I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016. I didn’t vote.

In 2020 I voted for Trump because knew Biden would be bad. He has done better than I expected but the inflation is killing me and the focus on the wrong thing isn’t helping.

Early on I was a De Santis fan but my interest has waned as he has taken hard stances on things that need compromise.

  • crashfrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    He hasn’t done near as good as Trump. We are engaged in several conflicts, inflation is high, etc.

    The US was engaged in a number of conflicts under Trump, including the war and occupation of Afghanistan, which were ended by Biden. Trump’s administration was singularly disastrous for the United States - reductions in life expectancy, increases in the number of Americans addicted to drugs, and quite famously, fires and riots in the centers of most major cities which Trump was totally unable to control. Another thing Trump was unable to control: the spread of the novel coronavirus inside the United States.

    Objectively Trump is bad at being President. I don’t see how a conservative can dispute that - Trump’s tenure was a riotous time in both the US and the world.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Trump didn’t start those and the wars didn’t start under Trump. He was continuing conflicts that were already in play. The life expectancy was because of a pandemic and became worse under Biden. I don’t blame either of them for that. That’s partisan bs. The president isn’t in charge of drug addiction. That’s a state issue. The deaths were growing before Trump took office. Addicts are going to die. That’s life. I don’t see the value in spending a lot of money that’ll sort itself out. The riots were democrats rioting. Trump could have called up the military and didn’t. So you’re upset he didn’t use more force to quell the rebellion? That’s really what you’re complaining about ? Trump wasn’t able to control a virus? lol. Neither could Biden or Europe or rest of the world. It’s a virus. Maybe you haven’t read the constitution much but handling pandemics is a right of the states. So blaming Trump for your state failing is weird. I went back to active duty during the pandemic because of my skill set. We had to work with the states because that’s the law. The 10th amendment says if it’s not defined in the constitution then it’s a right of the state.

      • crashfrog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Trump didn’t start those and the wars didn’t start under Trump.

        I didn’t say that he did, but you said we weren’t in conflict under Trump, and that’s false.

        Trump did expand the conflicts in a number of theaters, resulting in the deaths of US servicemen; you just don’t remember noticing because he was responsible for so much domestic chaos, too.

        The president isn’t in charge of drug addiction.

        There’s literally a Federal agency, reporting to the President, that regulates and interdicts drug traffic in the United States. The President literally is in charge of drug addiction.

        The riots were democrats rioting.

        You’re saying that Trump couldn’t possibly have won left-of-center votes?

        Look, it strikes me that a politician - whose job is to build a popular consensus around a slate of policies and ideals - who winds up being absolutely hated by well over half of the American people, hated enough to take to the streets about it, can’t be said to be very good at the job.

        Neither could Biden or Europe or rest of the world.

        There were three virus outbreaks during the Obama administration that you don’t even remember because rapid and effective action by the administration prevented them from being national pandemics. So actually not only could Biden, but Biden did. Trump sat on his own balls on his first one. That’s pretty bad! Trump was objectively bad at the job, there’s just no question about it once you move beyond special pleading (“it was a virus! Who could have predicted?!” lol) and excuse-making.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Did you really just tell a veteran he didn’t notice being deployed? lol.

          The President literally is in charge of drug addiction

          No. The president is not. Once again that’s a state issue. The federal government is in charge of trying to stop the flow, monitoring pharmacies, etc. they’re not in charge of addiction or treatment.

          There were three virus outbreaks during the Obama administration that you don’t even remember because rapid and effective action by the administration prevented them from being national pandemics

          None of them were handle by the government. They just burned out naturally and Zika is still around. Obama did nothing to stop the outbreak. They just ran their natural course.

          hated enough to take to the streets about it,

          I thought they are rioting over Floyd. Now you are saying it was an armed insurrection against Trump ?

          • crashfrog@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Did you really just tell a veteran he didn’t notice being deployed?

            Did you just tell a Federal public health researcher that public health isn’t a Federal responsibility? lol

            The president is not. Once again that’s a state issue. The federal government is in charge of trying to stop the flow, monitoring pharmacies, etc.

            Yes, but again, Trump didn’t succeed at these things either. Fentanyl from China flowed over the border and caused an ongoing crisis. Trafficking of drugs is a Federal, not state, crime. Trump’s DoJ should have had it in hand but under Trump, he had them spending more time on a fruitless wild goose chase for “corruption” in Mueller’s investigation instead of issues that actually affected Americans. Trump was incompetent.

            None of them were handle by the government.

            They were all handled by the government.

            Obama did nothing to stop the outbreak.

            There was no “Zika pandemic.” There also was no swine flu pandemic, SARS-1 pandemic, nor MERS pandemics in the United States. Oh, were those not the ones you were thinking of? Well, yes, that’s my point - you don’t remember them because they were objectively non-issues. They didn’t “burn out naturally”, they were actively and successfully stopped by rapid, effective public health action. I’m an expert in this field, remember?

            • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              11 months ago

              Did you just tell a Federal public health researcher that public health isn’t a Federal responsibility? lol

              If you think that’s true. Cite the law that gives the federal authority to take control form the states. I’d like to see the law citation as you’re the first person to make that claim.

              Yes, but again, Trump didn’t succeed at these things either

              And neither did Carter, Reagan, bush, Clinton, etc.

              Can you cite the law that once again overrules the states? I’ve never seen nor heard that.

              They were all handled by the government

              Sure, show me the vaccines.

              You claim to be an expert but keep making claims that are false. I’ll see if you can cite these imaginary laws you claim.

              • crashfrog@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                Cite the law that gives the federal authority to take control form the states.

                USC 42 § 243

                Sure, show me the vaccines.

                https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3371787/

                https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7172901/

                https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/public/vaccination_qa_pub.htm

                Any other dumbshit questions?

                you claim to be an expert but keep making claims that are false.

                If they’re “false” how are you so completely failing to refute them?

                • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Any other dumbshit questions?

                  Let’s keep it civil at the least. Because I don’t think most people could cite the law that gives the federal government authority to take control from the states. Don’t use your knowledge to browbeat people.

                  • crashfrog@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Because I don’t think most people could cite the law that gives the federal government authority to take control from the states.

                    Right, but I did.

                • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Cite the law that gives the federal authority to take control form the states.

                  USC 42 § 243

                  No where in that law is authority taken away from the state’s. Where does that law give federal government authority to take control from the states?

                  The Secretary is authorized to accept from State and local authorities any assistance in the enforcement of quarantine regulations made pursuant to this chapter which such authorities may be able and willing to provide.

                  The Secretary shall encourage cooperative activities between the States with respect to comprehensive and continuing planning as to their current and future health needs

                  The Secretary is authorized to develop (and may take such action as may be necessary to implement) a plan under which personnel, equipment, medical supplies, and other resources of the Service and other agencies under the jurisdiction of the Secretary may be effectively used to control epidemics of any disease or condition and to meet other health emergencies or problems.

                  The Secretary may, at the request of the appropriate State or local authority, extend temporary (not in excess of six months) assistance to States or localities in meeting health emergencies of such a nature as to warrant Federal assistance.

                  • crashfrog@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    No where in that law is authority taken away from the state’s.

                    I didn’t say that it does. What it does is grant overriding authority to the Secretary take whatever actions are in the interests of public health under the condition that there’s a public health emergency. States retain their authority but the Federal government has superseding authority because it’s the Federal government.

                    Where does that law give federal government authority to take control from the states?

                    It’s in the exact part you quoted - “the Secretary may take such actions to implement” a plan of control of any disease or condition, or to end any public health emergency or problem.

                  • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    No where in that law is authority taken away from the state’s. Where does that law give federal government authority to take control from the states?

                    It doesn’t. If you read down further, you will see the law is about ports of entry.

                    The states run their one pandemic show. It’s why we have all the different rules. In parts of Missouri no masks were required. In other areas masks were required. Ironically, the areas without masks did better than those with masks.

                    Chicago required masks when you were outside. Oregon the same, most other states did not.

                    I think people didn’t see COVID as a threat like the Democrats wanted them to see it. That is why people pushed back.

                    Had it been an Ebola outbreak on the same scale, I think people would have tried to be compliant.

                    When you look at the mortality rate of COVID, it was tiny. If you caught it, the chances of you dying were very slim unless you were old or had other medical issues.

                    Personally, I ignored everything Faucci said and stuck with my training. I didn’t catch COVID until last year; it was a minor case.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  SARS and mers were never an issue. As you are aware mers was never even used in the Middle East since it vanished before it could be trialed. My trip was cancelled for that reason. There was nothing to test.

                  Did you actually read the law? It states exactly what I said.

                  The feds provide assistance. They do not control it. That’s done at a state level. It’s why each state had different rules and the feds couldn’t do anything about it. They could only out rules on trains/planes and federal facilities.

                  It’s why Florida had lax rules and New York had strict rules.

                  It’s why I wa recalled since this is what I did for twenty years in the army as a medical officer.

                  • crashfrog@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Did you actually read the law?

                    Did you? It empowers the Federal government to take steps to control outbreaks of infectious disease, and to take other measures supportive of public health, and delegates these powers to the particular Federal agencies that have this responsibility including the Public Health Service.

                    SARS and mers were never an issue.

                    Yes, that’s my point. That’s what successful interdiction of infectious disease looks like. Prevention is 9/10ths of a cure, remember?

                    It’s why I wa recalled since this is what I did for twenty years in the army as a medical officer.

                    When you worked as a medical officer in the Army were you required to have state involvement to treat a patient? No, right? Was your medical license issued by any US state? Not until you left the Army, right?

                    The Federal government has its own public health authority, and that authority had been successfully used by previous Presidents to prevent infectious pandemics. Trump failed to follow suit because he was a totally incompetent executive, which I’ve proved and you no longer even attempt to dispute.

                • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  USC 42 § 243

                  Funny how you have to resort to citing blatant garbage that far exceeds the constitutionally granted powers of the federal government.

                  • crashfrog@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Funny how you have to resort to citing blatant garbage

                    Lol, what I cited was the US Code, but I’m sure you’ve never heard of it.

                    that far exceeds the constitutionally granted powers of the federal government.

                    Take it up with the Supreme Court, loser