Reply With Quote
Lockdown protesters have been peaceful protesters. Carrying guns and not firing a single bullet? Can't get anymore peaceful than that tbh.
He has hired yes-men to advise him on Presidential matters and their only priority, as per his priority, is keeping him in office.
That's not good leadership in a pandemic. It's not even good advice, because usually in a crisis of this magnitude, a President gets a significant boost in public support, unless he's incompetent and objectively dishonest. He'd have a better shot at being re-elected if he'd get out of his own way, and as a "bonus," fewer people will die.
Only to people like you who don't want to hear it. The same kind of people who are prone to frequently bringing up Antifa at random. Weak.Liberals are trying to ruin the lives of people on the right. Any group that would support masked thugs breaking business windows and rioting because of the outcome of an election isn't a group with everyone's best interest in mind. The left has at least as much of a hard-on for power as the right, they just aren't as cohesive in their message and have looped in to many fringe special interest group, all with different ideas of which direction things should go.
What you're criticizing him for, being a pompous asshole, is quite legit. Claiming he killed people is just ing stupid and that kind of desperate hyperbolic rhetoric takes a on the rest of your message.
Lockdown protesters have been peaceful protesters. Carrying guns and not firing a single bullet? Can't get anymore peaceful than that tbh.
If the death total was half of what it is now, for intents and purposes things would not be any different. If it was twice what it is right now for intents and purposes things would not be any different. The left would still say Trump has blood on his hands. I mean they pretty much have to say that because this is an election year and narratives are important.
Of course you're going to say it's weak, you're on the left. You're speaking from a position of weakness and I'm not. What is the statistical death count threshold for whether or not Trump has blood on his hands?Only to people like you who don't want to hear it. The same kind of people who are prone to frequently bringing up Antifa at random. Weak.
I’d say he’s responsible for 60k
And that’s just being generous
DMC seems to have failed to notice that criticizing Trump for his gross incompetence re:COVID-19, might not only be politically expedient for the Dems but also objectively true for everybody.
He has been POTUS for 4 years already dont see how he cannot be held responsible for ty US response to the pandemic.
still he is not the sole responsible. entire US economic/medical system failed.
until americans realize their system is ed from the foundations. will never improve nonmatter who is in charge
not carrying guns would be more peaceful
Not the way his mind works. Democrats cannot be right about anything. Reductio ad liberalum.
Pretty simple logic tree. Did a liberal say something is true? No--stop. Yes----claim it is not true, and that liberals are only saying it for political advantage.
It is the worst kind of projection.
I cannot remember a single time he has admitted that anyone he views as liberal has a good point.
Strawman/personal attack response awaited.
Not carrying guns in the first place.
This is not hard . Unless you are a moron.
Did Trump do anything wrong RE: the current pandemic?
Yes or no.
If yes, what did he do wrong?
I'm not basing my criticism on a number. I'm basing it on his actions. They're right there in front of you.
Given his antipathy towards testing, his desire to keep the "numbers down" by doing things like leaving people on cruise ships, and his other PR-based priorities re: this pandemic, it's useless for a death count to be the KPI here.
"If he killed 40,000, you'd say he killed 40,000. If he killed 80,000, you'd say 80,000."
Thanks for illustrating the point quite well. Throwing out a silly ass comment like "there'd be fewer deaths" doesn't do anything for you. So what? Would it change anything about your rage? No.
"If he killed 40,000, you'd say he killed 40,000. If he killed 80,000, you'd say 80,000."
Again, genius, what's the magic ing number where it's acceptable?
chop chop
So if no one died, you'd have the exact same criticism?
You're now the arbiter of truth and objectivity.
That would be interesting if anyone gave a what you said.
Sea cow must have gone outside and heard the laughter
Aren’t you happy that we can’t see you?
You keep asking for photos though, like some creeper got
I would say salty.... but since where you live
7th grade level talking. Step up your game.
Sea cow is angry
Is it the laughter?
There is no absolute number that have to die.
Thats just a silly argument.
Its the fck ups and lies.
And there are plenty of those.
Pot committed to a low tier, juvenile shtick, won't put money on the take.
So 'fewer would die" isn't the real issue here.
Let us proceed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
