The Next Decade Could Be Even Worse

[Theodarzna]

At best the arguments you are making can be boiled down to:

"Democrats are only Pro-Science because Republicans are Anti-Science"

It still puts the Republicans firmly in the Anti-Science camp...and they are the ones keeping themselves there.

You are the one constantly invoking science, I am now stuck having this discussion. I admire your dedication to party talking points though. "I'm pro-science", what on Earth does that mean? I mean? In terms of like policy and debate about policy? Or is this another method of removing politics from politics?

- - - Updated - - -

No, you didn't. You didn't even come close. You got one tweet from DeBlasio on MArch 2nd, and he isn't opposing any of those things in the tweet.

I'm not reposting previous posts for the third time, either have a point or get back on topic.

[Edge-]

Well yes, kind of like I can post any topic and you people will oppose whatever you think its about simple to assert partisan allegiance.

You're not that special Theo, and we agree on topics periodically. So no, you're not my personal nemesis on this site, just another poster that I often disagree with.

You still haven't managed to cite much of anything but I do admire your dedication to recitation of talking points.

Still waiting on when Dan fucking Patrick (because it was the Lt. Governor who said that on TV, not Gov. Abbott) became the most influential person in the world, changing the opinions of not just Americans overnight, but medical professionals and scientists across the world who don't know who don't even know that states have Lt. Governors.

[Egomaniac]

I cited what changed, Greg Abbott said "We gotta kill the elderly for the economy", and then after March the partisan valiance became "GOP = Virus is fake news" and "Liberal = We gotta lock down".

And I cited Joe Biden talking about Listening to experts nearly two weeks before that happened... as much as you want to ignore that.

[Theodarzna]

@Theodarzna At best the arguments you are making can be boiled down to:

"Democrats are only Pro-Science because Republicans are Anti-Science"

It still puts the Republicans firmly in the Anti-Science camp...and they are the ones keeping themselves there.

Also, I am curious why we've dropped the Mitt Romney discussion?

[NineSpine]

You are the one constantly invoking science, I am now stuck having this discussion. I admire your dedication to party talking points though. "I'm pro-science", what on Earth does that mean? I mean? In terms of like policy and debate about policy? Or is this another method of removing politics from politics?

- - - Updated - - -



I'm not reposting previous posts for the third time, either have a point or get back on topic.

So your strategy here is just to lie and say you did provide evidence when you didn't? Real mature.

[smityx]

Better question... why did we leave the tree?

The trees left us. The climate changed (iceages, etc...) so the environment changed. Forests gave way to grasslands, etc.. We adapted. That's what humans are good at adaptation.

[wunksta]

I cited what changed, Greg Abbott said "We gotta kill the elderly for the economy", and then after March the partisan valiance became "GOP = Virus is fake news" and "Liberal = We gotta lock down".
.

But that's demonstrably false, as shown above. The polarization had already started happening and Republicans did not treat it seriously. Some were calling it mass hysteria before the grandma quote
https://www.courier-journal.com/stor...19/2873635001/

[Theodarzna]

You're not that special Theo, and we agree on topics periodically. So no, you're not my personal nemesis on this site, just another poster that I often disagree with.

Still waiting on when Dan fucking Patrick (because it was the Lt. Governor who said that on TV, not Gov. Abbott) became the most influential person in the world, changing the opinions of not just Americans overnight, but medical professionals and scientists across the world who don't know who don't even know that states have Lt. Governors.

Whenever we disagree on topics YOU make things personal and are quick in start with insults and cursing.

As for your question, why does that matter if he is influential in some broad sense? Why this persons stature matters, only that it made a media controversy at the time.

[szechuan]

You are the one constantly invoking science, I am now stuck having this discussion. I admire your dedication to party talking points though. "I'm pro-science", what on Earth does that mean? I mean? In terms of like policy and debate about policy? Or is this another method of removing politics from politics?

Says the person constantly ignoring Science.

[Machismo]

Whenever we disagree on topics YOU make things personal and are quick in start with insults and cursing.

As for your question, why does that matter if he is influential in some broad sense? Why this persons stature matters, only that it made a media controversy at the time.

It's hard to make it personal, when you keep getting caught using other people's words. Is it personally against the real authors?

[Felya]

When are you planning to show that liberals opposed travel restrictions, lockdowns, or masks?

They are conflating Biden’s claims that it’s xenophobia to target Asian community in US, which resulted in Palosi doing China town stroll. On top of this, they are conflating Trump’s 48 hour warning on EU travel ban, resulting in spreading covid even more in packed airports, with democrats complaining about the ban... not the implementation.

It’s really easy to believe that all of the media and democrats and tech is in cahoots... than it is to believe that Trump didn’t initially impose a travel ban on parts of EU that had his golf courses was intentional. That energy and real estate tycoons like Trump and his buddies, would risk lives to a disease to keep their business open.

It’s like in 2016 Halliburton became for the working class, while working class fucks hitting it big in IT, became the elites.

[Theodarzna]

But that's demonstrably false, as shown above. The polarization had already started happening and Republicans did not treat it seriously. Some were calling it mass hysteria before the grandma quote
https://www.courier-journal.com/stor...19/2873635001/

Again, you cite from March, when the valiance had changed and the GOP was about "Grandma's gotta die for the market". I don't specifically mean one man changed the story, but that the GOP shifted to that line and thus the reactive response.

Thank you for basically agreeing with me, save for the most splitting of hairs difference.

[Edge-]

As for your question, why does that matter if he is influential in some broad sense? Why this persons stature matters, only that it made a media controversy at the time.

Because you're claiming that his comments were the "moment" that partisan attitudes flipped, and even if you only meant the US (and not globally), it'd still be unproven and wrong.

You claimed his "grandma and grandpa" comment was that moment. Prove it, because you've still failed to do so. And if that one moment was indeed it, then Dan Patrick is truly one of, if not the, most influential men in America. If not the whole world.

[NineSpine]

Again, you cite from March, when the valiance had changed and the GOP was about "Grandma's gotta die for the market". I don't specifically mean one man changed the story, but that the GOP shifted to that line and thus the reactive response.

Thank you for basically agreeing with me, save for the most splitting of hairs difference.

How about you actually show us when the liberals opposed masks, lockdowns, or travel restrictions?

[wunksta]

Again, you cite from March, when the valiance had changed and the GOP was about "Grandma's gotta die for the market". I don't specifically mean one man changed the story, but that the GOP shifted to that line and thus the reactive response.

Thank you for basically agreeing with me, save for the most splitting of hairs difference.

You made it sound like the grandma comments were the catalyst, not March in general.

[Edge-]

Again, you cite from March, when the valiance had changed and the GOP was about "Grandma's gotta die for the market". I don't specifically mean one man changed the story, but that the GOP shifted to that line and thus the reactive response.

Thank you for basically agreeing with me, save for the most splitting of hairs difference.

https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/...ct-wall-street

End of March, Theo, March 24. His comment was a full business week after the Courier-Journal link (March 19, updated March 21).

Edit:

Abbot is the sole reason anything changed. If some science came out that changed peoples minds feel free to cite it, but I can cite, and just did the exact moment it switched.

You literally did specifically state that one man changed the story, btw.

[Theodarzna]

You made it sound like Abbott's comments were the catalyst, not March in general.

Then I apologize for the lack of clarity. I cited an example.

[szechuan]

Again, you cite from March, when the valiance had changed and the GOP was about "Grandma's gotta die for the market". I don't specifically mean one man changed the story, but that the GOP shifted to that line and thus the reactive response.

Thank you for basically agreeing with me, save for the most splitting of hairs difference.

[Felya]

Again, you cite from March, when the valiance had changed and the GOP was about "Grandma's gotta die for the market". I don't specifically mean one man changed the story, but that the GOP shifted to that line and thus the reactive response.

Thank you for basically agreeing with me, save for the most splitting of hairs difference.

Trump called it a hoax in February...

[Theodarzna]

I do love that the topic of Turchin has vanished here. I guess we are ready to move on from the counter-elite vs. elite confusion that some of you had since Pandemic response is a big hot topic.

In the interest of being on topic, Here is a Corona Virus mega thread, feel free to mention me to continue this fascination conversation there.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/...ct-wall-street

End of March, Theo, March 24. His comment was a full business week after the Courier-Journal link (March 19, updated March 21).

Edit:



You literally did specifically state that one man changed the story, btw.

Aight, then I spoke terribly. I should have said "Patrickism" or something, Apologies and my bad.