prev <-> next
[2022-01-14 19:06:34] - a: What circumstances are different? Trump had a Congress in control by the opposite party and Biden has a Congress in control (or... um... whatever alternative Daniel had said) by his party? -paul
[2022-01-14 19:05:40] - paul: "half his authoritarian desires" do you see this in biden? ~a
[2022-01-14 19:05:21] - a: And he was similarly surrounded by people not clever enough to pull it off. I'm far more worried about somebody more clever than Trump with half his authoritarian desires because I feel like people are easily fooled. -Paul
[2022-01-14 19:05:06] - (oops, i mean january 2025, my mistake on the exact dates) ~a
[2022-01-14 19:04:43] - what are you even talking about? biden will leave office (very likely) in 2024. is there some reason you don't think this will happen? i was worried that january 6th was going to turn trump into the first ever lifetime-president. maybe you weren't worried, but i was. ~a
[2022-01-14 19:03:14] - a: "one president was in danger of becoming a "king" much more than the other" It's interesting you say this because I actually think the bigger danger this moment is Biden. If Trump wasn't such an incredible idiot then I might agree with you because he definitely had the desire but he wasn't nearly clever enough to pull it off. -Paul
[2022-01-14 19:02:35] - "the responses i see" was what that was supposed to say, sorry. ~a
[2022-01-14 19:02:15] - paul: the i see responses. "I think the circumstances are just a *bit* different now." "Context matters". i totally agree with the responders. ~a
[2022-01-14 19:01:01] - paul: yes, totally "related". the stark difference in counts are totally expected even in a perfect world. one president was in danger of becoming a "king" much more than the other. ~a
[2022-01-14 18:47:59] - https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1482031981521211394 Kind of related, but geez, I think Justin Amash is/was like the perfect politician for me. I think I agree with him on like 99% of things. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:45:51] - I used to try to convince them otherwise, but I am getting old and tired and don't have the time or energy anymore so I often just throw my hands up and click the unfriend / unfollow / mute or whatever button. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:44:57] - Lots of people have this mindset that the only reason you would criticize their team/guy is because you're one of those evil nazis/communists on the other side that likes to eat babies. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:44:12] - Daniel: But I get it, I've had plenty of times when I will criticize Biden or the Dems and the response is basically, "You're a Trumptard" and I'm like *hard eye-roll* -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:43:19] - Daniel: Ah, okay, I understand now. I guess (unsurprisingly) I see it as a false... dichotomy? Is that the right term? Like, I don't see why criticizing Biden (or D's) has to at all mean support for Trump (or R's) and in fact, I think that kind of thinking is super harmful because it leads to people blindly supporting their side even when it does bad things. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:42:15] - I said that wrong. "better enable more viable political parties".
[2022-01-14 18:41:41] - I mean I think a lot of this might be fixed to some degree if we could change our voting system to better enable more political parties viable. -Daniel
[2022-01-14 18:40:32] - construe my critism and lack of satisfaction with the current D party as an endorsement of the R's in any way shape or form." -Daniel
[2022-01-14 18:40:10] - a: "if this is not allowed" It's not at all a matter of whether it's allowed or not. Last thing I want to do is say what others are allowed to say. I'm just trying to save time and say let's just all assume that we can agree Trump was probably worse than Biden on this but that shouldn't prevent us from pointing out when Biden is also doing something bad (even if less worse). -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:40:07] - paul: How would/could/should I criticize Biden in a land of narratives that doesn't end up strengthening Trump / R positions down the road? Its semi rhetorical - just thinking about the state of the media/headlines/tweets etc that its hard to get across the semi nuanced position of "I think Biden kinda sucks but its because I want him to do more things to the left and that he is still infinitely better than Trump, so please don't...
[2022-01-14 18:38:10] - Daniel: "Congress has to start doing things again to help with that" Absolutely, and this is where things get a little weird for me because, obviously in theory Congress should be a sharply different institution from the Presidency, but in actuality recently, it seems like it often just acts as an extension of the presidency when the parties in power are the same. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:38:00] - paul/daniel: so, along those lines, if this is not allowed . . . can/should miguel compare trump to democrats? i.e. saying that a democrat doing something bad is *almost as bad as* trump, instead of the opposition saying that a democrat doing something bad is *better* than trump? ~a
[2022-01-14 18:37:07] - The D's only control part of congress. I get they count as majority in Senate but its hard for to say they "control" the Senate. -Daniel
[2022-01-14 18:36:44] - Daniel: I don't think I understand the question. I mean, just because one option is worse than the other, it doesn't mean both options are bad. Are you saying I can't criticize Biden because Trump was worse? I know that's a total straw-man, but I legit don't know what other point you are making. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:36:29] - "respect for limits on executive power" is something that has been lacking since like Korean War but isn't something that the president can entirely fix on his own. Congress has to start doing things again to help with that. -Daniel
[2022-01-14 18:35:18] - And despite his talk during the campaign, he seems to have just as little respect for limits on executive power in terms of trying to get rid of the filibuster and cramming unconstitutional vaccine mandates through OSHA instead of having Congress (which his party controls) do something. -paul
[2022-01-14 18:34:59] - paul: brings up an interesting point in the land of narratives - how do you call out Biden while also recognizing he's vastly (six points on this scale) superior and that one would (for sake of the argument) vote for Biden 10/10 times over Trump. -Daniel
[2022-01-14 18:33:51] - But to Miguel's point, I'm starting to question some (stressing SOME) of those assumptions that Trump was far far worse than Biden could ever be. I thought that "winter of severe illness and death for the unvaccinated -- for themselves, their families and the hospitals they'll soon overwhelm" comment sounded fairly Trumpian (I know others disagree). -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:32:06] - In short, sure, Trump was probably 15/10 bad for any number of things and I would fully admit that, but that doesn't mean Biden's 9/10 badness is excusable. -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:31:24] - "And if it weren't for Trump and his unique horribleness this type of stuff would be alarmingly bad and noteworthy and just because Trump was a ton worse doesn't mean this is okay or acceptable." -Paul
[2022-01-14 18:30:44] - a: That might have been me. I think there was one point where I was criticizing Democrats for something and the response was basically, "Yes, but Trump was 10x worse" and I basically said something along the lines of, "I'm probably going to agree that Trump was far worse on the majority of things but that's because Trump was a horrible President."... -Paul
[2022-01-14 17:52:46] - mig: ok, my mistake. i went back and now i can't find anything (you or paul). my memory was that i was supposed to stop comparing democrats to trump. ~a
[2022-01-14 17:47:52] - a: i usually detest people being compared to nazis or confederates or racists or other awful people. Comparing people to Trump himself not so much. - mig
[2022-01-14 16:58:13] - on the message board, total messages that contain "trump" (the word, so sometimes in reference to a "trump card", etc): 2010=4 2011=4 2012=0 2013=1 2014=3 2015=90 2016=333 2017=206 2018=189 2019=207 2020=407 2021=391 . nothing terribly surprising, except 2020/2021, i guess. 2022, if you ignore today and multiply it by 365/13, you get 365, which is much higher than most years during his presidency. ~a
[2022-01-14 16:49:23] - mig: don't you usually detest people being compared to trump? i'm not sure you can play both sides of that coin. ~a
[2022-01-14 16:26:38] - daniel: Things like Jim Eagle and the whole "if you oppose my agenda you're basically Jefferson Davis and George Wallace" has really just been irritating. All this whining and moaning about needing to return to "norms" and "not being divisive" but this mother fucker isn't much better than Orange Man(tm). - mig
[2022-01-14 15:53:49] - once i can do a stable-coin to eth exchange for (say) under $10 in total fees, i'll start becoming more interested in etherum. ~a
[2022-01-14 15:52:11] - a free coin will never entice me. even as a method to force me to learn a thing: a free coin means that the system has nothing of value to provide. i'd prefer to put $20 into eth and learn stuff there, but first the eth fees need to come down a lot. the bitcoin fees finally dropped a bunch (no idea why), but eth is still super-fucked from a fees standpoint. $100 in gas (a fee) alone, for some types of transactions? fuck. that. ~a
[2022-01-14 15:49:32] - paul: buy some eth. ~a
[2022-01-14 15:49:25] - Maybe I should just buy some ETH. -Paul
[2022-01-14 15:49:03] - a: Yeah, makes sense. I'm just leery about plopping any money down on anything I don't understand. I thought that maybe if I could get an ethereum.... wallet? ENS? pessen.eth? Whatever thingy... and could start collecting free NFT / DAO passes / whatever.... then maybe I could learn that way. -Paul
[2022-01-14 15:42:36] - for example, there is this: ens now supports walletconnect. so yeah, i think when i said they weren't "related", that probably wasn't right at all. but i know nothing about the "support" that they discuss. i've never used either system. i recommend you give them both a try though (with small amounts). i learn best by doing. ~a
[2022-01-14 15:39:53] - well, if it helps i'm not 100% sure. again, i don't know what walletconnect is (i've read some websites about both, but have never used either system!), so they might interface with each-other. ~a
[2022-01-14 15:38:43] - a: Okay, thanks. Darn. I was just starting to think I understood how things connected.
-Paul[2022-01-14 15:32:24] - paul: i don't know what walletconnect is, but i don't think so, no, they don't seem related. looks like ethereum name service (ens. documentation) has nothing to do with walletconnect? ~a
[2022-01-14 14:46:18] - a: So there is a (probably 90% joke) DAO that was offering to let people freely mint one of the limited number of passes, but you had to connect a wallet. The options were Coinbase Wallet or WalletConnect. I get the former one, but is the latter the whole pessen.eth thing we were talking about? -Paul
[2022-01-13 20:27:39] - And they did leave in place another mandate for healthcare workers or something too. -Paul
[2022-01-13 20:27:38] - agreed, i was going to add something about that . . . i was never really on the biden side here. ~a
[2022-01-13 20:26:56] - a: I saw. I guess it's fair to say my side there, although I honestly think you might partially agree with the ruling. This is less about whether the government can declare a mandate and more about if OSHA can do it without consulting Congress. I believe the majority ruling was that the mandate is okay, but it has to go through Congress. -Paul
[2022-01-13 20:08:58] - -Daniel
[2022-01-13 20:08:56] - paul: I hadn't heard the Jim Eagle thing before. Took me a minute to get it. That seems over the top to me. I do get frustrated when I hear people say that racism is at an time high or the worst its ever been or w/e because I'm like uh no? Pretty sure kkk membership is down and lynchings are down and that buses are integrated. Like there is still work to be done but I don't think diminishing the work that was done is helpful either.
[2022-01-13 20:08:15] - paul: looks like your side won in court, 10 minutes ago. ~a
[2022-01-13 19:24:29] - daniel: sure that's not a good extreme either. I do that a lot of the backlash currently though, wasn't over the initial decision to close schools, but the constant dragging off the feet to eventually get them open, usually because of constant goal post shifting by teachers on the conditions for reopening. - mig
[2022-01-13 19:17:51] - So a bunch of people, warned that Republicans are rigging elections, might see their candidate lose in an election with lower turnout and less expansive voting than was allowed in 2020 and not unreasonably think the election was stolen. -Paul
[2022-01-13 19:16:12] - At the same time, Republicans are on the warpath in terms of fighting "election fraud" and there might even be some not entirely unreasonable rollbacks of certain expanded voting that was allowed because it was in the middle of a pandemic in 2020 and in 2024 COVID might not be as big a problem. -Paul
[2022-01-13 19:14:36] - It will be a perfect storm. Incumbents don't usually lose, but Biden is super-old with historically bad approval ratings and I think we can all admit part of his appeal was not that he was Biden, but that he wasn't Trump. Turnout is almost certainly going to be lower in 2024 from the crazy high of 2020, and Democrats have been clamoring about voting rights. -Paul
[2022-01-13 19:11:56] - And more recent comments comparing those opposed to getting rid of the filibuster with segregationists. -Paul
[2022-01-13 19:09:33] - Daniel: Obviously we've already seen it with Republicans and their argument. I don't think I have to go into any more detail there. But I'm saying I'm seeing it just as much with Democrats (lots in the past, as mentioned before with Hillary and Abrams and Gore and whatnot), but especially going forward, and I think a lot of it is thanks to this overheated rhetoric from Biden about Jim Eagle... -Paul
[2022-01-13 19:07:54] - Daniel: Obviously. all fair points since we can't know the future. But knowing what we know now, what do you think the chances are that there will be something that people can point at as being "the reason" why Biden was cheated? This is what I'm worried about: People are primed on both sides to disbelieve the election results if their side loses. -Paul
[2022-01-13 18:59:39] - I agree that people rely on schools so certainly more communication / updates / efforts on that front would have been (or still would be) good but I think ideas to just "open back up" have their own challenges too. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 18:58:33] - mig: this is a fair criticism and i'm very unknowledgeable about this situation, because i don't have school-aged kids. regardless, i do agree that there's an epidemic of pedestrian deaths in america . . . ~a
[2022-01-13 18:57:20] - As a counterpoint everyone I know associated with the school system here in TX thinks its been a disaster on some level to remain open with the same expectations as normal because so many teachers / students have been out. Thats certainly currently anecdotal but I don't think its as simple as schools should have remained open the end. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 18:53:28] - a:https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/ I still think democrats really do not grasp how much people blame them in general for the state of school closures over the last year and a half. - mig
[2022-01-13 18:46:29] - a: more or less. I do think there were a significant segment of parents that were super pissed about schools being closed for as long as they were. Was it fair to blame McAuillife? Since he really didn't disavow those actions, probably. - mig
[2022-01-13 18:37:56] - paul: because northam closed the schools, mcauliffe lost? i'm not questioning your logic, just checking/asking if this is what you mean? ~a
[2022-01-13 18:34:58] - (those are all me just making up things not things I think will happen) -Daniel
[2022-01-13 18:34:46] - paul: depends? Does the R win CO, PA, VA, and WI with all of them having record high turnout? Seems pretty legit then. Do they only win because TX stayed red even though mail in ballots would have made it blue (just making up examples here) but were throw out by Paxton? Less legit. Do they win only because GA goes back red but with 20% less turnout and with many reports of white people with guns at urban polling places? Less legit.
[2022-01-13 18:05:41] - So I guess maybe the best question is: Assuming Biden is a 50 on the "legitimate president scale" (out of 100? who knows?) Where would you put a potential Republican winner in 2024? Are we talking like 45? Or 10? -Paul
[2022-01-13 18:04:52] - a: if I wanted to point to a "one reason" I would point to schools being closed for over a year more than his gaffe. - mig
[2022-01-13 17:58:46] - mig: imo that single gaff was enough to make up for 2% difference in the results. after that gaff, i seriously considered not voting for him. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:57:34] - mig: oh yeah? weren't the results 49/51? i'm not sure too many reasons were needed to turn that tide. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:55:34] - a: mcauliffe lost for a lot of reasons. - mig
[2022-01-13 17:53:31] - https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/does-high-voter-turnout-help-one-party On a whim, I did a search and found this. Going to start reading it because it sounds interesting. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:51:21] - mcauliffe lost that with one single gaffe. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:49:37] - a: "republicans would still prefer a lower turnout in general in virginia" Sure, but again, I think it's an oversimplification. Lower turnout in Northern Virginia, but not rural Virginia. Or even then, lower turnout among certain groups but not others. I'm sure they loved high turnout of middle-class women who were parents to a school aged kid or whoever turned out big for Youngkin. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:49:22] - mig: I don't think they cackle but I 100% think there are smart R's in a room trying to figure out how to get less voters. If you don't I guess that can be your thought but doesn't seem born out by their policies or goals. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:48:36] - paul: "if their guy loses" i'll be doing it either way. regardless i really hope biden doesn't run. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:48:32] - Less voters = less good representation of the will of the people. Will of the people = Legitimacy.
[2022-01-13 17:48:17] - "R's want less voters. Do you not agree to that?" In sense that there's republicans in a room cackling about how they can suppress voters, no I don't agree to that. As far as stuff like the GA law, I think the idea that it "suppresses" voters is way way overblown. - mig
[2022-01-13 17:47:59] - I do generally think of R's as less legitimate as an entire party (for a couple of reasons) but the one relevant here is that they actively seek to have less voters vote. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:47:28] - Maybe we need a different term? -paul
[2022-01-13 17:47:21] - Daniel: But also, I guess I don't see the same connection of "legitimacy" with "number of voters who turned out", at least in terms of what I am talking about. This seems like a bizarre attempt to redefine the term so that Republicans crying about illegitimacy in 2020 can still be thought of as crazy conspiracy mongering but Democrats can do it in three years if their guy loses. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:46:52] - "will have cheated" != "cheated to win". I can cheat on a problem of a test and not on the whole thing and still pass legitimately. I don't think its binary - hence the spectrum you alluded to earlier. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:46:31] - paul: "But not always" you found a case where republicans won with a higher turnout. not disagreeing with you here, but: republicans would still prefer a lower turnout in general in virginia. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:45:32] - Daniel: But not always. Virginia recently had big turnout and still went Republican. Sometimes turnout represents dissatisfaction with the party in power. I wouldn't be surprised if Republicans wanted bigger turnout in 2024, especially if Biden's approval ratings continue to be low. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:44:25] - Daniel: "R's want less voters. Do you not agree to that?" At a high level, sure. I also think it's not the most accurate way to look at it. I think Republicans and Democrats want different groups to vote. Republicans tend to, for a variety of reasons, be more dedicated voters so lower turnout on average tends to be better for them. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:42:43] - paul: "by your own admission the Republicans are going to be cheating in the election in three years" ah ok. you're right that's what i literally said. so, i'll retract that statement and add the same statement with an "if" thrown in. if they don't change their ways, it'll be pretty fucked up, win or lose. i'm not going to hold my breath, but sometimes people make the right decisions, or are forced into them. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:40:19] - a: "but it's the same answer. if they stop cheating" No, sorry, I'm being very bad at explaining myself. I am saying that by your own admission the Republicans are going to be cheating in the election in three years. Therefore a winning Republican will have cheated. Meaning the president cheated to win. Meaning that president would be illegitimate almost by definition. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:32:21] - Less voters = less good representation of the will of the people. Will of the people = Legitimacy. So wanting less voters is inherently less legitimate (though still could be legitimate). -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:31:08] - paul: "I'm asking how you could see that president as anything BUT illegitimate" but it's the same answer. if they stop cheating. if they (slowly and tactfully) reverse their position on voting laws. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:31:05] - I don't see it as the same as R's in regards to 2020. They allege actual results / elections were stolen. I do not think that will happen. I think ahead of time and currently R's seek to make voting harder and suppress turn out. R's want less voters. Do you not agree to that? -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:30:20] - mig: there are differences, though, and i pointed them out (in our bush conversation). trump lost 59 court cases regarding election tampering. so far, biden has lost zero, and i doubt it'll ever get to 59 or more. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:28:54] - Cause they don't have enough votes to take control? I think in all the places that are close where they still have control they are doing as much as they can to consolidate that power regardless of whether that represents the will of the people. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:28:46] - a: "that's an easy one. don't cheat. jfc, so obvious." You misunderstand. I'm not asking how that person could become a legitimate president. I'm asking how you could see that president as anything BUT illegitimate. -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:28:05] - And that's not even getting into.... proof? I mean, this seriously doesn't sound too dissimilar to me from what a lot of Republicans are saying about the 2020 election in terms of vague claims of cheating. Why don't Republicans have control of any branches of federal government, then? Not interested in cheating in 2020? -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:27:28] - Define cheated - I already said that I think the elections will be legally abided. But I think R's want to make laws that better favor them. Do I think an R will ever win the national popular vote again? Possibly but increasingly unlikely. So splitting hairs/ defining things is probably important here. I think an R could win the electoral college yes. Would I assume they cheated? The election no. Will of the people? Maybe. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 17:27:11] - paul: "How would such a person be legitimate then?" that's an easy one. don't cheat. jfc, so obvious. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:27:08] - I really don't see how this is any different than Trump's "election fraud" fantasies. - mig
[2022-01-13 17:26:13] - And if you think Republicans cheated, then wouldn't it make whoever won illegitimate in some way? I know that's a bit of a chain of "if...then" so please correct me where I'm wrong, but it really sounds like both of you are effectively saying if a Republican wins the next election they must have cheated. How would such a person be legitimate then? -Paul
[2022-01-13 17:26:00] - paul: yes. whether he wins or loses, they will cheat. ~a
[2022-01-13 17:24:49] - aDaniel: So I feel like we're splitting hairs here. a: "republicans are going to cheat" Daniel: "they know they won't win otherwise". The latter heavily implies that the only way Republicans can win an election is by cheating. The former outright states Republicans are going to cheat. So... if Republicans win in three years then it's safe to assume you both think R's cheated? -Paul
[2022-01-13 16:34:38] - Paul: I don't know that I would blame him losing the election on cheating. I think as a separate question is do I think that R's are actively and currently trying to stack the deck in their favor as much as they can because they know they won't win otherwise. Yes I do. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 16:34:26] - paul: "Republicans are going to cheat so if Biden loses in two years we'll know why" close. if biden wins *or* loses in *three* years, republicans are going to cheat. ~a
[2022-01-13 16:19:49] - Daniel: "I'm sure there are people already calling the next election illegitimate" Okay, so maybe I was misunderstanding things, but it sounded like both you and Adrian were already leaning on the side of, "Republicans are going to cheat so if Biden loses in two years we'll know why". -Paul
[2022-01-13 15:49:56] - oops, lots of typos. that's what i get for using my phone. ~a
[2022-01-13 14:59:06] - the buried the lead trump (one of them) is selling an nft!
~a[2022-01-13 14:52:57] - g: i also use coinomi on android a lot. the nice thing about coinomi is i can hold other currencies like usdt and ether (etc)? ~a
[2022-01-13 14:50:28] - g: i'd ask paul, since he's quite the expert. i've been using mycelium wallet for a while now, on android, it's probably my favorite. make sure you write down your seed phrase, and i wouldn't keep more than (say) $100 on your phone. ~a
[2022-01-13 14:42:17] - Paul: "are there degrees of illegitimacy" - yes - Though I think its hard to know / measure. The closer you are to the will of the people the more legitimate. But how do you ascertain that or measure that? Other than voting which as we've shown isn't always easy or direct. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 14:41:12] - Is there an easy way to setup a Bitcoin wallet? A specific site I should use?~g
[2022-01-13 14:37:45] - But thats partly my guess for where those would be coming from. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 14:36:48] - My guess is that when its talked about R's talk about it as if the 2020 election was fraudently stolen and that D's would talk about it terms of voting access/rules and that actively working to reduce the number of voters reduces the legitimacy (perhaps at some point crossing a threshold and becoming illegitimate). -Daniel
[2022-01-13 14:35:02] - paul: I'm sure there are people already calling the next election illegitimate but I haven't seen that so I don't think its widespread and certainly isn't the position of most of Congress at the least. -Daniel
[2022-01-13 13:50:50] - Put those all together and you have the perfect recipe for a one term president. -Paul
[2022-01-13 13:50:23] - Frankly, I don't know why anybody would expect Biden to necessarily be favored over anybody right now. Sure, he has incumbent advantage, but his administration doesn't really have anything to hang their hat on (no significant accomplishments) and lots of negative news (Afghanistan, COVID, inflation, southern border, etc). -Paul
[2022-01-13 13:49:05] - When I have been seeing just as much of that, if not more, from Democrats. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like multiple people here are already pre-calling an election two years away illegitimate if a historically unpopular incumbent doesn't win. And my sample size is more than just the message board, I'm getting similar sentiments online. -Paul
[2022-01-13 13:47:26] - I guess what frustrates me is that (and we see this on both sides for basically ALL the issues, but for the purposes here I am focusing on one topic and the Democrats) all I've been hearing for like two years now is how incredibly dangerous it is that Republicans are undermining democracy and sowing mistrust of elections and everything else... -Paul
[2022-01-13 13:46:01] - Daniel: On some level I understand what you mean, but can we agree that's not what 99% of people mean by the term? Also, in your case, are there degrees of illegitimacy? -paul
[2022-01-13 13:45:19] - Daniel: Sorry, I had all night to think about this and I still don't quite know where to go.
So Obama was an illegitimate president? Biden is illegitimate? When Republicans talk about how Biden is an illegitimate president... you agree? And no, I meant 2024, I was going to present a hypothetical but you blew that idea out of the water... -Paul[2022-01-13 05:53:41] - On the topic of hypothetical presidential elections - https://thehill.com/homenews/media/589363-nyt-columnist-floats-biden-cheney-ticket-in-2024 -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:50:33] - daniel: did they air the whole thing? "woah woah woah! [he starts to ask a question] ... oh, he's gone, ok" that ending was weird. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:34:48] - 300 million doesn't seem right. isn't that the whole country? or at least the ones over 18? ~a
[2022-01-12 22:25:26] - Paul: I think generally people are important but natural resources and what they bring to the table are not insignificant. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:24:32] - Paul: Lol - I wondered when you would ask. I think there are questions to be asked about the EC and how it matches the will of the people at this point. I think it made (more) sense in a big ass distributed country back in the day. I go slightly back and forth on it. If geographic representation is meaningful in representation and if so how much. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:24:24] - daniel: you were close. i've also only ever heard his name! steve inskeep and this is the thing you meant: the video link looks to have the audio too. thanks daniel! ~a
[2022-01-12 22:23:01] - paul: Did you mean 2016 there? Didn't they win that one? I'm slightly confused there. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:22:10] - Daniel: Sure, and if Biden loses in 2024 and you want to make the argument that it's illegitimate because of the electoral college.... actually, wait, so you think every election is illegitimate because of the electoral college? -Paul
[2022-01-12 22:22:05] - Morning Edition had a thing where Trump talked to Steven Inscape (spelling? only heard that name before I think) that aired today. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:21:23] - I try not to assume people are just crazy pants, so if they talked about legitamacy and the EC and will of the people and all that I would think its a very different conversation than counting votes in GA and AZ. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:20:34] - daniel: which show? ~a
[2022-01-12 22:20:11] - Paul: I mean Trump got 9.25 minutes on NPR today that I listened to. He could have made a case for it. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:18:39] - Daniel: Hmmm, I can kind of see the distinction, but I feel like that is extremely splitting hairs and is not the type of nuance that would be afforded to anybody else. I mean, if Republicans were talking about how the 2016 election was illegitimate, would you listen to see if they had a thoughtful argument about the electoral college or just assume they were crazy pants? -Paul
[2022-01-12 22:14:56] - So then if R's go about instituting laws that make it harder to vote and thus less people vote then how well does the gov reflect the will of the people? And if it doesn't reflect that then how legitimate is it? Those are more philosophical questions and less legal ones though. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:14:31] - daniel: yes, great distinction. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:14:07] - paul: "your likely candidate" i very often don't vote for the democrat. and i almost always hate the democratic candidate. republicans (imo) cheat, that's the real difference in my eyes. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:13:59] - paul: I think partly in my head it's a question of illegal vs illegitimate. I'm pretty sure / confident it will be a legal election run by the applicable laws. Whether its legitimate begins to dig deeper into those questions of what counts as legitimate and what doesn't. Is the electoral college legitimate? Or a way to give outsize power to nebraska / dakotas / idaho etc? -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:13:28] - "has to win or else the result is illegitimate?" i keep reminding you that i'm pretty sure the republicans will use the law to make voting for the poor difficult regardless of who wins. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:12:26] - mig: obviously democrats gerrymander. i don't disagree with your link. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:12:12] - a: Which, honestly, I think is bonkers and is just as crazy dangerous and bad as anything Republicans are saying about stolen elections. How can it not be dangerous to already say an election 2 years away in which your likely candidate is currently historically unpopular has to win or else the result is illegitimate? -Paul
[2022-01-12 22:11:34] - a: gerrymandering absolutely happens in blue states. - mig
[2022-01-12 22:11:16] - daniel: this is true. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:10:55] - a: I think its easier to vote for fair districts when you know that ultimately fair is better for you. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:10:27] - a: But as bad as Republicans / Trump are with this, I think the left is just as consumed with it (especially lately). Even ignoring the whole not accepting defeat in the 2000 election or the 2016 election or the whole thing with Stacey Abrams.... I'm seeing a lot of evidence that Democrats have already decided that if they do not win in 2024 that the result is illegitimate. -Paul
[2022-01-12 22:10:08] - a: Sure which is nice - but I'm not sure if the D's were the minority party if they would be so magnanimous. I mean we hope so right? But human nature is hard to overcome sometimes. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:09:07] - daniel: "I do think D's might be just as likely if the positions were reversed" i disagree. most anti-gerrymandering proponents are democrats. anti-gerrymandering proponents want there to be independent councils to redraw boundaries. and many of them are getting what they want. i think virginia has forged ahead with this (my mother participates in political actions regarding anti-gerrymandering). ~a
[2022-01-12 22:09:01] - So R's either have to accept a backseat or find ways to try and work around the fact that they don't represent the will of the majority. Though they clearly still represent a lot but settling for a proportional amount of power is unsatisfactory for them (or their voters). -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:08:47] - a: "it'll be illegitimate(ish) regardless" Yeah, no, that's what I'm getting at and your answer is what I am concerned about. I agree with the argument from the left about how this mistrust of election results and belief that the system is rigged is bad and dangerous and everything and I absolutely think Republicans who insist Trump won in 2020 are horribly misinformed. -Paul
[2022-01-12 22:07:52] - Whether 'representing the will of the people' is good or not is a slightly separate question. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:06:53] - I think in terms of "representing the will of the people" R's are less interested in that than D's currently because I don't think the majority of the people are R's. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:06:38] - mig: i answered this later. "republicans will use the law to make it prohibitively difficult for poor and disadvantaged to vote". ~a
[2022-01-12 22:06:08] - paul: I think R's are definitely more pro pushing boundaries as much as possible (see gerrymandering) though I'm not sure that its an R thing because I do think D's might be just as likely if the positions were reversed. I think R's know that they are the shrinking party numbers wise but still have geographic power and work to find ways to make that work for them. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:06:01] - daniel: "FL was down to figuring out those hanging chads or w/e" to add to this, the republican run executive told the voting officials to stop counting well ahead of the deadline. she should not have done this and she only told them to stop counting because she wanted bush to win. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:04:52] - a: "one side of me is like, they're going to cheat (imo) regardless," how? - mig
[2022-01-12 22:04:35] - paul: i think i've already answered this question. it'll be illegitimate(ish) regardless. (controversial and i already know you disagree, but it's my opinion) republicans will use the law to make it prohibitively difficult for poor and disadvantaged to vote. ~a
[2022-01-12 22:03:50] - mig: That election was bonkers close to be fair. I haven't gone back to review but basically whoever won FL won right? And FL was down to figuring out those hanging chads or w/e. -Daniel
[2022-01-12 22:01:45] - a: So, I guess the question I am getting at is: If Biden loses to a Republican (who is not Trump), do you think it will be a legitimate loss? Or because you already assume the Republicans will cheat are you already ready to believe the next election will be stolen? -Paul
[2022-01-12 22:01:40] - mig: hmmm. i like your analogy! it gives me a lot to think about. there are some interesting similarities. but there are also some stark differences: gore did NOT lose 59 court cases. yes, it went to the supreme court in both situations, and both of the electoral college voting happened with 100% legitimacy, but it didn't get to 59 court cases in both situations, and january 6th didn't happen in 2001. it only happened in 2021. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:54:11] - paul: there are people to do this day who still don't believe W Bush legitimately won his election. - mig
[2022-01-12 21:50:45] - paul: i understand. i'll agree that biden is terribly unpopular. i hope he doesn't run in the next election. if he does run, he'll likely lose. win or loose, the republicans will cheat. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:49:15] - a: Right, I'm not even talking about pointing fingers. Maybe Republicans will cheat or play dirty tricks. I don't know. What I am worried about is that it sounds like even without dirty tricks, there's no good reason to think Biden would necessarily be favored to win re-election right now, but I feel like if he loses some people are going to think the election was stolen by R's and not just because inflation/Afghanistan/COVID/etc. -Paul
[2022-01-12 21:46:48] - paul: "Biden loses in 2024 and a huge number of Democrats are convinced it was because of Republican dirty tricks" isn't this basically 1/3rd of all republicans today? i.e. "the big lie"? the world still turns. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:45:26] - paul: scroll down where the two presidents are compared. biden's approval ratings are basically the same. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:45:18] - a: And so I'm pre-emptively worried about a scenario where Biden loses in 2024 and a huge number of Democrats are convinced it was because of Republican dirty tricks. -Paul
[2022-01-12 21:44:22] - paul: "if a Republican wins the presidency in 2024 then it's because the Republicans have gamed the electoral system and cheated" one side of me is like, they're going to cheat (imo) regardless, so this statement is literally true, but not only in the situation where the republicans win. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:44:08] - a: But at the same time, Biden's approval rating is bad. Like, really bad. If it weren't for Trump previously and his awful approval ratings, I'm sure we would be talking about how bad Biden's are. So it's pretty reasonable to assume there's a good chance Biden runs again and loses. -paul
[2022-01-12 21:42:51] - paul: "Only for people in the hospital for COVID related illness?" hmmm, i don't know. probably? i'm not sure. "Would you specifically ask so you know which patients to prioritize?" controversial opinion: oh, fuck yes, absolutely. if they refuse to answer, or don't have or refuse to show a vaccine card, that's allowed, of course, but i think it should be up to the triager to decide how to triage during especially dire times. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:42:48] - a: Obviously all very fair points. The background for why I ask: I've seen articles which, to me, sound dangerously like making the claim that if a Republican wins the presidency in 2024 then it's because the Republicans have gamed the electoral system and cheated. -Paul
[2022-01-12 21:41:09] - a: How would that work in practice? Only for people in the hospital for COVID related illness? Would you specifically ask so you know which patients to prioritize? What if the vaccinated person was in better shape than an unvaccinated person? Does the vaccinated person get the ventilator or whatever treatment? -Paul
[2022-01-12 21:40:01] - otoh, biden is a million years old. i don't for a second, assume that biden will run in 2024. but also, 2024 is like a million years away, it's a bit early to be in election mode. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:39:05] - depends on the republican? after the last republican primary, i can't possibly imagine predicting what would happen this early. ~a
[2022-01-12 21:38:12] - Question: Assuming the 2024 presidential election is between Biden and a generic Republican who is not Trump: If you had to bet right now on which side wins, who would you bet on? -Paul
[2022-01-12 21:30:35] - paul: i'm pro universal healthcare, and for triaging the unvaccinated during especially dire times (say, during a deadly + extremely virulent global pandemic) ~a
[2022-01-12 19:51:29] - https://coronavirus.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/coronavirus/page_content/attachments/DCHealthVaxDCGuidanceFAQ1.10.22.pdf "Businesses will also need to verify vaccination with photo identification for patrons ages 18 years and older, such as:" - mig
[2022-01-12 19:18:27] - https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1481249621779304449 Ironically, and bizarrely, to me, Trump has seemingly been pretty consistently pro-vaccine lately and it seems to be getting pushback from his supporters. I think he was booed recently for saying he got boosted. -Paul
[2022-01-12 19:16:42] - And at a certain point it causes me to wonder how much of it is about public safety versus how much of it is another sign of tribalism and punishing "the other side". -Paul
[2022-01-12 19:16:12] - There have even been people pointing out politicians who were all for universal healthcare for all a few years ago and who are now saying healthcare shouldn't be provided for the unvaccinated (or it should at least be deprioritized for them). -Paul
[2022-01-12 19:15:20] - https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1481282054625140736 This actually very succinctly gets at what I feel like is different this time with COVID vaccine mandates. It's one thing to require mandated vaccines for certain activities, but people seem to be going overboard with requiring the COVID vaccine for a much broader range of stuff. -Paul
[2022-01-12 19:15:05] - so the mayor's wording is probably poor. She's basically talking about doing anything indoors in DC, not randomly stopping people in the street and checking their vaccination status. However, while the order doesn't specifically say anything about ID requirements, the mayor's statement means that verifying that the card holder is who they say there are is expected (hence photo IDs are required for entry to indoor establishments). - mig
[2022-01-12 19:09:19] - mig: wow! do you think that was a state (city) law or order? it could have been a rule of the business. for example, the order you link hasn't gone into effect. ~a
[2022-01-12 19:03:38] - a: I went to a show in DC a week or so ago. I was required in addition to my vax card that I show photo ID as well. - mig
[2022-01-12 18:53:23] - paul: "so it's mostly related to COVID?" mmm. 50/50? ~a
[2022-01-12 18:47:34] - https://www.statnews.com/2021/12/14/pfizers-covid-pill-remains-89-effective-in-final-analysis-company-says/ 89% efficacy among high risk patients seems pretty good. -Paul
[2022-01-12 18:45:37] - a: Ah, so it's mostly related to COVID? It seems inevitable that it's going to be with us in some form permanently, but I'm pretty optimistic. Isn't there a treatment (not a vaccine, but an actual treatment) which has a pretty amazing success rate in terms of preventing death from COVID? -Paul
[2022-01-12 18:36:56] - paul: "only a host of bad ones of varying degrees" this is my answer to your first question "why". the bad solutions we're being forced into have negative repercussions, and that will cause issues for us now or later. i hope things turn out for the best, but i'm pessimistic that things will keep getting better. ~a
[2022-01-12 18:34:44] - a: Not sure how I will measure inflation. I hadn't thought that far ahead. I typically "call" my predictions early because normally those last few weeks don't make a difference, but obviously it will be a bigger deal for this one. I guess I'll just have a follow up later once the full 2022 data is in? -Paul
[2022-01-12 18:33:55] - a: "i predict misery for the human race in the coming decades (compared to usual)" Curious as to why. I agree that vaccine mandates are a really tough "rock and a hard place" situation. It's very much like a trolley problem for me: no good solutions, only a host of bad ones of varying degrees. -Paul
[2022-01-12 17:13:28] - paul: for your 8% prediction, are you going to use november to november (so the results will be available before the end of 2022?). if not, what are you going to use? ~a
[2022-01-12 17:00:25] - mig: (i made a searchable pdf version of that order if you want it. the official link is to a scanned pdf that was not run through OCR. i feel like that should probably go counter to ADA laws, right?) ~a
[2022-01-12 16:59:07] - mig: so here's something weird. i looked at the official order. and it doesn't talk about photo ids, or id of any kind. it discusses "proof" (without defining it). maybe "proof" is defined elsewhere? ~a
[2022-01-12 16:54:05] - nobody is required to have an id of ANY kind to be in public. or be at a privately owned business. please tell me i'm misunderstanding this tweet. ~a
[2022-01-12 16:52:51] - mig: wtf is that? no way man. that's total bullshit. photo id to be out in public. seriously? this has to be illegal. ~a
[2022-01-12 16:50:35] - paul: honestly i am too! this is the biggest "between a rock and a hard place" situation i've ever seen in my life. also, i predict misery for the human race in the coming decades (compared to usual). ~a
[2022-01-12 14:32:56] - I completely understand the practical reasons to require all sorts of vaccines for all sorts of activities. I'm just uncomfortable with the idea of forcing anybody to inject something into their body, and specifically now I'm uncomfortable with the enthusiasm everybody seems to have for enforcing it in this case. -Paul
[2022-01-12 14:31:09] - a: "should it be illegal to attend public schools without the mmr vaccine?" I don't know. Would be a lot easier question for me to answer if the laws were a lot more accepting of homeschooling and supportive of charter schools and whatnot. If somebody is basically forced to go to public school, than requiring a vaccine means they are forced to get a vaccine, which makes me a little uncomfortable. -Paul
[2022-01-12 13:17:00] - https://twitter.com/MayorBowser/status/1480956796395216900 aren't ID laws racist? - mig
[2022-01-10 19:53:28] - paul: or the polio vaccine? ~a
[2022-01-10 19:52:33] - paul: i'll ask you point blank, because it seems like you don't touch on it. should it be illegal to attend public schools without the mmr vaccine? ~a
[2022-01-10 19:50:53] - paul: "So you're saying it should be illegal to not get vaccinated?" hmm, i'm not sure. it might depend on specifics? maybe you're required to be vaccinated to get into schools. or take some international flights. or work in a group-atmosphere? (most of these were always a thing with mmr, dtap, hepa, hepb, etc) ~a
[2022-01-10 19:45:50] - paul: "Why one and not the other?" we're a bit closer to agreeing here. it might depend on if the concert was indoors or outdoors. ~a
[2022-01-10 19:45:43] - a: So you're saying it should be illegal to not get vaccinated? People should not be allowed to choose what to inject themselves with? -Paul
[2022-01-10 19:45:13] - paul: "I was referring to the argument that the unvaccinated are stressing the healthcare system and taking up hospital beds" then, i'll wholeheartedly agree obese people stress the healthcare system and take up hospital beds. if that was the only problem with unvaccinated, i'd be on your side here. but it isn't. and i'm not. ~a
[2022-01-10 19:44:43] - If we're going to blame the unvaccinated for spreading COVID, how about blaming a vaccinated person who went to a concert and spread it? Why one and not the other? -paul
[2022-01-10 19:43:18] - paul: "This isn't some binary thing". you're oversimplifying. you have a MUCH smaller chance of getting variants (close to zero) if you have near-universal vaccination. ~a
[2022-01-10 19:42:31] - paul: "What is it then?" (i'm not being sarcastic, i really don't know what we should call it) it is whatever we call stopping for red lights when you get to a traffic signal. ~a
[2022-01-10 19:42:23] - a: And isn't it possible variants can show up even with near universal vaccination? This isn't some binary thing. -Paul
[2022-01-10 19:41:32] - a: "do you seriously believe this?" No, you can't catch obesity nor are there obesity variants. I was referring to the argument that the unvaccinated are stressing the healthcare system and taking up hospital beds. Also, I think a bit much is being made of associating variants and spread to the unvaccinated. Sure, they're part of the problem, but the vaccinated can spread COVID (especially with omicron, it sounds like)... -paul
[2022-01-10 19:31:21] - a: Injecting yourself with a relatively experimental vaccine isn't a personal choice? What is it then? -Paul
[2022-01-10 18:58:39] - paul: "one could argue that obese people harm non-obese people in the same way the unvaccinated harm the vaccinated" oof. do you seriously believe this? i'm with you on the downsides to being overweight and obese, but you can't possibly believe this. you can't catch obesity! (though it is shown that obese people correlate with having obese family/friends). also, there aren't obesity variants! wtf paul. ~a
[2022-01-10 18:45:53] - paul: it's a bit cold and callous, i agree. "personal choice": here's where we disagree. i don't consider getting the sars-cov-2 vaccine a "personal choice" any more than getting the mmr vaccine is a "personal choice", or the tetanus shot is a "personal choice". ~a
[2022-01-10 18:44:03] - Also, in terms of obesity, it goes both ways. Is losing weight harder than getting a jab? Yeah, in most ways. But not being obese helps for a lot of things like diabetes and heart disease. In fact, one could argue that obese people harm non-obese people in the same way the unvaccinated harm the vaccinated (ie, using up the healthcare system). -Paul
[2022-01-10 18:42:39] - a: But bringing any of them up in place of sympathy seems a bit cold and callous. -Paul
[2022-01-10 18:42:06] - a: In terms of if it being a little inappropriate to go straight to a personal choice when hearing about somebody getting sick/dying? Not really. If you want you can substitute my previous analogy about unprotected gay sex and aids. Yeah, all of those are reasonable factors that in theory it's logical to wonder about... -Paul
[2022-01-10 18:09:04] - paul: "I don't really see a big difference between asking that, and immediately asking if a person was vaccinated" you don't see the difference between doing something fundamentally easy/routine and doing something insanely difficult? ~a
[2022-01-10 18:06:52] - damn it, i did it again? smh. ~a
[2022-01-10 18:02:28] - Both seem to be completely discarding sympathy for implying blame based on decisions made by the person who died. -Paul
[2022-01-10 18:01:51] - Somebody on twitter mentioned knowing a person in their 30s who died of COVID and some jerk immediately asked how overweight they were and that person was roundly criticized. I don't really see a big difference between asking that, and immediately asking if a person was vaccinated. -Paul
[2022-01-10 18:00:24] - Daniel: I'm not necessarily trying to trivialize the impact on the healthcare system, but have you been harmed by it? Have most vaccinated people? As for the education system, I don't really see a connection between harm from unvaccinated people and stress to the education system. In many cases schools are going remote or virtual regardless of vaccination statuses. -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:58:13] - a: I'm not sure I understand. Because so many unvaccinated (I assume that's what you meant) people are dying... it's okay to not be sympathetic? -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:22:22] - paul: Also I think the stresses on systems such as healthcare and education aren't trivial. I'm not sure they themselves dictate a need for mandates but I think they are valid factors to consider. -Daniel
[2022-01-10 17:22:14] - paul: "What are the significant and relevant reasons?" i think i've said it before, but we probably wouldn't be seeing 6000 dead per day if it weren't for the vaccinated (at the current rates). ~a
[2022-01-10 17:21:16] - https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid Sounds like Delta might have originated in India. -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:20:32] - a: That's interesting that the variants are the #1 issue for you because isn't that the only one which kind of can't be blamed on the unvaccinated in America? I don't recall where delta originated, but omicron seems to have come from overseas (South Africa?) and even if the US had 100% vaccination rates those variants can still appear internationally. -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:18:51] - a: "the reasons are significant and relevant" What are the significant and relevant reasons? Because the reasons seem to primarily be "politics", which sounds like a really crappy reason to not be sympathetic to people. -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:17:42] - paul: the spreading and emergency room beds were never at the top of my list of issues with the unvaccinated. it was the variants: 1. variants. 2. spreading. 3. emergency room beds. 4. some semblance of caring for the suffering. i'm fine (I GUESS) ignoring #2, #3, and #4, but #1 is becoming a nightmare. ~a
[2022-01-10 17:17:32] - a: Because people are seeing all of this mixed messaging and wondering, "if the vaccines are so effective and good, then how are they being harmed by the unvaxxed and why do they still need to wear masks and avoid restaurants?" -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:16:46] - a: If you are vaccinated, it's very unlikely an unvaccinated person is going to harm you in any significant way. That's why the vaccines are great! And I think all of this talk about the harm to the vaccinated from the unvaccinated and how EVERYBODY needs to keep masking and not eating indoors and whatever is really harming the important message of how effective the vaccines are. -Paul
[2022-01-10 17:15:19] - yes. i saw that typo too. my b. ~a
[2022-01-10 17:15:01] - a: "the vaccinated are making life hard for everybody" Assuming you meant unvaccinated, but this is I think they key disagreement between us. I don't think the unvaccinated are making life hard for everybody in any significant way. Yes, I understand the arguments about spreading and emergency room beds, but that is a weak connection in my mind. -paul
[2022-01-10 17:13:05] - Daniel: Looking forward to December of 2022 when I announce we're all losers for not only losing to the market, but also being significantly negative.
-Paul[2022-01-10 17:04:31] - mig: since our conversation friday, deaths have ticked up. if we ignore case-counts (which are very troubling), deaths are at 5 deaths (daily, per million americans, 7-day average). that's almost to the delta-level of 6 deaths. ~a
[2022-01-10 17:00:00] - mig: "if an individual caught it, it wasn't necessarily because they were being irresponsible" while this is true, and i agree with what you say, i'm not sure your point. i obviously don't blame everybody that catches covid with being irresponsible. i blame people who spread misinformation more than anybody. but also i blame those who refuse to look both ways before crossing a busy roadway. ~a
[2022-01-10 16:54:55] - paul: "for.... reasons". the reasons are significant and relevant. ~a
[2022-01-10 16:54:37] - paul: "certain amount of sympathy that seems to be lacking with this specific disease" i agree. and i also agree that it's bad. but i think the reason for that is that the vaccinated are making life hard for everybody. so, the sympathy, that should be there, is slowly wearing thin. "oh my god that sucks" eventually turns into "it's your fucking fault we're all here living this nightmare" AND "are you fucking surprised?" ~a
[2022-01-10 15:52:06] - paul: new milestone for fantasy investing! everyone negative! woo! -Daniel
[2022-01-10 14:41:14] - not to mention, at this point in time, even if you are completely vaccinated (w/ booster), covid is very catchable (though much milder this wave, thankfully). So if an individual caught it, it wasn't necessarily because they were being irresponsible. - mig
[2022-01-10 14:02:19] - a: I get that it's certainly reasonable to blame people. I'm not denying that. I just think there's a certain amount of sympathy that seems to be lacking with this specific disease for.... reasons. Can you imagine 30 years ago somebody saying they have AIDS and the reactions were all: "Guess you shouldn't have been having unprotected gay sex" Wouldn't we rightfully be chastising those people for not having more sympathy? -Paul
[2022-01-10 13:59:47] - a: "you'll rightly blame me for not taking this certain level of precaution" Maybe internally? But I would like to think my first reaction would be, "Oh, man, that sucks, I'm sorry and hope you feel better soon" and not "well, did you get vaccinated?" -Paul
[2022-01-08 15:44:51] - paul: and if i get hit without looking both ways, you'll be fair to point that out. same goes for the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. if i get measles or the mumps, and skipped that vaccine, you'll rightly blame me for not taking this certain level of precaution. ~a
[2022-01-08 15:42:46] - paul: "can't we just be sympathetic to everybody who gets sick" depends on who "we" is. if you're talking about the healthcare system? sure, healthcare system should treat everybody in the safest manner possible. if you're talking about you and me? no. a certain level of precaution is required to live in a society. even though i hate our fucked up car culture, i look both ways before crossing the street. ~a
[2022-01-08 02:42:13] - i agree. ~a
[2022-01-08 02:40:37] - https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/food-and-drug-administration-drives-racial-rationing-of-covid-drugs/ Controversial opinion alert: I think this is bad. -Paul
[2022-01-08 02:34:22] - ah lame. ok? it's over when i say it's over? ~a
[2022-01-08 02:33:50] - a: https://apnews.com/article/when-is-pandemic-over-viral-questions-2c47fdd7611411a418a7ea18a61f5d1c "There’s no clear-cut definition for when a pandemic starts and ends", "It’s somewhat a subjective judgment because it’s not just about the number of cases. It’s about severity and it’s about impact" Sounds like we get to decide when we consider it to be over. -Paul
[2022-01-08 02:29:26] - paul: when the cdc tells me it's over? i mean, i'm not deferring to authority here . . . i'm sure they've published a definition that people agree on, right? ~a
[2022-01-08 02:28:39] - a: When will the pandemic be over in your mind? -Paul
[2022-01-08 02:28:08] - I get the thinking behind it, but taken together it just seems like so much implied blaming going on. Can't we just be sympathetic to everybody to everybody who gets sick and realize that it can happen to anybody (even triple vaccinated, triple masked, pro-lockdown, pro-mandate people)? -Paul
[2022-01-08 02:26:47] - it'll stop being old to me when the pandemic is over. if the pandemic never ends, it'll never stop getting old? ugh never mind. ~a
[2022-01-08 02:24:51] - a: As is the bizarre dance that goes on whenever somebody says they tested positive and then they either have to immediately reassure everybody that they were, in fact, vaccinated, or the first thing people ask is if they were vaccinated. -Paul
[2022-01-08 02:23:53] - a: I get that there's a certain irony to COVID deniers dying of COVID and people who are anti-mandate catching COVID but.... I don't know, the whole non-stop drumbeat of stories focusing on the unvaccinated people dying of COVID is getting a little old to me. -Paul
[2022-01-08 00:00:20] - mig: "I think we need to be nearing the 'stuffing the excess dead in ice trucks' again for me to consider vaccine mandates a palatable option". wow, i strongly disagree. this seems very short-sighted, and maybe assumes that nobody is hurt if they don't die, or that death rates can't change, or that new variants can't appear. nobody being stuffed in ice trucks today is not my line for vaccine mandates. ~a
prev <-> next