• Well, in their defense, they may have just been listening to the President.

Not sure what you mean. NYC was attacked in 2001. Cuomo has been governor since 2011 and de Blasio has been mayor since 2013. Are you saying they were listening to Obama?

"You should also expose New York for being not only unprepared, but poo-pooing the coronavirus threat quite recently. Here's Bill de "Blahsio" on March 10th, yes March 10th, telling New Yorkers to just go about their business during an MSNBC interview."

• Does that help you? Or does it need to be in all caps? You can't even remember your own post?

okaydo said:

---

---

Question of the Day: Could a prosecutor get a unanimous verdict for conviction if George pillow smothered Kellyanne?

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's where Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

The President can't do that. Your misguided and projected animus is becoming more belligerent, more nonsensical. Like a mass shooter 360-shooting at everything in the building.

https://reason.com/2020/04/03/no-trump-does-not-have-the-power-to-declare-a-national-stay-at-home-order/

Grigsby said:

---

Fox is toast. They are going to be sued into oblivion.

---

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-moguls-rupert-and-lachlan-murdoch-stockpile-attorneys-against-coronavirus-lawsuits

".... that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully...."

tRump, wider in the caboose than the shoulders and possessed of no muscles and cute whittle mittens for fists, would have had a tough time pulling off the role of the bully on the playgrounds of Oakland when I was a boy. I'm pretty sure when he was young if you messed up a single hair on Little Lord Fauntleroy's head that his POS old man paid a couple of thugs to tune you up.

GBear4Life said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's where Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

The President can't do that. Your misguided and projected animus is becoming more belligerent, more nonsensical. Like a mass shooter 360-shooting at everything in the building.

https://reason.com/2020/04/03/no-trump-does-not-have-the-power-to-declare-a-national-stay-at-home-order/

---

Not literally he can't, but as the article states Trump does have strong political influence to convince the remaining holdout states to implement such laws. All of those remaining states are Republican-controlled. Trump has not really exerted that political power.

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's where Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

The President can't do that. Your misguided and projected animus is becoming more belligerent, more nonsensical. Like a mass shooter 360-shooting at everything in the building.

https://reason.com/2020/04/03/no-trump-does-not-have-the-power-to-declare-a-national-stay-at-home-order/

---

Not literally he can't, but as the article states Trump does have strong political influence to convince the remaining holdout states to implement such laws. All of those remaining states are Republican-controlled. Trump has not really exerted that political power.

---

It was just another completely bogus criticism. I called it out. Takes a lie, frame the criticism as an abject moral and political failure among like-minded partisans. The irony is palpable.

The higher-ups at Fox Entertainment are worrying about their stock portfolios again:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/everywhere-already-fox-news-hosts-214715914.html

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's where Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

The President can't do that. Your misguided and projected animus is becoming more belligerent, more nonsensical. Like a mass shooter 360-shooting at everything in the building.

https://reason.com/2020/04/03/no-trump-does-not-have-the-power-to-declare-a-national-stay-at-home-order/

---

Not literally he can't, but as the article states Trump does have strong political influence to convince the remaining holdout states to implement such laws. All of those remaining states are Republican-controlled. Trump has not really exerted that political power.

---

It was just another completely bogus criticism. I called it out. Takes a lie, frame the criticism as an abject moral and political failure among like-minded partisans. The irony is palpable.

---

I don't think the original post said anything about Trump literally being able to make his own laws, just that he could be doing something stronger than making suggestions. That's not really a lie.

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's where Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

The President can't do that. Your misguided and projected animus is becoming more belligerent, more nonsensical. Like a mass shooter 360-shooting at everything in the building.

https://reason.com/2020/04/03/no-trump-does-not-have-the-power-to-declare-a-national-stay-at-home-order/

---

Not literally he can't, but as the article states Trump does have strong political influence to convince the remaining holdout states to implement such laws. All of those remaining states are Republican-controlled. Trump has not really exerted that political power.

---

It was just another completely bogus criticism. I called it out. Takes a lie, frame the criticism as an abject moral and political failure among like-minded partisans. The irony is palpable.

---

I don't think the original post said anything about Trump literally being able to make his own laws, just that he could be doing something stronger than making suggestions. That's not really a lie.

---

Pressuring GB4L to admit Trump could have done more (not even Trump has done anything wrong) is like teaching Furdie mascot to dance. Don't hurt his feelings.

Professor Henry Higgins said:

---

Californium said:

---

I think it is a mistake to want to punish people with your political choices. At each stage the choice should be the best (or the least crappy, when that's all there is) one available. If you are so pissed off that you end up hurting the people you are supposedly trying to help, then I don't think you are making good decisions, irrespective of whether or not you are "right"

---

Tell that to Trump voters

---

I don't really understand your point. 1st I don't agree with or understand Trump voters and 2nd most trump voters were voting what they thought was the best choice (unless it's true that people who wanted Sanders to be president voted for Trump because those ARE the trump voters I would be talking to).

You and I, on the other hand, seem to want the same or at least a similar political outcome (granted this is only inferred from your political choices and things you've written on posts, but it's what I'm going with for the moment). We are not going to get it in November 2020. If we ever do get it we will be starting from a better place if Biden is president for the next 4 years than if Trump is. And we would be in an even better place (not a good pace just better than we are after 4 years of Trump) if Hillary had won in 2016. Punishing Hillary or Biden or whatever centrists you are mad at (even if legitimately) is pretty much what they were thinking of when they invented the phrase: cutting of your nose to spite your face.

LMK5 said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

bearister said:

---

tRump has grown weary with Fox News. Here he is at a Mar a Lago event with his new favorite reporter, Chanel Rion, of OANN (One America News Network):



Rion's question to tRump at the March 30 Task Force pressie:

Rion said:

"2,405 Americans have died from [the virus] in the last 60 days. Meanwhile, you have 2,369 children who are killed by their mothers through elective abortions each day. That's 16 and a half thousand children killed every week. Two states have suspended elective abortion to make more resources available...Should more states be doing the same?"

---

That's right, f u k you unborn babies! I know you have a nervous system, beating heart, a unique genetic profile, but f u k you and Trump durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

---

I wasn't trying to start a moral debate about abortion. My point is tRump sees the role of the press as being his advocate like RT is for Putin. The point of Rion's question was to offer a total pivot away from tRump's mishandling of the federal government's pandemic preparedness and response.

---

If you think the Feds' response was not up to par, then you'll also have to include lots of other countries that are so often held up as model societies by the left: Germany; France; UK; Italy; Spain; Canada; and on and on. You should also expose New York for being not only unprepared, but poo-pooing the coronavirus threat quite recently. Here's Bill de "Blahsio" on March 10th, yes March 10th, telling New Yorkers to just go about their business during an MSNBC interview.

So New York City, the target of the 9/11 attacks and the number one terrorist target in America, was not prepared for a medical emergency. The governor, the newly-annointed future Dem presidential candidate, has been at the helm since 2011, yet also didn't prepare, but instead criticizes the federal branch. So New Yorkers, despite being the highest taxed people in the Union, did not get their money's worth from these clowns, despite their recent General Patton-like portrayals in the media.

---

Ain't whataboutism grand?

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's where Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

The President can't do that. Your misguided and projected animus is becoming more belligerent, more nonsensical. Like a mass shooter 360-shooting at everything in the building.

https://reason.com/2020/04/03/no-trump-does-not-have-the-power-to-declare-a-national-stay-at-home-order/

---

Not literally he can't, but as the article states Trump does have strong political influence to convince the remaining holdout states to implement such laws. All of those remaining states are Republican-controlled. Trump has not really exerted that political power.

---

It was just another completely bogus criticism. I called it out. Takes a lie, frame the criticism as an abject moral and political failure among like-minded partisans. The irony is palpable.

---

I don't think the original post said anything about Trump literally being able to make his own laws, just that he could be doing something stronger than making suggestions. That's not really a lie.

---

Your selective pedantry is always amusing

Quote:

---

They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Thanks, but I think this isn't just about preparation. Sure - everyone could be more prepared. But responding to events as they unfold on the fly is a key leadership skill and that's Cuomo/De Blasio really failed. They were too timid and shortsighted.

The federal failure is continuing and inexcusable. The fact that other countries have done poorly is not my concern because I don't live in those countries. They have at least instituted nationwide lockdowns to limit the spread whereas our President is too weak to do anything other than make suggestions. It's a shame that people in this country were misguided enough to think that they elected a strongman when they voted for a schoolyard bully who cowers in the face of any real obstacle.

---

And in case anybody is getting Biden lemon fever and thinking they want to do a Cuomo switcheroo, here's what the guy really stands for.

Made the mistake of turning on News with Brian Williams the other night (I rarely watch broadcast news these days) thinking it would be nothing but Hard News reporting given the circumstances. Virtually everything was spun at spotlighting Trump. They are much more subtle about their agenda and biases than FOX, but I was surprised at how incessant it was, especially for a primetime regular news broadcast.

GBear4Life said:

---

Made the mistake of turning on News with Brian Williams the other night (I rarely watch broadcast news these days) thinking it would be nothing but Hard News reporting given the circumstances. Virtually everything was spun at spotlighting Trump. They are much more subtle about their agenda and biases than FOX, but I was surprised at how incessant it was, especially for a primetime regular news broadcast.

---

Take a peek at CNN and you won't need to insert "subtle." How far the mighty have fallen. Remember when that was the go-to station when you wanted the facts fast, straight, and clear? Remember the stellar 9/11 coverage? Was that really the same network we see today? I literally heard Don Lemon refer to Chris Cuomo and himself as "journalists" last week. They just can't stomach the term "commentator."

Governor Cuomo sure isn't perfect by a long shot, but if all our leaders right now were subject to military law (Court Martial), worst case scenario based on that video he might be subject to discipline but he not would face life in the brig or execution at dawn like a whole lot of others.
With regard to Krystal Ball, her stock sunk faster than a whale dump and that is the wreckage she landed on before hitting the bottom.

Anarchistbear said:

---

---

Interesting that the graph, especially for Republicans, shows a steep negative slope starting in 2015. That's when, during the presidential campaign, CNN started with their daily election coverage panel made up of 8 people, 6 of which were Democrat sympathizers and 2 were the beleaguered opposition. Of course the moderator was also a Democrat. They didn't care how obviously biased the telecasts were. They were already on a mission and willing to throw their well-earned journalistic integrity out the window to get the job done.

At least CNN didn't kill a bunch of fat f@ucks on cruise ships with false reporting that now has Rupee scared he gonna get sued.

The graphs are probably related to Russian hysteria

bearister said:

---

At least CNN didn't kill a bunch of fat f@ucks on cruise ships with false reporting that now has Rupee scared he gonna get sued.

---

Does Fox have strong influence in NYC and New Jersey? After all, that's where almost half the US cases are. They were much more likely to have taken their advice from Bill DeBlasio on March 10th when he told everyone to not worry about it and just go do what you want to do. He didn't even announce intent to close schools, restaurants, and bars until March 15. Will he hire Rudy as his counsel?

It's ridiculous to presume so much power to FOX. They are one network on an island in the arena of broadcast MSM.

The low-information voters that consume FOX news are so detrimentally loyal and trusting of FOX that it leads to some of these egregious examples of ignorance many have noted. This loyalty is bred out of necessity -- there is nowhere else to go on broadcast news that doesn't have outright contempt for them.

bearister said:

---

With regard to Krystal Ball, her stock sunk faster than a whale dump and that is the wreckage she landed on before hitting the bottom.

---

LOLOLOL

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

It's ridiculous to presume so much power to FOX. They are one network on an island in the arena of broadcast MSM.

The low-information voters that consume FOX news are so detrimentally loyal and trusting of FOX that it leads to some of these egregious examples of ignorance many have noted. This loyalty is bred out of necessity -- there is nowhere else to go on broadcast news that doesn't have outright contempt for them.

---

I'm not sure that other media has "contempt" for low-information voters, though I can certainly see how low-information voters might FEEL like outlets that actually try to inform them are talking down to them.

---

Of course they do. It's palpable. The MSM's intent isn't to inform, it is to influence (less so than FOX, for sure). What a claim to assume that they are averse to information. It's a lack of trust and the -- take your pick: condescension, contempt, race baiting and identity politics. Presuming they dislike MSM because they conflate information with condescension personifies the attitude I'm referencing. The ideologues who watch Liberal MSM feel the same way about FOX. They don't trust them and their news is geared at affirming the conservative base and belittling liberals. Who would want to consume that product?

sycasey said:

---

I'm confused about what your point is here. First off, you used the term "low information voter," not me. Secondly, you posit that they are so disgusted by the attempts within "MSM" to "influence" them that they have been turned to watching Fox. Yet in the same paragraph you admit that Fox is trying even harder to influence them. So if these people are really just interested in getting good information, what are they doing watching Fox so much?

---

Because they THINK it's good information (confirmation bias).

Why are so many liberals watching Liberal MSM if they are really interested in simply hard news? Because they think it is (confirmation bias)