who is now officially a felon.
An undignified shameless sies-gat .
who is now officially a felon.
An undignified shameless sies-gat .
Foitog...what a farce...watch this space...
Good word .............. his entire political career has been farcical. An aberration.
‘ Musk prepares to pull the strings of his little clown puppet . . . who is now officially a felon.‘
Exactly right it is a farce what happened to a level playing field?
Do the crime you do the time.
"Do the crime you do the time."
He'll go to his grave as a felonious ex-president & being elected doesn't erase his f'wit status.
Americans don't mind that he sets a low bar.....sleeze being the latest.
Americans deserve this incompetent and classless clown . . . but as a non Yank, you have to be concerned that this conceited and egotistical buffoon has access to the codes required to launch nuclear warheads.
Roioinek dofdoos
Trump appointed Musk and Ramaswamy to clear the shit, incompetece and corruption out of the Federal Public Service on a limited time basis. The period is for 24 months/ Nohing more - shit spreader and supreme idiot.
Trump’s clownish antics and the abnegation of responsibility so characteristic of his administration are perfectly consonant with this vision of the evildoer. Emptiness, a lack of character, and a fundamental unwillingness to take responsibility for oneself lurk at evil’s core.
Americans deserve this incompetent and classless clown . . . but as a non Yank, you have to be concerned that this conceited and egotistical buffoon has access to the codes required to launch nuclear warheads.
Wonder what's he going to do about draining the swamp when he is the swamp. Perhaps it's a good thing that President Musk who carries no baggage is the active POTUS.
Trump’s clownish antics...
Wish he'd stop punching air as a dance......feck he looks damn frigging childish and stupid.
"Perhaps it's a good thing that President Musk who carries no baggage is the active POTUS."
I think President Musk has some baggage of his own
Oh no, is he another pussy grabber?
LMAO
Not sure what it is that President Musk likes to grab but if you read what his transgender child has to say about him then I don't think he's winning any father-of-the-year awards.
I’m sure he cares what a grunt in Australia thinks Hysteria.
Can anyone else hear that noise? Almost like a plaintive little cry along the lines of "Hey why is no-one responding to me? . . . I'm important . . . I'm significant . . . and I can integrate x squared! Why is no one talking to me? Hey guys, do you know what . . . hey guys . . . guys?"
Anyone else hearing it?
Your silence while I humiliate you is a tell…you can’t compete. It’s time for your no más.
"He'll go to his grave as a felonious ex-president & being elected doesn't erase his f'wit status."
...still better than having the personality of a lifeless corpse.
Am I right, Blo?
It's none of my business what people think of me ............. remember to sanitise your plugs.
It’s President Musk vs President No Más. Hilarious watching losers like Two Pot and Hysteria mocking a lad from Pretoria who changed the world.
Making America Great Again...and the world safer again...and the price of chedar is already dropping...WINNING!!!
It may take him a while to get to get that far from civilization Blob, but New Zealand will be a nice companion piece after we occupy Greenland. We don’t want to ignore the SH.
You know he's batshit 
Maybe, but look at Merkel who closed down all the nuclear plants and relied on Putin. Look at all the other incompetent bureaucrats running countries incompetently. Look at Adern:
‘Last year the average new buyer in New Zealand was spending 49 per cent of their income on mortgage repayments, the highest level since records commenced in the 1950s’
Trump was not my pick and I don’t like some of his cabinet choices. But he has the experience to be independent, not just a creature of his advisors. Time to see what happens, he has some new ideas that seem a bit nuts, but in a world of Russian expansion and Chinese threats to consume Taiwan, is US interest in protecting Panama and Greenland really that crazy.
OK BB
First f a;l you know fuck-all about the USA political situation and thw fact is that the US Government became totally ciorrupt under te Obama and Biden presidencies. So I thing a better desscrition should be snakeshit, That is why Biden is dishing out pardons and he ahs another week to go to pardon fllow corruption involved politicians and bureaucrats from future investigation.
You should not deal with batshit in te way you do. Batshit was used in gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Lab - funded by Dr Faucci and co - that caused the Covid pandemic. Snakeshit like Biden is a curse on humankind as well. So live wih it. .
The log list of shit propaganda shit quoted by you is amazing since none of the BS has been proved in any way,
, .
"...is US interest in protecting Panama and Greenland really that crazy."
No, it's not...it's actually batsh!t to do nothing about it.
Diversionary tactics .................... like, 'they eating our dawgs!!' 'they eating our cats!!'
He's batshit, & you lot are part of his Batshit Brigade.
You don't do much of your own thinking, do you, Blo?
Let's remove all the media hype, opinions and disinformation about Trump.
And then let's ask the TDS brigade one easy question and see if they can answer it...
Can you give us some examples of how Trump messed up America during his first term? I'm not talking about how he may have hurt some woke darling's feelings or perhaps pulled a power handshake on some weak wristed European. I'm not asking if your favourite leftist media outlet call him decisive and polarising.
I'm asking about policies or decisions he made that were bad enough that one could objectively say that he should not be president?
Did he invade anyone? Propose laws that destroyed lives? Make terrible decisions on tariffs or the economy that badly hurt the US? Perhaps defund some vital government department and it had detrimental effects? Undermine some crucial industry and cause massive job losses?
Can any of the TDS'ers enlighten me?
I'm not asking for answers like "He made Musk his vice president." Because obviously we don't what the outcome of the Rat Pack will be. I'm asking for actual actions he took that harmed the US in some massive way.
Anyone?
Well, he did call Trumpvirus "another Democrat hoax" until reality slapped him through his stupid face and then - after the horse had bolted - he enforced travel bans, leaving thousands of Americans trapped in busy airports and pretty much ensured the virus got to the USA.
He did claim that injecting bleach was a cure for Trumpvirus . . . along with a lot of other ignorant garbage about other untested drugs or remedies.
He did also incite stupid people to march on the Capitol and try to prevent the handover of power after he lost the election all because his pathetically weak ego couldn't handle being defeated by a doddering old fool . . . which basically dragged all US democratic principles through the mud.
He did withhold military aid to Ukraine unless they helped him dig up some dirt on Joe Biden.
Want more?
Fact is Rooidoos you know fuck all about everything - yu are jsut too stupid to learn anyhinmg other than being a first degree cunt. Your knowledge of anything is fictional - based on propaganda BS - nothing else. By idiots can be easily inflenced to believe BS and you are a supreme idiot.
BB
That horseshit you had as Prime Minister was selling out NZ to China and the present Government is not doing much better. NZ may plead with the U SA for protection - with Biden was not going to do anything without approval of President Xi. You must go on your knees to beg for NZ protection by the USA because the target of China being Australia with NewZealad following, becuse th e nly benefit held for Ch ina is to take ver Rugby in NZ - t ehya spire tbe top rugby playing nation in the world and the shit NZ has in coaching will be taken over and told to behave hemelf or go to a slave camp in China if they do nt behave and obey and fail the Chinese for use.
He did claim that injecting bleach was a cure for Trumpvirus . . . along with a lot of other ignorant garbage about other untested drugs or remedies.
..
Flat out lie….he claimed bleach killed the virus and the medical community should look at whether it could be used internally to stop the virus
I recall him saying that bleach could be injected under the skin, I don't recall him saying that it could be used internally but anyway here's the thing.
WH briefings were streamed live into our lounge rooms, I will never forget the look on Dr Birx's face while he was addressing her on the subject. The poor woman was cringing with embarrassment. I guess anyone other than a Trump supporter when watching it unfold would have cringed as well.
Whatever Rooinek has said in his above post is true so my question to you Mozart is, don't you think that Trump has painted himself as repulsive with his claim of fraudulent election results, the upheavel he caused by dragging the result through 60 courts, his instigation of J6 which disgraced America in front of an international audience, his badgering of officials in Georgia to find votes to overturn the election result and lastly the sleeze act of paying hush money?
The floor is yours.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/23/trump-bleach-one-year-484399
One year ago today, President Donald Trump took to the White House briefing room and encouraged his top health officials to study the injection of bleach into the human body as a means of fighting Covid. It was a watershed moment, soon to become iconic in the annals of presidential briefings. It arguably changed the course of political history.
Some ex-Trump aides say they don’t even think about that day as the wildest they experienced — with the conceit that there were simply too many others. But for those there, it was instantly shocking, even by Trump standards. It quickly came to symbolize the chaotic essence of his presidency and his handling of the pandemic. Twelve months later, with the pandemic still lingering and a U.S. death toll nearing 570,000, it still does.
“For me, it was the craziest and most surreal moment I had ever witnessed in a presidential press conference,” said ABC’s chief Washington correspondent Jon Karl, who was the first reporter at the briefing to question Trump’s musings about bleach.
For weeks, Trump had been giving winding, stream-of-consciousness updates on the state of the Covid fight as it clearly worsened. So when he got up from the Oval Office to brief reporters gathered in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on April 23, there was no expectation that the day’s proceedings would be any different than usual.
Privately, however, some of his aides were worried. The Covid task force had met earlier that day — as usual, without Trump — to discuss the most recent findings, including the effects of light and humidity on how the virus spreads. Trump was briefed by a small group of aides. But it was clear to some aides that he hadn’t processed all the details before he left to speak to the press.
“A few of us actually tried to stop it in the West Wing hallway,” said one former senior Trump White House official. “I actually argued that President Trump wouldn’t have the time to absorb it and understand it. But I lost, and it went how it did.”
Trump started his press conference that day by doing something he’d come to loathe: pushing basic public safety measures. He called for the “voluntary use of face coverings” and said of his administration, “continued diligence is an essential part of our strategy.”
Quickly, however, came a hint at how loose the guardrails were that day. Trump introduced Bill Bryan, head of science and technology at the Department of Homeland Security. “He’s going to be talking about how the virus reacts in sunlight,” the president said. “Wait ‘til you hear the numbers.”
As Bryan spoke, charts were displayed behind him about surface temperatures and virus half-lives. He preached, rather presciently, for people to “move activities outside” and then detailed ongoing studies involving disinfectants. “We tested bleach,” he said at one point. “I can tell you that bleach will kill the virus in five minutes.”
Standing off to the side, Trump clasped his hands in front of his stomach, nodded and looked out into the room of gathered reporters. When Bryan was done, he strode slowly back to the lectern.
“A question that probably some of you are thinking of if you’re totally into that world,” Trump began, clearly thinking the question himself, “So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light — and I think you said that that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you’re going to test that, too. It sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it gets in the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that.”
Dr. Deborah Birx, Trump’s former coronavirus response coordinator, sat silently off to the side as the president made these suggestions to her. Later, she would tell ABC, “I didn’t know how to handle that episode,” adding, “I still think about it every day.”
Inside the Biden campaign, aides were shocked as well. They were working remotely at that juncture, communicating largely over Signal. But the import of what had happened became quickly evident to them.
“Even for him,” said one former Biden campaign aide, “this was stratospherically insane and dangerous. It cemented the case we had been making about his derelict covid response.”
In short order, the infamous bleach press conference became a literal rallying cry for Trump’s opponents, with Biden supporters dotting their yards with “He Won’t Put Bleach In You” signs. For Trump, it was a scourge. He would go on to insist that he was merely being sarcastic — a claim at odds with the excited curiosity he had posing those questions to Birx. His former team concedes that real damage was done.
“People joked about it inside the White House like, ‘Are you drinking bleach and injecting sunlight?’ People were mocking it and saying, ‘Oh let me go stand out in the sun, and I’ll be safe from Covid,” said one former administration official. “It honestly hurt. It was a credibility issue. … It was hurting us even from an international standpoint, the credibility at the White House.”
That Trump was even at the lectern that day was head-scratching for many. For weeks, he and his team had downplayed the severity of the Covid crisis even as the president privately acknowledged to the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward that it had the potential to be catastrophic. But as it became clearer that the public was not buying the rosy assessments, Trump had decided to take his fate into his own hands — assembling the press on a daily basis to spin his way through the crisis.
He loved it. The former administration official said Trump was elated with the free airtime he was getting on television day after day. “He was asking how much money that was worth,” the aide recalled. The coverage was so ubiquitous that, at one point, Fox News’ Bret Baier attended the briefing and peppered the president with questions because his own show was being routinely interrupted.
The bleach episode changed all that.
Aides immediately understood what a public health quagmire Trump’s remarks had created. White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany insisted he was being taken out of context.
“President Trump has repeatedly said that Americans should consult with medical doctors regarding coronavirus treatment, a point that he emphasized again during yesterday’s briefing,” McEnany said in a statement issued the next day. “Leave it to the media to irresponsibly take President Trump out of context and run with negative headlines.”
But behind the scenes, Trump’s remarks were used as evidence by senior aides for why they needed to crack down on unvetted information being put in front of the president. “Either they didn’t know what he was going to say — which isn’t ideal — or they didn’t push back before he went out to the briefing,” said a former senior communications official in the Trump administration. “It was a huge unforced error that could have been prevented.”
By then, White House aides were already debating the efficacy of having Trump relay health information to the public and having to answer whatever question a reporter might throw his way. Some aides — along with Republican allies on Capitol Hill — were pushing to get the president to take a back seat to his health experts at the podium.
“It became like a presser for the sake of having a presser. We didn’t have anything to announce or real policy plans,” a former White House official said. “If you’re just coming out and talking, a Q&A [with reporters] wasn’t going to be helpful.”
Trump would end up doing only a handful more press conferences after the bleach episode before picking them back up again in July. A year later, the episode is still considered a defining point in the Covid fight and a prime exhibit of what can go wrong when an over-confident president believes he can message his way through a once-in-a-lifetime global pandemic.
“Undoubtedly [it was] a seminal moment in presidential communications, and while it is easy to laugh it off, I hope it educates leaders and communicators for decades,” said former Obama White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. “But this was the moment where we knew without any doubt that the government was in way over its head, and its ability to both respond effectively and educate Americans about what to do was not going to be anywhere close to meeting the moment.”
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0SV_uK
Tjis is as expected total B S spreading again/ Coming from Politico ir uis exoced to be a repaet of B S about he Bleach story/ Tump tried to cmfort the panicking people that the matter of Covid and made he mistake o deal with isues in the emdia who he know hated him - he did not know that the criminal he used as chief advisor was involved in the gain -of function research funded by the Government of the USA was the source of the pandemic.
When Trump became aware of the role of Dr Faucci and that women you quoted now wnt to see him to warn about the catsastrophic result that could result from the vitus, In the emntime the advice was floundering around - one daty he said masks don't protect people - a week later h aid everybody should wear masks. Meanwhile they banned existing approved drugs from being used - even when Indian doctors used it with successful usage of a drug normally used to treat malaria was sccessfully used in India the Health Department banned usage in the USA. Trump to take certain measures to protexct the USA -
* when he found out that both the WHO and President Xi lied to him he tore up the trade agreement with China and cancel the USA membership of the WHO and banned entry of non-citizens from China entering the USA on 30 January 2020 resulting of him being accused andf heat botch Pelosi went to the Chinese market to protest the racist action Trump took by banning entry as racist and it must also be remembered that he effectively closed the border from non citizens people entering the USA;
* he strongly advised the Pharma industry they must develop a vaccine to be used to fight Covid and foced the Health Deprtment to expedite approval of he vaccine while Biden and Harris campaigned against the usage of the vaccine and stated they would not accept the usage and swiore they would not use te vaccine themselves - anothe lie the two were one of the first people that was vaccinated;
* knowing that it would hurt the economy and the working class people and expecially the poor he made available grants to help people to te tune of $4,6 trillion in gant funding of people - of which the Auditor General fond that $5,4 illion was effecively stolen and the Wray FBI refuised to investigate;
* hen he became aware that the virus originated from the Wuhan Lab research and found out how it was funded by the UA Government in Sptembe 2020 he fired Faucci from the management teama nd appointed a special task team to investigate te origins o the vorus and the role the USA played in teh funding;
* Trump also know that in terms of the USA Consitution Health wa a State nd no Fedeal fuction and the only role he Federal Govenment played was to help the States financially and through whatever else they need help on - but the States did things that s highly dtrimental to people - for istance they sent infected people to the care eners for the elderly where tens of thousands of the elderly died as a reuslt and the death rate of people dieing from he virus was highe in 2021 - when Biden was president than it was in 2020 when Trump was President.
* On of Biden's first actions was to close down the task team Trump apppointed to investigate the origin of he virus and instructed the FBI and CIA to investigate the issue nd rport back the results of their investigation within six months. After a year the FBI nd CIA found that there were no evidence they could find - another lie since ina House hearing on the issue Wra aid it is common knowledge that he viruse came om the Wuhan Lab.
* In Democratic States the schools were cloed for two years and no education was provided to children in that peiod. Although all States closed down business operations and comfimed people to their homes - in Reublican states the closrue of business were stopped within six months since it was totally ineffective and started operating business and othe facilities and lifted the intial bans. Unfoirtunately the rules to keep people from leaving heir homes was not appi;iicable to the Demoratic Party elitte broke all theiir own rulles with luxury holildas in Florids sn in luxury restaurants and paries like Obama's birthdy party attended b over 600 people at his home in Martha's Vineyard island,
* Dr Faucci was aoointed s advisr of Biden as his WH advisor ob Heakth issues, shich was the same as as using a wolf to guard a chicken cage. He as summoned a numbe of times to apper in Sen ate and House hearings - especilly about his role in funding the gain-in fuction research in Wuhan and he started a long list of lies about his and other people's role in that funding. He kept finding new lies eveyime when quartioned and in the end he resigbed from wis Whirtehouse jobn and his bureaicrtic job he held in Septembe 2023 at the age of 85 years. He was reported to the Attorney General for prosecution as to lying under oath to Congress - but was protected by Biden and Garland.
* Problems developed as to the compulsory vaccine issue implemented by the Biden Administration and in the course of evidents 60 000 soldiers and tens of housands of nutsing staff were fired a result, The army member were particulaly badly treated before they were fired, As a result the army got into trouble when they could not recrute suficient people to serve in te miitary they offered the 60 000 soldiers a return to the army they turned it down totally = once btten twice shy.
* Trumps major problem in the whole issue was to help and promote a vaccine that did not prevent people fom getting infected and did zero to prevent elderly people from dying when they got infected, What was worse was that the Hospitals got government grants in the case of handling of Covid cases - so they inflate the deaths - so nobody know how mny peple acually died from Covid died fom existing morbidities they suffered from alredy. For instance in 2020 and 2021 there were no flu deats in the usa - whilst in ordinary years there were about 250 000 such deaths in the USA during ordinary years,
I would rather stop talking about BS diostorted by the media about injecting people with bleach - it as a media lie from the beginning. What was discussed was the need to clean table tops using bleach as a means to reduce infection of people that way. What the media came up wit was total BS and ordinary people knew it was political BS. Nbody eve died s result of using bleach a an injection ption - it w totl BS d lies spred by the media.
So live ith it lies did in thed not worked nd coninuous B S will not save people from being prosecited for a large numbe of offenses that Biden's FBI nd Justice Departments tried to cover up. It is bound to be investigted in ful now and people like Faucci - the above ldoes not include Biden since his mentaal state is so poor o court would fi him guilty of offemces - te res like Pelosi may get wy with it because she became mental ifiot s well basically die to be drunk most of the time.
. . . . .
.
As I suspected, nobody offered anything but weak attempts at character assassination.
I asked for "Did he invade anyone? Propose laws that destroyed lives? Make terrible decisions on tariffs or the economy that badly hurt the US? Perhaps defund some vital government department and it had detrimental effects? Undermine some crucial industry and cause massive job losses?"
It was a simple question but none of the TDS'ers could provide anything other than "I don't line Trump".
Weak.
The suffering voters knew exactly what Biden did badly and they claimed Trump's election would benefit thema nd the country. They knew what ahppened when they vted for tTrump in what they generally called "return to the time Trump was President and BS was limited. people like Rooinek, BB and Denny suffered as a result of worldwide inflation lagely caused by Biden policies that has world wide consequences,
All theyc an come up with is emdia criticism by hte leftist media which ey publish on site and is 99% factless BS, Th fact is all the ourt cases collapsed and if Trump was found guilty of anything he could appeal the BS Charges - even the two New York cases daing abck to 2017 and was part of the BS the D emocrats tried to use to ndermine the Trump election campaiagn
The one case about fraud insofar as Trumps projects in New York has already gone on appeal to the Federal Court and although he Judges ahs not reached a decision - their questioning indicated tat the whle case was BS supreme. In the case of the Hush money trial the Judge concerned - fearing the case was BS that could discredit him totally - now refuse o sentence Trump and has not sentenced him on anyhing. In reality there was no case at all in that case and a string of judicial misconduct and the Judge knew what happened so he tried to cove up the whole issue - no jail time and no fining was imposed - meaning that no appeal would be jusified,
One woulda ssume that all the silly "felon" BS would stop, Because no felony was invovled and the Judge knew it - but obeyed his political bosses and his daughter paid $12 million to do work for VP Harris' office wil becioem a problem - so no sentence, So the BS is no over and no felony was in fact punished, But idiots nd stupidity made people believe media BS propaganda and one must accept that the ree was stupid and beleived the S they come up with. Theys hould rather start thinking and not come up with streams of media BS.
, . .
"It was a simple question but none of the TDS'ers could provide anything other than "I don't line Trump"
Yep, that's all I saw
"he strongly advised the Pharma industry they must develop a vaccine to be used to fight Covid and foced the Health Deprtment to expedite approval"
Spot on Mike
I think people all over the world, just don't really understand how many millions of lives Trump saved just with this one directive alone.
That probably does not include all the people who have been thinking that the vaccines killed people.
"That probably does not include all the people who have been thinking that the vaccines killed people"
And to be fair, it did in some cases... many even quite a lot, due to some adverse reaction.
I was not a fan of the vaccine, never have been, but I do know that without it, and without Trump's insistence on getting a vaccine to market......millions and millions more could have possibly died... of that I have no doubt.
For the greater good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But he has the experience to be independent, not just a creature of his advisors
but in a world of Russian expansion and Chinese threats to consume Taiwan, is US interest in protecting Panama and Greenland really that crazy.
It is another liberal trait: the ability to waddle in contradiction. Liberals probably no longer pay attention, their brains are now selected to be immune to contradicitions. Their brains are wired that way.
The very independent Trump is going to expand because others do it, this is how you show independent will. More about it one day as it is very funny.
Since residents in here are supposedly africans, the bit would have been even more convincing if that liberal pundit included the incredible threat of Rwandan expansion in Congo. Which makes the current era a very dangerous era.
And notice the superficy, Canada, Panama canal, the greenland.... peanuts compared to the superficy of Taiwan or any territory eyed by Russia.
It is understood why people are so enamoured with liberal societies: in what other societies could one make a living spitting out such non sense? Liberal societies reward emptiness.
"For the greater good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Lol, people were forced an experimental treatment/vaccine...some died...for the greater good...greater good my fat arse...there is no greater good coming from forced medical procedures...it's a step backwards for human society...all decisions made from fear are most likely the wrong ones...fear is the path to the Dark Side.
Question...why would peoples fear of Covid 19 be any more a path to the Dark Side, then your fear of the vaccines?
Have you not traded one fear for another?
people were forced an experimental treatment/vaccine...
Thank vok it wasn't any of f'wit Trump's daft ideas.
Hysteria here’s the difference. I did say January 6th was a disqualifying event. I have criticized his cabinet picks. I don’t support vilifying illegal immigrants. Trump was never my candidate.
But Russian collusion was political assassination and he was never given a reasonable chance to govern. He and his team did a brilliant job with the Covid economy, only for it to be screwed up by Biden handing out money exactly when inflation was gathering strength.
Personally I don’t believe anybody could make good on all the campaign promises he made. But the country needs him to be given a fair shot and if he bats 50% it will be way ahead of Biden who has left a mess behind.
Is the penny beginning to drop?
"Question...why would peoples fear of Covid 19 be any more a path to the Dark Side, then your fear of the vaccines?
Have you not traded one fear for another?"
I try not to make decisions based on fear...there's a difference between fear and caution...and I definitely don't force anyone else to do something they don't want to do just to appease my fears...
Regarding the vaccines and their purported positive effect - I wonder what the state of natural immunity was at the time vaccines came in use to any significance. How many people already had natural immunity - I'd venture it was the majority.
Natural immunity was just tossed out the window during the pandemic by the vaccine peddlers, that's a fact, despite studies showing it was every bit as effective if not more so than vaccines (example Oct 2022 Journal of Clinical Medicine - "this extensive narrative review regarding a vast number of articles highlighted the valuable protection induced by the natural immunity after COVID-19, which seems comparable or superior to the one induced by anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination".)
Forcing people who already had natural immunity to be vaccinated was and always will be an absolute nonsense.
"Regarding the vaccines and their purported positive effect - I wonder what the state of natural immunity was at the time vaccines came in use to any significance. How many people already had natural immunity - I'd venture it was the majority. "
The "experts" kinda let us down really.
To the point where they made so many incorrect calls that it's almost naive to believe everything was above board.
And Moz is absolutely correct. As inflation was becoming dangerous, the Dems decided to chuck money on the fire. The world is still reeling and far more people have suffered due theirs caused global inflation than what people did under Covid.
Masks are super effective. Two weeks to flatten the curve. It came from animals. Vaccinated people can't spread Covid...the list goes on and on.
Masks are super effective
Wehe You're sure about that, careful now, it's not according to your master. Best you snatch up before it's too late.
The "experts" kinda let us down really.
Yes. Like the 6 feet distancing. Not to mention all the negative talk and blaming of the unvaxxed this, the unvaxxed that, when "unvaccinated" in no way, shape of form meant "without immunity".
But Russian collusion was political assassination and he was never given a reasonable chance to govern. He and his team did a brilliant job with the Covid economy, only for it to be screwed up by Biden handing out money exactly when inflation was gathering strength.
Stop holding up Russian collusion as an excuse for his political assassination, fact is he brought it on himself, he was too dumb and arrogant for his own good, anyone with the smarts plays the media, it's a matter of ends and means, no-one in his right mind takes on the media with the hope of winning. I don't know of anyone who has.As for Biden screwing up the economy....that's a highly debatable subject and I won't take your word on it, the economy might already have been screwed.
I know you, on a different agenda you'd decimate Trump....you have with others who had a lot less of his sins.
So there, I await your name calling and insults.
As an edit there is a stench about when he says he gets on very well with Vladi.....Vladi the murderer.
Got that?
I'd argue that Trump shone a light on just how corrupt and propaganda-filled the media is.
...and it worked out perfectly because since he started calling them out, their influence has only waned.
Just one more massive win that the Big Don brought.
No?
Okay, fine, then explain this...
You are free to believe the BS youi are fed by he media - but real facts count for nothing and BS reign supreme in your case. .
Hysteria….when Plum is saying masks are super effective, he’s being sarcastic….read his post again. And I love your ‘wehe’….such a Pot Pot bunny. Do I take it we can now expect ‘wehe’ rather than the floor beating laughter?
On to the substance. Trump’s whole Presidency was a legal attack, from beginning to end. That robbed him of legitimacy domestically and especially internationally, Russian collusion was just the start.
As for getting on with Putin. Would you prefer he was incapable of talking to him, like Biden? A bit of dialogue and a few smart concessions could have avoided the destruction of the Ukraine.
The vaccines were over sold. Many people believed they were immune to Covid after getting the shot. It wasn’t that kind of vaccine. It was like a flu shot, which protects you if the particular strain that emerges was the target of that generation of the vaccine. But the vaccine also made getting the disease less radical.
Covid peaked at the beginning of 2022. Vaccinations peaked a few months before that. Death rates dropped dramatically after that. It looks consistent, but natural immunity played a roll. By now half the world’s pop has probably had covid. It was much less in 2022. So would natural immunity alone have provided protection. It’s very effective if the first infection isn’t too severe.
Here’s the Lancet:
‘ For someone previously infected with COVID-19, their risk of hospitalization or death is 88% lower for at least 10 months compared to those who had not been previously infected, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis published in The Lancet
The analysis also suggests that the level and duration of protection against reinfection, symptomatic disease and severe illness is at least on a par with that provided by two doses of the mRNA vaccines (Moderna, Pfizer-BioNtech) for ancestral, Alpha, Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants. The study did not include data on infection from Omicron XBB and its sublineages.
“Vaccination is the safest way to acquire immunity, whereas acquiring natural immunity must be weighed against the risks of severe illness and death associated with the initial infection,” says lead author Dr Stephen Lim from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington’s School of Medicine, USA. [1]’
……….
My conclusion is the vaccine played a significant role in providing protection. And given this virus remains with us and can mutate into nastier variants, I hope they continue to evolve the vaccine. If it turns out the virus follows the path of self preservation and weakens over time..,there is no downside to insurance.
"On to the substance. Trump’s whole Presidency was a legal attack, from beginning to end"
Anyone who thinks differently to this is delusional
And yet Putin never launched his attack on the Ukraine during Trump’s presidency and started it about as early as would have been feasible after Biden became president. You underestimate how much of politics is personal. I get it, it’s inconvenient to think Trump could have talked Putin out of attacking Ukraine. Hell his sheer unpredictability could have been enough,
And yet Putin never launched his attack on the Ukraine during Trump’s presidency and started it about as early as would have been feasible after Biden became president. You underestimate how much of politics is personal. I get it, it’s inconvenient to think Trump could have talked Putin out of attacking Ukraine. Hell his sheer unpredictability could have been enough,
You didn't answer my question. What bit of dialogue and smart concessions could Biden have offered that would of prevented Putin from invading?
Its all very well saying Trump could of stopped it had he only been President. How exactly?
"I get it, it’s inconvenient to think Trump could have talked Putin out of attacking Ukraine. Hell his sheer unpredictability could have been enough,"
It was enough for four years all over the globe...no serious new wars and some peace initiatives in the ME...all coincidentally according to the rabid never Trump horde...
It was enough for four years all over the globe...no serious new wars and some peace initiatives in the ME...all coincidentally according to the rabid never Trump horde...
We don’t know ‘exactly how’….it could have been a private undertaking on the role of NATO or a public demonstration of friendship. There was no over arching need for Russia to invade. It came after many years of Western disrespect towards Russia, most notably at the Sochi Olympic games.
Trump would have regarded it as a major failure of diplomacy for Russia to have invaded Ukraine and done his best to resolve the matter. It would have been a challenge to his status as the great negotiator.
Did Biden make any attempt stop Russia? Public threats should have been private threats and private undertakings need the willingness to actually meet.
Biden blew the whole thing, this is something Trump would have been well suited to attempt. And while I full endorse the support for Ukraine, their country and so many lives have been destroyed. The cost of incompetency in the White House.
"Did Biden make any attempt stop Russia? Public threats should have been private threats and private undertakings need the willingness to actually meet. "
So inept, it almost looked deliberate...
We don’t know ‘exactly how’….it could have been a private undertaking on the role of NATO or a public demonstration of friendship.
Exactly you don't know. Its just this combination of a cult like belief that Trump's sheer presence can prevent bad things happening around the world and an American centric view of the world that everything that happens around the world is dependent on America's actions.
As for a private undertaking on the role of NATO, haven't you figured it out by now that Putin's grievances were all just a bullshit excuse to invade.
And a public demonstration of friendship...so what Putin threatens to invade a country and America's response is to say nice things about Russia, well unless the plan was to try to make Putin die from uncontrollable laughter what an utterly ridiculous weak sauce response.
It came after many years of Western disrespect towards Russia, most notably at the Sochi Olympic games.
What is it with you and this Sochi nonsense, some western media criticism of Russia's treatment of LGBT people, along with allegations of cost overruns and corruption, plus a couple of western leaders deciding not to attend the games is zeo justification for a war on Ukraine a country that wasn't involved in the alleged disrespect, and I say alleged because similar criticism's were leveled against Qatar in 2022 and South Africa in 2010. Oh look those countries didn't invade their neighbors how about that.
Trump would have regarded it as a major failure of diplomacy for Russia to have invaded Ukraine and done his best to resolve the matter.
Given Trump's record with Putin, he could just have easily said, not my problem, not America's problem and left Ukraine to fend for itself.
It would have been a challenge to his status as the great negotiator.
Trump is only a great negotiator in his own head and the mind of his supporters.
Did he get NATO allies to spend more on defense. Nope.
Did he negotiate successfully with North Korea. Nope.
Did he force Iran back to the negotiating table after pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal. Nope.
Did his tariffs force China to change his trade policies. Nope
When he pulled out of the INF nuclear missile treaty with Russia, was he able to negotiate a new deal. Nope.
Did his deal of the century between Israel and Palestine get taken up. Nope.
Did Biden make any attempt stop Russia? Public threats should have been private threats and private undertakings need the willingness to actually meet.
Private undertakings and meetings to say what exactly? That America would go to war on Ukraine's behalf if Russia invaded. That might have come as a shock to the American public if war broke out.
Biden blew the whole thing, this is something Trump would have been well suited to attempt. And while I full endorse the support for Ukraine, their country and so many lives have been destroyed. The cost of incompetency in the White House.
Well suited to cave to Putin. Trump was the reason that aid package to Ukraine got delayed for months, costing Ukraine lives and territory...yet you think this is the man to stand up to Putin?
The ironic thing is that Trump's position on Ukraine coupled with the mere possibility that he could win the White House again, likely encouraged Putin not to negotiate for the last year or so. Why negotiate with the west now when you can wait for Trump to come along and give you more favorable terms.
No one in the west wanted Trump anywhere near Ukraine.
The cost of incompetency in the White House.
As for incompetency in the white White House, just wait another 6 days and the clown show will start up all over again.
"Given Trump's record with Putin, he could just have easily said, not my problem, not America's problem and left Ukraine to fend for itself."
LOL!!!
Was it necessary for Trump to criticize Ukraine's missile strike in Russia?
Or Trump now negating any prospects of Ukraine joining NATO ?
A reminder to Putin .................. 'Vova, I'm on your side' ?
Anger you think Trump couldn’t have pulled it off….I think he could. This isn’t a point that can be proven. I would say if Trump facilitates a workable peace there is reason to believe he would have been successful in preventing the war.
According to The Guardian the games were more politicised than the before, serving as shameless promotion of Putin's Russia.[137] While former world chess champion and Russian opposition figure Garry Kasparov said that game bolstered Putin's cult of personality.[138]
Comedians and satirical newspapers took advantage of the widespread pessimism. On 8 February, The Daily Currant posted a story alleging that a man responsible for operating the Olympic rings during the opening ceremony, which famously suffered a technical glitch, had been "found dead...with multiple stab wounds."[139] The fictional story went viral on social media.[140] On 20 February, luger Kate Hansenposted a well-publicized video on her Twitter account allegedly showing a wolf roaming the hallways of her Sochi hotel; it was later revealed to be a hoax staged by talk show host Jimmy Kimmel and Hansen. USA Luge officials distanced themselves from the incident, with spokesman Sandy Caligiore stating, "I can tell you that our organization is not happy with the incident. That's not USA Luge speaking."[141] Throughout the duration of the Olympics the @SochiProblems Twitter account had nearly 100,000 more followers than the official IOC feed @Sochi2014.[142] The blog GossipSochi.com was later set up to debunk @SochiProblems postings, with many revealed to be fakes.[143][144]
In an interview, IOC supervisor Jean-Claude Killy stated that several hotels intended to house the foreign media were unfinished by the opening of the Olympics because officials realized "too late" that construction had fallen behind.[145] According to David Wallechinsky, president of the International Society of Olympic Historians, many of the incidents early in the Olympics were "standard problems" and were not unique to Sochi. Wallechinsky further noted, "When you mess up with the media before the Games start, you're going to have a problem."[142] In an interview that aired on Russian television on 24 February, Vladimir Putin opined that much of the criticism stemmed from rivalry in international politics, saying "There is a cohort of critics that are far from sport, they are engaged in a competitive struggle in international politics. They used this Olympic project to achieve their own objectives in the field of anti-Russian propaganda."[146]
Anger you think Trump couldn’t have pulled it off….I think he could. This isn’t a point that can be proven.
You think he can? well that doesn't stop you or Trump supporters acting like it was a guaranteed slam dunk so you can bash Biden for it.
Its amazing people are so convinced he could of stopped the war yet can never articulate how. Its just nebulous stuff like personality, private meetings and contradictory actions like threaten Russia but be nice to Russia.
They can't square the circle because they are trapped by their own contradictions. On one hand they say oh Trump would have scared Putin off by threatening him with American's full military might while spending the last three years screaming at Biden for endangering the world by escalating the conflict too far. Or they say there was a deal to be had but never want to spell out what the deal was, because they know damn well any deal that would of got Putin to stop would of been nothing less than a massive appeasement and capitulation that sold out Ukraine and that would just encourage Putin and others like him around the world to do the same in the future.
But hell even if this Donald Trump is a great negotiator cool aid had any substance, you're still stuck with Putin on the other side of the negotiating table, an incredibly bad faith actor.
I would say if Trump facilitates a workable peace there is reason to believe he would have been successful in preventing the war.
Not really, because circumstances change. Putin might want to negotiate in the next few months, but that that's with the benefit of three years of hindsight. Do you really think had Putin known this is how his three day special military operation would turn out back in February 2022 he would still have gone ahead with it?
You can't just look at any potential negotiations between Trump and Putin in isolation and not in the context of the 3 years of war that had gone before.
As for Sochi it was Russia’s chance to impress the world, instead the Western media and many organizations used it as an opportunity to humiliate Russia….an opportunity lost.This from Wikipedia:
No one gives two flying fig sticks about Sochi mate. Do you really think it made the slightest bit of difference to Putin's long term thinking.
So Trump achieving a peace would be less persuasive than your view that he wouldn’t have prevented the conflict in the first place…yes that makes sense.
So Trump achieving a peace would be less persuasive than your view that he wouldn’t have prevented the conflict in the first place…yes that makes sense.
The variables are not the same 3 years later. Putin's army has sustained enormous losses, Russia's vaunted military capability has been shown to be completely over-hyped in nearly all aspects, on the ground, in the air and at sea. A coup was attempted against Putin. Russia territory has been occupied. Ukraine has be so resource consuming Russia was unable to intervene in the Amerina-Azerbaijan conflict and unable to prop up the Assad Regime in Syria. The war has accelerated the decline of Russia's arm's exporting industry, Russia energy sales to Europe have dropped massively, Russia is under the toughest sanctions in history.
Russia has switched to a near war like economy, something that is unsustainable in the long run, with strong signs recently that the Russian economy is really starting to struggle. Putin 'swar kitty reserve isn't far off depleted and Russia has burned through most of the Soviet stockpiles of tanks and armoured vehicles. Russia has also faced the indignity of having to use North Korean troops.
Putin wouldn't have predicted any of this before the war started.
Despite the myth of endless Russian manpower and equipment, Russia can't keep going at its present rate. If the war ends during Trump's term, it doesn't necessarily mean its down to Trump's skill, as opposed to Russia needing the war to end because it can't sustain it. A situation that may have occurred had Biden/Harris kept the Presidency.
Then there is also the question of say if Trump does achieve a peace deal, will it be a good peace that lasts? Will Putin keep its word or do we find a few years later Russia makes up a bunch of BS and attacks Ukraine again?
All so enlightening to read liberals quarelling (liberals are too obseesed with the balance of power to be able to discuss or debate) Correct points are nowhere to be found, that is propaganda against propaganda, as fitting a dispute or a quarrel.
Was it necessary for Trump to criticize Ukraine's missile strike in Russia?
Or Trump now negating any prospects of Ukraine joining NATO ?
It probably was. DJT pictured himself as a mster negotiator. The terms of the peace are going to be defined by Russia. And Russia seems to have learned from the Indians that the US are not trustworthy, they are not bound by their own words. DJT is coerced to appease Russia in this environment. Probably won(t work as the Russians are set: they do not trust the united states of America.
It probably was. DJT pictured himself as a mster negotiator. The terms of the peace are going to be defined by Russia. And Russia seems to have learned from the Indians that the US are not trustworthy, they are not bound by their own words. DJT is coerced to appease Russia in this environment. Probably won(t work as the Russians are set: they do not trust the united states of America.
Still no idea what point you're trying to make. Could you go outside for a few months and interact with a few people so you understand how to communicate like a normal person and not like your reading from a script generated by some buggy beta A.I.
Anger it’s just a repeat of your unwillingness to give Trump credit for anything…..the vaccine comes out in record time, his pressure made no difference. NATO finally increases spending, his highlighting of the issue was irrelevant. So I fully expect if he helps negotiate a practical peace he will get no credit.
Anger it’s just a repeat of your unwillingness to give Trump credit for anything…..the vaccine comes out in record time, his pressure made no difference.
I actually have given Trump credit on multiple occasions for Operation Warp Speed. The thing about it is that he only gets so much credit for doing the default and only option available to him and that was to bet on vaccines being the way out of the pandemic. Are you seriously suggesting that another President be they Democratic or Republican would of just sat there with the scale and seriousness of the pandemic, and thought you know what, let's just let the medical scientists develop the Covid vaccine at the normal peace of vaccine development, we can wait several years its no problem.
There would of been something similar to Operation Warp Speed under any other President. Maybe it would of helped get the vaccine out quicker, or maybe Operation Warp Speed was the best that could of been achieved, but like everything Trump did right, he and his supporters oversell it or leave out context.
NATO finally increases spending, his highlighting of the issue was irrelevant.
Yes it was irrelevant because America's NATO allies were already increasing their defense spending after commitments they made back in 2014 which predate his Presidency.
So I fully expect if he helps negotiate a practical peace he will get no credit.
Not necessarily. It depends on the terms of peace deal. Ukraine's preference would be to be given all the aid it needs to win the war but they are practical and would likely agree to a peace deal leaving the territory under Russian control that way for the time being in exchange for absolute cast iron security guarantees that if Russia breaks the deal, the west goes all in defending Ukraine, in affect NATO article 5 like protection without being in NATO. Any peace deal that does not provide such a security guarantee would not be worth the paper its printed on.
Stav
"Stop holding up Russian collusion as an excuse for his political assassination, fact is he brought it on himself, he was too dumb and arrogant for his own good, anyone with the smarts plays the media, it's a matter of ends and means, no-one in his right mind takes on the media with the hope of winning. I don't know of anyone who has.As for Biden screwing up the economy....that's a highly debatable subject and I won't take your word on it, the economy might already have been screwed."
Lets look at the above, The virus originated from the Wuhan where gain=of-function research was done by scientists funded by D r Faucci and the US Health Department withou Budget approval. Th virus leaked from that lab and led to a worldide pandemic.
Dr forexsed in 2017 that there will be a pandemic in he wol during Trump's term of office a president ad sur - there was a world wide pandemic i n 2020, How ddd Dr Faucci so accurately predict what would happen in 2020?
Aside from the Russian Hoax media BS based on lies spread by te Biden Regime and Clinton it was lies 12 hours per day. The other story was an attack on Trump 12 hours perdaay on the virus issue and the pandemic The whole thing was a farce with tragic consequinces for the world. When th e vorus struck Trump who had successfully negotiate a trade deal with China found that President Xi wa lying to him about the virus he tore up the enw trade deal and closed the border for non-citzens entering the USA from China, The Democrat Party screamed murder - Pelosi went t te Chinese Market in St Francisco and screamed n her normal drunken stete that Trump is a racis/ In the USA HEALTH is a S tate function ad not a Federal Government function and all Trump could legally do was to assist States when hel is needed to cobat the pandemic, He acted on requests from States who asked for help and that all of them got.
However - Trump made a huge mistake when he used Dr Faucci as his advisor on the pndemic. Faucci support ne day some action and the enxt day said the treatment would not wok and th enxt day he sid the exact oppositen to what he said begote, For example e admitted that the maksis not working - a week late he supported compulsory wearing of masks. When Trump found out about the funding of the Wuhan livrary and also thew affling of Dr Faucci - he fored him from ths advisory team dealing with Covid.
Based on Faucci' advice he banned on Trump made a fiuther mistake to ban schedule onm a te,prary basis advising the States they can unban the measures and Republican states started opening shops, schools and oher public facilities based on the State Governments own decisions - big mistake the Democratic Party took up to two years before schools and could be opened in DP controlled States . The same sates enforced compulsory mask wearing and people was forced to stay indoor for many months afte Biden took over the Peidency and the lattwer eent over-the board . Hoeever - while warp speed wa going onm in the eection campaign in 2020 Biden and Harris attacked te vaccine be developed and advied people not to take the Trump vaccine and swore they they would refuse the taking of the vaccine snd advise peole not to be vacciinated, As per normal two of the first people to be vaccinated as Biden and Harris,
That was followed by regulations that made it compulsory to be vaccinated and lied about two issues, namely -
* vaccine oreveted people from gettin infected and
* if you do not take vaccination you will die.
When in New York circa 30 000 nursing and medical staff refused to be vaccinated they got fired and days hereafter about 50 000 took part in dwmonstration New York city When 60 000 soldiers refused to take the vaccine they were arrested ,and held in badly firnished barracks and the lot of them discharged. It came back wirth a vengeance, When in 2023 the USA could not meet recruiting targets - the 60 000 soldier were approached by the DOD to rejoin the army, they refuise to return.
During the pandemic Trump enforced a decision to pay grant funding to the amount of $4,6 trilion dollars to assisy yje woring class and poor to small businesses and factories to get them re-open. In the case of assistance to small busineses as per normal went to Staes and malor cities, In 2023 the Auditor General found that in State and Major Cities comtrolled by the Democratic Party a total amount of $5,4 billion vaished into thin air. As to be expected from them the FBI refused to investigaate what happene to the missing $5,4 billion Hopefully under the new Adminstration the fate of the $5.4 billion will be inveestigated,
Another fact you may check is that in 2020 less people died as result of Covid in the last year of Trump's Presidency than died in a corresponding period wiith Biden as President.
So please keep writing on site narow-minded people could accept. the nonsense and thnking people would investogte isues nd would normally recognice the difference between wishful thinkig people and realists,
The press conference on the Vaccine:
He added: “Its objective is to finish developing and then manufacture and distribute a proven coronavirus vaccine as fast as possible. Again, we’d love to see if we can do it prior to the end of the year.”
Standing just behind him, Anthony Fauci, an infectious diseases expert wearing a face mask, cast his glance down and reached to adjust his tie. Trump did not wear a face mask.
In testimony to Congress on Tuesday, Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, warned: “There’s no guarantee that the vaccine is actually going to be effective.”
And on Thursday Rick Bright, the ousted head of a government agency seeking a vaccine, told Congress: “Normally, it takes up to 10 years to make a vaccine. A lot of optimism is swirling around a 12-to-18-month time frame, if everything goes perfectly. We’ve never seen everything go perfectly.”
Joe Lockhart, a former White House press secretary, tweeted: “There is not an objective scientist on TV right now that believes anything that was said at the press conference who believes anything like this can be done by the end of the year.
….. ..
Trump was way out in front pushing this project and forcing bureaucracy to take on some risk. Have you ever run anything Anger? These things happen because of leadership.
Chat on balance agrees Trump’s involvement with NATO had an effect. You of course attribute it all to trends that were already in place. If it’s a balance of views out there, I prefer Chat to your curated Woke sources:
‘ Donald Trump's administration often emphasized the issue of NATO member states not meeting their defense spending commitments, particularly the guideline of spending 2% of their GDP on defense. His public and private pressure on NATO allies to increase their spending was a significant aspect of his foreign policy.
While defense spending among NATO countries was already trending upward before Trump's presidency, his vocal and persistent criticism is widely acknowledged to have accelerated or amplified those increases in some cases. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg credited the increased spending in part to Trump's insistence, though it is also important to note that broader geopolitical factors, such as rising tensions with Russia, contributed to the trend.
As if the one of the worlds most devastating pandemics wasn't enough motivation for the worlds best scientific minds to come together to try to get a vaccine out as quick as possible. No, they all just sat around waiting for "leadership" from one of the worlds dumbest men who tends to just blurt out whatever comes into his mind that he thinks will make him look good.
You simply don’t understand the process. I worked with the FDA for many years. Their mission is to protect. Their first instinct is to slow things down, to be sure. The scientists are trained in that system. What Trump did was make it okay to be aggressive while Fauci was ‘looking down and adjusting his tie’
And to call Trump one of the world’s dumbest men is just petulance. He isn’t an academic type, but has plenty of street smarts and thinks for himself.
"And to call Trump one of the world’s dumbest men is just petulance"
That's being polite..... not just petulance
He might not be dumb but he remains imo. a dangerous f'wit.
Go ahead and tell us it's smart to stream a worldwide audience..... 'injecting bleach under the skin' ......gets rid of covid.
And OBTW truth be told Trump only woke up to covid in march long after it had manifested itself in November of the previous year.
Call that smart?
He did nothing special other than belatedly throw money at Big Pharma something anyone with no choice would have done.
But by far the dumbest thing he's done is to throw hush money out of campaign funds.
Oh, And I love your ‘wehe’….such a Pot Pot bunny
Bet you love ButtPlug nice and tight up your snatch a helluva lot more.
Sies!
Could you go outside for a few months and interact with a few people so you understand how to communicate like a normal person and not like your reading from a script generated by some buggy beta A.I.
So funny. Liberals are so entangled in their battle for supremacy they are now shaken off by the slightest disruption in their narraitve.
Russia does not want to negotiate. They claim they want but they do not want it. They consider that the US are untrustworthy and unable to respect any of the treaties they signed. A lesson that can be learned from the way the US interacted with the Indian pepulations. Yet as liberals are racist, they do not take this as a lesson of life and think that the US are trustworthy as they do not consider all the treaties the US disrespected in the indian situaitons as relevant.
You simply don’t understand the process. I worked with the FDA for many years. Their mission is to protect. Their first instinct is to slow things down, to be sure. The scientists are trained in that system.
Oh I understand the process very well, in the medical profession developing vaccines for serious diseases takes a long time and approval for widespread use only comes after years of trials. You don't know need to have worked in the FDA to know that. But what you also don't need a medical degree to know, is that Covid 19 was not your typical disease. It was disease of such seriousness that it was going to infect billions and kill tens if not hundreds of millions around the world. It was situation that mandated all effort be put into developing a vaccine as quickly as possible.
Trump did was make it okay to be aggressive while Fauci was ‘looking down and adjusting his tie’
No what Trump did was the poison the American political environment so much, that someone like Fauci now faces death threats and requires security for himself and his family, all for doing his job.
And to call Trump one of the world’s dumbest men is just petulance. He isn’t an academic type, but has plenty of street smarts and thinks for himself.
Petulance, you mean how Donald Trump acted after he lost the 2020 election. He has some street smarts alright and good political instincts, but when you say thinks for himself, absolutely he thinks about how a situation will best benefit him, he just spends next to no time thinking of anyone else.
Petulance.....you mean how Trump had the mother of all dummy spits when he lost the election?
So funny. Liberals are so entangled in their battle for supremacy they are now shaken off by the slightest disruption in their narraitve.
No we simply don't understand what you're saying.
Russia does not want to negotiate. They claim they want but they do not want it. They consider that the US are untrustworthy and unable to respect any of the treaties they signed.
Yes its true Russia claim to want to negotiate but they don't. To an extent America are untrustworthy, they have indeed broken some treaties they signed in the past. But the Russian's are also completely untrustworthy, having broken numerous agreements they have signed.
But you see here's the thing. Why is it the Russian's have to negotiate with America? I mean the war is between them and Ukraine.
A lesson that can be learned from the way the US interacted with the Indian pepulations.
Seriously, you think Russia never conquered, killed oppressed people through out its history. At this point who hasn't done that?
"No what Trump did was the poison the American political environment so much, that someone like Fauci now faces death threats and requires security for himself and his family, all for doing his job"
What absolute rubbish
Fauci did this to himself, Trump didn't need to do anything at all
"absolutely he thinks about how a situation will best benefit him, he just spends next to no time thinking of anyone else"
Yeah, for a guy that previously did and I assume still does so many things behind the scenes, for previously disadvantaged people, when expecting no reward or recognition, yeah, it's all for him.
Bollocks
What absolute rubbish
Yeah, for a guy that previously did and I assume still does so many things behind the scenes, for previously disadvantaged people, when expecting no reward or recognition, yeah, it's all for him.
Seriously is this a joke. Trump happens to be one of the most boastful people around. And here you're saying he didn't expect a reward or recognition.
Stav
No we simply don't understand what you're saying.
Of course,liberals do not. They can not accept what it is written.Liberals have a warped perception of themselves, they picture themseelves as champions of freedom whereas they champion coercion. They started as obvious slaver societies and yet keep depicting that era of theirs as a battle for freedom. The gap between people who accept what liberalism is and liberals who keep denying is too big for liberals to accept. They deny.
Seriously, you think Russia never conquered, killed oppressed people through out its history. At this point who hasn't done that?
The usual absence of defense as set by liberals. They have a good and evil perception of the world and yet keep sending back to people they consider as part of the evil side to explain their own behaviour. Very funny in fact, more about that if time.
When it comes to indian populations, it is not the number of treaties the US broke,, it is the number of treaties they respected. Liberals are racist so they dismiss it easily as a non case as the US targeted non white people. Now in Europe, they start thinking it was not such a good computation as the US also increasingly disregard their word when it comes to white populations.
Russia does not want to negotiate because it has accepted that negotiating with the US is pointless as since the US are unable of respecting their word. So they keep working at securing a fronier they deem necessary to feel protected.
Later, they will come up and dictate the peace resolution terms. As such, Trump who pictures himself as a master negotiator but who must face the very fact that Russia won't negotiate with the US, had to take as his own terms that are going to be dictated by Russia. It is a way to save the face: take the demands of the other side, make them appear as you introduce them and then, bingo, Yrump can still claim he is a master at negotiating.
"Fauci merely did his job. He spoke with the weight of the best scientific advise that was available to him at the time. But apparently that warrants death threats to him and his family now?"
If manipulating or coercing the general public into taking the vaccine is him just merely doing his job, I don't agree at all with you.
If he was any way involved in the research, production, management or delivering of the vaccine, he should not personally be directly discussing ways to strong arm the general public into taking the vaccine..
I think he has been excellent in other aspects of his career, but discussing ways to deliberately pressure people to take the vaccine by making it difficult to live their normal everyday lives, is most definitely not one of them.
"Seriously is this a joke. Trump happens to be one of the most boastful people around. And here you're saying he didn't expect a reward or recognition"
There are plenty.... plenty of times that he boasts and seeks recognition for things he has done.... I am not blind to that... and I never said he has never done that....
What you are completely blind to, is how many other things he has done, and it's a lot.....which never ever made it to the public domain..... because it's shows Trump in the wrong light.....
Again, I would say .... broaden your thoughts a bit on this issue.
Should not that Fauci guy be depicted as a salesman for the vaccine Trump allowed to design through his brilliant decision making? It reads as if he used classical liberal selling strategies.
Of course,liberals do not. They can not accept what it is written.Liberals have a warped perception of themselves, they picture themseelves as champions of freedom whereas they champion coercion. They started as obvious slaver societies and yet keep depicting that era of theirs as a battle for freedom. The gap between people who accept what liberalism is and liberals who keep denying is too big for liberals to accept. They deny.
No you speak absolute f**king gibberish. You mention the word liberal like a billion times but I still have no clue who your taking about. Is it right wing people, is it left wing people, is it both is it everyone in the west?
The usual absence of defense as set by liberals. They have a good and evil perception of the world and yet keep sending back to people they consider as part of the evil side to explain their own behaviour. Very funny in fact, more about that if time.
So American did bad things in the past and thus can't be trusted but Russia who also bad things in the past and are doing very bad things right now in Ukraine can be trusted.
When it comes to indian populations, it is not the number of treaties the US broke,, it is the number of treaties they respected. Liberals are racist so they dismiss it easily as a non case as the US targeted non white people. Now in Europe, they start thinking it was not such a good computation as the US also increasingly disregard their word when it comes to white populations.
What have the Indians to do with Ukraine? So liberal are racists that deny the US broke treaties with the Indians, okay strange definition. And Europe is having second thoughts on the US because it doesn't believe the US disregards Europe's word on white populations. WTF are you on about?
Russia does not want to negotiate because it has accepted that negotiating with the US is pointless as since the US are unable of respecting their word.
You didn't answer the question, why does Russia need to negotiate with the US and not Ukraine directly? They invaded Ukraine not the US.
So they keep working at securing a frontier they deem necessary to feel protected.
Ah so you're one of these clowns that think Russia was under threat from the US and it was okay for them just to invade another sovereign nation on the grounds of security and also the fact that American's were not very nice to the Indians?
Later, they will come up and dictate the peace resolution terms. As such, Trump who pictures himself as a master negotiator but who must face the very fact that Russia won't negotiate with the US, had to take as his own terms that are going to be dictated by Russia. It is a way to save the face: take the demands of the other side, make them appear as you introduce them and then, bingo, Yrump can still claim he is a master at negotiating.
And just for clarity those Russian dictated terms will be what exactly?
What you are completely blind to, is how many other things he has done, and it's a lot.....which never ever made it to the public domain..... because it's shows Trump in the wrong light.....
I've gave him credit for the Abraham Accords, Operation Warp Speed and finishing the fight against ISIS in Syria on numerous occasions, but now you want me to give him for credit for stuff that nobody knows about. What sort of thinking is that?
"I've gave him credit for the Abraham Accords, Operation Warp Speed and finishing the fight against ISIS in Syria on numerous occasions, but now you want me to give him for credit for stuff that nobody knows about. What sort of thinking is that?"
I am not referring to him as the President at all .... you are... because I don't and never have just looked at him and judged him that way at all.... why... is that all you have ever judged him by..... being president....it cetainly looks like it.
Also, I am not talking about things that nobody knows about, he is actually quite well known for things that he has done throughout his life, but people that dislike him so much, like you, often overlook this part of who he is and what he has done during his life.
I am specifically talking and referring to things that he, as a man, not as the president, has done throughout his life and career, that most people don't actually take the effort, to look at and acknowledge.
You see the man, and you judge the man, without really looking into what he has done "off" the books and "out" of the spotlight.
Just like you staunchly defended Fauci here, without (I guess) knowing that he was actively involved in coercing / manipulating / forcing the public into taking the vaccine that he was involved with.
No you speak absolute f**king gibberish. You mention the word liberal like a billion times but I still have no clue who your taking about. Is it right wing people, is it left wing people, is it both is it everyone in the west?No you speak absolute f**king gibberish. You mention the word liberal like a billion times but I still have no clue who your taking about. Is it right wing people, is it left wing people, is it both is it everyone in the west?
Shows how much liberals are confused. It has nothing to do with left, right and center since all of them are liberals. A liberal is a proponent of liberalism, the political philosophy that established the US and prevailed in part of the world.
What have the Indians to do with Ukraine? So liberal are racists that deny the US broke treaties with the Indians, okay strange definition. And Europe is having second thoughts on the US because it doesn't believe the US disregards Europe's word on white populations. WTF are you on about?
Nothing like that was evere written. The US have a history. A history that is marked by disrespecting most if not all treaties they drafted and signed with Indian populations. More than enough to characterize the US as an unstrustworthy nation. Yet people, mostly white people, keep considering the US as a trustworthy nation. How comes? Racism is a legitimate explanation. They do not think that all the broken treaties matter as they were signed with Indians. As usual, with liberals, there is an inversion in accusation. It is: what are people on to keep thinking the US is trustworthy despite all the treaties they broke with the Indians? Not when people point the obvious: the US are untrustworthy as they broke too many treaties to be considered trustworthy.
Ah so you're one of these clowns that think Russia was under threat from the US and it was okay for them just to invade another sovereign nation on the grounds of security and also the fact that American's were not very nice to the Indians?
It shows that it is not possible to discuss with liberals as they can not stand anything that does not match their propaganda. It was written that Russia will end the war when they achieve the war objectives they consider as necessary to ensure and enforce by themselves the defence of their territory. For example, since the English launched attacks from Odessa on the russian soil (using drones), Odessa is likely to be a war objective they will want to take to prevent an attack launched from Odessa in the future.
You didn't answer the question, why does Russia need to negotiate with the US and not Ukraine directly? They invaded Ukraine not the US.
Another inversion. Liberals invert most of the things. That's the US that think Russia must negotiate with them in order to validate an end to the war. It is pretty straightforward that Russia could do without foreign interference betwenn them and Ukraine.
And just for clarity those Russian dictated terms will be what exactly?
Anything they deem necessary to their protection. It will very likely include no NATO adhesion for Ukraine. That is why Trump who pictures himself as a master negotiator hinted at that. Again, taking the demand from the other side and painting as coming from him or being something he would have supported without Russia demanded is a way to save the face as the illusory master negotiator he depicts himself as.
Trad
Stav and I may disagree on many things, but he is 100% spot on regarding you.
Your posts are so poor in context and information..... literally rubbish.
Oh I understand the process very well, in the medical profession developing vaccines for serious diseases takes a long time and approval for widespread use only comes after years of trials. You don't know need to have worked in the FDA to know that. But what you also don't need a medical degree to know, is that Covid 19 was not your typical disease. It was disease of such seriousness that it was going to infect billions and kill tens if not hundreds of millions around the world. It was situation that mandated all effort be put into developing a vaccine as quickly as possible.
….
President Donald Trump is doubling down on his claim that Americans could see a vaccine for the novel coronavirus by the end of the year.
"Another essential pillar of our strategy to keep America open is the development of effective treatments and vaccines as quickly as possible. I want to see if we can do that very quickly," Trump said Friday at an event to highlight his administration's effort to expedite a vaccine, dubbed "Operation Warp Speed." "When I say 'quickly,' we're looking to get it by the end of the year if we can. Maybe before."
But the Trump administration's own medical and scientific experts leading the race to develop a vaccine routinely cast doubt on that timeline.
….
‘But the Trump administration experts cast doubt’….did they ever, including lead doubter Fauci.
The vaccine was delivered in December 2020….7 months after this article was written. Trump refused to be moved by expert opinion that the vaccine couldn’t be delivered for years. He made it happen through funding, putting pressure on the approval process and reducing risk for the drug companies.
Most politicians would have been guided by the experts, which inevitably would have pushed out the time line.
If you ever managed anything you would understand that,
Trad
Stav and I may disagree on many things, but he is 100% spot on regarding you.
Why did Trump want to be elected? To do the same as Biden. He wanted to be in charge to do the very same. That's liberalism, a fight to be the one in charge to do a predetermined program that does not depend on the one who is in charge. Trump just like Biden presses Ukraine to move down the age of conscription in Ukraine for example to feed the battle front with more soldiers. Just like Biden, Trump wants to fight the proxy war with Russia to the last Ukrainian. Trump is a globalist, just like Biden is or any liberal is. Etc
Liberals are the people who freed the slaves and gave the people the freedom to elect their own government...Trad seems to support monarchies and dictators...wonder how he would like living in Russia, China, Iran or Nork...
I am not referring to him as the President at all .... you are... because I don't and never have just looked at him and judged him that way at all.... why... is that all you have ever judged him by..... being president....it cetainly looks like it.
Well I primarily judged him on his Presidency because that's what's most relevant. I'm aware he was a business man long before he was President and that his record as a business man has been hit and miss, he's also had various legal issues over the years.
Also, I am not talking about things that nobody knows about, he is actually quite well known for things that he has done throughout his life, but people that dislike him so much, like you, often overlook this part of who he is and what he has done during his life.
I am specifically talking and referring to things that he, as a man, not as the president, has done throughout his life and career, that most people don't actually take the effort, to look at and acknowledge.
You see the man, and you judge the man, without really looking into what he has done "off" the books and "out" of the spotlight.
How can I look into something's he done off the books, wouldn't the whole point of doing something off the books be that no one finds out about it?
Just like you staunchly defended Fauci here, without (I guess) knowing that he was actively involved in coercing / manipulating / forcing the public into taking the vaccine that he was involved with.
No I knew about his comments about makings difficult for the unvaccinated so they give up their ideological bullshit as he called it, but I'm simply ambivalent about it. I can understand people not wanting to be forced into getting a vaccine but I can also see the viewpoint that the unvaccinated were putting an unnecessary and greater strain on health services for their own selfish reasons. People talk about the situation as being a matter of free choice, but the choice of not get vaccinated was not a free lunch were the consequences only affected the non vaccinated. My ire would be directed towards the people who pushed misinformation about the vaccines and fueled vaccine skepticism.
Trad
Stav and I may disagree on many things, but he is 100% spot on regarding you.
‘But the Trump administration experts cast doubt’….did they ever, including lead doubter Fauci.
Fauci was merely managing expectations and trying to ensure people complied with health guidelines, which they would have been less inclined to do if they believed a vaccine was just around the corner, which there may or may not have been.
The vaccine was delivered in December 2020….7 months after this article was written. Trump refused to be moved by expert opinion that the vaccine couldn’t be delivered for years. He made it happen through funding, putting pressure on the approval process and reducing risk for the drug companies.
Trump of course was trying to present a rosy and optimistic picture as possible, and it just so happened that he coincidentally right on this occasion. Again no one is saying Operation Warp Speed didn't help, but its just absolute ridiculous to think that another President would not have pushed for a vaccine as soon as possible, that approval and funding wouldn't have been fast tracked or that scientists needed a hurry up from politicians.Most politicians would have been guided by the experts, which inevitably would have pushed out the time line.
And he wasn't. That's why his handling of the pandemic got him dump out of office in 2020.
If you ever managed anything you would understand that,
Are you honestly going argue that no other President would have pushed for a vaccine on an accelerated time line.
Fauci was merely managing expectations and trying to ensure people complied with health guidelines, which they would have been less inclined to do if they believed a vaccine was just around the corner, which there may or may not have been.
Nope his punting of Remdisivir was far too optimistic ….but it was his thing, No managing expectations there. He should have been echoing Trump’s time line, that had no effect on immediate measures like distancing, masks or anything else.
Trump of course was trying to present a rosy and optimistic picture as possible, and it just so happened that he coincidentally right on this occasion. Again no one is saying Operation Warp Speed didn't help, but its just absolute ridiculous to think that another President would not have pushed for a vaccine as soon as possible, that approval and funding wouldn't have been fast tracked or that scientists needed a hurry up from politicians.
What you are saying is leadership and goal setting has no effect on results. Warp speed put the challenge out there and Trump’s style made it clear he expected action, Obama or Biden would never have been that direct. He wasn’t coincidentally right….he was right.
And he wasn't. That's why his handling of the pandemic got him dump out of office in 2020.
Helped by the media which exaggerated his statements and never retracted the shameful Russian collusion hoax. Apparently the voters have forgiven him, but now of course the voters are stupid.
Are you honestly going argue that no other President would have pushed for a vaccine on an accelerated time line.
Nope his punting of Remdisivir was far too optimistic ….but it was his thing, No managing expectations there. He should have been echoing Trump’s time line, that had no effect on immediate measures like distancing, masks or anything else.
Fauci’s statements were based on the best available data at the time. Trump was just putting out optimistic assessments that were not backed by the reality of vaccine development up to that point.
What you are saying is leadership and goal setting has no effect on results. Warp speed put the challenge out there and Trump’s style made it clear he expected action, Obama or Biden would never have been that direct. He wasn’t coincidentally right….he was right.
Oh no leadership can have a role in results. But there is more to leadership than just shouting X needs to be done by such a timeline. You know what would have happened if Obama or Biden were President, they wouldn't have played down the serious of the pandemic, they wouldn't have down played the importance of testing, or downplayed the need for lockdowns. But of course you think a man who actually tried to get the funding for the CDC cut in 2020 when Covid was already spreading around the world and who himself was formerly a vaccine skeptic is the only man who could of possibly pushed to get a Covid vaccine developed in record time. I'm sure the Biontech scientists who did alot of the development for the vaccine over in Germany were just causally developing the vaccine oblivious to the global pandemic, and only got the hurry up because Trump said he would like a vaccine out as quick as possible.
Helped by the media which exaggerated his statements and never retracted the shameful Russian collusion hoax. Apparently the voters have forgiven him, but now of course the voters are stupid.
Russian hoax, Russia hoax, Russia hoax, if I just say Russian hoax enough I can switch off my brain and never have to think critically.
Every President would have pushed a vaccine, probably 19 months out. Just like every CEO pushes for better profits. The proof is in the pudding and the Donald delivered in the least conceivable time saving millions of lives. Ridiculing that accomplishment is pure, unadulterated bias.
Bollocks any President or global leader in Trumps position would of done something similar. The pandemic was simply too big an issue not to try to expedite the development of a vaccine. We don't know if it was the least conceivable time, it might have been, I've acknowledge Operation Warp Speed was certainly a very positive thing and I never ridiculed it. But like everything good Trump did he and his supporters make these obnoxious boasts and over exaggerate his role like he actually went into a lab and personally developed the vaccine or something. No credit to the German scientists (working for a company that was founded by 2 Muslim immigrants lol) that did most of the heavy lifting when it came to the actually scientific research that lead to the vaccine. Had Obama/Biden been President the vaccine would of been delivered in roughly the the same time frame and more American's would of been around to benefit from it because they wouldn't have butchered the handling of the pandemic as badly as Trump did.
Well let’s get a dispassionate point of view from Chat:
The evaluation of Donald Trump's handling of COVID-19 is a complex and polarizing topic, shaped by differing political perspectives, public health outcomes, and varying interpretations of leadership effectiveness. Here's a balanced breakdown of the factors that could contribute to or detract from credit being given to his administration:
Operation Warp Speed:
Economic Measures:
Travel Restrictions:
Public Messaging:
Testing and Mitigation:
Polarization of Public Health Measures:
Responsibility for Outcomes:
How much credit Trump deserves depends on individual perspectives and priorities. Supporters often highlight the vaccine rollout and economic measures, while critics focus on public health failures and the overall death toll.
Ultimately, evaluating his role requires a nuanced understanding of the challenges posed by the pandemic, the actions his administration took, and their outcomes relative to other nations and historical pandemics.
So credit for Warp Speed, Economic Measures…..the first two being the points I made. Chat adds the early travel restrictions.
The negatives…lack of support for measures like masks. Sure, but has any study showed a compelling case for masks..
His rhetoric at the Covid briefings was too casual. But if that was wrong the media’s deliberate misrepresentation of remarks like the bleach thing accentuated any risk.
His early messaging about Covid is criticized. But this was the advice from the ‘expert’ you defend:
‘ Fauci said, "Obviously, you need to take it seriously and do the kind of things the (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and the Department of Homeland Security is doing. But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.’
The overall death rate in the US was higher than some other countries, but the implementation of policies varied widely among states and in a federation like the USA is controlled closer to the action. Trump had limited influence on implementation, And demographics, climate and vaccine acceptance played a big role.
On the vaccine Trump may have become less supportive in 2024, but in the 2021 he was an ardent proponent of the vaccine, which seems to have been the biggest factor in relative performance of States.
‘ People still skeptical of the COVID-19 vaccine can be persuaded to get vaccinated after watching a public service-style announcement featuring former President Donald Trump and his family encouraging voters to get the shot, according to a new study that included researchers from Stanford University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina State University and the University of California, Berkeley.’
So on the whole I think he did an excellent job with the economy and the vaccine, shot himself in the foot at the briefings, but had plenty of company in the negative column, including St Fauci.
Chat adds the early travel restrictions.
Yes the early travel restriction did give America extra time, but his subsequent actions squandered it.
The negatives…lack of support for measures like masks. Sure, but has any study showed a compelling case for masks..
You never asked chat that question?
Several key studies have demonstrated that masks are effective at reducing the transmission of COVID-19, particularly by preventing the spread of respiratory droplets that can carry the virus. Below are notable research studies and reviews that provide evidence for the effectiveness of masks:
These studies provide a robust body of evidence supporting the effectiveness of mask-wearing in reducing the transmission of COVID-19, particularly in settings where physical distancing is difficult to maintain, such as indoors, crowded places, or healthcare environments. While the degree of effectiveness can vary depending on the type of mask, the general consensus is that masks are a key tool in controlling the spread of the virus.
And if that doesn't blow your mind wait till you ask chat how much Biden's America Rescue Plan Act contributed to the inflation of 2021, or even better why don't you ask it what caused global temperatures to rise in the early 20 century and ask it if half the global temperature rise since the industrial revolution and now occurred in the first part of the 20th century or ask if the rate of warming back in the early 20th century is the same as the present warming.
His rhetoric at the Covid briefings was too casual. But if that was wrong the media’s deliberate misrepresentation of remarks like the bleach thing accentuated any risk.
His early messaging about Covid is criticized. But this was the advice from the ‘expert’ you defend:
‘ Fauci said, "Obviously, you need to take it seriously and do the kind of things the (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and the Department of Homeland Security is doing. But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.’
Hmm when it comes to that quote you wouldn't be leaving out the part were Fauci said the virus was an evolving situation and would have to consistently assessed. He made those comments on 21st January 2020, the date of the first confirmed case of Covid in America. He made similar comments 5 days later but also qualified that statement by saying things could change.
This compares to Trump who for months and months and months declared on two dozen or so occasions that Covid was just going to go away or it was declining, even as case numbers were going up.
Its completely disingenuous to compare the two.
The overall death rate in the US was higher than some other countries, but the implementation of policies varied widely among states and in a federation like the USA is controlled closer to the action. Trump had limited influence on implementation, And demographics, climate and vaccine acceptance played a big role.
Oh now Trump has limited influence in the country which he's the President, but when it comes to global issues like Ukraine, the man basically just has to show up and peace will be achieved. So are you saying Trump couldn't influence the governors of Red States if he called for tighter restrictions earlier?
On the vaccine Trump may have become less supportive in 2024, but in the 2021 he was an ardent proponent of the vaccine, which seems to have been the biggest factor in relative performance of States.
‘ People still skeptical of the COVID-19 vaccine can be persuaded to get vaccinated after watching a public service-style announcement featuring former President Donald Trump and his family encouraging voters to get the shot, according to a new study that included researchers from Stanford University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina State University and the University of California, Berkeley.’
Yes, Donald Trump’s actions and statements during his presidency did play a role in fostering vaccine skepticism among some Americans, particularly in certain political and social groups. His handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and his rhetoric surrounding vaccines contributed to mixed perceptions of the vaccine, especially among his supporters. Below are some key factors that may have contributed to vaccine skepticism during and after his presidency:
Overall, while Trump’s actions and messaging were not the sole cause of vaccine skepticism, his leadership played a significant role in shaping the climate of distrust around COVID-19 vaccines, particularly among those who were already skeptical of the government or public health authorities.
So on the whole I think he did an excellent job with the economy and the vaccine, shot himself in the foot at the briefings, but had plenty of company in the negative column, including St Fauci.
On the whole I think American would of been better served had pretty much any other recent President been running the show, and that includes that dope Bush Jnr. You would of got overall better results and poor old Fauci wouldn't be getting death threats from lunatics for simply doing his job.
Well didn’t you notice the studies were all early in Covid and many were associated with other measures like distancing, which will obviously help. Here the follow up from Chat with later dated studies .
………..
Yes, some studies and observations have suggested limited or context-dependent effectiveness of masks in certain situations, including studies conducted in Spain and other countries. These findings often highlight the complexity of isolating the effects of masks from other factors, such as compliance, type of mask, and additional public health measures. Here are some examples:
Spain National Analysis:
US States and Mask Mandates:
Masks Are Not a Silver Bullet:
Mixed Evidence Does Not Mean Masks Are Ineffective:
Context Matters:
While some studies raise valid questions about the real-world impact of masks under specific circumstances, the broader body of evidence supports their role as an important tool in mitigating COVID-19 spread when used correctly and consistently.
. ….
So masks work when combined with social distancing and vaccinations. But social distancing and vaccinations work just by themselves.
If there was a definitive study that proved masks made a clear cut difference in protecting against Covid, don’t you think that would have been front page on all the world’s papers? And don’t you think if those early studies were definitive the later studies wouldn’t have been commissioned?
I repeat my original assertion there has been no definitive study that has proven that masks by themselves work.And the two largest specific studies which focused on masks and followed proper grouping, Spain and Denmark, both find masks don’t work.
Cover your mouth when you cough or sneeze. If you don't have a tissue available, sneeze into your elbow. Particles from your sneeze can travel up to 26 feet. The droplets can linger in the air for up to 10 minutes.
I believe in masks 
"Well I primarily judged him on his Presidency because that's what's most relevant. I'm aware he was a business man long before he was President and that his record as a business man has been hit and miss, he's also had various legal issues over the years."
I agree and disagree ... and I am also not referring to what he did as a businessman, I am specifically referring to what he just did, for so many different people.... as a basic fellow human being.
I prefer to see what people are like outside of the spotlight ....... when the cameras and the public attention is not on you..... that, to me, is when you see the genuine real character of someone.
Maybe for one second, look into what Trump has done for individuals and communities, long before he became president, and even take the businessman aspect out of it, and just look at the man himself...... because it might surprise you.
"How can I look into something's he done off the books, wouldn't the whole point of doing something off the books be that no one finds out about it?"
Simple, if you really were interested in wanting to find out about someone, and not just what you see in front of the cameras or the mainsream media, you would look into them properly.... I don't think you have done that with Trump.... in fact many haven't.
By off the books, I mean it is still very much in the media, just not the mainstream media, because they don't want to portray that side of Trump, because it would probably have generated a lot more votes for him either in the first or second election, and he himself for some reason does not personally put this information out there himself, which in a way is quite surprising considering his immense ego and boastfull / arrogant attitiude at times.
"No I knew about his comments about makings difficult for the unvaccinated so they give up their ideological bullshit as he called it, but I'm simply ambivalent about it. I can understand people not wanting to be forced into getting a vaccine but I can also see the viewpoint that the unvaccinated were putting an unnecessary and greater strain on health services for their own selfish reasons. People talk about the situation as being a matter of free choice, but the choice of not get vaccinated was not a free lunch were the consequences only affected the non vaccinated. My ire would be directed towards the people who pushed misinformation about the vaccines and fueled vaccine skepticism."
I can't agree .... Fauci's intentions were extremely clear to me, and given that he was involved in the oversight, coordination, and scientific guidance on the vaccine, he should not be advising anyone on how best to coerce or manipulate the public or anyone else into taking the vaccine that he himself was involved with.
The pressure was on regarding the unvaccinated and the pressure they were putting on the healthcare systems around the world, but Fauci was disengenuous with the general public.
Fauci even adjusted his initial percentage on what he thought was needed for herd immunity, but not because the science or data had changed....because that I would have actually agreed with......no... he later admitted to adjusting his herd immunity percentage purely based off of the public's receptiveness to taking the vaccine, not what would scientifically work or be more beneficial in saving lives.... again.... more manipulation.
"LOL he goes on to claim we are one and the same"
If ever a poster could be so wrong, lol
Well didn’t you notice the studies were all early in Covid and many were associated with other measures like distancing, which will obviously help. Here the follow up from Chat with later dated studies .
Ah yes the Danish study which you brought up at the time. Well that isn't really any newer than the studies referred too in my post and as at the time you brought up the the Danish Study, the lead author of the paper on the study still recommended wearing face masks, while an accompanying editorial by the editor in chief at the journal noted the study "does not disprove the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing"
As for the study in Catalonia.
Researchers specifically noted that there were limitations to their paper, which is a review of already-collected data rather than a randomised controlled trial, something considered “the gold standard for effectiveness research”.
It also applies to two specific age groups in Catalonia schools, rather than the wider population.
The researchers said they couldn’t take into account differences in students’ behaviour, the density of students in classrooms, or the classroom dynamics between those in preschool and primary school.
It is unclear whether such a study can be extended to show that masks in general “make no difference” particularly when the researchers say the school children involved may have worn masks incorrectly.
But lets come back to your point that all the studies I posted were done in the early stages of Covid. Okay lets get some studies that are even more up to date than the ones you linked too.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36865900/
https://www.idhjournal.com.au/article/S2468-0451(23)00010-X/fulltext#secsectitle0110
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36856551/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36944343/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36854572/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36829127/
Even your own chat gpt post noted caveats about the research you are referring.
So masks work when combined with social distancing and vaccinations. But social distancing and vaccinations work just by themselves.
Moving the goal posts. The fact that social distancing and vaccinations work by themselves doesn't mean masks aren't useful or effective.
If there was a definitive study that proved masks made a clear cut difference in protecting against Covid, don’t you think that would have been front page on all the world’s papers? And don’t you think if those early studies were definitive the later studies wouldn’t have been commissioned?
No I don't think it would of made the front page on the newspapers because unless you have literally found the cure to cancer, medical studies don't tend to make front pages on many newspapers. And the fact that was multiple studies later on is simply the standard scientific process. Different countries have different research bodies, they don't all just rely on one or two studies and call it a day. No study can cover ever scenario or edge case, that's why multiple studies are done.
I repeat my original assertion there has been no definitive study that has proven that masks by themselves work.And the two largest specific studies which focused on masks and followed proper grouping, Spain and Denmark, both find masks don’t work.
You are simply and demonstrably wrong. Both the researchers behind the Spanish and Danish research specifically said their research was not to be taken as proof that masks were ineffective and not needed. And when you say proper grouping, I distinctively remember when you brought up the Danish study back during COVID you on multiple occasions talked about it using the Gold standard of being a randomized controlled group, well the Spanish study didn't. And guess what they were not the largest studies either.
Studies conducted in Bangladesh have been pivotal in understanding the effectiveness of mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research in Bangladesh, particularly a large-scale randomized controlled trial, has provided insights into how masks can reduce the transmission of the virus.
One prominent study, known as the "Bangladesh Mask Study," was led by researchers from various institutions and published in 2020. It involved more than 300,000 participants across rural and urban areas. The key findings of the study included:
Effectiveness of Masks: The study demonstrated that mask-wearing could significantly reduce the spread of COVID-19. It showed that surgical masks and cloth masks, when used properly, provided considerable protection, particularly in densely populated areas.
Behavioral Impact: The research found that people who were encouraged to wear masks had a higher adherence to mask-wearing in their daily routines, contributing to a reduction in COVID-19 transmission.
Community-level Benefits: The study suggested that promoting widespread mask usage in the community, including public health campaigns, could have a substantial impact on controlling the spread of COVID-19.
Oh look it meets your gold standard of randomized controlled trial.
And finally the piéce de résistance (I think I got the spelling right lol)
A review conducted by the Journal.ie found that when it searched for studies (in March 2023) with the terms "Covid" "Masks" "Effectiveness" on PubMed found that in the 50 most recent medical studies not a single one of them concluded masks were ineffective.
So at this point its about as conclusive as it can get. Masks are useful in combating the spread of Covid 19.
Liberals are the people who freed the slaves and gave the people the freedom to elect their own government...Trad seems to support monarchies and dictators...wonder how he would like living in Russia, China, Iran or Nork...
So many things much wrong in this comment. It shows that white people are the ones erasing the history of Europe. Slavery was banned in most of Europe before the rise of liberalism. Liberalism grew hand in hand with slavery, the war of indiependence was capitizalized by using human beings as assets. No capital, no war. Liberals keep inverting, a government is a means to an end, not an end in itself. People used to assess the merits of a government through its achievements. Not on fancied drivel. If liberals had been interested in ending slavery, the first bill passed by the US government after the war of independence would have end to slavery. Instread of that, the US government passed bill after bill to strengthen slavery as an institution. No president in the US was ever elected to put an end to slavery, presidents were elected to strengthen the slavery institution. In liberal minds, liberalism is the best thing as it allowed slavery contrary to other regimes that forbad it. Dictature that prevents slavery: bad; liberalism that allows slavery: good. That is the liberal way, and proudly supported by voters. If voters vote it, it can not be bad.
Hilarious.
So because the researchers doing the Spanish and Danish studies said it shouldn’t be concluded that masks don’t work, negates the fact that their studies clearly show masks don’t work. Of course they said that, they knew they were going to get withering criticism and it was a small concession.
All these studies have one great difficulty, it’s not like taking a pill. It’s also a behavioral change that almost certainly effects the participants entire behavior around protection. Which -might make the kids study in Spain the most valid.
But the Bangladesh study you are so pleased with…if correct, reported a reduction of 11% wearing surgical masks. It’s not saying masks provide significant protection as you claim, it’s marginal protection and almost no protection for cloth masks. It’s statistically significant according to the study….which means that some effect can be detected, not that the effect is substantial. You never knew that distinction?
But was even that 11% a reliable number? It seems not here are some of the criticisms that have been made:
….
Marginal Effect Size:
Study Context:
Compliance Issues:
Seroprevalence Measurement:
Cloth Masks:
……………………
So under a non urban transmission setting ….using surgical masks marginally reduces transmission by 11% and cloth masks hardly at all. But there are all sorts of reasons the results were not entirely reliable and probably biased in favor of masks. If these people sensed the study was designed to show masks worked and they had to self report symptoms, the chances of them holding back had to be real. And they knew because apparently there were economic incentives to participate.
………
For all the insistence that people should wear masks, there is no study that conclusively proves they have a significant effect.. And the community knows the study that shows they are significantly effective will make the career of the researchers. There is every incentive to prove they work. Which makes it noteworthy that flawed studies like Bangladesh showing minimal results are still the gold standard for those pushing mask use.
So because the researchers doing the Spanish and Danish studies said it shouldn’t be concluded that masks don’t work, negates the fact that their studies clearly show masks don’t work. Of course they said that, they knew they were going to get withering criticism and it was a small concession.
No the studies did not conclude that, otherwise the researchers would have said that they did. Of course they added that disclaimer, they knew people like yourself would cherry pick it to push a political agenda. But you always have an unproveable conspiracy to fall back on when you don't have the data on your side.
All these studies have one great difficulty, it’s not like taking a pill. It’s also a behavioral change that almost certainly effects the participants entire behavior around protection. Which -might make the kids study in Spain the most valid.
Are you really going argue that 3-5 year olds and 6-11 year olds are the group that's going best know how to use a face mask and compile with guidelines as well as an adult.
But the Bangladesh study you are so pleased with…if correct, reported a reduction of 11% wearing surgical masks. It’s not saying masks provide significant protection as you claim, it’s marginal protection and almost no protection for cloth masks. It’s statistically significant according to the study….which means that some effect can be detected, not that the effect is substantial. You never knew that distinction?
Are you mental, when we're talking about the Covid 19 pandemic, infections were literally tens if not hundreds of thousands of people per day in some regions of the world. An 11% reduction is f**king massive when you're talking about those numbers. That could be the difference between a country medical health care system just about managing or completely collapsing and on a global level it could translate to tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives that could potentially have been saved.
So under a non urban transmission setting ….using surgical masks marginally reduces transmission by 11% and cloth masks hardly at all. But there are all sorts of reasons the results were not entirely reliable and probably biased in favor of masks. If these people sensed the study was designed to show masks worked and they had to self report symptoms, the chances of them holding back had to be real. And they knew because apparently there were economic incentives to participate.
………
For all the insistence that people should wear masks, there is no study that conclusively proves they have a significant effect.. And the community knows the study that shows they are significantly effective will make the career of the researchers. There is every incentive to prove they work. Which makes it noteworthy that flawed studies like Bangladesh showing minimal results are still the gold standard for those pushing mask use.
Your best card was a study done in 2020 with dubious protocols, financial inducements and self reporting of symptoms. That study came up with cloth masks showing little benefits and surgical masks showing an 11% benefit. The issue with 11% is that it is so close to the non masked population result that slight protocol errors could negate the benefit. And Chat mentioned a few, the most damning of which was the effect of other variables like distancing, which concerned critics.
So by now one would have thought a confirming study would have been available.
I could pick apart your petty criticisms one by one…for example the point about the children is they won’t be motivated to game the trial and give researchers the results they want, not that they would handle masks better. As usual you leap to conclusions and no argument is going to penetrate your bias. You are ideologically locked in.
Feel free to provide better evidence if you can find it.
‘Farcical man’ ….oh dear, are we reduced to name calling. The Danish and Spanish studies show no evidence of masks helping. That’s the data….the commentary is the positioning. I believe the data. And if masks were a potent factor, regardless of any flaws in the studies you would never get a zero result with competent researchers. You would never get a zero result for social distancing .
Your best case shows an 11% improvement ….that’s low enough that the conclusion would hinge on how you pose the research question and even that had flaws. Every other study I have seen with positive reports comes with ‘low confidence in the data’ or without clear elimination of other factors like social distancing in the results.
‘Farcical man’…..hahaha…..the no mas moment when you had to resort to name calling.
I'll tell you one reason why masks would be ineffective from my observation of the public: people not wearing them correctly. The percentage of people wearing masks so that they either didn't cover their noses, or hung so loose around their noses that whatever wanted to get out will get out, was far too high. Not to mention the type of masks - many people over here used buffs, which was pointless. Also people took their masks off all the time. Only the most paranoid kept them on wherever they went. Vapor don't just disappear the moment you put on a mask when you see someone get close. Whatever you breathed out or sneezed or coughed out is still hanging there and still getting spread around. That's why the 6 feet "distancing" was a nonsense.
Yes you’re right effectiveness is a function of mask capability and how they are used. The net of that is extent of protection. Use is complicated by many factors, for example eating. Particles trapped on masks can also be dislodged. Eg by coughing.
Measuring all this is complicated, because wearing a mask in a test can lead to changes in behavior.
So proper design of experiments would require completely randomized sampling and mask assignment and protocols to ensure the test isn’t inducing behavioral changes. No test has done that, some haven’t even adjusted for the COVID vaccine. And those that have, allowed self reporting on mask use….ie people that wore masks and those that didn’t wear masks formed the sampling groups. Those who wear masks may be inherently more cautious…making the test invalid.
Testing one factor in a battery of factors, when the test induces behavioral changes that could effect results and there are supposedly immediate health risks for half those sampled….is very difficult.
‘Farcical man’ ….oh dear, are we reduced to name calling.
Turn of phrase, like don't have a cow man. But oh dear you knew that.
The Danish and Spanish studies show no evidence of masks helping. That’s the data….the commentary is the positioning.
Its data that you're misrepresenting. The commentary is necessary to stop misrepresentation.
I believe the data. And if masks were a potent factor, regardless of any flaws in the studies you would never get a zero result with competent researchers. You would never get a zero result for social distancing .
Your best case shows an 11% improvement ….that’s low enough that the conclusion would hinge on how you pose the research question and even that had flaws. Every other study I have seen with positive reports comes with ‘low confidence in the data’ or without clear elimination of other factors like social distancing in the results.
You believe only the data that you interpret as matching your political views and dismiss the overwhelming preponderance of data that doesn't. Completely dishonest as always.
‘Farcical man’…..hahaha…..the no mas moment when you had to resort to name calling.
LOL man, (oh no I've just name called you LOL man, I'm so mean!) the absolutely desperate attempt at distraction from how badly you have lost this argument. It's as predictable as it is comical.
Getting Moffie to admit he made a dick of himself is not possible. I've tried.
Acolytes remain acolytes….the style changes. It’s now passive aggressive, straying into aggressive when you have no more excuses. Four centuries ago people like you would have been burning people at the stake. The ‘belief’ is simply replaced by ‘the science’, thank heaven for the independent thinkers we have, damn few left.
No study has been done that would meet any proper PhD design of experiments criteria. But never mind, you have the support of a person who has no post graduate education, no quantitative literacy and thinks time stamps change when posts are edited.
I generously repeat my offer….feel free to come back when you have a proper study supporting your case.
Acolytes remain acolytes….the style changes. It’s now passive aggressive, straying into aggressive when you have no more excuses. Four centuries ago people like you would have been burning people at the stake. The ‘belief’ is simply replaced by ‘the science’,
Do you even hear yourself. So apparently a person who in the course of a debate on an internet forum links to over a dozen studies that support his argument is now the modern day Inquisitor. Yeah that makes total sense.
And oh look how predictable, he's trotting out the "science is the new religion" argument, something you do every time the science is not on your side.
thank heaven for the independent thinkers we have, damn few left.
The delusion is hilarious. You're repacking being wrong, as free thinking! You're the exact opposite of a free thinker. We all know its ideology and ego with you.
No study has been done that would meet any proper PhD design of experiments criteria. But never mind, you have the support of a person who has no post graduate education, no quantitative literacy and thinks time stamps change when posts are edited.
Well actually I have the support of virtually every major medical organization on the planet. But apparently Moz is smarter than all of them.
I generously repeat my offer….feel free to come back when you have a proper study supporting your case.
Name calling and silly little clips and appeals to authority. Pathetic stuff. There is no study I can find that creates a proper masked vs not masked experiment without bias being introduced in the selection of the two sample populations.
No translation needed….you need to have random assignment of mask participants to exclude behavioral patterns inherent in those who have chosen to wear masks. Here is Chat’s conclusion:
Participants in the CDC study voluntarily wore masks and were not assigned to specific mask types or maskless conditions. While this approach provides insights into real-world behavior, it also introduces potential biases that limit the ability to draw definitive conclusions about the causal effectiveness of masks. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), where participants are assigned mask types or maskless conditions, provide more robust evidence but are challenging to conduct in large populations.
….
There, no need to resort to childish insults. It’s just how ‘The Science’ works. I know this will be new to you. But it’s an opportunity for you to learn something. What’s your education anyway Anger…do you have some college?
Participants in the CDC study voluntarily wore masks and were not assigned to specific mask types or maskless conditions. While this approach provides insights into real-world behavior, it also introduces potential biases that limit the ability to draw definitive conclusions about the causal effectiveness of masks.
In the medical and science world all studies have potential biases or limitations or caveats, or whatever you want to call them, key word being potential, that include the studies you claim support your argument. Some more than others, but that doesn't necessarily make them invalid. Its also the reason why the same subject can be researched over and over again.
There, no need to resort to childish insults. It’s just how ‘The Science’ works. I know this will be new to you
LOL, you claim to know how "The Science" works, after your constant misrepresentations of it. You have the balls of a brass monkey.
But it’s an opportunity for you to learn something.
I guess I'll learning from you is how far some will dig themselves a hole defending the undefendable.
What’s your education anyway Anger…do you have some college?
I do. Do you have some humility...just asking for a friend.
You aren’t quite getting it….most medical studies are definitive. You take a pill or have a procedure and results can be measured regardless of anything the participant does. In this case you wear a mask, but you also go on living….going to restaurants, avoiding people that are ill….social distancing. The person wearing a mask is much more likely to do those things carefully. So you can’t allow mask participants to form a group without bias
Of course studies have potential biases, but having non random samples is particularly problematic where the distinguishing characteristic, in this case wearing a mask, may say something about the general behavior of the individual. Is wearing a mask more likely to indicate an individual who is more risk averse and thefore less susceptible to be infected for other reasons eg distancing? You betcha.
So allowing mask wearers to form one group and tracking them against non mask wearers is a pretty serious flaw.
Once again, the gold standard or perhaps the only acceptable standard because of the behavioral component in this case is randomized selection of the samples. ChatGTP scans the whole field when it answers, so I asked if there were any studies following random sampling protocols and here is the answer:
Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs):
…………
And as you may recall the Danish study shows the protective difference between mask wearers and those not wearing a mask was insignificant.
……..
Guess what that means, it means there are no studies out there that reliably prove masks provide significant protection, which was my original statement. I’m not saying they couldn’t provide some protection under extremely severe , basically unachievable protocols. I’m saying it hasn’t been proven.
So there you have it, if your friend wants to be educated as well he need only ask,
Several studies have used Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) to assess the effectiveness of face masks in reducing COVID-19 transmission. RCTs are considered the gold standard for evaluating the causal impact of interventions. Here are some prominent studies that used RCTs to evaluate the effectiveness of masks:
While RCTs on mask efficacy generally support the idea that masks help reduce the transmission of COVID-19, the exact magnitude of their effectiveness varies depending on the context (e.g., mask type, environment, adherence). The Bangladesh study stands out as one of the largest and most comprehensive RCTs to date, showing clear evidence of mask effectiveness in reducing virus transmission. However, other studies, such as DANMASK-19, showed more limited results, highlighting the challenges in measuring real-world mask effectiveness across diverse populations and settings.
Guess what that means, it means there are no studies out there that reliably prove masks provide significant protection, which was my original statement. I’m not saying they couldn’t provide some protection under extremely severe , basically unachievable protocols. I’m saying it hasn’t been proven.
So there you have it, if your friend wants to be educated as well he need only ask,
What the preponderance of data and studies show, is that masks are effective in protecting Covid 19. Its why the world foremost medical organizations had all endorsed the use of face masks as a measure to combat Covid 19.
Significant protection?. So you get to define what is and isn't significant. Even a relatively low reduction rate of say 11% as seen in the Bangladesh study, could on a global scale translate into hundreds of millions of less Covid cases over time, and millions of cases of lives saved or seriousness illness prevented.
So there you have it, if your friend wants to be educated as well he need only ask,
We can use you as a case study of what happens when ingrained political ideology meets hard data.
Interesting fact - Next time you shake someone's hand, take a look at how long it takes for them to touch their face. In most cases, within 20 seconds the person whose hand you shook will touch their face in some way.
This is getting embarrassing. Are you truly this thick? These are not proper randomized studies. Take the Bangladesh study….villages were divided into groups wearing masks and those not wearing masks. Just becoming part of a team was going to affect behavior. Here again is Chat:
In rural settings like those in the Bangladesh mask study, the behavioral effect of wanting to please researchers or community leaders (often called the "social desirability bias") is a valid concern and likely not fully eliminated. This bias can be particularly pronounced in close-knit rural communities where social norms and external influences can strongly shape behavior.
……
There are no properly randomized studies showing masks work. I repeat if there was a definitive study it would be all over the news.
Interesting factoid Plum….I’ll check it out. Remember when Fauci said this:
‘ I don't think we should ever shake hands ever again, to be honest with you," Fauci, a key member of the White House task force, said during a Wall Street Journal podcast. "Not only would it be good to prevent coronavirus disease -- it probably would decrease instances of influenza dramatically in this country."
…..
Of course like many of his warnings this has been forgotten…Covid was his chance to change the world, but it turns out the world didn’t want to be changed.
"Of course like many of his warnings this has been forgotten…Covid was his chance to change the world, but it turns out the world didn’t want to be changed."
Thank God for resistance to change...sometimes it's a good thing...
This is getting embarrassing.
How long are you going to try to brazen you way out of this. Its remarkable the lengths some people will go to save face.
Are you truly this thick.
These are not proper randomized studies.
Are you calling ChatGPT thick?
Take the Bangladesh study….villages were divided into groups wearing masks and those not wearing masks. Just becoming part of a team was going to affect behavior. Here again is Chat:In rural settings like those in the Bangladesh mask study, the behavioral effect of wanting to please researchers or community leaders (often called the "social desirability bias") is a valid concern and likely not fully eliminated. This bias can be particularly pronounced in close-knit rural communities where social norms and external influences can strongly shape behavior.
You can fixate on the potential biases potentially affecting the outcome of the Bangladesh study all you want, while ignoring the limitations and potential biases of the DANMASK study of which they are several according to chat.
The DANMASK-19 study was a randomized controlled trial conducted to assess the effectiveness of face masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19 in a community setting. While it provided valuable data, there are several limitations to the study:
Population and Setting:
Self-Reported Mask Usage:
Sample Size and Power:
Control Group:
Compliance with Other Preventive Measures:
COVID-19 Variants:
Outcome Measure:
External Factors:
Despite these limitations, the DANMASK-19 study contributed to the broader understanding of mask efficacy during the pandemic, but its results should be interpreted in light of these constraints.
.......
But the fact is that Bangladesh study conclusions are backed up/supported by over a dozen other studies. The sheer weight of evidence is undeniable, face masks are useful in combating Covid 19.
There are no properly randomized studies showing masks work. I repeat if there was a definitive study it would be all over the news.
I repeat virtually every major international and national medical body on the planet takes the position that face masks are effective at reducing Covid infection, a position that's backed by an overwhelming preponderance of data from various studies into the matter. That's a fact.
Chat had caveats for all the studies, which proves my point. As for your constant use of the medical establishment as a reason to believe, I believe properly conducted, randomized studies. here are two among many instances where poor research led the medical establishment to erroneous conclusions, one of which had damaging effects that are still playing out.
‘ War on dietary fat
In a recent about-face on fat, the US dietary guidelines advisory committeehas removed its previous recommendations against fat and cholesterol consumption in its most recent report.
The medical establishment had for decades advised against the consumption of fat and cholesterol, which in turn led to a higher consumption of carbohydrates and sugars. Studies show this change in dietary habits had a strong correlation to soaring rates of diabetes, obesity and heart disease.
Signalling a continuing paradigm shift, a recent report by the National Obesity Forum (NOF) and Public Health Collaborative (PHC) titled "Eat Fat, Cut The Carbs and Avoid Snacking To Reverse Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes" called for an overhaul of existing guidelines, according to Reuters. The NOF and PHC also stated "eating fat does not make you fat".
Such drastic changes in dietary recommendations have led to generations turning to fad diets and skewing nutritional intake resulting in not just cardiological problems but also metabolic concerns’
And
‘ Flossing
A new report officially knocked flossing off its pedestal; a practice universally taught alongside brushing.
The American Dental Association (ADA) has been promoting floss since 1908, however, it has recently emerged there was never any scientific basis for the recommendation.
The ADA accepts studies conducted by the floss industry, which represents a conflict of interest.
For years the ADA was adamant flossing prevents the build-up of plaque, gingivitis and tooth decay.
In an analysis of 25 studies on floss, the AP found most of the studies, which the ADA cited as a basis for their claims, used unreliable methods; carried a "moderate to large potential for bias"; and sometimes tested few participants. One study tested 25 people after only a single use of floss. Some studies lasted a mere two weeks, not a sufficient duration for a cavity or gum disease to develop.’
…..
The ADA methods carried moderate to large potential for bias…..so do these mask studies.
……..
So there you have two examples of why research has to be properly conducted. The mask studies are particularly challenging and at this point are unreliable. I know you are begging me to end the debate, all it needs is for you to admit there is no study which reliably proves the effect of masks. Hell even those supporting masks report widely varying effects…they are totally inconsistent, just another indication that this remains an unknown. Your serve.
Chat had caveats for all the studies, which proves my point. As for your constant use of the medical establishment as a reason to believe, I believe properly conducted, randomized studies. here are two among many instances where poor research led the medical establishment to erroneous conclusions, one of which had damaging effects that are still playing out.
In any field of research, particular one has vast as medicine of course there will be mistakes from time to time but pointing that out doesn't just invalidate studies with conclusions you don't like. You can cherry pick the times the experts got it wrong while ignoring the far numerous occasions were they got it right, but essentially you're just making a argument that expertise can be ignored, something which can be applied to any field of expertise. But I suppose why change a habit when that's what right wing America has been doing for years.
Aside from that the two cases you pointed our here are two different health bodies in American looking at two separate health care issues, where as with masks and Covid 19, every health body in every country on the planet looked into the issue and concluded using face masks is an effective tool in combating Covid 19. Are you really going try to argue they are all wrong?
So there you have two examples of why research has to be properly conducted
They were properly conducted. Just because you don't like their conclusions does not make them invalid.
The mask studies are particularly challenging and at this point are unreliable.
I'm sure each study has challenges but when you have so many studies that come to the same conclusion it builds up an extremely strong case. The worlds health organizations have deemed them reliable enough to take a position on the issue.
I know you are begging me to end the debate, all it needs is for you to admit there is no study which reliably proves the effect of masks.
LOL the self projection.
Hell even those supporting masks report widely varying effects…they are totally inconsistent, just another indication that this remains an unknown
Widely varying effects...totally inconsistent. You know you just saying words doesn't make them so.
Your serve.
You lost the game 3 sets to zero as soon as I linked to all those studies. Everything since has been face saving.
In any field of research, particular one has vast as medicine of course there will be mistakes from time to time but pointing that out doesn't just invalidate studies with conclusions you don't like.
"You lost the game 3 sets to zero as soon as I linked to all those studies. Everything since has been face saving."
You lost the game 3 sets to zero as soon as I linked to all those studies. Everything since has been a vain attempt at face saving.
Fixed.
As for the rest it’s just repetition of your basic position….I believe everything the medical fraternity produces and they have many studies that show masks work. No I don’t know the first thing about the studies, no I never realized samples should be random. I reject any study which contradicts masks. Anybody who questions the gospel is a heretic.
LOL, I can just sense the anger and desperation behind your posts at this point.
Apparently taking a position on a topic that's backed up the evidence/research is mere belief, on the same level of credibility as believing in the tooth fairy.
While I'm not in the medical research profession and don't proclaim to be an expert on the matter, I was actually aware of the benefits of random controlled trails being considered the gold standard. That does not mean studies that do not use random controlled trails can just be instantly dismissed.
I'm not the one rejecting around 17 different studies each showing the benefits of wearing face masks in combating Covid 19 several of which used RCT. You're the one holding up the DANMASK-19 study have it was the gospel and the one truth when even the researcher behind said the study have said
"Our results suggest that the recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in mask wearers in a setting where social distancing and other public health measures were in effect, mask recommendations were not among those measures, and community use of masks was uncommon. Yet, the findings were inconclusive and cannot definitively exclude a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection of mask wearers in such a setting. It is important to emphasize that this trial did not address the effects of masks as source control or as protection in settings where social distancing and other public health measures are not in effect."
Additionally
The leader researcher in an interview with Forbes also stated.
"Even a small degree of protection is worth using the face masks,” he said,“because you are protecting yourself against a potentially life-threatening disease."
And in the accompanying editorial in the journal the study was published stated the
"does not disprove the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing"
If you have anything more intelligent to offer please do. If not let’s just accept I believe in numbers and proof, you believe in the word from above. Two generations ago you would have been a religious fanatic.
You accept nothing but your belief in your own infallibility. Two generations ago you would of been known as an obnoxiously smug, pompous bellend and two generations later nothing would of changed.
"an obnoxiously smug, pompous bellend "
Lots of blather with from the time stamp moron and the uneducated Irish woke man. But again, let’s look at those two quotes. In the first quote the researcher simply says the study doesn’t evaluate the effectiveness of masks where social distancing was not present. Translation, if social distancing is present masks provide no benefit, but perhaps they might if there was no social distancing and other measures.
Useful because that’s exactly what other studies don’t exclude…the benefit of social distancing which shows up in flawed sample selection in every other study.
And then the research leader says it doesn’t disprove the benefits of widespread mask wearing. Of course it doesn’t, the study investigated the benefit to the mask wearer…not the benefit of community protection from general mask wearing. The benefit to the mask wearer in this properly randomized sample study was zero….no ambiguity there.
Feel a bit more educated now, it took you how many days to figure that out. Come now you can’t have an Irish degree, their schools are better than that.
Lots of blather with from the time stamp moron and the uneducated Irish woke man.
LOL so citing medical studies is woke now?
In the first quote the researcher simply says the study doesn’t evaluate the effectiveness of masks where social distancing was not present. Translation, if social distancing is present masks provide no benefit, but perhaps they might if there was no social distancing and other measures.
Amazing how you only focus on a select part of that quote. I wonder why.
Useful because that’s exactly what other studies don’t exclude…the benefit of social distancing which shows up in flawed sample selection in every other study.
Useful because you think its an issue you can use to discredit every other study when the truth is you have no idea if the presence of social distancing would change the outcome of the studies significantly enough for them to have to come to a different conclusion, all the while as you ignore the potential issues with the DANMASK study.
And then the research leader says it doesn’t disprove the benefits of widespread mask wearing. Of course it doesn’t, the study investigated the benefit to the mask wearer…not the benefit of community protection from general mask wearing. The benefit to the mask wearer in this properly randomized sample study was zero….no ambiguity there.
Yes the journal editor in chief had to add the comment to stop people like you misrepresenting the study.
Feel a bit more educated now, it took you how many days to figure that out. Come now you can’t have an Irish degree, their schools are better than that.
Gotta love these pitiful attempts at trolling.
bumpitty bump
The Eternal thread.
Thanks Blob.
Okay Anger find the post where I said this study made any assertion about population protection under a broad mask regime. I read the Chat disclaimers which contained that exact point. What it does say is those poor high risk individuals who are exhorted to wear masks for protection are being misled.
I strongly believe the population level protection is also dubious as suggested in the Spanish study, but not conclusively proven.
None of your responses are substantive, not once have you found anything which changes the hypothesis that not one study conclusively proves masks are effective, Which I know is true, because if there were such a study it would be a major part of the narrative. Every study has been contested.
Admit it, you never took one undergraduate level statistics course…let alone anything serious.
I strongly believe the population level protection is also dubious as suggested in the Spanish study, but not conclusively proven.
LOL now he's happy to use a study that didn't make use of RCT to try to back up his position.
None of your responses are substantive, not once have you found anything which changes the hypothesis that not one study conclusively proves masks are effective, Which I know is true, because if there were such a study it would be a major part of the narrative. Every study has been contested.
Nothing Substantive, I've posted information or linked to about about 17 studies conducted by experts in the field of medicine (of which you are not) that support the position that face masks are affective tool in combating the spread of Covid 19. Taken together it builds a strong if not overwhelming case for the usefulness of masks.
You know precisely the square root of jack sh*t. Narrative, there is no narrative other than face masks are effective in combating Covid 19, because that's what the experts say on the matter. Do you think the entire worlds health body just rang each other up on Skype and one of them said "face mask work against Covid, heads", "face masks don't work against Covid tails", then flicked a coin and heads won?. No what they do is the look at the totality of all the studies and research on the topic (while factoring into account the limitations of the studies) and then issue their advice/guidance. And no don't bother trying to imply some bullshit unprovable conspiracy that there position was due to pressure from governments or "the left".
Admit it, you never took one undergraduate level statistics course…let alone anything serious.
Just admit it, your ideology and ego have you trapped.
Once again I have the tedious task of explaining the study to you:
Study Design and Population:
The researchers conducted a retrospective population-based study involving 599,314 children aged 3 to 11 years attending preschool (ages 3–5) and primary education (ages 6–11) in Catalonia. Notably, during the study period from September 13 to December 22, 2021, mask mandates were implemented for children aged 6 and above, while children aged 5 and below were not required to wear masks.
Key Findings:
Incidence Rates: The study found that SARS-CoV-2 incidence was significantly lower in preschool children (ages 3–5) compared to primary education students (ages 6–11). Specifically, 6-year-old children, who were subject to mask mandates, exhibited a higher incidence rate (3.54%) than 5-year-olds (3.1%), who were not required to wear masks.
Transmission Metrics: Secondary attack rates (SARs) and the effective reproductive number (R*) were slightly lower in 6-year-olds compared to 5-year-olds, but these differences were not statistically significant.
Conclusion:
The study concluded that there were no significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 transmission attributable to mask mandates in Catalonian schools. Instead, age appeared to be the most significant factor influencing transmission risk among school-attending children.
These findings suggest that while mask mandates were implemented for children aged 6 and above, the absence of such mandates for younger children did not result in higher transmission rates among the younger cohort.
…..
So….the groups were totally determined by age, which was clearly the basis of selection. Very logical because the study was trying to assess the need for mask use by very young children.
There is no bias. There are no pro or anti mask biases from sampling hidden in the data, because they never sampled….within that region they simply split the kids by age. That’s not sampling, two populations were tested against each other. Or perhaps you could explain what random samples would make this particular test more valid.
And the results are very clear, the younger children without masks got less COVID than the older children with masks. And they are close enough to make sense. Making very young children wear masks is one of the many travesties of the COVID protocol tyranny.
Read my comment again….I’m saying there was no sampling bias. Obviously it’s a strange study using such young children. But given the large size of each group one would have expected some sort of benefit for the masked kids.
Another hissy fit about the use of ‘protocol tyranny’ when there is substantial discussion of the very subject. Right in this experiment forcing 6 year old kids to wear masks is protocol tyranny demonstrated by the study itself.
We don't know what effect pro mask biases in studies have….hence my agnostic position. Backed up by the fact that the studies Chat identifies as the best pro mask studies all have flaws….the CDC studies not being properly randomized, the Bangladesh study having community pressure and self reporting flaws.
There is no study that is definitive supporting masks. The Danish study does appear to disprove the masks as protection for the wearer claim. But as Chat points out doesn’t opine on masks as a community protection. The Catalonian study does not find any community protection from masks, but given the focus on children needs replication, even though it was a population level study with many participants.
That’s all we know.
Rooinek
Hall Of Famer14,899 posts
Bozo is officially a convicted felon following the New York hush money hearing where he was found guilty.
To the great relief of President Musk and his puppet Bozo, the sentence from judge Juan Merchan was "unconditional discharge without punishment" although he was quick to point out to Bozo that it was "the office of the presidency – and not the occupant – that was afforded extraordinary legal protections" . . . which basically means that Bozo would have been punished like any other criminal but for the fact that he was about to assume the presidency . . . something that is also only in name as a rather embarrassed President Musk prepares to pull the strings of his little clown puppet . . . who is now officially a felon.