EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3414
| 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 | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Husyelt
United States832 Posts
On December 22 2021 07:07 JimmiC wrote: The system you should change is having "news" stations that have no rules about fairness or actually being honest and truthful. It is awful for your country that there are two of these and each ones panders one party. Like if Tucker is going to do "satire" and not be held accountable for his lies and big warning should appear before each episode. There needs accountability. Don’t disagree, but I was referring to the system setup between NIH / White House official spokesperson or whatever. How the public receives the new guidelines or current info should not be through Good Morning America or with a CNN host and via practically one mans messaging ability. Because he’s not great. I don’t know the perfect remedy, but if it had to be someone, have it be someone without an immediate personality. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25476 Posts
On December 22 2021 07:02 Husyelt wrote: For sure, in a neutral world he is doing just fine. What I’m saying is that he is an easy target and I would prefer someone far more boring or none at all. Stick to boring papers and reports read out by the anchors. If you have to cut back to a few people who only speak for a few minutes and don’t get chummy with the hosts. The setup we have isn’t good for 24/7 partisan / salacious news cycles. So remove him and change the system. People will just change target though If it’s not Fauci it’ll be whoever else. If it’s merely statements from an organisation that media reproduce, then the organisation will get the same flak in different ways like ‘who are these people and why aren’t they accountable?’ If anything having a human face makes mistakes and fallibility more tolerable than some anonymised government agency, for people who aren’t innately ‘skeptical’ about Covid and just are looking for a punching bag to justify their innate biases. I haven’t seen much of Fauci for quite some time myself, but I don’t recall him doing too much egregious, certainly not enough to see his name negatively invoked every other post on social media anyway. This is not to say he’s beyond reproach, but I don’t believe you can put in another figure, or method of communicating that won’t be divisive, there are too many folks who are incapable of believing anything Covid related, theirs is not real skepticism as it’s completely immutable and I am unsure there is any information contrary to their current beliefs that would alter that. As mentioned above, this doesn’t absolve Fauci from actual critique for mistakes in approach, and genuine skeptical inquiry. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13956 Posts
On December 22 2021 08:47 LegalLord wrote: There’s really no benefit to having Fauci play “medical celebrity” as the face of the corvid response anymore. Him stepping aside would not be a bad choice. Thats silly, It would change nothing and add credibility to his critics and the critics of the entire health establishment. The next person would get attacked over the same nonsense even harder trying to get another person fired. If trump didn't fire him after the incredible friction between them then biden has a lot less of a reason to. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 22 2021 08:52 Sermokala wrote: Thats silly, It would change nothing and add credibility to his critics and the critics of the entire health establishment. The next person would get attacked over the same nonsense even harder trying to get another person fired. If trump didn't fire him after the incredible friction between them then biden has a lot less of a reason to. There doesn’t need to be a “next person.” The entire role of "medical professional making the news cycles" has outlived its usefulness. Let Biden (or a political appointee of his admin) own their own policy decisions. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
Just extend it until the year 3000 and let the issue be done with | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I do think that extending it now is all but an admission that the pause can never be lifted without significant adverse policy implications. It may unfortunately be time to admit the obvious. | ||
|
dp
United States234 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
Why not longer considering there is massive pressure to forgive anywhere from the $10k he campaigned on to all of them and 0 pressure from anyone to restart them? As far as I can tell the best case scenario is that it is a cruel and cynical political ploy. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21707 Posts
Why on earth would you not push this past the election right away. | ||
|
Starlightsun
United States1405 Posts
On December 23 2021 02:54 Gorsameth wrote: The election is in November right? So any short extension is just going to make it fresher in peoples minds that the Democrats are waffling on the issue. Which is a bad thing. Why on earth would you not push this past the election right away. Perhaps some of the people waiting for their money from student debt repayments are major campaign donors. It's absurd how much money is amassed and spent on election campaigns in this country. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21707 Posts
On December 23 2021 03:32 Starlightsun wrote: no amount of campaign funds is going to help you if people go to the voting booth with the memory that you restarted loan payments.Perhaps some of the people waiting for their money from student debt repayments are major campaign donors. It's absurd how much money is amassed and spent on election campaigns in this country. | ||
|
Starlightsun
United States1405 Posts
On December 23 2021 03:44 Gorsameth wrote: no amount of campaign funds is going to help you if people go to the voting booth with the memory that you restarted loan payments. I'm not so sure, if the choice were between that or not bankrolling your campaign. Besides, many avenues to power and wealth are still open to the losers of elections. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
