Trump's strong support / Democrats' lack of support, by white women

[Wildswanderer]

It's already been demonstrated to reduce the severity of COVID and to reduce the spread as well.
Several times over. It ain't gonna be "proven wrong any day now."

Literally the only reason to get the vaccine is to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death ... And you think that's a bad thing? Dude, your priorities are messed up. Please don't bother trying to tell me that you're pro-life when you clearly aren't.


I'd suggest putting down the Fox "News."

"COVID-19 vaccine will not stop transmission of the virus, U.S. Centers for Disease Control Rochelle Walensky said Thursday.

“Our vaccines are working exceptionally well,” Walensky told CNN in an interview on Thursday, Aug. 5. “They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death – they prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission.”

 

[metis]

But on the last election I could see the only way to keep tyranny at bay was to re elect Trump. And I was right.

Again, you're clueless. Trump tried to overthrow the results of the election which, if successful, would have ended our democracy.

It seems that you "know" as much about political science as you do about vaccines.

 

[ecco]

No I don't. People are dying from the vaccine.

If you can not support that allegation with facts from a reliable source, then you are intentionally spreading covid misinformation.

And experiencing all kinds of weird side effects... some women have thier periods restarting after not having one for years.

If you can not support that allegation with facts from a reliable source, then you are intentionally spreading covid misinformation.

but I listen to the people, not the government.

The people you are listening to are spreading covid misinformation.

Aside from people dying (680,000 Americans) and spending weeks in hospitals, some of those recovering, even from mild cases, are experiencing "long haul" effects.

 

[ecco]

That can happen either way. Literally the only reason to take the vaccine is the claim that it makes covid less severe.

WRONG!

 

[SkepticThinker]

"COVID-19 vaccine will not stop transmission of the virus, U.S. Centers for Disease Control Rochelle Walensky said Thursday.

“Our vaccines are working exceptionally well,” Walensky told CNN in an interview on Thursday, Aug. 5. “They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death – they prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission.”

The article you didn't provide any link to is talking about how new variants may be able to get around our vaccines. How are we getting new variants? By the virus continuing to be spread around by the unvaccinated. (You didn't actually read this article, did you?)



COVID vaccines slash viral spread – but Delta is an unknown

"COVID-19 vaccines are effective at protecting you from COVID-19, especially severe illness and death. COVID-19 vaccines reduce the risk of people spreading the virus that causes COVID-19. If you are fully vaccinated, you can resume activities that you did before the pandemic."
COVID-19 Vaccination


Benefits of Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-vaccines-herd-immunity-variants-1.6104364
Mounting evidence suggests COVID vaccines do reduce transmission. How does this work?
The Crucial Vaccine Benefit We’re Not Talking about Enough



Oops, you avoided the point again. (You're not pro-life ).

 

[Wildswanderer]

If you can not support that allegation with facts from a reliable source, then you are intentionally spreading covid misinformation.

Are you serious? This isn't debatable. Even the CDC acknowledges it can cause blood clots and deaths.

 

[Wildswanderer]

COVID vaccines slash viral spread – but Delta is an unknown

"COVID-19 vaccines are effective at protecting you from COVID-19, especially severe illness and death. COVID-19 vaccines reduce the risk of people spreading the virus that causes COVID-19. If you are fully vaccinated, you can resume activities that you did before the pandemic."
COVID-19 Vaccination


Benefits of Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-vaccines-herd-immunity-variants-1.6104364
Mounting evidence suggests COVID vaccines do reduce transmission. How does this work?
The Crucial Vaccine Benefit We’re Not Talking about Enough



Oops, you avoided the point again. (You're not pro-life ).

And you ignored the fact that vaccinated people are still spreaders.

 

[ecco]

"COVID-19 vaccine will not stop transmission of the virus, U.S. Centers for Disease Control Rochelle Walensky said Thursday.

“Our vaccines are working exceptionally well,” Walensky told CNN in an interview on Thursday, Aug. 5. “They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death – they prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission.”

WRONG!

Fact Check-CDC director did not confess that vaccines are failing

Rochelle Walensky has not confessed that vaccines are failing. False claims attributed to the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stem from an article published on a known misinformation website.

Examples of social media posts sharing a screenshot of a “medical article” from NaturalNews.com are visible here and here .

Social media users use words from an article ... written by Mike Adams and published on NaturalNews.com (www.naturalnews.com/About.html). The website is classified as conspiracy and pseudoscience by Media Bias, saying it is known for publishing unverified content (here).

​

If you fact-checked anything you post, you wouldn't be guilty;ty of posting covid misinformation so many times.


However, I do understand getting the right information conflicts with your anti-science, anti-vaxx agenda.

 

[SkepticThinker]

And you ignored the fact that vaccinated people are still spreaders.

 

[Stevicus]

Pointing out that you intentionally misrepresented the information in your linked article isn't bending over backwards to defend anyone.

It's to show that your article intentionally misrepresented the facts and that you furthered and compounded that misrepresentation by vomiting a qualifier about $100 donations.

Please don't use words like "intentionally misrepresented" with me again. You don't know my intentions, and frankly, you're way out of line here. This is about the issues, not about me or what you think my views or intentions are.

You might consider staying on topic. I offered my views regarding the OP topic and why Democrats have a lack of support. Instead, you seem to take every opportunity to needlessly snipe at people. There's no need for you to have a chip on your shoulder every time you post. You should learn to relax.

 

[ecco]

If you can not support that allegation with facts from a reliable source, then you are intentionally spreading covid misinformation.

Are you serious? This isn't debatable. Even the CDC acknowledges it can cause blood clots and deaths.

It can, can it? Has it? How many confirmed deaths from blood clots from the vaccine? Source?

 

[Wildswanderer]

If you can not support that allegation with facts from a reliable source, then you are intentionally spreading covid misinformation.

The CDC is the source!

 

[ecco]

Please don't use words like "intentionally misrepresented" with me again. You don't know my intentions

You made a comment that Democrats are the recipients of donations from billionaires. In support of your allegationyou linked an article containing a chart.

Your allegation is technically correct according to the article. Howefver, since you were citing billionaires' contributions the implication was that they were large donations. You did nothing to dispel this implication.

The article you linked, clearly did. In one small bit of integrity they put a qualifier right above the chart. I pointed this out in post #171, but you have failed to address it. Here is my post again...

But more important than anything else is your omission of the following...

Forbes mined Federal Election Commission data for donations from billionaires and their spouses, searching for all itemized donations of at least $100. This chart represents how many donors we found for every candidate.
That disclaimer was right above the chart.

As I wrote, the disclaimer was right above the chart. You saw the chart, you cut/pasted the chart into an RF post. You did not copy the qualifier about the $100. If that was not an intentional omission, if you just, somehow, didn't see it, I'll be glad to listen to your reasoning. Until then, in the absence of anything to the contrary, I'll have to stick with my "intentional" judgment.

This is about the issues, not about me or what you think my views or intentions are.

You are right, it is about issues. However, in order to have a rational discussion about issues, the issues must be honestly presented. Again, you can try to explain what your intentions were when you omitted the qualifier.

 

[ecco]

You might consider staying on topic. I offered my views regarding the OP topic and why Democrats have a lack of support. Instead, you seem to take every opportunity to needlessly snipe at people. There's no need for you to have a chip on your shoulder every time you post. You should learn to relax.

I am very relaxed. I have no chips on my shoulders. But I get ticked off when people throw bull**** around to try to support an agenda. One form of bull**** seen often on RF is quoting out of context. Failing to post an important qualifier, that actually exists in a linked article, is an example of this. You may want to consider that to be "needless sniping", I call it maintaining integrity.

 

[ecco]

If you can not support that allegation with facts from a reliable source, then you are intentionally spreading covid misinformation.

The CDC is the source!

I suppose you want me to look through every article published by the CDC to see if I can support your allegation.

That's not the way it works - not on RF - not in any forum - not in a one-on-one in-person conversation. You are not new to RF, so you know that and have no excuse for making a comment like "The CDC is the source!"

Find the article that you think supports your position, read it to make sure you understand it and that it actually supports your position. Post an excerpt of the portion that you believe supports your position and post a link to the article. Until then, all you are doing is posting your unsupported opinion.

 

[Stevicus]

You made a comment that Democrats are the recipients of donations from billionaires. In support of your allegationyou linked an article containing a chart.

Your allegation is technically correct according to the article. Howefver, since you were citing billionaires' contributions the implication was that they were large donations. You did nothing to dispel this implication.

The article you linked, clearly did. In one small bit of integrity they put a qualifier right above the chart. I pointed this out in post #171, but you have failed to address it. Here is my post again...

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. The key takeaway from that article and the accompanying chart was that Sanders had 0 billionaires donating to him. It was really just a side point I was bringing up; the article was not my main point. I never said anything about the size of the donations they received, but it's clear that many people from the upper classes (not just billionaires) support the Democrats.

The original question was about why Democrats have been losing support from white women. I would link this to an overall trend which was evident in the 2016 election, too. The Democrats have abandoned being the party of working people.

Trump merely had to express his opposition to NAFTA and other free trade agreements. He supported tariffs, which has been supported by the working class since even before the Civil War.

Any Democrat could have opposed NAFTA and/or favored tariffs to help the workers, but they didn't. That's the elephant in the living room that you and many partisan Democrats refuse to acknowledge.

Whatever you say about that Forbes article or your projections about me is meaningless compared to that.

Either Democrats support bringing jobs back to America, or they don't. Either Democrats support affordable housing, or they don't. Either they support socialized medicine, or they don't. From all indications, the majority of Democrats support none of these things. Billionaires don't want these things either, because then it would mean they can't screw the people anymore. Democrats are aiding and abetting them in this process, regardless of how much these billionaires donating (or not donating) to Democratic candidates.

As I wrote, the disclaimer was right above the chart. You saw the chart, you cut/pasted the chart into an RF post. You did not copy the qualifier about the $100. If that was not an intentional omission, if you just, somehow, didn't see it, I'll be glad to listen to your reasoning. Until then, in the absence of anything to the contrary, I'll have to stick with my "intentional" judgment.

To be honest, I didn't think it was relevant to the point I was making. I'm not sure why you think it's such a big deal. Are you seriously trying to argue that Democrats support working people? If so, then do you have support for such an argument? All you've really done is tell me that the Republicans are worse, which I'm not denying, but who cares?

If the Republicans are so much worse, then it should be cakewalk for Democrats every election, because there are more working and middle class Americans than there are billionaires. If the working people were convinced that their lives would get better and that they had friends in the Democratic Party, they would vote for them. My contention is that the Democrats haven't done a thing in a very long time to convince the workers that they're on their side.

Rent controls, price controls, tariffs, increased unionization, withdrawal from free trade agreements, socialized medicine, free higher education - these are things the Democrats should push for and support, and they would get votes. But they don't do that. Why do you think that is?

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

Lol, Biden is working hard? He doesn't even appear to know what day it is most of the time.

Must be so.
Since you say it is.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

Blaming the previous administration is a cop out.

Must be so.
Because you say it is.

 

[ecco]

The original question was about why Democrats have been losing support from white women. I would link this to an overall trend which was evident in the 2016 election, too. The Democrats have abandoned being the party of working people.

That was the point you were trying to make. You sidetracked by referencing and discussing an article that fallaciously indicated that Dems were the recipients of billionaires' largesse.

Trump merely had to express his opposition to NAFTA and other free trade agreements. He supported tariffs, which has been supported by the working class since even before the Civil War.

Nonsense. Ninety-nine percent of Americans couldn't tell you what was in and was not in any trade agreement. The only thing they went by was Trump saying "Bad - bad - bad : Repeal and replace" (yeah, same as ACA).

His deal with China was a complete fraud. He ended up spending billions to farmers because he cost them a big customer.

Either Democrats support bringing jobs back to America, or they don't.

Trump lied about bringing jobs back - just ask the coal miners and the steelworkers. He didn't bring any jobs back.

Maybe the Dems should lie about it also to pander to the ignorant.


Biden is taking the lead in emphasizing that growth lies in green jobs.

 

[ecco]

If the Republicans are so much worse, then it should be cakewalk for Democrats every election, because there are more working and middle class Americans than there are billionaires. If the working people were convinced that their lives would get better and that they had friends in the Democratic Party, they would vote for them. My contention is that the Democrats haven't done a thing in a very long time to convince the workers that they're on their side.

They haven't lied like Trump did.