login
Media panic as Trump approval soars
-
No new posts
 2020-03-27 9:07 AM |
Champion  10157    Alabama |  Subject: Media panic as Trump approval soarshttps://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_a... This is one of the few polls I trust as it is a average of all polls. Trump just blew past his all-time high. The reason for this many are saying is the daily briefings with ratings showing millions are watching. As they see more of Trump in action they like it. The POTUS is doing what Presidents are supposed to do and that is try to reassure the country, keep calm and not panic the nation into another depression. There is a growing trend by MSM to stop airing the daily briefings. I wonder why? Just look at the graph of approval rating at RCP. Americans are not stupid and don’t need their news filtered through talking heads who think they are smarter than their viewers. Then Biden comes out with a briefing that made him look like an idiot. He was unable to speak without his teleprompter. Contrast this to Trump who can talk for hours with no teleprompter. |
| 2020-03-27 9:21 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Yeah, I've tried to down down my political talk while this is going on......and then I watched CNN for an hour late last night. I think I'm completely done watching that channel. At least while the country is in a crisis. It's just TOO dumb, even for me. |
| 2020-03-27 10:13 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Chis Hayes from PMSNBC tweeted that 50% of the country could die. These people have no shame. |
| 2020-03-27 11:11 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Chris Hayes is actually dumber than a sack of hammers.. he really can't help himself. |
| 2020-03-27 11:18 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 7553 Albuquerque, New Mexico | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by Rogillio Chis Hayes from PMSNBC tweeted that 50% of the country could die. These people have no shame. And the other half lives on indefinitely? I'll make an even bigger prediction...100% of the country WILL die. |
| 2020-03-27 11:28 AM in reply to: 0 |
1731 Denver, Colorado | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars ****disclaimer: I am not a supporter of any party> coming from another country, I am an observer, but I am also devoted to this country, wanting the best for it (I am saying this just because I don't want any unnecessray yelling towards me, as I've seen before on this forum). Reading the news vs. watching the actual briefings life is a huge difference. I am trying to take a look at all news, from each side, and then grasp an avergare, but still cannot build any trust or even reasoning, as the media are providing misinterpretation, exeggaration, opinions, not facts... I started wtahcing some briefings, and I have to admit I admire Trump's patience towards some reporters..... Last week someone asked him if he considers phrase "Chinese food" as racism... Seriously...? We have an international emergency, and that is the question you ask....? Then I go and read the headlines, with all bunch of info that does not always align with what was said. Again, opinions and interpretations, instead of facts. I can see how all of that leads to a huge panic. Edited by marysia83 2020-03-27 11:29 AM |
| 2020-03-27 12:36 PM in reply to: marysia83 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marysia83 ****disclaimer: I am not a supporter of any party> coming from another country, I am an observer, but I am also devoted to this country, wanting the best for it (I am saying this just because I don't want any unnecessray yelling towards me, as I've seen before on this forum). Reading the news vs. watching the actual briefings life is a huge difference. I am trying to take a look at all news, from each side, and then grasp an avergare, but still cannot build any trust or even reasoning, as the media are providing misinterpretation, exeggaration, opinions, not facts... I started wtahcing some briefings, and I have to admit I admire Trump's patience towards some reporters..... Last week someone asked him if he considers phrase "Chinese food" as racism... Seriously...? We have an international emergency, and that is the question you ask....? Then I go and read the headlines, with all bunch of info that does not always align with what was said. Again, opinions and interpretations, instead of facts. I can see how all of that leads to a huge panic. I think the media constantly using this crisis to bash Trump shows how far from journalism the MSM has come. Earlier today I hard John King talk about how the Trump is working to defeat this “...but just a month ago he downplayed the crisis. Here is Trump just 30 days ago downplaying the virus.” And they showed an old video. I cursed at the TV and changed the channel. |
| 2020-03-27 1:54 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Edited by marcag 2020-03-27 1:56 PM |
| 2020-03-27 2:13 PM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. |
| 2020-03-27 2:18 PM in reply to: marcag |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. I do think a prediction is nothing more than a prediction.....and nobody is very good at it. The doubling rate in NY is slowing dramatically.....so we'll see what next week will bring. Lot's of predictions on where the next "hot spot" will be and how bad it will be.....we'll see. Most of what I read says we are 3-4 weeks from diminishing infections......we'll see. But, my family is staying away from others to a large degree, and my city is pretty much shut down....we'll be good members of the community. If it gets us past the "panic mode" quicker then I suppose it was necessary. Again, we'll see. There is so much conflicting, crazy, hyped and not hyped information right now that there is nothing to do but hunker down as you can and see where it goes. My family is enjoying the time together.......we'll see. |
| 2020-03-30 5:53 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. Fauci is saying 100,000-200,000 deaths. Could be 10x that without social distancing Did society over-react ? Good to see the the leaders finally get it. |
| 2020-03-30 9:00 PM in reply to: marcag |
| , Arizona | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars |
| 2020-04-01 7:29 AM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. Fauci is saying 100,000-200,000 deaths. Could be 10x that without social distancing Did society over-react ? Good to see the the leaders finally get it. So we should do this every year for the flu? Think of how many lives could be saved every year if we lever left the house. |
| 2020-04-01 8:27 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. Fauci is saying 100,000-200,000 deaths. Could be 10x that without social distancing Did society over-react ? Good to see the the leaders finally get it. So we should do this every year for the flu? Think of how many lives could be saved every year if we lever left the house. I'm not sure what your point is. Had we not quarantined we would have 1-2 million people in the US would die. We shouldn't have quarantined ? You said previously we over-reacted to this. Still saying that ? Still comparing this to the flu ? |
| 2020-04-01 9:37 AM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. Fauci is saying 100,000-200,000 deaths. Could be 10x that without social distancing Did society over-react ? Good to see the the leaders finally get it. So we should do this every year for the flu? Think of how many lives could be saved every year if we lever left the house. I'm not sure what your point is. Had we not quarantined we would have 1-2 million people in the US would die. We shouldn't have quarantined ? You said previously we over-reacted to this. Still saying that ? Still comparing this to the flu ? Yes |
| 2020-04-01 9:58 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. Fauci is saying 100,000-200,000 deaths. Could be 10x that without social distancing Did society over-react ? Good to see the the leaders finally get it. So we should do this every year for the flu? Think of how many lives could be saved every year if we lever left the house. I'm not sure what your point is. Had we not quarantined we would have 1-2 million people in the US would die. We shouldn't have quarantined ? You said previously we over-reacted to this. Still saying that ? Still comparing this to the flu ? Yes I guess if saving 1-2million lives is not worth the shutdown, well, we just have to agree we have different opinions on the value of human life. And I 100% get LBs comments on the cost of lives associated to shutting things down. But it's not millions of lives. Edited by marcag 2020-04-01 10:00 AM |
| 2020-04-01 10:16 AM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio My question to you, et al, is at what point does the morality rate need to get to till you concede we (society) over reacted? If it drops to 5x the flu was all the showdown justified? 3x? 2x? Good question. First of all I think comparison to the flu is stupid. If we see that we didn't even come close to overwhelming the medical system, we over-reacted. If we manage to stay at the breaking point, we were just right If we overwhelm the system and more people die than needed to, we under-reacted. And when we do the post-mortem on over reaction, let's include our government's failure in preparing for this and handling it as it broke out. I am not singling out your government. From the other thread. You asked me when do we say we over-reacted. I answered. My question to you. Still say we over-reacted ? What is your measure ? BTW, that was 1 week ago. Not hard to predict where we will be in one week. Unless and until we exceed the annual flu deaths, I say we over reacted. Consider this...if every year we reacted like this to the flu how many lives could we save? But society cannot function like this. Fauci is saying 100,000-200,000 deaths. Could be 10x that without social distancing Did society over-react ? Good to see the the leaders finally get it. So we should do this every year for the flu? Think of how many lives could be saved every year if we lever left the house. I'm not sure what your point is. Had we not quarantined we would have 1-2 million people in the US would die. We shouldn't have quarantined ? You said previously we over-reacted to this. Still saying that ? Still comparing this to the flu ? Yes I guess if saving 1-2million lives is not worth the shutdown, well, we just have to agree we have different opinions on the value of human life. And I 100% get LBs comments on the cost of lives associated to shutting things down. But it's not millions of lives. My “yes” was as sarcastic as your questions. But yes, the flu is a virus and spreads via social interactions and could be lessened by the exact same things. There is no telling how many lives were saved by shutting things down. 30,000 to 50,000 die every year from the flu. I guess those people are not worth a shutdown.... I think it is still to early to armchair quarterback. When this is over we can see the cost, risk/reward etc and see if we over reacted. |
| 2020-04-01 10:38 AM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 7553 Albuquerque, New Mexico | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag I guess if saving 1-2million lives is not worth the shutdown, well, we just have to agree we have different opinions on the value of human life. And I 100% get LBs comments on the cost of lives associated to shutting things down. But it's not millions of lives. I suspect each of us have differing opinions on the value of human life. Consider: Would you deplete your assets all the way to ZERO to save your own life? My own answers to these questions is "it depends" but there is still a significant gap between the first and last question getting "yes." |
| 2020-04-01 12:34 PM in reply to: McFuzz |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by McFuzz Originally posted by marcag I guess if saving 1-2million lives is not worth the shutdown, well, we just have to agree we have different opinions on the value of human life. And I 100% get LBs comments on the cost of lives associated to shutting things down. But it's not millions of lives. I suspect each of us have differing opinions on the value of human life. Consider: Would you deplete your assets all the way to ZERO to save your own life? My own answers to these questions is "it depends" but there is still a significant gap between the first and last question getting "yes." To save my life? No. Have a special needs daughter who needs a substantial inheritance. To save family member? Depends. My kid? Absolutely. My MIL? Prolly not. Random stranger? No. What will get scary is if it becomes necessary to take an 80 off a respirator to save a 20 yo. Who plays God so to speak? |
| 2020-04-01 2:40 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by Rogillio What will get scary is if it becomes necessary to take an 80 off a respirator to save a 20 yo. Who plays God so to speak? -facetious on- that's easy. Whoever can pay the most for it. It's all about economics!!-facetious off- |
| 2020-04-01 3:54 PM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Media panic as Trump approval soars Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Rogillio What will get scary is if it becomes necessary to take an 80 off a respirator to save a 20 yo. Who plays God so to speak? -facetious on- that's easy. Whoever can pay the most for it. It's all about economics!!-facetious off- Maybe not so facetious. 40 yo homeless person with no insurance or 40 yo businessman with good insurance? Hope it never comes to this. I heard Cuomo say that the longer someone stays on a ventilator the less chance they have of ever coming off (recovery). So at want point do you decide it’s a lost cause and try to save someone else and let that person go? https://youtu.be/Q0gx_D--iDw |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK