We have enough politarding here already. I don't need a bunch of smug coastal SJWs and conspiracy-obsessed right wingers showing up here to ruin the forum with terrible endless arguments.Originally Posted by blake
We have enough politarding here already. I don't need a bunch of smug coastal SJWs and conspiracy-obsessed right wingers showing up here to ruin the forum with terrible endless arguments.
that’s literally the whole site though.We have enough politarding here already. I don't need a bunch of smug coastal SJWs and conspiracy-obsessed right wingers showing up here to ruin the forum with terrible endless arguments.
that’s literally the whole site though.
We need to get back to having me make threads about hot twinks and jocks and you guys donating my vacation fundraising threads.
That's how we restore order here.
also I don’t get your thinking here since all of your posts and threads started involve politics. it’s not like you hate political discussions. you’re the driving force of the politics talkWe have enough politarding here already. I don't need a bunch of smug coastal SJWs and conspiracy-obsessed right wingers showing up here to ruin the forum with terrible endless arguments.
I’m not hating on it, i obviously like political talk too.
since it already is a strictly political forum, what would be the harm in “officially” shifting the focus of the site by renaming it? Maybe aggregate news links, etc.?
edit — I’m thinking like a Drudge Report with a forum. You could even monetize the site. You can thank me later.
Last edited by blake; 11-30-2020 at 07:41 AM.
Sure, so you just randomly link tweets about a conspiracy to not report something something Illinois. A tweet that's exclusively based on picking a timeline that's favorable for Florida.I've always been honest about the virus, and not afraid to criticize my own side when warranted. In fact, I did just that at the end of this week's radio. I've also done it a bunch of times in this thread.
The different is that the right isn't running around screaming, "This is all the Democrats' fault!", and yet the left has made "Trump killed 250,000+ people" their main theme of 2020.
Well, I guess it's now Trump and GOP governors killed 250,000 people.
The left-wing media has been so dishonest about COIVD that they actually had the nerve to state that the BLM protests of 60,000 people weren't dangerous. Yet those same people can't explain why they're also against allowing large, outdoor events to take place. I thought huge gatherings of people outdoors is totally safe!
There's just been such tremendous dishonesty and hypocrisy from Democratic politicians and media babout this, while at the same time they sit on their high horses and smugly claim to be "the ones following the science".
Even worse, very few on the left (even on this forum) are willing to stand up and admit that their side has often been dishonest, contradictory, and hypocritical.
Fairly sure your stance has been that Trump and GOP did just as well as any Democrat would have. Doesn't really leave that much room for interpretation.
You're free to link a study showing that BLM rallies had a significant impact to Covid numbers. I've linked a few before that showed the opposite.
Speaking of numbers, a month ago you said 100k deaths before the end of the year was unlikely. Do you still think it's unlikely? 326k total would be the number.
Sure, so you just randomly link tweets about a conspiracy to not report something something Illinois. A tweet that's exclusively based on picking a timeline that's favorable for Florida.
Fairly sure your stance has been that Trump and GOP did just as well as any Democrat would have. Doesn't really leave that much room for interpretation.
You're free to link a study showing that BLM rallies had a significant impact to Covid numbers. I've linked a few before that showed the opposite.
Speaking of numbers, a month ago you said 100k deaths before the end of the year was unlikely. Do you still think it's unlikely? 326k total would be the number.
Those studies were garbage, and the ones behind them were hyper-biased. I'm not just saying this to be a conspiratard. The studies themselves have glowing language about the importance of the BLM protests. Every single researcher was found to be highly supportive of the BLM protests based upon their social media footprint. The theories and conclusions are complete bunk. They basically started with a conclusion they wanted to see, came up with creative ways to "prove" their point, and then massaged the data to fit.
Regardless, if huge crowds outdoors were safe, we could have a tremendous boost to the economy by simply moving a lot of closed stuff outdoors -- and reopen everything already outdoors (like Coachella and open-air sports stadiums). Yet there's just about zero support for this from Democrats. How could one explain this if mass crowds gathering outdoors is safe?
If you do think huge crowds outdoors are safe, congratulations -- you are now aligned with many MAGA types!
Regarding the deaths, yes, there's a decent chance they reach 326k by December 31. At the time I doubted that, there wasn't the huge surge in some of these midwestern states, which we are seeing now. I don't claim to know the future, and I don't claim to know everything about the virus. At the time, my doubt of 100k new deaths by December 31 was a good prediction.
There's other aspects to this site besides politics. Even in this subsection of PFA, there are sports threads and threads about gambling/poker stuff, such as Doug Polk's match. The radio show is mostly NOT about politics, and honestly that drives most of the new traffic here.also I don’t get your thinking here since all of your posts and threads started involve politics. it’s not like you hate political discussions. you’re the driving force of the politics talk
I’m not hating on it, i obviously like political talk too.
since it already is a strictly political forum, what would be the harm in “officially” shifting the focus of the site by renaming it? Maybe aggregate news links, etc.?
edit — I’m thinking like a Drudge Report with a forum. You could even monetize the site. You can thank me later.
I don't want to shut everything else out just to turn this into a politics site (of which there are many and I probably won't get new people anyway).
So you don't have any studies to support your claim. Cool.
Those studies were garbage, and the ones behind them were hyper-biased. I'm not just saying this to be a conspiratard. The studies themselves have glowing language about the importance of the BLM protests. Every single researcher was found to be highly supportive of the BLM protests based upon their social media footprint. The theories and conclusions are complete bunk. They basically started with a conclusion they wanted to see, came up with creative ways to "prove" their point, and then massaged the data to fit.
Regardless, if huge crowds outdoors were safe, we could have a tremendous boost to the economy by simply moving a lot of closed stuff outdoors -- and reopen everything already outdoors (like Coachella and open-air sports stadiums). Yet there's just about zero support for this from Democrats. How could one explain this if mass crowds gathering outdoors is safe?
If you do think huge crowds outdoors are safe, congratulations -- you are now aligned with many MAGA types!
Regarding the deaths, yes, there's a decent chance they reach 326k by December 31. At the time I doubted that, there wasn't the huge surge in some of these midwestern states, which we are seeing now. I don't claim to know the future, and I don't claim to know everything about the virus. At the time, my doubt of 100k new deaths by December 31 was a good prediction.
I've explained it before why belief of BLM rallies as superspeader events was unfounded. It's based on facts and solid logic. Same facts and logic will also tell you why Coachella and Sport events are a really bad idea.
Your prediction month ago was shit. I told you to wait a month and see what happens. I saw what you're seeing today a month earlier. I didn't feel like wasting anymore time back then to explain every single point that led to my conclusion. Nearly everything that led to that number was already in place on their expected trajectory.
So you don't have any studies to support your claim. Cool.
I've explained it before why belief of BLM rallies as superspeader events was unfounded. It's based on facts and solid logic. Same facts and logic will also tell you why Coachella and Sport events are a really bad idea.
Your prediction month ago was shit. I told you to wait a month and see what happens. I saw what you're seeing today a month earlier. I didn't feel like wasting anymore time back then to explain every single point that led to my conclusion. Nearly everything that led to that number was already in place on their expected trajectory.
I really hate to say it because it’s what I miss most, but bars and alcohol while socializing seem to be the worst combination. I hate that. I thought the closing bars at 10 idea was idiotic, but its just incredibly easy to let your guard down when you’re drinking.
You get a few drinks in you, and you literally forget about it and do shit that is particularly idiotic like hug people saying hello or goodbye that you haven’t seen for awhile, or you just met and chatted with a few hours. I’ve watched it play out in front of me a number of times. You show up somewhere with it on your mind, and then you have a few drinks, and life just feels normal. You simply forget about it. You default into standard behavior. I’ve seen whole groups simply finish the night and all hugging each other to say goodbye and then pausing and saying,”oh shit, that was stupid.”
I think the degree of proliferation of the virus has shown itself to be cultural. The more stoic personal space counties had less of an issue. The countries where people are more outgoing and hug people goodbye or whatever, like Italy or France had bigger issues.
When I think of Chicago, it’s legit one of my favorite cities in the country to hit the bars and drink in. Everyone is nice and you can be alone even, and soon you’ll have a bar full of friends. Just inviting people. Just a great vibe. Boston is similar. They got pounded last year. NYC is a great drinking town.
I think its always problematic, but add in cold weather, and it’s worse as most drinking moves indoors, whether it be a bar or someone’s house.
There are obviously a lot of trouble spots, but I think alcohol is the driving factor in many of these outbreaks. I think it might be more dangerous than the gathering itself when it comes to a wedding or family gathering, where the carnage has often occurred.
Combination of protesters that would have otherwise done something riskier and people afraid of Anteeeefa/Negroes staying indoors meant that the end result was that there was no increase in Covid numbers. Doing the same thing in South-Korea likely would have meant an uptick in Covid numbers because their baseline is 95% of people doing what they are supposed to vs your 50% on a good day.
Protests are fairly mobile almost all the time and you tend to stay with people you came with.
Festivals and sporting events are not. Groups are getting stuck next to strangers for hours. People get wasted. People do stupid things.
Comparing BLM rallies to Festivals is roughly the same as comparing going to a grocery store to going to a bar.
Ya, similar to the grocery store.Combination of protesters that would have otherwise done something riskier and people afraid of Anteeeefa/Negroes staying indoors meant that the end result was that there was no increase in Covid numbers. Doing the same thing in South-Korea likely would have meant an uptick in Covid numbers because their baseline is 95% of people doing what they are supposed to vs your 50% on a good day.
Protests are fairly mobile almost all the time and you tend to stay with people you came with.
Festivals and sporting events are not. Groups are getting stuck next to strangers for hours. People get wasted. People do stupid things.
Comparing BLM rallies to Festivals is roughly the same as comparing going to a grocery store to going to a bar.
Ok. Should i now post picture of Scalir in Coachella? Or do i have to explain this to you like you were a complete idiot.Ya, similar to the grocery store.
All indoor activities have different levels of risk. All outdoor events have different levels of risk. Druff's argument for retards was that all outdoor events are just as risky.
We don't have to guess how bad the BLM rallies have been for Covid nor do we have to guess how bad the Trump rallies were. We have plenty of studies on both. Druff doesn't like those studies because it makes team retard look retarded. At this point team retard doesn't even bother to buy their own studies. They just cry something about science and have their own make belief version of reality.
Ok. Should i now post picture of Scalir in Coachella? Or do i have to explain this to you like you were a complete idiot.
Ya, similar to the grocery store.
All indoor activities have different levels of risk. All outdoor events have different levels of risk. Druff's argument for retards was that all outdoor events are just as risky.
We don't have to guess how bad the BLM rallies have been for Covid nor do we have to guess how bad the Trump rallies were. We have plenty of studies on both. Druff doesn't like those studies because it makes team retard look retarded. At this point team retard doesn't even bother to buy their own studies. They just cry something about science and have their own make belief version of reality.
I don't need a study, only common sense to tell me that hundreds of thousands of people standing, yelling, chanting and singing in the streets will spread covid.
For some reason, I believe you're arguing that the net effect makes the spread insignificant. Is that what you're trying to say? If so, when they report statistics on how many people have died of covid why don't they leave out people that would have probably died anyway from being old , sick, etc etc? That way we would know the real excess deaths that covid caused.
The answer is these studies and how information is presented is all politically driven and inconsistent.
Last edited by nightmarefish; 11-30-2020 at 03:37 PM.
They report covid deaths the same way they report all deaths. If a 99 year old dies in a car accident, then that's the cause of death. They don't guess how long he would have lived otherwise.
I don't need a study, only common sense to tell me that hundreds of thousands of people standing, yelling, chanting and singing in the streets will spread covid.
For some reason, I believe you're arguing that the net effect makes the spread insignificant. Is that what you're trying to say? If so, when they report statistics on how many people have died of covid why don't they leave out people that would have probably died anyway from being old , sick, etc etc? That way we would know the real excess deaths that covid caused.
The answer is these studies and how information is presented is all politically driven and inconsistent.
And yes what i am arguing is that in your case the net effect was insignificant. That's what the studies that measured social distancing from cell data and infection numbers among participants told us. They did so many different studies because by common sense there should have been an uptick on infections. It just didn't play out like that.
Studies themselves have been decent, while reporting has been pretty awful. I don't blame studies for that, just like i don't blame masks for people being idiots.
So your argument is that by some unforeseen strange circumstances there wasn’t a net uptick in Covid spreading during the rioting? If true, which is debatable, I’m not sure that matters and isn’t what Druff is really concerned about. Druff is concerned with the hypocrisy of how it’s covered and the hundreds of thousands that didn’t care if they spread it. You can say later that the net effect wasn’t significant but it’s not like the rioters and the media members covering it had done that calculation at the time. In the moment, it seemed obvious to everyone that these protests/riots would spread Covid and the people participating didn’t give a shit and the media covering it basically looked the other way while blasting any conservative gathering to nauseam.They report covid deaths the same way they report all deaths. If a 99 year old dies in a car accident, then that's the cause of death. They don't guess how long he would have lived otherwise.
And yes what i am arguing is that in your case the net effect was insignificant. That's what the studies that measured social distancing from cell data and infection numbers among participants told us. They did so many different studies because by common sense there should have been an uptick on infections. It just didn't play out like that.
Studies themselves have been decent, while reporting has been pretty awful. I don't blame studies for that, just like i don't blame masks for people being idiots.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/30/asia/...ntl/index.html
per about a dozen previous posts, china totally cooked the books during the opening days of the crisis.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
Lot of things were unknown then, so you can say it was risk at the time. And you can say all sorts of things about the media. It's been a while when it was more about the news than entertainment. With that comes viewing demographics, sponsors/ads and giving focus groups what gets most minutes out of them.So your argument is that by some unforeseen strange circumstances there wasn’t a net uptick in Covid spreading during the rioting? If true, which is debatable, I’m not sure that matters and isn’t what Druff is really concerned about. Druff is concerned with the hypocrisy of how it’s covered and the hundreds of thousands that didn’t care if they spread it. You can say later that the net effect wasn’t significant but it’s not like the rioters and the media members covering it had done that calculation at the time. In the moment, it seemed obvious to everyone that these protests/riots would spread Covid and the people participating didn’t give a shit and the media covering it basically looked the other way while blasting any conservative gathering to nauseam.
I don't really agree anyone should keep parroting why X isn't allowed when BLM whatever was. Covid wise Thanksgiving is gonna fuck you over way more than BLM rallies did. Nothing to do with what's fair or decent. Well plague and Thanksgiving does kinda go together.
Ya, I even let my guard down for Thanksgiving. Had my mom fly down, first time I've seen her since last Thanksgiving. She had never met my son who was born in July and the last time she saw my middle son he was only 10 months old. We generally play it pretty safe and she had covid a few months back which I believe makes it less risky for us but who knows. Alot of people will be taking the same risk and it's not gonna be pretty.Lot of things were unknown then, so you can say it was risk at the time. And you can say all sorts of things about the media. It's been a while when it was more about the news than entertainment. With that comes viewing demographics, sponsors/ads and giving focus groups what gets most minutes out of them.
I don't really agree anyone should keep parroting why X isn't allowed when BLM whatever was. Covid wise Thanksgiving is gonna fuck you over way more than BLM rallies did. Nothing to do with what's fair or decent. Well plague and Thanksgiving does kinda go together.
sonsabitches
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)
Reply With Quote