Jump to content

The Next President is...


disgruntledemployee

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Homestar said:

Indeed, you are right. 3 SCOTUS noms will ensure his “conservative” legacy for a generation. 

I don't know.  We keep selecting "conservative judges" and they keep doing things that are unexpected.  Sure, they'll probably be more right leaning and less "legislative," but at the same time there's always that outlier case that can really change things. 

I have a feeling getting on SCOTUS is a lot like joining the Presidents Club.  The weight of the office modifies, if not changes, some previously held beliefs.  Kinda like Command in that way as well.  Either way Senate will remain R (woo) so not too much damage will be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

And the next begins, where we start walking back our foreign policy gains on China, Russia, and Iran, but the POTUS appears "more coherent."  It's all about trade offs.

You think the US made gains with Russia the past 4 years?

Donnie did Vlad's bidding on the reg.

Agreed on China and Iran, but so much could have been done with both of those, so much more effectively.  Dude was all over the place.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think the US made gains with Russia the past 4 years?
Donnie did Vlad's bidding on the reg.
Agreed on China and Iran, but so much could have been done with both of those, so much more effectively.  Dude was all over the place.

Agreed!

CinC spoke out of both sides of his mouth on China until the Rona. Unfair trade out of one side, great leader, great country out of the other. His “hard line” with China could have been so much more effective, but I’ll take the little he did do. More than Obama by a far cry...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

You think the US made gains with Russia the past 4 years?

Donnie did Vlad's bidding on the reg.

Agreed on China and Iran, but so much could have been done with both of those, so much more effectively.  Dude was all over the place.

Maybe you don’t see as much as you think you do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slackline said:


Please, enlighten the group...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would you say our FP with respect to Russia has been more or less aggressive over the last 4 years? If you think less, have you spent time in EUCOM?

 

Edit: I’ll give you the hint...EUCOM ops under Obama/Biden was more akin to wearing a straight jacket than the last 4 years. Same with China, who expanded in the ECS/SCS aggressively under Obama/Biden. And Iran and Syria/Russia, who walked all over that admin. 

Edited by SurelySerious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://nypost.com/2020/11/09/pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-is-more-than-90-percent-effective-company/

 

Quote

hat rate is well above the 50 percent effectiveness that the Food and Drug Administration requires for a coronavirus vaccine and far higher than the typical efficacy of the seasonal flu shot, which was only 29 percent effective in the 2018-2019 flu season, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The results suggest Pfizer’s shot works almost as well as the measles vaccine, which is about 93 percent effective with one dose and roughly 97 percent effective with two doses, the CDC says.

Operation Warp Speed is not a plan - according to Biden. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://nypost.com/2020/11/09/pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-is-more-than-90-percent-effective-company/
 

hat rate is well above the 50 percent effectiveness that the Food and Drug Administration requires for a coronavirus vaccine and far higher than the typical efficacy of the seasonal flu shot, which was only 29 percent effective in the 2018-2019 flu season, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The results suggest Pfizer’s shot works almost as well as the measles vaccine, which is about 93 percent effective with one dose and roughly 97 percent effective with two doses, the CDC says.



How is this possible? Was there a cabinet position created or did the HHS secretary take over? I was told that was the way to succeed against covid and yet I haven’t heard of those things occurring. (Sarcasm).

Go ahead SLACKline. Insert your drivel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Who did?

 

To claim that anyone's response can be graded thus far is premature. Europe is falling apart again. His response can't be bad if none of them were good. 

 

As with most things, if he could just keep his mouth shut and act like a president, his response wouldn't be discernable from any other

Europe's response to second wave has now started to lower case rates again.  I would say falling apart is a bad characterization.  Also, most people over here don't conflate COVID response measures with politics.  Everyone is rallied together to minimize the needless deaths on the susceptible populations.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

You think the US made gains with Russia the past 4 years?

Donnie did Vlad's bidding on the reg.

Agreed on China and Iran, but so much could have been done with both of those, so much more effectively.  Dude was all over the place.

Why do we care about Russia? Wasn't the Cold War like 30 years ago? Remember when Obama called Russia a regional power and instantaneously overturned the reset in one remark? Cause I do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Waingro said:

Pfizer was never part of warp speed. 

Vaccine was not part of the plan to fight pandemic? 🤣

 

https://www.hhs.gov/coronavirus/explaining-operation-warp-speed/index.html

Quote

July 22: HHS announced up to $1.95 billion in funds to Pfizer for the large-scale manufacturing and nationwide distribution of 100 million doses of their vaccine candidate. The federal government will own the 100 million doses of vaccine initially produced as a result of this agreement, and Pfizer will deliver the doses in the United States if the product successfully receives FDA EUA or licensure, as outlined in FDA guidance, after completing demonstration of safety and efficacy in a large Phase 3 clinical trial, which began July 27th.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Waingro said:

Pfizer was never part of warp speed. 

Pfizer was in direct competition with every pharmaceutical company looking to be the first to market with a safe vaccine.Whoever gets there first “wins”; they will make billions. Even if they didn’t take a penny, they were racing against those that did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sim said:

 

I just watched that video and that's not really what he is saying.

Trust me, I would love to jump at the chance to trash Cuomo and his complete idiocy, but he's talking about Trump's vaccine roll out plan and not that the vaccine itself is bad news and that they are going to try and stop the vaccine. This definitely falls under a sensationalist and slightly fake news tweet.

Even at the end he discusses working with other governors to find ways they can tweak Trump's roll out plan and not stop the vaccine from getting to their populations. Of course the TDS still runs deep in Cuomo so maybe that's where him and the other governors will end up if they can't work to tweak Trump's plan, but that was not what I got from the video right now.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, jrizzell said:

Pfizer was in direct competition with every pharmaceutical company looking to be the first to market with a safe vaccine.Whoever gets there first “wins”; they will make billions. Even if they didn’t take a penny, they were racing against those that did.

So, if you don’t take the money, are you legally bound to be in the program?

Edited by Sua Sponte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

So, if you don’t take the money, are you legally bound to be in the program?

I don’t know, nor is it important. The only thing  pharmaceutical companies care about is money. And getting their vaccine distributed global, first, is all that matters. OWS created an environment of accelerated development, which they were directly part of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To go back to something quickly from over the weekend.  I've thought more about it.  AOC's list of Trump supporters, IMHO, is wrong.  I think it returns to a dark time in our Nation's past.  Shows her immaturity, and I hope she's able to grow up a little.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Who did?

 

To claim that anyone's response can be graded thus far is premature. Europe is falling apart again. His response can't be bad if none of them were good. 

 

As with most things, if he could just keep his mouth shut and act like a president, his response wouldn't be discernable from any other

New Zealand has done pretty well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cognitive dissonance much? I linked warp speed plan with that company on it. it was part of the plan. If that plan changed, that doesn't make it that it wasn't part of the plan. 

I think that's an important difference. Saying that you put out a bid/competition to a pool of companies that potentially included Pfizer is very different than saying that Pfizer had taken on contractual obligations to develop a vaccine on America's behalf. I believe they saw the undertaking as a future golden cash cow and didn't want any control of their IP or parents tied to US oversight.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...