Anyone defending Trumps handling of Covid is difficulty have a rational debate with given how indefensible his record in it is and how many unnecessary deaths his words and actions have caused. There are things to defend him on. There are grey areas but Covid isn’t one of them.
Last time I mentioned these things you just exited stage right. But closing of the borders far earlier than anyone was asking for, speed of distribution of the vaccine, and an incredible testing programme where 225 million tests have been carried out. People are getting tested a couple of times a week without having to be a care worker, through choice. Because it's so easy. You say it's indefensible, but I would have liked all three of those arguments to come to light in a debate about our own country. And I'm not defending his handling of it, just challenging the claims that don't consider all the facts.
He's not defending him. He just gave some facts. They're easily validated. I hate Trump, but nothing Loko wrote in the post you quoted is incorrect. It is factual.
no mate I have a life so haven’t been on the board. Family stuff with my uncle being about to die arguing with a British MAGA isn’t high on my agenda. I can literally find hundreds of articles criticising Trumps handling of Covid but you don’t want to hear them because for all your protestations Trumps your guy (and if you happy to ignore the racism and misogyny then nothing else will convince you) so it would be pointless. I do enjoy the spectacle of the quiet Trump supporter though.
They might be factually correct, but it doesn't make them defendable. Peter Sutcliffe factually killed 13 women - but you don't hear many folk saying how good a truck driver he was.
Apologies. I saw you posting this morning that was all. Family stuff is way more important than the BBS and I wish you the best there, but I'm a far cry from a British MAGA. I mean seriously? Now you're just trying to throw out insults. I'm happy to hear the Trump articles, because I'm not defending him, I'm challenging your view point that is handling has been as bad as you make out. Of course there's faults. Lots of them. But there's actions taken that I wish we'd have taken. Quiet Trump Supporter is a nice effort too, but again wide of the mark.
And I thought only @SuperTyke was the only one capable of the terribly bad analogies. That one doesn't even make sense. I'm not defending anyone.
You’d be better off locking this thread. It’s just causing arguments and people are never going to agree.
I think you forgot to reply to/quote SuperTyke when talking about him - bit bizarre and rude but I guess it gave you a laugh so that’s good.
I thought I had copied/tagged him in actually. That's why I referred to him by name rather than just a 'he'. It's way more friendly and personal like that. Also, his terrible analogies is a long running joke and it was a comment said in jest.
That’s not the only reason why, it would have made no sense to just write ‘he’ there; no one would have had a clue who you were on about as there hadn’t just been a conversation involving him.
Agree to disagree as always. It's just far easier that way for us on anything. You're right in what you say, but the point still stands that saying 'he' is just rude. Only in my opinion of course.
Pronouns were invented so you don’t have to keep saying a person’s name over and over when it’s clear who is being referred to. Also, if I’d said the exact same thing but wrote ‘Loko’ instead of ‘he’ you’d have still complained. But yes, agree to disagree. It’s hardly anything worth falling out over in any case.
Like I said. Agree to disagree. Otherwise it becomes a painful back and forth that doesn't change the mind of anyone.