The exodus of the blue avatars
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:32:40 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  The exodus of the blue avatars
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
Author Topic: The exodus of the blue avatars  (Read 6586 times)
crazy jimmie
jamespol
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,513


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #150 on: September 25, 2022, 11:42:52 PM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square
Logged
Aurelius
Cody
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,170
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.35, S: 0.35

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #151 on: September 25, 2022, 11:44:59 PM »

Lockdowns were always a horrible idea. Pre-vaccine there should have been nothing more than mask requirements during the peaks of waves. I have no problem with the March 2020 lockdowns because we had no idea what the hell was going on. But the ones continuing after that were bad and wrong, and especially the ones in winter 2020-21 (which happened in a few states including CA) were indefensible. Trump was right to go after the Dem governors of those midwestern states in May and June 2020.

The vast majority of research and data indicates that if we used a time machine and did what you're proposing, a lot more people would have died or developed long-term heart or lung illnesses. When I say "a lot", I mean hundreds of thousands and possibly over a million.

What was so extremely important that made saving all of those lives "a horrible idea"? The concept of anti-collectivist libertarianism? I'm sure that would have comforted all the people who lost family members and comforted the people who died as they lay there dying.
Those who value their own security over others' liberty deserve neither. Nothing has ever stopped people from choosing to stay at home. They do not have the right to force others to do the same. Personally I would rather take the tiny risk and live a full life than cower at home afraid of other people.

The only situation in which this doesn't hold is when hospitals are completely overrun. But this was rarely a problem in the US after the first few months, especially if you use real metrics about hospital beds, not fake ones that allowed authoritarians to more easily continue their power trips.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #152 on: September 25, 2022, 11:48:10 PM »

Anyway way a post Furgeson made one time actually clearly sums up why debate is so hard now days. He outright said he finds it hard to believe someone can claim they care about the views they have unless they think people who are on the opposite side of that debate are more immoral for having those views.

That to me is 100% a wrong approach to politics

Logged
Aurelius
Cody
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,170
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.35, S: 0.35

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #153 on: September 25, 2022, 11:50:31 PM »

Anyway way a post Furgeson made one time actually clearly sums up why debate is so hard now days. He outright said he finds it hard to believe someone can claim they care about the views they have unless they think people who are on the opposite side of that debate are more immoral for having those views.

That to me is 100% a wrong approach to politics


Even if you accept this, which I don't, it only even makes sense if you subscribe to a good/evil system of morality. It doesn't make sense if, like me, you mostly subscribe to a good/bad system of morality instead.

Yes, there are some things where I think certain positions are immoral, but those are relatively few and far between. Mostly I just think they are wrong, and in some cases stupid. Wrong or stupid doesn't automatically mean immoral.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #154 on: September 25, 2022, 11:50:59 PM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.
Logged
crazy jimmie
jamespol
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,513


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #155 on: September 26, 2022, 12:29:08 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.
Logged
No War, but the War on Christmas
iBizzBee
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,798

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #156 on: September 26, 2022, 02:19:21 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

The FIRST time MAGA lost an election by a clear and decisive margin but wasn't handed the mandate any way they attempted an insurrection. It's mind-boggling.
Logged
No War, but the War on Christmas
iBizzBee
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,798

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #157 on: September 26, 2022, 02:23:29 AM »

If Blue avatars want to leave cause they don't feel like this is a 'safe-space' for them, go for it. I think the mods on Atlas actually do an amazing job of withholding bias and keeping the forum an open space for discussion with limits on obvious out of bounds behavior.

On the one hand I will never back down from calling out hypocrisy and the very real damage the Conservative ideology and movement causes to marginalized communities and people. Sometimes that involves harsh words and realizations.

I also have always done my best to try and not let it become an attack on the individual as a person instead of an attack on their ideology, but I can see where heated discussions like that can blur the lines.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #158 on: September 26, 2022, 02:25:58 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

Kerry literally had no case whatsoever that it was stolen . Like I can't even think of an argument that he had that he had other than literally say the machines were rigged which is just as conspiratorial as what some the biggest election deniers use for 2020.

The election was not stolen from Trump , and it was not from Kerry with(wasn't from Gore too but thats a different story).

 
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #159 on: September 26, 2022, 02:27:20 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

Hillary did not win the PV in 2016 as if we had a PV system there would have been a runoff in 2016. To win the PV you need a majority which she did not have
Logged
No War, but the War on Christmas
iBizzBee
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,798

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #160 on: September 26, 2022, 02:29:40 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

Hillary did not win the PV in 2016 as if we had a PV system there would have been a runoff in 2016. To win the PV you need a majority which she did not have

Your argument relies on a hypothetical realty, mine is based on the actual popular vote that occurred in our reality, but I digress.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #161 on: September 26, 2022, 02:33:16 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

Hillary did not win the PV in 2016 as if we had a PV system there would have been a runoff in 2016. To win the PV you need a majority which she did not have

Your argument relies on a hypothetical realty, mine is the actual popular vote that occurred, but I digress.

Yours also is based on a hypothetical reality cause if we had a PV system , campaign strategies would be very different as well. Campaigns are run to win 270 EV so they focus on the states that would most help there while if there was a PV system the candidates would focus on the states that would most help win that.

I was just saying that in a PV system you need to win a majority of the PV to win and Hillary did not get that either.
Logged
No War, but the War on Christmas
iBizzBee
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,798

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #162 on: September 26, 2022, 02:39:46 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

Hillary did not win the PV in 2016 as if we had a PV system there would have been a runoff in 2016. To win the PV you need a majority which she did not have

Your argument relies on a hypothetical realty, mine is the actual popular vote that occurred, but I digress.

Yours also is based on a hypothetical reality cause if we had a PV system , campaign strategies would be very different as well. Campaigns are run to win 270 EV so they focus on the states that would most help there while if there was a PV system the candidates would focus on the states that would most help win that.

I was just saying that in a PV system you need to win a majority of the PV to win and Hillary did not get that either.

That isn't true at all, plenty of popular vote systems allow the winner of the plurality vote to win overall. Although if you're arguing for a more equitable system that also transfers votes then by all means OSR, I'm with you.

And my argument isn't a hypothetical, the absolute fact is that Hillary Clinton won nearly 3 million more votes than Donald Trump under our current system. That's hardly an insignificant margin and not even close to a hanging chad or Florida 2000 margin.

I would argue that our current system actually supresses the vote in urban areas and big states that are already solid Democrat so they don't bother to vote. But we could go in circles all day arguing about how turnout might be effected by changing the electoral system... The fact is, that under the only system we can verify turnout for as a fact, Hillary won by a significant margin on a person per person basis.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #163 on: September 26, 2022, 02:46:27 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

Hillary did not win the PV in 2016 as if we had a PV system there would have been a runoff in 2016. To win the PV you need a majority which she did not have

Your argument relies on a hypothetical realty, mine is the actual popular vote that occurred, but I digress.

Yours also is based on a hypothetical reality cause if we had a PV system , campaign strategies would be very different as well. Campaigns are run to win 270 EV so they focus on the states that would most help there while if there was a PV system the candidates would focus on the states that would most help win that.

I was just saying that in a PV system you need to win a majority of the PV to win and Hillary did not get that either.

That isn't true at all, plenty of popular vote systems allow the winner of the plurality vote to win overall. Although if you're arguing for a more equitable system that also transfers votes then by all means OSR, I'm with you.

And my argument isn't a hypothetical, the absolute fact is that Hillary Clinton won nearly 3 million more votes than Donald Trump under our current system. That's hardly an insignificant margin and not even close to a hanging chad or Florida 2000 margin.

I would argue that our current system actually supresses the vote in urban areas and big states that are already solid Democrat so they don't bother to vote. But we could go in circles all day arguing about how turnout might be effected by changing the electoral system... The fact is, that under the only system we can verify turnout for as a fact, Hillary won by a significant margin on a person per person basis.

No that is not how things work as you cant just use a number that has zero actual meaning and assume that is what the number would be if it did have meaning. If the rules of the game would change so would the campaign and nobody knowns what the actual PV ends up like in that campaign.

What we have right now as the PV is the hypothetical while the EV tally is reality 
Logged
No War, but the War on Christmas
iBizzBee
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,798

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #164 on: September 26, 2022, 03:32:33 AM »

For the liberals who defend Bush and say Trump was more dangerous to democracy.. do not forget this:

Bush STOLE Florida in 2000 and got away with it.

Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004 and got away with it.

Trump won and lost the states he won and lost fair and square

There is absolutely no valid reason to say Ohio in 2004 was stolen and in fact saying so is more crazy than saying 2016 or 2020 were rigged.


I found it so funny when Trump said on TV on January 6th that it was a stolen election.

Gore and Kerry didn't go on TV cheering insurrections and saying it was a stolen election. Especially when the election was clearly STOLEN from Gore and probably stolen from Kerry.

I've always wondered this. Even in 2016, technically, Democrats had a MUCH better reason to riot and attempt to overturn the election. In other countries if the candidate who got millions of votes less was inaugurated there /WOULD/ be significant civil unrest. But besides obviously a lot of, justified IMO, 'resistance' mantra's among the Left we did accept it for the sake of peace and our system.

Hillary did not win the PV in 2016 as if we had a PV system there would have been a runoff in 2016. To win the PV you need a majority which she did not have

Your argument relies on a hypothetical realty, mine is the actual popular vote that occurred, but I digress.

Yours also is based on a hypothetical reality cause if we had a PV system , campaign strategies would be very different as well. Campaigns are run to win 270 EV so they focus on the states that would most help there while if there was a PV system the candidates would focus on the states that would most help win that.

I was just saying that in a PV system you need to win a majority of the PV to win and Hillary did not get that either.

That isn't true at all, plenty of popular vote systems allow the winner of the plurality vote to win overall. Although if you're arguing for a more equitable system that also transfers votes then by all means OSR, I'm with you.

And my argument isn't a hypothetical, the absolute fact is that Hillary Clinton won nearly 3 million more votes than Donald Trump under our current system. That's hardly an insignificant margin and not even close to a hanging chad or Florida 2000 margin.

I would argue that our current system actually supresses the vote in urban areas and big states that are already solid Democrat so they don't bother to vote. But we could go in circles all day arguing about how turnout might be effected by changing the electoral system... The fact is, that under the only system we can verify turnout for as a fact, Hillary won by a significant margin on a person per person basis.

No that is not how things work as you cant just use a number that has zero actual meaning and assume that is what the number would be if it did have meaning. If the rules of the game would change so would the campaign and nobody knowns what the actual PV ends up like in that campaign.

What we have right now as the PV is the hypothetical while the EV tally is reality 

Who gets to assign meaning to the popular vote? All we can do without veering into hypotheticals, is once again, the popular vote as it exists under our current system. It's my cursory opinion without doing deeper research that the electoral college largely surpasses urban voters and those who lean left, you obviously think differently.

If you want to have a larger conversation about this I'm all game but perhaps it should be moved to a different thread about our electoral system and/or how different systems might change the popular vote outcome.
Logged
Hindsight was 2020
Hindsight is 2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,207
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #165 on: September 26, 2022, 10:04:14 AM »

Practically ever internet site that deals with politics become a “liberal echo chambers” because everyone here has access to a variety of sources to cite so it becomes impossible to argue things that are stable of American conservatism ideology when you in seconds are pull up various studies and articles that show global warming is real, 2020 wasn’t rigged nor was the voting results abnormal in any way, racial profiling by our police does happen, and trickle down economics don’t really work. And lastly for those you blame the mods for being bias I’d like to point out that Reaganfan posted openly white nationalist talking points for years before the mods decided he got enough strikes to be out and that several of them are gay yet DeadPrez has been allowed to call gay people “groomers” without getting kicked off
Logged
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,969


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #166 on: September 26, 2022, 10:13:05 AM »

Lockdowns were always a horrible idea. Pre-vaccine there should have been nothing more than mask requirements during the peaks of waves. I have no problem with the March 2020 lockdowns because we had no idea what the hell was going on. But the ones continuing after that were bad and wrong, and especially the ones in winter 2020-21 (which happened in a few states including CA) were indefensible. Trump was right to go after the Dem governors of those midwestern states in May and June 2020.

The vast majority of research and data indicates that if we used a time machine and did what you're proposing, a lot more people would have died or developed long-term heart or lung illnesses. When I say "a lot", I mean hundreds of thousands and possibly over a million.

What was so extremely important that made saving all of those lives "a horrible idea"? The concept of anti-collectivist libertarianism? I'm sure that would have comforted all the people who lost family members and comforted the people who died as they lay there dying.
Those who value their own security over others' liberty deserve neither. Nothing has ever stopped people from choosing to stay at home. They do not have the right to force others to do the same. Personally I would rather take the tiny risk and live a full life than cower at home afraid of other people.

The only situation in which this doesn't hold is when hospitals are completely overrun. But this was rarely a problem in the US after the first few months, especially if you use real metrics about hospital beds, not fake ones that allowed authoritarians to more easily continue their power trips.
Good people don't put their own comfort over other's lives. Liberty is not the only thing that matters.
Logged
crazy jimmie
jamespol
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,513


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #167 on: September 26, 2022, 05:21:29 PM »

We've even had a small handful of posters in 2020 and 2021 advocating for absolutely zero COVID restrictions, NOT on the basis of "they don't work", but on the basis of "they might actually work, but individual freedom is more important". That is the morally wrong position and it isn't justifiable.

Ding dong your opinion is wrong. You have the right to stay in your house forever if you are afraid of getting the cold. You do not have the right to force me to live according to your irrational fear.

Do you genuinely believe that there should never have been any covid restrictions at all, even in March-April 2020? Post-vaccine, I agree there shouldn't be restrictions, but T'Chenka is specifically referring to a point before we had the vaccine, and fear of covid was not irrational then.

In hindsight the best strategy would have been to allow covid to spread and have as many people infected as possible and create a strong initial immunity giving variants less opportunity to develop.
Logged
Ferguson97
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,812
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #168 on: September 26, 2022, 10:46:09 PM »

We've even had a small handful of posters in 2020 and 2021 advocating for absolutely zero COVID restrictions, NOT on the basis of "they don't work", but on the basis of "they might actually work, but individual freedom is more important". That is the morally wrong position and it isn't justifiable.

Ding dong your opinion is wrong. You have the right to stay in your house forever if you are afraid of getting the cold. You do not have the right to force me to live according to your irrational fear.

Do you genuinely believe that there should never have been any covid restrictions at all, even in March-April 2020? Post-vaccine, I agree there shouldn't be restrictions, but T'Chenka is specifically referring to a point before we had the vaccine, and fear of covid was not irrational then.

In hindsight the best strategy would have been to allow covid to spread and have as many people infected as possible and create a strong initial immunity giving variants less opportunity to develop.

This is deranged.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,093
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #169 on: September 27, 2022, 10:44:25 AM »

We've even had a small handful of posters in 2020 and 2021 advocating for absolutely zero COVID restrictions, NOT on the basis of "they don't work", but on the basis of "they might actually work, but individual freedom is more important". That is the morally wrong position and it isn't justifiable.

Ding dong your opinion is wrong. You have the right to stay in your house forever if you are afraid of getting the cold. You do not have the right to force me to live according to your irrational fear.

Do you genuinely believe that there should never have been any covid restrictions at all, even in March-April 2020? Post-vaccine, I agree there shouldn't be restrictions, but T'Chenka is specifically referring to a point before we had the vaccine, and fear of covid was not irrational then.

In hindsight the best strategy would have been to allow covid to spread and have as many people infected as possible and create a strong initial immunity giving variants less opportunity to develop.

This is deranged.
maybe, but nowhere near as deranged as "locking down" 87% of society for two weeks to "stop the spread".


And if the first thought that went through your head was "well yeah, it should have been 100%" then you don't understand society or the corners of it that keep humans alive on a daily basis.
Logged
Aurelius
Cody
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,170
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.35, S: 0.35

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #170 on: September 27, 2022, 10:50:59 AM »

We've even had a small handful of posters in 2020 and 2021 advocating for absolutely zero COVID restrictions, NOT on the basis of "they don't work", but on the basis of "they might actually work, but individual freedom is more important". That is the morally wrong position and it isn't justifiable.

Ding dong your opinion is wrong. You have the right to stay in your house forever if you are afraid of getting the cold. You do not have the right to force me to live according to your irrational fear.

Do you genuinely believe that there should never have been any covid restrictions at all, even in March-April 2020? Post-vaccine, I agree there shouldn't be restrictions, but T'Chenka is specifically referring to a point before we had the vaccine, and fear of covid was not irrational then.

In hindsight the best strategy would have been to allow covid to spread and have as many people infected as possible and create a strong initial immunity giving variants less opportunity to develop.

This is deranged.
maybe, but nowhere near as deranged as "locking down" 87% of society for two weeks to "stop the spread".


And if the first thought that went through your head was "well yeah, it should have been 100%" then you don't understand society or the corners of it that keep humans alive on a daily basis.
Or the reasons we value life to begin with. Life is valued in large part because it is good and worth living. Making life miserable merely for the sake of not letting a single person die is bizarre. I'd rather live 60 great years than 80 miserable ones.
Logged
T'Chenka
King TChenka
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,044
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #171 on: September 27, 2022, 02:07:07 PM »


Or the reasons we value life to begin with. Life is valued in large part because it is good and worth living. Making life miserable merely for the sake of not letting a single person die is bizarre. I'd rather live 60 great years than 80 miserable ones.

Thank god we have right wingers to make these decisions for us all!
Logged
Aurelius
Cody
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,170
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.35, S: 0.35

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #172 on: September 27, 2022, 02:15:11 PM »

Or the reasons we value life to begin with. Life is valued in large part because it is good and worth living. Making life miserable merely for the sake of not letting a single person die is bizarre. I'd rather live 60 great years than 80 miserable ones.

Thank god we have right wingers to make these decisions for us all!
You people were the ones forcing everyone to make a particular choice! I was advocating to let people choose their own level of risk tolerance. Under the restrictive regime, everyone is forced to value (expected mean) duration of life over quality of life. Under the permissive regime, which I have supported since pretty early on in covid, everyone gets to decide for themselves which they value more. Thank God that neurotic lefties are no longer successfully forcing everyone else to cower in fear alongside themselves in "solidarity"!

Do you even think about what you post?
Logged
T'Chenka
King TChenka
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,044
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #173 on: September 27, 2022, 02:28:02 PM »


Do you even think about what you post?

Lol of course I do. I'm not the one trying to make a false equivelance between ignoring experts to get people killed and mildly inconveniencing entitled hyper-anti-collectivists.
Logged
Aurelius
Cody
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,170
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.35, S: 0.35

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #174 on: September 27, 2022, 02:29:54 PM »
« Edited: September 27, 2022, 02:34:15 PM by Aurelius »

Do you even think about what you post?

Lol of course I do. I'm not the one trying to make a false equivelance between ignoring experts to get people killed and mildly inconveniencing entitled hyper-anti-collectivists.
Like I have said a thousand times, if you don't want to take the *tiny* risk of being killed by covid, you have the right to stay home, mask, social distance, order grocery dropoff, etc. You do not have the right to force the rest of us to do the same. My choice to live my life without fear does not have to affect hypersensitive hypochondriacs who are still masking and distancing.

I choose to treat the risks from covid like the risks from driving, eating medium rare steak, going outside without slathering myself in sunscreen, etc. They are infinitesimal but real, and not worth making a big deal of.

And "experts" do not have the right to dictate politics any more than monarchs do (they don't). We can consider what they have to say and then choose to go a completely different direction. This is what democracy is for! I choose to completely disregard the psycho epidemiologists on twitter who are still freaking out that most people are no longer playing along with their hysteria.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.074 seconds with 11 queries.