COVID-19 Response: An issue that shouldn't be at all political....yet here we are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

Are you and valade like twins or something? :p
Answering a question differently than you want isn't 'not answering' the question.

If you ask me what my favorite pie is and I say I don't eat pie, is that a non-answer where you're justified in continuing to ask the question? Because that's what this feels like.

I've really felt this discussion has just been entirely pointless for pages and pages now because I feel we've all made our stands pretty clear and further discussion isn't going to change anything. But when I've stopped responding, there's posts like this expecting one.

---

I am not talking about not answering how I want, I am talking about not answering at all. You answered some parts with your opinion but would not go in depth when questions more lol. This is ridiculous, it’s hitting nasty level with you (still need me to quote the atheist stuff btw?). Are you guys twins?

It’s pointless because there isn’t a genuine conversation. Nasty came in making up a bunch of stuff and not understanding what people have said. You haven’t responded in depth past stating your opinion/but what abouts and leaving it at that while also jumping in randomly later then repeat when you seem to not like how I am wording things only to still not go in depth on it.

If you would actually respond in a genuine way to the conversation/my points when presented it wouldn’t be much of an issue with you (other than not being aware of how nasty has been presenting the arguments falsely and getting into atheism stuff).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

Except what you do is answer the question "what is your favorite pie" with "a bicycle" and then say "well I think a bicycle is a pie actually". Sure, it's an answer, but you can see people's frustrations when your answer doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps you should evaluate how you engage people if multiple people call you out on similar behavior.

---

To add he then shuts down the conversation/stops responding when you make counter points and provide issues with what he has said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

He may not believe it. Maybe he's being paid, or maybe he has family held in camps so he can't say what he knows to be true.

---

Who knows what the case is but he has fully established that he doesn't deserve a seat at the table when it comes to conversations about propaganda and media (amongst many other topics). The real issue is that, despite the fact that at times he'll waver from one side of a position to the other like the wind changes direction, he'll basically never admit that he is wrong. If one wants to have an honest conversation with someone knowledgeable and aware of the topic at hand, there's basically no reason to ever engage nasty.

**** has reached comical levels of absurdity at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nastynice

As far as I can see, it seems to perfectly address it.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

---

Lol probably because you have no idea what the conversation you enter are even about


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

I do not deny the massive increase in deaths of despair and economic impact. I deny that these massive increases are even approaching the number of deaths or impact from coronavirus.

This is a common conservative argument that the ancillary effects of covid response are worse than the covid response, therefore we shouldn't enact any covid responses.

I agree, that there eventually comes a point where the effects are worse than covid, but I don't believe we are anywhere near that point currently. For instance, in order for suicides to approach covid deaths, we'd have to see suicides increase by near 600%.

---

Can't keep track of how many times I've heard Trump say that "the cure can't be worse than the sickness".

A true statement? Yes....but it is being used in an inappropriate context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nastynice

No, I worded it like that because I never argued that china isnt lying, I argued that there is nothing in their data to suggest so and that their data gave us all the pertinent information we needed to run our covid response.

To me it's just funny, I know how to read stats and data, so it's funny to see people so feverently on that story with no actual footing to stand on.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

---

....and the facade continues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

Yes, it's possible or even probable people will suffer the remainder of their lives from being infected. But that is going to be a tiny population, and it will theoretically be finite if the vaccine works. And I didn't assume anything, I said "may end corona" not "will end corona". Semantics matter buddy :)

It's not that they outweigh them, but the coverage and opinion seems to be bent away from the despair issues too far. Like you saying that talking about drug, suicide, and economical related deaths is somehow a conservative viewpoint.

How is it conservative to care about people's lives? Aren't we better people by caring about everybody?

---

And I never said you did. I said "you are making a massive assumption" about no long lasting effects of covid. I said "It's also a massive assumption" about vaccine's eliminating covid. I specifically did not say "you are making that assumption". I know semantics matter thank you very much :)

It's only a conservative viewpoint because it is common in bait and switch tactics where it starts off talking about that, but the true purpose of bringing it up is to talk about how we shouldn't do X or Y covid precuations. That is why 99% of the time conservatives only bring it up in a discussion about covid procedures.

It's a lot like how conservatives only bring up violence in Chicago in a discussion about gun control, or how they only ever talk about helping the homeless in a discussion about funding some other liberal agenda.


I agree, at some point we need to talk about those issues. In fact, we already did. Guess you missed it. It's why many are not in favor of another national lockdown (including Biden himself) because of those ancillary effects. So perhaps it's not that they aren't talking about these issues enough, it's that you're not listening :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nastynice

I know my half white friend, 80% of the back and forth here are semantics.

I'm sure your Mexican half recognizes what I'm saying...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

---

The boy who cried racist is pretending like one's race defines their knowledge? Color me shocked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

First, yes you did argue China's numbers were not incorrect. And if you're so good at looking at data and we are all so bad at it, how come we all looked at the data and came to the right conclusion and you looked at the data and came to the wrong one?

Honestly, I knew you were conceited, but I never knew you were "the reason I got the question wrong is because of how much better at this I am than you" conceited.

---

Wish I could say that I was surprised but this is nothing new for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

Can't keep track of how many times I've heard Trump say that "the cure can't be worse than the sickness".

A true statement? Yes....but it is being used in an inappropriate context.

---

Exactly. My point wasn't even whether Scoots was correct, its that this argument is a conservative viewpoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nastynice

What was their propaganda? That they locked down? They shut all highways in and out of Wuhan? They disinfected entire city blocks if one case of corona came up? They had public service announcements teaching their residents how to deal with the virus, including opening windows in your house for numerous hours every day for ventilation?

Is this the propaganda I bought into?

Because that's actually called science, not propaganda. If you went to school to learn about epidemics, you would know this.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

---

Oh, man. Your delusions are truly adorable. Keep pretending that you are PSD's resident expert on everything despite all evidence to the contrary.

Of course I'm not referring to anything you mentioned as propaganda. The things you mentioned are simply draconian measures that, for better or worse, wouldn't fly here in America.

Whatever school you went to wasn't enough to rescue you from your own ignorance. Keep spreading the good word of CGTN, comrade.

I hope that the Senate bill doesn't become law and businesses aren't granted liability protection from opening. Because these institutions that are fighting to not follow basic rules of protection shouldn't be exempt from the damage they cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

I am not talking about not answering how I want, I am talking about not answering at all. You answered some parts with your opinion but would not go in depth when questions more lol. This is ridiculous, it’s hitting nasty level with you (still need me to quote the atheist stuff btw?). Are you guys twins?

It’s pointless because there isn’t a genuine conversation. Nasty came in making up a bunch of stuff and not understanding what people have said. You haven’t responded in depth past stating your opinion/but what abouts and leaving it at that while also jumping in randomly later then repeat when you seem to not like how I am wording things only to still not go in depth on it.

If you would actually respond in a genuine way to the conversation/my points when presented it wouldn’t be much of an issue with you (other than not being aware of how nasty has been presenting the arguments falsely and getting into atheism stuff).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I think he'd rather just repeat "who's on first" over and over to deflect from his refusal to answer certain inquiries. Acting like this conversation has just randomly spun out of control, when in reality it is directly due to nasty and him hijacking the discussion with strawman arguments, a refusal to answer very relevant questions, and general nonsense. nasty is much more responsible for this tailspin but Site is certainly adding to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

Exactly. My point wasn't even whether Scoots was correct, its that this argument is a conservative viewpoint.

---

It's certainly a viewpoint that is being peddled heavily by conservatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

I am not talking about not answering how I want, I am talking about not answering at all. You answered some parts with your opinion but would not go in depth when questions more lol. This is ridiculous, it’s hitting nasty level with you (still need me to quote the atheist stuff btw?). Are you guys twins?

It’s pointless because there isn’t a genuine conversation. Nasty came in making up a bunch of stuff and not understanding what people have said. You haven’t responded in depth past stating your opinion/but what abouts and leaving it at that while also jumping in randomly later then repeat when you seem to not like how I am wording things only to still not go in depth on it.

If you would actually respond in a genuine way to the conversation/my points when presented it wouldn’t be much of an issue with you (other than not being aware of how nasty has been presenting the arguments falsely and getting into atheism stuff).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Well given I've been in the 'is there still a point' category regarding a lot of this for like 20 pages now, perhaps I didn't answer a question because I didn't actually catch that it had been asked of me, I don't know. There's nobody that knows me 'in real life' that would call me disingenuous. If I responded, but just not in depth enough, well that's a different thing. I mean, I'm just posting on a message board, not completing a civics essay.

Quote the atheist stuff? Did I ever say anything other than what I just said earlier? That all I've said was that it had primarily been people who've basically identified themselves as not being religious that had been pushing nasty and I on our takes? Do you believe that not to be the case?