"You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine."
-
@Copper said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
If this chart was not politically biased it would tell us how many more would have died if social distancing started a week later
First, if it were President Hillary Clinton I’d be saying the same thing. This isn’t political.
Second, the analysis is relevant as you had a president downplaying the virus in mid March.
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
Here’s a good test. If it wasn’t President Trump but President Hillary Clinton in the office and the EXACT same everything happened, would you be saying the same thing about her handling of the pandemic? I know I would.
@Larry I’m waiting for your answer.
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@Copper said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
If this chart was not politically biased it would tell us how many more would have died if social distancing started a week later
First, if it were President Hillary Clinton I’d be saying the same thing. This isn’t political.
Second, the analysis is relevant as you had a president downplaying the virus in mid March.
He wasn't alone.
How many lives did he save by not waiting another week?
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@Mik said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
The fallacy in 89th's assertion is that the federal government does not impose shutdowns. The states do. Can you imagine if Trump had done that unilaterally? He'd not be just Hitler, but Hitler squared!
Had he encouraged states to, or even taken the deadliness off the virus seriously, some states may have shut down earlier than they did. Most waited until the last week of March.
I guess he could have sent in the Army and closed them at bayonet point.
-
I don't think the criticism of the timing of the lockdown is really fair. There's a lot of retrospective wisdom being applied, here.
I do think that quite a bit of Trump's communication has been poor, and some of his Tweets are unbelievable - that Free Minnesota etc. Tweet was very poorly timed, based on the official policy they were trying to implement.
Trump's strength, and his weakness, is that he's such a loose cannon. He needs to learn to shut up over serious stuff. Playing to the peanut gallery, which he frequently does with his tweets, might be OK when you're talking about day-to-day politics, but it's really dumb in a major crisis.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
I don't think the criticism of the timing of the lockdown is really fair. There's a lot of retrospective wisdom being applied, here.
I do think that quite a bit of Trump's communication has been poor, and some of his Tweets are unbelievable - that Free Minnesota etc. Tweet was very poorly timed, based on the official policy they were trying to implement.
Trump's strength, and his weakness, is that he's such a loose cannon. He needs to learn to shut up over serious stuff. Playing to the peanut gallery, which he frequently does with his tweets, might be OK when you're talking about day-to-day politics, but it's really dumb in a major crisis.
I'll be damned...A fair criticism.
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
Here’s a good test. If it wasn’t President Trump but President Hillary Clinton in the office and the EXACT same everything happened, would you be saying the same thing about her handling of the pandemic? I know I would.
@Larry I’m waiting for your answer.
And I will give it the very instant you stop trying to claim this isn't political.
-
The fact that I’d say the same thing regardless if it was Trump or anyone else from any other party...it’s quite clear it’s not political. Heck, I’d rather have Trump over Biden in November. I’m not anti-trump. None of what I’m saying is political.
So, your answer to my question, would you be saying the same about the presidents response had it been Hillary?
-
It's either motivated by your dislike of Trump, or you need help...
But I'll answer your question, because it's clear you refuse to let go of your delusion...
If I saw that a president Hillary was genuinely concerned with the nation and its citizens and was sincerely doing the best she could trying to handle the situation, I would not hold decisions she made or things she said against her from a position on hindsight. That's a silly thing to do, and is childish. It's just as childish as holding the lack of action on seat belts against the president in 1920.
-
Thank you for answering.
The problem is the further we get away from Feb/March the more people forget how much Trump downplayed the virus when it was clear what was going to happen. Heck, many folks here in TNCR were ringing the alarm bells. I even predicted 1 million cases by May 1 when there were only 2,000 and I was off by like one day.
We said it then, that these delays could be exponentially bad and that’s what we ended up seeing (and now displayed in the Columbia study). I refuse to forget the attitude Trump had toward the virus that most likely resulted in nearly 50,000 unnecessary deaths (according to the study).
As much as it’s hard to understand, none of this is driven by “hating Trump”. There are many things he did I like, both against COVID and in the previous 3 years. But I firmly standby that statement that his “downplay the virus” approach to COVID likely resulted in tens of thousands of deaths.
-
First, no we didn't know. You're using hindsight. Nancy Pelosi was on TV telling everyone not to worry, go to Chinatown to eat and shop. The news media was attacking Trump calling him xenophobic and racist. Lots of democrats and news media types were busy telling everyone to ignore Trump, everything was just fine. If you were acknowledging that I would come closer to buying your story. But you flat out ignore it, and jump right over it to toss rocks at Trump.
-
I wish even a fraction of the energy used to go after Trump, would go after the Chinese CCP.
Trump didn't start the damn virus and try to cover it up.
THE CHINESE DID.But, I guess oh well, that's OK. No big deal, we don't want to be racist. Maybe the next virus that comes out of China, given their track record, we'll find even more evidence of what we did wrong, and we can apologize because that's what the progressives seem to focus upon.
Right anger, wrong target.
-
Kamala Harris is on it.
-
@Rainman said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
I wish even a fraction of the energy used to go after Trump, would go after the Chinese CCP.
Trump didn't start the damn virus and try to cover it up.
THE CHINESE DID.But, I guess oh well, that's OK. No big deal, we don't want to be racist. Maybe the next virus that comes out of China, given their track record, we'll find even more evidence of what we did wrong, and we can apologize because that's what the progressives seem to focus upon.
Right anger, wrong target.
Oh he tried to cover it up alright. He made light of it for months while he was being warned by many experts that this shit was going to explode. "but the stock market! if it falls, I'm doomed. Let's just lie some more. It will die away with the warm weather." There is your nutshell of why he acted the way he did. I didn't much care for Hillary either, but you all stepped in the dog crap pulling the lever for this idiot.
-
@nobodyssock
Your response had absolutely nothing to do with what I posted. -
@Jolly said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@taiwan_girl said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@Jolly said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
Then there is no reason to elect or change leaders of any country, is it? We're all on autopilot and nothing ever makes a difference.
Let me ask you, do you think President Obama did a good job with the economy?
I think Mr. Obama did a good job trying to sink 1/7 of it.
But in your scenario, it doesn't matter...Obama has little or no effect.
I never said that they have no effect, but I do think (like Xenon says better than I) that their effect is not as much as people think (and not as much as they themself think).
I do agree with your point that you make in a later post that the President can make people feel better about the economy and that can help (or hurt) the economy. (Hopefully I interpret your meaning correctly).
Maybe this is a bad example, but imagine that it is 15 C out.
For people who are in favor of President Trump, it is sunny, blue sky, puffy white clouds. Just seems like a nice day.
For people who are anti President Trump, it is still 15 C out, but it is gloomy and cloudy, there are dark clouds, etc.
One day feels better/worse than the other, but the reality is that it is the same day.