Coronavirus

[Stigmata]

We would be much worse off if Trump didn't happen to be president right now, if you think about it in the big picture. The virus would have hit regardless- seeing as how it's hit just about every other country on the planet in similar fashion, and the shutdowns and social distancing measures would have been instated in roughly the same time under Hillary. Right now the demographic least likely to take social distancing seriously are people on the right, far right especially, who are more sensitive to losing any amount of their freedoms to government intervention than they are to their health or their neighbors. Many of these people would never have gone for it if it was a Hillary Clinton administration issuing the mandate. In fact, of the handful of right wing types I've talked sense into who were acting in very dangerous ways, the way I got straight through the conspiracy theories and got them to see the light was by being an example, and justifying myself to them by saying I was "following the presidents orders to be a good american." That shut them up almost every time, and modified their behavior. If Trump wasn't the president right now, we would not be flattening the curve anytime soon.

Not to mention all those weeks spent denying the entire thing as a partisan hoax and dismissing the initial cases as nothing we should worry about.

 

[anticlimatic]

Not to mention all those weeks spent denying the entire thing as a partisan hoax and dismissing the initial cases as nothing we should worry about.

I doubt any other POTUS would have done better, based on how other countries handled it as well. Of course we'll never know. I do know, however, that if you already have a bias against Trump your opinion on how he's handled this doesn't mean much.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I doubt any other POTUS would have done better, based on how other countries handled it as well. Of course we'll never know. I do know, however, that if you already have a bias against Trump your opinion on how he's handled this doesn't mean much.

Naw, my cat would have done better.

 

[Stigmata]

I doubt any other POTUS would have done better, based on how other countries handled it as well. Of course we'll never know. I do know, however, that if you already have a bias against Trump your opinion on how he's handled this doesn't mean much.

And you're that same bias to bail him out of his poor immediste response, despite having months of forewarning, to absolve him of accountability as the nation's leader because, supposedly yet based on nothing tangible, anyone else would've been equally as unresponsive, but definitely not moreso the president who has spent his entire presidency both undermining and combating not only his own intelligence agencies, but also the media. Nope, definitely didn't exacerbate the problem.

 

[á´…eparted]

I doubt any other POTUS would have done better, based on how other countries handled it as well. Of course we'll never know. I do know, however, that if you already have a bias against Trump your opinion on how he's handled this doesn't mean much.

The projection is so bright it's blinding

 

[ceecee]

And you're that same bias to bail him out of his poor immediste response, despite having months of forewarning, to absolve him of accountability as the nation's leader because, supposedly yet based on nothing tangible, anyone else would've been equally as unresponsive, but definitely not moreso the president who has spent his entire presidency both undermining and combating not only his own intelligence agencies, but also the media. Nope, definitely didn't exacerbate the problem.

But this is the cult of personality for people that actually believe opinion outweighs fact, driven by an insane amount of anxiety(that he's already mentioned) and fear. Trump fans know they themselves aren't enough to create a better world, they need a strongman to do it for them. I don't need a piece of human garbage to lead me, I can lead myself and people in my community that believe the same thing can as well.

 

[anticlimatic]

And you're that same bias to bail him out of his poor immediste response, despite having months of forewarning, to absolve him of accountability as the nation's leader because, supposedly yet based on nothing tangible, anyone else would've been equally as unresponsive, but definitely not moreso the president who has spent his entire presidency both undermining and combating not only his own intelligence agencies, but also the media. Nope, definitely didn't exacerbate the problem.

shrug
When you're biased against someone you can only see the worst intentions and you can only hold them to the strictest standards, two things that play off each other- neither of which typically is accurate. It blinds people to a wider and more encorperated reality. Any couples counselor will tell you the same.

 

[ceecee]

Everyone, especially those so enamored with nationalism, should watch this guy.

 

[anticlimatic]

Everyone, especially those so enamored with nationalism, should watch this guy.

"If you're not with us, you're against us" is where he diverts from common sense and reason. Everyone is with us in this.

 

[ceecee]

"If you're not with us, you're against us" is where he diverts from common sense and reason. Everyone is with us in this.

lol

 

[Jonny]

shrug
When you're biased against someone you can only see the worst intentions and you can only hold them to the strictest standards, two things that play off each other- neither of which typically is accurate. It blinds people to a wider and more encorperated reality. Any couples counselor will tell you the same.

And when you've thrown in with someone, tied your life philosophy/worldview to them, defended them at progressively worse stages of behavior...your sense of self and support of that person become intertwined...the two things play off of each other- neither of which typically is accurate. It blinds people to a wider and more encorperated reality. Any rational person will tell you the same. Utter. Fucking. Hogwash.

The whole TDS shtick is a lazy cop-out at best. The man lays a legitimate claim to the worst president in modern history, and my (and others') belief of that doesn't make me (or them) deranged. It doesn't make us victims of some psychological blind spot in the human condition.

What's the point behind your and others consistent refrain other than self-soothing? I'm legitimately asking. Even if what you say were true for a particular person, what's the point of repeatedly telling people, other than to sidestep the argument? Would any "couples counselor" suggest that saying the same tired thing over and over again is effective at changing someone's mind?

Why don't you talk a bit about the supposed facts that lead to to your alternate conclusion about Trump's performance?

 

[Vendrah]

shrug
When you're biased against someone you can only see the worst intentions and you can only hold them to the strictest standards, two things that play off each other- neither of which typically is accurate. It blinds people to a wider and more encorperated reality. Any couples counselor will tell you the same.

Let me "use my Ne" here to do a mirror operation:

"When you're biased for someone you can only see the best intentions and you can only hold them to the most lenient standards, two things that play off each other- neither of which typically is accurate. It blinds people to a wider and more encorperated reality. Any couples counselor will tell you the same."

Some people use the word "minion" for that. Unpaid minion. Lots of them in my country spreads lies for their beloved president, also a far right one, say he is a media victim and etc...

EDIT: Extra

I doubt any other POTUS would have done better, based on how other countries handled it as well. Of course we'll never know. I do know, however, that if you already have a bias against Trump your opinion on how he's handled this doesn't mean much.

I doubt any other POTUS would have done worse, based on how other countries handled it as well. Of course we'll never know. I do know, however, that if you already have a bias for Trump your opinion on how he's handled this doesn't mean much.

Taking into account that the US is the country with most infections in the world (or the 2nd more?) from CODVID-19 so far, and it is on podium in the number of death, I do think my reverse version is more coherent with data.

 

[Vendrah]

Right now the demographic least likely to take social distancing seriously are people on the right, far right especially, who are more sensitive to losing any amount of their freedoms to government intervention than they are to their health or their neighbors. Many of these people would never have gone for it if it was a Hillary Clinton administration issuing the mandate. In fact, of the handful of right wing types I've talked sense into who were acting in very dangerous ways, the way I got straight through the conspiracy theories and got them to see the light was by being an example, and justifying myself to them by saying I was "following the presidents orders to be a good american." That shut them up almost every time, and modified their behavior. If Trump wasn't the president right now, we would not be flattening the curve anytime soon.

Wait, wait, wait, wait...

Let me put this in another words...

The "more sensitive to losing any amount of their freedoms to government intervention than they are to their health or their neighbors" is just a poetic re-framed version of: "they are more sensitive to the quarantine than to they are to the health or their neighbors", which means that they would rather have other people dead than just staying at home.

So, the argument here is that the only way of the far right guys that are dangerously uncaring about others, is to elect one of them as a president so they will collaborate? Hmm... If they are Christian perhaps we should argue that people should elect Lucifer as president as well with the same argument...

Well, at least you "enlighten" them to collaborate, meaning that perhaps you are in a "higher degree" when compared with them?

 

[Vendrah]

Sorry for triple posting...

But I want to share this far right brazilian video description:
"The doctor JOSELITA AGUIAR SOUSA from IMPERATRIZ-MA, CRM-MA 1105, posted this video to prove that #COVID ー 19 is a COMMUNIST FARSE [FARSE=LIE], disregarding THOUSANDS OF DEATHS ⚰️on the 🌍.
I don't know what @minsaude @lhmandetta @Medicina_CFM @OPASOMSBrasil think, but I thought there was a lack of ethics ..."

The video is a woman driving a car, using the world leftopats, arguing that she sees that the hospitals are empty, and that politicians are creating chaos (with the quarantine) for their own benefit.

 

[Jonny]

Wait, wait, wait, wait...

Let me put this in another words...

The "more sensitive to losing any amount of their freedoms to government intervention than they are to their health or their neighbors" is just a poetic re-framed version of: "they are more sensitive to the quarantine than to they are to the health or their neighbors", which means that they would rather have other people dead than just staying at home.

So, the argument here is that the only way of the far right guys that are dangerously uncaring about others, is to elect one of them as a president so they will collaborate? Hmm... If they are Christian perhaps we should argue that people should elect Lucifer as president as well with the same argument...

Well, at least you "enlighten" them to collaborate, meaning that perhaps you are in a "higher degree" when compared with them?

Jesus Christ. His argument was really...because far right folks would refuse to cooperate with Hillary Clinton then Trump is the more effective president?

@anticlimatic Did you really say this? Can you not see what that sort of logic implies? I get that we want a president who people can accept because without that acceptance then they cannot effectively lead. It's a good argument for choosing the moderate/compromise candidate over the extremes. But, I mean, that same argument can equally be used against Trump for a host of other circumstances. And, even if it were one-sided in this instance, what's to stop a party or group from explicitly adopting that policy of mutually assured destruction? "If you don't elect my guy I'm going to refuse to cooperate with your guy." Because that's essentially what you're saying about Trump supporters...that they have some sort of derangement syndrome where they would hurt themselves and their families unless Trump is president. I can see why you consistently project this mentality on those who don't support Trump if this is what you think friends and family act like. What a poor, sad view you have of your community. I think it's mistaken.

 

[anticlimatic]

Let's all calm down a wee little bit, eh? I wasn't trying to trigger anyone. I'll elaborate when I have some free time, just give me the benefit of the doubt until then if you can.

 

[ygolo]

We would be much worse off if Trump didn't happen to be president right now, if you think about it in the big picture. The virus would have hit regardless- seeing as how it's hit just about every other country on the planet in similar fashion, and the shutdowns and social distancing measures would have been instated in roughly the same time under Hillary. Right now the demographic least likely to take social distancing seriously are people on the right, far right especially, who are more sensitive to losing any amount of their freedoms to government intervention than they are to their health or their neighbors. Many of these people would never have gone for it if it was a Hillary Clinton administration issuing the mandate. In fact, of the handful of right wing types I've talked sense into who were acting in very dangerous ways, the way I got straight through the conspiracy theories and got them to see the light was by being an example, and justifying myself to them by saying I was "following the presidents orders to be a good american." That shut them up almost every time, and modified their behavior. If Trump wasn't the president right now, we would not be flattening the curve anytime soon.

Is the core of your argument that the worst behaving people during this crisis could only be brought to behave with empathy by one of their own?

Let's all calm down a wee little bit, eh? I wasn't trying to trigger anyone. I'll elaborate when I have some free time, just give me the benefit of the doubt until then if you can.

We're all calm. Just confused by the argument, looking for clarification. I does strain credulity.

edit: At least I'm calm. Didn't want to speak for everyone else. I can get why when several people back to back answer the same way it can not feel calm. Also, I'll admit, it was a knee-jerk post of mine, also. Though still a calm one. The main reaction was "did you say what I think you said".

So personally just looking for clarity.

 

[Jonny]

Let's all calm down a wee little bit, eh? I wasn't trying to trigger anyone...

"...to refute my seemingly ignorant arguments and cause me to be defensive. I was hoping that people would just gobble up the shit I'm feeding them."

Fixed that for you. In all seriousness, again, you're subtly (or not so subtly) pushing the blame onto those with whom you disagree. They either have Trump Derangement Syndrome or are "triggered." There is great irony in this post, because you also say the following:

...just give me the benefit of the doubt until then if you can.

while apparently refusing to get us "to see the light...by being an example"


What am I missing here? I'd love to understand where you're coming from, because I just don't. I only see hypocrisy and a deep need to self-sooth and justify your beliefs. I'm not saying what I see is right, but that's what I see.

 

[ceecee]

Let's all calm down a wee little bit, eh? I wasn't trying to trigger anyone. I'll elaborate when I have some free time, just give me the benefit of the doubt until then if you can.

The walk back! So sorry I missed it live.

You're not triggering, or even trying to trigger, anyone. You're trying to convince yourself that you can go back to your hyper-individual lifestyle when you have just been shown that it benefits no one. Not even you in the end.

 

[Virtual ghost]