SectionC3

What exactly has he accomplished? Wall? Nope. Complete Mexican funding for wall? Not happening. Repeal and replace? Nope. Economic growth? Nah. Job growth? Yeah, no. Comprehensive trade deal with China? Nope. Deficit elimination? Not looking good. Balanced budget? Nope. Tax cut for everyone? Fake news. Health care premium tax deduction? Maybe next term, if he gets one. Rebuilding national infrastructure? See wall. Fooling about 38% of the electorate with fake winning? Mission accomplished.

What's the problem with "mail in voting?"

Denial is one of the first stages of Biden Derangement Syndrome. Be careful. *** The perils of fake leadership: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-us-death-toll-halved-093000321.html

That’s funny. I had the same thought about you. Your recent activity strongly suggests Biden Derangement Syndrome. Get well soon! Yup. Fake leadership from a fake winner.

Another study, another indication that the miracle cure trump promotes is just another example of his fake news: https://apnews.com/23f7a2d9645602bee1c3dc7c0c952191

Buffalo Gal has never heard of mitigation of damages.

Who said anything about being happy or unhappy about it? The zig-zagging is the issue. The political wind blows this guy all over the place, which is kind of a problem for a "wartime president" mired public health and economic crises.

Trump flip flopped. As usual. Blame him.

Par for the course with this administration.

Just leaving this here. Interesting extrapolations with respect to a problem with no "right" solution: https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2020/05/05/coronavirus-latest-new-university-of-penn-model-predicts-350000-deaths-by-end-of-june-if-all-states-fully-reopen/

To be expected from a "wartime president" who is dismantling the COVID task force in the middle of the fight (for obvious political reasons). Mission accomplished!

Don't forget the Roundup. Death on weeds. Death on coronavirus.

Kind of like trump telling people to wear masks, right?

Meteoritic catastrophe is hypothetical. COVID catastrophe is not. And instead of focusing on the problem, the person with “absolute authority” to lead on the issue is belittling late night talk show hosts. This is the proper thread. Wegmans was ok on beef last week but low on chicken. Fish seemed to be in decent supply.

Domestic COVID-19 deaths now exceed American deaths in the Vietnam War. The percentage of workforce unemployed likely is higher now than it was during the Great Depression. In spite of all of that, today we received this message from the President of the United States: “Wow! Congratulations to Greg Gutfeld, a one time Trump Hater who has come all the way home. His Ratings easily beat no talent Stephen Colbert, nice guy Jimmy Fallon, and wacko ‘last placer’ Jimmy Kimmel. Greg built his show from scratch, and did a great job in doing so.” This. Is. Freaking. Nuts.

No kidding. He’s not letting Fauci go to the house side of the hill because he Fauci’s going to get creamed in front of an unfavorable committee. The Senate committee will go soft on Fauci. It’s all about spin, which is freaking nuts in this situation. The easy out for Trump would have been to have kept Fauci off the hill altogether, and to have tried to control Fauci and the narrative through the pressers. Instead, . . . the leader of the free world middles it and blames “haters.” It’s just. Freaking. Nuts. Right on. Freedom Caucus, anyone?

Come on, if haters really is the reason why Fauci isn’t going to the House, don’t you think he could just slap on some hater blockers for protection and solve the problem? https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=haterblockers

When you roll around with pigs you both get muddy. Trump is casual with the treason accusation, and the fact that somebody else might have been casual with it, too, doesn’t dignify his actions.

I didn’t read the whole thing (stumbled upon it looking for info on Amazon’s drop in the last hour). “Haters” is a ridiculous reason not to let the guy testify, especially if the Senate is worth his time. I still don’t know the scope or the point of the trip to the hill, but holy cow what a dumb reason to cite to prevent him from visiting the House. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/05/coronavirus-trump-blocked-anthony-fauci-house-testimony-because-of-haters.html

W/r/t the last point, it depends on the purpose for which Fauci was called. My news consumption lately has been limited to information germane to the pandemic and my economic interests, so I’m not as familiar as I should be with respect to the request for Fauci’s testimony. A Congressional investigation is not on my radar. If the testimony was expected to take an amount of time commensurate with that Fauci has spent standing around on the dias at one of Trump’s pressers, then I’d question the motivation for the block. If Fauci was supposed to be on the hill for a couple of days, then it probably would be a different story.

Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed this mourning: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/05/trump-george-conway-conservative-critics-new-coronavirus-ad-236461 ”Moonface” is a new insult. I’d never heard that before. Good thing the leader of the free world has the free time to worry about George Conway on Twitter during this public health and economic catastrophe.

Fair enough on Pence. But Fauci and Birx are part of the leadership w/r/t the response, no? If not, there would be no reason to have them on the podium. And the fact remains that they can’t analyze and marshal every piece of data and analysis generated with respect to this issue. That’s where the relevant scientific community, i.e., peer review, comes into play.

Of course more data is better. But the leader of the federal response to the pandemic has a limited amount of time, and can’t wade through every piece of data out there. Peer review first, then presentation to leadership. Also, there’s a bit of “fake logic” there. You return to the point that the fact that the presenter here is a “credentialed professional[]” is determinative. It’s not. It’s the quality of her work that counts. Peer review measures the quality and reliability of the study. If of quality, and if reliable, then it should move up the chain.

To make an errant decision is not to make one undignified. You make a good point. The treason allegation is a terrible one, and it should be used only in the rarest of circumstances. To levy it wantonly is wrong and beneath the accuser and his/her office. https://www.axios.com/trump-treason-russia-investigation-new-york-times-e1660029-c73c-4809-8bd5-8988f1ed4fda.html

I hope you’re right. I’ve wondered whether the vaccine timeline will be expedited with the advances in computing power and communication that have occurred over the past decade. I’ve been in a mask since February. I’d obviously prefer not to have to wear it, but it’s a matter of respect for others and personal peace of mind. If we all do our own “little” parts we’ll hopefully get through this much faster.