Trump will win the 2020 election

[evil wasabi]

What's a disturbing thing is that the Whitehouse and everybody in Trumps orbit goes through the proper procedures.

It's what Asia did and it worked out pretty well for them.



Wear a face covering, stay several feet away from others, wash your hands and use proper hygiene cleaning procedures. If somebody sneezes on you don't rub it in your eyeballs. That should stop almost all of it.

I just went to the gas station behind my house and saw around 20 people and no masks.



I can't picture some shadowy puppet-master pulling Trumps strings. He's the one who said it's a Democrat hoax, it'll go away in April. it's just the flu, people wear masks just to make him look bad...it's all on him.

Look at Japan they could really use the deaths. Here in a bit they are going to need to import a million Filipinos to babysit grandma and grandpa at the nursing home. 79,438 cases, 1508 deaths.

Teh AZianzs are all about the collective too so if anybody would have jumped on the kill the useless people bandwagon it would have been them. Instead they used that energy to wear masks, screen, test, trace and isolate.

We don’t know the truth about China, but we do know the top countries for deaths are the US, India, Brazil, and Russia, I think. Idk. Been a minute since I checked. In Russia’s case it’s was gross incompetence. Maybe in all 4 cases. But I am certain that in all those cases, someone said that “on the bright side...”

 

[norton9478]

US: Becoming a fascist kleptocracy
India: Religious fascists
Russia: Kleptocratic Fascists
Brazil: Kleptocratic Fascists

 

[evil wasabi]

US: Becoming a fascist kleptocracy
India: Religious fascists
Russia: Kleptocratic Fascists
Brazil: Kleptocratic Fascists

Which one doesn’t belong

Ans: India. Not a big contributor for porn.

 

[wataru330]

It's all good man. That dude was always crooked.

We live and learn.

Been thinking of a tell all on aero fighters 3. My conscious is clean.

Funny, how after 8 years, there's not 1 single shred of evidence against me?

I've held my tongue and protected pussies that abandoned me - still debating whether or not it's worth it to burn these fucks to the ground?

Time will tell.

Grown men were mad at me for making a few bucks. I still can't believe that entire ordeal.

Kept every single financial document, email and receipt.

I'm just putting this out there if anyone has anything they want to say upfront.

There's quite a few members who know the real story.

It probably won't make a difference to the people I want it to - but my side will be heard at some point.

I thought I was going to die last week. Not out of the woods yet - but I'm not going out without telling my side, no matter who it hurts.

Burn dem fools, I’ve got some popcorn to eat.

 

[clithy]

We don’t know the truth about China, but we do know the top countries for deaths are the US, India, Brazil, and Russia, I think. Idk. Been a minute since I checked. In Russia’s case it’s was gross incompetence. Maybe in all 4 cases. But I am certain that in all those cases, someone said that “on the bright side...”

I sure hope you're not being so disingenuous as to use absolute deaths.

Belgium has a higher fatality rate than us by nearly 50%...

Peru, Bolivia, Chile, and Ecuador are all above Brazil. Not that any of them are shining examples of good government.

We are about on par with Sweden, Italy, and the UK.

I don't really believe Russia's numbers anyway, but they're 38th.

India, not sure whether to believe any data there either, isn't even in the top 50. Same for China and I definitely don't believe their numbers.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

 

[roker]

Read in nyt that Americans are expecting a Trump comeback win. Seems Biden's lead in swing states is shrinking.

 

[evil wasabi]

I sure hope you're not being so disingenuous as to use absolute deaths.

Belgium has a higher fatality rate than us by nearly 50%...

Peru, Bolivia, Chile, and Ecuador are all above Brazil. Not that any of them are shining examples of good government.

We are about on par with Sweden, Italy, and the UK.

I don't really believe Russia's numbers anyway, but they're 38th.

India, not sure whether to believe any data there either, isn't even in the top 50. Same for China and I definitely don't believe their numbers.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

What do you believe then?

Since our access to verifiable data is lacking.

 

[clithy]

All of the data is lacking due to varying testing rates, differences in fatality counting rules, and general delays in reporting. To the point where the numbers mean very little to me.

I believe most current restrictions on the American people are incompatible with natural rights and our concept of government regardless of the severity of the pandemic.

There was a court win for some PA counties recently although my understanding is that it largely ruled on orders from back in March which have changed since then. It is difficult to get timely rulings and rule by fiat continues to be the order of the day.

 

[evil wasabi]

I believe most current restrictions on the American people are incompatible with natural rights and our concept of government regardless of the severity of the pandemic.

Most of the restrictions are on commerce. The rights of Americans are more abridged in the state's response to protests than they are to the pandemic. Businesses don't have rights, much to the consternation of business owners, who want more rights, and less for their employees.

Here are where I imagine the rights problems to exist:
commerce clause - right to travel, dormant commerce clause
equal protection - how can a state determine which businesses can operate and which cannot, for example, in NY
1st amendment - assembly

But in these cases you have an issue of public welfare, which has historically superceded civil liberties. "Salum populi suprema lex" is the court's way of saying "the welfare of the people is the supreme law." We have seen this with smallpox, tuberculosis, and other diseases, where an infected person is quarantined against their rights, and the court sides with the public health officials. The deciding factor will fall on positive expert testimony. But overall, there is precedence for this, and there is history for your argument about the civil liberties - a losing history, but a history nonetheless.

If we are going to talk about deteriorated civil liberties, a bigger problem is the manner that the federal government has directed law enforcement to handle protestors.

 

[clithy]

Businesses don't have rights

When you say this, do you mean in practice or in principle?

But in these cases you have an issue of public welfare, which has historically superceded civil liberties. "Salum populi suprema lex" is the court's way of saying "the welfare of the people is the supreme law."

Along the same lines, do you think this is just?

"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right."

We have seen this with smallpox, tuberculosis, and other diseases, where an infected person is quarantined against their rights, and the court sides with the public health officials.

Quarantining the infected is entirely different than quarantining the population, no?

 

[evil wasabi]

When you say this, do you mean in practice or in principle?



Along the same lines, do you think this is just?

"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right."



Quarantining the infected is entirely different than quarantining the population, no?

In principle. In practice we have seen the supreme court start to give businesses the first amendment right of negative religious freedom. I say negative because in the case of hobby lobby or masterpiece cake, the right was used to deny the rights of other people, as opposed to protect an individual's rights from the state.

if you are asking if public welfare should supercede individual civil liberties, I say yes. But public welfare has to be narrowly tailored, such that public welfare is limited to physical health.

 

[clithy]

In principle. In practice we have seen the supreme court start to give businesses the first amendment right of negative religious freedom. I say negative because in the case of hobby lobby or masterpiece cake, the right was used to deny the rights of other people, as opposed to protect an individual's rights from the state.

A proprietor surely has rights to the use of their property as they see fit, right? How do you then separate out the rights of an owner from the actions of a business. Compelling a business to provide a service against their will is much more of an abridgment of their first amendment rights than it is any sort of abridgement of a potential customer's rights (of which I would suggest they have basically none when on the private property of another at their pleasure). A decision against Hobby Lobby or a cake shop would simply make private enterprise the instrument of the people aka public ownership aka socialism.

A business is not a person sure, but it is a legal entity, an expression of an individual or group of individuals, and those people definitely have rights.

if you are asking if public welfare should supercede individual civil liberties, I say yes. But public welfare has to be narrowly tailored, such that public welfare is limited to physical health.

I'm inclined to agree in extraordinarily narrow cases. But then how do we get away with public health orders that apply broadly to all citizens regardless of their current infection status?

 

[evil wasabi]

A proprietor surely has rights to the use of their property as they see fit, right? How do you then separate out the rights of an owner from the actions of a business. Compelling a business to provide a service against their will is much more of an abridgment of their first amendment rights than it is any sort of abridgement of a potential customer's rights (of which I would suggest they have basically none when on the private property of another at their pleasure). A decision against Hobby Lobby or a cake shop would simply make private enterprise the instrument of the people aka public ownership aka socialism.

A business is not a person sure, but it is a legal entity, an expression of an individual or group of individuals, and those people definitely have rights.

that would only work in a vacuum. Compelling a business to provide service without discrimination based on gender, sex, race, nationality, or other protected groups, should not be a problem. A person can be a racist, but his company cannot be. So the correct decision would have been that masterpiece cake would hire someone to build the cake for them, and provide that cake to the couple, but could not refuse the couple based on sexual orientation. For hobby lobby, the court decided that the company could refuse to provide insurance that covers women's hygiene, based on religious belief. This came off as the wrong decision for the court because it incentivizes hobby lobby to discriminate against women, regardless of sexual activity. Both of these were boneheaded appropriations of rights by some men (namely Thomas and Alito) who haven't had a passion for the law in decades. They are merely stealing a living at this point. If you have time, read Thomas's opinion in Masterpiece. It is the stuff of facepalms.

A good example of how to handle these problems of Hobby Lobby and Masterpiece is the way that judges are expected to handle conflicts of interest - they are to step aside and let someone unbiased do the work for them. In both instances, the business owners should recognize their conflict of interests, whether in providing adequate and equal healthcare to employees, or servicing customers, and step aside, so that the business can operate properly, without discriminating. This is capitalism.

Socialism is allowing those businesses to get money from the state when refusing to do their jobs.

 

[TonK]

Justin, do you wear a mask?

 

[clithy]

that would only work in a vacuum. Compelling a business to provide service without discrimination based on gender, sex, race, nationality, or other protected groups, should not be a problem. A person can be a racist, but his company cannot be. So the correct decision would have been that masterpiece cake would hire someone to build the cake for them, and provide that cake to the couple, but could not refuse the couple based on sexual orientation. For hobby lobby, the court decided that the company could refuse to provide insurance that covers women's hygiene, based on religious belief. This came off as the wrong decision for the court because it incentivizes hobby lobby to discriminate against women, regardless of sexual activity. Both of these were boneheaded appropriations of rights by some men (namely Thomas and Alito) who haven't had a passion for the law in decades. They are merely stealing a living at this point. If you have time, read Thomas's opinion in Masterpiece. It is the stuff of facepalms.

If I have a minute, I'll read the decision. My only answer in the form of a question here is to say, is Masterpiece Cake the only bakery in existence? Take your business somewhere that the owners don't hate you for who you are. Why anyone would want to leverage the power of government to put money in the pocket of others who want nothing to do with you is beyond my comprehension.

A good example of how to handle these problems of Hobby Lobby and Masterpiece is the way that judges are expected to handle conflicts of interest - they are to step aside and let someone unbiased do the work for them. In both instances, the business owners should recognize their conflict of interests, whether in providing adequate and equal healthcare to employees, or servicing customers, and step aside, so that the business can operate properly, without discriminating. This is capitalism.

Socialism is allowing those businesses to get money from the state when refusing to do their jobs.

Does Hobby Lobby offer insurance that covers contraception for men?

What are these businesses getting from the government?

Justin, do you wear a mask?

At a business with a sign posted yes, on at the door going in, off at the door going out, although they are currently compelled to post such signs by the governor/health secretary orders, I would prefer to comply with voluntary requests or relocate my business elsewhere at my own discretion. Otherwise, if I'm generically outside of the house, no.

 

[TonK]

At a business with a sign posted yes, on at the door going in, off at the door going out, although they are currently compelled to post such signs by the governor/health secretary orders, I would prefer to comply with voluntary requests or relocate my business elsewhere at my own discretion. Otherwise, if I'm generically outside of the house, no.

Really can't complain here. Thanks!

 

[evil wasabi]

If I have a minute, I'll read the decision. My only answer in the form of a question here is to say, is Masterpiece Cake the only bakery in existence? Take your business somewhere that the owners don't hate you for who you are. Why anyone would want to leverage the power of government to put money in the pocket of others who want nothing to do with you is beyond my comprehension.



Does Hobby Lobby offer insurance that covers contraception for men?

The idea of insurance is to help cover health issues. Does hobby lobby offer insurance that covers prostate exams for women? Female contraception is more than sexual, as birth control can help women against hormone imbalances. Refusing a woman contraceptive coverage has nothing to do with providing health benefits, but rather, denying them. And in this instance, the question becomes "are you doing this to a protected class of citizens?" The answer is yes, women are a protected class, as are men, but that's not important until we see a law refusing to cover prostates. The next question is "is this strictly necessary to provide the benefit to the people? And that's where the court leaned on politics to avoid doing its job. Denying health benefits to females in order to allow the owner of Hobby Lobby to practice his religion did not meet the strict scrutiny standard. Even if he wanted to restrict insurance from covering DNCs, which are necessary for most cases of miscarriage, but also known as abortions, there's a health question - why are they allowed to deny women their health coverage, and is this necessary? I have not seen a compelling argument for why it would be.

And as an aside, the owner of hobby lobby was discovered to be paying ISIS, through Israeli middlemen, for antiques stolen from Syria and Iraq. Not exactly something Jesus would do, in case anyone is asking.

As for taking your business where you are accepted, that is a dog whistle for systemic racism/discrimination. Like maybe black people should have just gone to dumpsters before the civil rights act? No need for them to spend their hard earned money on diners that refused to serve them.

If America is to be the greatest country in the world, which every country should aspire to be, it cannot allow businesses to treat anyone poorly on the basis of their skin, race, creed, sex, gender, or nationality.

 

[Tripredacus]

Justin, do you wear a mask?

I thought people who trusted the government were bootlickers. Make up your mind already.

 

[TonK]

I thought people who trusted the government were bootlickers. Make up your mind already.

No, people who lust after police are bootlickers.

People who wear masks are compassionate. I wore a mask before it was OrDeReD

 

[Tripredacus]

People who wear masks are compassionate.

The vast majority of people who wear masks are only doing so because they are "required" to do so.

 

[evil wasabi]

The vast majority of people who wear masks are only doing so because they are "required" to do so.

numbers to back that up, or just spouting bullshit?

 

[TonK]

The vast majority of people who wear masks are only doing so because they are "required" to do so.

I disagree. If by majority, you mean Trump supporters, then yes. Hopefully natural selection occurs.

Also. Trump suggested over riding the FDA. I'm scared.

 

[GohanX]

A lot of people wouldn't wear seat belts if it wasn't the law also, and they too would be dumb fucks.

 

[TonK]

A lot of people wouldn't wear seat belts if it wasn't the law also, and they too would be dumb fucks.

Been saying it for months. These people are all fucking stupid.

 

[norton9478]

The goverment shouldn't be telling anybody to wear a mask in public indoor settings.

They should be telling people not to go inside any indoor public setting where people aren't wearing masks.