

We sure could learn a few things from people from the Asian continent

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.14  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.13    one week ago

Yeah, I hear you.   My eldest son is a karateka and has made several trips to Japan to train with Shotokan senseis.   He has, as a result, learned quite a bit about the culture.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.15  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @6.2.10    one week ago

Basically, Americans are self-centered and selfish.

The Greatest Generation is dead

 
 
 
Dulay
6.2.16  Dulay  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.15    one week ago
The Greatest Generation is dead

My mom and mother in law are both part of that generation and still alive and kicking. They are a big part of the reason why I am so outraged about this story and Trump's incompetence with the pandemic in general. Last year we all loaded up in my wife's jeep and went to wineries, or outdoor concerts, or picnics or dinner at a dive bar almost every weekend. We actually bought our home because it's about equidistant between where our mothers live. 

My wife's mom is in an assisted living home and basically being kept prisoner. We visit through the window on cell phones. She had a hip replacement and we weren't allowed to be with her when she was afraid. 

I cannot express how fucking hard it has been to be distanced from my own mother and I will never forgive anyone who causes this shit to go on one more minute than it has to. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.17  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @6.2.16    one week ago

I'm very sorry for what you and your wife are going through. I can't even imagine.

My grandparents were of the Depression and WWII era. My father was a little kid during the war, and my mom was a baby, so I doubt they remembered much about it. However, I do know that my grandparents sacrificed and made do especially while Grampap was in Europe chasing Nazis.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.2.18  Dulay  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.17    one week ago

Thanks Trout.

My wife's dad was in the Navy in WWII and he worked for the military all his life. We just lost him to Covid 19 in July. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.2.19  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @6.2.18    one week ago

I'm very sorry for your loss

 
 
 
Dulay
6.2.20  Dulay  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.19    one week ago

Thanks again Trout. 

It's still hard to believe it's real. Not being able to be there and be with him to say goodbye makes it much less tangible. He was in the later stages of dementia but I saw him almost every week and I would swear that he still smiled at my jokes. My wife's parents were married for 69 years and her mom is inconsolable. Which makes it all the harder to be separated from her. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
6.2.21  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @6.2.16    one week ago

My heart goes out to you and yours.  

 
 
 
Dulay
6.2.22  Dulay  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @6.2.21    one week ago

Thank you Paula. 

This year can fuck off right soon. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
6.2.23  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @6.2.22    one week ago

I hear that.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.3  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @6    one week ago
Was Nancy Pelosi lying when she encouraged people to go walking through Chinatown in late February?

WHY did she go to Chinatown Tacos!? 

It can't be that because the virus originated in China fearful and xenophobic people were spreading FALSE rumors about Chinatown could it? 

You always one to try to intellectualize WHY Trump does or says what he does. But it seems clear that you save that effort for Trump and Trump alone. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.1  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @6.3    one week ago
WHY did she go to Chinatown Tacos!? 

Actually she told us exactly why.

It can't be that because the virus originated in China fearful and xenophobic people were spreading FALSE rumors about Chinatown could it? 

Rumors about Chinatown? I'm not familiar with rumors about Chinatown and Pelosi didn't mention any. 

Here is her stated reason:

"That’s what we’re trying to do today is to say everything is fine here," Pelosi said. "Come because precautions have been taken. The city is on top of the situation."

So she was trying to play down the virus in the same ways that Trump and de Blasio did.

"Everything is fine!" "The city is on top of the situation!"

If Trump said "Everything is fine. We are on top of the situation," you would accuse him of irresponsibly downplaying the virus.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.3.2  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @6.3.1    6 days ago
Rumors about Chinatown? I'm not familiar with rumors about Chinatown and Pelosi didn't mention any. 

From YOUR link:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi toured San Francisco's Chinatown Monday to send a message. She said there's no reason tourists or locals should be staying away from the area because of coronavirus concerns.

Pelosi visited The Wok Shop, a temple and the Golden Gate Fortune Cookie Factory, which was started 58 years ago by owner Kevin Chan's mother and uncle.

Chan said his business is losing about $500-$800 a day, or about 70% on average. He believes the fear of the virus is racially motivated.

"I think it's because even if I walk out and cough a little bit — my throat is itchy — they look at me, 'Oh,' like this, 'scary,'" he said.

You claim:

So she was trying to play down the virus in the same ways that Trump and de Blasio did.

Yet from YOUR link:

As Pelosi walked from the Golden Gate Fortune Cookie Factory to lunch at a dim sum restaurant, she hugged friends and waved to onlookers. She downplayed the racism issue, saying she understands people are concerned about China – the epicenter of the novel coronavirus. "But that shouldn’t be carried over to Chinatown in San Francisco," she said. "I hope that it’s not that. But all I can say is, 'I’m here.' We feel safe and sound, so many of us coming here."

YOUR own link proves my point yet you choose to ignore it. 

"Everything is fine!" "The city is on top of the situation!" If Trump said "Everything is fine. We are on top of the situation," you would accuse him of irresponsibly downplaying the virus.

Again, from YOUR link:

In India Monday, Trump said the virus is under control in the United States.

So Trump was doing JUST THAT on the SAME day and he had been doing so all along. 

Your use of whatabout Pelosi to defend Trump is pathetic. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.3  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @6.3.2    6 days ago

I still don't see anything about rumors. 

So Trump was doing JUST THAT on the SAME day and he had been doing so all along. 

Yes. So? I never said he wasn't or even that it would have been wrong for him to do. I was pointing out that people on the Left were doing it just as Trump was doing it. Therefore, it's hypocritical of them to criticize him for it now. And that same analysis extends to supporters who want to pretend there was an important difference in their behavior.

The fact is they were all trying to play it down for the public. Behind the scenes, people were trying to do what they could to stem the tide, but publicly, they were putting on a brave face. It's really not that unusual a thing.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.3.4  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @6.3.3    6 days ago
I still don't see anything about rumors. 

I can't see things for you. 

I was pointing out that people on the Left were doing it just as Trump was doing it.

Pelosi makes one statement in San Francisco's Chinatown and to YOU it's the same as Trump, with the head of half of the agencies heading DAILY shit show where he spewed lies and misinformation. 

Your galactic false equivalency illustrates that it's impossible to have a cogent conversation with you. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
7  Greg Jones    one week ago

Trying to pin the the pandemic's spread and severity on just one person is simply idiotic and wrong.

Normal people who think logically can easily see through the bullshit and propaganda and aren't buying or believing the left wing lies

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
8  Buzz of the Orient    6 days ago

BB18Z6XE.img?h=450&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

CB
GregTx
Freefaller
Kavika
Tacos!
Sunshine
Gsquared
Thrawn 31
MrFrost


41 visitors