Trump Blames Biden, Who Isn’t President, For Not Instituting Mask Mandate

This political chat room is for you to sound off about any political ideology and discuss current political topics. Everyone is welcome, yes, even conservatives, but keep in mind, the nature of the No Holds Barred political chat forum platform can be friendly to trolling. It is your responsibility to address this wisely. Forum Rules
91 posts
User avatar
omh

Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 9,948

Crazytrain » 16 Sep 2020, 6:18 pm » wrote: Trump actually has to run on his record.
His record, not your recording with extreme artistic impression.
Log in or Register to remove ads


User avatar
annLee

Unread post

User avatar
   
   
Posts: 1,404
Politics: Democratic
Location: GA

Coolguy10013 » 16 Sep 2020, 9:01 am » wrote: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-biden-mask-mandate-abc-town-hall_n_5f617ac9c5b68d1b09c9541a?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003&guccounter=1

This guy is a complete moron!!!

Trump Blames Biden, Who Isn’t President, For Not Instituting Mask Mandate

“To be clear: I am not currently president,” Biden wrote moments later. “But if you chip in now, we can change that.”President Donald Trump moved to blame his Democratic competitor, former Vice President Joe Biden, for not instituting a national mask mandate during the coronavirus pandemic.

 The claim, made at an ABC News town hall Tuesday with undecided voters in Pennsylvania, is misleading for two reasons: Biden has, in fact, urged all state governors to mandate mask-wearing to slow the spread of COVID-19. The Democratic candidate is also not the president and has no authority to mandate anything. Trump does.

 Julie Bart asked the president why he hadn’t instituted a national mask mandate during the height of the pandemic and why he had largely refused to wear facial coverings even as the nation’s top medical officials urged the public to do so.

“Well, I do wear them when I have to and when I’m in hospitals and other locations,” Trump said. “But I will say this. They said at the Democrat convention they’re going to do a national mandate. They never did it, because they’ve checked out and they didn’t do it. And a good question is, you ask why Joe Biden ― they said we’re going to do a national mandate on masks.”The president went on to say “a lot of people think the masks are not good” and said health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, were hesitant to push masks during the early days of the pandemic. That claim is misleading as medical officials have since learned much more about COVID-19 and the spread of infection, and as the shortage of medical-grade masks for health professionals has dissipated. Fauci has since urged for “universal wearing of masks.”

 Trump maintained at Tuesday’s town hall that his administration had succeeded in tackling the coronavirus pandemic, saying he didn’t think he could have done more to prevent the virus that has killed nearly 200,000 people and infected more than 6.6 million in the U.S.

 “Could you have done more to stop it?” ABC News host George Stephanopoulos asked.“I don’t think so,” Trump replied. “I think what I did by closing up the country, I think I saved two, maybe two and a half, maybe more than that lives. I really don’t think so. I think we did a very good job.”Addressing claims made to journalist Bob Woodward earlier this year that he had actively downplayed the threat of the coronavirus despite knowing how dangerous it was, Trump said he didn’t do that and, in fact, had cast the virus as more serious.

 “I didn’t downplay it,” Trump said during the town hall. “I actually, in many ways, I up-played it, in terms of action. My action was very strong.”Despite those assertions, the president stood by false claims that COVID-19 would merely go away.“It is going to disappear. It’s going to disappear, I still say it,” Trump said. “We’re not going to have studios like this, where you have all of this empty space in between. I want to see people, and you want to see people. I want to see football games. I’m pushing very hard for Big Ten, I want to see Big Ten open ― let the football games ― let them play sports.

tRump is a SEVERE LUNATIC in our WH......HELP LORD
It is my desire to debate you on the topic!

Crazytrain

Unread post

      
      
Posts: 6,541
Politics: Beer and Popcorn

Beer
omh » 16 Sep 2020, 6:20 pm » wrote: His record, not your recording with extreme artistic impression.
Yeah his record. Yeah and trump isn't good at artistic impressions either. 

User avatar
omh

Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 9,948

Crazytrain » 16 Sep 2020, 6:23 pm » wrote: Yeah his record. Yeah and trump isn't good at artistic impressions either.
his record is established, your recording doesn't play back, empty symbolism, no substance but heresay among those ben trying to remove him since nov 3 2016. By any means necessary including total destruction of the original American idea of liberty for all mutually evolving replacements of the species so far and from now on. Your ideology erased that a century ago and now you are here attempting to finish the process.4 generations later.
Last edited by omh on 16 Sep 2020, 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Crazytrain

Unread post

      
      
Posts: 6,541
Politics: Beer and Popcorn

Beer
Damn it trump already blaming Biden for his failures and Biden isn't even president yet.

User avatar
annLee

Unread post

User avatar
   
   
Posts: 1,404
Politics: Democratic
Location: GA

Crazytrain » 16 Sep 2020, 6:27 pm » wrote: Damn it trump already blaming Biden for his failures and Biden isn't even president yet.

tRump will be in prison January 2021 so he won't be able to blame President Biden then      
It is my desire to debate you on the topic!

User avatar
omh

Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 9,948

annLee » 16 Sep 2020, 6:51 pm » wrote: tRump will be in prison January 2021 so he won't be able to blame President Biden then    
Will Biden be alive January 23, 2021. seems this is a backdoor way to get Harris as president. Has been since Bernie got knocked out again..

User avatar
annLee

Unread post

User avatar
   
   
Posts: 1,404
Politics: Democratic
Location: GA

omh » 17 Sep 2020, 5:57 am » wrote: Will Biden be alive January 23, 2021. seems this is a backdoor way to get Harris as president. Has been since Bernie got knocked out again..
Another racist, bias, bigot, undereducated, foolish, brainless, mindless, thoughtless, indiscreet, unwise, unintelligent, ill-advised, impolitic, reckless, foolhardy, lunatic, and idiotic comment >>          
 
It is my desire to debate you on the topic!

User avatar
omh

Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 9,948

annLee » 17 Sep 2020, 6:14 pm » wrote: Another racist, bias, bigot, undereducated, foolish, brainless, mindless, thoughtless, indiscreet, unwise, unintelligent, ill-advised, impolitic, reckless, foolhardy, lunatic, and idiotic comment >>        
You afraid of natural life you have to hide in verbal realities ignoring your genetic space as timed apart now? Rhetical question because I know you don't fear natural position, you loath it.

Buffalo

Unread post

   
   
Posts: 1,269
Location: Central Texas

Coolguy10013 » 16 Sep 2020, 9:01 am » wrote: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-biden-mask-mandate-abc-town-hall_n_5f617ac9c5b68d1b09c9541a?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003&guccounter=1

This guy is a complete moron!!!

Trump Blames Biden, Who Isn’t President, For Not Instituting Mask Mandate

“To be clear: I am not currently president,” Biden wrote moments later. “But if you chip in now, we can change that.”President Donald Trump moved to blame his Democratic competitor, former Vice President Joe Biden, for not instituting a national mask mandate during the coronavirus pandemic.

 The claim, made at an ABC News town hall Tuesday with undecided voters in Pennsylvania, is misleading for two reasons: Biden has, in fact, urged all state governors to mandate mask-wearing to slow the spread of COVID-19. The Democratic candidate is also not the president and has no authority to mandate anything. Trump does.

 Julie Bart asked the president why he hadn’t instituted a national mask mandate during the height of the pandemic and why he had largely refused to wear facial coverings even as the nation’s top medical officials urged the public to do so.

“Well, I do wear them when I have to and when I’m in hospitals and other locations,” Trump said. “But I will say this. They said at the Democrat convention they’re going to do a national mandate. They never did it, because they’ve checked out and they didn’t do it. And a good question is, you ask why Joe Biden ― they said we’re going to do a national mandate on masks.”The president went on to say “a lot of people think the masks are not good” and said health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, were hesitant to push masks during the early days of the pandemic. That claim is misleading as medical officials have since learned much more about COVID-19 and the spread of infection, and as the shortage of medical-grade masks for health professionals has dissipated. Fauci has since urged for “universal wearing of masks.”

 Trump maintained at Tuesday’s town hall that his administration had succeeded in tackling the coronavirus pandemic, saying he didn’t think he could have done more to prevent the virus that has killed nearly 200,000 people and infected more than 6.6 million in the U.S.

 “Could you have done more to stop it?” ABC News host George Stephanopoulos asked.“I don’t think so,” Trump replied. “I think what I did by closing up the country, I think I saved two, maybe two and a half, maybe more than that lives. I really don’t think so. I think we did a very good job.”Addressing claims made to journalist Bob Woodward earlier this year that he had actively downplayed the threat of the coronavirus despite knowing how dangerous it was, Trump said he didn’t do that and, in fact, had cast the virus as more serious.

 “I didn’t downplay it,” Trump said during the town hall. “I actually, in many ways, I up-played it, in terms of action. My action was very strong.”Despite those assertions, the president stood by false claims that COVID-19 would merely go away.“It is going to disappear. It’s going to disappear, I still say it,” Trump said. “We’re not going to have studios like this, where you have all of this empty space in between. I want to see people, and you want to see people. I want to see football games. I’m pushing very hard for Big Ten, I want to see Big Ten open ― let the football games ― let them play sports.
Hey brainducked, moonbatty useful idiot, notcool, masks do not protect you nor others from contracting or spreading the chinese communist party virus.
Nor do they prevent the spread of anti-Trump LIES by ****, moonbatty useful idiots that the ccp virus is Trumps fault. 

BY BRIAN MAHER
POSTED
SEPTEMBER 15, 2020

The Shocking Truth About FacemasksTHE coronavirus menaces yet.Maybe you believe a face shield is your sword, a colossal weapon against the microscopic barbarians at your gate.Our agents inform us you can purchase a face shield for perhaps $10.But let us suppose you perch upon the upper rungs of America’s social ladder.Let us further suppose you wish to be seen upon this ladder, high aloft… all beneath looking up in heart-eating envy.Well then, we have the personal protection equipment for you…

The Price of VanityA Louis Vuitton face shield you can have for $961 — some $950 above standard.

Is this viral barrier $950 superior to the plebian plastic that shields the lower 99%?Our men have conducted a thorough scientific inquiry — in studies singly blind, doubly blind and triply blind.As a barrier, they conclude, Louis Vuitton’s face shield is the precise equal of the socially inferior issue.Yet the socially inferior issue does not bear the razzle-dazzle of Louis Vuitton.“We are all in this together,” we are told. Yet even together… apparently… some insist upon standing apart.Vanity, Louis Vuitton is thy name.

If You Must SettlePerhaps a $961 plastic yet golden face cover is beyond your means.You nonetheless aspire to radiate a superior air to the lessers around you.May we then suggest a leather Louis Vuitton face mask?The unwashed hordes may go about in their ten cent surgical masks. But you can advertise your aristocracy for a mere $50. Gucci, meantime, will sell you similar “luxury masks.”You may have difficulty breathing while wearing one. You nonetheless wallow in luxury, in opulence.But are masks and shields — Louis Vuitton, Gucci, or Acme — effective barriers at all?They are not, concludes physicist Denis Rancourt. This fellow is a learned master of “environmental nanoparticles.

​​​​​​​”A Maginot LineA facial covering is — he concludes — a Maginot Line of sorts.It is no more effective at keeping out viruses than France’s Maginot Line was at keeping out Germans.Both are easily outflanked.As well erect a chain link fence to keep the flies out. Rancourt:
When I looked at all the randomized controlled trials with verified outcome, meaning you actually measure whether or not the person was infected … NONE of these well-designed studies … found there was a statistically significant advantage of wearing a mask versus not wearing a mask…What this means — and this is very important — is that if there was any significant advantage to wearing a mask to reduce this [infection] risk, then you would have detected that in at least one of these trials, [yet] there’s no sign of it.That to me is a firm scientific conclusion: There is no evidence that masks are of any utility either preventing the aerosol particles from coming out or from going in. You’re not helping the people around you by wearing a mask, and you’re not helping yourself preventing the disease by wearing a mask.This science is unambiguous in that such a positive effect cannot be detected.Wearing a mask or being in an environment where masks are being worn or not worn, there’s no difference in terms of your risk of being infected by the viral respiratory disease.There’s no reduction, period. There are no exceptions. All the studies that have been tabulated, looked at, published, I was not able to find any exceptions, if you constrain yourself to verified outcomes.
Yet we are ordered to seal our facial orifices in public venues indoors and out. All — evidently — to very little effect.Why, Dr. Rancourt, are masks such hopeless sieves?Aerosol Particles
We’re talking about the small size fraction of aerosols, so typically smaller than 2 micrometers… When you get down to those sizes, gravitational outtake is very inefficient and they basically stay in suspension. And, as soon as you have currents or flow of air, [the particles] are carried…These aerosol particles that are the vector of transmission are completely suspended as part of the fluid air. They’re really part of the fluid air, so any air that gets through, [the viral particles are also] going to come through. That’s why masks don’t work…Those fine aerosol particles will follow the fluid air. In a surgical mask, there is no way you’re blocking the fluid air…In other words, very little of the airflow is going to be through the actual mask.
But masks block saliva. Saliva houses the virus. Is it then not sound to sport masks and don shields to keep saliva in?No, argues Dr. Rancourt. That is because the virus is transmitted in the fluid air of which he writes — not through saliva:
The mask is only designed and intended to stop your spitballs from coming out and hitting someone… The large droplets drop to the floor immediately and are not breathed in. So, they’re not part of the transmission mechanism. You can do a scientific study that demonstrates that viruses survive a fairly long time on a surface…That does not mean that transmission occurs through surfaces. It only means that a scientist was able to establish that a virus can survive a long time on a surface. It doesn’t tell you anything about the likely transmission mechanism of the disease. So, there are a lot of studies like this that are basically irrelevant in terms of transmission mechanism.[Infectious respiratory diseases] are transmitted by these fine aerosol particles that are in suspension in the air. In a case like that, will a mask, will something that is preventing spitballs from coming out, protect you or protect others? And the answer is no, it makes no measurable difference.
Please, doctor, continue:
There are many studies that show how difficult it is to actually infect someone when you’re just trying to put something like a fluid or something you know is bearing the virus into their eye or into their nose. It’s hard to do this. That’s what the studies show.But if you take a fine aerosol and you breathe it in deeply, that’s where the infection starts… So, by breathing in aerosols laden with these viruses, you’re going to be infected. Try to do anything else, and it’s going to be difficult [to spread infection].
In conclusion:
The most recent randomized controlled trial [published] this year basically concluded they could find no evidence that masks, hand-washing and distancing, in terms of reducing the risk of these types of diseases, were of any use. [They] didn’t help.
Thus the good Dr. Rancourt blasts the bedrock upon which public policy rests.Yet the hocus-pocus of mask-wearing is mighty in the land. And the masked are horrified into white hot rages should you appear among them unmasked.Can we guarantee Rancourt’s claims? We cannot. We are not a scientist.Yet we have seen similar evidence elsewhere.More importantly, they confirm our biases. They slant the way we lean…And a fellow leans this way or that way in life, forever foraging for facts that fit his precious theories, forever picking cherries.We are by nature skeptical of official policies — they are generally anchored in error, bankrupt.These findings affirm our deep-dyed skepticism.They soothe us. They massage our scalp… and caress our gills.ConsolationMust we endure the futility of slipping on personal protection equipment before entering stores?Alas, we must. Yet we are consoled by this capital fact:It affords us the chance to display our plumage, to strut, to showboat our popinjay superiority, to be a big deal in this world.And it only costs $961, payable to Louis Vuitton — a bargain at thrice the price.Regards, Brian Maher
Managing Editor, The Daily Reckoning

 
 
War is a Racket

User avatar
Coolguy10013

Unread post

User avatar
   
   
Posts: 896
Politics: Liberal
Location: New York, New York

Buffalo » 18 Sep 2020, 8:48 am » wrote: Hey brainducked, moonbatty useful idiot, notcool, masks do not protect you nor others from contracting or spreading the chinese communist party virus.
Nor do they prevent the spread of anti-Trump LIES by ****, moonbatty useful idiots that the ccp virus is Trumps fault. 

BY BRIAN MAHER
POSTED
SEPTEMBER 15, 2020

The Shocking Truth About FacemasksTHE coronavirus menaces yet.Maybe you believe a face shield is your sword, a colossal weapon against the microscopic barbarians at your gate.Our agents inform us you can purchase a face shield for perhaps $10.But let us suppose you perch upon the upper rungs of America’s social ladder.Let us further suppose you wish to be seen upon this ladder, high aloft… all beneath looking up in heart-eating envy.Well then, we have the personal protection equipment for you…

The Price of VanityA Louis Vuitton face shield you can have for $961 — some $950 above standard.

Is this viral barrier $950 superior to the plebian plastic that shields the lower 99%?Our men have conducted a thorough scientific inquiry — in studies singly blind, doubly blind and triply blind.As a barrier, they conclude, Louis Vuitton’s face shield is the precise equal of the socially inferior issue.Yet the socially inferior issue does not bear the razzle-dazzle of Louis Vuitton.“We are all in this together,” we are told. Yet even together… apparently… some insist upon standing apart.Vanity, Louis Vuitton is thy name.

If You Must SettlePerhaps a $961 plastic yet golden face cover is beyond your means.You nonetheless aspire to radiate a superior air to the lessers around you.May we then suggest a leather Louis Vuitton face mask?The unwashed hordes may go about in their ten cent surgical masks. But you can advertise your aristocracy for a mere $50. Gucci, meantime, will sell you similar “luxury masks.”You may have difficulty breathing while wearing one. You nonetheless wallow in luxury, in opulence.But are masks and shields — Louis Vuitton, Gucci, or Acme — effective barriers at all?They are not, concludes physicist Denis Rancourt. This fellow is a learned master of “environmental nanoparticles.

A Maginot LineA facial covering is — he concludes — a Maginot Line of sorts.It is no more effective at keeping out viruses than France’s Maginot Line was at keeping out Germans.Both are easily outflanked.As well erect a chain link fence to keep the flies out. Rancourt:

Yet we are ordered to seal our facial orifices in public venues indoors and out. All — evidently — to very little effect.Why, Dr. Rancourt, are masks such hopeless sieves?Aerosol Particles

But masks block saliva. Saliva houses the virus. Is it then not sound to sport masks and don shields to keep saliva in?No, argues Dr. Rancourt. That is because the virus is transmitted in the fluid air of which he writes — not through saliva:

Please, doctor, continue:

In conclusion:

Thus the good Dr. Rancourt blasts the bedrock upon which public policy rests.Yet the hocus-pocus of mask-wearing is mighty in the land. And the masked are horrified into white hot rages should you appear among them unmasked.Can we guarantee Rancourt’s claims? We cannot. We are not a scientist.Yet we have seen similar evidence elsewhere.More importantly, they confirm our biases. They slant the way we lean…And a fellow leans this way or that way in life, forever foraging for facts that fit his precious theories, forever picking cherries.We are by nature skeptical of official policies — they are generally anchored in error, bankrupt.These findings affirm our deep-dyed skepticism.They soothe us. They massage our scalp… and caress our gills.ConsolationMust we endure the futility of slipping on personal protection equipment before entering stores?Alas, we must. Yet we are consoled by this capital fact:It affords us the chance to display our plumage, to strut, to showboat our popinjay superiority, to be a big deal in this world.And it only costs $961, payable to Louis Vuitton — a bargain at thrice the price.Regards, Brian Maher
Managing Editor, The Daily Reckoning
Sure. 

​​​​​​​
When I "dismiss" you it only means that I have determined that further discussion is useless or counter-productive. Don't take it personally. Go ahead and have your last word...and move on.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Al Donal, Alexa [Bot], Annoyed Liberall, Bill Gates [Bot], Buffalo, Famagusta, FOS, Ike Bana, JeanMoulin, Majestic-12 [Bot], Neo, PaperLi [Bot], Pengwin, Polar1ty, Ricky Tavy, Semrush [Bot], solon, Squatchman, Steve Jobs [Bot], Termin8tor, Twitter [Bot], Zeets2 and 142 guests


Log in or Register to remove ads