Do you think Trump would have won if?

[Lastamender]

Yeah. I don't think so. If Trump had been more involved, the media would have turned on him just the same. This is why not getting involved was the best approach. The media had a harder time dividing blame between governors it didn't like.

Maybe. But those voters who thought he was a complete douchebag before January 22, 2020 would have seen him as a man who empathized with what was happening and took action.
They would have voted for him. At least enough to make a difference in his re-election.

I doubt it. But of course, we'll never know.

And 2024 is a moot point. The only certainty is that a populist isn't going to win.

The ability to defraud anyone should be law by then.

 

[DrLove]

Yeah. I don't think so. If Trump had been more involved, the media would have turned on him just the same. This is why not getting involved was the best approach. The media had a harder time dividing blame between governors it didn't like.

Maybe. But those voters who thought he was a complete douchebag before January 22, 2020 would have seen him as a man who empathized with what was happening and took action.
They would have voted for him. At least enough to make a difference in his re-election.

I doubt it. But of course, we'll never know.

And 2024 is a moot point. The only certainty is that a populist isn't going to win.

GOOD! The world needs more authoritarian, autocratic wannabe pricktaters like the world needs another Dotard J Rump!!

 

[meaner gene]

Actually COVID has a lower survival rate than WW 2.

More Americans died during a week of COVID than during a week of D-Day.

Think about that.

Well, not all Americans were enlisted. On a given week in many months of last year, we likely had more people exposed to COVID than were present on a battlefield during WW2. It's hard to know exactly how many people were exposed without getting symptoms or getting tested.

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

 

[Utilitarian]

I could find plenty of other examples of questionable filings of "comorbidity" with COVID, but I get the impression you'll just downplay anything I provide.

It's not my aim to distract you from your fixation on COVID. You live in Oregon, and you can support whatever restrictions you like, while we loosen restrictions here. That's the beauty of the state approach. I can't impose on you, and you can't impose on me.

Cool - shoot dog! Hit me with all the “questionable findings”
Fact is, nearly all experts in the field of virology estimate COVID mortality in US to be UNDERestimated by minimally 20%
Go lick a few door handles at your local mall and don’t vax to prove to us what a tough guy you are!

Your attitude only further proves my point. You also seem to have the flawed assumption that anyone who isn't paranoid about COVID is against vaccination or masks.

I take certain precautions to avoid exposure, because I'm not eager to get COVID. I just don't view it as an eminent threat to society. The countries that have fared best with COVID used private action to "flatten the curve" more than government action. They weren't coerced by the state. They just exercised caution and respected their fellow citizens.

Our society is too individualistic and materialistic to handle COVID as effectively, so the best approach here is just to be careful but not paranoid. And to not assume that the state has some magic wand for this mess.

 

[Utilitarian]

Yeah. I don't think so. If Trump had been more involved, the media would have turned on him just the same. This is why not getting involved was the best approach. The media had a harder time dividing blame between governors it didn't like.

Maybe. But those voters who thought he was a complete douchebag before January 22, 2020 would have seen him as a man who empathized with what was happening and took action.
They would have voted for him. At least enough to make a difference in his re-election.

I doubt it. But of course, we'll never know.

And 2024 is a moot point. The only certainty is that a populist isn't going to win.

GOOD! The world needs more authoritarian, autocratic wannabe pricktaters like the world needs another Dotard J Rump!!

You seem to assume that globalists aren't authoritarian.

 

[meaner gene]

Who had a higher fatality rate?
Those testing positive for COVID,
or those serving in Vietnam?

I'm sure you'll deny the reality.

 

[Utilitarian]

Actually COVID has a lower survival rate than WW 2.

More Americans died during a week of COVID than during a week of D-Day.

Think about that.

Well, not all Americans were enlisted. On a given week in many months of last year, we likely had more people exposed to COVID than were present on a battlefield during WW2. It's hard to know exactly how many people were exposed without getting symptoms or getting tested.

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Then that means we were pretty good at keeping our soldiers alive. The same was definitely not true for the Soviet soldiers.

 

[DrLove]

Actually COVID has a lower survival rate than WW 2.

More Americans died during a week of COVID than during a week of D-Day.

Think about that.

Well, not all Americans were enlisted. On a given week in many months of last year, we likely had more people exposed to COVID than were present on a battlefield during WW2. It's hard to know exactly how many people were exposed without getting symptoms or getting tested.

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Yes sir - we are fast appoaching a death toll which will eclipse WW1, WW2, and Vietnam combined!

 

[Utilitarian]

Who had a higher fatality rate?
Those testing positive for COVID,
or those serving in Vietnam?

I'm sure you'll deny the reality.

Where have I denied your war comparisons? As far as Vietnam goes, survivability depended on the year. There was a period of the Vietnam War in the later years where survivability was a lot lower.

 

[DrLove]

Actually COVID has a lower survival rate than WW 2.

More Americans died during a week of COVID than during a week of D-Day.

Think about that.

Well, not all Americans were enlisted. On a given week in many months of last year, we likely had more people exposed to COVID than were present on a battlefield during WW2. It's hard to know exactly how many people were exposed without getting symptoms or getting tested.

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Then that means we were pretty good at keeping our soldiers alive. The same was definitely not true for the Soviet soldiers.

As expected, we may have yet another Russian troll newbie in our ranks!

 

[meaner gene]

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Then that means we were pretty good at keeping our soldiers alive. The same was definitely not true for the Soviet soldiers.

The Toll of the Spanish Flu in the Military and A Sampling of ...
https://www.leecountyhistoricalsociety.org › spanish-flu...


Nearly as many soldiers died of spanish flu, as died in battle.

Think about it.

 

[Utilitarian]

Actually COVID has a lower survival rate than WW 2.

More Americans died during a week of COVID than during a week of D-Day.

Think about that.

Well, not all Americans were enlisted. On a given week in many months of last year, we likely had more people exposed to COVID than were present on a battlefield during WW2. It's hard to know exactly how many people were exposed without getting symptoms or getting tested.

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Then that means we were pretty good at keeping our soldiers alive. The same was definitely not true for the Soviet soldiers.

As expected, we may have yet another Russian troll newbie in our ranks!

Uh... Pointing out that the Russians didn't do as well at keeping their soldiers alive makes me a Russian troll. Ok...

 

[DrLove]

Yeah. I don't think so. If Trump had been more involved, the media would have turned on him just the same. This is why not getting involved was the best approach. The media had a harder time dividing blame between governors it didn't like.

Maybe. But those voters who thought he was a complete douchebag before January 22, 2020 would have seen him as a man who empathized with what was happening and took action.
They would have voted for him. At least enough to make a difference in his re-election.

I doubt it. But of course, we'll never know.

And 2024 is a moot point. The only certainty is that a populist isn't going to win.

GOOD! The world needs more authoritarian, autocratic wannabe pricktaters like the world needs another Dotard J Rump!!

You seem to assume that globalists aren't authoritarian.

Couldn’t you have tossed in a One World Order or Deep State in there somewhere Qbie?

 

[Utilitarian]

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Then that means we were pretty good at keeping our soldiers alive. The same was definitely not true for the Soviet soldiers.

The Toll of the Spanish Flu in the Military and A Sampling of ...
https://www.leecountyhistoricalsociety.org › spanish-flu...


Nearly as many soldiers died of spanish flu, as died in battle.

Think about it.

You won't get any argument from me that Spanish Flu was an international crisis.

It also killed a much higher percentage of the world population and mostly alone, not from comorbidities.

 

[DrLove]

Actually COVID has a lower survival rate than WW 2.

More Americans died during a week of COVID than during a week of D-Day.

Think about that.

Well, not all Americans were enlisted. On a given week in many months of last year, we likely had more people exposed to COVID than were present on a battlefield during WW2. It's hard to know exactly how many people were exposed without getting symptoms or getting tested.

People who tested positive for COVID were as likely to die, as those who served in WW 2.

Think about it.

Then that means we were pretty good at keeping our soldiers alive. The same was definitely not true for the Soviet soldiers.

As expected, we may have yet another Russian troll newbie in our ranks!

Uh... Pointing out that the Russians didn't do as well at keeping their soldiers alive makes me a Russian troll. Ok...

Thanks for your admission & how is the weather in St Petersburg?

 

[Utilitarian]

You seem to assume that globalists aren't authoritarian.

Couldn’t you have tossed in a One World Order or Deep State in there somewhere Qbie?

If you think it's a conspiracy theory that multinational lobbyists own both parties, then I guess you've never heard of K Street or the military industrial complex.

I tend to believe in guys like Eisenhower. He didn't strike me as a "Q" type.

 

[Utilitarian]

Uh... Pointing out that the Russians didn't do as well at keeping their soldiers alive makes me a Russian troll. Ok...

Thanks for your admission & how is the weather in St Petersburg?

I'll say this much. If I lived in St. Petersburg, I'd probably have better things to do than to be on a political forum. I try to limit my time here already, but that city is pretty nice from what I hear.

 

[meaner gene]

You won't get any argument from me that Spanish Flu was an international crisis.

It also killed a much higher percentage of the world population and mostly alone, not from comorbidities.

Wrong again. Most spanish flu deaths were from pneumonia, as a secondary infection, not from the spanish flu itself.


The majority of deaths were from bacterial pneumonia, a common secondary infection associated with influenza. This pneumonia was itself caused by common upper respiratory-tract bacteria, which were able to get into the lungs via the damaged bronchial tubes of the victims.

The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria.

 

[DrLove]

You seem to assume that globalists aren't authoritarian.

Couldn’t you have tossed in a One World Order or Deep State in there somewhere Qbie?

If you think it's a conspiracy theory that multinational lobbyists own both parties, then I guess you've never heard of K Street or the military industrial complex.

I tend to believe in guys like Eisenhower. He didn't strike me as a "Q" type.

Hey man I apologize. Keep posting - you are far more articulate, interesting & relevant than 90% of the RW idiots this forum has brewed up

 

[Utilitarian]

You won't get any argument from me that Spanish Flu was an international crisis.

It also killed a much higher percentage of the world population and mostly alone, not from comorbidities.

Wrong again. Most spanish flu deaths were from pneumonia, as a secondary infection, not from the spanish flu itself.


The majority of deaths were from bacterial pneumonia, a common secondary infection associated with influenza. This pneumonia was itself caused by common upper respiratory-tract bacteria, which were able to get into the lungs via the damaged bronchial tubes of the victims.

The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria.

Fair enough. Thanks for correcting me on that. It still killed a lot more people percentage wise though.