ATLANTIC MAGAZINE: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... is/607867/
If somebody other than Donald Trump were in the White House, the coronavirus crisis would not be unfolding this way.
March 11, 2020
David Frum
Staff writer at The Atlantic
The Worst Outcome
The Worst Outcome
March 11, 2020
David Frum
Staff writer at The Atlantic
Re: The Worst Outcome
Hogwash! If it happened while Obama was in office, the US would be worse off than Europe.
Re: The Worst Outcome
It's interesting to see The Atlantic publish this because in the past they have been leaning in support of the Trump agenda.
Every point made in the article actually happened. Speculating what might have happened in some other era is irrelevant.
It's just food for thought.
Every point made in the article actually happened. Speculating what might have happened in some other era is irrelevant.
It's just food for thought.
Re: The Worst Outcome
Although the statements made are true, they have no relevance whatsoever to what Trump is doing.
I could list thousands of things he is Not doing that I think he should.
I can also list thousand of things he IS doing which are good for the nation as a whole.
Most of the article covers things he has nothing to do with in the first place.
We are NOT a Dictatorship, and the government is not in the manufacturing business.
In other words, he has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether the pharmaceutical industry has provided test kits for a brand new and totally unknown virus. He can ask all pharmaceutical industries to begin making testing kits, he can ask them to try and find a vaccine or cure. He can even order then to stop making anything else except test kits, which would be more disastrous since much needed medicines would become no longer available.
He could have taken the virus as a bio-weapon that got accidentally released and declared war on China too.
Perhaps even blow that continent to smithereens. But he is a much wiser man than that!
Biden want's to keep all the borders open and welcome all the travel to the US as possible.
Obama would probably do the same thing, since that was his agenda, to destroy the US as quickly as possible.
True, a section of wall fell over in a 35 mph wind. For a very simple reason, the concrete had not yet set up.
It is not a fault of the wall or its design. Tornado's tear down houses and buildings, and Democrats blame it on Trump, just like they do everything else.
Now they are complaining because a new useless bill was killed. The forget to mention for the ONE good thing about the bill, they ADDED 20 MOST Undesirable things to it. Anyone with an inch of sanity would kill such a bill!
You can't allow sexual pedophile predators to give candy from the side door of vans to children and expect any good to come from it. But that is exactly what any bill coming from the democrats look like to everyone. OH CANDY GOOD, that's all they see, so pass our bill for the sexual predators to give it out from the door of their vans.
It ain't gonna happen with nonsense like that added to riders of democrat produced bills.
I could list thousands of things he is Not doing that I think he should.
I can also list thousand of things he IS doing which are good for the nation as a whole.
Most of the article covers things he has nothing to do with in the first place.
We are NOT a Dictatorship, and the government is not in the manufacturing business.
In other words, he has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether the pharmaceutical industry has provided test kits for a brand new and totally unknown virus. He can ask all pharmaceutical industries to begin making testing kits, he can ask them to try and find a vaccine or cure. He can even order then to stop making anything else except test kits, which would be more disastrous since much needed medicines would become no longer available.
He could have taken the virus as a bio-weapon that got accidentally released and declared war on China too.
Perhaps even blow that continent to smithereens. But he is a much wiser man than that!
Biden want's to keep all the borders open and welcome all the travel to the US as possible.
Obama would probably do the same thing, since that was his agenda, to destroy the US as quickly as possible.
True, a section of wall fell over in a 35 mph wind. For a very simple reason, the concrete had not yet set up.
It is not a fault of the wall or its design. Tornado's tear down houses and buildings, and Democrats blame it on Trump, just like they do everything else.
Now they are complaining because a new useless bill was killed. The forget to mention for the ONE good thing about the bill, they ADDED 20 MOST Undesirable things to it. Anyone with an inch of sanity would kill such a bill!
You can't allow sexual pedophile predators to give candy from the side door of vans to children and expect any good to come from it. But that is exactly what any bill coming from the democrats look like to everyone. OH CANDY GOOD, that's all they see, so pass our bill for the sexual predators to give it out from the door of their vans.
It ain't gonna happen with nonsense like that added to riders of democrat produced bills.
Re: The Worst Outcome
I see my food for thought has given you indigestion. LOL
Re: The Worst Outcome
I don't trust any media to tell the truth about anything.
Every single one of them pick n choose parts of a comment that fit their agenda.
I had over 20 posts bashing Trump or the Senate for blocking the Bill to Fund FREE Abortions on Demand.
Of course they didn't word it that way, they worded it that the Bill to help those with Coronavirus was blocked.
When that is NOT the reason at all that it was blocked, AND THEY KNOW IT!
They will LIE in order to make our President look bad, when all it's really doing is killing their own votes.
Sane people see through the lies and half-truths which are also lies.
God help us all if a Communist gets elected!
Every single one of them pick n choose parts of a comment that fit their agenda.
I had over 20 posts bashing Trump or the Senate for blocking the Bill to Fund FREE Abortions on Demand.
Of course they didn't word it that way, they worded it that the Bill to help those with Coronavirus was blocked.
When that is NOT the reason at all that it was blocked, AND THEY KNOW IT!
They will LIE in order to make our President look bad, when all it's really doing is killing their own votes.
Sane people see through the lies and half-truths which are also lies.
God help us all if a Communist gets elected!
Re: The Worst Outcome
I regret having to be the first to inform you, but there already is a Russian Asset occupying the Oval Office. There is nothing I can tell you that will help you understand what is going on because those brainwashing machines you detest so much have obviously embedded their detergents into your soul. Neither you nor I are happy about the direction this country has taken. We don't disagree about the deterioration. The fact that we see the demise of America through different political lenses is understandable. The solution, however, does not center on maintaining the current regime.
I posted another relevant news item describing what Microsoft has done recently to combat the propaganda of which I speak. It's even more scary than the current Corona Virus threat.
I posted another relevant news item describing what Microsoft has done recently to combat the propaganda of which I speak. It's even more scary than the current Corona Virus threat.
Re: The Worst Outcome
I'll have to watch for that other review!
I do agree. For years I voted Independent. Even still have a Ross Perot sticker here by my desk, hi hi.
I sorta hated voting for an Independent when I knew they would never win, so it was like a wasted vote.
But I honestly and truly dislike the two party system we are stuck with.
I do agree. For years I voted Independent. Even still have a Ross Perot sticker here by my desk, hi hi.
I sorta hated voting for an Independent when I knew they would never win, so it was like a wasted vote.
But I honestly and truly dislike the two party system we are stuck with.
Re: The Worst Outcome
A three party system has been my solution for umpteen number of years now. Actually more than three would be fine too. It would likely take some negotiating and compromising in order to turn a plurality into a majority which is exactly what is missing these days. A binary system is fine when people are willing to negotiate, but multiple parties would almost guarantee no single agenda would take hold. If Bernie Sanders wasn't owned by them godless Commies in Moscow, I could support a progressive party. But it's already obvious that ain't gonna happen THIS year. So what does it take to get off the current system and start something better?
Re: The Worst Outcome
Abolish parties altogether and make candidates run on their own history.
Or require a minimum of four separate parties, along with a rule that no one party can can be reelected for more than two terms until the fourth term rolls around. In other words, whatever party was in for one or two terms, they would not be eligible again for twelve or sixteen more years. Also you could not change parties in order to run again sooner.
Don't know if something like that would work, but it might cause more parties to appear than just the four.
Heck we could have Constitutionalists, Republicans, Independents, Socialists, Democrats, Communists, Environmentalists, Doomsdayers, Preppers, and of course a Dictatorship party.
Unfortunately, they would all still fall under two main groups, those who value life and those who seek to destroy it.
Or require a minimum of four separate parties, along with a rule that no one party can can be reelected for more than two terms until the fourth term rolls around. In other words, whatever party was in for one or two terms, they would not be eligible again for twelve or sixteen more years. Also you could not change parties in order to run again sooner.
Don't know if something like that would work, but it might cause more parties to appear than just the four.
Heck we could have Constitutionalists, Republicans, Independents, Socialists, Democrats, Communists, Environmentalists, Doomsdayers, Preppers, and of course a Dictatorship party.
Unfortunately, they would all still fall under two main groups, those who value life and those who seek to destroy it.
Re: The Worst Outcome
Political parties are a necessary evil. People would not want to identify with a Bernie Sanders' agenda, but they could give some serious thought to a Progressive Party. The psychology of being part of a group outweighs that of being amenable with a single individual. It smacks of cronyism when seen in political forums.
Back in the beginning I think there was more than just one theory on how these United States should be organized. Certain figures of the day promoted one theory or the other and that is how political parties began. There is an underlying agenda that like minded people can identify with. Back then two different agendas might have been all that was popular. The others were disregarded as untenable. Today's environment clearly has diversified into more than the two parties that dominate. There are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans but Libertarians, Progressives, and even Socialists are gaining strength. This is not due to single individuals with bright ideas. People en masse change, or get tired of the old established way of doing things. The need for change is in the air, but codifying that under one political umbrella has proven difficult. That inner drive for change is known as populism, and catering to that group is how Donald Trump became president.
The current president is not the answer to change, but rather a symptom. That's why I believe the coming election will be critically important. The movement for change in a positive direction must be made before the current system collapses. I don't know if we will see a new political party in 2024, but I do have some doubts the current two party system will remain as it stands. Some institutional changes need to be made immediately.
Back in the beginning I think there was more than just one theory on how these United States should be organized. Certain figures of the day promoted one theory or the other and that is how political parties began. There is an underlying agenda that like minded people can identify with. Back then two different agendas might have been all that was popular. The others were disregarded as untenable. Today's environment clearly has diversified into more than the two parties that dominate. There are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans but Libertarians, Progressives, and even Socialists are gaining strength. This is not due to single individuals with bright ideas. People en masse change, or get tired of the old established way of doing things. The need for change is in the air, but codifying that under one political umbrella has proven difficult. That inner drive for change is known as populism, and catering to that group is how Donald Trump became president.
The current president is not the answer to change, but rather a symptom. That's why I believe the coming election will be critically important. The movement for change in a positive direction must be made before the current system collapses. I don't know if we will see a new political party in 2024, but I do have some doubts the current two party system will remain as it stands. Some institutional changes need to be made immediately.
Re: The Worst Outcome
Although heavily biased I'm sure.
There was a long article posted on a website with links to it from Farcebook.
It was written by that chubby guy with the glasses that complains about anything and everything.
You may have seen it back a year ago?
Basically it was talking about what the U.S. and the world would look like if Hillary was elected instead of Trump.
It did truthfully cover every agenda with actual quotes of hers regarding several topics that affect everyone.
Even I thought some of the commentary was a little far fetched, but could have been possible.
Naturally everything she wanted to do went against the Constitution, if not directly then by process.
The article also assumed a democratic house and senate based on the outcome of an election where the democrats were in total power. Which is why I say some of the commentary was far fetched, but possible.
I can't remember any of the specifics, but it covered Gun Control, Abortion, Medicare, a revamp of Obamacare, Open Borders, Voting for Illegal Aliens, and a whole raft of things, each of which would raise taxes to unbearable levels.
If everything she wanted was put into place, a third world country would be an improvement over what she intended to happen to the U.S., it would become a Muslim nation as well.
There was a long article posted on a website with links to it from Farcebook.
It was written by that chubby guy with the glasses that complains about anything and everything.
You may have seen it back a year ago?
Basically it was talking about what the U.S. and the world would look like if Hillary was elected instead of Trump.
It did truthfully cover every agenda with actual quotes of hers regarding several topics that affect everyone.
Even I thought some of the commentary was a little far fetched, but could have been possible.
Naturally everything she wanted to do went against the Constitution, if not directly then by process.
The article also assumed a democratic house and senate based on the outcome of an election where the democrats were in total power. Which is why I say some of the commentary was far fetched, but possible.
I can't remember any of the specifics, but it covered Gun Control, Abortion, Medicare, a revamp of Obamacare, Open Borders, Voting for Illegal Aliens, and a whole raft of things, each of which would raise taxes to unbearable levels.
If everything she wanted was put into place, a third world country would be an improvement over what she intended to happen to the U.S., it would become a Muslim nation as well.