POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

[SDHornet]

Health officials lost their credibility when they/some called for shutdowns but openly supported/praised the blm protests/riots. Maybe apply a consistent message on large gatherings next time. Just a thought.

Refresh my memory. I don't recall the CDC or any state/local health officials supporting/praising blm protests/riots (they're both the same thing and supporting protests is the same as supporting riots, right?). Maybe it's because I'm in Montana. Did your county health officials endorse them? Did I miss it when the CDC said to go out and protest/riot? Our health officials didn't comment on them that I'm aware of and I wouldn't expect them to have official comments on political/law enforcement issues like that.

Perhaps you're conflating politicians with health officials? Or maybe that happened in other places?

Check the covid thread. I posted plenty of pics/tweets of healthcare workers attending protests in their garb. Here in CA there was little to no condemnation on the blm protests as opposed to the anti-shutdown protests from the media/politicians.

[GannonFan]

BTW, on the fracking thing:

I agree that Biden would have been better off not saying anything about that. However, one should bear in mind that a lot of people don't like fracking. Fracking appears, for example, to be underwater in terms of public opinion in Pennsylvania.

Here is a story on a poll in August where 52% of respondents oppose fracking while 48% favor it:

https://www.axios.com/pennsylvania-frac ... 2f5fb.html

Here is an earlier poll, from January, showing the same basic result:

https://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/562 ... y-2020.pdf

In that one, 48% supported a ban on fracking while 39% opposed it.

So the extent to which convincing voters that Biden wants to ban fracking in the near future would hurt Biden is uncertain.

I'm sure it'd hurt him in Texas. But, even though it's likely to be uncomfortably close for Republicans this time, it's not likely that Biden would win Texas anyway.

Dude, stick to what you know (which, truth be told, I have no idea what that could be outside of NAMBLA meetings and McNeese football). I don't know if you've ever been in PA, but Biden's stance towards fracking is a major weakness for him in PA. A lot of people stand to make a lot of money from fracking, and they're generally the small farmers and other property owners in most of the state that's not Philly or Pittsburgh. It may not be enough to stop Biden from winning PA, it's really 50/50 here right now, but you can almost guarantee that Biden would win PA going away if he wasn't seen as so anti-fracking.

[Ibanez]

It is amusing to me that BDKJMU reporting on Trump has a lot of similarities to BDKJMU reporting on JMU football. Even an unbiased all the way.

Bullshit- you just haven't been paying attention.
I've been extremely critical of JMU football at times. That includes the last 4 HC going all the way back to Matthews. Most recently the play called at the end of last seasons NC game was idiotic- that's on Cignetti (whether or not he or the OC made the call). I criticized Houston's at times terrible clock management (esp the 2017 NC game), and having one foot out the door at the end of 2018. The prior HC Withers was terrible. I've criticized the AD LOTS over the doz years on here & AGS, esp when it comes to scheduling. I've criticized the fair weather fan base leaving at halftime, its too hot, its too cold, wah..I could go on.

You aren't critical of Trump...that's what you get called on. Trump could say, " I hate blacks and want to murder every Jew," and when asked about it your response would be, " Yeah well, Clinton and Biden....". You aren't unbiased - not that you hide it.


And JMU is doing the best they can. Cut 'em some slack.

[89Hen]

Trump could say, " I hate blacks and want to murder every Jew,"

In fairness, that's what a lot of people want you to believe he's said many times.

[kalm]

Trump could say, " I hate blacks and want to murder every Jew,"

In fairness, that's what a lot of people want you to believe he's said many times.

How many?

[89Hen]

In fairness, that's what a lot of people want you to believe he's said many times.

How many?

I lost count, sorry.

[Ibanez]

Trump could say, " I hate blacks and want to murder every Jew,"

In fairness, that's what a lot of people want you to believe he's said many times.

Maybe the intolerant and illogical far left but those of that haven't lost all reason know that isn't the case.

[89Hen]

In fairness, that's what a lot of people want you to believe he's said many times.

Maybe the intolerant and illogical far left but those of that haven't lost all reason know that isn't the case.

Then I know a lot of intolerant and illogical far left people.

[AZGrizFan]

Maybe the intolerant and illogical far left but those of that haven't lost all reason know that isn't the case.

Then I know a lot of intolerant and illogical far left people on this board.

FIFY.

[catbooster]

Refresh my memory. I don't recall the CDC or any state/local health officials supporting/praising blm protests/riots (they're both the same thing and supporting protests is the same as supporting riots, right?). Maybe it's because I'm in Montana. Did your county health officials endorse them? Did I miss it when the CDC said to go out and protest/riot? Our health officials didn't comment on them that I'm aware of and I wouldn't expect them to have official comments on political/law enforcement issues like that.

Perhaps you're conflating politicians with health officials? Or maybe that happened in other places?

I can't answer for SD, but Fauci did call a Trump event outside a super spreader event and was then mum on all the BLM and women's March.

Fauci should have just stayed out of it, but he gave his opinion and then wasn't consistent.

Well, yeah, but IIRC, that was in response to a direct question from a reporter about that event. I'm not inclined to interpret that as "supporting/praising blm protests/riots". Just like if Trump doesn't condemn a laundry list of groups/activities when asked about a specific one, I don't assume that means he supports and is encouraging all of the others.

[SeattleGriz]

I can't answer for SD, but Fauci did call a Trump event outside a super spreader event and was then mum on all the BLM and women's March.

Fauci should have just stayed out of it, but he gave his opinion and then wasn't consistent.

Well, yeah, but IIRC, that was in response to a direct question from a reporter about that event. I'm not inclined to interpret that as "supporting/praising blm protests/riots". Just like if Trump doesn't condemn a laundry list of groups/activities when asked about a specific one, I don't assume that means he supports and is encouraging all of the others.

Faucl specifically said an event held at the Whitehouse was a super spreader event and then when asked directly by Jim Jordan about protesting, he wouldn't comment.

He tried to hide behind the term 'crowds'.

He condemned one event and wouldn't condemn the other.

[catbooster]

Refresh my memory. I don't recall the CDC or any state/local health officials supporting/praising blm protests/riots (they're both the same thing and supporting protests is the same as supporting riots, right?). Maybe it's because I'm in Montana. Did your county health officials endorse them? Did I miss it when the CDC said to go out and protest/riot? Our health officials didn't comment on them that I'm aware of and I wouldn't expect them to have official comments on political/law enforcement issues like that.

Perhaps you're conflating politicians with health officials? Or maybe that happened in other places?

Suddenly, Public Health Officials Say Social Justice Matters More Than Social Distance
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... sts-301534

Johns Hopkins epidemiologist:


Over 1,000 health professionals sign a letter saying, Don't shut down protests using coronavirus concerns as an excuse
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/05/health/h ... index.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronaviru ... s-separate

Maybe I should have said perhaps you're conflating health care workers with health care officials. To me, officials implies someone with some official authority (governmental or regulatory).

You've cited an opinion piece (that uses health care "officials" in the headline, but the body only mentions "workers", "experts", etc.), a doctor's tweet (that was a source in the op-ed) and so on. I don't see any "official" saying avoid gatherings unless they are protests.

1,000 health care workers signed a letter - Big whoop. A quick google says there are 18 million health care workers in the US. My goodness, 0.0006% of them signed a letter saying protests are an acceptable risk! Whatever shall we do.

It seems to me this claim is just a bunch of hyperbole and distraction.

[catbooster]

Refresh my memory. I don't recall the CDC or any state/local health officials supporting/praising blm protests/riots (they're both the same thing and supporting protests is the same as supporting riots, right?). Maybe it's because I'm in Montana. Did your county health officials endorse them? Did I miss it when the CDC said to go out and protest/riot? Our health officials didn't comment on them that I'm aware of and I wouldn't expect them to have official comments on political/law enforcement issues like that.

Perhaps you're conflating politicians with health officials? Or maybe that happened in other places?

Check the covid thread. I posted plenty of pics/tweets of healthcare workers attending protests in their garb. Here in CA there was little to no condemnation on the blm protests as opposed to the anti-shutdown protests from the media/politicians.

I've seen the pictures. I have no doubt there are thousands of health care workers who participated in protests and maybe in looting/riots too. I doubt there is any issue that there isn't some portion of people employed in the healthcare industry on either side. There are a lot of people in that industry.

But you said officials, not workers. I'm not aware of any official pronouncement that we should shut down anything but protests/riots. That's what I was asking, because that's what your post implied.

[catbooster]

Well, yeah, but IIRC, that was in response to a direct question from a reporter about that event. I'm not inclined to interpret that as "supporting/praising blm protests/riots". Just like if Trump doesn't condemn a laundry list of groups/activities when asked about a specific one, I don't assume that means he supports and is encouraging all of the others.

Faucl specifically said an event held at the Whitehouse was a super spreader event and then when asked directly by Jim Jordan about protesting, he wouldn't comment.

He tried to hide behind the term 'crowds'.

He condemned one event and wouldn't condemn the other.

Ok, thanks for clarifying. Much weaker than what SD claimed IMO, but what fun is this stuff without a little hyperbole?

To me, this is very similar to the left claiming Trump supports some group because he didn't specifically call them out. It's reasonable to expect a person in a position of authority to be able to communicate well and it's legitimate to criticize them if they do a bad job of communicating. But in the end, that stuff is usually just a distraction used to discredit someone rather than an important part of the underlying issue being debated.

[SeattleGriz]

Faucl specifically said an event held at the Whitehouse was a super spreader event and then when asked directly by Jim Jordan about protesting, he wouldn't comment.

He tried to hide behind the term 'crowds'.

He condemned one event and wouldn't condemn the other.

Ok, thanks for clarifying. Much weaker than what SD claimed IMO, but what fun is this stuff without a little hyperbole?

To me, this is very similar to the left claiming Trump supports some group because he didn't specifically call them out. It's reasonable to expect a person in a position of authority to be able to communicate well and it's legitimate to criticize them if they do a bad job of communicating. But in the end, that stuff is usually just a distraction used to discredit someone rather than an important part of the underlying issue being debated.

You're welcome.

In fairness to Fauci, he was technically correct on criticizing crowds, but unfortunately got caught calling out a particular 'crowd' event. Maybe he simply didn't want to receive shit over his statements from two sides.

I certainly didn't get too worked up over it.