Corvid-19 and its impact (name edit)

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,111
5,832
118
Country
United Kingdom
tstorm823 said:
You're not that dumb, Agema.

Series of events:

1) News asks Fauci if things could have been done better, and paints it as a betrayal of Trump when he gives the only correct answer.
2) Someone on Twitter implies that Trump should fire Fauci for betraying him.
3) Trump responds calling the original reports Fake News.

He responded to a tweet that said firefauci with literally "Sorry Fake News". That's not saying he wants to fire Fauci. That is some of the dumber spin I've seen lately, and that's a high bar.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249470237726081030

Well, that's a little misleading; the "Fake News" he refers to is clearly the idea that he instituted the travel ban in response to advice. He's saying in that tweet that he instituted the ban "long before people spoke up" (January 31). "Fake News" doesn't refer to the idea of firing Fauci. He doesn't address that, because he's only interested in his own image.

I don't really think Trump and Fauci had any particular fallout or dispute. But the speculation was fuelled by Trump's careless tweeting and his record for lashing out when people go off-message.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
tstorm823 said:
You're not that dumb, Agema.
You're right, I'm not. Why is why I know your explanation is a load of nonsense.

The entire story of Trump and Fauci fighting was fake news.
You need to explain why it was that vast numbers of people, including high ranking Republicans, journalists (including right-wing ones at Fox), and many, many other people, all took that tweet as a potential sign of problems between Trump and Fauci. We did so because it looked very much like that, and Silvanus has already explained how it came across.

It only became innocuous with the hindsight that Trump and Fauci had to issue a post-hoc explanation (Trump needs to do that an awful lot because he's so slapdash in his communications) and clarification.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
Agema said:
You need to explain why it was that vast numbers of people, including high ranking Republicans, journalists (including right-wing ones at Fox), and many, many other people, all took that tweet as a potential sign of problems between Trump and Fauci. We did so because it looked very much like that, and Silvanus has already explained how it came across.
The news media lied to all of you and you all bought it. That's what happened. That's the explanation. Don't be mad that I didn't need the lie explained to me.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
tstorm823 said:
The news media lied to all of you and you all bought it. That's what happened. That's the explanation. Don't be mad that I didn't need the lie explained to me.
If you came out with that 3-4 days ago it might have some weight. Saying nothing and then suddenly piping up claiming you're right after hindsight gave you the answer is no achievement at all.

Secondly, you always take Trump's side when he burbles some something unclear or misleading. Like a broken clock is right two times a day, sometimes that means you'll be right too. That's not just no achievement, but a failing as it seems to fool you into thinking you have insight that you don't.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
Agema said:
If you came out with that 3-4 days ago it might have some weight. Saying nothing and then suddenly piping up claiming you're right after hindsight gave you the answer is no achievement at all.

Secondly, you always take Trump's side when he burbles some something unclear or misleading. Like a broken clock is right two times a day, sometimes that means you'll be right too. That's not just no achievement, but a failing as it seems to fool you into thinking you have insight that you don't.
That's sort of a no win situation you've got me in. If I had responded days ago when you called #firefauci ominous, I'd be guilty of blindly taking Trump's side on everything. If I wait for a clear outcome before saying something, then I've failed by waiting.

And like, I don't always take Trump's side. But you're not going to see that on a left-leaning forum with plenty of left-leaning sources to choose from. The chances of someone saying something a)pro-Trump b)that I think is worth arguing against and c)that nobody else has already said what I would are incredibly, incredibly small. I get my jabs in when I can, but even when I'm saying something bad about Trump, people assume I'm praising him, so there's really no winning.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
tstorm823 said:
That's sort of a no win situation you've got me in. If I had responded days ago when you called #firefauci ominous, I'd be guilty of blindly taking Trump's side on everything. If I wait for a clear outcome before saying something, then I've failed by waiting.
It was ominous. Trump has had a habit of publicly criticising people who he then kicks out of their position not long after. That's not "media lies", that's a fair evaluation of Donald Trump's behaviour.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,111
5,832
118
Country
United Kingdom
tstorm823 said:
That's sort of a no win situation you've got me in.
You think that's precipitous, think of the situation Dr. Fauci was put in! If he'd said Hydroxychloriquine worked, he'd have been guilty of a lapse of ethics, giving false hope, bypassing proper vetting procedure, possibly putting people in danger... but if he said it didn't work, he'd have been contradicting the President, which tends to get you fired.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
Agema said:
It was ominous. Trump has had a habit of publicly criticising people who he then kicks out of their position not long after. That's not "media lies", that's a fair evaluation of Donald Trump's behaviour.
Ok, but he wasn't publicly criticizing Fauci, he was publicly criticizing the media (well, excepting One America News.

Silvanus said:
You think that's precipitous, think of the situation Dr. Fauci was put in! If he'd said Hydroxychloriquine worked, he'd have been guilty of a lapse of ethics, giving false hope, bypassing proper vetting procedure, possibly putting people in danger... but if he said it didn't work, he'd have been contradicting the President, which tends to get you fired.
Why would he say either of those things? You skip over the ethical issues of saying the latter for some reason.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,111
5,832
118
Country
United Kingdom
tstorm823 said:
Why would he say either of those things? You skip over the ethical issues of saying the latter for some reason.
Apologies. Should have been; "[...] if he'd said that it was untested, and it's unwise to place hopes in untested, potentially dangerous drugs, he'd have been contradicting the President, which tends to get you fired".
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,697
2,881
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
tstorm823 said:
Agema said:
If you came out with that 3-4 days ago it might have some weight. Saying nothing and then suddenly piping up claiming you're right after hindsight gave you the answer is no achievement at all.

Secondly, you always take Trump's side when he burbles some something unclear or misleading. Like a broken clock is right two times a day, sometimes that means you'll be right too. That's not just no achievement, but a failing as it seems to fool you into thinking you have insight that you don't.
That's sort of a no win situation you've got me in. If I had responded days ago when you called #firefauci ominous, I'd be guilty of blindly taking Trump's side on everything. If I wait for a clear outcome before saying something, then I've failed by waiting.

And like, I don't always take Trump's side. But you're not going to see that on a left-leaning forum with plenty of left-leaning sources to choose from. The chances of someone saying something a)pro-Trump b)that I think is worth arguing against and c)that nobody else has already said what I would are incredibly, incredibly small. I get my jabs in when I can, but even when I'm saying something bad about Trump, people assume I'm praising him, so there's really no winning.
Well, now you have some idea how it is being a leftie or liberal, normally, even before Trump. Because this happens to this side all the time. Somehow, we're all seen as evil.

Also, if you don't want to be criticized, think about what your saying first instead of just blurting things out. Or apologies for making a mistake. Trump DID retweet a call to have Fauci fired. That's not on anyone else. That's on Trump. He could have apologised. But he didn't. He blamed everyone else. He just declared via twitter that Virginia as being under siege. Over operation Gridlock of all things. Yet if we even discuss it, somehow its our fault and taking his LITERAL words out of context. Even when the context usually makes him sound way worse.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
tstorm823 said:
Ok, but he wasn't publicly criticizing Fauci, he was publicly criticizing the media (well, excepting One America News.
Indeed he probably wasn't criticising Fauci, as we now know from the clarification... but as far as anyone could tell at the time, he might have been. That's why Trump's careless tweeting can be a liability.

Although he can use it potentially effectively - or at least effectively for his own benefit. I think Trump thrives on generating chaos: because when everyone around him is in chaos, they're in less position to do anything about him. I suspect plenty of his recent output is deliberately provocative shit-stirring that's designed to distract because a lot of media focus is currently on the shaky parts of Trump's covid-19 record.

Regarding loosening controls, he's claimed "total authority" to dictate to states that as far as know he doesn't have, hmm. Then his administration issues a plan to re-open the economy, with "guidelines" to the states that effectively leaves the decision to them - okay, that's fine. And then he immediately makes public statements that undercut his own administration's policies, and to cap it off tweets incendiary posts to encourage protests against state governments. This is creating chaos. It should be no way to run a government.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
trunkage said:
Well, now you have some idea how it is being a leftie or liberal, normally, even before Trump. Because this happens to this side all the time. Somehow, we're all seen as evil.
Do you understand that happens to you almost certainly less than to me? I have no doubt that right-leaning people consider you bad things as a left-leaning person, and I'm sure you've experienced that personally, and I don't mean to minimize that. But the stereotypes are bleeding-heart liberals vs heartless conservatives. Based on political positions, people are more likely to think you're ignorant and naive, and more likely to think I'm evil and bigoted. I'm not going to suggest either side receives more or less hatred from the opposition, but on the specific claim of evil, I'm probably thought of as evil more often than you are.

And like, I am a Catholic conservative Republican man (in order of relevance) who likes games. You know how unavoidable attacks against me are? This morning, I was playing the game Murder By Numbers, because it's on the Switch and murder mystery picross game sounded right up my alley. And while I was playing, one of the characters decided to take an uninstigated pot-shot at Catholics. And like, I move along and keep playing because being browbeat with liberal moral theories is the price I pay for playing indie games and I understand that, but do you really think I don't experience people thinking I'm evil all the time forever? It's not a Trump thing now, and it's certainly not a unique left-wing experience ever.
 

Specter Von Baren

Annoying Green Gadfly
Legacy
Aug 25, 2013
5,632
2,849
118
I don't know, send help!
Country
USA
Gender
Cuttlefish
trunkage" post="707.1057704.24334367 said:
Well, now you have some idea how it is being a leftie or liberal, normally, even before Trump. Because this happens to this side all the time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! On this forum?! You're being completely full of it and you know it if you're claiming this when Tstorm is the only right wing person on these forums.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
Specter Von Baren said:
when Tstorm is the only right wing person on these forums.
To be fair, I can ignore these forums whenever I want to, trunkage could be thinking about things said by friends or family. Which I also get, but I'm not gonna assume it wasn't a serious comment here.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,282
3,105
118
Country
United States of America
So, mail voting doesn't appear to benefit either party. [https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/04/14/mail-voting-doesnt-benefit-either-party-study-finds-1275893] President Trump is saying that it benefits Democrats and so he doesn't want to to do it. This is going to get people killed.
 

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 20, 2010
1,989
355
88
Country
US
Seanchaidh said:
So, mail voting doesn't appear to benefit either party. [https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/04/14/mail-voting-doesnt-benefit-either-party-study-finds-1275893] President Trump is saying that it benefits Democrats and so he doesn't want to to do it. This is going to get people killed.
The theory that it would benefit Democrats comes from Democrats generally being the primary beneficiary when turnout increases. Republicans vote in a consistent fashion pretty much no matter what but Democrats generally have to be coaxed into actually voting. It won't make a huge difference either way, except in states that are likely to be close.

If you really want to piss off r/politics these days, point out that it's hypocritical to demand improved election security and also mail in ballots, when mail in ballots are inherently less secure.
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
Seanchaidh said:
So, mail voting doesn't appear to benefit either party. [https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/04/14/mail-voting-doesnt-benefit-either-party-study-finds-1275893] President Trump is saying that it benefits Democrats and so he doesn't want to to do it. This is going to get people killed.
How is Postal Voting not a thing in the United States?
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
Gordon_4 said:
How is Postal Voting not a thing in the United States?
It is. Some states do all mail-in voting. In most places, absentee ballots are by request. In some places, it's by request only with a valid reason.

But there's a stupid argument that goes around US politics that the more is done to let/help people vote, the better Democrats do. It's a stupid argument because the evidence for it comes from comparing places where Democrats aggressively push voting among exclusively demographics that disproportionately support them (young voters and racial minorities) to other places where they don't do that. I don't believe high turnout benefits Democrats in a general sense, and there's no evidence I'm aware of that would suggest all mail-in voting would benefit either party.

But when someone like Bernie Sanders repeatedly argues that Republicans suppress votes because low turnout hurts Democrats, someone like Trump is liable to believe it and treat it like an instruction manual.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,697
2,881
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Specter Von Baren said:
trunkage said:
Well, now you have some idea how it is being a leftie or liberal, normally, even before Trump. Because this happens to this side all the time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! On this forum?! You're being completely full of it and you know it if you're claiming this when Tstorm is the only right wing person on these forums.
No, I meant elsewhere. Also, Tstorm doesn?t usually resort to insults when discussing issues, which is refreshing. Seen him call people liar and racist, but that?s as far as it goes.

tstorm823 said:
trunkage said:
Well, now you have some idea how it is being a leftie or liberal, normally, even before Trump. Because this happens to this side all the time. Somehow, we're all seen as evil.
Do you understand that happens to you almost certainly less than to me? I have no doubt that right-leaning people consider you bad things as a left-leaning person, and I'm sure you've experienced that personally, and I don't mean to minimize that. But the stereotypes are bleeding-heart liberals vs heartless conservatives. Based on political positions, people are more likely to think you're ignorant and naive, and more likely to think I'm evil and bigoted. I'm not going to suggest either side receives more or less hatred from the opposition, but on the specific claim of evil, I'm probably thought of as evil more often than you are.

And like, I am a Catholic conservative Republican man (in order of relevance) who likes games. You know how unavoidable attacks against me are? This morning, I was playing the game Murder By Numbers, because it's on the Switch and murder mystery picross game sounded right up my alley. And while I was playing, one of the characters decided to take an uninstigated pot-shot at Catholics. And like, I move along and keep playing because being browbeat with liberal moral theories is the price I pay for playing indie games and I understand that, but do you really think I don't experience people thinking I'm evil all the time forever? It's not a Trump thing now, and it's certainly not a unique left-wing experience ever.
On this site, probably. Elsewhere, I?d doubt it very much. Been called racist, sexist, ecoterorist, economic terrorist, evil, hateful, pedo-lover and fascist just in the last week, along with the typical random insult like idiot, cuck and a-hole. Also, was not specifically talking about me. I was talking generally. I?d point out that some pundits still call something like homosexuals kissing or a woman lead in a show as ?political?. Because people living their lives is somehow a crime against the populace. I also notice how ?free speechers? usually only care about their free speech and when someone brings up feminist talking points, they are labeled as anti-free speech. The irony does not escape me.

After making that post I saw the perfect example of this. Om another forum, we were discussing the scissor sister murders. Some sisters killed an person of Indian descent. He definitely hurt their mum (who was dating him), and probably raped a 15 disabled girl but was found not guilty. So a commentator stated that the PC brigade made sure that this guy wasn?t convicted because he was an immigrant. Another comment replied that it was because they are pro-homosexual, they were also pro-pedophilia this had a vested interest in not convicting him. Another was commenting on how allowing colonials automatic citizenship was ruining society. This last one I thought about replying to, as I wanted to clarify if he meant Indians in particular or are white Australians, South Africans and Kiwis not invited too. But... I know how that conversation would turn out. Being pro-immigrant is racist against White people. Been there too many times.

Also, that pedo-lover insult came during a discussion on another forum (not, as you might suspect from this first example). In a weird turn of events, it came during talks on George Pell. He was an Australian Catholic Arch-Bishop who was convicted on pedophile charges and this was overturned on appeal because the judges thought there could be reasonable doubt. Anyway, so the attacks come. ?Clearly this is lefties being anti-Christian? or anti-Catholic. Like religious people can?t do wrong things. Then I got a reply saying that these are god people and only homosexuals and their allies can be pedophilie.

But, then I realised I was working to hard to prove this. I can just point to Trump and point out that he insults anyone he doesn?t like. The reporters might be asking leading questions, but they generally don?t insult him. Even other world leaders don?t insult him that much. And yet Trump wonders why he?s ?attacked? so much.

As another example, Anna Perosina was on Rubin?s show. He was making his normal claims of the liberals and MSM ruining everything, but particularly about making the Coronavirus. She rebuffed him, which I?m glad a Fox presenter can leave that silliness out of her critique of the left. Doesn?t make up for the other Fox journalists who didn?t stand up for the rest of the MSM a few months ago, after they did stand for Fox during Obama?s reign. But I?m putting undue pressure on her. She?s only part of an entity, not speaking for the whole

And, you know, maybe you are insulted more than me. I hope this gives insight into what I deal with
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
trunkage said:
I hope this gives insight into what I deal with
It sounds like you go looking for fights online. As I said of myself a few posts up, I can ignore this forum whenever I want to. I'm here because I want to be. Why are you in any of these places fighting with people?

As an aside, do you really think George Pell is guilty? You think he managed to rape two boys at once in a busy church at specifically the time he'd be expected to greet people on their way out without anyone noticing?