Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:56 pm
Deleted
Permanent Portfolio Forum
https://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/
Yes, she is wrong. But can't you see, this starts with Trump? If I was a teacher and I singled out and insulted and bullied every student who I found annoying can you see how this culture would begin to spread among my students? Can you see how this could be a destructive way to act? Can you see how honestly expressing my feelings could do enormous damage?Tortoise wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 5:25 pm Michigan's Gov. Whitmer was recently ruled against by her own state's supreme court; they ruled that her lockdowns have been largely unconstitutional. But instead of accepting the ruling, she effectively gave the court the middle finger and publicly stated she'd sidestep their ruling as long as possible by continuing her illegal lockdown rules under "other authorities".
Given that even the Michigan Supreme Court's ruling can't convince Whitmer to refrain from petty tyranny, does anyone really think that anything Trump (who's not her boss) could have said to her earlier this year would have convinced her to refrain?
I think the politicization comes from a lack of clear goals. When the goals change from day to day, county to county and (most importantly) are not clearly stated, then people have no choice but to fall back on their already ingrained values. Whether or not they trust authority, How they calculate risk. How they value individual freedom and responsibility vs the collective good.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:56 pmI agree, the politicization of this virus has made things much worse. And the dearth of leadership has been an issue. Honestly, I lay a lot of that at the president's feet. I believe that his leadership style is divisive and he has been an awful communicator. The problems start at the top and filter down. At this point everything is so jumbled and the messaging so mixed it's just a shit show. It didn't have to be that way. Has the media played a role in this as well? Of course, but again our president has decided to insult and goad the media constantly. It's a real shame. It's why I think he has to go despite agreeing with many of his policies. He is an awful leader.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:12 pmI could cherry pick a few:doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 3:28 pmCan you give more specifics. I was in northern California during the original 'lockdown'. I honestly didn't notice much had changed. Restaurants doing take out...thatbwas about only thing different...oh and gyms closed which sucked. But again, town of 5000 people....but California none the less. Currently in largest city in Montana...Democrat governor. Haven't noticed much different. Oh, and will be heading to northeast shortly for winter...Maine area....should I expect issues?jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 3:13 pmSo do you think your opinion might be closer to ours if you lived in a more densely populated area? An area that 7 months after "14 days to flatten the curve" still has most restrictions in place even though in a county of 2.5 million people our 7 day avg rolling Covid death count is 2 deaths per day (and most all of them are people over 60 with underlying conditions). And most importantly, a place where nobody in a position of authority, not a Republican Governor nor a Democrat mayor can explain to the citizens any definitive criteria under which restrictions will be loosened. I really do not think under such circumstances that it is so far fetched to begin to think about conspiracies, tyranny and wondering if this will ever end.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:41 pm
I do not practice social distancing for the most part. I live in a relatively sparsely populated area but work and live largely without a mask. Honestly, this whole covid thing has affected me very little and that might be why I'm so shocked at what I see as a pretty insane response on behalf of many on this forum to what has been for me a minor inconvenience. I'd say the characterization of this as tyranny is a bit over the top, but then again I have only lived in three different states during this situation and never saw anything that would lead me to characterize things that way. For the most part, life for me with a few small adjustments is pretty much back to normal.
Bars have been closed since March. A bar according to the state is any establishment that gets more than 51% of its sales from alcohol. So certainly there are some restaurants that fall under that umbrella as well.
Non-essential businesses (including churches and daycare centers) can only open at 50% capacity. But in reality most smaller mom and pop restaurants/stores and fast food restaurants are just closed inside because their limited space does not allow them to open at that restricted capacity. I have no idea how daycare centers are deciding who can come and who cannot come based on capacity restrictions.
Hospitals in certain counties still cannot do elective procedures. No people allowed in waiting rooms of any medical establishment and that includes optometrists, dentists and veterinarians. My veterinarian can only see "emergency" cases or annual vaccinations and nobody is allowed inside. You must wait in your car in the parking lot. Some veterinarian clinics are so small they cannot make money on those restrictions so they have just closed, making the remaining vets that much harder to get into.
People in nursing homes, long term care facilities and elderly living centers could have no visitors up until 2 weeks ago. Now they can designate 2 family members that can visit them behind plexiglass for a limited time.
Rafting and tubing is banned. (??)
Many school districts are still doing remote learning only. Parents of those children are having to either quit their jobs to stay home with the kids or are leaving their kids home alone.
But again, the restrictions are only half the of the issue. The other half is a complete lack of any concrete goalpost as to what exactly needs to happen for things to loosen up. Instead you get a Republican governor who periodically tweets that bars "might" reopen soon, followed by a Democrat mayor or city official saying they will fight that. And neither side telling you what exactly is driving their decisions other than a generic "stopping the spread of Covid" platitude. To most people who just go along with whatever they are told to do, it makes no difference. For those few of us that actually care, we would like to know exactly what data drives these decisions and what they want to see for the decisions to change. And when they do not give us that, well conspiracy theories will abound.
From my understanding Fauci doesn't support closing schools and recognizes that the strategy needs to be about controlling numbers, not wholesale lockdowns. But the president alienated Fauci, and the WHO and the CDC as well as a lot of the medical establishment. He continually sought to seek blame rather than construct a solid plan around which to create consensus. This could have been a unifying moment, instead it has become the exact opposite. I fault the man in charge primarily. The same as I would a general for a botched military operation. It's his command, it's his responsibility.
Yes it's anarchy. Whose job is it to set goals for our nation and more importantly to inspire people? He is the captain. If there is mutiny among 50 percent of the population then it isn't the soldiers fault...he isnt an effective captain. Not everyone is born to lead. True leadership is a difficult thankless job. It involves taking responsibility and shouldering shit that isn't necessarily your fault. I've worked for good leaders and bad leaders I've seen what a good leader is capable of and how much disaster a bad leader can bring.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 5:30 pmI think the politicization comes from a lack of clear goals. When the goals change from day to day, county to county and (most importantly) are not clearly stated, then people have no choice but to fall back on their already ingrained values. Whether or not they trust authority, How they calculate risk. How they value individual freedom and responsibility vs the collective good.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:56 pmI agree, the politicization of this virus has made things much worse. And the dearth of leadership has been an issue. Honestly, I lay a lot of that at the president's feet. I believe that his leadership style is divisive and he has been an awful communicator. The problems start at the top and filter down. At this point everything is so jumbled and the messaging so mixed it's just a shit show. It didn't have to be that way. Has the media played a role in this as well? Of course, but again our president has decided to insult and goad the media constantly. It's a real shame. It's why I think he has to go despite agreeing with many of his policies. He is an awful leader.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:12 pmI could cherry pick a few:doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 3:28 pmCan you give more specifics. I was in northern California during the original 'lockdown'. I honestly didn't notice much had changed. Restaurants doing take out...thatbwas about only thing different...oh and gyms closed which sucked. But again, town of 5000 people....but California none the less. Currently in largest city in Montana...Democrat governor. Haven't noticed much different. Oh, and will be heading to northeast shortly for winter...Maine area....should I expect issues?jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 3:13 pmSo do you think your opinion might be closer to ours if you lived in a more densely populated area? An area that 7 months after "14 days to flatten the curve" still has most restrictions in place even though in a county of 2.5 million people our 7 day avg rolling Covid death count is 2 deaths per day (and most all of them are people over 60 with underlying conditions). And most importantly, a place where nobody in a position of authority, not a Republican Governor nor a Democrat mayor can explain to the citizens any definitive criteria under which restrictions will be loosened. I really do not think under such circumstances that it is so far fetched to begin to think about conspiracies, tyranny and wondering if this will ever end.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:41 pm
I do not practice social distancing for the most part. I live in a relatively sparsely populated area but work and live largely without a mask. Honestly, this whole covid thing has affected me very little and that might be why I'm so shocked at what I see as a pretty insane response on behalf of many on this forum to what has been for me a minor inconvenience. I'd say the characterization of this as tyranny is a bit over the top, but then again I have only lived in three different states during this situation and never saw anything that would lead me to characterize things that way. For the most part, life for me with a few small adjustments is pretty much back to normal.
Bars have been closed since March. A bar according to the state is any establishment that gets more than 51% of its sales from alcohol. So certainly there are some restaurants that fall under that umbrella as well.
Non-essential businesses (including churches and daycare centers) can only open at 50% capacity. But in reality most smaller mom and pop restaurants/stores and fast food restaurants are just closed inside because their limited space does not allow them to open at that restricted capacity. I have no idea how daycare centers are deciding who can come and who cannot come based on capacity restrictions.
Hospitals in certain counties still cannot do elective procedures. No people allowed in waiting rooms of any medical establishment and that includes optometrists, dentists and veterinarians. My veterinarian can only see "emergency" cases or annual vaccinations and nobody is allowed inside. You must wait in your car in the parking lot. Some veterinarian clinics are so small they cannot make money on those restrictions so they have just closed, making the remaining vets that much harder to get into.
People in nursing homes, long term care facilities and elderly living centers could have no visitors up until 2 weeks ago. Now they can designate 2 family members that can visit them behind plexiglass for a limited time.
Rafting and tubing is banned. (??)
Many school districts are still doing remote learning only. Parents of those children are having to either quit their jobs to stay home with the kids or are leaving their kids home alone.
But again, the restrictions are only half the of the issue. The other half is a complete lack of any concrete goalpost as to what exactly needs to happen for things to loosen up. Instead you get a Republican governor who periodically tweets that bars "might" reopen soon, followed by a Democrat mayor or city official saying they will fight that. And neither side telling you what exactly is driving their decisions other than a generic "stopping the spread of Covid" platitude. To most people who just go along with whatever they are told to do, it makes no difference. For those few of us that actually care, we would like to know exactly what data drives these decisions and what they want to see for the decisions to change. And when they do not give us that, well conspiracy theories will abound.
From my understanding Fauci doesn't support closing schools and recognizes that the strategy needs to be about controlling numbers, not wholesale lockdowns. But the president alienated Fauci, and the WHO and the CDC as well as a lot of the medical establishment. He continually sought to seek blame rather than construct a solid plan around which to create consensus. This could have been a unifying moment, instead it has become the exact opposite. I fault the man in charge primarily. The same as I would a general for a botched military operation. It's his command, it's his responsibility.
Your analogy might be a good one if not for the fact that the governors (presumably represented by the "students") are in fact adults in real life. They're big boys and girls. They've presumably learned growing up that you can't always silence bullies, so sometimes you just have to do your best to ignore or avoid them.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 5:29 pm Yes, [Gov. Whitmer] is wrong. But can't you see, this starts with Trump? If I was a teacher and I singled out and insulted and bullied every student who I found annoying can you see how this culture would begin to spread among my students? Can you see how this could be a destructive way to act? Can you see how honestly expressing my feelings could do enormous damage?
A principal is the teachers' boss. As we've already established, Trump is not the governors' boss. He's more like a fellow teacher.
I understand the president doesn't hire or fire governors. Nevertheless he is the highest elected official. He is the de facto 'leader' of our nation especially nowadays. With this comes a different level of decorum than being a reality tv show host. Where in the world is leadership like he displays effective? A lead teacher wouldn't treat fellow teachers that way...Tortoise wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 5:53 pmA principal is the teachers' boss. As we've already established, Trump is not the governors' boss. He's more like a fellow teacher.
Your analogy seems to be that if one teacher starts bullying another teacher, then the bullied teacher could be somewhat justified in taking her frustrations out on her students by tying them to their desks.
I agree with everything you say. A lot of this comes down to values. A good leader clearly communicates his values in a respectful way. Sure there will be disagreements. But disagreements don't have to lead to civil war. There are ways to civilly disagree and find consensus or at least compromise. This is why personality and communication are so important. That is the president's primary job. His tone, demeanor and style set an example. He is supposed to be a unique individual. A special person who despite party affiliations has unique qualities and characteristics that allows him to appeal to a diverse range of viewpoints. Biden is not possessed with those traits either. But, he at least is not a bully. He will be boring and uninspiring in everyway. But he won't amp up disagreements like Trump. We have to hold our leaders to a higher standard than what we watch on reality tv. Sure, they are human...but that is for their private lives. When they step into office and are entrusted with great powers they are being asked to assume a special role. They are no longer an ordinary citizen.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:08 pm I would be the first to agree that Trump is a very poor communicator. But realistically, what could Trump or any president do that would avoid "politicization" of the virus?
We can all agree that Covid is a danger to mostly the elderly. For anyone younger than say 60, the risk compared to the same risks you take every day is pretty negligible but it does depend on your overall health. But there is some risk even if it is a fraction of a percent. Therefore, whether or not you think an average 35 year old person should be forced to quarantine in his house or should be free to walk the streets at will and take the risks associated with that really does depend upon your personal values. How do you assess risk vs experiencing a life that has an undetermined ending point? How do you value freedom vs safety. Is individual choice more important than the collective good?
As we have established on this board and across the nation, people would answer these questions in VERY different ways according to their values. What could any president facing Covid possibly do to appease people with such diametrically opposed viewpoints?
I am not sure what Republican you think would be a good leader but I will pick one at random. Let's go with Mitt Romney. He seems fairly level headed and can communicate well. Let's say President Romney in 2020, in the face of European shutdowns, addresses the US and says that our data clearly states the most risk is to the elderly. We are going to focus our efforts on protecting them. The risk to everyone else varies from individual to individual and therefore we cannot force universal restrictions on the general public based on that. I think most Republicans would have been on board with that. Do you think Democrats would have all agreed in a big Kumbaya moment or do you think when non-elderly started dying and Europe started looking down on us for not shutting everything down that they would have started to say that all of the dead were on Romney's hands?doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:18 pmI agree with everything you say. A lot of this comes down to values. A good leader clearly communicates his values in a respectful way. Sure there will be disagreements. But disagreements don't have to lead to civil war. There are ways to civilly disagree and find consensus or at least compromise. This is why personality and communication are so important. That is the president's primary job. His tone, demeanor and style set an example. He is supposed to be a unique individual. A special person who despite party affiliations has unique qualities and characteristics that allows him to appeal to a diverse range of viewpoints. Biden is not possessed with those traits either. But, he at least is not a bully. He will be boring and uninspiring in everyway. But he won't amp up disagreements like Trump. We have to hold our leaders to a higher standard than what we watch on reality tv. Sure, they are human...but that is for their private lives. When they step into office and are entrusted with great powers they are being asked to assume a special role. They are no longer an ordinary citizen.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:08 pm I would be the first to agree that Trump is a very poor communicator. But realistically, what could Trump or any president do that would avoid "politicization" of the virus?
We can all agree that Covid is a danger to mostly the elderly. For anyone younger than say 60, the risk compared to the same risks you take every day is pretty negligible but it does depend on your overall health. But there is some risk even if it is a fraction of a percent. Therefore, whether or not you think an average 35 year old person should be forced to quarantine in his house or should be free to walk the streets at will and take the risks associated with that really does depend upon your personal values. How do you assess risk vs experiencing a life that has an undetermined ending point? How do you value freedom vs safety. Is individual choice more important than the collective good?
As we have established on this board and across the nation, people would answer these questions in VERY different ways according to their values. What could any president facing Covid possibly do to appease people with such diametrically opposed viewpoints?
Since you have picked Romney....I can say that Trump is no Romney.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:32 pmI am not sure what Republican you think would be a good leader but I will pick one at random. Let's go with Mitt Romney. He seems fairly level headed and can communicate well. Let's say President Romney in 2020, in the face of European shutdowns, addresses the US and says that our data clearly states the most risk is to the elderly. We are going to focus our efforts on protecting them. The risk to everyone else varies from individual to individual and therefore we cannot force universal restrictions on the general public based on that. I think most Republicans would have been on board with that. Do you think Democrats would have all agreed in a big Kumbaya moment or do you think when non-elderly started dying and Europe started looking down on us for not shutting everything down that they would have started to say that all of the dead were on Romney's hands?doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:18 pmI agree with everything you say. A lot of this comes down to values. A good leader clearly communicates his values in a respectful way. Sure there will be disagreements. But disagreements don't have to lead to civil war. There are ways to civilly disagree and find consensus or at least compromise. This is why personality and communication are so important. That is the president's primary job. His tone, demeanor and style set an example. He is supposed to be a unique individual. A special person who despite party affiliations has unique qualities and characteristics that allows him to appeal to a diverse range of viewpoints. Biden is not possessed with those traits either. But, he at least is not a bully. He will be boring and uninspiring in everyway. But he won't amp up disagreements like Trump. We have to hold our leaders to a higher standard than what we watch on reality tv. Sure, they are human...but that is for their private lives. When they step into office and are entrusted with great powers they are being asked to assume a special role. They are no longer an ordinary citizen.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:08 pm I would be the first to agree that Trump is a very poor communicator. But realistically, what could Trump or any president do that would avoid "politicization" of the virus?
We can all agree that Covid is a danger to mostly the elderly. For anyone younger than say 60, the risk compared to the same risks you take every day is pretty negligible but it does depend on your overall health. But there is some risk even if it is a fraction of a percent. Therefore, whether or not you think an average 35 year old person should be forced to quarantine in his house or should be free to walk the streets at will and take the risks associated with that really does depend upon your personal values. How do you assess risk vs experiencing a life that has an undetermined ending point? How do you value freedom vs safety. Is individual choice more important than the collective good?
As we have established on this board and across the nation, people would answer these questions in VERY different ways according to their values. What could any president facing Covid possibly do to appease people with such diametrically opposed viewpoints?
Good question. I don't know. That's why the job of president is so difficult. Because almost all of the time there are no easy answers and no matter what you are going to get a lot of blame to which you must react with dignity. You must show empathy and compassion while also pushing people to endure difficulty. That's why it requires an exceptional communicator who is literally able to eat shit sandwiches for the good of the country. A thin skinned, narcicist, with a penchant for scapegoating and bullying is not the personality type for the job of president. It's not a job where you get constant praise and pats on the back. It's why the job ages people so tremendously and takes such a toll.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:32 pmI am not sure what Republican you think would be a good leader but I will pick one at random. Let's go with Mitt Romney. He seems fairly level headed and can communicate well. Let's say President Romney in 2020, in the face of European shutdowns, addresses the US and says that our data clearly states the most risk is to the elderly. We are going to focus our efforts on protecting them. The risk to everyone else varies from individual to individual and therefore we cannot force universal restrictions on the general public based on that. I think most Republicans would have been on board with that. Do you think Democrats would have all agreed in a big Kumbaya moment or do you think when non-elderly started dying and Europe started looking down on us for not shutting everything down that they would have started to say that all of the dead were on Romney's hands?doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:18 pmI agree with everything you say. A lot of this comes down to values. A good leader clearly communicates his values in a respectful way. Sure there will be disagreements. But disagreements don't have to lead to civil war. There are ways to civilly disagree and find consensus or at least compromise. This is why personality and communication are so important. That is the president's primary job. His tone, demeanor and style set an example. He is supposed to be a unique individual. A special person who despite party affiliations has unique qualities and characteristics that allows him to appeal to a diverse range of viewpoints. Biden is not possessed with those traits either. But, he at least is not a bully. He will be boring and uninspiring in everyway. But he won't amp up disagreements like Trump. We have to hold our leaders to a higher standard than what we watch on reality tv. Sure, they are human...but that is for their private lives. When they step into office and are entrusted with great powers they are being asked to assume a special role. They are no longer an ordinary citizen.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:08 pm I would be the first to agree that Trump is a very poor communicator. But realistically, what could Trump or any president do that would avoid "politicization" of the virus?
We can all agree that Covid is a danger to mostly the elderly. For anyone younger than say 60, the risk compared to the same risks you take every day is pretty negligible but it does depend on your overall health. But there is some risk even if it is a fraction of a percent. Therefore, whether or not you think an average 35 year old person should be forced to quarantine in his house or should be free to walk the streets at will and take the risks associated with that really does depend upon your personal values. How do you assess risk vs experiencing a life that has an undetermined ending point? How do you value freedom vs safety. Is individual choice more important than the collective good?
As we have established on this board and across the nation, people would answer these questions in VERY different ways according to their values. What could any president facing Covid possibly do to appease people with such diametrically opposed viewpoints?
It's called tact. It helps when you have to work in conjunction with other people that you just can't fire on a whim. Amazingly it also helps bring people over to your side and build respect. I'm not displaying a tremendous amount of any of that here...but I'm on an internet forum, not in the oval office entrusted with highest position in country. You ever played any team sports? Did the team captain or coach just insult people who messed up or who he might not like? Did a coach who called players idiots and losers to deflect blame from having lost a game improve team morale and performance? To blame all of chicago's issues on democratic governors is absolute horseshit by the way. To blame california wildfires solely on bad forest management is likewise bullshit. To blame coronavirus on China, or economic issues on the Fed....leaders don't act like that. It's also painfully obvious how every thing that is good is because of him but everything that is bad is someone else's fault. The predictability is obnoxious. They can express their disagreement on issues without resorting to playground insults. Believe me, it helps.tomfoolery wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 8:15 pmAgreed. The superintendent should cover up for shitty teachers, shitty school districts, and never discuss it publicly. It only serves to seed discontent and racism. The white families with money will leave the parts of town with bad schools and the poor minorities will suffer with less tax dollars and less resources. It’s far better of the superintendent kept his mouth shut.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:05 pmI understand the president doesn't hire or fire governors. Nevertheless he is the highest elected official. He is the de facto 'leader' of our nation especially nowadays. With this comes a different level of decorum than being a reality tv show host. Where in the world is leadership like he displays effective? A lead teacher wouldn't treat fellow teachers that way...Tortoise wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 5:53 pmA principal is the teachers' boss. As we've already established, Trump is not the governors' boss. He's more like a fellow teacher.
Your analogy seems to be that if one teacher starts bullying another teacher, then the bullied teacher could be somewhat justified in taking her frustrations out on her students by tying them to their desks.
Take it one step higher....School superintendent. Not directly a teachers boss. Insults and fires principals publically....calls them names like pencil neck. Insults school board members who disagree with him. Talks publically about how shitty some schools are. How incompetent their teachers are. Publically blames individuals for poor district test results.
Even their behavior at the traditional Al Smith roast dinner was completely professional. The jibes traded were in good taste and not personal. The next round was the Trump/Clinton 2016 dinner which became downright dark as did debates 2 and 3 of that cycle. I understand the differing viewpoints on democrat and republican ideology, but there's a bigger problem. If the society is gripped by paranoia, hate and mistrust, I find it hard to believe there will be a winner either way. It's like we're flipping a coin with the assurance that both sides lose.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:44 pm For the record, I think Mitt Romney would have made a fine president. Unfortunately, his timing was bad. Go back and pull up Obama vs Romney debates on youtube. It will bring tears to your eyes at how far we have fallen. Two intelligent, articulate men discussing and disagreeing in a professional manner...then go watch last week's debate. A literal dumpster fire.
You may say that now. But I can go back to 2012 and pull a lot of quotes about Romney from high ranking Democrats that sound shockingly similar to their quotes about Trump today.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:44 pm For the record, I think Mitt Romney would have made a fine president. Unfortunately, his timing was bad. Go back and pull up Obama vs Romney debates on youtube. It will bring tears to your eyes at how far we have fallen. Two intelligent, articulate men discussing and disagreeing in a professional manner...then go watch last week's debate. A literal dumpster fire.
Yes the Democrats as a party hold a lot of responsiblity for the rise of Trump. They went too far and it elicited a reaction from the right that produced the election of Trump. He isn't the solution though....he is gasoline on the fire.jalanlong wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:32 pmYou may say that now. But I can go back to 2012 and pull a lot of quotes about Romney from high ranking Democrats that sound shockingly similar to their quotes about Trump today.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:44 pm For the record, I think Mitt Romney would have made a fine president. Unfortunately, his timing was bad. Go back and pull up Obama vs Romney debates on youtube. It will bring tears to your eyes at how far we have fallen. Two intelligent, articulate men discussing and disagreeing in a professional manner...then go watch last week's debate. A literal dumpster fire.
Do you think it's healthy that both political parties have pushed to the extreme...do you think it's representative of most americans? If a moderate could get through the primary process I think they would win in a landslide.tomfoolery wrote: ↑Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:13 amMaybe democrats have turned over a new leaf in 2020 and produced less of a similar reaction that led to Mr Tromp being voted in.
Common sense economic shutdowns in liberal states, common sense mandated mask wearing in liberal states, peaceful protesting where liberal mayors/governors refused Herr Trumps offer to have the national guard murder peaceful protesters.
Yes, I’m sure Democrats have turned off less middle and right-leaning voters this election cycle.
Biden 2020!!!
Actually I agree with doodle on this one. I've stated this here previously: a president who could have articulated a measured, more sensible response to COVID as a guideline to states and municipalities might have saved us a lot of agony. An executive order would have been even better. Maybe someone like Romney could have done that, maybe not. I'm assuming that Hillary Clinton, if she had won the election, would never have gone that route. Probably her executive orders would have mandated a national shutdown and made for a much more severe recession than we've already seen.doodle wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:44 pm For the record, I think Mitt Romney would have made a fine president. Unfortunately, his timing was bad. Go back and pull up Obama vs Romney debates on youtube. It will bring tears to your eyes at how far we have fallen. Two intelligent, articulate men discussing and disagreeing in a professional manner...then go watch last week's debate. A literal dumpster fire.