SectionC3

Fake news.

I don't acknowledge that the WHO lied for the Chinese. I do, however, note that the prez made the statement in question four to five weeks after the WHO noted evidence of human-to-human transmission. https://www.who.int/china/news/detail/22-01-2020-field-visit-wuhan-china-jan-2020 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-conference/ Points like the one you just tried to make are why you're on the "fake news" and "hoax" lists.

"We're at 15 cases, and soon we're going to be at zero!" This must be fake data, or fake science: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map

Look harder.

Asked and answered. By me. Search for my "February 1" comment in direct response to you earlier in this thread.

You just nailed it. I struggle to figure out what he's accomplished. Judges, I guess, and dividing the country, for sure. Renegotiating NAFTA, I suppose. And I guess that he had a first phase trade deal with China. But on balance, a whole lot of broken promises and nasty rhetoric. That's the sum of the Trump presidency. Re: the bolded. Thank you. I'm glad somebody else realizes it. All we have on the economic side of things is 3.5 years of dead money in an S&P index and a boatload of new debt in exchange for our trouble. The whole thing is a house of cards, which really shouldn't have surprised anyone given this guy's business record.

That's sort of the point. Nobody knew the subject because the president didn't allow the question. It very well could have been (and, given the context, probably was) a question about oil production and the president's negotiations with foreign producers to cut supply to protect the American energy industry. So before cutting off the question, as the president did, let's at least determine what the subject of the question is. They probably won't treat the next president the same way, you're right. And that's because the next president probably will be more truthful and candid than the current president, meaning that there won't be nearly the antagonism between the press and the next administration, Democrat or Republican.

Another fine example of a presidential dodge. The question was something along the lines of, "Can I check in on oil today?" Instead of allowing a substantive question to reach the floor, or answering the "pregnant" question (yes or no would have been appropriate), the prez responded with a question about the price of oil per bbl. That type of response invites more direct and forceful questioning. If you want to blame the media for doing its job, fine. That's where the prez wants you to go.

Perhaps, and this is just a thought, if Trump was more truthful and answered questions directly then the briefings wouldn't be so combative. By way of example, Trump said something to the effect that he knew that coronavirus wouldn't return as strongly in the fall. Twice he was asked for the basis for that statement. Twice he dodged and said something non-responsive.

I thought you watched the press conferences. Maybe you should watch a little more carefully.

If data eventually supports the theory, then we may have finally found an instance in which smoking saves lives. Amazing. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8246939/French-researchers-plan-nicotine-patches-coronavirus-patients-frontline-workers.html "You weren't called!"

So who, in your view, isn't stupid?

Fake news. The human and economic costs of COVID are far worse than the presence of new people on an Internet message board who challenge your misguided political positions. I think you forgot that the Emoluments clause is "phony." Trump said so himself. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/21/donald-trump-mocks-constitution-emoluments-clause-phony/4055162002/

More name-calling like that and you'll get yourself on a list sooner than later. I had the same thought. It's OK to be worried about a link in the supply chain, but still confident in the chain in its entirety. There is sound logic to that point. I'll qualify my support for that post. Good for Australia. Bad for Sabres fans. I've been punished enough.

Fake news. The only thing that was validated here was that you belong on the Washed up Psycho and snowflake lists, among others. Hoax. He believed he had the authority. He was just wrong about that. Among other things. Fake news. I have never made a three page argument in this setting.

not watching now. Birx to explain, or Birx to figure it out?

How he knows that remains a mystery. Me too. But he’s talking out of his posterior again. Just like he was on the miracle drug thing.

No argument there. But it is kind of like the guy who called the thing a hoax having “absolute authority” to run the show. Two bad ideas.

Still waiting for his answer on how he knows the virus will not come back. He was asked the question twice. He could have summed it up in two appropriate words: fake science.

Hoax. Also, comments like these are why you were placed on the snowflake list and why I have now placed you on the “Washed up Psycho” list with Deranged Rhino. Hoax.

Well said. Whether we agree or disagree with what's being done, those are some heavy responsibilities.

Fake news. Such is to be expected from someone who also is on the snowflake list.

Yup. That’s why you’re on the hoax list. You’re right about investments. It’s not trumps fault I like to use a vanguard S&P index as a core component of my portfolio. But it is telling that he evaluates his presidency with that metric, and that, inspite of his tax gamble, the thing is basically flat since he took office. That, sir, is not winning, regardless of politics.

I think you had a typo in the first sentence, because that phrase definitely makes no sense. I'll assume that it's "immeasurably worse" that's in play here. y way of example, compare Greece (not that bad) and Germany (pretty bad) to here (really bad). Although we know that early action would have improved matters (see, for example South Korea, Taiwan, and Greece), it's impossible to measure how much worse Trump made the situation through inaction. Ergo his failings in this respect are "immeasurabl[e]." Hoax. Comments like that are why you're on the Washed up Psycho list.

Agreed on both counts. He's the king of vague double-talk, e.g., we set guidelines to reopen the economy, but the protestors are cool, too. The constitutional one is going to be a tough deal for him for the reasons you said. And you're right, only the brainwashed will buy his attempt to blame the governors if the pandemic explodes in areas of early reopening and spread from those areas.