2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[DegaBama]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Well I don't agree with that any more than you do.

I'm not in favor of lockdowns.

And let's be real, many people are decent human beings but many are not. Many need to be given rules to encourage the decency part.

I think there are limits on how far we can or should go to defend our communities from Covid. Obviously, simple things like masks, distancing, and limiting the size of gatherings are on the easier side. Draconian lockdowns are on the difficult and unreasonable side. Almost all businesses can find ways to stay open while also being responsible and respectful. If they can't, public safety takes priority.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

A ton of businesses in this country, are struggling for one reason, lack of entertainment. All those college towns that depend on football and basketball to turn a profit, can't. All those cities that have hotels full because of a sporting event or a concert, can't. There are millions (maybe?) of jobs out there that are struggling because of social distancing rules. And why are we socially distancing? To make sure someone else doesn't get the virus where they can help themselves out by staying at home, 24/7. I just wish we saw more efforts to protect the at risk. Athletes shouldn't be taking rapid tests, nursing homes and hospitals should. Yet, here we are.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by techtre2003

Well let's see, we already have some dictator governors ordering warnings and tickets being issued for breaking their rules (not laws by the way). But "omg, Trump fired the Secretary of Defense and is going to use the military to go to war against America!". I'm done even trying to understand the freakout over what fantasy scenario Trump may do while shrugging off actual violations of Constitutional rights that are trying to be enforced by state leaders.

Yeah, this bolded part is for the best.

Trump waging war on America is not the concern. It's laughable to think he could utilize the military in this way. If this is what you're trying to understand, then you're wasting your brainpower on the wrong thing. Firing the Sec. of Defense during a contested election is causing a different set of problems than the one you are contemplating.

I'm not sure which Constitutional rights you think are being violated. Maybe you should just give up trying to understand. Success seems pretty unlikely at this point.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[justin80]

Originally Posted by lionsfan20

This whole Covid restrictions thing boils down to one simple term for me. Free will. I should have free will to celebrate a holiday with as many families as I want however I want within the law. Everyone else has the free will to not attend my holiday celebration if they are at high risk or don't feel safe attending. They also have the free will to wear full ppe when going in public or never leaving their house if they choose. Pretty simple. Free will. Part of what this nation was founded on.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

What about all the people you and your celebrants come into contact with after the feast? Tough luck for them?

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by DegaBama

A ton of businesses in this country, are struggling for one reason, lack of entertainment. All those college towns that depend on football and basketball to turn a profit, can't. All those cities that have hotels full because of a sporting event or a concert, can't. There are millions (maybe?) of jobs out there that are struggling because of social distancing rules. And why are we socially distancing? To make sure someone else doesn't get the virus where they can help themselves out by staying at home, 24/7. I just wish we saw more efforts to protect the at risk. Athletes shouldn't be taking rapid tests, nursing homes and hospitals should. Yet, here we are.

One could just as easily argue that businesses are going to be struggling whether they're open or not if people are staying home to protect themselves. Restaurants are not going to be full of patrons during a pandemic caused by an airborne virus. I'm sure they'd retain some percentage of customers, but even a 20% hit to business would be devastating.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[DegaBama]

Originally Posted by justin80

What about all the people you and your celebrants come into contact with after the feast? Tough luck for them?

Maybe just understand that seeing your grandma isn't smart right now... unless she wants to see you.

Originally Posted by JustRachel

One could just as easily argue that businesses are going to be struggling whether they're open or not if people are staying home to protect themselves. Restaurants are not going to be full of patrons during a pandemic caused by an airborne virus. I'm sure they'd retain some percentage of customers, but even a 20% hit to business would be devastating.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Sure, but give them that chance. Then, you have the entertainment side employees themselves. The one's that put on events, they have almost all lost their jobs.

[techtre2003]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Yeah, this bolded part is for the best.

Trump waging war on America is not the concern. It's laughable to think he could utilize the military in this way. If this is what you're trying to understand, then you're wasting your brainpower on the wrong thing. Firing the Sec. of Defense during a contested election is causing a different set of problems than the one you are contemplating.

I'm not sure which Constitutional rights you think are being violated. Maybe you should just give up trying to understand. Success seems pretty unlikely at this point.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Ok, so what set of problems then are created by firing the Sec. of Defense?
First Amendment - Freedom of Assembly. Our governor overstepped his authority way back at the beginning of the Summer by declaring consecutive shutdown orders and has lost in court because of it. Hasn't slowed him down one bit. He just recently again shut down restaurants but the owners around here decided to give him the finger and are staying open.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by techtre2003

Ok, so what set of problems then are created by firing the Sec. of Defense?
First Amendment - Freedom of Assembly. Our governor overstepped his authority way back at the beginning of the Summer by declaring consecutive shutdown orders and has lost in court because of it. Hasn't slowed him down one bit. He just recently again shut down restaurants but the owners around here decided to give him the finger and are staying open.

Part 1) To oversimplify, it encourages civil unrest.

Part 2) Your Constitutional right to freedom of assembly is not and has not ever been absolute. Much like the freedom to bear arms does not include nuclear weapons and your freedom of speech does not allow yelling fire in a crowded theater, slander, or inciting riots, your freedom of peaceable assembly has always had limits. Those limits have been tested time and again in courts. When public safety is a concern, your perceived absolute right has never applied.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[Clark]

Originally Posted by Jgil316

Biden will work with America's ALLIES to address China and form a united front instead of $hitting all over our allies and forging ahead alone.

With more detail, here is why I laughed at your statement.

Here are Dems in action with their NATO allies. Killary leading the charge in Libya, with the stamp of approval from Obama and Biden.

It is very revealing, including the war mongers emails. Lots of links as well if you really want to go down the rabbit hole.

https://theecologist.org/2016/mar/14...ry-imperialism

[techtre2003]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Part 1) To oversimplify, it encourages civil unrest.

Part 2) Your Constitutional right to freedom of assembly is not and has not ever been absolute. Much like the freedom to bear arms does not include nuclear weapons and your freedom of speech does not allow yelling fire in a crowded theater, slander, or inciting riots, your freedom of peaceable assembly has always had limits. Those limits have been tested time and again in courts. When public safety is a concern, your perceived absolute right has never applied.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Part 1) I disagree that there will be more civil unrest because of a personnel move by Trump than there has been over these lockdowns. You said yourself most people don't even pay attention to politics. Everyone has been affected by the lockdowns.
Part 2) Are you really that okay with government trying to tell you who or how many people can be in your house? You're cool with the government telling you not to sing or chant inside your own house? You're cool with government telling you your guest are "allowed" to use your bathroom but only if you sanitize it every time? Yes, there have been lawsuits. And just like I said the lawsuit against our governor was won but he's still dictating orders. For someone who claims to be a conservative you sure seem comfortable with government over reach.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by justin80

What about all the people you and your celebrants come into contact with after the feast? Tough luck for them?

At this point? Yeah... pretty much.

[mike1498]

A lockdown at this point is silly. People won't list so others need to realize this. I didn't work the first time.

I'm all for masks, social distancing whatever, but a full blown lockdown will do absolutely nothing.

It only takes one person with COVID to break the rules for the lockdown to be worthless

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by techtre2003

Part 1) I disagree that there will be more civil unrest because of a personnel move by Trump than there has been over these lockdowns. You said yourself most people don't even pay attention to politics. Everyone has been affected by the lockdowns.
Part 2) Are you really that okay with government trying to tell you who or how many people can be in your house? You're cool with the government telling you not to sing or chant inside your own house? You're cool with government telling you your guest are "allowed" to use your bathroom but only if you sanitize it every time? Yes, there have been lawsuits. And just like I said the lawsuit against our governor was won but he's still dictating orders. For someone who claims to be a conservative you sure seem comfortable with government over reach.

1) Of course there will be. Stand by. Moreover, what legitimate purpose is served by firing the man shortly before an inauguration? Why did he do it, if not to give some appearance of defiance or unrest? What grave misstep did the Defense Secretary make?

2) I agree that much of the mandate in Cali or whatever would be overreach if it was enforced. Nobody is kicking in doors and putting people in handcuffs on Thanksgiving though. All they've done is issue a set of guidelines and used the word mandate to describe an unenforceable document.

I'm all for government urging caution in relation to a virus that has already killed hundreds of thousands of us and is currently escalating. Yes. Conservatives do not turn a blind eye to threats against the American public. We never have and we never will. I'm not sure we see conservatism the same way. Conservatives are not in favor of everyone running around doing whatever they want, nor are conservatives worried about some libertarians crying about overreach. Conservatives are about kicking ass and getting things handled. Conservatives are about tightening our belts when needed, rather than whining about what we can't do or what we can't have.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by mike1498

A lockdown at this point is silly. People won't list so others need to realize this. I didn't work the first time.

I'm all for masks, social distancing whatever, but a full blown lockdown will do absolutely nothing.

It only takes one person with COVID to break the rules for the lockdown to be worthless

This ^^^^

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[lionsfan20]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

"Within the law" is the key phrase.

By your logic, we should be free to do whatever we want as long as others can defend themselves from it. So, we can blast music at deafening levels and if people aren't cool with it, they can put headphones on. I'm sure glad I'm not your neighbor.

Yep

Originally Posted by DegaBama

Correct. But there is also something called, being a decent human being. I don't need the government to tell me that I shouldn't be a foot away from a random person.

The difference is, I'm being told, "Shut you business down because there's a chance that someone at risk could be exposed by your business, but, the same business down the road can stay open because it's essential aka it's a Wal-Mart."

Bingo

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[techtre2003]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

1) Of course there will be. Stand by. Moreover, what legitimate purpose is served by firing the man shortly before an inauguration? Why did he do it, if not to give some appearance of defiance or unrest? What grave misstep did the Defense Secretary make?

2) I agree that much of the mandate in Cali or whatever would be overreach if it was enforced. Nobody is kicking in doors and putting people in handcuffs on Thanksgiving though. All they've done is issue a set of guidelines and used the word mandate to describe an unenforceable document.

I'm all for government urging caution in relation to a virus that has already killed hundreds of thousands of us and is currently escalating. Yes. Conservatives do not turn a blind eye to threats against the American public. We never have and we never will. I'm not sure we see conservatism the same way. Conservatives are not in favor of everyone running around doing whatever they want, nor are conservatives worried about some libertarians crying about overreach. Conservatives are about kicking ass and getting things handled. Conservatives are about tightening our belts when needed, rather than whining about what we can't do or what we can't have.

1) I have no idea why he did it. If we had a media that was actually interested in reporting rather than making Trump look as bad as they can perhaps we'd know.
2) It's called slowly eroding rights. Of course they aren't just going to kick in doors; yet. All I can say is although you don't realize it you're lucky you have people who will stand up against this garbage even if you don't agree.

[Onepocketj]

Originally Posted by techtre2003

1) I have no idea why he did it. If we had a media that was actually interested in reporting rather than making Trump look as bad as they can perhaps we'd know.
2) It's called slowly eroding rights. Of course they aren't just going to kick in doors; yet. All I can say is although you don't realize it you're lucky you have people who will stand up against this garbage even if you don't agree.

Trump doesn't need any help from the media to make himself look bad.

[yanksfan1]

So looks like there won't be another stimulus deal, GOP doesn't want to juice the economy for Biden. Only chance of a deal is for Dems to win the 2 GA senate runoffs.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

So looks like there won't be another stimulus deal, GOP doesn't want to juice the economy for Biden. Only chance of a deal is for Dems to win the 2 GA senate runoffs.

Shoulda taken the deal that was on the table. Oh well... bring the pain!

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

So looks like there won't be another stimulus deal, GOP doesn't want to juice the economy for Biden. Only chance of a deal is for Dems to win the 2 GA senate runoffs.

That's not quite correct. They didn't want to for Trump either if you recall.

The problem has not changed. Blue states want hundreds of billions in bailout $$ for their failed budgets and policies; and the Senate has said no chance. Blue banked on controlling the legislature after this election; failed and are now all but doomed. NY, NJ, IL etc. will have no choice but to cut budgets by massive amounts and borrow the money from the Fed.

Gambled, lost.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by techtre2003

1) I have no idea why he did it. If we had a media that was actually interested in reporting rather than making Trump look as bad as they can perhaps we'd know.
2) It's called slowly eroding rights. Of course they aren't just going to kick in doors; yet. All I can say is although you don't realize it you're lucky you have people who will stand up against this garbage even if you don't agree.

1) What if we had a President that we could trust to tell us the truth? What if that President told us why he fired Esper?

2) Nothing is slowly eroding here. Your paranoia is misplaced. Government guidance is not a problem, it's a part of a solution.
There is no reason for alarm, lol. The Empire of Japan is not halfway to Pearl Harbor looking to make trouble. The fact that you can get all hissy over some governor giving advice is due to great Americans that stood up when it mattered, not some minor group of whiners complaining about being asked to sanitize their bathrooms.
How about a little bit of perspective?
Yeah, I'm lucky. I'm lucky our grandparents protected this country rather than whined about rationing or whatever inconveniences they endured.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

So looks like there won't be another stimulus deal, GOP doesn't want to juice the economy for Biden. Only chance of a deal is for Dems to win the 2 GA senate runoffs.

I'm good with that.

While I'd favor a smaller stimulus, I'd rather have no stimulus than a wildly mismanaged waste like last time.

Collectors Universe received what...millions? C'mon. Like they're hurting.

Edit to Add: neither myself nor my husband has received the first stimulus check yet, lol. Mine was due to an IRS issue processing my name change five years ago, my husband doesn't know why his was delayed. We both planned to donate them anyway, his to his classroom and mine to our local animal shelter.

[discostu]

If another stimulus occurs (and it probably will), I'm of the belief that it should solely be for actual small businesses...not the wonky SBA definition.

Businesses with $10s of millions in annual payroll are not a small business.

Frankly, I'd send whatever stimulus to individuals, but nothing to businesses as entities.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

I'm good with that.

While I'd favor a smaller stimulus, I'd rather have no stimulus than a wildly mismanaged waste like last time.

Collectors Universe received what...millions? C'mon. Like they're hurting.

Edit to Add: neither myself nor my husband has received the first stimulus check yet, lol. Mine was due to an IRS issue processing my name change five years ago, my husband doesn't know why his was delayed. We both planned to donate them anyway, his to his classroom and mine to our local animal shelter.

Huh? I think you guys will be fine without a "stimulus".

[techtre2003]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

1) What if we had a President that we could trust to tell us the truth? What if that President told us why he fired Esper?

2) Nothing is slowly eroding here. Your paranoia is misplaced. Government guidance is not a problem, it's a part of a solution.
There is no reason for alarm, lol. The Empire of Japan is not halfway to Pearl Harbor looking to make trouble. The fact that you can get all hissy over some governor giving advice is due to great Americans that stood up when it mattered, not some minor group of whiners complaining about being asked to sanitize their bathrooms.
How about a little bit of perspective?
Yeah, I'm lucky. I'm lucky our grandparents protected this country rather than whined about rationing or whatever inconveniences they endured.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

That governor "mandated" restaurants completely shut down and a few days later his fat ass is partying it up in the streets with Biden supporters; that's the perspective I'm looking at. And you're right, it doesn't matter to us where I live because we don't give a damn what he says. There's your unity Democrats love to speak about.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by Clark

Huh? I think you guys will be fine without a "stimulus".

Absolutely. We are by no means wealthy, but we are just fine, stimulus or not.

Still, I'd prefer to see a smaller, better managed stimulus. I think the economic benefits for our nation are worth the national expense. I think it's not only the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do.

Times like these require loosening of the purse strings a bit. I just hope that we'll tighten back up again when things get better.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk