'More people may die,' Biden says, if Trump blocks cooperation on virus planning

[OneMoreFarang]

10 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

Totalitarianism, whichever brand, relies on abusing political opponents, harassment, intimidation and eventual prohibition of any differing views. Declaring people stupid for their political views is a foot on the slope.

Sounds like a perfect description of Trump.

 

And about Covid: Just look at the statistics. Many, many countries did a lot better than then USA.

[OneMoreFarang]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

People need to learn how to carefully research for themselves

Who will explain that to those 70 million Trump fans?

[Baerboxer]

Just now, OneMoreFarang said:

Sounds like a perfect description of Trump.

 

And about Covid: Just look at the statistics. Many, many countries did a lot better than then USA.

 

Belgium didn't for one! Are you claiming all their political leaders, and the people who voted for them, are stupid too? 

 

Thailand has done brilliantly. So using your logic, anyone who voted for the current government must be a genius 555! My word, Steven will be pleased!!

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Who will explain that to those 70 million Trump fans?

 

The same who will explain to the slightly more Biden fans. 

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

 

As Jeffr2 has said, "you are missing the point" because sure, everyone is entitled to their own political view and that's the way it's always been in "free" countries, but one has to wonder at the intelligence of followers who will lap up conspiracy theories, deep state rubbish and also overlook statements which are blatant lies.

 

Then of course follow a racist, misogynistic buffoon who went against the advice of the medical profession and has cost tens of thousands of lives, so I don't know what category you want to put that in, but I would certainly label it "stupid".

 

Do you realize the extreme irony in your comments?

 

You exemplify my points brilliantly - thank you so much!

[Jingthing]

7 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Voters can have any political view they want. Right wing, left wing, conservative, socialist, communist, whatever.

But please for someone who makes sense and who at least tries to work for the people.

What did Trump do to fight Covid? Anything? I am sure the pharma companies didn't need any motivation from him to develop a vaccine and make lots of money. So what did he do? He didn't do even the most basic things like telling people to wear masks. And he didn't even make sure that at least all health workers have proper protection.

He failed, completely, totally.

And it's not that this is hidden information. It's all over the news everyday. And even rightwing Trumpist must have noticed that lots of people are sick and die. And then they want 4 years more of that incompetence? Amazing!

Yes and he continues to fail miserably on the pandemic. Until January 20.

Even more absurd he's fighting to keep a job he clearly has no interest in actually doing. 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-the-worst-of-the-pandemic-our-mad-king-rages-only-about-himself/2020/11/16/4ae035cc-283b-11eb-8fa2-06e7cbb145c0_story.html

 

 

Amid the worst of the pandemic, our mad king rages only about himself

 

 

This is becoming like Greek tragedy. The nation is on fire with covid-19, cases and hospitalizations are soaring to unthinkable new highs, and our leader does nothing but rage and moan about his own punishment at the hands of cruel fate.

 

If it is true that “those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad,” then President Trump is finishing his shambolic term in office as Mad King Donald. 

[IAMHERE]

13 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

Talking about desperate, Trump lost get over it. 

Why 'get over it' ?  The democrats never got over Trump winning in 2016.  The old days of kumbha after the election have gone by the wayside. The democrats have shown the way over the last four years.

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

Why 'get over it' ?  The democrats never got over Trump winning in 2016.  The old days of kumbha after the election have gone by the wayside. The democrats have shown the way over the last four years.

 

More nonsense. Democrats never claimed electoral fraud and then repeatedly got shot down by the courts. But Trump and company are explicitly saying that. What you and your fellow travelers do is ascribe Democrats motives for opposing Trump to them never accepting the 2016 elections. In other words, you're mind reading. And doing it ridiculously. Democrats mostly don't agree with Republican's political positions. So why wouldn't they oppose Trump? 

Republicans tenaciously  opposed Obama. They didn't give him a single vote in the Senate in the wake of the economic catastrophe of 2008.  (How does that compare to Democrats who overwhelmingly supported the 2020 stimulus?) Yet Democrats weren't claiming that Republicans didn't accept the 2008 election.

And they would actually have much better grounds to do so for the 2012 election.. Remember that nonsense about Obama not being born in the USA? And who was it leading the charge? So please no more nonsense about it starting in 2016. The only event that possibly corresponds to it in that year was Donald Trump and the nasty and dishonest birther movement. Truly a disgusting chapter in American political history.

Trump concession on ‘birtherism’ hits a milestone as the nation awaits a transfer of power

“I have people that have been studying (Obama’s birth certificate) and they cannot believe what they’re finding," Trump said, claiming his investigators in Hawaii were unearthing evidence to make his case.

On several other occasions, Trump vowed to lay-out his findings when the time was right... Hawaii’s state registrar told the New York Times there was no record of Trump even asking for such information.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-election-2020-results-trump-obama-20201116-jopnedtwjngl7hbgnwvv7zpwva-story.html

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

Why 'get over it' ?  The democrats never got over Trump winning in 2016.  The old days of kumbha after the election have gone by the wayside. The democrats have shown the way over the last four years.

 

They were over the fact who won, they criticized the way the dictator was ruling.

[Scott]

Troll post and reply removed.

 

[bendejo]

It seems the virus affects more than just the respiratory system.  Or perhaps this is a symptom of another illness, a mental one.

https://ktla.com/news/coronavirus/south-dakota-nurse-says-some-patients-deny-covid-19-is-real-even-as-they-die-from-it/

 

Quote

former deputy director of the FBI Andrew McCabe suggested that Trump’s refusal to share information might be about more than stubbornness.

[...] it “would risk casting the president in a very negative light.”

[...]  suggesting that behind Trump’s refusal to let Biden see intelligence reports was the fear that those reports might implicate members of the Trump administration in wrongdoing.

https://billmoyers.com/story/coronavirus-denial-syndrome/

 

MAGA in progress, baby!

 

[bendejo]

5 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

6 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

Why 'get over it' ?  The democrats never got over Trump winning in 2016.  The old days of kumbha after the election have gone by the wayside. The democrats have shown the way over the last four years.

 

They were over the fact who won, they criticized the way the dictator was ruling.

 

This article is dated November 9, 2016, the day after the "orange dawn" election.  As they say in the vernacular, "duhhh...."

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501425243/watch-live-hillary-clinton-concedes-presidential-race-to-donald-trump

 

 

[Jeffr2]

18 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

You actually typify the intolerance that leads to totalitarian regimes.

 

Who decides what's fake news, conspiracy theory etc - you? Governments? Politicians? Political pressure groups?

 

Who decides who gets investigated and who doesn't? 

 

Why would some vote for Trump because they would never vote for a republican???

 

But many people, in democracies, do vote for one party. Sometimes even because that's who their parents voted for; or because all their friends and peers vote that way. They do this regardless of policies, performances and individual personnel changes. In the UK The Labour Party got a massive kick in the pants last election as many former staunch Labour voters switched sides. First time I can remember such a situation. Not sure if that happens more or less in other countries.

 

We live in the information age. That is good and bad. People need to learn how to carefully research for themselves but it isn't helped with all media being owned by a relatively few with their own agendas. Rupert Murdoch for one. 

Intolerant? Wow. Again, totally missing the point. 

[Jeffr2]

14 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

They were over the fact who won, they criticized the way the dictator was ruling.

Well put!

[tifino]

18 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Sounds like a perfect description of Trump.

 

And about Covid: Just look at the statistics. Many, many countries did a lot better than then USA.

But; covid measure are and have always been handled at State level not Federal... even down to Mayoral level in some Precincts.

 

 If Federal did have any direct physical day to day control over covid, then everyone would have got their HCQ doses No?

 

I guess it was the individual respective States that failed at the tasks at hand...? 

 

Blocking at Federal level would therefore have nil effect upon viral outcomes. 

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, tifino said:

But; covid measure are and have always been handled at State level not Federal... even down to Mayoral level in some Precincts.

 

 If Federal did have any direct physical day to day control over covid, then everyone would have got their HCQ doses No?

 

I guess it was the individual respective States that failed at the tasks at hand...? 

 

Blocking at Federal level would therefore have nil effect upon viral outcomes. 

The only reason there was so little coordination and control at the federal levrl was because that was Trump's choice. 

[Jeffr2]

17 minutes ago, tifino said:

But; covid measure are and have always been handled at State level not Federal... even down to Mayoral level in some Precincts.

 

 If Federal did have any direct physical day to day control over covid, then everyone would have got their HCQ doses No?

 

I guess it was the individual respective States that failed at the tasks at hand...? 

 

Blocking at Federal level would therefore have nil effect upon viral outcomes. 

From what I've read, other than the GOPs denial of the severity of the virus, lack of coordination at the federal level is a huge part of the problem. GOP partisanship is the #1 problem.

[OneMoreFarang]

24 minutes ago, tifino said:

But; covid measure are and have always been handled at State level not Federal... even down to Mayoral level in some Precincts.

 

 If Federal did have any direct physical day to day control over covid, then everyone would have got their HCQ doses No?

 

I guess it was the individual respective States that failed at the tasks at hand...? 

 

Blocking at Federal level would therefore have nil effect upon viral outcomes. 

Just one recommendation: "Always wear a mask!" would have saved many lives.

[riclag]

19 minutes ago, tifino said:

But; covid measure are and have always been handled at State level not Federal... even down to Mayoral level in some Precincts.

 

 If Federal did have any direct physical day to day control over covid, then everyone would have got their HCQ doses No?

 

I guess it was the individual respective States that failed at the tasks at hand...? 

 

Blocking at Federal level would therefore have nil effect upon viral outcomes. 

'Have and always have handled by the state '! Except when it comes to Trump, don't you know!

That being said your right! There are many instances of this in over 2 centuries . Its worth mentioning when the congress gets involved, it sometimes could override the state !

"The president, for instance, said on March 17 that he discussed “a national lockdown” with advisers to minimize the spread of COVID-19, but three days later he dismissed the idea. While some say such a centralized federal response would be more effective and needed, any executive order to that effect would be unprecedented and would likely lead to a court challenge on constitutional grounds".

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/

 

 

[tifino]

1 minute ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Just one recommendation: "Always wear a mask!" would have saved many lives.

But doesn't that get 'Ordered' at State/City Level? 

[OneMoreFarang]

1 minute ago, tifino said:

But doesn't that get 'Ordered' at State/City Level? 

Recommendation!

Like Biden did. He was and is often seen with a mask. And he recommends others to wear a mask to protect others and themselves. A good example would have helped a lot.

[tifino]

I reckon the only way to clarify, would be for a Covid Committee; to comprise the posse of State Governors 

 - Not just a group under the VP sitting inside the White House.... 

 

This is basically how Australia handles the covid... 

The gameplay is discussed, and then it is up to each State to implement what the respective State wants to do...

 

[tifino]

1 minute ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Recommendation!

Like Biden did. He was and is often seen with a mask. And he recommends others to wear a mask to protect others and themselves. A good example would have helped a lot.

well that's right, At Federal level there is only a recommendation...  Up to the States to individually do whatever they want... Some Won, some didn't 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

29 minutes ago, tifino said:

well that's right, At Federal level there is only a recommendation...  Up to the States to individually do whatever they want... Some Won, some didn't

 

You're missing, perhaps intentionally, a couple of aspects that clearly make Trump and cohorts responsible for a lot of the U.S.'s coronavirus carnage.

 

The president of the U.S. has what's often been called the largest/loudest bullhorn in the world. By speaking out and setting the right direction for the country, he could have made things vastly better, and brought along recalcitrant Republican governors who resisted, and still to this day resist, doing the things that the health experts said were needed.

 

Instead, Trump did just the opposite, downplaying the virus, falsely promising it would go away, pressuring states and politicans to re-open and lift restrictions prematurely, promoting unproven treatments, making mask wearing some kind of political litmus test of ideology, etc etc. Not to mention, obstructing and interfering with the work and recommendations of the U.S. CDC, leaving its reputation as a credible public health agency in tatters.

 

I don't know if a U.S. president has the authority to override state governors when it comes to public health policy, in this case in the event of a declared national health emergency. But I do know, the ones who the most didn't do what public health experts said was needed were the same Republican governors who almost never defy Trump on anything.

 

He could have made a huge difference for good, and instead, in keeping with his character, he did just the opposite. And now tens of thousands more Americans are dead, and maybe even more than those estimates, because of what the Trump Admin and many governors didn't do.

 

PS - the estimates below of lives that could have been saved vary, because they were made at different points in the pandemic and the projections covered different periods of time.

 

https://www.statnews.com/2020/10/23/universal-mask-use-could-save-130000-lives-by-the-end-of-february-new-modeling-study-says/

 

https://www.livescience.com/wearing-masks-save-tens-thousands-lives.html

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/03/886905055/widespread-use-of-face-masks-could-save-tens-of-thousands-of-lives-models-projec

 

[teacherclaire]

 President-elect Joe Biden said on Monday "more people will die"

[Eric Loh]

37 minutes ago, teacherclaire said:

 President-elect Joe Biden said on Monday "more people will die"

Trump is busy with golf and watching cable news. "It is what it is" Trump. 

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, tifino said:

But; covid measure are and have always been handled at State level not Federal... even down to Mayoral level in some Precincts.

 

 If Federal did have any direct physical day to day control over covid, then everyone would have got their HCQ doses No?

 

I guess it was the individual respective States that failed at the tasks at hand...? 

 

Blocking at Federal level would therefore have nil effect upon viral outcomes. 

Trump could have done a lot by using the Defense Production Act to mandate greater production of PPE.  More important, he could have exercised sound leadership by making it clear that the virus was a threat and that science must be followed in containing it.  He could also have set an example by wearing a mask and requiring all White House gatherings have social distancing and mandatory mask wearing.  He did the opposite.

 

The states, especially the states led by Republican governors and/or legislatures, followed Trump's lead.  Locking down cities and states would have been difficult politically without Trump ranting against it.  With Trump insisting it was unnecessary it became impossible for many state leaders.  There were many governors and legislatures actively resisting the city governments that mandated masks or restricted business hours or capacity.

 

Leadership should come from the top.  What came from Trump was not leadership.

[Virt]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Just one recommendation: "Always wear a mask!" would have saved many lives.

 

 

Today the results from a long awaited study from Denmark about masks should finally be released.

 

I expect to see some results that is not popular at the WHO headquarter.

 

I'm not anti mask and wear it daily here in public transport and shopping, but i would like to see some actual facts about how effective they are.

 

 

 

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Virt said:

 

 

Today the results from a long awaited study from Denmark about masks should finally be released.

 

I expect to see some results that is not popular at the WHO headquarter.

 

I'm not anti mask and wear it daily here in public transport and shopping, but i would like to see some actual facts about how effective they are.

 

 

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/21299527/masks-coronavirus-covid-19-studies-research-evidence

[placeholder]

12 minutes ago, Virt said:

 

 

Today the results from a long awaited study from Denmark about masks should finally be released.

 

I expect to see some results that is not popular at the WHO headquarter.

 

I'm not anti mask and wear it daily here in public transport and shopping, but i would like to see some actual facts about how effective they are.

 

 

 

B.S. There's already been reports about this study as you well know. And apparently the results are controversial. 3 journals have refused to publish it. The authors claim that's because the results are, well, controversial. Given that the results are controversial, it's pretty clear what they're going to show.