What's that tweet mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
What's that tweet mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
well, given the account is over 11 years old I'm gonna say...not fakedQuote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Try clicking on it and reading it for yourself. Come on now, dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by nastynice
I know that it's not fake. I am just stunned that the president sent a retweet that brought attention to someone who is so infatuated with him that she would intentionally get herself infected to just vote for him. He should be ignoring that tweet or if he is going to call it out point out that it is a bad idea to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiteWolf
I don't see how what Trump said is controversial. he is saying thank you to someone who wants to vote for him no matter what.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
I don't see that as what she said. just being around Covid19 doesn't mean that person is going to get Covid19, and even if someone wanted to make that conclusion there are far more people that have had Covid19 and recovered compared to dying.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Just love the drawn-out semantic gymnastics you perform in order to accomplish absolutely nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialFNK
Top medical journal calls for U.S. leaders to be voted out over COVID response
https://www.axios.com/new-england-jo...d7482927b.htmlQuote:
Editors of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday published a scathing rebuke of the Trump administration over its "astonishing" failure to respond to the coronavirus pandemic, writing that "this election gives us the power to render judgment" of current U.S. leadership.
Why it matters: The world's top medical journal has never before condemned or supported a political candidate, according to the New York Times, making Wednesday's editorial a first in the publication's 208-year history.
What they're saying: Without specifically naming President Trump, the editorial said U.S. leaders took "a crisis and turned it into a tragedy."
"COVID-19 has created a crisis throughout the world. This crisis has produced a test of leadership. With no good options to combat a novel pathogen, countries were forced to make hard choices about how to respond. Here in the United States, our leaders have failed that test. ... The magnitude of this failure is astonishing," reads the editorial, which according to the Times was signed by 34 editors who are U.S. citizens.
"Instead of relying on expertise, the administration has turned to uninformed 'opinion leaders' and charlatans who obscure the truth and facilitate the promulgation of outright lies."
"Let’s be clear about the cost of not taking even simple measures. An outbreak that has disproportionately affected communities of color has exacerbated the tensions associated with inequality."
"Why it matters: The world's top medical journal has never before condemned or supported a political candidate, according to the New York Times, making Wednesday's editorial a first in the publication's 208-year history."
Not surprised. Our leadership absolutely failed us by not implementing KNOWN AND VERIFIED KNOWLEDGE.
They failed epi 101.
When it comes to science there is no argument, there is no debate, Donald trump failed. Our govt failed. Anyone who says otherwise doesnt understand science.
We had a cheat sheet from china and we still failed. Absolute incompetence.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
James Madison was president 208 years ago. We had only just made the Louisiana Purchase a few years prior.
How'd that 401k post of yours age?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Better than your it’s only the flu nonsense posts you spew. Again how many people do you know that have died because of the flu? In your entire life? Nobody for me in my 40+ years of existence. Well actually I guess 3 now if you count the Covid flu that’s been slightly circulating this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo
Do I need to google motor vehicle deaths due to intoxication for you? There is a better argument to be made against outlawing alcohol (which I wouldn't do). But the point made was if lives saved in the deciding factor in how we make laws... then very little else could save as many lives as outlawing alcohol and tobacco.Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
To be fair, I just turned down the flu vaccine.Quote:
Originally Posted by nastynice
That's fine, I dont take it either. But that isnt either of our reasons for not wanting to take a vaccine created on a timeline based on election dates rather than scientific data and results.Quote:
Originally Posted by The20thK
Either way, word on the street is the govt has already abandoned the mass vaccination plan. Even if a vaccine does come out, itll be in such low doses, they will just administer it through normal means of vaccinations. They won't have enough for mass vaccination.
What I'm guessing is that Trump wants this vaccine out before elections, so he'll get it out in small quantities, and essentially the first people getting them will be the Guinea pig population whom they will follow and track as they do through drug phases.
They'll probably just basically treat the first vaccinations like a hybrid phase 3 trial.
It's not going to require a lot of people to take the vaccine for us to get data collected to know wether it is indeed safe or not.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
yeah I could see that happening if you're right about the mass vax doses being abandoned.Quote:
Originally Posted by nastynice