2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

drunkmonkey

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I've read the article you linked to and indeed the articles that it links to.

NONE of them say that masks increase the chance of Infection - NOT ONE.

There is a level debate about how much benefit they provide or that their effectiveness is potentially reduced as a results of incorrect usage etc.

The Norway study basically suggests that at a low level of community infection the benefits of wearing masks are possibly negligible. I'm not sure that the current US Hotspots would qualify as "Low levels of infection" though.

They do say that in the case of universal mask wearing that it's possible that the people that suffer adverse effects from wearing masks (Breathing difficulties , Skin irritation etc.) would outweigh the number of Covid infections it avoids

But as I said absolutely NONE have remotely suggested that wearing masks increases the risk of getting infected.

tl;dr

Masks might not reduce Covid Infefctions significantly, but they absolutely do not make it any worse

I didn't say the article claimed they increased transmission but one of the authors Professor Carl Heneghan was speaking yesterday at the advisory committee and he said they'd noticed cases went up in areas of the UK with compulsory mask wearing.

Leroy42

So it is incorrect usage rather than the masks themselves that you have an issue with.

Would you accept that masks, if used properly, are not dangerous and do not increase the spread?

Wouldn't it be great, since it is misuse that would appear to be the problem, if the US had some central agency that could diseminate the correct information to the public rather than getting continually mixed messages from POTUS that clearly doesn't understand the issue

Quin_Dub

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Right so you see what's happening with the General public then, I'm not referring to you it's the people coming into you. They adjust the mask from the front, pick up and then hand an item to you. It's then up to you to clean your hands after that customer to break the chain of transmission or you could unintentionally pass it to the next customer.
It's a good thing the virus isn't rampant as the dangers of all this misuse would become blatantly apparent and you'd be in a very risky environment.

How does the presence of a mask change the dynamic of this scenario???

Do people that don't wear masks not touch their face or something?

Don't get me wrong , the scenario you describe is a valid concern , but the potential negative implications are just as likely/prevalent with or without a mask.

No one has ever suggested that Masks are a panacea that provide universal protection. They do however help , even if it's only a tiny bit.

We all need to continue to do all of the other things - Hand washing , Social distancing etc. etc.

Anyway - This is really not the right thread for this conversation.

Carfacemandog

So this poster seems to both believe that masks increase the spread of covid, but also has said they believe covid is likely all a hoax anyway.

Yeah, totally checks out.

randd1

Carfacemandog wrote: »

So this poster seems to both believe that masks increase the spread of covid, but also has said they believe covid is likely all a hoax anyway.

Yeah, totally checks out.

What in any of his posts indicated that you were to expect reasonable points to be made?

The guy is clearly just having a laugh at a wind up.

drunkmonkey

[QUOTE=Quin_Dub;114304551

We all need to continue to do all of the other things - Hand washing , Social distancing etc. etc.

Anyway - This is really not the right thread for this conversation.[/QUOTE]

That's what's been lost from my observations, good Hygiene and distancing seen to have really slipped, once the mask goes on distancing seems to be an after thought, NPHET are concerned and so am I.

Your right it's the wrong thread, original question was answered. 54% republican in favor, still leaves a large cohort of Republicans not in favor.

James Brown

Trump reconfirms he's a racist citing a birther theory for Harris. 'Nasty' man.

Overheal

Bowie wrote: »

Trump reconfirms he's a racist citing a birther theory for Harris. 'Nasty' man.

Someone should remind him Obama won the election handily the year they really tested out this birther nonsense on him.

drunkmonkey

Bowie wrote: »

Trump reconfirms he's a racist citing a birther theory for Harris. 'Nasty' man.

Isn't Harris a racist pick, it was all black women Biden was choosing from.
Is the thinking all blacks will vote for her, didn't they think women would vote for Hillary.

Cody montana

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Isn't Harris a racist pick, it was all black women Biden was choosing from.
Is the thinking all blacks will vote for her, didn't they think women would vote for Hillary.

Racist to who?

Overheal

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Isn't Harris a racist pick, it was all black women Biden was choosing from.
Is the thinking all blacks will vote for her, didn't they think women would vote for Hillary.

That’s not true at all. Grisham, Duckworth and Warren were also up for consideration.

Igotadose

Well, that didn't work too well. Seems the change to send Covid case and mortality information to HHS rather than CDC (just a few weeks ago, which is of course feels like a lifetime in TrumpYears), is causing chaos for doctors. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/14/health/hospital-covid-19-data-letter/index.html

The #IMPOTUS's HHS spokesdroid is gaslighting the doctors that signed the letter saying the old system (which was more than just some software ffs), couldn't keep up. Funny, didn't hear that from the CDC previously.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/14/health/hospital-covid-19-data-letter/index.html

drunkmonkey

Overheal wrote: »

That’s not true at all. Grisham, Duckworth and Warren were also up for consideration.

I'll give you Grisham but Duckworth is Thai and there others a Native American. We've known for a while it was between black women though.
I dunno, what's the average American woman these days?

James Brown

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Isn't Harris a racist pick, it was all black women Biden was choosing from.
Is the thinking all blacks will vote for her, didn't they think women would vote for Hillary.

You stepping over Trump being a racist in a 'look over there!'?

Playing to a demographic is what all politicians do all the time, be it race or economically based.

Trump is playing if she's part black she might not be American, again. He's called all female political opponents 'nasty' at one time or another.

feargale

The Unbearables wrote: »

Obama is/was a saint for many. Truth is he was an evil yoke of a man who got away with plenty

Substantiate, please.

Igotadose

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'll give you Grisham but Duckworth is Thai and there others a Native American. We've known for a while it was between black women though.
I dunno, what's the average American woman these days?

Dafuq does that question mean? The average American woman is wonderful!

feargale

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

There's something a little off about the Florida chapter of Black Voices for Trump. But I can't quite put my finger on it.
https://twitter.com/EvanPower/status/1293582537969807367

I get it. Their surname is Black.

feargale

timsey tiger wrote: »

This is the name you're going with for Biden.

I can only think of on whining b*tch hiding in his bunker when protesters came and as the add says Biden's not that.

Golf bunker Donald!

Like Nero fiddling he played golf while Covid was ravaging his country.

Muahahaha

Bowie wrote: »

Trump reconfirms he's a racist citing a birther theory for Harris. 'Nasty' man.

Just more nonsense from Trump, its hard to believe at a time he is so far behind in the polls and needs to convince Biden voters to vote for him instead that he is engaging in this divisive crap. It didnt work vs.Obama and it wont work here either. Trump supporters and racists will lap it up as a dogwhistle meant for them but his campaign doesnt seem to realise that ultimately it will drive voters away from them. He really is doing a remarkable job at losing this election through unforced errors.

feargale

Kidchameleon wrote: »

He was asked a question by a reporter and he said this:

"I just heard it today that she doesn't meet the requirements ... I have no idea if that's right."

That's not "pushing" anything. Why do people just believe these things without doing a tiny bit of research? Cant find it but it would be nice to see the whole conference to get more context (that tweet cuts him off mid sentence)

Here's the article in question:

https://www.newsweek.com/some-questions-kamala-harris-about-eligibility-opinion-1524483

Here is an extract:

"I just heard that, I heard it today, that she doesn’t meet the requirements,” he said. “I have no idea if that’s right. I would have assumed the Democrats would have checked it before she gets chosen to run for vice president. But that’s a very serious ….You’re saying that they’re saying that she doesn’t qualify because she wasn’t born in this country?”

Ms Trump’s comments come on the back of a widely-circulated opinion piece by conservative law academic John Eastman in Newsweek magazine. The article questions whether Ms Harris is eligible to become vice president or president under the US constitution, claiming that neither her father or mother was a naturalised US citizen at the time of her birth in 1964.

The article argues that, before voters “so cavalierly accept senator Harris’ eligibility” questions should be posed “about the status of her parents at the time of her birth.”



Decide for yourself. You can put your hand on your heart and assert that the Great Liar's hand is not in it. Some will believe you without question, and others, albeit without hard and fast evidence right now, in the light of the similarly racist slur on Obama, will wonder. At least it came from the "conservatives.

There is no more justification for raising this than there is for questioning the status of Eastman's parents the night he was conceived.

feargale

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Thank you President Trump!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/13/israel-and-uae-to-form-diplomatic-ties-says-donald-trump

Israel and UAE to form diplomatic ties, says Donald Trump

"Israel and the United Arab Emirates have established full diplomatic ties in a historic Washington-brokered deal that will mean Israel “suspending” its plans to annex parts of the Palestinian territories.

The deal, announced in a joint statement between Israel, the UAE and the US, said the two states had “agreed to the full normalisation of relations."

So, they won't steal any more Palestinian land, but they will hang on to what they have stolen already. Thank you Golf Bunker Don.

A deal between Israel and UAE? Sounds like a deal between the IRA and Luxembourg.

Tell me how

Whats the betting that despite everything that has gone on so far and the widespread efforts to not lockdown, and to keep things open that Covid could still be used as an excuse in a November to restrict access to voting?

If this was a central African Nation of 20 years ago, the US and the UN would be sending representatives to monitor the electoral process and to ensure it was open and fair.

Things are going to get pretty mental.

Noeleff

Igotadose wrote: »

By all accounts, including Trump's, they knew each other. And Trump despite calling so many prominent women 'Nasty" and other childish nicknames, wished Ghislaine Maxwell well recently after she was captured and interred waiting for trial on child rape and other horrific crimes.

Yes he wished the trollop well.
But that is a kiss of death.
He has literally done that to all of his enemies just before they go down.

Tell me how

feargale wrote: »

So, they won't steal any more Palestinian land, but they will hang on to what they have stolen already. Thank you Golf Bunker Don.

A deal between Israel and UAE? Sounds like a deal between the IRA and Luxembourg.

Israel's behaviour over several decades has been shameful.

1 - Sign agreement promising to keep things as they are.
2 - Ignore agreement.
3 - Invade and occupy more Palestinian territory.
4 - Repeat from step 1.

There's only one reason they have gotten away with this. US support.

Tokyo

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That's an untested in the real world theory, there is 0 evidence to back up such a claim in a real world setting. Antidotal evidence is showing them to have the opposite effect. Large scale testing happening at the moment, results should be out soon.
Don't point me to a labatory test to back up your assumption.

Mod: "Don't back up *your* point of view with laboratory tests, but by all means accept my anecdotal 'evidence'".

I have no issue with you taking the contrarian point of view, but if you're going to do so, at least *try* to back it up with something more than 'cos I say so'. Otherwise, you're just stirring the pot.

Also, how does this relate to the topic at hand?

joseywhales

feargale wrote: »

So, they won't steal any more Palestinian land, but they will hang on to what they have stolen already. Thank you Golf Bunker Don.

A deal between Israel and UAE? Sounds like a deal between the IRA and Luxembourg.

Exactly they will be rewarded for breaking international law.

Timberrrrrrrr

Tell me how wrote: »

Whats the betting that despite everything that has gone on so far and the widespread efforts to not lockdown, and to keep things open that Covid could still be used as an excuse in a November to restrict access to voting?

If this was a central African Nation of 20 years ago, the US and the UN would be sending representatives to monitor the electoral process and to ensure it was open and fair.

Things are going to get pretty mental.

At this stage the Dems should actually ask the UN to send in observers, Imagine being American right now knowing that your president is doing his best to stop you from voting.

Closing polling stations in mostly Dem areas, Trying to stop mail in voting even though there is no evidence of fraud on a scale that could affect a nationwide election. Soon we will see the call to "patriots" to stand outside polling stations demanding to see peoples proof that they are eligible to vote, intimidating people as they try to exercise their right to vote for whomever they wish.

Quin_Dub

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

At this stage the Dems should actually ask the UN to send in observers, Imagine being American right now knowing that your president is doing his best to stop you from voting.

Closing polling stations in mostly Dem areas, Trying to stop mail in voting even though there is no evidence of fraud on a scale that could affect a nationwide election. Soon we will see the call to "patriots" to stand outside polling stations demanding to see peoples proof that they are eligible to vote, intimidating people as they try to exercise their right to vote for whomever they wish.

Already done

...Its premise is that a Republican victory in November is imperiled by widespread voter fraud, a baseless charge embraced by President Trump but repeatedly debunked by research. Democrats and voting rights advocates say the driving factor is politics, not fraud — especially since Mr. Trump’s narrow win in 2016 underscored the potentially crucial value of depressing turnout by Democrats, particularly minorities.

The Republican program, which has gained steam in recent weeks, envisions recruiting up to 50,000 volunteers in 15 key states to monitor polling places and challenge ballots and voters deemed suspicious. That is part of a $20 million plan that also allots millions to challenge lawsuits by Democrats and voting-rights advocates seeking to loosen state restrictions on balloting. The party and its allies also intend to use advertising, the internet and Mr. Trump’s command of the airwaves to cast Democrats as agents of election theft.

TheRepentent

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Already done

Unless it was a cop or an employee involved with the voting , I'd tell them to go get fukked.

Quin_Dub

TheRepentent wrote: »

Unless it was a cop or an employee involved with the voting , I'd tell them to go get fukked.

Sadly , because of the recent change in the law. They are legally entitled to challenge you , refusal could lead to you being prevented from Voting..

The efforts are bolstered by a 2018 federal court ruling that for the first time in nearly four decades allows the national Republican Party to mount campaigns against purported voter fraud without court approval. The court ban on Republican Party voter-fraud operations was imposed in 1982, and then modified in 1986 and again in 1990, each time after courts found instances of Republicans intimidating or working to exclude minority voters in the name of preventing fraud. The party was found to have violated it yet again in 2004.

So basically - they are allowed be in the polling station and randomly pick people out and demand that they prove their eligibility to vote. I think we all know exactly where these "Poll monitors" will be and what type of people they will be targeting.