jdub27

Between this and your comparison of professional sports pods and nursing homes, you really are on a roll!

Yet Trump is 1-28* in his court filings trying to prove election fraud. *I believe the lone victory was recently overturned by the PA Supreme Court.

Who's getting their panties in a bunch besides you? Though it's hilarious if you don't think it's going to end up with the same issues as Twitter or end up a giant sh*t show. Parler has, predictably, already ran into issues with their "free speech" policy. LOL. Far from it but I'm guessing you didn't have an original comment (again) but already had a link to someone else's thoughts on the matter queued up. I have zero issues with Parler but I'm also not pretending it's something it isn't at this point in time. Exactly. Not sure why this is such a problem for some to admit. The are literally right-wing personalities advertising it as this, yet it's apparently taboo to admit. I don't get it.

What exactly is dumb about it? It's literally how they have marketed it and why it has recently gained traction. They are promoting "free speech" to conservatives. Wonder how much stake some of those influencers have gotten to switch over and promote the product. Based on what I've seen, that's pretty far from accurate. At this point it is mostly a far right echo chamber that prioritizes verified users. Nothing wrong with that but no point in pretending it's something it isn't.

The new safe space for the extreme right?

Brilliant, why hasn't anyone thought of that yet? Counterpoints: Who's going to care for them? And do we lock down those caregivers families as well, including all of their kids? "How is that plan going to work with the hospitals in the region that are already nearing capacity with workers who are near their breaking point? I'm sure they will be happy to watch it "let er rip" while continuing to be stretched extremely thin due to a shortage of workers and/or capacity. How do you account for the large amount of the population who aren't vulnerable yet will continue to take cautions, particularly as people are ready to "let er rip". How well do you think that plan is going to work out for the businesses that I assume your plan is set to help.

After reading the filings and considering Trump is still letting Rudy argue in front of federal judges (in disastrous fashion) to prove his case, tough to buy its anything more than a money grab. If it wasn't, you'd think he'd use the money being donated to him for an actual defense instead of using it to pay off campaign debt. Didn't take them long to change course and certify it. He'll be 78. Not that he'd be successful if he ran, but he'll work other ways to pad his pockets.

I never claimed he started it, I stated he has made it an up-front, central part of his political strategy. I don't care where you are on the political spectrum, if you can't see Trump thrives off divisiveness and openly creating an "us vs. them" mentality more than any other politician in my lifetime, I don't know what to tell you. Is it prevalent with politicians of both parties? Absolutely. Does Trump openly take it further than anyone else? Without question. It is a strategy that worked for him in 2016 when he had the perfect villian in Hillary. It mostly worked during his 4 years as president to keep his base engergized but it absolutely is what derailed his election. If he had toned down his rhetoric and at least pretended that he could work with others, he would have won and probably by a fair amount. None of this should be any sort of shocking revelation. Nowhere did I state the division was along any sort of race or ethnicity line.

I agree. But the trade-off was letting Trump's brand of conservatism and strategy of divsion set the party back much further with another 4 years.

Anecdotally, I'm aware of plenty of that happening just in North Dakota. Not hard to see conservatives being tired of Trump and knowing that Biden would have minimal power with a R Senate. On top of that, frankly, it's the better play for the R's in the long run anyway. A D president give the R's a better shot at turning the house in 2022 (mid-terms historical show losses for the party holding the White House) and then they can run an actual conservative in 2024 who very possibly could be running against Harris, who would have to be a big underdog in a general election. Minimal short term pain (moderate Biden who can claim to have his hands tied with an R Senate) for long term gains (turning the House at mid-terms and running a solid candidate in 2024 to take back the White House).

Not disagreeing, just trying to figure out what the concern is: -There are accusations of citizens' most sacred right being denied -Citizens' votes don't actually matter in a Presidential election so Trump's legal strategy is a waste of time (though I believe the level of this varies from state to state)

Given that, it is interesting that one of the strategies being put forth is to remove the "will of the people" and have the state legislators pick their own electors, effectively eliminating those citizens most sacred right. I think the overall point is that the "fraud" actually being taken front of judges are minimal and even if they were to be proven as accurate, will have absoultely no effect on the final outcome of the election.

Talk about undermining the will of the people and removing any faith there would be in any presidential election going forward.

Wait, so now we're listening to Fauci? I get confused on who's right, who's wrong, when we should count votes, when we shouldn't, etc. 2020 is quite the conundrum.

Devil's advocate: Were you as concerned 4 year's ago when it was the D's claiming fraud? I'd also be curious what level of "irregularities" that 70% believes. Based on Trump's filings, his own lawyers don't have any basis or proof for the fraud they are claiming, admitting it to a judge and dismissing their own filings. Despite that, he's still on on social media continuing to rail that there was fraud and that is doing even more harm to undermine the election process. I have zero disagreements that if there is proof of fraud that it needs to be fully investigated, zero questions asked. But the evidence provided thus far has shown nothing even remotely concrete to verify that. As for "calling" the elections, the AP has been doing so since 1848. D's and R's alike have had no trouble accepting the results, including Trump himself who won by razor thin margins with calls of fraud from the otherside. The media reporting the votes and using experts analyzing the data to determine how things will shake out. Will there be an occasional miss? Absolutely. But if the media didn't report and we waited until December 14 until the election is certified, the country would burn. Can you imagine the sh*tshow that would occur if the current president got 40+ days to claim he won the election only to find out mid-December that he didn't? On top of that, there is important transition plans that need to be started. I get your overall point, but think the concern is overblown. To both points, it is wash, rinse, repeat every 2-4 years with the sides switching roles. No doubt that social media continues to exacerbate the problem.

His own lawyers are admitting they don't have evidence of fraud when asked in court.

Per the WHO, smallpox and rinderpest. Based on the lawsuits his team has been filing, I'd put pretty heavy odds on the former being the favorite. A most likely scenario is that he's pushing the envelope to raise money for a "defense fund" because he can use 60% of the funds to retire campaign debt. If he happens to throw something at the wall and it sticks, then even better.

It's been done before.

Mostly my thoughts as well, but are they going to have a designated "CoVid" staff so that those infected can stay away from their healthy co-workers? I know that the plan is to only have them work with already infected patients but it sure goes against the message of "if you're positive, stay home" and knowingly bringing the virus into a healthcare setting doesn't exactly scream "protect the vulnerable". Locally, close contacts and quarantined teachers is what is going to shut down the schools. Staff is being stretched way too thin despite kids being better off in classrooms. Tough to keep them there when they can't find enough bodies to even supervise. Teachers trying to teach multiple classes with aids/paras/other staff trying to fill in the gaps isn't great. My prediction is schools shutdown after Thanksgiving and don't reopen until after New Years.

What are your thoughts on Burgum allowing infected healthcare workers to continue working? I understand part of the logic due to the extereme shortage we're seeing in healthcare workers which is putting further stress on hospital capacity, but on the other hand, the optics of continuing to allow people knowingly infected into healthcare facilities becuase that's the only way to keep up points to there being just a little bit of a problem.

It's almost like both sides are the same, the roles just reverse every 2-4 years and they hope everyone forgets:

How did you forget about Space Force?? I highly doubt what he does or doesn't know has any bearing on the messages he's sending out. Reality isn't always in line with the messages. Which is also something the Pelosi is trying to deal with within her party. The fracturing by their lack of gains through down-party voting is going to cause some issues on how they move forward. I would aslo guess if Trump actually had something, Rudy would have brought it up over the weekend at his news conference at the Four Seasons (Total Landscaping) which was about as much high comedy as one could ask for. The humor in that mess can not be understated. Pretty thin line there. Trump (and Obama before him, and Bush before him, etc) have had absolutely zero issue claiming victory before Electors cast their official ballots. Biden's proclamation is at least based in something as he has multiple news agencies giving him the nod. The AP has been doing it this since 1848 with minimal problems.

Yes, they took on the full, unsubsidized risk and can now reap the full rewards. Not saying the turned down the money out of goodwill, they did it to protect their process and profits (assuming they were/are successful). It is only relevant to those pointing to the government's subsidization of the R&D for CoVid research and claiming that's how this supposed vaccine came about. The purchase agreement only comes into play if they were successful. In that event, I doubt there would have been an actual concern to find a market for a quality vaccine.

Because no one actually believes the hyperbole that he was going to put them out of the business except for the hyper-partisan fringe on both sides.

Same reason travel and entertainment related entities are up huge: If Pfizer's news is accurate, these industries will see a huge boost. Same reason "stay-at-home" companies like Zoom, Paypal and Peloton are down big: If Pfizer's news is accurate, these industries will take a hit.