| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7890 Posts
But it's at the moment the WHO is the most crucial, with dozens of millions of lives in balance, and because it showed him in a bad light. You know, for having botched completely this crisis. He's literally putting countless lives at risk to deflect blame from his failures. This guy is a grotesque monster. | ||
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
On April 15 2020 14:31 m4ini wrote: I'll be honest here. His scapegoating aside, i actually support this measure. Not for the reasons he's given (he clearly is trying to save his neck by blaming the WHO for his woefully inadequate reaction to a pandemic), but generally. I'm not including the viral interview in regards to taiwan either, since in all honesty, i'm not sure what the scientist in that interview was expected to say to the journalist, he's a scientist, so why is he asked about politics in regards to taiwan/china/ etc. The WHO is indeed too china-friendly. If you go through the praise that Ghebreyesus piled onto china, your head starts spinning, wondering where the heck he's been the entire time and if there's a chinese alex jones whispering sweet nothings into his ears. And not just sweet-talking, but demonstrably false, deliberately misleading claims in regards to chinas handling of all this. The WHO is obsolete. Not the original concept, there absolutely should be a global, international "overseer" in regards to health, but the WHO isn't it. Much like the UN, it's a political shitshow, where the real purpose just got buried under political backroom games, quabbles and charades. To be clear, i support Trumps decision in principle. Not the reasoning he gives behind it. A lot of nations rely on WHO for information and aid, and that would just be a slap in the face to them. US is Indeed backing out of any important world matters, thinking only about itself and giving the middle finger to other nations and organisations. For a decent time now US hasn't been acting like the world's leader... I don't know what you expect from WHO to criticize China and risk being banned from critical information in a time of a pandemic? Also it is a fact that China while probably a little slow to recognize the severity of the Covid, did implement effective measures and staved off a worse case scenario like in Italy, Spain and US. While China was completely locking down an entire region with tens of millions of people, Trump was saying that Covid was "just a flu", while other Asian nations like Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea were taking it a lot more seriously. After the delayed response from the US... now Trump shifts the blame on China and the WHO... It seems like China is better prepared to handle pandemics then the US and some other western nations at this point. Integrating wartime like measures in not just locking down regions, but mobilizing medical personal, building hospitals and industrializing the economy to provide the needed medical equipment. Even now China has the capacity to help other nations while obviously motivated by political and profitable gains. It's still better then US's ban all exports of medical equipment from 3M and other manufacturers. Not to mention that Trump's trade war left the world with a frail economy to handle a disaster like the Covid-19 pandemic. The trade war didn't help the US economy just made everyones worse. | ||
|
Slydie
1920 Posts
But the numbers don't lie: Currently the US has 26000 covid-19 deaths to China's 3300 (and a much higher population.) I will be extremely disappointed if American voters don't see through this bullshit. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21694 Posts
On April 15 2020 14:31 m4ini wrote: How does an international overseer get funded? I'll be honest here. His scapegoating aside, i actually support this measure. Not for the reasons he's given (he clearly is trying to save his neck by blaming the WHO for his woefully inadequate reaction to a pandemic), but generally. I'm not including the viral interview in regards to taiwan either, since in all honesty, i'm not sure what the scientist in that interview was expected to say to the journalist, he's a scientist, so why is he asked about politics in regards to taiwan/china/ etc. The WHO is indeed too china-friendly. If you go through the praise that Ghebreyesus piled onto china, your head starts spinning, wondering where the heck he's been the entire time and if there's a chinese alex jones whispering sweet nothings into his ears. And not just sweet-talking, but demonstrably false, deliberately misleading claims in regards to chinas handling of all this. The WHO is obsolete. Not the original concept, there absolutely should be a global, international "overseer" in regards to health, but the WHO isn't it. Much like the UN, it's a political shitshow, where the real purpose just got buried under political backroom games, quabbles and charades. To be clear, i support Trumps decision in principle. Not the reasoning he gives behind it. The 2018-2019 budget for the WHO was 4.4215 Billion. Where on earth does an independent self funded organisation get 4.5 billion? Simple, they don't. So someone will be funding such an organisation and those funding it will have power over it. Any international organisation is going to be a political shitshow because countries will be funding them. And yes its bad how far the WHO's head is up China's ass but what is the alternative? WHO tells the truth and shakes their finger at China. China says "fuck it" and withdraws funding and bans WHO officials from the country. Would China have even alerted the world in January? Would they have shared the virus's sequencing at that time? Sometimes its better to play along with the politicians, for all the bad that does, because the alternative is worse. I'm sure you can also find a parallel in there to the talk about Progressives supporting Biden if you wanted to. As for the Democrats 'earning' your vote, I think your looking at it wrong. The US is a 2 party system, either Trump or Biden is going to become President. Ignore parties having to earn your vote or be expected to vote for one of them, ask yourself the simple question "which of these 2 candidates would be better/worse for what I believe in?". The US doesn't have a dozen parties spread across the political spectrum where there are 2-3 that fall around your personal beliefs and where those 2-3 parties try to entice you to vote for them. Its Biden or Trump no matter how much you might hate both of them. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23239 Posts
On April 15 2020 18:18 Gorsameth wrote: ... The US doesn't have a dozen parties spread across the political spectrum where there are 2-3 that fall around your personal beliefs and where those 2-3 parties try to entice you to vote for them. Its Biden or Trump no matter how much you might hate both of them. Does it make sense then if you want a conservative SCJ you have no choice but to vote Trump no matter how awful he is? | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28673 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21694 Posts
On April 15 2020 18:21 GreenHorizons wrote: I think Trump is bad enough that its not worth it, and if someone does think Trump is an acceptable price for a SCJ seat then I would probably consider him/her a terrible person. Does it make sense then if you want a conservative SCJ you have no choice but to vote Trump no matter how awful he is? But hey, the political nature of the SC and that the Judiciary is used to push policy instead of the Legislative branch is just another in a long list of failures of the American political system. Edit: And to add in 'vote Biden for the SCJ seat' I will say this. Biden might not be good enough for you and might not be worth voting for for a SCJ seat, I understand that. But there is no candidate closer to your political leaning, Trump is undeniable worse for the Progressive cause. | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
Trump will have his name printed on the $1200 relieve checks. Just so you know who to vote for in November of you want more socialism /s. Does anyone have an idea how turnout will affect the outcome of the election? With the Corona crisis likely not being over with in November and voting by mail seemingly being off the table turnout could be very low. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7890 Posts
On April 15 2020 18:38 schaf wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/coming-to-your-1200-relief-check-donald-j-trumps-name/2020/04/14/071016c2-7e82-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html Trump will have his name printed on the $1200 relieve checks. Just so you know who to vote for in November of you want more socialism /s. And apparently it will delay the whole process at an absolutely critical time. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25419 Posts
The two main areas that I think Trump is doing damage in areas that will be difficult to repair are his actions in regards to multilateral international bodies and his attempts to discredit the media and fan the flames of wild conspiracy theories. Here with pulling these funds it’s a shit sandwich of both. I’d vote Biden for these reasons, Supreme Court is obviously important but I’d consider Trump’s irresponsible behaviour in courting and fuelling world views that are not predicated on any kind of evidence as more dangerous in the long run for the fabric of the US and the world it influences. It’s bad enough already, how’s it going to look with another four years of a President who’s happy to peddle conspiracy theories and continually attacks the concept of media holding leaders to account? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23239 Posts
On April 15 2020 18:31 Gorsameth wrote: I think Trump is bad enough that its not worth it, and if someone does think Trump is an acceptable price for a SCJ seat then I would probably consider him/her a terrible person. But hey, the political nature of the SC and that the Judiciary is used to push policy instead of the Legislative branch is just another in a long list of failures of the American political system. Edit: And to add in 'vote Biden for the SCJ seat' I will say this. Biden might not be good enough for you and might not be worth voting for for a SCJ seat, I understand that. But there is no candidate closer to your political leaning, Trump is undeniable worse for the Progressive cause. I feel like most people allow Tara Reade (presuming her story is true) the liberty of not voting for Biden or Trump without any shame or moral condemnation, right? Can we imagine that there are other people for which Biden's personal and/or political actions have been devastating in their own right to the degree they should be afforded that same consideration? Or is the argument that they all need to suck it up and vote Biden even if he destroyed their life and sounds like a half-cooked Reagan clone by Nov because two-party fptp and he's closer to them politically than a cartoonishly nefarious man-baby? EDIT: Biden could run on Mitt Romney's 2012 platform and get all the Democrats that support him now to vote for it. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21694 Posts
On April 15 2020 19:10 GreenHorizons wrote: Have you run out of actual arguments to use that you now turn to debating about individual people's feelings towards Biden?I feel like most people allow Tara Reade (presuming her story is true) the liberty of not voting for Biden or Trump without any shame or moral condemnation, right? Can we imagine that there are other people for which Biden's personal and/or political actions have been devastating in their own right to the degree they should be afforded that same consideration? Or is the argument that they all need to suck it up and vote Biden even if he destroyed their life and sounds like a half-cooked Reagan clone by Nov because two-party fptp and he's closer to them politically than a cartoonishly nefarious man-baby? As for your edit. Welcome to the wonderful world of 2 party politics. I've talked enough about how shit the system is. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23239 Posts
On April 15 2020 19:24 Gorsameth wrote: Have you run out of actual arguments to use that you now turn to debating about individual people's feelings towards Biden? As for your edit. Welcome to the wonderful world of 2 party politics. I've talked enough about how shit the system is. No. I'm trying to illustrate a point about what your/this argument means for someone like Tara Reade (and countless others that have been devastated in their own right by Biden's personal and political actions). | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4333 Posts
On April 15 2020 15:50 Biff The Understudy wrote: If he had cut the funds for good reasons and at an ok timing, we could talk about it. But it's at the moment the WHO is the most crucial, with dozens of millions of lives in balance, and because it showed him in a bad light. You know, for having botched completely this crisis. He's literally putting countless lives at risk to deflect blame from his failures. This guy is a grotesque monster. We're talking about the WHO that strongly advised countries not to close their borders? back in early February? Anyone here want to still tow that line? They can't even get the basics right.Borders are the first line in protecting the people of a nation. https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/WHO-chief-urges-against-excessive-China-travel-curbs There is no need for measures that "unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade," Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said. The WHO will send a team of experts to China as early as this week to discuss steps to contain the outbreak. In declaring an international health emergency on Thursday, the WHO issued a similar advisory, saying "there is no reason for measures that unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade." Declares international health emergency but don't restrict travel to and from China? Righto. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25419 Posts
On April 15 2020 19:41 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: We're talking about the WHO that strongly advised countries not to close their borders? back in early February? Anyone here want to still tow that line? They can't even get the basics right.Borders are the first line in protecting the people of a nation. https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/WHO-chief-urges-against-excessive-China-travel-curbs If they had advised that in early February then what? Their advice has shifted with facts on the ground and was not heeded, especially by the US. Hell restrictions on travel from Europe exempted the U.K and Ireland for a period so Trump could have his cheap shot at the EU, they sure as hell weren’t based on any assessment of actual risk. As things are developing over here the U.K. was one of the ones that should have had travel restrictions the soonest. As with many things the WHO, while not infallible or perfect is yet another institution that has been thrown out as a scapegoat for other failings and people who six months ago may not have heard of it, never mind have an idea on how it functions or it’s historical achievements are now really angry at it. If it’s to be put under the microscope and subject to actual scrutiny sure, do that at some point when things have settled down a bit. Your fire department may have some failings but you don’t remove funding to them when there’s a wildfire. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7890 Posts
On April 15 2020 19:41 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: We're talking about the WHO that strongly advised countries not to close their borders? back in early February? Anyone here want to still tow that line? They can't even get the basics right.Borders are the first line in protecting the people of a nation. https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/WHO-chief-urges-against-excessive-China-travel-curbs Declares international health emergency but don't restrict travel to and from China? Righto. Back in early february when Trump was saying that the corona was just a flu and losing week after week after week after week doing absolutely nothing and lying about everything, yeah. Oh and refusing the efficient tests of said WHO to end up fucking up so much that to this day the US can't even fucking test people. We can evaluate later how good the WHO is and if it's worth restructuring it. Trump destabilizes it at an absolutely critical time when it's the most needed for purely personal reasons. He is such an incompetent narcissistic fucktard, I have a headache thinking that anyone still think he belongs to the white house. He would be a bit too much for The Office. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
| ||
|
Neneu
Norway492 Posts
| ||
|
Excludos
Norway8082 Posts
On April 15 2020 17:56 Slydie wrote: Dropping WHO support is an obvious spin move, Trump doing as always: everything in his power to escape responsibility and shift the blame away from himself. But the numbers don't lie: Currently the US has 26000 covid-19 deaths to China's 3300 (and a much higher population.) I will be extremely disappointed if American voters don't see through this bullshit. I would be careful about saying "numbers don't lie" when quoting statistics released from China.. On April 15 2020 20:04 Neneu wrote: I think if Trump wins his second term, it will be the final confirmation for allies that USA is an unreliable and destabilizing partner. That note has been well and thoroughly marked by now anyways. Even if Trump doesn't win a second term, US is never more than 4 years away from possibly fucking over all their allies on a whim from a madman. US has well and truly established themselves as completely untrustworthy. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11519 Posts
On April 15 2020 20:04 Neneu wrote: I think if Trump wins his second term, it will be the final confirmation for allies that USA is an unreliable and destabilizing partner. And probably a good sign for progressives to try to leave the country and move to somewhere sensible. I think i am slowly arriving at the conclusion that the US simply cannot and does not want to be saved from their shitty systems. As such, on an individual level, the best choice is to try to get out to a country which is more sensible. The healthcare system alone is reason enough to leave. The fact that the votes of almost everyone are simply irrelevant, and those who can vote have to decide which the lesser of the two evils is does not bode well for any change in a positive direction either. The US seems to become worse and worse over time. | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Summer Champion…
RSL Revival
PiGosaur Monday
WardiTV Summer Champion…
The PondCast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
Online Event
SC Evo League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
