hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 434 of 495 FirstFirst ... 334384424431432433434435436437444484 ... LastLast
Results 8,661 to 8,680 of 9881

Thread: US Politics Thread, 2.0

  1. #8661
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    7,156
    gg no re USA

    Trump 2024!
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  2. #8662
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    you're supposing a incredible and unbelievable level of competence on behalf of the Democrats there. nobody outside of China and Korea took COVID-19 seriously in January, it was barely even "worrying" until late February when the first cases started popping up in Europe. everybody was sleeping in class on this one, because pandemics don't happen any more, or something.

    and my point is exactly that they would have feuded with the experts and states in private, with the experts first due to the enormous cost of combatting the pandemic, and the states afterwards to get them to actually do jack shit about it once the mass graves in central park popped up, no doubt hobbling themselves due to "decorum" and "compromise" and other such nonsense in the process.

    its different flavours of shit sandwich, not a choice between a shit sandwich and a regular one.
    I'll also point out that the pretty much party line democrat governors of WA and CA probably both saved significant numbers of lives with literal "shut down everything" actions.

    So, I don't think they would have waffled about and gone to the pizza hut and told their citizens to pray the virus away like we saw out of republicans.
    I'll be interested to see the after-action analysis by economists and social scientists on the "lives saved by shutting it all down" vs. the "lives destroyed and lost by shutting it all down".
    why are you Just Asking This Question now of all times?

    There's no literally no options here besides lockdown and the economy would collapse anyway if millions started to die.

  3. #8663
    Donor Spaztick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    No Longer up High Sierra's Ass
    Posts
    10,506
    in b4 pissed off berniebros vote trump out of spite

  4. #8664
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    It's an old article but it checks out: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/u...rats-2020.html

    Didn't engage outside of his base, didn't try for endorsements, didn't try to build a diverse coalition.
    Why are we back to this dumb talking point?

    He had strong support with Latino voters and under 40s of every strata and race. Older voters simply showed up in huge numbers for Biden, and his base didn't.

  5. #8665
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    5,854
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    It's an old article but it checks out: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/u...rats-2020.html

    Didn't engage outside of his base, didn't try for endorsements, didn't try to build a diverse coalition.
    Why are we back to this dumb talking point?

    He had strong support with Latino voters and under 40s of every strata and race. Older voters simply showed up in huge numbers for Biden, and his base didn't.
    Turnout has been up across all demographics, including young people, but older voters still dominate.

    Vote by mail would help this, honestly. No one should have to wait in line for hours to vote.

  6. #8666
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    It's an old article but it checks out: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/u...rats-2020.html

    Didn't engage outside of his base, didn't try for endorsements, didn't try to build a diverse coalition.
    Why are we back to this dumb talking point?

    He had strong support with Latino voters and under 40s of every strata and race. Older voters simply showed up in huge numbers for Biden, and his base didn't.
    Turnout has been up across all demographics, including young people, but older voters still dominate.

    Vote by mail would help this, honestly. No one should have to wait in line for hours to vote.
    Yep of course pensioners will dominate if lines are the norm in many areas.

    And students naturally get fucked with depending on the jurisdiction they reside + study in. If nothing else mail-in ballots to their home would fix lots of problems.

  7. #8667
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    5,854
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    It's an old article but it checks out: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/u...rats-2020.html

    Didn't engage outside of his base, didn't try for endorsements, didn't try to build a diverse coalition.
    Why are we back to this dumb talking point?

    He had strong support with Latino voters and under 40s of every strata and race. Older voters simply showed up in huge numbers for Biden, and his base didn't.
    Turnout has been up across all demographics, including young people, but older voters still dominate.

    Vote by mail would help this, honestly. No one should have to wait in line for hours to vote.
    Yep of course pensioners will dominate if lines are the norm in many areas.

    And students naturally get fucked with depending on the jurisdiction they reside + study in. If nothing else mail-in ballots to their home would fix lots of problems.
    Yes but those aren't "problems" to the political class.

  8. #8668
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    14,915
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    you're supposing a incredible and unbelievable level of competence on behalf of the Democrats there. nobody outside of China and Korea took COVID-19 seriously in January, it was barely even "worrying" until late February when the first cases started popping up in Europe. everybody was sleeping in class on this one, because pandemics don't happen any more, or something.

    and my point is exactly that they would have feuded with the experts and states in private, with the experts first due to the enormous cost of combatting the pandemic, and the states afterwards to get them to actually do jack shit about it once the mass graves in central park popped up, no doubt hobbling themselves due to "decorum" and "compromise" and other such nonsense in the process.

    its different flavours of shit sandwich, not a choice between a shit sandwich and a regular one.
    I'll also point out that the pretty much party line democrat governors of WA and CA probably both saved significant numbers of lives with literal "shut down everything" actions.

    So, I don't think they would have waffled about and gone to the pizza hut and told their citizens to pray the virus away like we saw out of republicans.
    I'll be interested to see the after-action analysis by economists and social scientists on the "lives saved by shutting it all down" vs. the "lives destroyed and lost by shutting it all down".
    why are you Just Asking This Question now of all times?
    Because I am a Super Sekret Black Hat Operative of the Fascist States of Amerikkka here to corrupt you.

    ....

    Because it interests me? Because me, and many I know, have wondered if full bore shutdown was the right call, knowing people now suffering because of it, and most of us not knowing anyone sick as yet (thank God)?

    There's no literally no options here besides lockdown and the economy would collapse anyway if millions started to die.
    There are always options. Value judgments. Allocation of scare resources in the face of overwhelming potential loss.

    Hence why I will be interested to see legitimate, peer reviewed, academic research on if we made the right call or not.

    I supported the policies of lockdown, but I do wonder. Clearly I am not nearly as know-everything-self-assured-in-my-view as you are Mew, sorry.


  9. #8669
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    14,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Spaztick View Post
    in b4 pissed off berniebros vote trump out of spite
    I voted Bernie in the primary.

    I will hold my nose and vote Biden in the General Election.

    Anyone. But. Trump. (well, maybe not actual RoboHitler.....but anyone ELSE but Trump and RoboHitler).


  10. #8670
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    There are always options. Value judgments. Allocation of scare resources in the face of overwhelming potential loss.
    No

  11. #8671
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    14,915
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    There are always options. Value judgments. Allocation of scare resources in the face of overwhelming potential loss.
    No
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Clearly I am not nearly as know-everything-self-assured-in-my-view as you are Mew, sorry.


  12. #8672
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,341
    That's right

    I don't think there is any "nuance" or "on the other hand..." when it comes to stopping a pandemic, or guaranteed healthcare, or guaranteed education.

  13. #8673
    Super Chillerator Global Moderator teds :D's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 9, 2011
    Posts
    9,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    you're supposing a incredible and unbelievable level of competence on behalf of the Democrats there. nobody outside of China and Korea took COVID-19 seriously in January, it was barely even "worrying" until late February when the first cases started popping up in Europe. everybody was sleeping in class on this one, because pandemics don't happen any more, or something.

    and my point is exactly that they would have feuded with the experts and states in private, with the experts first due to the enormous cost of combatting the pandemic, and the states afterwards to get them to actually do jack shit about it once the mass graves in central park popped up, no doubt hobbling themselves due to "decorum" and "compromise" and other such nonsense in the process.

    its different flavours of shit sandwich, not a choice between a shit sandwich and a regular one.
    I'll also point out that the pretty much party line democrat governors of WA and CA probably both saved significant numbers of lives with literal "shut down everything" actions.

    So, I don't think they would have waffled about and gone to the pizza hut and told their citizens to pray the virus away like we saw out of republicans.
    I'll be interested to see the after-action analysis by economists and social scientists on the "lives saved by shutting it all down" vs. the "lives destroyed and lost by shutting it all down".
    why are you Just Asking This Question now of all times?
    Because I am a Super Sekret Black Hat Operative of the Fascist States of Amerikkka here to corrupt you.

    ....

    Because it interests me? Because me, and many I know, have wondered if full bore shutdown was the right call, knowing people now suffering because of it, and most of us not knowing anyone sick as yet (thank God)?

    There's no literally no options here besides lockdown and the economy would collapse anyway if millions started to die.
    There are always options. Value judgments. Allocation of scare resources in the face of overwhelming potential loss.

    Hence why I will be interested to see legitimate, peer reviewed, academic research on if we made the right call or not.

    I supported the policies of lockdown, but I do wonder. Clearly I am not nearly as know-everything-self-assured-in-my-view as you are Mew, sorry.
    your options are basically shutdowns with travel restrictions, which will result in some deaths and heavy damage to the economy or;

    no restrictions, the populace builds up herd immunity and rather a lot of people die, but less damage to the economy (but still quite a bit)

    i know the economy tanking will result in suicides and other deaths, but i'd rather go for the one where people didn't vote for people to die.

  14. #8674
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    14,915
    Quote Originally Posted by teds :D View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    you're supposing a incredible and unbelievable level of competence on behalf of the Democrats there. nobody outside of China and Korea took COVID-19 seriously in January, it was barely even "worrying" until late February when the first cases started popping up in Europe. everybody was sleeping in class on this one, because pandemics don't happen any more, or something.

    and my point is exactly that they would have feuded with the experts and states in private, with the experts first due to the enormous cost of combatting the pandemic, and the states afterwards to get them to actually do jack shit about it once the mass graves in central park popped up, no doubt hobbling themselves due to "decorum" and "compromise" and other such nonsense in the process.

    its different flavours of shit sandwich, not a choice between a shit sandwich and a regular one.
    I'll also point out that the pretty much party line democrat governors of WA and CA probably both saved significant numbers of lives with literal "shut down everything" actions.

    So, I don't think they would have waffled about and gone to the pizza hut and told their citizens to pray the virus away like we saw out of republicans.
    I'll be interested to see the after-action analysis by economists and social scientists on the "lives saved by shutting it all down" vs. the "lives destroyed and lost by shutting it all down".
    why are you Just Asking This Question now of all times?
    Because I am a Super Sekret Black Hat Operative of the Fascist States of Amerikkka here to corrupt you.

    ....

    Because it interests me? Because me, and many I know, have wondered if full bore shutdown was the right call, knowing people now suffering because of it, and most of us not knowing anyone sick as yet (thank God)?

    There's no literally no options here besides lockdown and the economy would collapse anyway if millions started to die.
    There are always options. Value judgments. Allocation of scare resources in the face of overwhelming potential loss.

    Hence why I will be interested to see legitimate, peer reviewed, academic research on if we made the right call or not.

    I supported the policies of lockdown, but I do wonder. Clearly I am not nearly as know-everything-self-assured-in-my-view as you are Mew, sorry.
    your options are basically shutdowns with travel restrictions, which will result in some deaths and heavy damage to the economy or;

    no restrictions, the populace builds up herd immunity and rather a lot of people die, but less damage to the economy (but still quite a bit)

    i know the economy tanking will result in suicides and other deaths, but i'd rather go for the one where people didn't vote for people to die.
    You're voting for people to die one way or the other.

    Mostly the old, sick, and otherwise underlying condition folks in the major cities vs. the various forms of widespread death and destitution that come with economic destruction.

    I think it's fair to have empathy for both folks at risk here, those who get sick, and those who will be destroyed by this shutdown in every meaningful way.

    If it says anything, it says we need a materially better system of social safety net here in the U.S.

    Like I said, and no disrespect to the great minds here at FHC, but I'll wait and see what the academics have to say long down the road when the full picture is clear.

    Presuming I don't get COVID and die, of course.
    Last edited by Alistair; April 9 2020 at 12:20:06 AM.


  15. #8675
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    14,719
    Quote Originally Posted by teds :D View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    you're supposing a incredible and unbelievable level of competence on behalf of the Democrats there. nobody outside of China and Korea took COVID-19 seriously in January, it was barely even "worrying" until late February when the first cases started popping up in Europe. everybody was sleeping in class on this one, because pandemics don't happen any more, or something.

    and my point is exactly that they would have feuded with the experts and states in private, with the experts first due to the enormous cost of combatting the pandemic, and the states afterwards to get them to actually do jack shit about it once the mass graves in central park popped up, no doubt hobbling themselves due to "decorum" and "compromise" and other such nonsense in the process.

    its different flavours of shit sandwich, not a choice between a shit sandwich and a regular one.
    I'll also point out that the pretty much party line democrat governors of WA and CA probably both saved significant numbers of lives with literal "shut down everything" actions.

    So, I don't think they would have waffled about and gone to the pizza hut and told their citizens to pray the virus away like we saw out of republicans.
    I'll be interested to see the after-action analysis by economists and social scientists on the "lives saved by shutting it all down" vs. the "lives destroyed and lost by shutting it all down".
    why are you Just Asking This Question now of all times?
    Because I am a Super Sekret Black Hat Operative of the Fascist States of Amerikkka here to corrupt you.

    ....

    Because it interests me? Because me, and many I know, have wondered if full bore shutdown was the right call, knowing people now suffering because of it, and most of us not knowing anyone sick as yet (thank God)?

    There's no literally no options here besides lockdown and the economy would collapse anyway if millions started to die.
    There are always options. Value judgments. Allocation of scare resources in the face of overwhelming potential loss.

    Hence why I will be interested to see legitimate, peer reviewed, academic research on if we made the right call or not.

    I supported the policies of lockdown, but I do wonder. Clearly I am not nearly as know-everything-self-assured-in-my-view as you are Mew, sorry.
    your options are basically shutdowns with travel restrictions, which will result in some deaths and heavy damage to the economy or;

    no restrictions, the populace builds up herd immunity and rather a lot of people die, but less damage to the economy (but still quite a bit)

    i know the economy tanking will result in suicides and other deaths, but i'd rather go for the one where people didn't vote for people to die.
    Has any of these fancy models calculated unnecessary deaths from emergency services being too loaded to do anything else, because I've only seen models related to COVID related deaths. Not the knock on effects as well.

    The "keep the economy running" people deny science half the time in the US, at least, ffs, why would we trust their math on this?

    I don't really see it as a choice, and I agree with you. Whatever "bad effects" the economy damage has simply can't be calculated against the potential loss of life, not to mention everlasting PTSD for all the first responders who we put through that.
    Last edited by erichkknaar; April 9 2020 at 02:02:21 AM.
    meh

  16. #8676

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    4,403
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    You're voting for people to die one way or the other.

    Mostly the old, sick, and otherwise underlying condition folks in the major cities vs. the various forms of widespread death and destitution that come with economic destruction.

    I think it's fair to have empathy for both folks at risk here, those who get sick, and those who will be destroyed by this shutdown in every meaningful way.

    If it says anything, it says we need a materially better system of social safety net here in the U.S.

    Like I said, and no disrespect to the great minds here at FHC, but I'll wait and see what the academics have to say long down the road when the full picture is clear.

    Presuming I don't get COVID and die, of course.
    Yeah okay, but what is important is what the right call to make is now. And the worst-case risks for pandemic vs depression are still worse for the pandemic. I fully expect some post-fact fingerwagging by the intellectual backbench once this is over, but right now there is no such thing as being too cautious.

    Not to mention this: Resources dont have to be scarce, and not all resources are alike. America is among the wealthiest countries on earth. It can alleviate the economic costs, if it wants to. But costs in human lives can never be unmade.

  17. #8677

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,443
    America will never make poor people whole for their pandemic losses and a lot of them are in an exceedingly precarious position. You're going to see a lot of divorces, lost houses, lost apartments, lost cars, lost livelihoods and lost hope. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the deaths from the economic shock were several times the deaths from coronavirus a few years down the road.

    However not shutting down the country would massively increase the coronavirus deaths, probably into the millions and a lot of economic damage would happen anyway as people stopped going out in public of their own accord.

    Then there's the risk that by letting the coronavirus run free it will mutate to such an extent that the vaccines under development don't work for all the strains and you essentially get a much more lethal and contagious multi-strain flu surging continually around the world.

    Imo Prudence dictates a shutdown and a UBI equivalent. Probably coupled with loan, mortgage and rent suspension.

    Or you could give shitloads of free money to bankers and private equity guys to buy up all the distressed assets and then jack up everyone's rents and laugh as deaths of despair spiral upwards.

  18. #8678

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    7,709
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    I'm personally inclined to believe there was also an army of trolls trying to amplify the fringe "Bernie Bro" beliefs and drive a wedge between young progressives and the rest of the left.
    I am 100% convinced the internal narratives of the democratic party are entirely dominated by Russian-manufactured controversy that aims in particular to radicalise American leftish youth to the point they just completely disengage with the political process, or vote for someone so absurd they destroy the country with their incompetence. Not even a little bit kidding.

  19. #8679
    Donor Spaztick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    No Longer up High Sierra's Ass
    Posts
    10,506
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    I'm personally inclined to believe there was also an army of trolls trying to amplify the fringe "Bernie Bro" beliefs and drive a wedge between young progressives and the rest of the left.
    I am 100% convinced the internal narratives of the democratic party are entirely dominated by Russian-manufactured controversy that aims in particular to radicalise American leftish youth to the point they just completely disengage with the political process, or vote for someone so absurd they destroy the country with their incompetence. Not even a little bit kidding.
    Simpler than that, they see berniebros as useful idiots.

  20. #8680
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    2,169
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    I'm personally inclined to believe there was also an army of trolls trying to amplify the fringe "Bernie Bro" beliefs and drive a wedge between young progressives and the rest of the left.
    I am 100% convinced the internal narratives of the democratic party are entirely dominated by Russian-manufactured controversy that aims in particular to radicalise American leftish youth to the point they just completely disengage with the political process, or vote for someone so absurd they destroy the country with their incompetence. Not even a little bit kidding.
    turbomong

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •