• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Trump's Federal Government failure on coronavirus

Mass Shift

Member
Jun 12, 2019
1,084
1,104
415
You answered your own question. It wasn't just hard, it was practically impossible.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt until that point. There's a disconnect preventing you from seeing that Trump was never given an opportunity to work with the Dems. He was labeled a racist, sexist, xenophobic, treasonous fascist from the very beginning and the media amplified that message so loudly that "the resistance" opposed almost everything he supported.

That peaceful transition of power between Obama's admin and his own never really occurred. They never accepted the results of the 2016 election and were doing everything in their power to undo it with the help of their lackeys in the media, the same people now siding with China over America. Sitting by and taking that incoming fire 24/7/365 was never an option.
I have to disagree with you on just one point.

There was an anticipation in Washington that after the election that Trump was going to transition and that his behavior was going to be more "Presidential" . Even the press was watchful for it even as they grudgingly put down their swords for the traditional honeymoon period each new President enjoys.

But Trump called a meeting with the press the day after his inauguration and had Sean Spicer ring the press out in a ratchet style meeting where they were chastised and set on fire. Lmao!

Trump killed his own honeymoon. Or maybe he just thought I'm going to skip the pleasantries and start my war with them right now. But that's neither here nor there at this point. He fired shots and declared war on day number one.

Now I agree with you that the hostilities were already there. Democrats were already talking impeachment, but they didn't have any guns before he fired Comey. Republicans who controlled both houses set Mueller lose on him. THEY DID THAT.

If he hadn't fired Comey we would have never gotten that far. It opened the door to look at all of the weird animals in his campaign. Again just a little bit of discipline on that and Mueller report would have never happened.

But I don't deny the hostilities, it spilled over into the 2018 vote and Democrats felt they had a mandate on impeachment. I would have gone for censure for a more bipartisan result in the Senate but that's just me.

But I do miss the SNL Spicer skits. Those things were hilarious.
 

Mass Shift

Member
Jun 12, 2019
1,084
1,104
415
Funny. Last person that got upset at being called out and sperged with the petty 'phony intellectualism' reaction immediately went into picture-spamming and literal 'no u' level of engagement immediately afterwards.

All it showed was that they had no actual argument that held water. And that their offense at a perceived gulf in intellect was more about one standard being very low, rather than the other being very high.

My point stands.
Appeal to authority fallacy, whilst certainly not the first red flag, remains a prominent one.
Oh please. Get over yourself.
 
Dec 15, 2011
7,190
18,278
1,090
Oh please. Get over yourself.
You keep replying, but you still don't address the appeal-to-authority fallacy that you chose to employ.

Instead it's "take me at my message"

Which I am doing, starting at the beginning and stopping when I reach the first fallacy and challenging you on it.
If you want people to take you at your message, why are you objecting when they take you at your message?
Another fallacy I suppose.

You've got nothing: Deflection, projection and petty remarks.

You've just put up more red flags.
My point still stands.
 

Cato

China delenda est
Oct 27, 2017
4,205
6,317
690
Moore Park Beach
Meanwhile, on the Democratic side:

The mans brain is fried.

I would like to see someone troll him on live tv and ask him "how was it to serve as VP under JFK?"
At this point I think it is 50/50 that he would start talking about how he, JFK and CornPop were handling the missile crisis like bosses.

That would be fun.
 
Last edited:

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
4,838
8,866
525
Campaign versus a time of disaster. You can't spew naive hope during times of crisis.
So it’s only okay to be hopeful when you’re applying for the job, but once you get it fuck all that. Got it.

Edit: it would seem Obama never got the message.


“Hope in the face of difficulty. Hope in the face of uncertainty. The audacity of hope!”

Was a winning message back when you guys thought you were going to cruise to power again, but suddenly you’ve become such pessimists. Wha’ happen???
 
Last edited:

Ornlu

Gold Member
Oct 31, 2018
2,761
3,973
610
Wow. LOL. I should probably tell you that I don't care what names anyone calls me. You're talking to a person who has worked in both Democratic and Republican campaigns.
Well that's a good red flag statement to tell me I shouldn't bother reading the rest of the essay! :messenger_grinning_squinting:

Campaign versus a time of disaster. You can't spew naive hope during times of crisis.
Lol @ not classifying the 2008 election cycle as a "time of disaster or crisis". That was the first half of the recession. You're gonna have to take the L on this one dude. Literally 99% of that political cycle was "Who's gonna fix this shit?!?!?!?"
 

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
4,838
8,866
525
Well that's a good red flag statement to tell me I shouldn't bother reading the rest of the essay! :messenger_grinning_squinting:



Lol @ not classifying the 2008 election cycle as a "time of disaster or crisis". That was the first half of the recession. You're gonna have to take the L on this one dude. Literally 99% of that political cycle was "Who's gonna fix this shit?!?!?!?"
Hell, it wasn't even that long ago they were spewing this phrase out:


Maybe they should all buy themselves a shirt and a nice big cup of STFU to go with it. It'll bolster the economy and save everybody's nerves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oner

womfalcs3

Member
May 11, 2007
6,342
1,659
1,450
Trump is about to become a socialist lol
That, and the airline business is now saying it has to be owned by the government because it's a public utility, unlike other businesses. So the government may take over airlines to overcome the COVID-19 demand decline.

 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: crowbrow

crowbrow

Banned
Feb 28, 2019
3,156
3,555
570
That, and the airline business is now saying it has to be owned by the government because it's a public utility, unlike other businesses. So the government may take over airlines to overcome the COVID-19 demand decline.

They love socialism when it suits them and their corporations but hate it for the common folk.
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
37,905
8,468
1,540
Let’s let all of these corporations fail.

I’m 100% on board for that. All airlines fail, all cruise lines fail. Fuck em.
Why? That would basically kill international business and I don't see how that benefits the country. Not to mention all of the jobs that would be lost in those industries.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

monegames

Member
Sep 26, 2014
3,066
3,332
615
Why? That would basically kill international business and I don't see how that benefits the country. Not to mention all of the jobs that would be lost in those industries.
People really don't realize that corporations have employed the largest percentage of the American workforce since the Great Recession do they?

 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
37,905
8,468
1,540
People really don't realize that corporations have employed the largest percentage of the American workforce since the Great Recession do they?

I don't know. People just love to hate corporations. For all of their railing against the idea of "corporations are people," they sure do treat corporations like individuals, without a care in the world for what happens to the people that are employed by them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bladed Thesis

oatmeal

Member
Jun 17, 2007
15,928
1,516
1,285
Why? That would basically kill international business and I don't see how that benefits the country. Not to mention all of the jobs that would be lost in those industries.
Because they're irresponsible. Similar to the banks in 2008, they're being bailed out for no real reason.

If we just hit pause on everything (like citizens have), the airlines aren't going anywhere. There's no payroll, there's no operating costs, everyone just waits it out and then ideally, it comes back to normal. But Boeing, a week into this, asked for a 60B bailout. A WEEK! It's ludicrous.

Everyone hits pause, the workers should get a 2 month bailout, and when things start winding back up, the jobs are there waiting for them because the companies aren't at fault, the workers aren't at fault, the business just wasn't there.

Maybe I'm wrong, but what is causing the airlines to need billions of dollars when they have no operating costs for a few weeks?
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
37,905
8,468
1,540
Because they're irresponsible. Similar to the banks in 2008, they're being bailed out for no real reason.

If we just hit pause on everything (like citizens have), the airlines aren't going anywhere. There's no payroll, there's no operating costs, everyone just waits it out and then ideally, it comes back to normal. But Boeing, a week into this, asked for a 60B bailout. A WEEK! It's ludicrous.

Everyone hits pause, the workers should get a 2 month bailout, and when things start winding back up, the jobs are there waiting for them because the companies aren't at fault, the workers aren't at fault, the business just wasn't there.

Maybe I'm wrong, but what is causing the airlines to need billions of dollars when they have no operating costs for a few weeks?
Wait... the idea of these bailouts is so they can keep payroll going. A good portion of operating costs will still be incurred.

People living paycheck to paycheck (or close to it) can't just "hit pause" for the most part.

Now if they get bailed out *and* they still lay off a large portion of their employees, then I'll be right there with you, but the whole point of this as I understand it is to keep people employed.

It's totally different from the ridiculous bank bailouts we saw in 2008.
 
Last edited:

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
4,838
8,866
525
Wait... the idea of these bailouts is so they can keep payroll going. A good portion of operating costs will still be incurred.

People living paycheck to paycheck (or close to it) can't just "his pause" for the most part.

Now if they get bailed out *and* they still lay off a large portion of their employees, then I'll be right there with you, but the whole point of this as I understand it is to keep people employed.

It's totally different from the ridiculous bank bailouts we saw in 2008.
One of the reasons I’m still getting a check this week is because the owner of the company I work for is going to be able to use this to float payroll and ride out the storm.
 

oatmeal

Member
Jun 17, 2007
15,928
1,516
1,285
Wait... the idea of these bailouts is so they can keep payroll going. A good portion of operating costs will still be incurred.

People living paycheck to paycheck (or close to it) can't just "his pause" for the most part.

Now if they get bailed out *and* they still lay off a large portion of their employees, then I'll be right there with you, but the whole point of this as I understand it is to keep people employed.

It's totally different from the ridiculous bank bailouts we saw in 2008.
Why do they need payroll to keep going if they're hitting pause on business? The Boeing request of 60B immediately was absolute insanity.

If the situation was "Businesses, continue paying your employees, we will cover it." Great. But we're instead doing a big bail out for them, and a tiny eighth measure for the employees, and that money isn't going to the workers.
 

oatmeal

Member
Jun 17, 2007
15,928
1,516
1,285
I’m still not sure on that. I know it’s basically a loan from the feds that is forgiven as long as it goes to payroll.
That's the under reported stuff from this I guess.

Small business stuff. It's just frustrating to watch all of that money that will definitely be misused while people are fighting for scraps. It's all just a shitty situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeresJohnny

Mass Shift

Member
Jun 12, 2019
1,084
1,104
415
Let’s let all of these corporations fail.

I’m 100% on board for that. All airlines fail, all cruise lines fail. Fuck em.
I used to think like that about most corporations, but there's millions of hard working people, literally the middle class of the country would experience a collapse they wouldn't return from.

I hated the auto industry bailout during the Obama administration, but understood that if they didn't do it the automakers were just going to send all of those people home with nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zefah

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
4,838
8,866
525
That's the under reported stuff from this I guess.

Small business stuff. It's just frustrating to watch all of that money that will definitely be misused while people are fighting for scraps. It's all just a shitty situation.
I can dig it man, and usually I’d be totally on board but I think the key differentiator for me on this versus 2008/9 is that the companies seeking help now aren’t guilty of getting us into this mess. The banks last time we’re carrying loans on people who were super high risk and then selling them to overseas investors mixed in with good loans (think someone giving you a roll of ones with a hundred on the outside) knowing full goddamn well that most if not all those loans were going to default. It was basically a giant fucking Ponzi scheme that was brought about from a belief in GW Bush’s “ownership society” which thought that everyone should own a home which is completely
Laughable.

Then we had the automakers who demanded money because they’d let their unions bend them over and fuck them into insolvency. This looks completely different to me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Oner and oatmeal

oatmeal

Member
Jun 17, 2007
15,928
1,516
1,285
These big corporations also have debts that aren't going to be put on pause during this. Its not just payroll. If they can't cover their debts jobs won't be coming back after things Clear up. Thats why a pause doesn't work.
I guess it just doesn't seem like a lot of these companies are going to do the right thing (maybe not the small businesses), and it worries me that there will be 1T of money wasted. And these corporations will continue to run the same way where there's no savings.

I hope everyone in the country starts to look at money differently, spending below their means and not maxing out every month.
 
  • Like
Reactions: monegames

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
7,319
5,824
785
Canada
Wow. LOL. I should probably tell you that I don't care what names anyone calls me. You're talking to a person who has worked in both Democratic and Republican campaigns.

Look, you're clearly stressed. You believe in left wing CCP cabals conspiring against the President. Just as the left believed in vast right wing conspiracies whenever a Democrat is living in the White House. I don't believe in any of that tin foil nonsense. I've seen too much in my life to drink the koolaid. Politicians get themselves in trouble. Given who they are it's just a natural occupational hazard.

I don't ever fault people for who they vote for, it's a personal choice and their given right. But not to be able to criticize or point out differences is where supporters begin to lose crucial perspective. And you've definitely lost yours.

Theyre not Gods, theyre not perfect. They're not even right most of the time. They re politicians, and they don't even dislike each other as much as their supporters hate one another. I'll go one even further, they're aren't even as invested in all of the politics we care about. They have handlers, kingmakers, spin meisters who poll and keep them engaged. Don't believe me? Join a campaign, watch it for yourself. It's very enlightening.

Trump is special though. He might actually believe his own lies. But that doesn't mean I have to accept them. It doesn't mean you have to defend them so vociferously either.

And I know you don't believe everything he says. So I never get mad at Trump supporters. You might be faithful but I don't believe you're that stupid.

It should be obvious that I don't like this guy, but I'm honestly not hoping for this President to fail during this crucial moment. I have a mother with chronic asthma, a sister with diabetes. They are BOTH at risk and haven't been able to venture out. I want this President to GET IT. This moment isn't just about him. Real lives are hanging on his every decision. So yes, I am holding him responsible for everything going on under his watch.

This is the Presidency. It the toughest job in the world. And when you don't have your act together like this President, you open yourself to any number of calamities. Like tough criticism, investigations, hearings and yes impeachment. This man loves to show his ass, so naturally adversaries are going to put a bullseye on it.

He's not unique to trouble, he's just sloppy and undisciplined, so he has more of it. He doesn't like to heed the warnings of his advisors. He doesn't have to duke it out with the press everyday. Squander the power of his office to get into junkyard dog fights?! That's stupid and unnecessary. Obama went almost a year without a press conference and hardly anybody noticed.

He picks unnecessary fights with everyone. The press, FBI the whole intelligence community, people in his own party. Insults his own generals in a tweet storm.

What for?

You think winning over Pelosi or Shumer would have been hard? Sure they don't want to hand him any victories but Democrats love big spending bills. Pelosi would have pushed the kind of large infrastructure bill through Congress that he wants so badly. Nancy may be getting along in years and looks rather shakey these days but she knows how to pull the many caucus groups in her party together and vote in line. Even for shit they don't want to do. Get that bitch on your side for what you need! Shit, even Newt and Clinton took meetings and passed legislation during all their fights and disagreements. And the Clintons ran the nastiest, meanest political machine ever created.

Oh, what a wall of text I've created. I apologize for that, but I could write a book about Trump's self inflicted injuries. Hires like Flynn, Manafort? Kissing Putin's ass all the time? Firing Comey. Nobody on the left made him do any of that shit. Those guys were scum long before 2016. Yeah and I mean Comey too.

Oh Let me stop.
This entire screed because I challenged you on one fact you got wrong. I don't give a shit if you don't like the president, love him, want to suck his dick, want him to suck your moms dick. IDGAF. Just don't peddle bullshit at us and expect us to take it. As I said, there is enough real things to criticize him over that you don't' have to resort to spreading falsehoods. Also, telling people what they believe based on a minimal interaction is laughable. You don't know me so quit trying to imply what I believe or attempt to paint me as some sort of cook with your left wing CCP cabal commentary.
 

oatmeal

Member
Jun 17, 2007
15,928
1,516
1,285
I can dig it man, and usually I’d be totally on board but I think the key differentiator for me on this versus 2008/9 is that the companies seeking help now aren’t guilty of getting us into this mess. The banks last time we’re carrying loans on people who were super high risk and then selling them to overseas investors mixed in with good loans (think someone giving you a roll of ones with a hundred on the outside) knowing full goddamn well that most if not all those loans were going to default. This looks completely different to me.
For sure. Though the car bailouts weren't directly tied to the banks were they? That was more housing related with the sub-prime mortgages given to anyone with a pulse.

The car bailouts were because they were affected so hard when they became something that no one really needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeresJohnny

desertdroog

Member
Aug 12, 2008
4,594
6,980
1,100
I can dig it man, and usually I’d be totally on board but I think the key differentiator for me on this versus 2008/9 is that the companies seeking help now aren’t guilty of getting us into this mess. The banks last time we’re carrying loans on people who were super high risk and then selling them to overseas investors mixed in with good loans (think someone giving you a roll of ones with a hundred on the outside) knowing full goddamn well that most if not all those loans were going to default. It was basically a giant fucking Ponzi scheme that was brought about from a belief in GW Bush’s “ownership society” which thought that everyone should own a home which is completely
Laughable.

Then we had the automakers who demanded money because they’d let their unions bend them over and fuck them into insolvency. This looks completely different to me.
Small correction, while Bush did add to the housing bubble, let's not forget President Bill Clinton's hand in starting that and then Obama and Hillary's action when it was attempted to be rewritten as a result of the sub-prime mortgage loans continued. There is plenty of blame to go around, but as in all things - follow the money:


Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits.

These new HUD rules lowered down payments from the traditional 20 percent to 3 percent by 1995 and zero down-payments by 2000. What's more, in the Clinton push to issue home loans to lower income borrowers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made a common practice to virtually end credit documentation, low credit scores were disregarded, and income and job history was also thrown aside. The phrase "subprime" became commonplace. What an understatement.

...

Just to make this story worse, Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama voted to filibuster a Republican effort to roll back Fannie and Freddie. But on top of all this, while Hillary was propping up Fannie and Freddie, she was taking contributions from their foundations.


A Washington Times investigative report concluded that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's political action committee and individuals linked to the companies donated $75,500 to Mrs. Clinton's senatorial campaign. And on top of that, the embattled Clinton Foundation received a $50,000 contribution from Freddie Mac, according to the Times.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
13,639
20,981
1,080
We ever gonna find out why the CDC was sending out faulty test kits. I know the House was looking into it, any findings? Did Orange Man break them all himself?
 

Bladed Thesis

Member
Jun 7, 2019
806
1,959
410
People: "Uncle sam uncle sam I've got bills and I'm stuck at home, I need money"

Same people: "These companies should not fire people, they need to keep people on their payroll in this time of need."

Same people: "These companies have no expenses so why are we bailing them out, let them fail or tell them to put their businesses on hold. They can ride it out"

It's like you can instantly tell who has no fucking clue how running a business works.
 

Mass Shift

Member
Jun 12, 2019
1,084
1,104
415
This entire screed because I challenged you on one fact you got wrong. I don't give a shit if you don't like the president, love him, want to suck his dick, want him to suck your moms dick. IDGAF. Just don't peddle bullshit at us and expect us to take it. As I said, there is enough real things to criticize him over that you don't' have to resort to spreading falsehoods. Also, telling people what they believe based on a minimal interaction is laughable. You don't know me so quit trying to imply what I believe or attempt to paint me as some sort of cook with your left wing CCP cabal commentary.
Oh gawd man. Way too personal. Especially for politics.

Please don't take this the wrong but I'm sure you probably will But I used to be like you. All passionate and full of fire over these Presidents and the rest of these damn politicians and their bullshit. I used to defend, engage in apologist nonsense when they screwed up. And they're ALWAYS screwing up. It would actually be comedy if many of the things they do didn't have such negative consequences for all of us.

I still love the debate, still like the conversation. But not when it's like this. Nothing good can come out of the names and personal attacks.

But I will continue to share my thoughts and positions. If those still offend, then this forum has features you can use for just such a situation. We CAN avoid each other. It's very easy.