Insurrection 2021

[Frank_Jaeger]

Because saying HIV prevention laws are unscientific makes a lot of sense, right? I'd love to hear your recommendation on how it's discrimination to not allow people to just spread HIV to random participants.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/31/business/china-travel-coronavirus.html

In response:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/04/26/pelosi-you-know-trumps-travel-ban-didnt-go-far-enough-n2567639

So democrats called it racist and xenophobic and shouted it down as bigoted, but it's Trump fault, right?

Let's not forget the media:

https://trendingpolitics.com/flashback-the-media-called-trump-s-china-travel-ban-emotional-political-not-effective/

And this

 

[Taco]

How do you have to require scientific data to understand having to tell your partner you have HIV before having sex with them potentially limits the spread of HIV. The whole purposes of those specific laws is to limit the spread rate, or stop people from spreading those specific diseases to sexual partners who may be unaware.

Next, I'm sure Biden could make the claim arresting people for drinking and driving is discrimination too, and I'm sure you'd want the data to show that drinking and driving while impaired may potentially lead to more deaths than if you took the precaution to laws preventing that exact scenario. All dry sarcasm aside, you don't need to be a professional to understand basic cause and effect and potential.

The core argument is making laws about HIV discourages people from getting tested and if people find out they are infected they are less likely to contact people they may have infected if there's a chance the law will get involved even if they didn't break it. They've done studies about this, I never looked at them because why would I, but if I was writing laws related to HIV I would. So IDK why making data available would be something to get mad about especially when it has no impact on the ability of the states to do whatever they want anyways.

 

[Mewtwo_Rain]

The core argument is making laws about HIV discourages people from getting tested and if people find out they are infected they are less likely to contact people they may have infected if there's a chance the law will get involved even if they didn't break it. They've done studies about this, I never looked at them because why would I, but if I was writing laws related to HIV I would. So IDK why making data available would be something to get mad about especially when it has no impact on the ability of the states to do whatever they want anyways.

So the better option is to just leave someone HIV infected .Sounds like irresponsible losers upset they have to be held accountable for not checking if they have STDs or to make sure they don't infect others.

You don't need a study to understand human cowardice, but not making a law allows people to potentially spread more HIV than the adverse. Yeah they may not refuse getting tested but they wouldn't have made laws against it if it wasn't an issue in the first place.

It'd be like if there were no laws as referenced to drinking and driving, do you think people would check themselves if there weren't laws about it? No. Of course not. It's an excuse. Heck even with laws, people still drink and drive and cause thousands of deaths a year. The purpose of the law is to create a risk vs. reward just like in this case. If you do it, and get caught you pay a price. If you are negligent and don't get tested you get held accountable. Same concept.

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

Maybe if Trump had taken this shit seriously from the start half the country still wouldn't be in lockdown.

But "muh election optics". Now even the vaccine rollout's apparently fucked up too.


The difference is the Democrats realized they were wrong and started taking the virus seriously * maybe too seriously in California's case * while Trump to this day still cries that it's a hoax * even after getting it himself * and tells his followers to not do even basic bitch shit like wearing a mask.

I do find it interesting that there are several people in this thread that keep on bringing up misleading or debunked claims as "matter of fact" about Trump. Whats the angle here exactly, to get hardcore Trumpers riled up? Or do you really believe Trump nuked a Hurricane, called Coronavirus a Hoax, and the peepee tape is just suppressed currently?

 

[CheezzyMach]

Politics is how many chronically online speds talk about you on the internet.

Aren't Rightwingers the ones always saying that Twitter and terminally online SJW speds are a tiny minority that don't speak for the US population too?

But somehow Trump's online following makes him the most popular president in US history.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Okay I'll bite.

I believe the election is rigged. I'm absolutely certain of it. I believe this, not because of the mountains of circumstantial evidence that occurred during the election and were roundly deboonked within minutes of being posted online (sure guys), but because of everything that happened leading up to it.

So Trump was filling stadiums and Biden couldn't pull 12 people. So what, Coronavirus, whatever. Sure. Yeah. Ignore that.

Good thing that total attendance during campaign events aren't the metric used to decide the president then, right?

No one would disagree that Trump's supporters are more fanatical than the Biden voters. However, the least enthusiastic person's vote counts just as much as the most enthusiastic supporter's. Trump had a lot of people going to multiple superspreader rallies, while Biden intentionally held more lower attendance events because of covid. It's really not a difficult concept. You can get this, champ. I know you're autistic so it's tough, but just try.

And this

Who gives a shit? Chinatown isn't where it originated. Asian people who weren't in Wuhan when it originated were as unlikely to have it as white people who weren't in Wuhan. I know it's tough with your crippling autism to understand context, but it's important here.

 

[Aidan]

That's why it's not healthy to become over invested in it. The country has a habit of resetting itself to normal. And no amount of sperging online is going to change it, so you've gotta look out for you.

Spoiler: PL story time

I used to be SUPER into politics. Like, treating it like a sport, getting in debates with everyone at every opportunity, and never ignoring anyone who disagreed with me in order to 'school' them. And you know what it did for me? Fucking nothing. I never changed anyone's mind, it just stressed me out and destroyed my relationships. My grandparents and parents are all super right, and I'm your classic dirty libtard. Were politics more important than my relationship with my family? That's one of the sadder things coming out of all this Q bullshit, is how many people just CANNOT let bygones be bygones and agree to disagree for the sake of peace. Arguing with my Dad over politics is fucking stupid, because it's not like me changing his mind is going to do fuck all in the larger scheme.

Anyway, I keep my political sperging on this anonymous forum for the sole purpose of calling idiots out for being idiots. As someone who has different politics than me, I know it's easy to write off what I am saying, but believe me that this shit isn't worth destroying your day to day. Look out for you, have a stable job, stable income and stable relationships. Once those boxes are checked, find reasonable ways to involve yourself in politics, canvassing for your chosen candidate, donating, or even attending rallies/protests. But make sure that you never let any of this trump the first three, or you'll end up like half the spergs in this thread and all of thedonald.win

Also, ignore stickers.

I don't mean this in a negative way, but why is it always left-leaning people who want to debate all the time about politics? I've never been able to ask anyone that who wasn't actively wanting to debate.
Usually I just get "Because we're smart and facts back up what we say" or something equally smug and not constructive.

As for current events and spergery, I think people got invested while US politics were fun and wacky and learned it's fucked and everyone sucks but can't accept that's how it's always been.
I'll disagree that nothing will change, it just depends on if one party gets Congress and the presidency, then they try to ram through major changes ASAP.

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

No one would disagree that Trump's supporters are more fanatical than the Biden voters. However, the least enthusiastic person's vote counts just as much as the most enthusiastic supporter's. Trump had a lot of people going to multiple superspreader rallies, while Biden intentionally held more lower attendance events because of covid. It's really not a difficult concept. You can get this, champ. I know you're autistic so it's tough, but just try.

I find it hard to correlate Trump hatred for Biden support, Bidens livestreams even get low view numbers. If you hated Trump that much and weren't keen on Biden wouldn't there be some sort of record third party turnout? Supposedly Biden outperformed Obama, the "Black Jesus" as some put in his heyday.

What I'm seeing in the statistics and what I see on the ground doesn't seem to match up in conventional wisdom. And yet, no court wants to take the case, so it makes me lose faith in the system, as they aren't willing to give time to investigate an obvious statistical anomaly. If people feel disenfranchised by the system, shouldn't the system regain that trust by proving they are transparent? But no one is interested. Youtube bans videos for talk of election rigging. Now I'm not saying that's proof, but it's sure suspicious.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

I find it hard to correlate Trump hatred for Biden support, Bidens livestreams even get low view numbers. If you hated Trump that much and weren't keen on Biden wouldn't there be some sort of record third party turnout?

The third parties all ran literally whos. You need a charismatic third-party candidate to have a Perot Spoiler or anything to that effect. Not too mention that the DNC already shot the Green Party in the leg by stealing their one campaign plank.
Also: life is not required to conform to your expectations. Trump's victory was also a huge statistical anomaly.

 

[Mewtwo_Rain]

I don't mean this in a negative way, but why is it always left-leaning people who want to debate all the time about politics? I've never been able to ask anyone that who wasn't actively wanting to debate.
Usually I just get "Because we're smart and facts back up what we say" or something equally smug and not constructive.

As for current events and spergery, I think people got invested while US politics were fun and wacky and learned it's fucked and everyone sucks but can't accept that's how it's always been.
I'll disagree that nothing will change, it just depends on if one party gets Congress and the presidency, then they try to ram through major changes ASAP.

I have the alternative experience. Usually if I found leftist willing to debate instead of being smug and pompous (even when incorrect) and willing to debate most people wouldn't be odded out or disgusted by them. The bigger issue many people have is they force their politics on others and get all volatile when people disagree with them in any continence even when they bring up their nonsense in the first place then play crybully when they get called out in real life at least or try to hide behind the "agree to disagree" escape especially when facts are involved.

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

Trump's victory was also a huge statistical anomaly.

So Trump in 2016 didn't win a majority of bellwether states and counties?

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

So Trump in 2016 didn't win a majority of bellwether states and counties?

There is more than one way to be a statistical anomaly.

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

There is more than one way to be a statistical anomaly.

I saw that as the "polls are meant to manipulate opinion, not reflect it" why report to others, what people are deciding on unless you want to influence their decision?

 

[Aidan]

I have the alternative experience. Usually if I found leftist willing to debate instead of being smug and pompous (even when incorrect) and willing to debate most people wouldn't be odded out or disgusted by them. The bigger issue many people have is they force their politics on others and get all volatile when people disagree with them in any continence even when they bring up their nonsense in the first place then play crybully when they get called out in real life at least or try to hide behind the "agree to disagree" escape especially when facts are involved.

Sounds like you're the one seeking "debates" with people with the way you described this.
But yes, an unusually high number of people are on edge politically and if anything challenges their political views those people will flip shit. Politics is a new religion.

 

[Mewtwo_Rain]

Sounds like you're the one seeking "debates" with people with the way you described this.
But yes, an unusually high number of people are on edge politically and if anything challenges their political views those people will flip shit. Politics is a new religion.

Nah, I'm pretty anti-social. I let people approach me, but if they bring something up then I confront them. I don't mind just listening to music while walking through stores on my music player of choice, but if they ask for a debate or push a claim then they also have to realize they open themselves up to criticism. Regardless of their claims. I mean to be honest if someone like myself made a bunch of bullshit claims in public I'd expect no less the same treatment no? The difference is if I tried the "let's agree to disagree" I doubt they'd let me walk away when pushing nonsense in the first place.

 

[Taco]

So the better option is to just leave someone HIV infected .Sounds like irresponsible losers upset they have to be held accountable for not checking if they have STDs or to make sure they don't infect others.

You don't need a study to understand human cowardice, but not making a law allows people to potentially spread more HIV than the adverse. Yeah they may not refuse getting tested but they wouldn't have made laws against it if it wasn't an issue in the first place.

It'd be like if there were no laws as referenced to drinking and driving, do you think people would check themselves if there weren't laws about it? No. Of course not. It's an excuse. Heck even with laws, people still drink and drive and cause thousands of deaths a year. The purpose of the law is to create a risk vs. reward just like in this case. If you do it, and get caught you pay a price. If you are negligent and don't get tested you get held accountable. Same concept.

You don't actually break the law if you don't know you have HIV during consensual sex in any state. In Wisconsin if you rape someone and have HIV it's an extra charge but if you knew you had it or not is taken into consideration during sentencing. Oh the things you can learn in five minutes on the internet.

 

[Ebonic Tutor]

I wish people talking about Biden and Trump would stop oversimplifying things to the US President has dictatorial powers. And then in the same breath complain they didn't declare themselves Emperor and dissolve congress. Especially when the Governors over the past 8 months are causing most of the crap. Obama couldn't even close Guantanemo like he said he would because the establishment said "lol no.". Trump even had to wrangle funds out of the Pentagon to get the wall built.

Pretty sure he barely even tried to and gave up at the first bit of resistance.

 

[All becomes gunt]

Maybe if Trump had taken this shit seriously from the start half the country still wouldn't be in lockdown.

But "muh election optics". Now even the vaccine rollout's apparently fucked up too.


The difference is the Democrats realized they were wrong and started taking the virus seriously * maybe too seriously in California's case * while Trump to this day still cries that it's a hoax * even after getting it himself * and tells his followers to not do even basic bitch shit like wearing a mask.

But wearing a mask doesnt help. I've gone through this discussion before but if you wanna go for it again ill be quite happy to tear you to shreds.

 

[Ebonic Tutor]

But wearing a mask doesnt help. I've gone through this discussion before but if you wanna go for it again ill be quite happy to tear you to shreds.

"TV people said mask good, so mask good."

Knowing how often the "experts" (I'm including the number crunch wonks in there with the doctors) get it wrong with everything else and not questioning this so much is really strange to me. Holes bigger than the virus in most masks, much less people wearing them incorrectly and multiple times and they think they actually help.

Maybe they would help if it was an airborne virus, but it's spread by surface contact and if an idiot doesn't cover their mouth when they sneeze it's still gonna get shot right through that mask.

 

[Elbe]

Or do you really believe Trump nuked a Hurricane

He could've at least tried!