2019-2020 coronavirus pandemic (Vaccination 2021 Edition)

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,016
897
118
What fine print is this? I've read about the fine print in the deal meaning "small business" loans could potentially go to big businesses, but nothing about people not actually getting their $2,000.

...This isn't about it being $1,400, is it? Because, of course, people have already received $600. It would be better to get more-- more is always better-- but this is what was promised, no?
Yeah, it's an absolute mystery how anyone could have thought that The Democrats were promising $2,000 checks and not $1,400 checks (or even less if they let The Republicans negotiate them down some more)


(You may notice the dates on a lot of these images too are January 5th and that time. You know, after the $600 Trump Checks were sent)

It's interesting that it became a "Finishing the $2,000 checks" AFTER The Georgia runoff...

So the BEST case scenario is they are incredibly bad at conveying what message they want to say. The much more likely scenario is they fucking bold face LIED to everyone and are using this $600 + $1400 Mickey Mouse Math to try to gaslight everyone into believing their bullshit.

If the Democrats want to "Fine Print" everyone and say "Well ACTUALLY...(she's a thousand year old dragon)", then go for it. But do it knowing what I and many of other progressives have warned; you're going to get slaughtered in the next round of elections because whether it was piss poor messaging or a straight up lie, people are going to feel betrayed by this. Just remember that we warned you (I mean...Democrats won't, they'll just blame us for splitting the party again for daring to hold Democrats accountable for what they said they were going to do).
 

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
1,480
586
118
Country
United States
Pretty much

Democrats are setting up for Trump 2.0 already (and making sure to give him/her the House/Senate in the process) with all this "Fine Print" bullshit with their "$2,000" checks. You finally get Georgia to flip Blue for the first time in ages and the first thing you do is jam a knife into their back. IF we're lucky, Trump 2.0 will actually just be Trump again but I don't think we're going to be that lucky. They're setting up to give Trump 2.0 everything he/she could ever hope for with power but I'm going to go ahead and guess that Trump 2.0 isn't going to be nearly as stupid as Trump 1.0 was (if for any other reason, that shouldn't be physically possible).

But hey, enough Democrats are comfortable with nothing fundamentally changing so it is what it is. When nothing fundamentally changes to Trump 2.0, I want all those Centrists to remember that we fucking warned you and you scoffed at us (at best, some of the Centrists are actively getting in our fucking way because they're so petrified that something might fundamentally change for the better by accident).

I'm not going to enjoy telling them "I told you so" because I'm going to get just as fucked by it as they are but nothing going on right now makes me think that I'm not going to be telling them "I told you so" in two years (and then again in four years).
So yeah...

If you're going to mount up your high horse and start pre-ordering your "i told you so"s over Democrats not fundamentally changing anything, maybe do it over policies that would actually fundamentally change things? $2000 checks to most Americans aren't going to fundamentally change how broken America's political and economic systems are. They would certainly be helpful and make a difference to a large number of people, but six months from now we'll be right back where we started.

When you trot out this same exact argument for every single individual personal preference rather than saving it for things that might, you know, effect fundamental change, it truly comes across as nothing more than empty posturing. "Boy who cried wolf" syndrome and all...
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,006
3,090
118
Trump is someone that wants to be liked, wants money, wants comfort, wants to be popular. 2.0 isn't going to be like that, 2.0 will actually have real ambitions for change, being popular will be a means to an end rather than the goal itself.
Will they? I'm not sure the current post-Trump frontrunners like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley want real change. I think they are brimming with passion to climb to the top and precious little passion to do anything particular when they get there. So it is with most egotistically ambitious people. What I suspect the Republicans will have in 2024 is a candidate is someone who aggressive spouts Trumpism, is more competent than Trump, but still has a fundamentally modest agenda.

Change needs to come with a massive reordering of Congress, because it is Congress that most impedes progress. A party needs to control Congress (both houses) and the presidency, and not be divided against itself. The progressive Democrats can do little but push the party slightly left, and the Trumpist Republicans likewise to the right, because without the support of their party moderates, nothing gets past the other party. Congress is geared towards deadlock.

I think it's very plausible the USA is moving towards radical change, but it's plenty more than 4 years away.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,016
897
118
So yeah...

If you're going to mount up your high horse and start pre-ordering your "i told you so"s over Democrats not fundamentally changing anything, maybe do it over policies that would actually fundamentally change things? $2000 checks to most Americans aren't going to fundamentally change how broken America's political and economic systems are. They would certainly be helpful and make a difference to a large number of people, but six months from now we'll be right back where we started.

When you trot out this same exact argument for every single individual personal preference rather than saving it for things that might, you know, effect fundamental change, it truly comes across as nothing more than empty posturing. "Boy who cried wolf" syndrome and all...
When The Democrats get smoked in the midterms and next election, do you want me to quote this back at you or do you just want me to pretend to be shocked about it?

EDIT: Shit, this isn't even an issue that I'm arguing needs to be changed because it would be good for people. This is something The Democrats CAMPAIGNED on. I'm not even going after them on shit they SHOULD be trying to fix like our shitastic Health Care system or Racism in the police force or things like that. This is something they specifically said they were going to do and somehow calling them out on it is me being on a high horse :D
 

Specter Von Baren

Annoying Green Gadfly
Legacy
May 4, 2020
2,935
669
118
I don't know, send help!
Country
USA
Gender
Cuttlefish
Will they? I'm not sure the current post-Trump frontrunners like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley want real change. I think they are brimming with passion to climb to the top and precious little passion to do anything particular when they get there. So it is with most egotistically ambitious people. What I suspect the Republicans will have in 2024 is a candidate is someone who aggressive spouts Trumpism, is more competent than Trump, but still has a fundamentally modest agenda.

Change needs to come with a massive reordering of Congress, because it is Congress that most impedes progress. A party needs to control Congress (both houses) and the presidency, and not be divided against itself. The progressive Democrats can do little but push the party slightly left, and the Trumpist Republicans likewise to the right, because without the support of their party moderates, nothing gets past the other party. Congress is geared towards deadlock.

I think it's very plausible the USA is moving towards radical change, but it's plenty more than 4 years away.
The hell do Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley have to do with this? Agema, have you come mpletely forgotten what "side of the aisle" Caesar came from? This is not left vs right, this is up vs down Trump 2.0 will come from whichever "side" they damn well please but they are WÀAAAAAAY more likely to come from the Dems because they embrace the rockstar types much more often or did everyone forget what the first four years of Obama were like? The populist types usually come from the Dems while the "stuffed suits" come from the Republicans.

There are generally two types in the Democratic party, the Biden types and the AOC types. Caeser was an AOC type, the hip with the kids, young "cool sect" types. Hell if I know why you made the comment the other day of how the US would make good change if it had more people like her given that fact.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
2,947
384
88
Country
USA
Spoken like a true son of the middle class. I'm not an advocate for revolution, but if you leave enough people with no recourse to improve their lot in life it is not stupid for them to advocate for the destruction of the system that is keeping them down. If anything, it is a natural course of action to remove the obstacles you perceive to be in the way of a better life.
Yeah, but that's not "revolutionary thought". It's not the people with no recourse to improve their lot in life who spend time theorizing about how best to mobilize the masses for their revolutionary cause. It's well off people who think that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Specter Von Baren

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,006
3,090
118
The hell do Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley have to do with this? Agema, have you come mpletely forgotten what "side of the aisle" Caesar came from? This is not left vs right, this is up vs down Trump 2.0 will come from whichever "side" they damn well please but they are WÀAAAAAAY more likely to come from the Dems because they embrace the rockstar types much more often or did everyone forget what the first four years of Obama were like? The populist types usually come from the Dems while the "stuffed suits" come from the Republicans.
The Democrats won the election and the party establishment, the dull stuffed suits, still run the show. Trump indicated that it is the Republicans who are mad as hell and willing to do something about it. I think at least for now, they are the party with more revolutionary fervour - but they lack a revolutionary leader, because their ideology is fucked.

There are generally two types in the Democratic party, the Biden types and the AOC types. Caeser was an AOC type, the hip with the kids, young "cool sect" types. Hell if I know why you made the comment the other day of how the US would make good change if it had more people like her given that fact.
I think this is to misunderstand the Populares. The basic format of the Roman state - SPQR - was that power derived from the aristocratic Senate and the People. Traditionally, Roman leaders exercised power through the Senate and consuls. Those politicians who did so became known as the Optimates, and the Populares were those (few) politicians who instead relied more on popularity with the masses and the tribunes. However, aside from the Gracchi, very few Populares were really reform-orientated, unless you include reforms to give themselves enormous power.

This doesn't really equate well to the modern USA, because the institutions of state are so different and because of the party system.

My point about AOC is that if we look at the sort of feelings that the Republican populists exploit - the elites, cronyism and lobbying, political alientation - AOC is just about the only answer. She will not win the support of the right because she believes in breaking this through government (plus she's a feminist, etc.), and big government is an anathema to much of the right. This is in my view the sheer, pointless absurdity of Republican radicalism mobilised by Trump. It fears and hates the state, but wants to constrain elites who can only be constrained by the state. The answer, I think, is a heroic individual who can mobilise the power of the state whilst somehow not seeming like the state. So, a populist dictator.

And thus Trump. Trump himself sums this paradox up: an elite, billionaire monster of cronyism, corruption, self-interest who is supposedly going to break the power of the elites. Four years of almost total inaction to actually break up the power of the elites, and still supported. His naked desire for total power invested in himself: arbitrary, authoritarian, absolute (the very notion of a self-pardon) - all the worst threats of an overpowerful state. Trump who is believed to love the people, told a host of his dearest supporters he would walk with them to the capital: as they marched off instead pops into his luxury car back to his luxury grace and favour mansion to watch it unfold on TV and throws them under a bus when he finally realises how much they've embarrassed him.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
5,637
1,337
118
Country
United Kingdom
(You may notice the dates on a lot of these images too are January 5th and that time. You know, after the $600 Trump Checks were sent)
Huh, yeah, you're kinda right. That's damn misleading.

I doubt this will have a great impact on electoral chances, though: this is the kind of rhetorical sleight-of-hand which politicians have always employed. It's shitty and misleading but it's not extraordinary.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,016
897
118
Huh, yeah, you're kinda right. That's damn misleading.

I doubt this will have a great impact on electoral chances, though: this is the kind of rhetorical sleight-of-hand which politicians have always employed. It's shitty and misleading but it's not extraordinary.
I think you're greatly underestimating how badly a lot of people need help that you think they won't remember this in two years (especially if Biden manages to break his $2000 promise even further from $1400 if he lets Republicans negotiate him down more).

I do think most people do expect politicians to lie but Covid has changed the game. There are millions who DESPERATELY need help and the Democrats specifically campaigned on throwing them a lifeline only to pull it right back as soon as they got in office.

It's certainly not impossible I'm wrong but they're playing with a ton of fire here. Maybe somehow they'll manage to not get burned but I 100% believe that after 2020, people are waking up and realizing that we shouldn't keep settling for Democrats sticking a knife in our gut just because they stick the knife one inch shallower than Republicans. Unfortunately this likely just means a lot of people just not voting anymore rather than fighting for a third party since they've seen that voting for either big party means nothing will fundamentally change (or some outsider comes in talking about "draining the swamp" and they decide Fuck It, it doesn't get better voting in Democrats so might as well give this trustworthy looking snake oil salesmen a try).
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
5,637
1,337
118
Country
United Kingdom
I think you're greatly underestimating how badly a lot of people need help that you think they won't remember this in two years (especially if Biden manages to break his $2000 promise even further from $1400 if he lets Republicans negotiate him down more).
Sure, but to the point that they'd facilitate the party promising that they'd no money at all?

The people who desperately need financial support are not going to decide that there's no difference between $0 and $1,400.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,760
654
118
I do think most people do expect politicians to lie but Covid has changed the game. There are millions who DESPERATELY need help and the Democrats specifically campaigned on throwing them a lifeline only to pull it right back as soon as they got in office.
Well, it worked pretty well for the Republicans, who only barely lost the last election.

Less flippantly, the not-as-far-right needs to get its act together like yesterday, in the US and any number of other places.

The people who desperately need financial support are not going to decide that there's no difference between $0 and $1,400.
While there is a difference between the two, I'd not be so sure that this sort of stunt wouldn't put voters off.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,016
897
118
Sure, but to the point that they'd facilitate the party promising that they'd no money at all?

The people who desperately need financial support are not going to decide that there's no difference between $0 and $1,400.
I don't know, I think you're understating how much people hate the old Bait & Switch.

People get irked at the $5 hidden fee your cell phone company does and will trash the hell out of the carrier for it. This is (at least) a $600 "hidden fee" that might be the difference between paying rent this month for a lot of people...

The Democrats are playing a dangerous game here expecting people to just forgive and forget this stunt...

But hey, it's not my party. I didn't vote Biden and I will very likely not vote Harris next go around. If The Democrats finally get burned by their lies, it doesn't bother me at all. Though I really hope the burned voters finally give Third Party a chance rather than just swear off politics...
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,760
654
118
If The Democrats finally get burned by their lies, it doesn't bother me at all. Though I really hope the burned voters finally give Third Party a chance rather than just swear off politics...
If a viable third party doesn't crop up, people being turned off the Democrats might end up bothering you a bit, I'd imagine, given the alternatives.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,016
897
118
Well, it worked pretty well for the Republicans, who only barely lost the last election.

Less flippantly, the not-as-far-right needs to get its act together like yesterday, in the US and any number of other places.
Honestly, that's the scary part to me. The Republicans are a shattered cluster fuck of a mess right now and they STILL almost dropped the Democrats.

You get Trump 2.0 but someone who isn't a complete and utter moron in play...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Specter Von Baren

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,016
897
118
If a viable third party doesn't crop up, people being turned off the Democrats might end up bothering you a bit, I'd imagine, given the alternatives.
I mean, yeah, ultimately it does effect me and I get hurt by it as well.

But as I said in the election time, I'm not going to let Democrats hang the "well if we don't win, Republicans will!!!" threat over my head anymore. I'm done letting them take my vote hostage that way.

It will 100% suck if I'm right and Demos get themselves killed in the next two elections fucking around like this but I can't force them to stop being shit and I will not reward them for being slightly less shit than their opponents.
 
Last edited:

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,006
3,090
118
Who would have thought, Sputnik appears to be safe and effective.

I'm honestly not surprised: Russia has the technology and skills to make a successful vaccine so there's no reason to think it wouldn't work. I never had any serious doubts about its safety, the only question is how effective it was going to be, because we definitely could not trust their early claims. The problem with its credibility is that Russia realised very quickly it would not be one of the first vaccines available, and so jumped the gun for public relations (and sales).

The Sinopharm vaccine is pretty iffy: 50.4% effective. 50% is the minimum that would meet approval, and a little part of me wonders whether someone nudged the data just that little bit to squeeze it over.

Although do bear in mind in terms of effectiveness it means effectiveness for any symptoms. The key thing we want to stop is are severe symptoms, and nearly all the vaccines are upwards of 95% for that.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
2,947
384
88
Country
USA
The Sinopharm vaccine is pretty iffy: 50.4% effective. 50% is the minimum that would meet approval, and a little part of me wonders whether someone nudged the data just that little bit to squeeze it over.
That 0.4% is like the fake ID that says you're 22 because being exactly 21 would be more suspicious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agema

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
419
527
98
Country
Ireland
I mean, yeah, ultimately it does effect me and I get hurt by it as well.

But as I said in the election time, I'm not going to let Democrats hang the "well if we don't win, Republicans will!!!" threat over my head anymore. I'm done letting them take my vote hostage that way.

It will 100% suck if I'm right and Demos get themselves killed in the next two elections fucking around like this but I can't force them to stop being shit and I will not reward them for being slightly less shit than their opponents.
What's not to get. If you keep rewarding Dems for their corporatist bullshit eventually they'll stop it to thank you for voting for them