This is a typoc politics and current events thread, homie. The only thing it's allowed to be about is how bad orange man is, and how bad anyone who disagrees with that is as well.
Just reinforcing what has been said:
1) US is the country on the world with most Corona cases, and it will (or perhaps already did) reach the most deaths. If we think in terms of "but that's because US is very populated", China, that have 3-4x more people, have "probably" less cases and perhaps less deaths. I do not had checked, but I bet (and others can point here) that Canada is doing better (or even Mexico).
2) [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] gave you a whole list directly pointing out what could have done and what wasnt, and that counts as direct rational critics of the government. He did that kind of pointing stuff more than one time.
3) Not only [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION], but some other members did pointed out directly evidence and statistics on the front of you (@Jonny is posting numbers everyday), whereas the strongest one is how US is doing when compared to other countries in the world and what steps the president took.
4) Not to mention a few others members pointing out the flaws in your logic, like I did in a direct way, and perhaps rude, yet realistic way, even pointing out the absurd conclusion that the best president for a religious country is the devil.
Aaannnddd.. Your answer to all these things is: "People are being irrational, its just Trump hate"? As far as I see, you are slowly trying to push the discussion out of Trump and directly pushing it through members when you have a good oportunity (just a slightly better version of the classic brazilian far right loop: "Far-right president is doing a bad job"; "What about the most popular Democratic party?"; "No, Im talking about the far right president administration...", "What about the most popular Democratic party?"; (repeat it 1-2 more times); "So, it seems that you dont have any arguments and havent answered my questions ["what about the most popular party?"]. So I can take you are irrational and that Im right"). But, instead of towards the democracy party, it is towards the "emotional" person, so, instead of evaluating the person points, you take. The loop by design is basic this: "Somebody do a critic about something Trump did, have then an emotional reaction about what he did"; "You are being emotional";"Somebody re-points that, get a small slip on the emotional department"; "You are being emotional"; (repeat it again); "So it seems that you dont have any arguments, and I can presume you are irrational towards your Trump hate".
But, of course, its a little bit more than that. When members direct the criticizing through what was been done you had been tactically redirecting the person through the present moment, asking them "what about now, thats in the past, you are not helping, you are just here for the bash" and then when they do it in the present, you ask them for evidence, which forces them to return to the past tense to point the evidence, so you can just repeat the speech of "its past, what about now? You are just here to the bash". Or get silent when that happens to directly (I noticed you havent answered [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] directly because it would be too obvious). And when they make assumptions about the future or other possibilities (to perhaps try to escape that other loop), you argument is that it is just speculation and that they are "obviously being overly optimistic about the other possibilities and bashing Trump".
Just for the record, time to gather and point the posts and perhaps even gather more stuff. Well, Im sorry for not having read the whole argument of others. Here it is:
[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION]
[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] says how Hillary would make different choices that would bring to better results
ANSWER:
I think weighing and judging reality against an imaginary fantasy is less effectual than weighing and judging an imaginary fantasy against reality. Let me elaborate.
If you are buying a car and narrow it down to two choices, a Ford and a Toyota, and you go with the Toyota- and then 2 years later you have to pay to have the head gaskets replaced, you might assume that everything would have been completely fine had you only bought the ford. Tempting, yet bad logic. (...) I just can't summon a fantasy based on reality in which that would be plausible with a single person swap-out.
(...Some posts earlier...)
We would be much worse off if Trump didn't happen to be president right now [the post continues with that argument summing the exactly same fantasy based on reality in which that would be plausible with a single person swap-out]
[MENTION=1206]cascadeco[/MENTION]
Cascadeco posts a topic about governors VS federal, I didnt read the article only his observation and it is very likely or perhaps imminent that the article is stating that the feds are somewhat getting in the way of local states and not helping
ANSWER:
The prioritization of attacking political opponents over having anything productive or constructive to say on the pandemic at hand. It looks just as petty as when Trump does it.
[MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION]
Virtual ghost posts literally a list of suggestions and stuff that could have been done
ANSWER:
I ask for things he should be doing differently or better now, in the present, and you come up with a list of six 'should haves?'
ceecee said:
Trump is not responsible for COVID-19. Big enough for you?
In fact I recall no one here ever saying that Trump created and then unleashed this virus on the planet. Never heard or read anyone say it, in all honesty.
His administrations's response to COVID-19 most certainly on him, good bad or otherwise, as it would be for any president. [rant about corruption]
ANSWER:
As much as I appreciate your reliable emotionally charged diatribes against evil right-wingers, this situation calls for a bit more logic, reason, and objective perspective than you're capable of summoning at the moment. I don't think anyone else on this forum could be more blinded by their bias than you. No offense.
(similar pattern happened with Jaguar, but that chat was a little bit more offensive)
--
I need to do the statement that I just described a process and actions, rather than calling another member with any names at all.
And, finally, sorry mods, such as [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION], [MENTION=5159]Lexicon[/MENTION], perhaps [MENTION=13112]Stigmata[/MENTION] and [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] are also here as well? Anyway, sorry for being part of derailing the thread, but I couldnt think any place better for posting this, and I felt the need to post about this. You are going to need to move this to the off-topic thread and look like this at us:
