Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[DingDongKing]

But for who? The GOP base don't care. The Dem base won't change because of. The independents already knew he was a PoS and him lying and stealing money hasn't really mattered to them. The only thing that seems to move the needle on Trump is people needlessly dying, and the economy tanking. None of that has or was relevant to anything impeachment wise.

Yes it would be great if they were all attackdog and barked loudly about everything. Unfortunately they do not do that.

Throw the irate Young Turks audience a bone.

[Gorsameth]

1. Do you really think people are more stupid in America than , random example, the EU?
2. If 1) is true. Do you mean that Trump did the right thing? I mean those supporting the idea that America is the fool's land are falling in a contradiction. On one side yeah people are stupid so ..I understand that they can't be told the truth because they panic but on the other side Trump's behavior was horrible because he hide that very truth.

So what's it? Stupid that needs to be lied? Not stupid so don't lie to them? Stupid but leaders shouldn't lie to them anyway?.

No,let's be serious: the disgusting and patronizing idea that lying was for their own good is absurd and insulting. We have seen all over the world that no matter what percentage of your population is uneducated and uninformed you still can tell them the truth and there's no civilization crushing panic.

Your right that there are stupid people everywhere but I do believe America tends to have more stupid then most of the rest of the world yes. Its a result of many things working together, bad basic/state education, a fierce tribal political divide, indoctrination (aided by the lack of proper basic education) ect.

And no Trump didn't do the right thing, just because people are stupid doesn't mean they need to be lied to and sheltered. Did America explode into a remake of the Purge when a few cases of Ebola showed up from Africa (I think it was Africa). No, no it didn't.
Telling people to be careful and take Corona seriously would not have been the end of civilisation (large scale economic disruption combined with no social security net worth talking about handled that just fine on its own).

[Themius]

Republicans mottos is 6 feet under instead of 6 feet apart.

[Breccia]

The TIME Magazine cover says it all. But the article says it all in detail.

Forty-five days

/eyeroll

before the announcement of the first suspected case of what would become known as COVID-19, the Global Health Security Index was published. The project—led by the Nuclear Threat Initiative and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security—assessed 195 countries on their perceived ability to handle a major disease outbreak. The U.S. ranked first.

It’s clear the report was wildly overconfident in the U.S., failing to account for social ills that had accumulated in the country over the past few years, rendering it unprepared for what was about to hit. At some point in mid-September—perhaps by the time you are reading this—the number of confirmed coronavirus-related deaths in the U.S. will have passed 200,000, more than in any other country by far.

If, early in the spring, the U.S. had mobilized its ample resources and expertise in a coherent national effort to prepare for the virus, things might have turned out differently. If, in midsummer, the country had doubled down on the measures (masks, social-distancing rules, restricted indoor activities and public gatherings) that seemed to be working, instead of prematurely declaring victory, things might have turned out differently. The tragedy is that if science and common sense solutions were united in a national, coordinated response, the U.S. could have avoided many thousands of more deaths this summer.

Indeed, many other countries in similar situations were able to face this challenge where the U.S. apparently could not. Italy, for example, had a similar per capita case rate as the U.S. in April. By emerging slowly from lockdowns, limiting domestic and foreign travel, and allowing its government response to be largely guided by scientists, Italy has kept COVID-19 almost entirely at bay. In that same time period, U.S. daily cases doubled, before they started to fall in late summer.

Among the world’s wealthy nations, only the U.S. has an outbreak that continues to spin out of control. Of the 10 worst-hit countries, the U.S. has the seventh-highest number of deaths per 100,000 population; the other nine countries in the top 10 have an average per capita GDP of $10,195, compared to $65,281 for the U.S. Some countries, like New Zealand, have even come close to eradicating COVID-19 entirely. Vietnam, where officials implemented particularly intense lockdown measures, didn’t record a single virus-related death until July 31.

At this point, we can start to see why the U.S. foundered: a failure of leadership at many levels and across parties; a distrust of scientists, the media and expertise in general; and deeply ingrained cultural attitudes about individuality and how we value human lives have all combined to result in a horrifically inadequate pandemic response. COVID-19 has weakened the U.S. and exposed the systemic fractures in the country, and the gulf between what this nation promises its citizens and what it actually delivers.

Although America’s problems were widespread, they start at the top. A complete catalog of President Donald Trump’s failures to address the pandemic will be fodder for history books. There were weeks wasted early on stubbornly clinging to a fantastical belief that the virus would simply “disappear”; testing and contact tracing programs were inadequate; states were encouraged to reopen ahead of his own Administration’s guidelines; and statistics were repeatedly cherry-picked to make the U.S. situation look far better than it was, while undermining scientists who said otherwise. “I wanted to always play it down,” Trump told the journalist Bob Woodward on March 19 in a newly revealed conversation. “I still like playing it down, because I don’t want to create a panic.”

Common-sense solutions like face masks were undercut or ignored. Research shows that wearing a facial covering significantly reduces the spread of COVID-19, and a pre-existing culture of mask wearing in East Asia is often cited as one reason countries in that region were able to control their outbreaks. In the U.S., Trump did not wear a mask in public until July 11, more than three months after the CDC recommended facial coverings, transforming what ought to have been a scientific issue into a partisan one. A Pew Research Center survey published on June 25 found that 63% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said masks should always be worn in public, compared with 29% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents.

By far the government’s most glaring failure was a lack of adequate testing infrastructure from the beginning. Testing is key to a pandemic response—the more data officials have about an outbreak, the better equipped they are to respond. Rather than call for more testing, Trump has instead suggested that maybe the U.S. should be testing less. He has repeatedly, and incorrectly, blamed increases in new cases on more testing. “If we didn’t do testing, we’d have no cases,” the President said in June, later suggesting he was being sarcastic. But less testing only means fewer cases are detected, not that they don’t exist. In the U.S. the percentage of tests coming back positive increased from about 4.5% in mid-June to about 5.7% as of early September, evidence the virus was spreading regardless of whether we tested for it. (By comparison, Germany’s overall daily positivity rate is under 3% and in Italy it’s about 2%.)

Testing in the U.S. peaked in July, at about 820,000 new tests administered per day, according to the COVID Tracking Project, but as of this writing has fallen under 700,000. Some Americans now say they are waiting more than two weeks for their test results, a delay that makes the outcome all but worthless, as people can be infected in the window between when they get tested and when they receive their results.

Most experts believe that early on, we did not understand the full scale of the spread of the virus because we were testing only those who got sick. But now we know 30% to 45% of infected people who contract the virus show no symptoms whatsoever and can pass it on. When there’s a robust and accessible testing system, even asymptomatic cases can be discovered and isolated. But as soon as testing becomes inaccessible again, we’re back to where we were before: probably missing many cases.

The article does go on to lay some blame on partisan politics, but before you members of the rabid fanbase start shrilling about BOTH SIDES, calling something "partisan" is not calling both sides wrong. It's saying both sides disagree.

Republicans and Democrats today don’t just disagree on issues; they disagree on the basic truths that structure their respective realities. Half the country gets its news from places that parrot whatever the Administration says, true or not; half does not. This politicization manifests in myriad ways, but the most vital is this: in early June (at which point more than 100,000 Americans had already died of COVID-19), fewer than half of Republican voters polled said the outbreak was a major threat to the health of the U.S. population as a whole. Throughout July and August, the White House’s Coronavirus Task Force was sending private messages to states about the severity of the outbreak, while President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence publicly stated that everything was under control.

Some incredulity about the virus and public-health recommendations is understandable given the reality that scientific understanding of the newly emergent virus is evolving in real time. The ever shifting advice from health officials doesn’t instill public confidence, especially in those already primed to be skeptical of experts. “Because this is a new infectious disease, a new virus, we don’t have all the answers scientifically,” says Colleen Barry, chair of the department of health policy and management at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “I think that creates an environment that could potentially erode trust even further over time.” But the trust fractures on partisan lines. While 43% of Democrats told Pew in 2019 that they had a “great deal” of trust in scientists, only 27% of Republicans said the same.

Woodward's revelations about Trump are bad enough, but Trump knowing that the virus was deadly and doing nothing is another.

- - - Updated - - -

So here's an interesting double-header.

Trump is basically going with

Bob Woodward had my quotes for many months. If he thought they were so bad or dangerous, why didn’t he immediately report them in an effort to save lives? Didn’t he have an obligation to do so? No, because he knew they were good and proper answers. Calm, no panic!

For someone who made everyone in the White House sign NDA's, even those who failed security checks, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. Also I am unaware of what Woodward's "obligation" was. I would imagine, that if a private citizen found out the virus was dangerous, he was under no specific legal or ethical requirement to disclose that information. This isn't like, say, divesting from businesses or releasing subpoena'd documents. By contrast, a government official who learns of a threat and fails to act on it, that sounds like violating an "obligation" to me.

However, it's moot. Woodward has already spoken up on the issue and, well, maybe Trump shouldn't have said anything.

He tells me this, and I’m thinking, ‘Wow, that’s interesting, but is it true?’ Trump says things that don’t check out, right?

That's right: Woodward didn't tell anyone, because he assumed Trump was lying.

Now, for those of you wondering why Trump would talk to the man who tore Nixon down, you're not alone. Tucker Carlson speaks up on the issue:

Why in the world would he do that? Well, tonight from a source who knows the answer to that mystery, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. It was Lindsey Graham who helped convince Donald Trump to talk to Bob Woodward, Lindsey Graham brokered that meeting, Lindsey Graham even sat in on the first interview between Bob Woodward and the president. How'd that turn out?

Lindsey Graham is supposed to be a Republican, so why would he do something like that?

You'd have to ask him, but keep in mind that Lindsey Graham has opposed, passionately opposed, virtually every major policy initiative that Donald Trump articulated when he first ran, from ending illegal immigration, to pulling back from pointless wars, to maintaining law and order at home, Lindsey Graham was against all of that more than many Democrats. So maybe you already know the answer.

First of all, Mr. Carlson, that doesn't sound like "Woodward is lying" to me. That sounds like "Woodward is telling the truth and you don't like that we found out".

Second of all, even if Graham did convince Trump to talk to Woodward, Graham didn't speak for Trump. Trump said all that stuff on his own. Carlson seems pretty upset that Graham let Trump say all those stupid things, but for some reason, Carlson doesn't seem upset that Trump said all those stupid things. Hmm.

Third of all, if Graham opposed everything Trump did, why would Trump listen to Graham?

Fourth of all, if Carlson is leading the charge against Graham, that's yet more "the right is eating itself to stay alive". Also, side note, if Grahamis out of a job, I'll find it a lot more awkward to bang his wife in the shower.

And finallyth of all, of course:

tonight from a source who knows the answer to that mystery

Who is the source? Carlson did not specify. Which naturally leads into yet another 24-hour challenge. Trump supporters, you have 24 hours to decide between these, your only two options:

1) Actual reporters can and do have anonymous sources and use them for real stories, shielding their identity both to protect their source from retribution (even illegal retribution) and also to get more stories in the future. Carlson can do it, but so can any other news source, and "unnamed source" is therefore not grounds for dismissal.

2) Anonymous sources are fake, even when Carlson is doing it, and Carlson is lying.

Y'all know where I stand, but I'm not the one being a hypocrite. As always, 24 hours or I get to decide for you and also you admit your cowardice by refusing to answer.

[Adam Jensen]

hows the fires going? anyone getting fucked up on here?

The fires aren't a big deal, we're doing a tremendous job with the fires. The fires will go away, like a miracle, one day they'll just go away.

- Trump, probably.

- - - Updated - - -

The TIME Magazine cover says it all. But the article says it all in detail.

But at least the coffin business is booming.

[DingDongKing]

Lindsey Graham is supposed to be a Republican, so why would he do something like that?

Republican party in a nutshell. 'How dare you reveal our utter complicity and stupidity?

[Bodakane]

The TIME Magazine cover says it all. But the article says it all in detail.



/eyeroll



The article does go on to lay some blame on partisan politics, but before you members of the rabid fanbase start shrilling about BOTH SIDES, calling something "partisan" is not calling both sides wrong. It's saying both sides disagree.



Woodward's revelations about Trump are bad enough, but Trump knowing that the virus was deadly and doing nothing is another.

- - - Updated - - -

So here's an interesting double-header.

Trump is basically going with



For someone who made everyone in the White House sign NDA's, even those who failed security checks, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. Also I am unaware of what Woodward's "obligation" was. I would imagine, that if a private citizen found out the virus was dangerous, he was under no specific legal or ethical requirement to disclose that information. This isn't like, say, divesting from businesses or releasing subpoena'd documents. By contrast, a government official who learns of a threat and fails to act on it, that sounds like violating an "obligation" to me.

However, it's moot. Woodward has already spoken up on the issue and, well, maybe Trump shouldn't have said anything.



That's right: Woodward didn't tell anyone, because he assumed Trump was lying.

Now, for those of you wondering why Trump would talk to the man who tore Nixon down, you're not alone. Tucker Carlson speaks up on the issue:



First of all, Mr. Carlson, that doesn't sound like "Woodward is lying" to me. That sounds like "Woodward is telling the truth and you don't like that we found out".

Second of all, even if Graham did convince Trump to talk to Woodward, Graham didn't speak for Trump. Trump said all that stuff on his own. Carlson seems pretty upset that Graham let Trump say all those stupid things, but for some reason, Carlson doesn't seem upset that Trump said all those stupid things. Hmm.

Third of all, if Graham opposed everything Trump did, why would Trump listen to Graham?

Fourth of all, if Carlson is leading the charge against Graham, that's yet more "the right is eating itself to stay alive". Also, side note, if Grahamis out of a job, I'll find it a lot more awkward to bang his wife in the shower.

And finallyth of all, of course:



Who is the source? Carlson did not specify. Which naturally leads into yet another 24-hour challenge. Trump supporters, you have 24 hours to decide between these, your only two options:

1) Actual reporters can and do have anonymous sources and use them for real stories, shielding their identity both to protect their source from retribution (even illegal retribution) and also to get more stories in the future. Carlson can do it, but so can any other news source, and "unnamed source" is therefore not grounds for dismissal.

2) Anonymous sources are fake, even when Carlson is doing it, and Carlson is lying.

Y'all know where I stand, but I'm not the one being a hypocrite. As always, 24 hours or I get to decide for you and also you admit your cowardice by refusing to answer.

Let it be also pointed out that the implication by Carlson (and anyone else that takes his stance) is that he obviously believes Trump is too stupid to talk to a reporter and was going to get himself into trouble.

[Thekri]

Let it be also pointed out that the implication by Carlson (and anyone else that takes his stance) is that he obviously believes Trump is too stupid to talk to a reporter and was going to get himself into trouble.

And further, that Trump is so gullible and easily manipulated that Lindsey Graham can con Trump into doing things against his best interests.

So Trump is too stupid to talk to Bob Woodward, too stupid to realize that, and gullible enough to trust Graham (Who is apparently a deep state liberal now). Even if you follow Carlson's crazy logic here, Trump looks absolutely terrible. Also, none of that does anything to improve the comments Trump actually made.

[Adam Jensen]

Fourth of all, if Carlson is leading the charge against Graham, that's yet more "the right is eating itself to stay alive".

There's a reason why Republican support for Donald Trump is past 90%.

It's because most of the Republicans who hate the Donald have fled or been booted out.

[Zaktar]

And further, that Trump is so gullible and easily manipulated that Lindsey Graham can con Trump into doing things against his best interests.

So Trump is too stupid to talk to Bob Woodward, too stupid to realize that, and gullible enough to trust Graham (Who is apparently a deep state liberal now). Even if you follow Carlson's crazy logic here, Trump looks absolutely terrible. Also, none of that does anything to improve the comments Trump actually made.

It's the best smoke they can throw up on this one. Trump did so much of this on his own he blindsided everyone around him. The hubris it takes to think you can spin one of the most notable journalists in modern American history with long, extemporaneous conversations. And yet it will be shocking if this makes a significant, lasting impact on the polls.

[Thekri]

It's the best smoke they can throw up on this one. Trump did so much of this on his own he blindsided everyone around him. The hubris it takes to think you can spin one of the most notable journalists in modern American history with long, extemporaneous conversations. And yet it will be shocking if this makes a significant, lasting impact on the polls.

Yeah, "I can probably bullshit Bob Woodward into writing a nice book about me" is not something you say if you actually know who Bob Woodward is. While is somewhat interesting that he actually prepped for those interviews, something he doesn't often do, it is absolutely hilarious that "Prep" seems to be stuffing the room full of stupid props and giving Bob posters of himself.

[Benggaul]

Florida just posted 378 deaths on the day which illustrates why I can't really do my daily updates again just yet. That is, of course, a new record for Florida by a huge amount, but it's a combination of several days' worth of data. It's still horrific either way and what makes it even worse is that Florida has been hiding their numbers since nearly the start, so it's likely even worse than advertised.

In any case, expect the numbers from all over to remain wonky today.

Meanwhile, we've got colleges in all 50 states reporting infections and a few teachers have already died. It's going to get worse.

[Felya]

hows the fires going? anyone getting fucked up on here?

My gf’s old Highschool burned down... I was NFL Fantasy drafting, so that pissed her off for not listening... then when I was done and she told me, jumping into the air and screaming ‘schools out for ever!!!’, was not the tone she was looking for. I suffered the next couple of hours...

Yeah, it’s bad around Sumner, WA... her old neighborhood is cut off without electricity and people can’t evacuate, since Bony Lake is on one side and fire is on the other...

[Adam Jensen]

Florida just posted 378 deaths on the day which illustrates why I can't really do my daily updates again just yet. That is, of course, a new record for Florida by a huge amount, but it's a combination of several days' worth of data. It's still horrific either way and what makes it even worse is that Florida has been hiding their numbers since nearly the start, so it's likely even worse than advertised.

In any case, expect the numbers from all over to remain wonky today.

Meanwhile, we've got colleges in all 50 states reporting infections and a few teachers have already died. It's going to get worse.

378 deaths, but if any of those people had diabetes, AIDS, obesity, acne, asthma, a propensity for running into sharp objects, then, as our right wing morons would let us know, they weren't actual "COVID" deaths.

[Benggaul]

378 deaths, but if any of those people had diabetes, AIDS, obesity, acne, asthma, a propensity for running into sharp objects, then, as our right wing morons would let us know, they weren't actual "COVID" deaths.

Oh they also posted more than 200 deaths yesterday, so nearly 600 for two days is alarming regardless of the context.

[Edge-]

378 deaths, but if any of those people had diabetes, AIDS, obesity, acne, asthma, a propensity for running into sharp objects, then, as our right wing morons would let us know, they weren't actual "COVID" deaths.

Man, I was poking around /r/conservative and they eventually had a thread on the Woodward report.

You should have seen how surprised I was to see one of the top comments claim that only 6% of the total deaths were actually due to covid-19 because 94% had comorbidities and other health complications.

As if those were the cause of death and they weren't exacerbated by having covid-19.

The conservative movement in the US is destined for the loony bin of history.

[Benggaul]

Man, I was poking around /r/conservative and they eventually had a thread on the Woodward report.

You should have seen how surprised I was to see one of the top comments claim that only 6% of the total deaths were actually due to covid-19 because 94% had comorbidities and other health complications.

As if those were the cause of death and they weren't exacerbated by having covid-19.

The conservative movement in the US is destined for the loony bin of history.

Ah, so you didn't see that that's been a talking point for the past week? That was a whole big deal for a few days before they had to move on to defend Trump disparaging fallen soldiers.

Adam Corolla (yeesh) got into some hot water for essentially repeating that nonsense. A whole lotta memes went around about how everyone was surprised how the two hosts from The Man Show went in completely opposite directions career-wise.

[Adam Jensen]

Man, I was poking around /r/conservative and they eventually had a thread on the Woodward report.

You should have seen how surprised I was to see one of the top comments claim that only 6% of the total deaths were actually due to covid-19 because 94% had comorbidities and other health complications.

As if those were the cause of death and they weren't exacerbated by having covid-19.

The conservative movement in the US is destined for the loony bin of history.

Right?

Imagine having diabetes. You go through life getting insulin shots and watching your blood sugar. Then you get COVID and end up hospitalized. And you die from symptoms of diabetes that have been thrown out of whack by COVID.

You still died of COVID, because if it weren't for COVID, you'd still be alive, despite the diabetes.

That's why I can't stand this "6%" bullshit.

[swiftowner]

Oh nice /s

President Donald Trump bragged that he protected Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) from congressional scrutiny after the brutal assassination of American journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

[Thekri]

Oh nice /s

President Donald Trump bragged that he protected Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) from congressional scrutiny after the brutal assassination of American journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

The icing on this very classy cake is that Trump is bragging about covering up the brutal murder of a Washington Post journalist to a Washington Post journalist.