We'll let POTUS know later
-
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Trump recently fired his secretary of defense over Twitter. He fired many people through media without telling them. I think Comey was famously giving a speech somewhere when it showed up on the news.
My point is - isn’t that disrespectful to the Presidency? Cheapens the authority given to the holder of the office.Forgot this....
Trump recently fired his secretary of defense over Twitter. He fired many people through media without telling them. I think Comey was famously giving a speech somewhere when it showed up on the news.
My point is - isn’t that disrespectful to the Presidency? Cheapens the authority given to the holder of the office.
The fact that you condemn Trump for doing EXACTLY what Pfizer seems to have done sort of undermines your argument, doesn't it?
Oh god! That’s exactly my point! My point is about selective outrage. Some people don’t care when Trump does it, but so when Pfizer does.
That is and was my only point.
I started by saying that Pfizer should have told Trump first. That was my first statement
-
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
This is purely a matter of respect.
Exactly.
And that's the point you've been making all along. You claim, perhaps correctly, that Trump doesn't deserve respect because of his behavior.
Pfizer, when doing the same thing is OK, because, well "Mom, he hit me first!"
-
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
This is purely a matter of respect.
Exactly.
And that's the point you've been making all along. You claim, perhaps correctly, that Trump doesn't deserve respect because of his behavior.
Pfizer, when doing the same thing is OK, because, well "Mom, he hit me first!"
I said Trump personally doesn’t deserve it, but the office does. I guess I didn’t say this part explicitly: but what the office deserves is much much much more important than the man holding it
-
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Oh god! That’s exactly my point! My point is about selective outrage. Some people don’t care when Trump does it, but so when Pfizer does.
That is and was my only point.Fair enough.
You said...
My point wasn’t that he shouldn’t have been notified first (he should have).
But it’s also a two way street.
But you justify Pfizer because of Trump's prior behavior.
As I said, "Mom! He hit me first!" is a pretty weak defense.
-
If Pfizer wanted to control the message and felt that the President wasn't trustworthy to keep the announcement to himself, they should not have shared with anyone prior to the announcement - or given it to him at 9:00 a.m. and made the announcement at 10:00 a.m. AND whomever on the Biden side let this be known "haha, we knew before the President" is an ass.
-
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Oh god! That’s exactly my point! My point is about selective outrage. Some people don’t care when Trump does it, but so when Pfizer does.
That is and was my only point.Fair enough.
You said...
My point wasn’t that he shouldn’t have been notified first (he should have).
But it’s also a two way street.
But you justify Pfizer because of Trump's prior behavior.
As I said, "Mom! He hit me first!" is a pretty weak defense.
Sorry - my bad for being unclear.
-
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Link to videothe office deserves is much much much more important than the man holding it
Exactly.
Act accoriding to the office, not the man. Do what's right, not because you hate the man, but because it's fucking right.
-
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Link to videothe office deserves is much much much more important than the man holding it
Exactly.
Act accoriding to the office, not the man. Do what's right, not because you hate the man, but because it's fucking right.
Yeah - which is my main beef with Trump. His grade school antics are below the office.
I get the whole “it’s all about policy crowd” - I do. That’s not me though.
-
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Link to videothe office deserves is much much much more important than the man holding it
Exactly.
Act accoriding to the office, not the man. Do what's right, not because you hate the man, but because it's fucking right.
Yeah - which is my main beef with Trump. He grade school antics are below the office.
So, if Sobel had said "Fuck you!" to Winters, you'd be OK with that, even if Winters was an asshole?
-
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
Link to videothe office deserves is much much much more important than the man holding it
Exactly.
Act accoriding to the office, not the man. Do what's right, not because you hate the man, but because it's fucking right.
Yeah - which is my main beef with Trump. His grade school antics are below the office.
I get the whole “it’s all about policy crowd” - I do. That’s not me though.
"Mommy, she said mean things to me!! Booooohooooohooooooo"
-
-
-
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@xenon said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@George-K not at all. But, I’d also have an issue if Winters started calling Sobel “dopey” “loser” or some such.
Where is the point where disrespect for the man justifies disrespect for the office?
We’re getting deep into the analogy here.
I don’t think disrespect for the office is ever good.
But disrespect for the office can only really be shown by people, entities, or things that are important to the office. (In this case - a private company showed disrespect by not communicating it’s national security/safety gamer changer to the entity in charge of national security).
Perhaps showing physical disrespect to the President himself if you’re in a direct interaction with him?
I dunno - it can be fuzzy
-
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@jon-nyc said in We'll let POTUS know later:
There’s a material public health benefit to not having Trump announce it.
What's that, if I may ask.
Trump’s efforts to overrule his FDA on safety standards in order to get an emergency approval in before the election caused a significant loss of confidence in the vaccine approval process. Polling showed a 15+ percent drop in confidence overall, with even a material drop among Republicans, who were already majority skeptics on taking the vaccine. It got to the point where the presidents of 7 major pharmaceutical companies signed a statement basically saying they would only seek approval on the FDA’s timeline.
What's the material health benefit of letting candidate Biden know ahead of time?
I didn’t make that case.
-
@jon-nyc said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@George-K said in We'll let POTUS know later:
@jon-nyc said in We'll let POTUS know later:
There’s a material public health benefit to not having Trump announce it.
What's that, if I may ask.
Trump’s efforts to overrule his FDA on safety standards in order to get an emergency approval in before the election caused a significant loss of confidence in the vaccine approval process. Polling showed a 15+ percent drop in confidence overall, with even a material drop among Republicans, who were already majority skeptics on taking the vaccine. It got to the point where the presidents of 7 major pharmaceutical companies signed a statement basically saying they would only seek approval on the FDA’s timeline.
What's the material health benefit of letting candidate Biden know ahead of time?
I didn’t make that case.
Bull shit. Pure democrat talking point.
-
I have a thread where I showed the polling and the WSJ article discussing the statement.
