What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Government Response To The Coronavirus (10 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if this is going to be the new line from the republicans which is often the case on complex issues....no solution is a better solution because there is no perfect solution
You guys seem awfully upset about an order not being in place but have zero answers as to the legality or level.

Wanting the dpa used for ventilators or masks is a crystal clear desired outcome and plan and the legality of it seems pretty clear. That one is pretty easy to advocate for.

A national stay at home order is incredibly complex unless it is pretty strict. We arent ready for pretty strict and probably never would be.

Just seems to me if you are advocating for such a thing it should be pretty easy to rattle off some info about it. 

 
430,000 People Have Traveled From China to U.S. Since Coronavirus Surfaced

There were 1,300 direct flights to 17 cities before President Trump’s travel restrictions. Since then, nearly 40,000 Americans and other authorized travelers have made the trip, some this past week and many with spotty screening.

Since Chinese officials disclosed the outbreak of a mysterious pneumonialike illness to international health officials on New Year’s Eve, at least 430,000 people have arrived in the United States on direct flights from China, including nearly 40,000 in the two months after President Trump imposed restrictions on such travel, according to an analysis of data collected in both countries.

The bulk of the passengers, who were of multiple nationalities, arrived in January, at airports in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Chicago, Seattle, Newark and Detroit. Thousands of them flew directly from Wuhan, the center of the coronavirus outbreak, as American public health officials were only beginning to assess the risks to the United States.

Flights continued this past week, the data show, with passengers traveling from Beijing to Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York, under rules that exempt Americans and some others from the clampdown that took effect on Feb. 2. In all, 279 flights from China have arrived in the United States since then, and screening procedures have been uneven, interviews show.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thats a pretty silly answer. 
About as silly as your question. 

Stay home. That’s it. We need it to be national because people aren’t paying attention. Maybe we’ll have to give out tickets, maybe we won’t. Maybe we’ll need to make it stricter. We’ll figure it out. But it needs to be national. Otherwise we’re going to needlessly lose  lives. 

I can almost guarantee you Trump will reach this conclusion as well, and it’s going to be sooner rather than later. Unfortunately it’s already taken too long. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
On February 1st Biden called the coronvirus event a crisis. This was before Trump implemented his partial China travel ban.
The China travel ban was January 31st. Joe Biden’s first instinct was to play the race card and attack President Trump over it.

I should probably stop criticizing Biden here actually, the last thing I want is the Democrats to pull him for somebody half way competent. 

 
I can almost guarantee you Trump will reach this conclusion as well, and it’s going to be sooner rather than later. Unfortunately it’s already taken too long. 
I dont see this happening until every state has one in place already. Which population wise we are almost all the way there already.

I obviously could be wrong, but thats my feelings on the matter. 

 
The China travel ban was January 31st. Joe Biden’s first instinct was to play the race card and attack President Trump over it.

...
It was declared January 31st. It was implemented February 2nd.It was partial, not total - 40,000 people have still come in - and it was after Italy had done their own total ban.

I'm specifically calling you out on the bolded - that did not happen, it's a consistent lie told over and over again. I've asked Bubbles, Birds, BladeRunner (see my post above) and now you about this. Please provide backup.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You may not need to flatten the curve depending on whether the hospitals can deal with an influx of patients. If they can handle it, or arrangements can be made for them to handle it, then you can avoid you flushing your economy down the commode for no reason. 

It's nice there's at least one country not giving into hysteria; when U.S. governor's start taking credit for saving the world, hey Larry Hogan look over there at Sweden... and they got out of it with their jobs too.
I'm also interested to see how things progress in Sweden, but it's still pretty early. And it sounds like they may be changing course soon themselves.

I think we all struggle with the uncertainty of how to handle it (doing it one way is not "giving in to hysteria"). If memory serves, I remember our own @timschochet who is now on "team national lockdown" initially responding that we need as many people to get it quickly to get closer to herd immunity (please correct if that's not accurate).

This is a very unique situation with no clear answers. I think most of us have seen our thoughts about it evolve and they'll continue to do so. 

Sweden is interesting, and I hope what they do works for them. Their approach, however, does seem to be the way nearly every government does it..........at first. 

 
The China travel ban was January 31st. Joe Biden’s first instinct was to play the race card and attack President Trump over it.

I should probably stop criticizing Biden here actually, the last thing I want is the Democrats to pull him for somebody half way competent. 
The WHO criticises ALL international travel bans. 

 
The China travel ban was January 31st. Joe Biden’s first instinct was to play the race card and attack President Trump over it.

I should probably stop criticizing Biden here actually, the last thing I want is the Democrats to pull him for somebody half way competent. 
Or realize Joe Biden holds no office and the screw ups in the government response are failures of thenTrump administration?

Also as Saints pointed out...please back ip this claim with a legit source about Biden...thats a large assertion to make with no proof.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dont see this happening until every state has one in place already. Which population wise we are almost all the way there already.

I obviously could be wrong, but thats my feelings on the matter. 
No you may very well be right. Either way it will happen and it will have happened far too late. 

 
@Widbil83 or any Trump supporter, please for the nth time. Here is Biden's speech in Iowa which is constantly referred to for the claim that he attacked the partial China travel ban.

- In this speech - on January 31st - Biden called cv19 a crisis, something he repeated in tweet. His comments begin @7:30 roughly. He does not mention the partial China travel ban at all. He discussed “draconian cuts” to the NIH, CDC, and USAID.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also if we can just simply propose lockdowns and the legality if it is irrelevant, then I propose a national lockdown of all people over 65, diabetics, cancer , and HIV patients. 

Only way you can leave your property line is if you get permission from a doctor for a medical reason or are in an ambulance.

National guard and volunteer organizations can distribute food to those that cant figure out instacart or whatever other services. 

States can handle how they want to lockdown the rest.

Flattens the curve more than any other plan being discussed legality and morality be damned. 

 
Why do you have to beg him for vents? Because you weren't prepared.  If I recall correctly, whitmer didn't submit the FEMA paperwork until like last week.

Try as you might, you probably should look to your local county and state level leaders first.  The feds aren't supposed to be the first line of defense.
 It's not like a localized blizzard, earthquake or other natural disaster where supplies can be rerouted from unaffected places.  It's a National pandemic.  It's silly to think that this isn't a modern day "first line of defense" of the Federal Government.    

 
It was declared January 31st. It was implemented February 2nd.It was partial, not total - 40,000 people have still come in - and it was after Italy had done their own total ban.

I'm specifically calling you out on the bolded - that did not happen, it's a consistent lie told over and over again. I've asked Bubbles, Birds, BladeRunner (see my post above) and now you about this. Please provide backup.
Yes we know you and the media are trying to move the goalposts on Biden’s initial reaction.  :lmao:  It won’t work though nice try.

 
I'm also interested to see how things progress in Sweden, but it's still pretty early. And it sounds like they may be changing course soon themselves.
I've read something about their parliament trying to do something. Not sure how that's developing. Last I heard only 1/5th of Swedes want to lockdown, so hopefully democracy prevails. 

 
One of the sad elements of this whole episode - no matter how you think Trump should have acted here - he flubbed it.

Think the fears are overblown, and businesses should be up and running - Trump flubbed it.

Think that we should have locked down sooner to prevent the spread - Trump flubbed it.

At the end of the day - Trump had no plan, and that meant every decision was being made in the heat of the moment, influenced by emotion, and not rational thinking.  The man is not fit to lead.

 
One of the sad elements of this whole episode - no matter how you think Trump should have acted here - he flubbed it.

Think the fears are overblown, and businesses should be up and running - Trump flubbed it.

Think that we should have locked down sooner to prevent the spread - Trump flubbed it.

At the end of the day - Trump had no plan, and that meant every decision was being made in the heat of the moment, influenced by emotion, and not rational thinking.  The man is not fit to lead.
The irony of Trump is that he is everything the repubs used to hate...after a shooting they come on tv and say 'let's not make any decisions while we are emotional'.  All Trump does is make decisions based on how he is feeling and most of the time it's from a place where his feelings are hurt because everyone is making fun of him

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate Hillary... and I also hate Trump. 

It's not partisan.  They just both suck. 
Which is fine.  The criticism of specifics is good.  The generalizations such as you can't have intelligent discussions with conservatives or others of the numerous posts which attack the intelligence the other side is getting old. 

 
You guys seem awfully upset about an order not being in place but have zero answers as to the legality or level.

Wanting the dpa used for ventilators or masks is a crystal clear desired outcome and plan and the legality of it seems pretty clear. That one is pretty easy to advocate for.

A national stay at home order is incredibly complex unless it is pretty strict. We arent ready for pretty strict and probably never would be.

Just seems to me if you are advocating for such a thing it should be pretty easy to rattle off some info about it. 
I don't disagree that their are inherent complexities with this whole situation but in the end decision paralysis is the completely wrong way to go and shows an absolute lack of leadership.  That's what leadership is, making tough decisions, and wading your way through the consequences of those decisions

 
Which is fine.  The criticism of specifics is good.  The generalizations such as you can't have intelligent discussions with conservatives or others of the numerous posts which attack the intelligence the other side is getting old. 
There are some people you can't have intelligent discussion with, because they are completely unwilling to view and consider things from different perspectives. They exist all across the political spectrum.... and they exist in this thread.  

 
That's in the live video I just presented you with a time mark - he does not mention the partial China travel ban at all.
Apologies, I haven’t watched the video. If not the travel ban, what is the xenophobia and fear mongering referencing?  What is the context of that particular criticism of Trump when discussing the coronavirus situation at that time?

 
One of the sad elements of this whole episode - no matter how you think Trump should have acted here - he flubbed it.

Think the fears are overblown, and businesses should be up and running - Trump flubbed it.

Think that we should have locked down sooner to prevent the spread - Trump flubbed it.

At the end of the day - Trump had no plan, and that meant every decision was being made in the heat of the moment, influenced by emotion, and not rational thinking.  The man is not fit to lead.
Raring by Easter!

I’ve wondered when he said that, was he just looking at a calendar and saying, “okay, 3 weeks from now, we’ll get going again.”

& when he was saying that, did anyone in the room ask him what he based that on?

 
Apologies, I haven’t watched the video. If not the travel ban, what is the xenophobia and fear mongering referencing?  What is the context of that particular criticism of Trump when discussing the coronavirus situation at that time?
His rally in Iowa just a couple days before most likely. He had also been doing other rallies. The comment about his view towards science are very much in the context about the cuts to CDC, NIH & USAID, which was the thrust of his point.

In general, a Democrat could say or could have said Donald Trump engages in "hysteria and xenophobia, hysterical xenophobia, and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science" in July 2015, April 2016, December 2019, or just about any day since he has been running for president been in office.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've seen multiple articles every day talking about the follies of Sweeden's approach. Paraphrasing this one: some people in Sweden (and many people elsewhere) think they should lockdown and their Parliament has drawn up some legislation. But only 1/4 of Swedes support such measures. 

The media can't handle even one country behaving sensibly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've seen multiple articles talking about the follies of Sweedens approach everyday. Paraphrasing this one: some people in Sweden (and many people elsewhere) think they should lockdown and Parliament has drawn up some legislation. But only 1/4 of Swedes support such measures. 

The media can't handle even one country behaving sensibly.
I'm not sure what you are saying here...they have drawn up legislation and their health experts support it.  They are moving as a country to a lockdown...it has nothing to do with the media

 
And for those of you spouting off about how the Federal Government is not the front line, but merely the last resort - get out of here.

If that were remotely true - then we don't need a federal government.  States can fend for themselves. 
If states want a wall, they build their own wall.

 
Yes we know you and the media are trying to move the goalposts on Biden’s initial reaction.  :lmao:  It won’t work though nice try.
Never seen sleepy Joe move so fast as how he tried to backtrack on his moronic “xenophobic “ tweet responding to the ban. He’s completely lost. 

 
And for those of you spouting off about how the Federal Government is not the front line, but merely the last resort - get out of here.

If that were remotely true - then we don't need a federal government.  States can fend for themselves. 
Exactly.  

 
I don't disagree that their are inherent complexities with this whole situation but in the end decision paralysis is the completely wrong way to go and shows an absolute lack of leadership.  That's what leadership is, making tough decisions, and wading your way through the consequences of those decisions
It isnt decision paralysis when discussing a national lockdown. 

Thousands of other things, absolutely. In some cases it is even deliberate inaction. Zero arguments there. 

I mostly take issue with the "we need a national lockdown!" criticism since nobody seems to be able to even answer what exactly that would mean or how to do it. 

I also feel if Trump ever did it, conveniently the new criticism would be stories all about the poor immigrant that couldnt get to her doctors appt because she got questioned by the national guard and they let five white people walk by. 

 
I know he doesn’t. But he was certainly referencing obviously.
Oh obviously, it's also obvious he did specifically address Trump cuts, but not the partial travel ban. - Please refrain from 'you guys,' it's not a Dem talking point, it's a point I'm specifically raising here to the Trump supporters. Just a continuing lack of support for this claim.

- This even in the face of today's reporting that thousands have continued to flood in from China. The ban wasn't even a ban.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They are moving as a country to a lockdown...
Parliament passed a law to prepare for a possible lockdown. Not set in stone. 

Your prediction of death tolls forcing the issue ignores the death tolls in countries where they have done lockdowns. Perhaps the Swedes see this and decide against adding economic woes to a problem lockdowns won't fix.

 
Parliament passed a law to prepare for a possible lockdown. Not set in stone. 

Your prediction of death tolls forcing the issue ignores the death tolls in countries where they have done lockdowns. Perhaps the Swedes see this and decide against adding economic woes to a problem lockdowns won't fix.
I guess that's why they passed legislation then?  

You are so against the lockdown, against what every medical health professional across the globe is advising at this point

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top