POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Political discussions
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 9362
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
A.K.A.: Unification88
Location: Fence Sitter & Ball-Sack Splitter

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by UNI88 »

89Hen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:04 pm
Ibanez wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 11:44 am
I'm simply amazed that people look at such failure and are ready to sign up for more.
I don't disagree that the messaging has been inconsistent and pretty poor. But that's from EVERYONE. Who has been consistent? Not Fauci, not WHO, not Cuomo...

Give me a few examples of what you think Clinton or Biden would have done better. Of course anything you or I say about what somebody else would have done is pure conjecture, so I don't know how much time you want to waste on this frivolous exercise.
Has Fauci been inconsistent or has his messaging changed as the understanding of the virus has changed?

I'm not going to criticize someone for having a different message today or in June than they had in March.

I don't think Clinton would have done better. She would have attempted to unilaterally lock things down in order to exert greater authoritarian government control which might have saved lives but I would be really concerned about the long term impacts of that control on liberty.

User avatar
89Hen
Maroon Supporter
Maroon Supporter
Posts: 36593
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by 89Hen »

UNI88 wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:21 pm
89Hen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:04 pm

I don't disagree that the messaging has been inconsistent and pretty poor. But that's from EVERYONE. Who has been consistent? Not Fauci, not WHO, not Cuomo...

Give me a few examples of what you think Clinton or Biden would have done better. Of course anything you or I say about what somebody else would have done is pure conjecture, so I don't know how much time you want to waste on this frivolous exercise.
Has Fauci been inconsistent or has his messaging changed as the understanding of the virus has changed?

I'm not going to criticize someone for having a different message today or in June than they had in March.

I don't think Clinton would have done better. She would have attempted to unilaterally lock things down in order to exert greater authoritarian government control which might have saved lives but I would be really concerned about the long term impacts of that control on liberty.
I won't knock them for an evolving understanding, but that doesn't change the fact that the messaging has been very inconsistent. If their understanding changed, that means they were wrong in their thinking to start. Again, not a knock, but the truth.
Image

User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 14674
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by GannonFan »

UNI88 wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:21 pm
89Hen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:04 pm

I don't disagree that the messaging has been inconsistent and pretty poor. But that's from EVERYONE. Who has been consistent? Not Fauci, not WHO, not Cuomo...

Give me a few examples of what you think Clinton or Biden would have done better. Of course anything you or I say about what somebody else would have done is pure conjecture, so I don't know how much time you want to waste on this frivolous exercise.
Has Fauci been inconsistent or has his messaging changed as the understanding of the virus has changed?

I'm not going to criticize someone for having a different message today or in June than they had in March.

I don't think Clinton would have done better. She would have attempted to unilaterally lock things down in order to exert greater authoritarian government control which might have saved lives but I would be really concerned about the long term impacts of that control on liberty.
The only thing I'd fault Fauci for was the initial decision not to press for universal mask usage - he himself said he didn't press for it even though it was known early on that it would be effective. The thought was that frontline workers could be left without if there was a rush for masks. He also said they purposely withheld this information early on. I'd fault him for not advocating for something we really needed and I fault him for admitting to essentially lying about masks early on. I get the need to lie in this case if you already made the decision that you could endanger the front-line medical workers, but you save the revealing of the lying after the crisis is over and we're doing the retrospective on what worked and what didn't. Fauci didn't help the confidence or trust in health officials by admitting mid-crisis that he was playing free and fast with the truth as he thought necessary.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation

User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 14622
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by SDHornet »

GannonFan wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:42 pm
UNI88 wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:21 pm


Has Fauci been inconsistent or has his messaging changed as the understanding of the virus has changed?

I'm not going to criticize someone for having a different message today or in June than they had in March.

I don't think Clinton would have done better. She would have attempted to unilaterally lock things down in order to exert greater authoritarian government control which might have saved lives but I would be really concerned about the long term impacts of that control on liberty.
The only thing I'd fault Fauci for was the initial decision not to press for universal mask usage - he himself said he didn't press for it even though it was known early on that it would be effective. The thought was that frontline workers could be left without if there was a rush for masks. He also said they purposely withheld this information early on. I'd fault him for not advocating for something we really needed and I fault him for admitting to essentially lying about masks early on. I get the need to lie in this case if you already made the decision that you could endanger the front-line medical workers, but you save the revealing of the lying after the crisis is over and we're doing the retrospective on what worked and what didn't. Fauci didn't help the confidence or trust in health officials by admitting mid-crisis that he was playing free and fast with the truth as he thought necessary.
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.

User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 9362
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
A.K.A.: Unification88
Location: Fence Sitter & Ball-Sack Splitter

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by UNI88 »

GannonFan wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:42 pm
The only thing I'd fault Fauci for was the initial decision not to press for universal mask usage - he himself said he didn't press for it even though it was known early on that it would be effective. The thought was that frontline workers could be left without if there was a rush for masks. He also said they purposely withheld this information early on. I'd fault him for not advocating for something we really needed and I fault him for admitting to essentially lying about masks early on. I get the need to lie in this case if you already made the decision that you could endanger the front-line medical workers, but you save the revealing of the lying after the crisis is over and we're doing the retrospective on what worked and what didn't. Fauci didn't help the confidence or trust in health officials by admitting mid-crisis that he was playing free and fast with the truth as he thought necessary.
That criticism is justified.
SDHornet wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:46 pm
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.
As is this criticism.
89Hen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:32 pm
I won't knock them for an evolving understanding, but that doesn't change the fact that the messaging has been very inconsistent. If their understanding changed, that means they were wrong in their thinking to start. Again, not a knock, but the truth.
But I'm not going to criticize Fauci and others for being wrong at the start. They were dealing with something new and different and making assumptions in order to provide guidance. Trump's inconsistencies seem to have more to do with wanting to give credence to his base of "this isn't a big deal" believers and to make people feel good in order to bolster his chances at reelection. As I would expect of a sociopathic egomaniac, it's been about him and his future with little to no regard for the lives of the people he supposedly leads.

I have criticized Fauci for being arrogant (thinking that he should be believed because of his medical knowledge without providing enough context such as why his recommendations were changing/evolving), not using an expect in communications to help craft the message (social distancing was a bad term but we're stuck with it now), and not considering the psychological and sociological impact of his recommendations.

User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 18664
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by JohnStOnge »

Pwns wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:08 am
For the JSOs out there that think Trump is the only politician with a cavalier attitude on facts.

It's common in politics but that video is an exercise in taking snips out of context. Biden's position is that he will work to transition away from fossil fuels over time. He's not going to get elected then start working to outlaw fracking. He did not say he opposes fracking in the sense that he's going to get elected then eliminate fracking.

My bet would be, for example, that when he's talking to the bald guy it's a situation where the guy is very anti fracking and what Biden is in the process of doing is telling him that it's not something that can be done instantly; that there has to be a transition over time. The next word out of Biden's mouth after the video cut off the scene was almost certainly a "but" followed by an argument for why it can't be done immediately. It's likely somebody snipped that part of the conversation to create a false impression.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image

Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 8493
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by Baldy »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:53 pm
Pwns wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:08 am
For the JSOs out there that think Trump is the only politician with a cavalier attitude on facts.

It's common in politics but that video is an exercise in taking snips out of context. Biden's position is that he will work to transition away from fossil fuels over time. He's not going to get elected then start working to outlaw fracking. He did not say he opposes fracking in the sense that he's going to get elected then eliminate fracking.

My bet would be, for example, that when he's talking to the bald guy it's a situation where the guy is very anti fracking and what Biden is in the process of doing is telling him that it's not something that can be done instantly; that there has to be a transition over time. The next word out of Biden's mouth after the video cut off the scene was almost certainly a "but" followed by an argument for why it can't be done immediately. It's likely somebody snipped that part of the conversation to create a false impression.
lol nah

User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 18664
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by JohnStOnge »

All other things aside: Trump is now 0-5 in general election debates. See https://www.vox.com/2020/10/23/21529810 ... iden-trump.

And it's not just because more Democrats watched. That Vox article doesn't provide details on all the polls but the CNN poll has Biden as winning by 55% to 36% among independents.

BTW the CNN poll has Biden winning by 64% to 29% among Whites whites with college degrees. Just a reminder that the smart/informed factor is not on Trump's side.

This reminds me of discussions we've had before on this board about how Democrats had to worry about Trump as a debate opponent. Could they handle the MIGHTY Trump in a debate? I asked at the time WTF people who think like that were talking about. The guy is not good at debates. Clinton thumped him all three times and now Biden has thumped him twice.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image

User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 18664
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by JohnStOnge »

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/2 ... ate-431558
Trump's sideshow fizzles out
But so far the Bobulinski allegations seem like bubkes. At 10:47, minutes after the debate ended, the Wall Street Journal, part of the same media empire as Fox News and the Post, reported, “Text messages and emails related to the venture that were provided to the Journal by Mr. Bobulinski, mainly from the spring and summer of 2017, don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden” — the former vice president’s brother — “discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture.”

Even if Bobulinski is telling the truth, that Joe Biden knew about the China enterprise, it’s not clear what the scandal is — he was a private citizen at the time and not yet running for president. Trump has elevated an unsubstantiated assertion that Biden had knowledge about his son’s legal and failed business venture to a “crime” for which he “should be in jail.” To put in context how absurd this allegation is, one of the first things George W. Bush did after he left the White House was deliver a paid speech in China. Somehow he remains at large.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image

User avatar
catbooster
Level2
Level2
Posts: 561
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:37 am
I am a fan of: Montana State

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by catbooster »

SDHornet wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:46 pm

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?

User avatar
89Hen
Maroon Supporter
Maroon Supporter
Posts: 36593
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by 89Hen »

UNI88 wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:01 pm
89Hen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:32 pm
I won't knock them for an evolving understanding, but that doesn't change the fact that the messaging has been very inconsistent. If their understanding changed, that means they were wrong in their thinking to start. Again, not a knock, but the truth.
But I'm not going to criticize Fauci and others for being wrong at the start. They were dealing with something new and different and making assumptions in order to provide guidance. Trump's inconsistencies seem to have more to do with wanting to give credence to his base of "this isn't a big deal" believers and to make people feel good in order to bolster his chances at reelection. As I would expect of a sociopathic egomaniac, it's been about him and his future with little to no regard for the lives of the people he supposedly leads.

I have criticized Fauci for being arrogant (thinking that he should be believed because of his medical knowledge without providing enough context such as why his recommendations were changing/evolving), not using an expect in communications to help craft the message (social distancing was a bad term but we're stuck with it now), and not considering the psychological and sociological impact of his recommendations.
That's a valid opinion. Doesn't change the fact that NOBODY has had a consistent message.
Image

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

Ibanez wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 11:37 am
BDKJMU wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:59 am

Yep, she was one sided. I honestly thought it would be worse, though. And the loaded questioning on things like racial relations and climate change of course benefitted Biden, allowing him to come out in offense and Trump on defense.
Maybe in 2024 we can have Republicans ask the Republicans questions and the Democrats as Democrat questions. That way both sides will be happy with the questions.


Why do you feel Biden benefitted from Race and Climate discussions? The Climate one is obvious. But Race? Trump has emboldened white supremacists. It's not until has asked, hounded and had days of bad press does he actually have a firm statement.
When?

The Charlottesville narrative is a lie that keeps getting repeated by the media. The 'good people on both sides' comment was directed at the people who PRIOR to the riots were debating the issue of whether or not the Lee statue should come down, which had been going on for a while. There were good people on both sides of that peaceful debate. Trump wasn't referring to the neo Nazis & white nationalists on one side, and ANTIFA on the other.

The Proud Boys? The group who's leader is a black Latino, and whose membership is 10-20% minority, according to the Kentucky professor who has studied the group.
Last edited by BDKJMU on Sat Oct 24, 2020 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

SunCoastBlueHen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:06 pm
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. :thumb: :thumb:
:suspicious: 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.
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

SDHornet wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:46 pm
GannonFan wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:42 pm


The only thing I'd fault Fauci for was the initial decision not to press for universal mask usage - he himself said he didn't press for it even though it was known early on that it would be effective. The thought was that frontline workers could be left without if there was a rush for masks. He also said they purposely withheld this information early on. I'd fault him for not advocating for something we really needed and I fault him for admitting to essentially lying about masks early on. I get the need to lie in this case if you already made the decision that you could endanger the front-line medical workers, but you save the revealing of the lying after the crisis is over and we're doing the retrospective on what worked and what didn't. Fauci didn't help the confidence or trust in health officials by admitting mid-crisis that he was playing free and fast with the truth as he thought necessary.
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.
Yep- I saw lots about how some (granted maybe they were in the minority, I don't know) of front line health care workers that supported the BLM protests in June, inclcuding in states that were in some form of lockdown.

Anyone who supported the BLM protests, but are against large gatherings, restaurants, stadiums etc, being fully open (includes most donk govs) are all a bunch of hypocrites. Fuck em.
Last edited by BDKJMU on Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:53 pm
Pwns wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:08 am
For the JSOs out there that think Trump is the only politician with a cavalier attitude on facts.

It's common in politics but that video is an exercise in taking snips out of context. Biden's position is that he will work to transition away from fossil fuels over time. He's not going to get elected then start working to outlaw fracking. He did not say he opposes fracking in the sense that he's going to get elected then eliminate fracking.

My bet would be, for example, that when he's talking to the bald guy it's a situation where the guy is very anti fracking and what Biden is in the process of doing is telling him that it's not something that can be done instantly; that there has to be a transition over time. The next word out of Biden's mouth after the video cut off the scene was almost certainly a "but" followed by an argument for why it can't be done immediately. It's likely somebody snipped that part of the conversation to create a false impression.
Biden: "Look in my eyes-I guarantee you, I guarantee you, we're going to end fossil fuels."
Harris, who we all know would be taking Biden's seat if he won, said flat out in the other video: "Absolutely, I would ban fracking".

Did anyone catch Biden before he got on the plane last night, after he said during the debate we're going to transition away from fossil fuels, say to a reporter along the lines of "What I meant was not transitioning away from fossil fuels, but transitioning away from subsidies.". :roll: He's all over the place.

Next thing you know he'll be telling the hundreds of thousands who work in the fossil fuels energy they should learn to code or something.
Last edited by BDKJMU on Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 9941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by SeattleGriz »

catbooster wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 2:54 pm
SDHornet wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:46 pm

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?
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.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

During the debate Biden denied ever trying to cut social security. Played on a big jumbo tron at Trump's Pensacola rally.

Trump ought to run this ad naseum as a commercial, esp in Florida.
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 9941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by SeattleGriz »

UNI88 wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:21 pm
89Hen wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:04 pm

I don't disagree that the messaging has been inconsistent and pretty poor. But that's from EVERYONE. Who has been consistent? Not Fauci, not WHO, not Cuomo...

Give me a few examples of what you think Clinton or Biden would have done better. Of course anything you or I say about what somebody else would have done is pure conjecture, so I don't know how much time you want to waste on this frivolous exercise.
Has Fauci been inconsistent or has his messaging changed as the understanding of the virus has changed?

I'm not going to criticize someone for having a different message today or in June than they had in March.

I don't think Clinton would have done better. She would have attempted to unilaterally lock things down in order to exert greater authoritarian government control which might have saved lives but I would be really concerned about the long term impacts of that control on liberty.
His position should not have changed that much. We have a LONG history and understanding of Epidemiology and infectious diseases.

He's more of an administrator than scientist now.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz

User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 18664
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by JohnStOnge »

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.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image

User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 18664
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by JohnStOnge »

Here's a good discussion of public opinion on "fracking:"

https://www.sightline.org/2020/07/28/pu ... -fracking/

One interesting point in there is that it polls better if it's called "shale drilling." I think there are upsides and downsides for both sides. But I don't know if Trump putting himself on the side of "fracking" and casting Biden as "wanting to ban fracking" is going to be a net benefit for him. I hope not. We'll see.

Again: I think Biden would've been better off not to say it. Nothing to gain by doing it. The anti fracking people are already voting for him. No sense taking the chance of alienating anybody if you don't have to. But, overall public opinion wise, taking a "ban fracking" stance appears to be in line with majority or at least plurality public opinion.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image

Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 8493
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by Baldy »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 2:10 pm
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/2 ... ate-431558
Trump's sideshow fizzles out
But so far the Bobulinski allegations seem like bubkes. At 10:47, minutes after the debate ended, the Wall Street Journal, part of the same media empire as Fox News and the Post, reported, “Text messages and emails related to the venture that were provided to the Journal by Mr. Bobulinski, mainly from the spring and summer of 2017, don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden” — the former vice president’s brother — “discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture.”

Even if Bobulinski is telling the truth, that Joe Biden knew about the China enterprise, it’s not clear what the scandal is — he was a private citizen at the time and not yet running for president. Trump has elevated an unsubstantiated assertion that Biden had knowledge about his son’s legal and failed business venture to a “crime” for which he “should be in jail.” To put in context how absurd this allegation is, one of the first things George W. Bush did after he left the White House was deliver a paid speech in China. Somehow he remains at large.
Kimberly Strassel easily eviscerates that article in this thread...


kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 47180
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 4:57 pm
SDHornet wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:46 pm


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.
Yep- I saw lots about how some (granted maybe they were in the minority, I don't know) of front line health care workers that supported the BLM protests in June, inclcuding in states that were in some form of lockdown.

Anyone who supported the BLM protests, but are against large gatherings, restaurants, stadiums etc, being fully open (includes most donk govs) are all a bunch of hypocrites. Fuck em.
Health officials or front line workers? Are the nurses now the enemy too?
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:26 am
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.
Polls that include unlikely voters, around 40% of whom don’t vote, on an election issue, are irrelevant. If any exit polling is done for fracking in Pa, it will show higher support than general pre election polls.
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18708
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by BDKJMU »

catbooster wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 2:54 pm
SDHornet wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:46 pm

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?
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
BLM: Burning Looting Marxists

User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 14622
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: POTUS Debate #3, 10/22 9 PM ECB

Post by SDHornet »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:53 pm
Pwns wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:08 am
For the JSOs out there that think Trump is the only politician with a cavalier attitude on facts.

It's common in politics but that video is an exercise in taking snips out of context. Biden's position is that he will work to transition away from fossil fuels over time. He's not going to get elected then start working to outlaw fracking. He did not say he opposes fracking in the sense that he's going to get elected then eliminate fracking.

My bet would be, for example, that when he's talking to the bald guy it's a situation where the guy is very anti fracking and what Biden is in the process of doing is telling him that it's not something that can be done instantly; that there has to be a transition over time. The next word out of Biden's mouth after the video cut off the scene was almost certainly a "but" followed by an argument for why it can't be done immediately. It's likely somebody snipped that part of the conversation to create a false impression.
Yeah, none of this lines up with anything Biden has said regarding fracking and the oil industry on multiple occasions...on tape. Nice failpost. :rofl:

Post Reply