Author Topic: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe  (Read 38683 times)

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #200 on: March 14, 2020, 12:39:50 AM »
In that case many NDA's regarding "private matters" would need to voided. "Blackmail worthy material" is anything which can cause "a scandal" if it becomes public, and the bar for cause a public scandal is VERY low, and it is also highly subjective as to "cause a scandal from whose point of view?"

Yes, we would then have to get into what level of potential scandal/blackmail is considered enough to break a NDA. Like, career-ending may not be a high enough bar, whereas "will go to jail if discovered" is probably enough for blackmail to be very effective. Some people might tolerate losing their job if that was the worst-case scenario of a risk-assessment, but there are much worse things that can happen than that.

I believe that is already bog standard as a matter of law, NDA's which involve criminal activity are non-binding in many/most jurisdictions.

I guess I was talking in this instance less about just NDA's in the particular, and more that the people need to know about potential blackmail issues of a criminal nature (following up on yossarian's comment).

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #201 on: March 14, 2020, 07:06:11 PM »
NDAs are not the end-all and be-all to transparency or personal honor. In the business world, it has long been a corporate decision whether to fight accusations which can have negative effects or payoff suspected liars to get rid of the downside. There are many scammers out there who prey on the rich and powerful - but then, too, there are many rich and powerful who prey on the vulnerable.

I have personal knowledge of "professional" accusers who make waves instead of doing their jobs. Even when they are paid off, they just move to another company to do the same thing, and the former company can't warn the new company, because of NDAs of their own. To my sense of justice, I don't think the "Me, too" movement is worth anything at all. Even if anyone tries to be totally transparent, truth suffers based on the approval or disapproval of the press.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #202 on: March 14, 2020, 08:08:37 PM »
Back to Biden. He is playing to no audience and still screwing up. On Friday, He forgot the year, when the election would be, and in a streamed video, wandered off camera forcing them to cut away to a logo. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/14/nolte-joe-biden-forgets-year-meanders-off-frame-in-disastrous-livestream/

..And not just him, the whole crew was technically inept.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #203 on: March 16, 2020, 12:01:29 PM »
I wonder if the virus will keep Joe from manhandling people.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #204 on: March 16, 2020, 12:34:19 PM »
I seriously doubt it. Sniffer's gotta sniff.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #205 on: March 17, 2020, 07:54:25 PM »
Biden just earned four Pinnichios because of the disinformational ad he put out: https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/biden-ad-attacking-trump-on-coronavirus-gets-four-pinocchios-from-wapo/

"The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee received "Four Pinocchios" for an ad that deceptively edited video of a Trump campaign rally to make it appear that the president called the coronavirus a hoax. In the ad, Trump can be seen saying "coronavirus," followed immediately by "This is their new hoax."

But as the Post noted, the Biden campaign cut out more than 120 words in between those two statements. In his comments, Trump was calling the Democratic politicization of coronavirus a "hoax," not the virus itself:"

This follows his standard operational procedure.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #206 on: March 18, 2020, 03:16:16 PM »
The virus sucked any potential focus and energy the Sanders campaign could have hoped to muster. So now we're pretty set on a Trump vs Biden general. Grumpy old men - presidential election edition. I was hoping it would stretch out longer. I think the democratic voters needed to see Biden tested more by Sanders. He managed to get here by basically name recognition. His numbers dipped after nearly every debate, there just was never enough momentum for any of the other moderates. Yang - too unknown. Pete - too young and inexperienced. Amy - never enough coverage/space. Steyer/Bloomberg - there wasn't room for 2 billionaires. Harris/Booker - never could get that much traction in a crowded field.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #207 on: March 18, 2020, 03:39:44 PM »
Yang - too unknown. Pete - too young and inexperienced. Amy - never enough coverage/space. Steyer/Bloomberg - there wasn't room for 2 billionaires. Harris/Booker - never could get that much traction in a crowded field.

Bernie - election fraud. Oops! You were naming things that already happened.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #208 on: March 18, 2020, 05:31:43 PM »
Anyone see that video of him at a lectern? Dude, it was horrible. He meanders through a speech, not too badly. Then, when it's over, just stands there, blanked out. Eventually, Jill approaches and Joe is obviously surprised to see her. She gives him a hug, whispers "good boy" into his ear (picked up by mike) and he kind of thanks her. She walks off and Joe remains standing there, clearly at a loss as to where he is or what he should do next.

It was bad. I mean, it was bad. I thought it was some kind of fake at first it was so bad. Joe may not make it through the primaries, I dunno. Somebody needs to stick up for him.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #209 on: March 21, 2020, 07:15:55 PM »
... Joe may not make it through the primaries, I dunno. Somebody needs to stick up for him.

He will make it through the primaries with a solid majority, which makes the DNC impotent to intervene if he deteriorates too badly. If he announces his VP before the convention, she will surely be the new Democrat figurehead. The only way for them to bring forward a possible winner would be if he recognizes his decline and voluntarily steps down.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #210 on: March 23, 2020, 08:20:24 AM »
Bo Erickson, CBS News:
Quote
“In past week, Joe Biden has only had 1 on-camera public address as COVID escalated. (He spoke for ~6 mins on Tuesday from his home.),” Erickson wrote on Twitter.

“He also hosted a tele-town hall w/voters, answered Qs on press call & video chatted w/donors. Everything else has been statements ripping POTUS,” he said.

Joe's campaign reported to CNBC that all of his virtual events were postponed and for future events he would not take live questions.

Might be time to activate a silver alert.

« Last Edit: March 23, 2020, 08:29:39 AM by Crunch »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #211 on: March 23, 2020, 12:02:18 PM »
I generally agree with Biden in decline, however, they might well have cancelled because his campaign is technically inept.

virtual town hall mess

Quote
The Zoom call was plagued with technical problems from the beginning. First, it began over three hours late. Once Biden did start speaking, his staff had to restart his entire speech because there was no audio, fading his campaign logo in and back out again to signify that they were redoing the address. As he started reading off his prepared remarks again, Biden’s audio was suddenly painful to hear and impossible to understand, at least until they replaced whatever mic he was using with a smartphone.

After his opening address was finished — as unintelligible as it was — staff opened the call up to questions. “Mr. Biden’s speech was garbled the entire time,” the first questioner said before being cut off.

A staffer responded saying, “We appreciate you bearing with our technical difficulties.” Then, they quickly clicked on to the next questioner. It was a few more seconds of dead air and another supporter who seemingly couldn’t unmute themselves before the town hall got its first real question.

It will be interesting to see if Trump does better with virtual campaign events. His style seems to depend on feeding off the energy of the crowd, chants and cheers.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #212 on: March 23, 2020, 12:04:03 PM »
Quote
It will be interesting to see if Trump does better with virtual campaign events. His style seems to depend on feeding off the energy of the crowd, chants and cheers.

He's sort of using the daily coronavirus briefings as mini-shows, mugging for the camera and interjecting jokey remarks while others are asking or answering questions.  Ever the celebrity entertainer.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #213 on: March 24, 2020, 08:21:25 AM »
Quote
Joe Biden’s new foray into regular video updates about coronavirus stumbled out of the gate as the teleprompter malfunctioned and he called the sitting Massachusetts governor by the wrong name.

Biden was speaking behind a podium when he began verbally stumbling around, as if he wasn’t sure what to say, or was buying time.

“Beef up the number of responders dealing with the crush — these crush of cases. And, uh, and in addition to that,” he said, looking down at his notes, before he waved his hand upward under the podium to conceal it.

“And in addition to that we to, um, make sure that we, uh, we are in a position that we are, well, let me go to the second thing. I spoke enough of that,” Biden said, before trying to move on from the blunder.

Biden called the current Massachusetts governor “Charlie Parker,” a jazz saxophonist from the 1950s.

This was Biden’s first of what he said would be many video appearances.

You gotta watch the video, it’s tough to see this happening to him.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #214 on: March 24, 2020, 09:56:51 AM »
Quote
This was Biden’s first of what he said would be many video appearances.

You gotta watch the video, it’s tough to see this happening to him.

Sorry going to go  whataboutism
I agree watching Biden  speak is often cringe worthy however you have lost your right to comment on such things.
Your apologist defense of your man's communication speach/style/gaffes makes any such comment pure hypocrisy.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #215 on: March 24, 2020, 10:33:44 AM »
Trump's style is weird, I've talked about that. But what Biden is doing is not in the same league and you know it.

Defend him however you want, it's sad to watch Biden being taken advantage of like this.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #216 on: March 24, 2020, 11:07:11 AM »
Quote
Trump's style is weird, I've talked about that. But what Biden is doing is not in the same league and you know it.

Defend him however you want, it's sad to watch Biden being taken advantage of like this.

That's a difference I'm not defending Biden, its sad watching Biden and Trump IMO - in a basement league arguing about which is the worst is pointless
I'm saying as a apologist you don't get to comment on the topic without being a hypocrite 
Its the new normal in public speech which you have endorsed... welcome to your new normal.

"Be careful what you wish for, history starts now"

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #217 on: March 24, 2020, 11:10:45 AM »
Whatever you say, if it makes you feel better about it, then lean into it and really embrace it.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #218 on: March 24, 2020, 11:46:02 AM »
Quote
Whatever you say, if it makes you feel better about it, then lean into it and really embrace it.

have you ever looked up the topic - shadow projection
From my perspective your the one leaning into it but as you so well put... Like... Whatever :)

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #219 on: March 24, 2020, 08:15:38 PM »
...as a apologist you don't get to comment on the topic without being a hypocrite 
Its the new normal in public speech which you have endorsed... welcome to your new normal.

The new normal is deriding Trump at every opportunity and condemning polite, low-key speaking as aggressive and out of control. What many in the media complain about is him not allowing aggressive, over the top questioners, and actually calling them out on their rudeness. Why is it that reacting to rudeness is considered rude, but the real rudeness he reacts to is given a pass?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #220 on: March 24, 2020, 11:34:07 PM »
What exactly was it about Alexander's line of questioning that was inappropriate or rude?

For transcript, ignore the editorial commentary.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/20/politics/peter-alexander-donald-trump-coronavirus/index.html

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #221 on: March 25, 2020, 10:02:44 AM »
What exactly was it about Alexander's line of questioning that was inappropriate or rude?

For transcript, ignore the editorial commentary.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/20/politics/peter-alexander-donald-trump-coronavirus/index.html

Answering his question would have demonstrated that he has no empathy. In his mind it would be like asking someone working from home using a video conferencing tool to stand up so you can see that they're not wearing pants.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #222 on: March 25, 2020, 10:15:51 AM »
From Joe Biden, on The View:
Quote
'The good news is the bad news. The bad news is people know me. The good news me is they know me. So it's hard to pin something on me that's not accurate. It's easy to pin things on me that are accurate.'

Huh?

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #223 on: March 25, 2020, 10:21:40 AM »
I'm willing to make a ((very) small) bet that the Democratic Party will draft Andrew Cuomo to replace Biden.  That can happen if the rest of the primaries are cancelled and Biden doesn't have the necessary number of pledged delegates at convention time.
That will give people like Crunch a whole new realm of complaints and meretricious lines of attack against him and the Democrats for picking him.  I would like to see Gretchen Whitmer (Michigan Gov) as his running mate, which will give people on the right an opportunity to make unkind comparisons with Sarah Palin, because she's no long relevant or needed.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #224 on: March 25, 2020, 10:23:35 AM »
Bernie is still running. Good luck "drafting" someone else.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #225 on: March 25, 2020, 10:30:31 AM »
...as a apologist you don't get to comment on the topic without being a hypocrite 
Its the new normal in public speech which you have endorsed... welcome to your new normal.

The new normal is deriding Trump at every opportunity and condemning polite, low-key speaking as aggressive and out of control. What many in the media complain about is him not allowing aggressive, over the top questioners, and actually calling them out on their rudeness. Why is it that reacting to rudeness is considered rude, but the real rudeness he reacts to is given a pass?

I'm actually stunned if you watch Trump's press conferences, and this is not remotely a new obsevation though it has continued during the coronavirus pressers, how apalling poorly behaved members of the US leftist press are.  When an international journalist asks a question, it's substantive and neutral and provokes an answer that is informative and expansive.  When a member of the US press that leans right asks a question, it's polite and leads to an expansive informative response.

When a member of the mainstream US press asks a question?  Not even close, they front load the question with several insults and even lies, like putting in Democratic talking points that they know are false as premises that have to be assumed to answer the question.  I've seen them encode accusations of racism, in the current case accusations that he's killed people or repeats of the Dem lie that he said the virus was a hoax.  Or encoding that his touring of a treatment that is showing promise is somehow dangerous or unscientific.   I have NEVER seen them act this way with anyone else in a press conference with any head of state - that branch of the press was always part of the "news" side that was there to get information and not to spin a story and that's no longer the case.  They're now part of the "commentary" side that's there to push an opinion and not to obtain information.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #226 on: March 25, 2020, 10:35:51 AM »
Give it a rest.  Trump doesn't like anybody challenging him or anyone he has chosen as a Deep Trumpist.  Here he is attacking Chris Wallace for asking if the media was "fake" for saying that the news about coronavirus was "bad".

Quote
".@SteveScalise blew the nasty & obnoxious Chris Wallace (will never be his father, Mike!) away on Chris’s lowest rated [sic] (unless I’m on) morning show," Trump tweeted Sunday. "This kind of dumb and unfair interview would never have happened in the @FoxNews past."

Amazingly, he managed to praise himself at the same time he was attacking Chris Wallace, his network and his heritage.  How does that rate on your scale of fairness?

You know (because Trump has said it repeatedly) that if someone hits him he hits them back harder.  He perceives anything he doesn't want to hear as a "hit" and "fake" and hits back with his own peculiar brand of fakery.

If you can't acknowledge that, then you're not a fair observer yourself.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2020, 10:37:57 AM by Kasandra »

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #227 on: March 25, 2020, 10:52:35 AM »
I'm willing to make a ((very) small) bet that the Democratic Party will draft Andrew Cuomo to replace Biden.  That can happen if the rest of the primaries are cancelled and Biden doesn't have the necessary number of pledged delegates at convention time.
That will give people like Crunch a whole new realm of complaints and meretricious lines of attack against him and the Democrats for picking him.  I would like to see Gretchen Whitmer (Michigan Gov) as his running mate, which will give people on the right an opportunity to make unkind comparisons with Sarah Palin, because she's no long relevant or needed.

Not an expert on Cuomo but I can't imagine a much worse choice to run than Biden. And Cuomo vs Trump following the covid-19 pandemic would be a very different campaign dynamic.

I still think Amy makes a good VP choice for anyone. Also from the midwest, woman, some national name recognition, experience in the Senate.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #228 on: March 25, 2020, 11:02:09 AM »
Give it a rest.  Trump doesn't like anybody challenging him or anyone he has chosen as a Deep Trumpist.

Two things can be true at the same time. Your comment above, and the fact that the press expresses their disdain by lacing many of their questions with presuppositions and innuendo.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #229 on: March 25, 2020, 11:34:06 AM »
What exactly was it about Alexander's line of questioning that was inappropriate or rude?

First of all, here's a link to the full transcript for the press conference.  https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-coronavirus-task-force-march-20-press-conference-transcript-trump-spars-with-reporters-in-fiery-briefing

This was a second question by Peter Alexander and followed up on a clear response to effectively the same question by the prior reporter, not to mention multiple references in the prepared remarks.

Quote
To Dr. Fauci, if I could? Dr. Fauci, as was explained yesterday, there has been some promise with hydroxychloroquine as potential therapy for people who are infected with coronavirus. Is there any evidence to suggest that, as with malaria, it might be used as a prophylaxis against COVID-19?

To which Fauci, responded:

Quote
No. The answer is no. The evidence that you’re talking about is anecdotal evidence. As the commissioner of FDA and the president mentioned yesterday, we’re trying to strike a balance between making something with a potential of an effect to the American people available at the same time that we do it under the auspices of a protocol that would give us information to determine if it’s truly safe and truly effective. But, the information that you’re referring to specifically is anecdotal. It was not done in a controlled clinical trial, so you really can’t make any definitive statement about it.

Now, by anecdotal, it seems all he means is that anything that is not a double blind clinical trial is anecdotal.  Not sure if you've ever solved a problem in real life, but I'm pretty sure you've been able to figure out solutions without running double blind clinical trials.  If any study of scale shows improvement at the rate of the French results on the combination.

And then Trump clarifies his position on exactly this issue:

Quote
I think, without seeing too much, I’m probably more of a fan of that, maybe, than anybody. I’m a big fan, and we’ll see what happens. We all understand what the doctor said is 100% correct. It’s early, but I’ve seen things that are impressive. We’ll see. We’re going to know soon. We’re going to know soon. Including safety. When you get that safety, this has been prescribed for many years for people to combat malaria, which was a big problem, and it’s very effective. It’s a strong drug.

And there's nothing there that's incorrect.  Trump said that the doctors are right, but that he's hopeful.  I think anyone rational is hopeful based on the "anecdotal" results, and given the proven history of the drug (it's literally been used for decades and the side effects are "well understood"), and the urgency of the health need expediting a trial - even if not double blind makes a lot of sense.

I mean honestly, per the FDA guidelines there "in no approved treatment" for an illness with a high fatality rate, how does that not justify running with the promising yet "anecdotal" results?

Then they continue, Faucci and Trump walking through exactly why it's "anecdotal" (i.e., not done in a clinical trial).

So then Peter gets his first question, which you'll note is already combative:

Quote
About the possible therapies, yesterday, Mr. President, you said that they were for “immediate delivery”. Immediate. We heard from..

To which the President gives a clear response about the orders and concludes with this:  "We’ll see how it works out. I’m not saying it will, but I think that people may be surprised. By the way, that would be a game changer. We’re going to know very soon. We have ordered millions of units. It’s being ordered from Bayer, and there is another couple of companies also that do it"

Then we get this, from Peter:

Quote
For clarity, Dr. Fauci said there is no magic drug for coronavirus right now, which you would agree. I guess on this issue...

Which is a poor characterization of what Fauci said.  All Fauci said is that the results are anecdotal and not the result of a double blind study, ergo he doesn't want to tout them too highly.    He never gave any opinion on whether substantively the cocktail will work.

Peter did this characterization specifically to demean the solution and to force a reponse that either affirms a "magic drug" or that can be used to claim that Trump and Fauci disagree.

Trump handled that pretty well, "I think we only disagree a little bit. *** I disagree. Maybe and maybe not. Maybe there is, maybe there isn’t. We have to see. We’re going to known soon."

So what does Peter do?  Tries again to build in an insult and DNC talking point into the question:

Quote
Is it possible that your impulse to put a positive spin on things may be giving Americans a false sense of hope and misrepresenting our preparedness right now?

That question is NOT AT ALL RESPONSIVE to what Trump actually said, which was in fact measured but hopeful and builds in multiple insults.  Your "impulse" - ie you are impulsive and don't think things through, a common DNC talking point; "positive spin" - in context you're lying or overselling the results - not the case, the results are what they are notwithstanding the lack of an 18 month double blind study; "false sense of hope" - you're lying to Americans (even though he's literally not); "misrepresenting our preparedness" - DNC meme and a lie that America is not prepared - we were in fact rated most prepared country for a crisis of this nature in a recent study, and Trump's been very active in containment and actions (including those that Biden and the DNC claimed were "racist" even though they were the right call). 

So yeah, Peter Alexander's questions were intended to be insults and phrased as insults, and if you watch them live you can pick it up even more from the tone.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #230 on: March 25, 2020, 12:18:04 PM »

So then Peter gets his first question, which you'll note is already combative:

Quote
About the possible therapies, yesterday, Mr. President, you said that they were for “immediate delivery”. Immediate. We heard from..

Why is it combative to call him out on saying immediate? That wasn't a paraphrase, that was exactly what he said.

Quote
"We have a couple that we're in really good shape on, and that's for immediate delivery," Trump said.

Clearly nothing is ready for immediate delivery, is it? And it is an opportunity for Trump to clarify. Instead he says, "we'll see". A proper response would defer to FDA, CDC and medical professionals for when it might be deployed. Its his over exuberant optimism that the press is trying to clarify. Frankly, if they don't press on these questions, they aren't doing their job. He could also have said that it "can be immediately delivered when..."

His words imply that its being shipped out and going to be used immediately.
To which the President gives a clear response about the orders and concludes with this:  "We’ll see how it works out. I’m not saying it will, but I think that people may be surprised. By the way, that would be a game changer. We’re going to know very soon. We have ordered millions of units. It’s being ordered from Bayer, and there is another couple of companies also that do it"

Then we get this, from Peter:

Quote
For clarity, Dr. Fauci said there is no magic drug for coronavirus right now, which you would agree. I guess on this issue...

Which is a poor characterization of what Fauci said.  All Fauci said is that the results are anecdotal and not the result of a double blind study, ergo he doesn't want to tout them too highly.    He never gave any opinion on whether substantively the cocktail will work.

Peter did this characterization specifically to demean the solution and to force a reponse that either affirms a "magic drug" or that can be used to claim that Trump and Fauci disagree.

Trump handled that pretty well, "I think we only disagree a little bit. *** I disagree. Maybe and maybe not. Maybe there is, maybe there isn’t. We have to see. We’re going to known soon."

So what does Peter do?  Tries again to build in an insult and DNC talking point into the question:

Quote
Is it possible that your impulse to put a positive spin on things may be giving Americans a false sense of hope and misrepresenting our preparedness right now?

That question is NOT AT ALL RESPONSIVE to what Trump actually said, which was in fact measured but hopeful and builds in multiple insults.  Your "impulse" - ie you are impulsive and don't think things through, a common DNC talking point; "positive spin" - in context you're lying or overselling the results - not the case, the results are what they are notwithstanding the lack of an 18 month double blind study; "false sense of hope" - you're lying to Americans (even though he's literally not); "misrepresenting our preparedness" - DNC meme and a lie that America is not prepared - we were in fact rated most prepared country for a crisis of this nature in a recent study, and Trump's been very active in containment and actions (including those that Biden and the DNC claimed were "racist" even though they were the right call). 

So yeah, Peter Alexander's questions were intended to be insults and phrased as insults, and if you watch them live you can pick it up even more from the tone.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #231 on: March 25, 2020, 12:43:11 PM »
Quote from: Seriati
Then we get this, from Peter:

Quote
For clarity, Dr. Fauci said there is no magic drug for coronavirus right now, which you would agree. I guess on this issue...

Which is a poor characterization of what Fauci said.  All Fauci said is that the results are anecdotal and not the result of a double blind study, ergo he doesn't want to tout them too highly.

Actually, that is almost verbatim what Fauci said: "...but there's no magic drug out there right now"

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #232 on: March 25, 2020, 01:00:29 PM »
Quote
Why is it combative to call Trump out

The rules of Trump-ism state that any questioning of Trump or his administration = combative
her's a riddle for you: In Trump-ism politics how do you tell the difference between a counter punch and a preemptive punch
You don't - Like Bart Simpson just keep swinging your arms.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #233 on: March 25, 2020, 02:00:48 PM »
Seriati, was Chris Wallace being nasty?

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #234 on: March 25, 2020, 04:03:42 PM »
Quote
BIDEN: "The president's numbers with the public have gone up in handling this crisis, but they haven't gone up in terms of his presidency."

*awkward silence*

REPORTER: Actually, his job approval is also up.

BIDEN: "Well, I hope that he's so strong that he's up way above that."

Jesus

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #235 on: March 25, 2020, 04:15:32 PM »
Quote from: Seriati
Then we get this, from Peter:

Quote
For clarity, Dr. Fauci said there is no magic drug for coronavirus right now, which you would agree. I guess on this issue...

Which is a poor characterization of what Fauci said.  All Fauci said is that the results are anecdotal and not the result of a double blind study, ergo he doesn't want to tout them too highly.

Actually, that is almost verbatim what Fauci said: "...but there's no magic drug out there right now"

Lol, yeah or you could listen to the entire CNN interview to put that in context, rather than the edited clips that jump straight to it.

In fact, citing that back just goes to show how easily things are manipulated in this day and age.  Even the CNN interview tried to present things in misleading ways, but they couldn't quite figure out how to interrupt Fauci and he kept giving full explanations.

So to be clear, Fauci, on CNN after several minutes of walking through exactly what I said, that people were going to be using the cocktail because it has encouraging results, but that there hasn't been a double blind study, was asked a follow up question to which the response was effectively, there is No FDA approved treatment or magic drug that cures the virus. 

He didn't say that in the interview with Trump, and it was IN FACT a poor summary of what he did say, both in that interview on CNN and with Trump. 

But hey, once again you've proved that if anyone uses any words the media finds useful to sell a false story, they will pull the clip and play it to sell the fake story and people will repeat it like they've made a point.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #236 on: March 25, 2020, 04:17:24 PM »
Seriati, was Chris Wallace being nasty?

When?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #237 on: March 25, 2020, 04:21:44 PM »
Or you could continue with the interview, his very next question, after going out of his way to downplay a possible treatment, to claim that Trump is being too positive and to call him a liar.  Notwithstanding that the science is literally on Trump's side.  The drugs in question have been show to suppress coronavirus in a lab and the method of action on how they do it is understood.

Quote
What do you say to Americans who are scared, though? Nearly 200 dead. 14,000 who are sick. Millions, as you witness, who are scared right now. What do you say to Americans who are watching you right now who are scared?

So, what do you say to the scared people, now that I've called you a liar and said you're overselling hope?

Quote
I say that you’re a terrible reporter. That’s what I say. I think it’s a very nasty question, and I think it’s a very bad signal that you’re putting out to the American people. The American people are looking for answers and they’re looking for hope, and you’re doing sensationalism. The same with NBC and Comcast. I don’t call it Comcast, I called Concast, for who you work.

And I agree, he's a terrible "reporter" who is not there to get information or to report, but literally there to cause panic and  scare people because it doesn't serve his own political agenda for Trump to succeed even where that success is fighting a pandemic.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #238 on: March 25, 2020, 04:29:27 PM »
Quote
So to be clear, Fauci, on CNN after several minutes of walking through exactly what I said, that people were going to be using the cocktail because it has encouraging results, but that there hasn't been a double blind study, was asked a follow up question to which the response was effectively, there is No FDA approved treatment or magic drug that cures the virus.

I had no luck finding a transcript, and I'll cut off my own hands before I sit through a whole CNN video. I'd love to evaluate this statement and see exactly what he said about people "using the cocktail". Particularly whether he was recommending it, or just acknowledging that some doctors are just going to skip CDC and FDA advice.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #239 on: March 25, 2020, 04:31:37 PM »
Quote
What do you say to Americans who are scared, though? Nearly 200 dead. 14,000 who are sick. Millions, as you witness, who are scared right now. What do you say to Americans who are watching you right now who are scared?

How is that a hard question to answer? It starts with "I would tell them..." and probably with a condescending tone rather than belligerence and defiance.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #240 on: March 25, 2020, 04:41:56 PM »
Seriati, was Chris Wallace being nasty?

When?

See my post above where he tweeted an attack on Wallace.

Quote
So, what do you say to the scared people, now that I've called you a liar and said you're overselling hope?

You answer the damned question, because hundreds of millions of Americans want to know what you would say to them.  What kind of moron is asked such a pertinent and sensitive question and blows up because he feels he's been insulted by other questions???
« Last Edit: March 25, 2020, 04:44:02 PM by Kasandra »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #241 on: March 25, 2020, 05:54:44 PM »
To the original topic:

Quote
Biden said: “My focus is just dealing with this crisis right now. I haven’t thought about any more debates. I think we’ve had enough debates. I think we should get on with this.

Huh? What exactly is he doing to "deal with this crisis"? He holds no office. He's not fundraising for charity like Sanders. About all he's been doing is releasing critical statements.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #242 on: March 25, 2020, 05:56:45 PM »
To the original topic:

Quote
Biden said: “My focus is just dealing with this crisis right now. I haven’t thought about any more debates. I think we’ve had enough debates. I think we should get on with this.

Huh? What exactly is he doing to "deal with this crisis"? He holds no office. He's not fundraising for charity like Sanders. About all he's been doing is releasing critical statements.

That objection applies to everyone who isn't carrying supplies into hospitals, doesn't it?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #243 on: March 25, 2020, 06:06:52 PM »
To the original topic:

Quote
Biden said: “My focus is just dealing with this crisis right now. I haven’t thought about any more debates. I think we’ve had enough debates. I think we should get on with this.

Huh? What exactly is he doing to "deal with this crisis"? He holds no office. He's not fundraising for charity like Sanders. About all he's been doing is releasing critical statements.

That objection applies to everyone who isn't carrying supplies into hospitals, doesn't it?

I just barely cited Sanders' efforts to encourage charitable donation. Holding productive discussions and statements to encourage good behavior. While he might criticize parts of legislation, its out of conviction and he makes his own counterproposals. Of course, he actually holds a Senate seat so its not a direct comparison.

Making the charitable contributions is something else many people can do. I'm not carrying supplies into hospitals but I've made several donations as well as gifts to several friends who lost their service industry jobs for at least 4 weeks.

He has also criticized Trump as part of all his activities.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #244 on: March 25, 2020, 06:12:39 PM »
The cure is worse than the disease?

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-biden-gaffe-alert-stuns-043232408.html


"He did offer one gem in response to Sara Haines’s question on whether businesses should reopen very soon.

“Are you at all concerned, as Trump said, that we cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself?” Haines asked.

Biden noted in his reply that the COVID-19 cure “will make the problem worse, no matter what.”

No one from The View followed up for a clarification. But social media didn’t let it go, seizing on it like a dog with a meaty bone."

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #245 on: March 25, 2020, 06:42:04 PM »
Seriati, was Chris Wallace being nasty?

When?

See my post above where he tweeted an attack on Wallace.

You're going back to an interview between Wallace and Scalise from November about the impeachment?  In which Wallace repeatedly interrupted factual statements to interject with hypotheticals that didn't turn out to be true to try and get Scalise to commit to agreeing to impeach in advance?

I say, he's right about how Wallace was acting on that occasion.

Quote
Quote
So, what do you say to the scared people, now that I've called you a liar and said you're overselling hope?

You answer the damned question, because hundreds of millions of Americans want to know what you would say to them.  What kind of moron is asked such a pertinent and sensitive question and blows up because he feels he's been insulted by other questions???

He did answer the question, repeated and multiple times.  of course you missed that cause you got to caught up in a reporting trying to scare people and getting called out on it.

He also answered that question about fake reporters multiple times, as did Pompeo, who even went so far as to flat out say how frustrating he finds it to answer questions for reporters multiple times, in multiple ways with no question they understand his answer and then to find articles where they completely misrepresent and lie about the position. 

I guess, the answer here is, you'd rather believe lies than take the time to get the truth.  None of the media "misunderstandings" and spin is legit.  The answers are literally in the transcript.  Read it for yourself and quit passing off lies and information as if it's true because some talking head curated it for  you.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #246 on: March 25, 2020, 07:04:48 PM »
Sometimes you gotta answer the same question over and over again. How many times did Obama get asked about his birth certificate? I don't remember him flying off the handle.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #247 on: March 25, 2020, 07:07:59 PM »
Quote

In the interview excerpt, which is posted to Soundcloud, Reade described a graphic 1993 incident where a superior asked her to take a gym bag to Biden "down towards the capital." Then she recalls being called towards the "side area" where Biden greeted her.
"We were alone and it was the strangest thing," she said. "There was no like exchange really. He just had me up against the wall."

Reade went on to say that she was wearing a business skirt with no stockings because it was hot at the time. While up against the wall, Reade says Biden's "hands were on me and underneath my clothes."

"He went down my skirt but then up inside it and he penetrated me with his fingers," Reade emotionally continued.

Reade also said Biden was kissing her and saying multiple things to her. She remembered a couple of the comments.

"I remember him saying first, like as he was doing it, 'Do you want to go somewhere else,'" she said. “And then him saying to me when I pulled away, he got finished doing what he was doing, and I kind of just pulled back and he said, 'Come on man, I heard you liked me"’ And that phrase stayed with me because I kept thinking what I might've said and I cant remember exactly if he said'‘i thought' or 'I heard' but he implied that I had done this."


Well, that’s it for Joe.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #248 on: March 25, 2020, 07:17:41 PM »
I hope that does end it for him. I believe the accuser.

I wonder how you'd respond to this if someone were blaming Trump or perhaps any conservative with the same story. I suspect you'd insist it was politically motivated, that it can't be corroborated, and that it is strange that she never came forward earlier, neh?

Is Reade more or less credible than Ford? If so, why?

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« Reply #249 on: March 25, 2020, 07:29:43 PM »
Quote
I hope that does end it for him. I believe the accuser.

Given everything you know that Trump did to all kinds of women for decades for which he has gotten a pass, why does that "end it for him"?