"You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine."
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@George-K said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
The timeline: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/timeline-trump-administration-s-response-coronavirus-n1162206
Note: This timeline in the "politics" section of NBC is heavy on 'what he said' in addition to what actually was done.
What, specifically, should have been earlier?
Before moving off of what was said, just having a President publicly take the outbreak seriously and erring on the side of caution and prudence instead of erring on the side of downplaying and saying it’ll “go away”, would’ve been a great example.
There, 89th. That's a good example of how you are wrong. You state a flat out falsehood as if it were fact, and then complain about it.
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@George-K said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
The timeline: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/timeline-trump-administration-s-response-coronavirus-n1162206
Note: This timeline in the "politics" section of NBC is heavy on 'what he said' in addition to what actually was done.
What, specifically, should have been earlier?
Before moving off of what was said, just having a President publicly take the outbreak seriously and erring on the side of caution and prudence instead of erring on the side of downplaying and saying it’ll “go away”, would’ve been a great example.
I asked you to be specific about what should have been done earlier. If you look at the timeline from NBC there were lots of things in the works early on.
So, what, specifically, should he have done earlier? Which advisors (both in and outside the White House) did he ignore?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Larry said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@Larry said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
89th, it doesn't matter how many times you say it, it won't change the fact that you are incorrect.
You have yet to tell me what I’m incorrect about, after asking you many times.
EVERYTHING!!!! You start out on a false narrative and then build your entire position from it.
So the part I’m incorrect about is the false part. Oh ok. Thanks for clarifying
-
My statement was that there is a alternate reality out there, where the positions are completely opposite from what we see here. In other words, in this different universe with a Democrat president, each party has taken a position opposite what they have done in our reality, simply because they are against the other party/
-
@89th - I am no Trump fan. Neither am I a badger. There’s been a lot that he’s done that I’ve disliked and there has been a lot that he has done that I have been very pleasantly surprised. I think that he is much smarter than people give him credit for, and I suspect his talking in overly simplistic ways is actually a fairly intelligent manipulation of the public.
Now let me put this out there, and please hear me out before jumping all over me.
Trump was right. It’s not that bad. And he was right to try to tamp down the panic. Remember what early - Mid March was like. The phrase “bodies on the streets” was tossed around a lot. The stock market had dropped to 18000 and many were saying it had a lot farther to go. New York was screaming that they needed 30K ventilators, their hospital system was overwhelmed, and this was what everybody else in the country had coming. Florida and Louisiana were going to be a living hell, and people were panic buying toilet paper and supplies at unbelievable levels. It was panic.
Trump said that it was serious, but not THAT bad. He was right.
-
@LuFins-Dad yes and traffic deaths go down when folks wear seat belts.
Many predicted that, once the curve is flattened, there will be those that say "See? It wasn't that bad" while ignoring the reason why the curve flattened. <Insert pictures of empty NYC streets at noon>
Also, Trump initially said it wasn't serious. Only once the deaths started stacking up did he admit it was.
-
@Larry
Maybe not in a true sense (but who knows).There are plenty of examples of politic parties changing their positions because the opposite party changed their position.
My understanding (which may be of course incorrect) is that in the recent past, Democrats were more for protection of the US market and Republics were more for open trade. That seems to have changed.
But before then (100 years ago), the Republic Party was more for protection of American workers,
I understand that party positions change, but I do not think that President Trumps policy positions today would fit in with the Republic party of (for example) 30 years ago.
Things change - I get that. And some of that change is because the other party wants to be different.
The Republic party of today wants more protection for American markets. The Democrats cannot agree with that, so they have to move to a different viewpoint.
Here are a couple of conservative think tanks that have the same view
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@LuFins-Dad yes and traffic deaths go down when folks wear seat belts.
Many predicted that, once the curve is flattened, there will be those that say "See? It wasn't that bad" while ignoring the reason why the curve flattened. <Insert pictures of empty NYC streets at noon>
Also, Trump initially said it wasn't serious. Only once the deaths started stacking up did he admit it was.
You honestly don't see how crippled your logic is, do You?
Jesus.
-
@George-K said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
So, what, specifically, should he have done earlier? Which advisors (both in and outside the White House) did he ignore?
So, on March 16th he announced 'Social Distancing Guidelines' that were to be in place for two-weeks, which basically were "stay home if you're feeling sick"...when just a week earlier he was telling the public the coronavirus isn't nearly as bad as the seasonal flu? Quite a mixed message, and a weak one at that.
Now, him making moves like closing air traffic from Europe on March 11th, that was a bold step. I was impressed. So to answer your question, having a clear and coherent message from the white house about strict social distancing in early to mid March, or encouraging states to issue stay at home orders in early to mid March, would've likely saved tens of thousands of lives. Instead, we didn't see that until the last week of March. (don't forget Trump subsequently urged folks to resist the stay at home orders)
-
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@LuFins-Dad yes and traffic deaths go down when folks wear seat belts.
I don’t even see how that statement relates to anything I said. Please explain.
Many predicted that, once the curve is flattened, there will be those that say "See? It wasn't that bad"
I was the first to make that prediction in February on TNCR. The second part of my prediction was that there would be those shaking their heads saying it was worse than we thought. It goes both ways. People on this forum and the web were predicting near apocalyptic conditions by now even WITH MITIGATION.
Also, Trump initially said it wasn't serious. Only once the deaths started stacking up did he admit it was.
Flat out wrong. Trump addressed it before anybody else did. He thought it was serious enough to talk about at SOTU. He thought it was serious enough to appoint a task force. He thought it was serious enough for travel bans including Europe in early March. You aren’t applying context to what he was saying.Serious is a subjective phrase.
-
@89th said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@Larry said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
You honestly don't see how crippled your logic is, do You?
Jesus.
Until you specify what I'm incorrect about, I'm just going to ignore you.
I've done that already.
-
Examples of what? All I've said from the start was had Trump taken this more seriously and acted earlier (even by a day, let alone a few weeks), we would've likely seen fewer deaths, based on science/math/statistics. No one, and especially you, have said where that is an incorrect statement.
-
The seat belt comment was in reference to your first prediction, that because of mitigation strategies, we didn't see "beds in the street". In other words, if society started wearing social-distancing "seat belts", the traffic deaths on Pandemic Avenue wouldn't be as bad as they would otherwise have been.
For the other part, you said Trump said it "was serious but not that bad". Even on March 9th he was saying it wasn't that serious. And if you define "bad" as beds on the street, then of course you're right, but if you define "bad" as 100,000+ Americans died, then you're wrong.
-
@taiwan_girl said in "You're damn right I'm taking hydroxychloroquine.":
@Larry
Maybe not in a true sense (but who knows).There are plenty of examples of politic parties changing their positions because the opposite party changed their position.
My understanding (which may be of course incorrect) is that in the recent past, Democrats were more for protection of the US market and Republics were more for open trade. That seems to have changed.
But before then (100 years ago), the Republic Party was more for protection of American workers,
I understand that party positions change, but I do not think that President Trumps policy positions today would fit in with the Republic party of (for example) 30 years ago.
Things change - I get that. And some of that change is because the other party wants to be different.
The Republic party of today wants more protection for American markets. The Democrats cannot agree with that, so they have to move to a different viewpoint.
Here are a couple of conservative think tanks that have the same view
Too simplistic, and you're missing some big things. For example, the Chinese pumped money into the Clintons, as far back as the 90's. The ChiComs didn't do it to protect American workers.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion.
