2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[Jgil316]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Here we go.

If it's "science", you should be able to easily show us that masks are indeed effective against COVID transmission.

Honestly, this is a crazy request. However, I will do my best to "answer" it the best way possible.

First: To run a controlled study on Covid transmission rates with masks vs without masks would be crazy (IMHO).
The perimeters needed would also have to focus just on masks, placement and type - all the while keeping the eyes covered (another possible vector for inoculation). Further, you would need age, race, gender and ethnicity demographics to be able to make definitive determinations.
This would be conducted as a DOE (design of experiment) and you would need to expose the groups, wait the incubation period of time, test and them compare the data sets.
As for the total data set to make a determination - I would imagine 30,000+ people for each experiment.

Easiest way is to just wear a mask and be safe.

[rhigh2390]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

You must understand a fundamental difference between conservative and progressive ... progressives believe the wrong person holds the power. Conservatives believe the power should not exist.

To Trump's credit; he has not once, tried to mandate anything. Biden tells you right away if he wins, get ready for some new rules (which he's unlikely to be successful with but who knows). People who line up at the booth and willfully trade away their freedoms simply so their candidate is in charge are crazy. Never ever ever ever ever gives those up.

100% facts.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by Jgil316

Honestly, this is a crazy request. However, I will do my best to "answer" it the best way possible.

First: To run a controlled study on Covid transmission rates with masks vs without masks would be crazy (IMHO).
The perimeters needed would also have to focus just on masks, placement and type - all the while keeping the eyes covered (another possible vector for inoculation). Further, you would need age, race, gender and ethnicity demographics to be able to make definitive determinations.
This would be conducted as a DOE (design of experiment) and you would need to expose the groups, wait the incubation period of time, test and them compare the data sets.
As for the total data set to make a determination - I would imagine 30,000+ people for each experiment.

Easiest way is to just wear a mask and be safe.

My problem is that people continually hide behind the word "science" as though it makes you ultra-informed while we're a bunch of Amish who refuse to use medicine. If you're going to claim "science", show me the data. If you don't have data, quit telling us to be open-minded to "science". It isn't science. It's opinion. And the only real data we have shows us that COVID spreads no matter how many people are wearing masks.

[rhigh2390]

Originally Posted by Boo

For sure, probably in excess of 50% voting for Biden because he isn't Trump. 2024 will be interesting if Biden wins and Republicans actually put a good, likeable candidate up against him.

Biden won't be running again in 2024, but I agree with the point. What do democrats run to if someone like Nikki Haley ends up being the Republican candidate in 2024? Or even worse for them, if Candace Owens does in the future. They won't be able to scream racist, sexist, etc. Which is all they know how to do these days.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

You must understand a fundamental difference between conservative and progressive ... progressives believe the wrong person holds the power. Conservatives believe the power should not exist.



To Trump's credit; he has not once, tried to mandate anything. Biden tells you right away if he wins, get ready for some new rules (which he's unlikely to be successful with but who knows). People who line up at the booth and willfully trade away their freedoms simply so their candidate is in charge are crazy. Never ever ever ever ever gives those up.

100% shortsighted malarkey.

Freedom is just a buzzword, friend.

Your freedom to not mask up infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible. The question is which freedom is more important, not whether a freedom exists.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[Boo]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

100% shortsighted malarkey.

Freedom is just a buzzword, friend.

Your freedom to not mask up infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible. The question is which freedom is more important, not whether a freedom exists.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

You can buy a hazmat suit if you want to be in public as safely as possible.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by Astros19

Well for everyone of those Trump signs there's a video of a Trump supporter being attacked verbally or physically. They're not hard to find if you look.
Personally, I won't wear at hat because I'm just not up to having to deal with some 18 year old girl getting in my face out in public. Its a no win situation that I'll avoid thank you very much.
Yard signs and bumper stickers as well. No need to test your theory and find out you're wrong by having my car keyed or windows broken out.
I'm not one who wears political hats or use bumper stickers/yard signs but if I was and was supporting Biden I wouldn't have these concerns.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Funny, a pandemic responsible for over a million deaths this year doesn't scare you, but a little girl does.

Buy more guns. You'll be okay.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[cnewby]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

100% shortsighted malarkey.

Freedom is just a buzzword, friend.

Your freedom to not mask up infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible. The question is which freedom is more important, not whether a freedom exists.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

good morning!

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Your freedom to not mask up infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible.

This is bizarre. No one is stopping you from going full-on hazmat. You control your safety in public. Me walking through Publix with no mask (which I don't do, by the way) doesn't infringe on anything.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by Boo

You can buy a hazmat suit if you want to be in public as safely as possible.

Originally Posted by coachnip13

This is bizarre. No one is stopping you from going full-on hazmat. You control your safety in public. Me walking through Publix with no mask (which I don't do, by the way) doesn't infringe on anything.

Beat me to it.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

This is bizarre. No one is stopping you from going full-on hazmat. You control your safety in public. Me walking through Publix with no mask (which I don't do, by the way) doesn't infringe on anything.

This is like saying it's okay to drive drunk. Other drivers can either drive on different roads or get a tank.

Freedom. Merica.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

100% shortsighted malarkey.

Freedom is just a buzzword, friend.

Your freedom to not mask up infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible. The question is which freedom is more important, not whether a freedom exists.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Smoking.

Boom. Your argument is gone.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

This is like saying it's okay to drive drunk. Other drivers can either drive on different roads or get a tank.

Freedom. Merica.

Nope. Not even close. Analogies should be well-vetted before clicking Submit.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Smoking.



Boom. Your argument is gone.

I don't get it.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[calculusdork]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

I don't get it.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Second-hand smoke kills people.

People are still allowed to smoke in public.

Some people smoke in "designated areas". Some don't.

Nobody cares either way.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Nope. Not even close. Analogies should be well-vetted before clicking Submit.

Well done. You told me. Lol.

If you can't see the similarities, I can't understand it for you.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

I don't get it.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

"Your freedom to smoke infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible. The question is which freedom is more important, not whether a freedom exists."

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by calculusdork

Second-hand smoke kills people.



People are still allowed to smoke in public.



Some people smoke in "designated areas". Some don't.



Nobody cares either way.

I can't even remember the last time I was subjected to smoke. Im honestly not sure if it's banned here indoors or not, but nobody does it.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

"Your freedom to smoke infringes on my freedom to go out in public as safely as possible. The question is which freedom is more important, not whether a freedom exists."

Smoking is banned indoors most places, no? So is not masking, at least here in Miami.

Thanks for making my point.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Well done. You told me. Lol.

If you can't see the similarities, I can't understand it for you.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

There are no similarities.

[AwesomeBrian]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

LOL at this tucker carlson story tonight. Says he had a trove of Hunter Biden docs given to them in NY and because Carlson was in LA, they mailed them to him there via a private shipping company, only for them to be lost in the delivery. He claims there had to be some sort of inside job to get rid of them.

1. Surely you would make copies of such important documents. Can we see the copies?
2. Why didn't you scan and email them like a normal human being?

According to Rudy's interview on Kennedy he has the papers in his office... the way I see it:

1. Tucker's people stuff documents into first class bubble mailer
2. Rudy lurks in the shadows, waiting for dark so he can come outside
3. 3:44am, sorting plant... a winged creature swoops down into a mailbin and grabs the document. Flies back to NYC to prepare for interview with ex-MTV VJ on Fox Business Channel who highly irritates him.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Smoking is banned indoors most places, no? So is not masking, at least here in Miami.

Thanks for making my point.

Before I break this one as well, I want to be clear. You're no longer talking of a mast mandate in public, just one indoors?

Outdoor public gatherings, no masks are OK yes?

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

There are no similarities.

Ah, back to the "I don't see it" response. Again, well done.

You not getting it doesn't make it less true.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[calculusdork]

Originally Posted by AwesomeBrian

According to Rudy's interview on Kennedy he has the papers in his office... the way I see it:

1. Tucker's people stuff documents into first class bubble mailer
2. Rudy lurks in the shadows, waiting for dark so he can come outside
3. 3:44am, sorting plant... a winged creature swoops down into a mailbin and grabs the document. Flies back to NYC to prepare for interview with ex-MTV VJ on Fox Business Channel who highly irritates him.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Smoking is banned indoors most places, no? So is not masking, at least here in Miami.

Thanks for making my point.

Smoking is allowed in bars and casinos. If I want to go to one of those places, do I get to tell everyone inside to stop smoking?