Lurker > pistachio12

So it's either get 2 million usd or lose 2 inches? Such a hard choice...

Is he trying to say they stopped testing for Ebola or H1N1?

Which is still an incredibly dense and idiotic statement.

Rypt posted...

All I needed to know. We're done.

How are you going to gate keep a job you know nothing about and want nothing to do with anymore?

ASithLord7 posted...

Lmao the fucking melty

Really makes you wonder how he was fired huh.

Rypt posted...

People like this are the main problem in teaching, they like to bullshit people. Yeah I bet that networking really came in handy when it came to keeping your job... heh, networking that's what they are calling it now. I always heard it referred to as sucking up.

I would maybe say you're the main problem in teaching if this is how you continue to respond to criticism. For nay potential future teachers looking at this, teaching is a job that requires you be able to deal with criticism. People will be in and out of your classroom all the time watching what you're doing. Some will know what good teaching is, others will be clueless. Get ready to hear people's opinions on what you could be doing better.

And I got my first job because I met three different teachers from that school in one of my classes. It is still the best teaching job I have had. I worked 5 years with 20 other math teachers that were bright, young and driven by their work. We all collaborated with each other and worked towards a positive goal. Is my situation universal? Definitely not. Anyone who is telling you that it's impossible is lying though.

Rypt posted...

Lol so you're just going to say that without saying which subject? Did you guys have a YAG and what kind of tools did you use for lesson planning?

I had to look up YAG as we call them curriculum maps. I teach high school math. The course overview was determined by the department before I got there. We were never required to write lesson plans. (This is all from my first school.)

Also what age group, how would you recommend dealing with disruptive kids, how did you log your parental contact, did you have a high volume of IEPs, what are your thoughts on Harry Wong?

I struggled with discipline for the first two years. We also had different vice principals for each high school grade. Some were great with dealing with their students, others made secret background deals without the teachers. That certainly is an example of shitty politics.

But for those that we could make a difference, I would follow a certain set of steps. Set few but clear expectations at the beginning of the year. Hold the students accountable from the very beginning with no exceptions. When you see a transgression in class, stop class until it is fixed. If a student repeats behavior and won't correct themselves, pull them out and have a conversation. If they continue more, kick them out.

We had to log our parent contact with the vice principals office. This was mostly for meetings but could also be done for emails if you wanted to log them.

I had a mix of classes. I would teach 2 lower level math classes that was either 50% English language learners or 50% students on an IEP. My other three classes were higher level classes which usually had about 1 or 2 students on IEPs for each.

I don't know who that is and I'm not going to look him up.

Kastrada posted...

The older teachers get so jaded but I love them.

And for anyone thinking of getting into teaching, theses are the MOST important people to know when starting out, in ascending order.

3. The Institution - The teacher who has been there the longest. Usually the oldest teacher, most likely a coach of some sort. Get in good with them and they can protect you from the bullying/pressure from other teachers. They also may have insight on students and their home life due to just being there so long.

2. The Secretarial/Administration Staff - They pretty much run the place. The whole school would fall apart without them. They can warn you about any upcoming changes, incoming staff, gauge the temperature of the principal or any higher ups before a meeting.

1. The Custodial Staff/Maintenance Workers - By far the most important people in the school for a teacher. Way way way underappreciated. You treat them well and they will bend over backwards to help you out. I always got our staff Christmas cookies and or coffee for their little break area. And if I ever needed the room cleaned? Extra tissues, extra trash runs, waxed floors, light bulbs, air freshers, watered plants, or anything else? That was taken care of so fucking quickly. I used to have one of the cleanest and most efficient rooms in my school for the sheer fact that I remember and treated them like the rest of my co-workers.

This is a great list. And to add some things:

1) If you're training to be a teacher, you may be taking courses with other current teachers at the same time. Network and get to know about the schools in your area. If you find people that have a similar mindset on education, they may even be able to help you get a job.

2) Don't jump at the money. Inner-city schools usually pay the best but unfortunately lack the stability and support structure of other types of schools. You'd be better off teaching outside the city first and moving in when you're more experienced if you really wanted to do that.

Now the shit part of the second case is that lian forgiveness for federal loans almost certainly forces new teachers to take roles in those inner city jobs where they will most likely burn out after 5 years or even before they get their loan forgiveness.

Rypt posted...

idk why im responding, but were you ever a teacher?

I am and have been for 10 years.

Rypt posted...

Lol ok, then your wife has something to talk shit about. But you? I don't think so.

If this is the attitude you bring to your coworkers, then I can see why you rubbed enough people the wrong way.

Maybe you need to work in a smaller school where there is little staff to interact with at the end of the day.

UnfairRepresent posted...

lolwut?

It's not true because they lied before?

Great logic Charlie

How about you provide evidence that it's still raging hard over there?

The same way Taiwan, Korea, Hong Kong, Vietnam, etc. dealt with it. Citizens of Asian countries trust their governments more, and are more willing to listen to orders from federal officials and wear masks out in public. They also have extensive contract tracing due to previous experience with pandemics.

UnfairRepresent posted...

also it's not under control there

Says who?

Solid Snake07 posted...

I think you know how to make shitty half assed deflections that don't make much sense

That's literally how you entered the topic.

But to reiterate - learn to read.

Solid Snake07 posted...

Dont think you understand what a lynching is

Don't think you understand how reading works.

Singapore is a Chinese city now?

UnfairRepresent posted...

continuation sadly

Why sadly?

My friend had an apartment in a non-black area of the city and was trying to find a roommate. Most people changed their mind when they showed up and found out he was a muscular black man with dreds. Sucks because he is one of the nicest people I've met.

Mark_DeRosa posted...

By the way, Im not ignoring specific users. But weve had this same argument before so theres no point of continuing. Just sit back and wait for the court battle, if they choose to indict.

1) Argues with people all topic on bullshit.
2) Gets presented actual case law and hypotheticals he can't answer.
3) "Let's just wait and see what happens."

Someone should compile all your cowardly posts in one.

jmikla posted...

Whats the objective evidence and positive cost/benefit analysis in favor of testing?

Is this a joke?

"If the shoe fits..." goddamn.

archedsoul posted...

Also black people die 3.6x more than white people from the virus. Latinos at 2.5x, so one can be far more damaging.

Now you're spreading misinformation. You worded this as if black and Hispanic people are more likely to die simply due to their race or ethnicity. It also fails to acknowledge the increased death rate for blacks is one of the motivating reasons for protesting in the first place.

WingsOfGood posted...

Protestors wearing mask isn't gonna stop the spread lmao.
They literally neck to neck shouting for hours on end. Did they change their mask every hour? No.

We actually don't know the true effectiveness of masks, but most preliminary data suggests any face covering is better than no face covering.

Rookie User
User Since: May 2020
Karma: 12
Active Posts: 43

Just ignore and move on.

darkprince45 posted...

aight, no point of seeing someones posts that wants to act like hairistotle lmao

You're seriously just going to ignore this?

Ruvan22 posted...

Which of the studies cited in post 10 were "just in NY" or limited in scope? From my quick reading, I have
1) North Carolina
2) Entire country
3) NYC
4) Oakland California
5) NYC
6) Entire country
7) Entire country
8) San Diego California
9) Entire country
So almost half are studies across the entire country, while only two referenced NYC?

You can't play victim when you fail to admit when you're wrong.

ncsonic posted...

China been going strong for 5,000 years or something crazy

China has gone through so many different dynasties and empires with complete different types of government in those 5000 years. Even militant Chinese supporters differentiate between 5000 years of Chinese culture and 70 years of communist government.

Veggeta X posted...

banh mi sandwhiches are so overrated. go get some pho instead

Terrible opinion. Banh mi are the top tier when it comes to sandwiches.

puppy posted...

Doesn't take much to realize that shutting down the world means most will die from starvation.

I know right! Let's look over at Asia where many of the countries were on lock down for a month or two... oh wait they are reopening when things are safe and restoring their economy in a normal manner. Well that's just Asia! Now we can look at how Europe is doing... oh places like Italy, Germany and Denmark are reopening now that they've flattened their curve to levels deemed acceptable by health officials.

Weird, it almost seems like the world didn't permanently shut down. Now if only some groups of Americans would realize that this virus could be tackled a lot faster with cooperation and a well functioning federal government as opposed to just protesting governors with weapons.

BalanceLost posted...

One factor not mentioned before is the Swedish Constitution - neither the Government nor Riksdagen (our parliament) can legally force the population at large to stay at home for weeks on end. And implementing such constitutional changes without public approval is not something most politicians wanna go through with. The Government getting the legal power to close schools and businesses has been implemented temporarily but it was a high risk move which was heavily scrutinized by the opposition parties and the media before being voted on.

Is it possible that Sweden could ask the public to actively choose to close businesses and schools or even voting to the government power to temporarily do this (say for a maximum of two months)?

joe40001 posted...

I said they hadn't really asked for it, meaning the topic of discussion has been why people are annoyed by it and hasn't been "bring us an itemized list!"

A review of this topic for you:

Post #27
CruelBuffalo posted...

What are gay characters that are strictly defined by their sexuality?

Post #42
Veggeta X posted...

What's a Netflix show that shoved down an unnecessary gay person into the show?

Post #55
Peeonidas posted...

People always talk about how these gay characters are shoehorned into their media [sic] but like I can't think of any examples at all

Post #84
FrisbeeDude posted...

Do you have any recent examples of this?

Post #129
NinjaBreakfast posted...

Have we been provided with a list of Netflix shows which apparently shoehorn this in more than countless other shows have used heterosexual relationships in the past yet?

All before your statement in post #136 saying no one has asked for a list.

And here is my favorite:

Post #93
lolife67 posted...

joe40001 posted...
That's just you strawmanning. Most people don't care if the person is LGBTQ they are just annoyed if that's literally the only trait and particularly if it's orthogonal to the show's plot itself.

Um, no. That's me reading post after post about this subject and drawing a conclusion. What characters would you say are being poorly written that get complained about? What straight characters get lambasted for being "shoehorned in" because they're straight, as opposed to simply speaking about the writing?

joe40001 posted...
I think most people who post memes like this are watching a lot of netflix and they are encountering this in the shows they watch.

Which shows?

joe40001 posted...

I think that's just your own confirmation bias, people take issues with all kinds of bad writing, including but certainly not limited to forced diversity
People have been critical of 1 note love interests for a long time too, if it were as common and fashionable as token diversity characters I expect you'd hear about it just as much if not more (since you won't get hated on as much for being critical of it)

1. My confirmation bias, as opposed to the numerous posts in this very topic about people complaining about gay characters and even you throwing out one of those meme images of Netflix and gay characters.
2. So you believe that shoehorned gay characters are more common than 1 note love interests? I think we should pick a show and go through to test this idea.

joe40001 posted...

I didn't say her existence was a stereotype but they shoehorned in a virtue signalling gay moment with her that doesn't track at all with a single thing we've see in her character in all of ST Voyager It's not annoying because it's gay stuff it's annoying because it comes from nowhere and is clearly just meant to manipulate the audience. There is no thought/writing behind it.
Why are you being so particular "I want examples!" *gives example* "That doesn't count!". I'm starting to think you don't want a good faith argument, because I honestly don't expect that if I took an hour reviewing all the netflix shows I watched in the past couple years and giving notes of times I've encountered it you'd go "ok those are good examples, thanks I acknowledge your point now." Be honest, would you? Or is this just more making this more difficult just for the sake of it.

1. Again, I haven't seen the show nor do I know much about Star Trek, so I'm probably the wrong person with which you should be having this conversation. I think it would be better if we could find a show or movie with one of these shoe-horned gay characters or plots that we have both seen.
2. I wasn't being particular. I was saying that people have been directly addressing Netflix in this topic (in fact you have even addressed at least 3 times in this topic), but you have only managed to bring up a show on CBS.

joe40001 posted...

So yes, it is entirely a strawman fiction in your head that I only am bothered by gayness.

You keep on thinking its "strawmanning" to directly characterize your attitude and beliefs from this topic. After my first response to you, I went back through this topic to see examples of people asking for shows with unnecessary gay characters. Instead I see numerous posts in this topic made by you about the same types of cringy posts made by the anti-SJW crowd of the past few years. My favorite is the combination of these two posts - made in different time intervals -bbut directly reflecting your train of thought:

joe40001 posted...

lolife67 posted...
Except most of the complaints come from people who don't even watch the series in question or before the show/movie even comes out. They get upset and start assuming the character will be horrible due to "agendas" and what not. They don't actually complain about wanting a better written LGBTQ character.

That's just you strawmanning. Most people don't care if the person is LGBTQ they are just annoyed if that's literally the only trait and particularly if it's orthogonal to the show's plot itself.

joe40001 posted...

They tried the same thing with ghostbusters 2016
"They're women now!"
"Ok so what? Did you bother to make a good movie?"
"No"
"Well I don't like bad movies, so I don't like this"
"Bigot!"

BalanceLost posted...

The majority of Swedes reason that the virus is here to stay until there is a vaccine or herd immunity. Closing down society for years is viewed as insane and as something which will hurt the prosperity of society, the education of our children and so forth harder than the virus.

That's kind of a cop out though. Most of East Asia / SE Asia has either reopened or stayed opened during this time without the same levels of death or infection. Some of those countries went on lock down first or had more strict social distancing policies. I feel like Sweden is a country where people will listen to their government (unlike say Americans) and thus would be able to shelter for a month while the country locks down on the spread of the virus and develops proper procedures to reopen things.

joe40001 posted...

People are hard on bad writing of all characters all the time, the only difference is that these writers with limited respect for gay people don't think a character being straight is enough of a characterization.So you rarely see a show where somebody being straight is their only defining characteristic.

I disagree.

1) People seem to be far more vocal about forced diversity than forced anything else.
2) Any character that was written to be a fleeting love interest is the perfect example of a character existing only to be straight. And there is nothing wrong with that type of character if it serves a role in the medium. Same thing if that character happened to be gay.
3) Lots of us are still waiting for examples of characters existing in media with their only characteristic as gay. People keep talking about how prevalent it is, but no one has provided an example yet (and I'll address this more later.)

joe40001 posted...

Most people don't like being manipulated, and so when a show underwrites gay characters and then expects you to like them just because they are gay, that is bad representation, and manipulative in a shallow insulting reductive way. We should have enough respect for all people to not bend over backwards to defend people who are choosing to virtue signal rather than write well and respectfully represent gay people or anybody as multidimensional characters.

Let me ask an honest question: have you ever written this much to complain about bland straight characters in film or TV? And I'm not asking the question to ask, I really think its an important thing to think about.

joe40001 posted...

Firstly people really haven't asked for that list in this topic, so that's probably why you aren't seeing it.

You must be blind. Do I really need to cite the many different times people have asked for said list in this very topic?

joe40001 posted...

That said I gave 1 example of totally pointless virtue signaling writing when talking about Star Trek: Picard. So to say "I haven't seen 1 example" would be false.

I haven't seen Picard and haven't really watched any Star Trek before but

1) Isn't 7 of 9 already an established character? Therefore isn't her existence more than just a stereotype of being gay. If there are storylines about her dating other women, are you also equally angry if there are just storylines of men dating other women?

2) People in this topic are specifically referencing Netflix since that is the company that responded here. You are making a more general statement which I understand, but just so you know, some people want to know how Netflix has been doing this.

Sonic Cannon posted...

Washing your hands poorly can't result in a situation where you're actually at higher risk than not washing. Using a mask incorrectly can.

Key things with a mask:
* Wash hands before putting it on, and before + after taking it off
* Cover both nose and mouth with good fit
* Don't touch any part of the mask while it is on your face.
* Moisture barrier: shouldn't be used longer than needed. Ideally under 15 mins, but up to 4 hours in some circumstances, sepending on the intention
The main risk IMO is people ignoring hand contact with the mask. Any droplets that transfer to your hand can be easily moved onto surfaces in the environment. Sometimes you also see people using it to cover the mouth but not the nose for some reason, too.

Yes, but there is also a difference between

• medical workers who are in direct contact with those who are known to have the virus
• people who work in live in areas with high levels of infection
• the rest of the general populace

It may be hard to know if you are in the second or third group with a lack of testing or if an outbreak has started without anyone knowing, but even still, most people fall in that third group. For the first two groups, the mask is used to protect you from those around you. For the last group, the mask is used to protect others from you if you are asymptomatically carrying it.

Nick_Saban posted...

I do think the federal government should put out guidelines but every time Trump claims authority over the states, people start claiming he is a tyrant.

You're confusing two things though:

• People who attack Trump for any reason.
• People who attack Trump for legitimate reasons.

The former can and should be dismissed. The latter should be acknowledged. Trump should put out guidelines regardless of the opinion of the former group because a) he is president and that is both his job and responsibility as a leader and b) those people never had high opinions on him anyway and it shouldn't have any affect on his job security.

You have to think about the nature of a funeral, its usually in a smaller building with tons of people. There is a lot of crying, hugging, handshaking, talking. There is a lot of the same in a southern church... There are reports that this virus is less likely to spread outdoors than indoors, that's what I'm basing my opinions on.

I agree and do follow that those reports are true. In an ideal world, beaches, basketball courts, skateboarding parks, etc. would all be open because people would be responsible and use them appropriately. But unfortunately the opposite has shown to be true here, regardless of the color of the state. I think California is a prime example because the beaches were crowded last weekend and the scenes demonstrated people weren't abiding by good social distancing. It would be reasonable for the governments to state that those outdoor areas could be reopened as long as people were responsible in their use of them, and if they were to break that responsibility, they would be re-closed.

I do believe Americans as a whole need to take a close look at how other countries handle this. Americans are largely inconsiderate when they're sick. I've said for a long time that Americans should focus on hygiene, wash their hands, use hand sanitizers, wear masks when sick like people do in Korea and Japan. That would do wonders for us during this and it would save lives during flu season for years to come.

Agreed.

As far as trusting the government, its hard to develop trust when the president is constantly being accused of being some fascist dictator waiting for his opportunity. I don't think electing Joe Biden would do anything to help either since there are many on the left that think he and the DNC cheated Bernie and people on the right think he has dementia.

Faith in government comes with good action by government. Look around the world and you'll see that in most other countries, leaders who are actually leading during this time have favorable views amongst the populace. Even someone like Boris Johnson who handled the virus poorly at the beginning has seen much stronger favorability numbers as of late. Bush Jr. had nearly 90% favorability after 9/11. Even Trump had strong favorability numbers for the two weeks following the outbreak in the U.S.

The stateand federal governments haven't clearly defined the peak.

No one knows what the peak is. Instead, public health agencies instead look for a continuous decrease in cases for two straight weeks to help find evidence they have passed the peak.

Nick_Saban posted...

Among other things. But political figures trying to use this crisis as a way to fundamentally change this country, it's going to evoke a response like what your seeing. I think an overwhelming majority of people were completely fine with the quarantine for 2-4 weeks to flatten the curve, but so far it's just been the government continually moving the goal posts. "2 weeks, no 4 weeks, well, no add 6 more weeks on to that, maybe in 2022? maybe never at this rate, who knows? " That's making people anxious.

Well maybe if the federal government got off its ass and actually created a sufficient amount of tests, distributed them to the states, set up federal guidelines for contract tracing, ensured protections and funds for medical facilities, etc., states would be in a much better situation right now and could start to think about reopening. Also, who specifically was saying it would take only two weeks. The most I ever heard officials say is something like "if we can force everyone inside for 14 days we could completely kill this thing" which would mean a full-fledged quarantine, not the looser social distancing that exists now.

Then the reason the conservatives are mad is what is being deemed essential is subjective and in left leaning states, some things that may not be truly essential that liberals tend to like are still okay while things that may not be truly essential that conservatives tend to like are banned.

I do agree there should be more wiggle room when deciding what is essential and non-essential. If only the federal government could put out a set of guidelines the states could follow so each state's guidelines don't seem so arbitrary and random.

If all social distancing guidelines are followed, an asymptomatic covid patient at a beach is significantly less dangerous than an asymptomatic covid patient at a grocery store that touched a few items he didn't purchase.

Yes but that same person also more likely went to the grocery store too. There are ways to get around funneling everyone through a few businesses, but those are more costly or time consuming that maybe nobody wants to take part of and certainly many people would object to it. But the other goal is to limit things that are open so that all those people who were in the grocery store at the same time then don't go to other open public places and spread it even more.

Take the example from Albany, Georgia. Reports seem to suggest that the virus spread so quickly in that town because there was an individual that went to two different funerals and then spread throughout different church communities after.

If people just follow social distancing guidelines(people should wear masks whenever possible and wash hands/use sanitizer often, keep 6ft away as much as possible, dont loiter around in stores) and we reopen everything that wants to open, we probably wont see near as much of a spike as some of you guys think. We just have to be smart about it. And for record, I really don't think these protests are smart but I understand why they're happening.

What evidence are you basing this on? I personally don't think it will be as bad as some people predict it will be, but I am not using any medical expertise to do that. I am assuming you too have no medical expertise. Maybe we should look at Sweden whose population is made up of individuals that trust their government more, listen to their government more, and did not enact any lockdown. Their total deaths and deaths/case ratio is much higher than surrounding Nordic countries.

Also, it would be great if people would follow all the guidelines. But many of these same people protesting are doing it without masks on while they stand right next to each other.

It's up to the people of Puerto Rico to decide, not those in the states. Some people don't want to become a state as they see their identity as a separate entity from American. Some don't want to join because then they'd be forced to follow all laws and rules of the United States which can be detrimental to them.

Regardless of this, Puerto Rico should have more protections established for it as a territory of the US and they, like other territories, should be able to have a vote in government.

The bigger question is when will the residents of D. C. be acknowledged?

Garioshi posted...

Guess who had 8 years to do something about it and didn't?

This neither addresses your point that Obama caused Trump (unless you want to amend it by adding Bush, Clinton and the majority of the government since the mid 90s to it), nor acknowledges that there was far from one issue involved within Obama's two terms as president. He spent all of his political capitol on health insurance and never had a functioning coalition after to do anything substantial after.

Garioshi posted...

It's not just about Wall Street, it's about being against the Obama status quo in general.

This clearly shows people were not content with the status quo

You're the one that specifically brought up Wall Street. I was addressing that, hence why I said Wall Street. That question in the poll is also highly flawed because the wording can imply numerous things. They should have had follow up questions to address exactly what respondents meant by "bringing change". If change is going back to republican ideals, there's nothing Obama could have done to change their minds while he was in office.

Someone else also addressed your statement about Medicare for All as well. Despite how much specific people rail against public polling when it's used to show the support of one individual over another, they then try to use that same type of polling to justify their beliefs about policy. You need to look beyond just the results of one question and look at aggregates, questions with varied wording, follow up analysis, etc.

Garioshi posted...

"increasing coverage" is not enough when 45,000 Americans die every year from a lack of healthcare. It is immoral that medical bankruptcies exist in the richest country in the world. The idea of the ACA was created by the Nixon administration in opposition to the Democrats' single-payer plan. Regardless, you don't start negotiating from your "compromise" position, your starting negotiation position is beyond should be even more than what you want because your idea will eventually get watered down, just as Biden's "expanding coverage" will get watered down even more than it already is. Speaking of compromise, though, I have news for you: Republicans ain't interested. Not a single Republican voted for the ACA and they ran against it for YEARS. The party has gone even further right now, what makes you think they'll vote to expand it? Absolute horseshit. Aldo, Biden's proposal of lowering the Medicare enrollment age to 60 is even weaker than Hillary's proposal of lowering it to 55.

The whole second half of your argument are problems Sanders would have faced so what solution are you proposing.

I do agree with your statement that you should always ask for more and not start at your compromised position.

Garioshi posted...

Not blaming Trump on Obama is ridiculous. One of Trump's main talking points on the campaign trail was railing against outsourcing. Under Obama, the Rust Belt was crippled by said outsourcing. Trump railed against the offensive wars Obama continued and started. He slammed Wall Street for "getting away with murder", and it's basically true because nobody was prosecuted for the subprime mortgage crisis under Obama. There are many other examples, but the main point is that Obama's actions (or inaction) are key things Trump used to get elected. If Obama's status quo was so great, then Hillary would have coasted on it. But she didn't. She lost the Rust Belt. With someone further left than Obama who actually fought for change, we would not have Trump today.

Outsourcing has been occurring since the mid-90s, it wasn't a new phenomenon in 2016.

Clinton's problems went well beyond continuing Obama's policies and legacies.

And do you have any data to support the idea a reasonably significant amount of people (say at least 3%) supported Trump because his stance seemed "tough" on Wall Street?

Garioshi posted...

Biden literally said he would veto Medicare for All if it was on his desk waiting to be signed.

If his party passed a bill in both the senate and house for Medicare for All, he'd be forced to sign it. He's saying something like that because he knows it'll never pass the house and senate. Bernie knew it'd never pass the house and senate. AOC knows it'll never pass the house and senate. Their mission is to push the party to the left so that compromised issues are far more progressive than they are now. That'll sure be less likely under Biden, but they're vastly more likely under him than Trump. Don't believe it? Listen to AOC and Bernie talk about it.

teepan95 posted...

iirc, it's better to eat more, smaller meals in a day

Based on...

Garioshi posted...

As he said, "Nothing will fundamentally change". He just wants to go back to the status quo before Trump. That's not enough. He's not going to get money out of politics, he's not going to fight for Medicare for All, he's not going to do anything about the student loan debt crisis, he's not going to go after the criminals on Wall Street, he's not going to stop offensive wars in the Middle East, he's not going to do anything about the fact that 70% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, and he's not going to stop the War on Drugs. He agrees with the GOP on 90% of things to some degree and will cave all the way to them 90% of the time. His neoliberal status quo bullshit might just bring about a second Trump. Obama's neoliberal status quo bullshit lead to Trump, after all.

1) Blaming Trump on Obama is ridiculous (unless we're talking that correspondents dinner).

2) Trump won't so any of the things you listed as well. But if Biden is president and the house or senate ends up passing more progressive bills, Biden would be forced to sign it. It's naive to assume that only the president is one to set the agenda or make changes in this country. Direction may come from the White House, but policy is passed in Congress.

3) If you live in a swing state, at least consider the impacts on the Supreme Court and things mentioned in point 2. If you don't live in a swing state, vote for whoever but make sure you vote.

EnragedSlith posted...

The one issue is that Democrats painted themselves into a corner with Kavanaugh's hearing. You can't champion the rhetoric of taking every rape accuser at their word and then pick apart Reade's bullshit story. And it absolutely is bullshit.

Except that's not fairly accurate. Did democrats and the media harp on accusations against Trump like they did Kavanaugh? No. The only reason why the Kavanaugh accusation seemed so "loud" was due to the proximity of his appointment and the focus of the politics at the time.

Talk2DaHand posted...

That's ok. Biden won't be on the ballot this November.

Will Trump not be on the ballot either because then you'd maybe have a point.

Sabram posted...

I'm an essential worker

That message clearly isn't to you. However, you should certainly be wearing a mask when you are out and especially working.

HiddenRoar posted...

Masks are supposed to prevent the spread though.

If everyone outside is wearing a mask, then....

Masks don't prevent the spread - they mitigate it. They are also more for helping to ensure you don't spread it, not vice versa.

Am I the first to want laser hair removal? I also recently had to get a crown for one of my teeth and wouldn't mind getting a few more put in to cover up all the cavaties I had as a child.

The American flag also has 4 red and 4 white stripes. And it's hard to count but I'm quite sure there are not 50 stars on that flag.

EnterTheTekken posted...

So for those who are criticizing the discussion and beginning of staggered re-opening with restrictions...are you also in critique of other nations across the world doing the same?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2020/04/14/here-are-the-countries-starting-to-ease-lockdowns-amid-the-coronavirus-pandemic/#1feb2719634c

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-19/germany-is-reopening-stores-in-first-step-toward-post-virus-era

You do realize that other countries have adequate testing and procedures in place to reopen right? I would be in complete support of a rollout of opening businesses if the federal government actually had a cohesive plan, states had access to a huge supplies of tests, at risk individuals were forced to quarantine before, contract tracing was established, etc.

Does Georgia have this? Or Tennessee? Or the other states that are planning on reopening?