The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[TGHusker]

8 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

The conversation really boils down to masks, though. You're phrasing your comments as if reopening the economy is some kind of insane/extreme notion. If Trump would have mandated an extreme, extended lockdown I have this sneaking suspicion you'd be on here right now condemning him for having killed the economy.

 

For this reason, again I say, this is really about masks at this point. 

Your sneaking suspicions would be wrong.  Trump is still killing the economy- with a slow death - strangulation vs a bullet. If he had locked down the economy with appropriate testing, mask wearing, PPE equipment & respirators, then we might have done more than just trying to flatten the curve.   I've always thought that the economy is secondary to saving as many lives as possible - which meant taking strong actions regarding masks, etc.  We can always rebuild an economy but not lives.  Yes, if a person could reopen the economy at the same time as strict application of mask rules, that would be a plus.  But opening up the economy without masks I think was a@$ backwards.  I think we opened up too soon and have said so many times.  

[Undone]

3 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

But opening up the economy without masks I think was a@$ backwards.  I think we opened up too soon and have said so many times.  

 

Agreed on the bold, and that's my argument here as well,  if that wasn't crystal clear. He made a massive misstep by not either strongly encouraging masks during re-opening (at minimum) or perhaps even mandating them.

 

And as far as the topic of this thread goes, Biden's team will have the upper hand on this and deliver a potentially crushing blow to The Donald on this during the debates. That is, if we have the debates at all.

 

But again, the point is that the conversation is about masks. I can't stress this enough. Maybe you and your family haven't been impacted financially by the economic downturn, but millions of others have. This country couldn't have just dug our way out of the hole by printing trillions of dollars more - the math just doesn't work. We had to reopen at some point. The benefit of hindsight makes it so easy to say "we did it too soon." 

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, Undone said:

 

The conversation really boils down to masks, though. You're phrasing your comments as if reopening the economy is some kind of insane/extreme notion. If Trump would have mandated an extreme, extended lockdown I have this sneaking suspicion you'd be on here right now condemning him for having killed the economy.

 

For this reason, again I say, this is really about masks at this point. 

Pretty sure you're not on point with this comment.  

 

The economy hasn't necessarily improved since reopening.  So...in an attempt to get Trump reelected, we have prolonged the problem.

 

And....I'm interested in your "legality to do so" comment.  I'm assuming you're one that looks at this as being a blow to your constitutional rights...or something like that?

[Undone]

20 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Pretty sure you're not on point with this comment.  

 

The economy hasn't necessarily improved since reopening.  So...in an attempt to get Trump reelected, we have prolonged the problem.

 

And....I'm interested in your "legality to do so" comment.  I'm assuming you're one that looks at this as being a blow to your constitutional rights...or something like that?

 

I really dislike it when one comments on the things someone isn't saying rather than the things they did say. You're doing that with the bold above.

 

And you can be as interested as you want as to my own opinions on how mask mandates intertwine with constitutionality - but that's not what I've been focused on at all here in any way and I actually don't know why you'd divert the conversation there. Because here are a couple snippets from this thread that you didn't quote where I have made it clear that I believe The Donald should have told everybody to wear masks:

 

1 hour ago, Undone said:

Agreed on the bold, and that's my argument here as well,  if that wasn't crystal clear. He made a massive misstep by not either strongly encouraging masks during re-opening (at minimum) or perhaps even mandating them.

 

 

2 hours ago, Undone said:

Yeah it's been bizarre to me that in an election year he didn't err on the side of telling people to wear masks. Not really sure how he thought his payout would be better with this move.

 

 

Anyway, the original train of thought I was on in the comment you quoted originally that I made to TG is really pretty basic and almost silly to quibble over: Is it not demonstrable that a president's political opposites tend to discredit anything he does, at all costs? If Trump had proposed and instituted a strict six month lockdown, with curfews put in place by the support of state governors with national guards, etc., etc., coronavirus would have had less effect, but Trump would be raked over the coals for killing the economy.

 

This is an election year, sir.

 

 

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

Is it not demonstrable that a president's political opposites tend to discredit anything he does, at all costs? If Trump had proposed and instituted a strict six month lockdown, with curfews put in place by the support of state governors with national guards, etc., etc., coronavirus would have had less effect, but Trump would be raked over the coals for killing the economy.

 

It is demonstrable. It is also demonstrable that when those arguments don't hold water, the public (usually) doesn't adhere to them. For example, the attacks leveled at Obama by Republicans over Obamacare prior to the 2012 election - those were bogus allegations, and Obama was reelected. In much the same way, Trump is trying to land punches against Biden, but they're not hitting - because people don't care about the things he's alleging.  When the inevitable Burisma allegations come out, they're going to fall flat. 

 

It is no guarantee that a lockdown would destroy the economy, nor is a six-month lockdown necessary. I'm not sure if any other country has done that, and I've heard no such recommendations from any expert. What the government could have done is to cover wages for the few months of the lockdown, which they have done in several other countries, and their economies are not crumbling.  

 

America, led by Trump, has responded to this in almost all the wrong ways.  That it is an election year is true. That Trump would have responded the same way to all of this if it had happened in a non-election year is also true.  Trump is not a leader, and his failure to lead here has nothing to do with the election.

[BigRedBuster]

14 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

I really dislike it when one comments on the things someone isn't saying rather than the things they did say. You're doing that with the bold above.

 

And you can be as interested as you want as to my own opinions on how mask mandates intertwine with constitutionality - but that's not what I've been focused on at all here in any way and I actually don't know why you'd divert the conversation there. Because here are a couple snippets from this thread that you didn't quote where I have made it clear that I believe The Donald should have told everybody to wear masks:

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, the original train of thought I was on in the comment you quoted originally that I made to TG is really pretty basic and almost silly to quibble over: Is it not demonstrable that a president's political opposites tend to discredit anything he does, at all costs? If Trump had proposed and instituted a strict six month lockdown, with curfews put in place by the support of state governors with national guards, etc., etc., coronavirus would have had less effect, but Trump would be raked over the coals for killing the economy.

 

This is an election year, sir.

 

 

 

Wow....sorry for jumping into the conversation with questions about a comment you made.  If you don't want to talk about it....that's fine.

 

I'll move on.

[TGHusker]

1 hour ago, Undone said:

And as far as the topic of this thread goes, Biden's team will have the upper hand on this and deliver a potentially crushing blow to The Donald on this during the debates. That is, if we have the debates at all.

I agree with this.   Perhaps a Trump supporter may claim that trump has done everything right during his 3.5 years in office but they cannot say wt all honesty that he was successful with his response during this crisis.  Leadership is tested in crisis - trump failed the test. I don't care how much he can kiss up to Fat Missile Boy, or how much he claims the stock market grew under his watch, or how may conservative justices he appointed.  This was the crisis of his administration and he wasn't up to the task.

 

1 hour ago, Undone said:

This country couldn't have just dug our way out of the hole by printing trillions of dollars more - the math just doesn't work. We had to reopen at some point. The benefit of hindsight makes it so easy to say "we did it too soon." 

I agree - at some point we'd have to reopen.   I was saying we (Oklahoma) were going to open too soon before we actually reopened.  Our 
Tulsa county health expert and our mayor had a much better pulse of the situation than our governor.  No hindsight was needed.  Oklahoma was one of the 1st states to reopen. My wife and I both shook our head at our governor for pushing it. Out Tulsa major (also a republican) did not want to reopen when the state did but he had no choice as every place around Tulsa was opening up.

Now he is one of the first in the state to mandate face masks for a city in the state and governor Stitt personally has come down with Covid19-  He's doing well without much of a problem as of this morning. 

[Undone]

14 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Wow....sorry for jumping into the conversation with questions about a comment you made.  If you don't want to talk about it....that's fine.

 

I'll move on.

 

I personally don't want to use this thread to debate whether governments should/shouldn't mandate masks. If you have that interest, I'm sure there are many that will take it up with you on this forum.

 

I was making sure that you understood clearly that I've stated that Trump should have pumped masks, early and often.

 

 

20 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It is demonstrable. It is also demonstrable that when those arguments don't hold water, the public (usually) doesn't adhere to them. For example, the attacks leveled at Obama by Republicans over Obamacare prior to the 2012 election - those were bogus allegations, and Obama was reelected. In much the same way, Trump is trying to land punches against Biden, but they're not hitting - because people don't care about the things he's alleging.  When the inevitable Burisma allegations come out, they're going to fall flat. 

 

It is no guarantee that a lockdown would destroy the economy, nor is a six-month lockdown necessary. I'm not sure if any other country has done that, and I've heard no such recommendations from any expert. What the government could have done is to cover wages for the few months of the lockdown, which they have done in several other countries, and their economies are not crumbling.  

 

America, led by Trump, has responded to this in almost all the wrong ways.  That it is an election year is true. That Trump would have responded the same way to all of this if it had happened in a non-election year is also true.  Trump is not a leader, and his failure to lead here has nothing to do with the election.

 

This is the kind of quality dialogue I appreciate.

[Undone]

15 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

I agree with this.   Perhaps a Trump supporter may claim that trump has done everything right during his 3.5 years in office but they cannot say wt all honesty that he was successful with his response during this crisis.  Leadership is tested in crisis - trump failed the test. I don't care how much he can kiss up to Fat Missile Boy, or how much he claims the stock market grew under his watch, or how may conservative justices he appointed.  This was the crisis of his administration and he wasn't up to the task.

 

I agree - at some point we'd have to reopen.   I was saying we (Oklahoma) were going to open too soon before we actually reopened.  Our 
Tulsa county health expert and our mayor had a much better pulse of the situation than our governor.  No hindsight was needed.  Oklahoma was one of the 1st states to reopen. My wife and I both shook our head at our governor for pushing it. Out Tulsa major (also a republican) did not want to reopen when the state did but he had no choice as every place around Tulsa was opening up.

Now he is one of the first in the state to mandate face masks for a city in the state and governor Stitt personally has come down with Covid19-  He's doing well without much of a problem as of this morning. 

 

Thank you for the dialogue, TG. Interesting to hear of Oklahoma's experience.

 

Back to the train of thought about how Trump/Biden will be perceived in the coming months with regards to what they say about COVID...just entertain the dialogue here, guys...

 

Imagine you're one of the 40 million people who lost their job due to the lock downs. If Biden slams Trump for not taking more action on C19, that doesn't necessarily resonate with those that lost their job in April, does it? As a general public at large, we only really became fully aware of the severity of the illnes in the U.S. in roughly the first week of March.

 

But as I said, Biden has been gifted a powerful weapon here. There will be those whose businesses got shut down that maybe believe they shouldn't have been who will be upset to hear rhetoric of "we should have done more," but I do think it comes down to wearing masks. It was a big misstep of Trump to not tell the country to wear masks if the guy wanted to be re-elected. To go against what Fauci was saying on that topic is an obvious misstep.

[TGHusker]

29 minutes ago, Undone said:

It was a big misstep of Trump to not tell the country to wear masks if the guy wanted to be re-elected. To go against what Fauci was saying on that topic is an obvious misstep.

This is important.  More people have faith in Fauci than Trump.  But trump wants to be perceived as the smartest man in the room so he could not step aside and let the experts lead the way.  Trump has done the same wt the military leaders, the intelligence leaders and now also with educators.  His acting is getting very old and I think people are seeing that he is an empty suit.    A good, effective leader isn't afraid of having smart people (and smarter people) around him.  A good leader sets the agenda, gives the inspirational vision and let the experts have the freedom to work out the details.  Trump is too insecure to allow that to happen and our country is paying for his insecurities.   The GOP have been enablers to this and as citizens, we have to stop the "enablement" - for the health of our country.

[Notre Dame Joe]

8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

3000 tyrants?  You're talking about the civilian protesters?

You do realize that's not possible for them to be tyrants......right?

Says whom?  You did see The Patriot?

[Notre Dame Joe]

6 hours ago, Undone said:

 

If the proper goal in this particular pandemic is to slow the spread for as long as possible, then mask wearing is essential. I take in sh*t loads of information on C19 and I still see conflicting arguments as to whether or not this will really pay off. I maintain that we will only know in hindsight what the proper response was, even though current data obviously greatly informs us as to which methods we should be using.

 

We flattened the curve. Then we caught the full weight of just how contagious C19 is and saw another spike.

 

So again: If the right play is slowing the spread as much as possible, then there is no disagreement - Trump should have told everybody to wear masks much sooner.

 

At this point I'd like to see a federal mask mandate, with the threat of serious fines for not complying. Not because I like the idea as it pertains to my personal political leanings on the legality of such a thing but for science; I'd like to see how the U.S. numbers do/don't change if every single person is walking around with a mask on.

 

There's not much solid evidence that a cloth mask mandate would slow or stop the spread of covid.  It is actually moot since masks sold out at the beginning of the spread.  But we have great evidence why Biden would be worse.  He called the travel ban racist and xenophoebic.  Obama-Biden did nothing when the swine flu hit in their first term.  Their policies incentivized our manufacturing to move to China and others.  His 'plan' which he hasn't himself written or read, involves little more than keeping the American people shut down until a vaccine becomes available, by which time pandemic will be over. 

[Danny Bateman]

9 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

There's not much solid evidence that a cloth mask mandate would slow or stop the spread of covid.  It is actually moot since masks sold out at the beginning of the spread.  But we have great evidence why Biden would be worse.  He called the travel ban racist and xenophoebic.  Obama-Biden did nothing when the swine flu hit in their first term.  Their policies incentivized our manufacturing to move to China and others.  His 'plan' which he hasn't himself written or read, involves little more than keeping the American people shut down until a vaccine becomes available, by which time pandemic will be over. 

 

I see we've reached the point of simply unfettered lying about things in an attempt to give yourself a leg to stand on.

 

The funny thing is even if that was the entirety of Biden's plan, which of course it's not, it would still be more effective than the anti-science nonsense being utilized by Trump and all too many GOP governors around the country.

[Notre Dame Joe]

I think if a man wants to play the L word he should have to highlight what he's referring to and post what he calls the Truth.

[teachercd]

6 months ago, Trump was a lock.

6 months later, he has no chance to win.

 

Pretty amazing, all he had to do was listen to Dr. F...that is it.  Think about that.  All he had to do was listen to a guy who has been doing his job for 40 years.