The Trump Presidency – 2016

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by panerd

I have two thoughts on this...

1) If these senators etc are found to be acting improperly they should face a harsh jail sentence not just penalties/fines. Not sure why any of them should be able to own stock. If you want to be a lifelong politician that should be part of the agreement. However it isn't so...

2) On the flip side generally these people (especially her husband) are highly successful for a reason. I mean isn't this the main criticism of Trump that everyone and their mother saw this coming from what was going on in China? If she and her husband had a hunch that the shit was going to hit the fan (and did nothing illegal from secret reports etc) I guess kudos to them right?

I would have to look it up, but IIRC a lot of the sales occurred almost directly after an intelligence briefing stating the virus would get bad.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by panerd

I have two thoughts on this...

1) If these senators etc are found to be acting improperly they should face a harsh jail sentence not just penalties/fines. Not sure why any of them should be able to own stock. If you want to be a lifelong politician that should be part of the agreement. However it isn't so...

2) On the flip side generally these people (especially her husband) are highly successful for a reason. I mean isn't this the main criticism of Trump that everyone and their mother saw this coming from what was going on in China? If she and her husband had a hunch that the shit was going to hit the fan (and did nothing illegal from secret reports etc) I guess kudos to them right?

If the information was public, fine, but that's the problem. For most of the briefings Congress was getting the WH made them confidential, so she knew things the general public didn't. In essence she was insider trading and that should at least end her career in the Senate.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by panerd

I have two thoughts on this...

1) If these senators etc are found to be acting improperly they should face a harsh jail sentence not just penalties/fines. Not sure why any of them should be able to own stock. If you want to be a lifelong politician that should be part of the agreement. However it isn't so...

2) On the flip side generally these people (especially her husband) are highly successful for a reason. I mean isn't this the main criticism of Trump that everyone and their mother saw this coming from what was going on in China? If she and her husband had a hunch that the shit was going to hit the fan (and did nothing illegal from secret reports etc) I guess kudos to them right?

Agreed. Not only this, but when they start buying them back when the virus subsides, you can't blame them either. But I fully agree with #1, where if you want to be a public servant, you should not be allowed to own stock to remove any chance of impropriety.

[Atocep]

Loeffler's stuff is questionable, but if a 3rd party is handled her selloff without any input from her or her husband then I don't think anything will come of it. Buying the Citrix stock nearly 2 weeks before the first signs of this really hitting the US became apparent looks shady as hell though.

I think Burr's timeline is far more questionable since he sold off the day of the record high without buying anything, again, nearly 2 weeks before it started to show here.

It's interesting that Loeffler bought Citrix shares the day after Burr had his selloff.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...irus-examined/

Here’s the timeline for Loeffler, whose trades were first reported by the Daily Beast:

Jan. 24: The Senate Health Committee, on which Loeffler sits, holds the private, all-senators briefing featuring top health officials.

Jan. 24-Feb. 14: Loeffler sells stocks jointly owned with her husband worth between $1,275,000 and $3,100,000.

Feb. 12: The Dow Jones industrial average closes at its highest-ever point.

Feb. 14: Loeffler buys stock in Citrix, a company that provides web-based services including teleconferencing, and Oracle.

Feb. 24: The Dow registers its first big drop of the year.

Feb. 28: Loeffler says in a tweet, “Democrats have dangerously and intentionally misled the American people on #Coronavirus readiness. Here’s the truth: @realDonaldTrump & his administration are doing a great job working to keep Americans healthy & safe.” The tweet links to an AP fact check that says some Democrats have “distorted” the readiness of the federal government.

Burr's timeline:

Jan. 24: The Senate Health Committee holds a private, all-senators briefing featuring Centers for Disease Control Director Robert Redfield and infectious disease expert Anthony S. Fauci.

Feb. 7: Burr in a Fox News op-ed with Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) says Americans are “rightfully concerned” about coronavirus but that, “Thankfully, the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus, in large part due to the work of the Senate Health Committee, Congress, and the Trump Administration.”

Feb. 12: The Dow Jones industrial average closes at its highest-ever point: 29,551.42. The Dow had remained steady around 29,000 for weeks and wouldn’t begin dropping for more than a week afterward.

Feb. 13: Burr sells off between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings in 33 separate transactions, including hundreds of thousands of dollars in hotel stock — his largest sell-off in at least 14 months. He doesn’t buy any stocks.

Feb. 24: The Dow registers its first big drop of the year, shedding more than 1,000 points.

Feb. 25: The CDC’s Nancy Messonnier says on a teleconference that the spread of coronavirus is “inevitable.” “Ultimately, we expect we will see community spread in this country,” she says.

Later in the day, though, the CDC’s Anne Schuchat says, “We believe the immediate risk here in the United States remains low, and we’re working hard to keep that risk low.”

Democrats complain that a briefing they received earlier in the day from Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar had been private and that the information wasn’t shared with their constituents. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) says the senators were told that “there is a very strong chance of an extremely serious outbreak of the coronavirus here in the United States.” Azar explains at a hearing that day, “Chairman Burr, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, asked that briefing be held at the top secret level.”

Feb. 26: Schuchat says at a White House briefing, “Our aggressive containment strategy here in the United States has been working and is responsible for the low levels of cases that we have so far. However, we do expect more cases, and this is a good time to prepare.”

Feb. 27: Burr tells a private audience, “There’s one thing I can tell you about this: It is much more aggressive in its transmission than anything we have seen in recent history. It’s probably more akin to the 1918 pandemic.” The comments were first unearthed by NPR earlier Thursday.

March 3: Burr tweets after the first confirmed case of coronavirus in his home state that, “The U.S. is in a better position than any other nation to handle a public health emergency,” but says Congress must make sure first responders have the resources they need.

[JPhillips]

Loeffler has dodged the question of whether she or her husband provided any information to their broker. I'm sure she's right when she says neither she or her husband sold anything, but that doesn't mean she didn't provide guidance through insider information.

[Ben E Lou]

Bwahahaha.


Reporter: "What about the uninsured? How will they get treated and not lose everything? You shut down the Obamacare Portal."


Trump: "Mike, take that one."


Pence: {5 minutes of utter nonsense, avoiding the question}


Trump then (deservedly) called Pence out for his utter b.s. answer.

Pence dodges a question from Fox on how Americans can get insurance during the coronavirus pandemic. After Pence finishes, Trump adds: "I think it's one of the greatest answers I've ever heard, because Mike was able to speak for five minutes and not even touch your question."

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) April 1, 2020

[cartman]

President Trump: "Did you know I was number one on Facebook? I just found out I’m number one on Facebook. I thought that was very nice, for whatever it means." https://t.co/CCmRRA6993 pic.twitter.com/QcLddSPYd8

— CBS News (@CBSNews) April 1, 2020

[RainMaker]

It was more than just buying Citrix. She also bought shares in a company that provides protective garments. Sold shares in retail outlets. This is not a big coincidence.

[Ben E Lou]

"I think that's one of the greatest answers I've ever heard. Because Mike was able to speak for 5 minutes and not even touch your question" -- Pence was so evasive in response to a question about health care for uninsured people that even Trump teased him about it pic.twitter.com/ckmoN6EMuX

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 1, 2020

[whomario]

If this was a movie i would expect a group of generals remove him from office any minute ...

[Thomkal]

I've said before I wouldn't wish the virus on anyone, even Trump, but I'm starting to think it might not be so bad if it was Devin Nunes:


https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/01/polit...ols/index.html

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by whomario

If this was a movie i would expect a group of generals remove him from office any minute ...

I sure hope not because that would be such a cop-out.

As a country, we elected Trump and surrounded him with the protective cocoon of a GOP Senate.

And we need to live with those consequences--even through the worst times--to show people that decisions like that matter.

When you elect Trump as your President, then Trump is your President.

It isn't a game, and you don't get a reset button.

And that's true even if "Both parties are the same," or "I'm really more of a libertarian," or "I'm casting a protest vote," or "Neither candidate really speaks to me," or "I'm going third party this year."

When a political party becomes so demented as to nominate a Trump, you do everything in your power to keep him from becoming President. No exceptions. Period. Full stop.

Because the generals are not coming to save us.

[tarcone]

There was a poll during the last election that showed 13% of people would rather an asteroid strike the Earth than have either candidate as president. So 13% of the people just said F it, kill me.

[tarcone]

My point being, when both parties throw up shitshow candidates, dont blame the others just because you blindly pull the dem lever.

Neither party gave us a quality candidate. And this is the result.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by tarcone

My point being, when both parties throw up shitshow candidates, dont blame the others just because you blindly pull the dem lever.

Neither party gave us a quality candidate. And this is the result.

Do you honestly think if Hillary were president right now things would be like this?

She was a deeply flawed candidate, but she isn't so much of a narcissist that she wouldn't default to the experts when she should have.

[CrimsonFox]

Meanwhile in Ventilator making hell

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Mike Pence is such an ass kissing snake.

such poetry...

i used the term

snakey weasel before too
yours is more actionoriented

[albionmoonlight]

If one sincerely and honestly believes that Hillary Clinton was as bad of a candidate as Donald Trump, then nothing I can say will change your mind.

[albionmoonlight]

dola: Reading that, it comes off as more aggressive than I meant it.

I actually meant it honestly. To me, Trump was so much worse of a candidate than Clinton that I have trouble explaining it to someone who does not see it.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Do you honestly think if Hillary were president right now things would be like this?

She was a deeply flawed candidate, but she isn't so much of a narcissist that she wouldn't default to the experts when she should have.

See, that is where Im not sure. You really dont think she is a narcissist? I mean, she let her husband get BJs in the oval office and let it go. Is that because she is just that forgiving or was it she had such a thirst for power that it just didnt matter.

Would she have handled this better? Probably. But the question is how much?

I dont know and we will never know. We can only speculate and that is usually clouded by our feelings and backgrounds.

My point was, put up quality candidates. Both parties are failing at this. And blaming people who refused to vote for either is wrong.

[Lathum]

Fair enough, but I'm not even sure you need to question if Hillary would handle this better. Trump is quite literally the worst type of person in the world to handle this. Literally someone who would do nothing is better. For once he should be golfing.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

dola: Reading that, it comes off as more aggressive than I meant it.

I actually meant it honestly. To me, Trump was so much worse of a candidate than Clinton that I have trouble explaining it to someone who does not see it.

And Im in the boat that both candidates were equally bad. It is opinion. But as I just said dont blame me for refusing to vote for 2 candidates that I felt were terrible. Blame your party for not getting the right people out in the right areas.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Fair enough, but I'm not even sure you need to question if Hillary would handle this better. Trump is quite literally the worst type of person in the world to handle this. Literally someone who would do nothing is better. For once he should be golfing.

I would hope she would. Or would she get into the mindset that was her legacy moment and not listened to her advisers and just do what she wanted? Would she look to protect her wealthy friends first before the people? Probably not, but maybe she would.

I believe she would have given more of the bailout to the people than the corporations though. At least, I think she would have.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I sure hope not because that would be such a cop-out.

As a country, we elected Trump and surrounded him with the protective cocoon of a GOP Senate.

And we need to live with those consequences--even through the worst times--to show people that decisions like that matter.

When you elect Trump as your President, then Trump is your President.

It isn't a game, and you don't get a reset button.

And that's true even if "Both parties are the same," or "I'm really more of a libertarian," or "I'm casting a protest vote," or "Neither candidate really speaks to me," or "I'm going third party this year."

When a political party becomes so demented as to nominate a Trump, you do everything in your power to keep him from becoming President. No exceptions. Period. Full stop.

Because the generals are not coming to save us.

I thought the "if this was a movie" made clear how this was meant I have the luxury looking at this from the outside, although of course the US being 'driven' by a narcissistic maniac also impacts us living elsewhere.

[SirFozzie]

Holllleeee shit. 10 million filed for unemployment over two weeks (3.3 last week, 6.6 this week).

The jobs report will show an uptick to 3.8 % (but that is because the numbers are finished off on the 15th of the month). After today's news, one economist said the realtime number is 10.1%

So basically, already one out of every 16 working americans lost their job in the last two weeks.

[panerd]

Yeah Clinton would be a far superior president if not just in terms of the difference in hubris and the mockery Trump has made of the oval office. However let's look just at this pandemic and please just explain what would Clinton have done any different (and better yet how do you know this?)

We have an entire world suffering similar to the United States...
We needed healthcare for all (like Italy?)
We needed less right wing leaders (Like Spain?)
A more respected leader (won't argue that but again what proof is there that this would do anything?)
A more authoritarian leader shutting everything down(ummm... okay so exactly the fears of pages 1-400 of this thread is what we now all claim we wanted)

The fact is it is all hindsight at this point. I would have expected Clinton's responses to be similar to Biden's about not being xenophobic or deBlasio's infamous "Go out on the town and enjoy yourself" tweet. I mean she for sure would have presented herself better and not been an ass to the media but why would we have any more testing kits that apparently don't exist anywhere? Why would the governor of FLorida who doesn't listen to Trump listen to her? Why would woodticks who think this is a hoax believe it if Clinton told them to shelter themselves?

A more interesting study would have been a Man in the High Castle type universe. Had Clinton made every single decision Trump made up until this point what would CNN's editorials say? What would Fox News say? Would certain FOFC members update us hourly about how awful she is?

I know some of you will take this as an exoneration of Trump but it's more of question of what would really be any different?

[albionmoonlight]

I think that it is more about competence than politics/policies.

I'm a liberal, but I would have rather had Jeb Bush in charge than Bernie to deal with COVID-19.

What we really needed was a great manager. And I think that that skill isn't really dependent on right/left politics.

[albionmoonlight]

dola:

I actually think that Bernie and Trump would have had very similar reactions to the virus. First, have dismantled the infrastructure we had in place to manage it because they are "outsiders." Second, yell at the virus to go away. Third, use it as an opportunity to attack the same old villains (immigrants and democratic governors in Trump's case; capitalism in Bernie's case).

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

dola:

I actually think that Bernie and Trump would have had very similar reactions to the virus. First, have dismantled the infrastructure we had in place to manage it because they are "outsiders." Second, yell at the virus to go away. Third, use it as an opportunity to attack the same old villains (immigrants and democratic governors in Trump's case; capitalism in Bernie's case).

First: What infrastructure do you think Bernie would've dismantled?

Second: Don't forget that Bernie would've wagged his finger

Third: I'm actually kind of surprised that Bernie isn't making a loud push for 'Medicare for all' right now.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by tarcone

See, that is where Im not sure. You really dont think she is a narcissist? I mean, she let her husband get BJs in the oval office and let it go. Is that because she is just that forgiving or was it she had such a thirst for power that it just didnt matter.

Would she have handled this better? Probably. But the question is how much?

I dont know and we will never know. We can only speculate and that is usually clouded by our feelings and backgrounds.

My point was, put up quality candidates. Both parties are failing at this. And blaming people who refused to vote for either is wrong.

I think its stronger to forgive then just to go down the fuck all, you're out camp. Shrug

[albionmoonlight]

double dola:

Romney would have been another good person to have in charge for COVID-19.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

dola:

I actually think that Bernie and Trump would have had very similar reactions to the virus. First, have dismantled the infrastructure we had in place to manage it because they are "outsiders." Second, yell at the virus to go away. Third, use it as an opportunity to attack the same old villains (immigrants and democratic governors in Trump's case; capitalism in Bernie's case).

Yeah this is a great response and one I completely agree with. I guess I shake my head at the "blood on his hands" questions about Trump like Clinton (or another Republican leader besides Trump) would have had a death toll completely different than what we have despite evidence from the entire world that this virus is killing people everywhere. But she would be less concerned about optics of how great she is for sure.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I think that it is more about competence than politics/policies.

I'm a liberal, but I would have rather had Jeb Bush in charge than Bernie to deal with COVID-19.

What we really needed was a great manager. And I think that that skill isn't really dependent on right/left politics.

Definitely. You can argue that some of the crises were partly her fault and she's far from uncontroversial, but Merkel over here is undoubtedly very good at managing one.


Trump had an amazing chance to remake himself here as a leader but simply can't get over himself. Merkel on the other hand was clearly on the way to 'checking out' before this hit and has taken up a more public leadership role because she needed to.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

First: What infrastructure do you think Bernie would'be dismantled?

No idea, but I think that everything about the way he has campaigned has indicated that he would have run things his way and not relied on what was already in place.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by whomario

Definitely. You can argue that some of the crises were partly her fault and she's far from uncontroversial, but Merkel over here is undoubtedly very good at managing one.

It seems as though Merkel's management is manipulating death numbers though right? Where Italy is counting everything as COVID.

Totally anecdotal but it hit home because I personally know somebody now and have a hard time saying whether Italy is doing it right or Germany. A coworker's mom was given a year max to live due to stage 4 cancer back around Christmas. She got COVID-19 a week or so ago and will likely pass any time now. So the COVID certainly made her death that much worse but is her death cancer or COVID? I don't have an answer, don't know the answer. Certainly don't think every death is this situation but it sure seems like a lot of the deaths in older people were very unhealthy people.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by panerd

Yeah Clinton would be a far superior president if not just in terms of the difference in hubris and the mockery Trump has made of the oval office. However let's look just at this pandemic and please just explain what would Clinton have done any different (and better yet how do you know this?)

We have an entire world suffering similar to the United States...
We needed healthcare for all (like Italy?)
We needed less right wing leaders (Like Spain?)
A more respected leader (won't argue that but again what proof is there that this would do anything?)
A more authoritarian leader shutting everything down(ummm... okay so exactly the fears of pages 1-400 of this thread is what we now all claim we wanted)

The fact is it is all hindsight at this point. I would have expected Clinton's responses to be similar to Biden's about not being xenophobic or deBlasio's infamous "Go out on the town and enjoy yourself" tweet. I mean she for sure would have presented herself better and not been an ass to the media but why would we have any more testing kits that apparently don't exist anywhere? Why would the governor of FLorida who doesn't listen to Trump listen to her? Why would woodticks who think this is a hoax believe it if Clinton told them to shelter themselves?

A more interesting study would have been a Man in the High Castle type universe. Had Clinton made every single decision Trump made up until this point what would CNN's editorials say? What would Fox News say? Would certain FOFC members update us hourly about how awful she is?

I know some of you will take this as an exoneration of Trump but it's more of question of what would really be any different?

Nah, I would counter Clinton wouldn't have gutted the State Department and would've listened to intelligence. I'm betting with a fully vested state department you would've been able to call China on it's bullshit instead of Trump d*cksucking because y'know despots.

Did ya see Russia bring aid to us, did you hear how the Patriots plane flew back from China with supplies (Bobby Kraft coming in for the Orange One). Do you think that would've happened with Clinton, I guarantee not.

What I do know is that it wouldn't have mattered because FoxNews, Trump and his ilk would've defied any shutdown measures because it would have been a leftist conspiracy to take over the US.

At the end of the day, we needed Fox News and Trump to damage America so badly that it may, I add with quotes once the CV wipes out most goobers, may see reason. That you need a strong Federal government to protect Americans instead of saying their on their own, which is what Trumpy is doing right now to states that disrespect him.

Now the added kicker is the level of unemployment, and even with all these the realities the Turtle is resistant to further aid. Cool. The number of dead and the number of 401k being flushed down the commode to instill Republican dominance is going to bite.

They'll still have their goobers but man, when this goes full tilt in the South, Southwest and Midwest, I can't imagine the added chaos. No wonder Pennsylvania is out of guns.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Qwikshot

Nah, I would counter Clinton wouldn't have gutted the State Department and would've listened to intelligence. I'm betting with a fully vested state department you would've been able to call China on it's bullshit instead of Trump d*cksucking because y'know despots.

Did ya see Russia bring aid to us, did you hear how the Patriots plane flew back from China with supplies (Bobby Kraft coming in for the Orange One). Do you think that would've happened with Clinton, I guarantee not.

What I do know is that it wouldn't have mattered because FoxNews, Trump and his ilk would've defied any shutdown measures because it would have been a leftist conspiracy to take over the US.

At the end of the day, we needed Fox News and Trump to damage America so badly that it may, I add with quotes once the CV wipes out most goobers, may see reason. That you need a strong Federal government to protect Americans instead of saying their on their own, which is what Trumpy is doing right now to states that disrespect him.

Now the added kicker is the level of unemployment, and even with all these the realities the Turtle is resistant to further aid. Cool. The number of dead and the number of 401k being flushed down the commode to instill Republican dominance is going to bite.

They'll still have their goobers but man, when this goes full tilt in the South, Southwest and Midwest, I can't imagine the added chaos. No wonder Pennsylvania is out of guns.

Isn't this hitting the blue areas (most population dense) the hardest? Not sure your rant addresses my questions or even makes sense?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by panerd

Yeah Clinton would be a far superior president if not just in terms of the difference in hubris and the mockery Trump has made of the oval office. However let's look just at this pandemic and please just explain what would Clinton have done any different (and better yet how do you know this?)

We have an entire world suffering similar to the United States...
We needed healthcare for all (like Italy?)
We needed less right wing leaders (Like Spain?)
A more respected leader (won't argue that but again what proof is there that this would do anything?)
A more authoritarian leader shutting everything down(ummm... okay so exactly the fears of pages 1-400 of this thread is what we now all claim we wanted)

The fact is it is all hindsight at this point. I would have expected Clinton's responses to be similar to Biden's about not being xenophobic or deBlasio's infamous "Go out on the town and enjoy yourself" tweet. I mean she for sure would have presented herself better and not been an ass to the media but why would we have any more testing kits that apparently don't exist anywhere? Why would the governor of FLorida who doesn't listen to Trump listen to her? Why would woodticks who think this is a hoax believe it if Clinton told them to shelter themselves?

A more interesting study would have been a Man in the High Castle type universe. Had Clinton made every single decision Trump made up until this point what would CNN's editorials say? What would Fox News say? Would certain FOFC members update us hourly about how awful she is?

I know some of you will take this as an exoneration of Trump but it's more of question of what would really be any different?

First off- I full on admit everything discussed is in hindsight, and we obviously will never know how Clinton, Bernis, or anyone else would have responded.

That being said I think they would have taken it more seriously from the start and at the very least started ramping up production of masks, PPE, etc...I think they would have called on the national guard earlier, I think they would have coordinated the distribution of equipment, ppe, etc...at the federal level so states wouldn't have to be bidding over each other. all of these actions would have slowed the spread, lowered the death toll, and in turn made the public calmer to the point of perhaps the market wouldn't have tanked so hard. In addition she likely would never have disbanded the CDC pandemic response team that would have seen this coming from further out.

Again, purely speculation. Trumps biggest problem is he is a horrendous human being and unless you have bought into the cult it's obvious.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by panerd

Isn't this hitting the blue areas (most population dense) the hardest? Not sure your rant addresses my questions or even makes sense?

It's hitting them first.

Not a rant. My point on the gutting of the State Department and the continual articles on Trump relying on his gut over Intelligence have been widely, widely reported.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Lathum

First off- I full on admit everything discussed is in hindsight, and we obviously will never know how Clinton, Bernis, or anyone else would have responded.

That being said I think they would have taken it more seriously from the start and at the very least started ramping up production of masks, PPE, etc...I think they would have called on the national guard earlier, I think they would have coordinated the distribution of equipment, ppe, etc...at the federal level so states wouldn't have to be bidding over each other. all of these actions would have slowed the spread, lowered the death toll, and in turn made the public calmer to the point of perhaps the market wouldn't have tanked so hard.

Again, purely speculation. Trumps biggest problem is he is a horrendous human being and unless you have bought into the cult it's obvious.

Yeah I think he is an ass as well. I just don't agree with the taking it seriously. (Not probably the right word but everyone in the world was somehow blindsided by this) I mean the narrative is the DNC or Clinton would have acted sooner but the Democratic debates in late February and early March spent about a minute on COVID, the Democratic leader's said to go out to Chinatown and don't be racists. I mean this is what actually happened. Would Clinton have led different? I don't know I can answer that with what actually really happened with other Democratic leaders.

Like somebody said earlier in the thread. We can look back on 9-11 and say oh yeah or look after a Yellowstone volcanic eruption and say oh yeah but why do we assume human beings (just like the ones in Italy and the rest of Europe) would have planned any different for something that hasn't happened on this scale in 100 years?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by panerd

However let's look just at this pandemic and please just explain what would Clinton have done any different (and better yet how do you know this?)

For one, she probably wouldn't have cut the pandemic funding that was in place under Obama. It may have helped quite a bit.

I would echo that anyone aside from Trump would have projected more confidence in these briefings. There was one day where the markets were going up when Fauci was talking but then Trump went on this nutty aside and the markets immediately dropped.

I do think the bailout likely would have been more tilted towards the middle and bottom - but it likely would have had more GOP opposition.

[Qwikshot]

You know what's more shocking, I'm betting W would've handled this better and we saw him handle 9/11 and Katrina.

With Trump, you could see the iceberg coming.

[ISiddiqui]

W would have easily handled this better.

[panerd]

I guess my whole point is that I can speculate and say so and so would have handled it better. And odds are they probably would have but all we have to go on is the reality which is the prominent democrats didn't do this. So I'm not sure we are doing anything but 20/20 here are we?

https://abc7news.com/sf-chinatown-pe...fears/5964696/

GoDaddy Security - Access Denied

I mean this is what really happened, not "I think this would have happened". I think we all missed this and it's just easier to say it's nobody's fault but Trump's.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by panerd

I guess my whole point is that I can speculate and say so and so would have handled it better. And odds are they probably would have but all we have to go on is the reality which is the prominent democrats didn't do this. So I'm not sure we are doing anything but 20/20 here are we?

https://abc7news.com/sf-chinatown-pe...fears/5964696/

GoDaddy Security - Access Denied

I mean this is what really happened, not "I think this would have happened". I think we all missed this and it's just easier to say it's nobody's fault but Trump's.

It's his fault, he's the president. He's done things to prevent oversight, he's bought hook line and sinker all the bullshit that our enemies tell him because they flatter him. This isn't hard think, whether you argue hindsight or not. He was a terrible option then, and he's a terrible option now, and he'll be a terrible option in the future. He is the nadir of America.

The whole whataboutism is weak. The man said he was the smartest guy in the room, it's true, because he surrounded himself with idiots. He gutted anyone who challenged him and he can only be the point of discussion, because that's what he wants. He is a spectacle without substance.

The man is a complete failure and with his lead that is what America is becoming too.

[Lathum]

Lets also not forget he trips over himself to take all the credit in the world when things are good, but when they go to shit he literally says he doesn't accept any responsibility.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

W would have easily handled this better.

Not really debating this, but someone linked to the Kanye Katrina video this morning and that moment is still pure gold.

[Qwikshot]

My whole feeling when he had all the CEOs there for the CV meeting was to point out that he was a successful CEO like them but president.

He's the epitome of the SNL sketch with Will Ferrell and the I'm #1 hat (ironically also red).

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Not really debating this, but someone linked to the Kanye Katrina video this morning and that moment is still pure gold.

Mike Myers didn't really know what to do in that moment.

[JPhillips]

edit: (not) dola

Saying De Blasio fucked things up doesn't mean every Dem has done the same thing. I think there's a chance the U.S. could look more like Washington state right now if we had competent leadership. Trump has flat out told us he wanted to keep the numbers of reported case down because it made him look bad and that states that don't respect him enough will have a more difficult time getting needed medical supplies. Almost any other president, Hillaryy included, would not have done those things.

But, I think there is a strong argument to be made that Hillary would have been ratfucked by the GOP to a degree that the outcome would be the same as Trump or worse, but I don't thin that's an indictment of Hillary.