Is Kim Jong-un Dead?

[RiverDog]

Media outlets in China and Japan reports that Little Fatty is either dead or terminally ill with no hope of recuperation.

Here's another point ... Saturday marks a major military anniversary in North Korea, where they celebrate the founding of the Korean People's Army in 1932 -- something they hype annually with a parade, and one in which Kim might normally make an appearance.
International reporters on the ground say if Kim was doing alright and not on death's doorstep, he and his team would figure out a way for him to show up to squash the rumors.

If he doesn't, it's probably not a good sign ... almost all but confirming something is wrong.

https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/25/north-ko ... rRJlTMt7b4

[Aseahawkfan]

Who knows in nations like that. If we see a different leader soon, then he's dead. Maybe China finally took him out as they grew tired of him.

[RiverDog]

Who knows in nations like that. If we see a different leader soon, then he's dead. Maybe China finally took him out as they grew tired of him.

Reminds me of how the USSR used to deny news reports of their leaders, like Brezhnev, when they died.

I'm generally not receptive of conspiracy theories. One report claims that Chinese surgeons were called in to perform a surgery that was botched, but I'm not sure the Chinese would want the bad publicity of their surgeons screwing up. But who knows.

[I-5]

I've seen the conflicting headlines, but there's nothing any of us can shed light on until N Korea announces a new leader.

The next question is, who will emerge as the new leader, and what will they be like with power? We can guess it will be his sister Kim Yo Jong, but again, we have no idea how she will be.

[RiverDog]

I've seen the conflicting headlines, but there's nothing any of us can shed light on until N Korea announces a new leader.

The next question is, who will emerge as the new leader, and what will they be like with power? We can guess it will be his sister Kim Yo Jong, but again, we have no idea how she will be.

She's supposedly very close to her brother so I wouldn't expect any fundamental changes. Perhaps being female would mean that she wouldn't be as ego driven as her brother obviously was/is.

This reminds me a lot of how the Soviet Union used to react when their leader died. First there's rumors followed by denials before they finally admit that their leader has perished.

[I-5]

We don't know much about her, but based on the track record of female dictators (look it up, there are very few, and their transgressions are lame compared to men, the most infamous being Indira Gandhi who was in power for 2 years before stepping down after losing an election that she called for), I doubt Kim Jo Yong can do any worse than her brother. I'm ready for a post Kim Jong Un Korea, whatever it brings. It can't be any less stable.

[RiverDog]

We don't know much about her, but based on the track record of female dictators (look it up, there are very few, and their transgressions are lame compared to men, the most infamous being Indira Gandhi who was in power for 2 years before stepping down after losing an election that she called for), I doubt Kim Jo Yong can do any worse than her brother. I'm ready for a post Kim Jong Un Korea, whatever it brings. It can't be any less stable.

That's kinda how I see it. I doubt that there'll be much change in international relations as I'm pretty sure that their military has an extraordinary amount of influence over their policies, but perhaps with a female in charge that it will lead to fewer human rights abuses and better treatment of their citizens.

[Aseahawkfan]

That's kinda how I see it. I doubt that there'll be much change in international relations as I'm pretty sure that their military has an extraordinary amount of influence over their policies, but perhaps with a female in charge that it will lead to fewer human rights abuses and better treatment of their citizens.

Wouldn't it be funny and tragic if Kim Jong Un's sister takes over and because of the feminist push to convince females to be equal to males in every respect she went about proving she is an even stronger and more vicious dictator than her brothers and father?

[I-5]

Well, it wouldn't be funny at all, but I don't see her as feeling pressured by any 'feminist push'. If she is a tyrant, it would be for much more pragmatic reasons, like keeping and consolidating power - just like her brother. It's hard to imagine how to top killing your own own uncle and brother, unless she starts a nuclear war. As I said, Kim Jong Un set the bar for instability. Let's see if she can maintain or improve it.

[Aseahawkfan]

Well, it wouldn't be funny at all, but I don't see her as feeling pressured by any 'feminist push'. If she is a tyrant, it would be for much more pragmatic reasons, like keeping and consolidating power - just like her brother. It's hard to imagine how to top killing your own own uncle and brother, unless she starts a nuclear war. As I said, Kim Jong Un set the bar for instability. Let's see if she can maintain or improve it.

What would be even cooler is if she engineered the death of her brother to bring about the end of the North Korean dictatorship and unite North and South Korea into one Korea. That would be way, way better.

The sad tales of a divided Korea eventually having a happy ending would be nice. All those stories about families divided by that vile war need to end in reunification like Germany.

[Hawktawk]

[quote="Aseahawkfan"
What would be even cooler is if she engineered the death of her brother to bring about the end of the North Korean dictatorship and unite North and South Korea into one Korea. That would be way, way better.

The sad tales of a divided Korea eventually having a happy ending would be nice. All those stories about families divided by that vile war need to end in reunification like Germany.[/quote]

Now you're talking Asea. I dont know a whole lot about this woman but I can't imagine she isn't more pragmatic than the 5'4" fat little N Korean DJT, a lifelong murdrous thug. Of course his lover "wishes him well"

One can hope she and our next president can bring NK into the community of nations.

I've heard he may have been injured by a missile test, wouldnt that be funny

[I-5]

Killing her brother and claiming power would rank right up with the biggest coup ever. But the way he lives, I don't think she has to do much to get her brother killed. His health is terrible. He is the very definition of gluttony.

Do we think it's any coincidence that a majority of the countries that have had the most success dealing with this pandemic are led by women? Taiwan, New Zealand, Iceland, Finland all come to mind. Germany is not out of the woods, but Merkel is helping the country re-open thoughtfully, mandating face masks with hefty penalties for violating the rules.

I don't know why the US seems to have a hangup about women leaders (at least in politics), but I trust them at least as much and in many cases moreso than men.

[Aseahawkfan]

Killing her brother and claiming power would rank right up with the biggest coup ever. But the way he lives, I don't think she has to do much to get her brother killed. His health is terrible. He is the very definition of gluttony.

Do we think it's any coincidence that a majority of the countries that have had the most success dealing with this pandemic are led by women? Taiwan, New Zealand, Iceland, Finland all come to mind. Germany is not out of the woods, but Merkel is helping the country re-open thoughtfully, mandating face masks with hefty penalties for violating the rules.

I don't know why the US seems to have a hangup about women leaders (at least in politics), but I trust them at least as much and in many cases moreso than men.

South Korea run by a woman? Or Japan? Or Canada? I don't think gender has much to do with how well run things are.

I think women would in general be more trustworthy perhaps because they aren't part of the boys clubs that dominate political power groups.

You know why America hasn't had a woman president. Traditionally they prefer WASP presidents. We've had one Catholic. No Jewish people. No women. And only one visible African ancestry president who was mixed with an African father and European ancestry American mother. Other than president though, we've had plenty of female leaders in Congress as Governors and other areas of leadership. So not real sure why you think we have a hangup with a female leader as other than president. I never much understand why you make these broad statements that are factually untrue. If you had specified president, then I could have understood it. But this idea that America in general has this problem is not really true of modern America.

And Hilary lost because she has a terrible name to many Americans. The Clinton name has a lot of bad baggage attached to it. Maybe hardcore Clinton supporters can't see it, but Americans in general, especially swing voters are aware of the baggage she has personally and of course the baggage from her husband. Even Hawktawk if it weren't for his hatred of Trump would have probably been railing against the toxic Hilary Clinton.

[RiverDog]

Killing her brother and claiming power would rank right up with the biggest coup ever. But the way he lives, I don't think she has to do much to get her brother killed. His health is terrible. He is the very definition of gluttony.

Do we think it's any coincidence that a majority of the countries that have had the most success dealing with this pandemic are led by women? Taiwan, New Zealand, Iceland, Finland all come to mind. Germany is not out of the woods, but Merkel is helping the country re-open thoughtfully, mandating face masks with hefty penalties for violating the rules.

I don't know why the US seems to have a hangup about women leaders (at least in politics), but I trust them at least as much and in many cases moreso than men.

First off, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that the two Kim's are at odds with each other enough for one to consider murdering the other. To the contrary, there is evidence to suggest just the opposite.

As far as female leadership and managing the coronavirus, let's take a look at each country individually. Iceland has a population of 360,000, or about 75% of the population of Wyoming. With such a low population, they have been able test nearly everyone in the country. New Zealand and Finland are both a little bigger, about 4.6 and 5.5 million respectively, but still smaller than our own state of Washington. With populations that low, it's a lot easier to manage as you can test a larger percentage of the population and contact tracing is much easier. As far as Taiwan goes, a number of Asian countries have done a good job of managing the virus, including South Korea and much of SE Asia have had good results, perhaps due to climatic differences as viruses don't like hot, humid environments. In any event, I don't see any evidence other than circumstansial that the gender of their leaders has anything to do with the management of the virus.

As far as the United State's aversion for female leaders, I can't see a lot of evidence for that, either. In 2018, there were 102 women elected to the House, 14 to the Senate, and 9 to Governorships. Of the 589 women that ran or said they would run for the Senate, House, or Governorship, 274 advanced to the primaries. That sounds like a pretty fair track record to me.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2 ... e-tracker/

[I-5]

Riv, I don't think you were directing your comment on the Kims to me. I don't think she would attempt any coup.

And I should have specified female presidents in the US, as opposed to female politicians.

Lastly, I'm not saying women have a monopoly on good leadership in the fight against COVID-19 at all. But the countries that are led by women are doing a more than credible job in dealing with it, and one of those countries that is improving rapidly is Germany.

https://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/world/countries-with-the-best-covid-19-responses-are-led-by-women-leaders/ar-BB12SmpM

[RiverDog]

Riv, I don't think you were directing your comment on the Kims to me. I don't think she would attempt any coup.

And I should have specified female presidents in the US, as opposed to female politicians.

Lastly, I'm not saying women have a monopoly on good leadership in the fight against COVID-19 at all. But the countries that are led by women are doing a more than credible job in dealing with it, and one of those countries that is improving rapidly is Germany.

https://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/world/countries-with-the-best-covid-19-responses-are-led-by-women-leaders/ar-BB12SmpM

Agreed with your first sentence. It was a general statement, and I didn't make that very clear. My bad.

As far as female POTUS goes, you can't in good conscious use HRC as an example. She was a very polarizing candidate, with the highest negative rating of any POTUS candidate BY FAR since they started doing the polling back in the 50's. Everyone except Trump. She is not a good example. Even so, she still won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote by less than 100K votes.

If the country was able to elect an African-American (I hate using hyphens) as their POTUS , they can certainly elect a female, so long as it's the right female. I'm a pretty conservative guy, and I know in my own heart that I wouldn't hesitate a second to vote for a female if she shared my perspective on things.

[I-5]

I fully agree that HRC was a very polarizing (albeit more capable than the current president in too many ways to list here) candidate to be our first woman president. I just think it's striking that Hillary notwithstanding, that so many countries from first world to developing have had women leaders, and the US still has not. I'm glad to hear that nothing is stopping you from supporting a qualified female candidate for president. My whole point in bringing that issue up is that I have observed that women world leaders for the most part tend to be pragmatic in their approach to governing. I would expect something similar in North Korea should his sister take over. I could be wrong, of course.

[RiverDog]

I fully agree that HRC was a very polarizing (albeit more capable than the current president in too many ways to list here) candidate to be our first woman president. I just think it's striking that Hillary notwithstanding, that so many countries from first world to developing have had women leaders, and the US still has not. I'm glad to hear that nothing is stopping you from supporting a qualified female candidate for president. My whole point in bringing that issue up is that I have observed that women world leaders for the most part tend to be pragmatic in their approach to governing. I would expect something similar in North Korea should his sister take over. I could be wrong, of course.

Saying that HRC is more capable than our current POTUS isn't much of a testimonial.

I'm not ready to generalize women being more pragmatic in governing than their male counterparts. They are absent the male ego, which in the case of North Korea, may make the female Kim a better option than her brother and indeed, make her more pragmatic. They are also are more affected by human tragedies than are men, which would give me hope that the female Kim might take more to heart the human rights abuses her brother has perpetuated in North Korea. But then again, I've met some cold hearted b******, too, the Nurse Ratchet (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest) types, so who knows.

[Hawktawk]

Id have taken Hillary in this specific situation hands down. She's a serious person who understands how government works, trusts intelligence and science and medicine, understands pandemics well. The Obama administration dealt with several problems, H1N1 and most recently Ebola. Obama had a plane on the ground in west africa as soon as the threat was known. Eventually 11 people reached US soil with 3 deaths. They got lucky but they acted.They also took the worldwide lead in developing vaccines and eventually trained 26 thousand medical professionals in africa to deal with this disease. 12K were lost to the h1N1 virus in 2009 over 12 months and Obama was run up a rail for it even though he declared a medical emergency before a single US citizen died. He was widely criticized for his Ebola response among republicans.He was hounded till the end of his presidency of Benghazi which tragically cost 4 lives...
Comparisons might be in order you think?

Yes I believe If Hillary Clinton had been president in December we would be in a far better place as would be the world. Yes I said it.

As for fat little rocket man hell is too good a place for him.

[RiverDog]

Id have taken Hillary in this specific situation hands down. She's a serious person who understands how government works, trusts intelligence and science and medicine, understands pandemics well. The Obama administration dealt with several problems, H1N1 and most recently Ebola. Obama had a plane on the ground in west africa as soon as the threat was known. Eventually 11 people reached US soil with 3 deaths. They got lucky but they acted.They also took the worldwide lead in developing vaccines and eventually trained 26 thousand medical professionals in africa to deal with this disease. 12K were lost to the h1N1 virus in 2009 over 12 months and Obama was run up a rail for it even though he declared a medical emergency before a single US citizen died. He was widely criticized for his Ebola response among republicans.He was hounded till the end of his presidency of Benghazi which tragically cost 4 lives...
Comparisons might be in order you think?

Yes I believe If Hillary Clinton had been president in December we would be in a far better place as would be the world. Yes I said it.

As for fat little rocket man hell is too good a place for him.

Agreed on both counts. But like I said, you can say that most anyone would have been better at responding to this crisis than Trump.

There are times that it's good to have a liberal in power and times you want a conservative at the controls. In this particular situation, it would have been better to have had most any of the major Dems in power than most any of the R's. However, I would much rather have a conservative Winston Churchill in power during a war than a liberal Neville Chamberlin.

[I-5]

I wasn't the biggest HRC fan, but to say she being more qualified or capable than DJT as president isn't much of a testimonial....that's a bit disingenuous. It sounds like she's no more qualified than the average citizen since Trump set such a low bar. She's FAR more capable than Trump, in terms of her deep knowledge of government, policy, and foreign policy experience. Her problem was her 'likeability', trustworthiness, or whatever you want to call the baggage she carried...which I'm not underestimating.

There are many republicans I could support...chief among them being Romney. I trust his principles, even if I don't agree with every policy.

[RiverDog]

I wasn't the biggest HRC fan, but to say she being more qualified or capable than DJT as president isn't much of a testimonial....that's a bit disingenuous. It sounds like she's no more qualified than the average citizen since Trump set such a low bar. She's FAR more capable than Trump, in terms of her deep knowledge of government, policy, and foreign policy experience. Her problem was her 'likeability', trustworthiness, or whatever you want to call the baggage she carried...which I'm not underestimating.

There are many republicans I could support...chief among them being Romney. I trust his principles, even if I don't agree with every policy.

My point wasn't so much about HRC as it was Trump. Just about anyone would have been able to respond much more effectively to this crisis.

The POTUS doesn't need to be much more qualified than the average citizen. Some of our most effective leaders, FDR, for example, weren't very book smart. Same with his successor. More than a deep knowledge of government, they need good managerial skills. They can hire people with the requisite deep knowledge of government if they know how to manage them. In my mind, that's where Trump is lacking most. He has very poor managerial skills, relies too much on his gut instincts, doesn't do his homework, fails to consult with his advisors before making decisions, surrounds himself with yes men or people that tell him what he wants to hear.

There's a lot of Dems I could support even though I don't agree with them on policy. Mayor Pete is a mayor of a mid sized city, so I doubt that, outside of his time in the military, that he has a very deep knowledge of government, but I'd bet that he could be a very effective POTUS, at least when it comes to managing a crisis like the one we face today.

[Aseahawkfan]

At this point I'm inclined to agree with Riverdog. Almost any president either party would be responding better to this pandemic and more importantly communicating what needs to be done better than Trump. The guy is wasting time and not understanding how modern technology can effectively help to deal with this. I doubt any other president would be so clueless as to the necessity of using technology to get this done. Crazy Uncle Trump can tweet, but doesn't seem to grasp the full power of the technology.

[I-5]

I don't think anyone here would disagree with that, except for a couple posters we know of.

[RiverDog]

I don't think anyone here would disagree with that, except for a couple posters we know of.

Yea, we really need to get Idahawkman and burrton back in here, give the place a little balance.

[Aseahawkfan]

Yea, we really need to get Idahawkman and burrton back in here, give the place a little balance.

Those two MIA though IDhawkan been a little bit in the main forum. I figure he knows he's not going to get much leeway on his Trump worship. With him gone, I'm now the "Trump defender" I guess if pursuing accuracy is defending the guy. People that hate Trump never bother to fact check themselves most of the time. I don't know how you can complain about a lying zealot like Trump and his followers while you are engaging in lying zealous behavior using biased, false sources of information to back up your opinion. At that point you become part of the problem.

[I-5]

I don't know how you can complain about a lying zealot like Trump and his followers while you are engaging in lying zealous behavior using biased, false sources of information to back up your opinion. At that point you become part of the problem.

False equivalence, unless you're willing to provide specific examples of something untrue that was said.

[Aseahawkfan]

False equivalence, unless you're willing to provide specific examples of something untrue that was said.

How about you comparing Trump to Hitler like you did? Or Riverdog claiming we had two weeks advance notice due to Italy when our first coronavirus case was before Italy? Or all the people that were talking about him having his finger on the button like he was totally unhinged? It's been three plus years, nothing of the kind. In fact, Trump has proven to be quite anti-war compared to some of his cabinet.

I could spend my time finding quite a few times you blamed Trump for things he had nothing to do with that either happened before he was president or not one of his decisions he gets blamed for. Maybe when I get bored, I'll go parse some more of the various posts and find all the lying BS that has been posted on here about Trump by the Trump Haters as bad as the BS posted by the pro-Trump crowd.

I have no idea why you think you're being truthful rather than admit you hate the guy and you'll lie, cheat, and steal or believe any half-ass article put out by a left wing journalist that skewers Trump. At least with Hawktawk it's obvious, why you continue to pretend that isn't driving your comments and beliefs.

I wish you guys would stop pretending while you ignore the many times I have given you factual information that Trump could not have stopped or slowed this pandemic as we were infected back in January. It was spreading and building and there wasn't any stopping it in an open country like ours. You guys completely overlook any factual information that is contrary to your opinions. And that's fine, but don't try to BS me that you're being in anyway honest or factual when it comes to Trump. You'd believe almost any lie about him that pillories the man. It's only to degrees as in there is Hawktawk and then lower down is I5 along the spectrum of Trump Hate.

[RiverDog]

How about you comparing Trump to Hitler like you did? Or Riverdog claiming we had two weeks advance notice due to Italy when our first coronavirus case was before Italy? Or all the people that were talking about him having his finger on the button like he was totally unhinged? It's been three plus years, nothing of the kind. In fact, Trump has proven to be quite anti-war compared to some of his cabinet.

I could spend my time finding quite a few times you blamed Trump for things he had nothing to do with that either happened before he was president or not one of his decisions he gets blamed for. Maybe when I get bored, I'll go parse some more of the various posts and find all the lying BS that has been posted on here about Trump by the Trump Haters as bad as the BS posted by the pro-Trump crowd.

I have no idea why you think you're being truthful rather than admit you hate the guy and you'll lie, cheat, and steal or believe any half-ass article put out by a left wing journalist that skewers Trump. At least with Hawktawk it's obvious, why you continue to pretend that isn't driving your comments and beliefs.

I wish you guys would stop pretending while you ignore the many times I have given you factual information that Trump could not have stopped or slowed this pandemic as we were infected back in January. It was spreading and building and there wasn't any stopping it in an open country like ours. You guys completely overlook any factual information that is contrary to your opinions. And that's fine, but don't try to BS me that you're being in anyway honest or factual when it comes to Trump. You'd believe almost any lie about him that pillories the man. It's only to degrees as in there is Hawktawk and then lower down is I5 along the spectrum of Trump Hate.

I see you're back in your Trump apologist mode, accusing others you disagree with as being motivated by a "hate" of Trump. You don't believe the reports of Trump ignoring warnings and intelligence briefings about the virus. Fine. I consider myself a reasonable person, and as a reasonable person, when I hear from a number of sources information that aligns perfectly with behavior that I've observed over the past 3+ years, I tend to view that information as being a believable scenario.

Every word and action Trump's spoken and taken since January indicates a deep, profound skepticism and/or ignorance of the threat. Indeed, when one considers his well known poor work habits, his refusal to read his daily intelligence briefings, his tendoncy to dismiss professional opinions in lieu of his own instinct or gut feel, his unpreparedness and misstatements of facts, his tendency to surround himself with people that tell him what he wants to hear no matter what the subject and dismiss those that disagree with him, all supports the narrative that Trump had been warned very early on about this virus and could not be convinced to take it as a serious threat let alone take appropriate action to address it. The reports conform to a 'T' that of a classic Trump response, a style of his that we've seen for the past 3+ years. In other words, the shoe is a perfect fits. Why wouldn't a reasonable person that has followed DJT over the past 3+ years believe those reports? Because Fox News hasn't reported on them?

No one, least of all me, ever claimed that Trump could have "stopped" the virus. But there is little doubt that he could have done a whole helluva lot more with regards to slowing it. J/b we had our first infection back in January doesn't mean that actions couldn't have been taken much earlier than they were, that observations of countries hit hard early on couldn't have been made, and that the nation couldn't have been warned about the threat the virus posed weeks earlier than we were. Instead, Trump told us back in January that we had the virus under control, that it was not a threat, and as late as February 28th, claimed that it was nothing more than a Democratic hoax to embarrass him. His position has been constantly changing, first claiming as late as March 6th that the virus "came out of nowhere" and now claims he warned of the crisis, believed the coronavirus outbreak was “a pandemic, long before it was called a pandemic.”

So go ahead and keep rationalizing the reports as being nothing but a product of the liberal media, keep defending him amid all this criticism, keep making excuses for his prior and continued ignorance and mis management of the crisis, but don't complain when others look at your defense of him and conclude that you must be a Trump supporter as those are the only people that are defending him.

[I-5]

How about you comparing Trump to Hitler like you did?

Trump is not Hitler, and I would I never equate the two. Show me exactly what I said if you disagree. Otherwise, give it up.

[Aseahawkfan]

I see you're back in your Trump apologist mode, accusing others you disagree with as being motivated by a "hate" of Trump. You don't believe the reports of Trump ignoring warnings and intelligence briefings about the virus. Fine. I consider myself a reasonable person, and as a reasonable person, when I hear from a number of sources information that aligns perfectly with behavior that I've observed over the past 3+ years, I tend to view that information as being a believable scenario.

Every word and action Trump's spoken and taken since January indicates a deep, profound skepticism and/or ignorance of the threat. Indeed, when one considers his well known poor work habits, his refusal to read his daily intelligence briefings, his tendoncy to dismiss professional opinions in lieu of his own instinct or gut feel, his unpreparedness and misstatements of facts, his tendency to surround himself with people that tell him what he wants to hear no matter what the subject and dismiss those that disagree with him, all supports the narrative that Trump had been warned very early on about this virus and could not be convinced to take it as a serious threat let alone take appropriate action to address it. The reports conform to a 'T' that of a classic Trump response, a style of his that we've seen for the past 3+ years. In other words, the shoe is a perfect fits. Why wouldn't a reasonable person that has followed DJT over the past 3+ years believe those reports? Because Fox News hasn't reported on them?

No one, least of all me, ever claimed that Trump could have "stopped" the virus. But there is little doubt that he could have done a whole helluva lot more with regards to slowing it. J/b we had our first infection back in January doesn't mean that actions couldn't have been taken much earlier than they were, that observations of countries hit hard early on couldn't have been made, and that the nation couldn't have been warned about the threat the virus posed weeks earlier than we were. Instead, Trump told us back in January that we had the virus under control, that it was not a threat, and as late as February 28th, claimed that it was nothing more than a Democratic hoax to embarrass him. His position has been constantly changing, first claiming as late as March 6th that the virus "came out of nowhere" and now claims he warned of the crisis, believed the coronavirus outbreak was “a pandemic, long before it was called a pandemic.”

So go ahead and keep rationalizing the reports as being nothing but a product of the liberal media, keep defending him amid all this criticism, keep making excuses for his prior and continued ignorance and mis management of the crisis, but don't complain when others look at your defense of him and conclude that you must be a Trump supporter as those are the only people that are defending him.

You often take a side and stick to it regardless of information to the contrary. So let's stop pretending your reasonable once you get an opinion in your head. You do this same garbage in football like your opinion of Pete Carroll or any particular player you get up in arms about. You aren't a ranting maniac like Hawkshack, but you are also not particularly interested in factual information if it contradicts your opinion. And have in fact glossed over information I provided that contradicted you several times without answering it. Just two examples below because it was not in line with your theory about Trump.

And you keep ignoring the information I provide you proving your opinion wrong that you conveniently ignore like the dates of first infection proving that we were already infected. You have ignored every piece of evidence I have given you showing we were concurrently infected and did not have advance notice or time to prepare as you are arguing. You literally ignore the dates when we were first infected. You do not for some reason accept that we had growing infections at the same time as Italy. The only reason we did not have a rising tally on the case trackers was not because we had not yet been thoroughly infected exactly like Italy, but because we did not have testing to tell us we were thoroughly infected. As in there was no way to prepare or answer better to avoid this going to information from Europe.

Two, you stated Trump should use the DPA to get PPE production going. Then I look it up and we don't have much PPE production in America due to outsourcing our PPE production as part of our textile outsourcing to order into production. 3M factories for PPE are mostly outside the country. You ignore this information to rag on Trump about PPE production using the DPA when it is outside the country and does not apply. We can manufacture ventilators easier than we can manufacture N95 masks and surgical gowns.

So no, I'm not a Trump apologist, you just don't give a crap about accurate information when it comes to Trump. You'll read any article halfway supporting your opinion and call it good without digging any deeper to see if there is another issue occurring. So don't BS me as a Trump apologist for wanting accuracy.

[Aseahawkfan]

Trump is not Hitler, and I would I never equate the two. Show me exactly what I said if you disagree. Otherwise, give it up.

Wow. You seriously forgot about comparing Trump to Hitler? I have to go back the many months and dig that up because you forgot? Really? What's next c-bob asking me to go back and find his comment when he wanted the guy he called a war criminal for five years in office over Trump in Bush Jr.? How about you remember your comment and not ask me to dig it up.

If I ever get bored, then I'll spend my time digging up the posts you all forgot to prove my point. Suffice it to say since I come here for mostly for entertainment, it is unlikely I waste my time doing that. All that matters is I remember these discussions when you insinuated Trump was like Hitler and it was you exaggerating because you can't stand the guy. You were hardly alone at the time since many liberal rags were calling his jingoistic nationalistic talk and anti-immigrant rhetoric as Hitler-like. Since the majority of liberals on this board tend to get their information from sources that encourage confirmation bias, there isn't much point to debating it with you. Either you're really interested in the truth of matters like myself or you're picking a side and accepting what they tell you. That is not my interest, which is why I disagree with the conservative posters on here often as well. If I were running things, documented evidence and factual information would be the prime driver of the world over emotion and sports-like fandom for politicians the politics they profess.

[I-5]

So if I tell you that I don't think Trump is like Hitler, you think I actually think he is Hitler.....really? I think you need to let it go, or find exactly what I said in full.

I also said just a few posts above that there are republican candidates that I could support for president, starting with Romney - and I don't even have to agree with them on some things. So I guess I'm still a democrat shill? You have some kind of ax grinding going on, but I'm really not sure why....

[I-5]

If there is anyone here who comes closest to making ad hominem attacks, it's statements like this:

"a ranting maniac like Hawkshack"

This is beneath the forum IMO. I respect everyone here, including those I disagree with.

[RiverDog]

If there is anyone here who comes closest to making ad hominem attacks, it's statements like this:

"a ranting maniac like Hawkshack"

This is beneath the forum IMO. I respect everyone here, including those I disagree with.

I think he meant to say Hawktalk.

I, too, respect everyone in here.

I can honestly say that Hawktalk is not a raving maniac. He's certainly prone to using some very over the top superlatives that may make him seem that way, but if you erase those colorful terms and read the rest of his text, you'll find that he's generally well informed.

[I-5]

Thanks Riv. Yes, Hawktalk.

The only superlatives I've heard from HT are directed not at anyone on this forum, good or bad. Everyone has strong opinions, which is great.

[Hawktawk]

I wish you guys would stop pretending while you ignore the many times I have given you factual information that Trump could not have stopped or slowed this pandemic as we were infected back in January. It was spreading and building and there wasn't any stopping it in an open country like ours. You guys completely overlook any factual information that is contrary to your opinions. And that's fine, but don't try to BS me that you're being in anyway honest or factual when it comes to Trump. You'd believe almost any lie about him that pillories the man. It's only to degrees as in there is Hawktawk and then lower down is I5 along the spectrum of Trump Hate.

You're correct saying Trump couldn't stop this, especially in hindsight. What he could have done as the president of the most prosperous knowledgeable country on the planet is take early action, lead THE WORLD IN THIS FIGHT !!!!like America has done through my 60 years of life and long before. Until Nov 2016 when it all came to a screeching halt when a climate denier, science denier intelligence community denier lazy incompetent mentally deranged man became the president. He could have slowed it in this country significantly as states that locked down far before his national action have proven. As an example california has deaths but nothing like other huge states such as NY who waited .

I'm not sure what your talking about saying we make stuff up, that being the majority of americans BTW because we hate trump.Hes about 42 % in a crisis at the point of which GW was 90% and and even Carter was still in the 70s with the Iran hostage crisis There's something worth hating and its a sad commentary on what america has become that anyone supports him at this point.

You dont have to make stuff up with this guy. here's the facts. Our intelligence was aware of a weird flu in China in november at the latest. Trump intelligence briefings he doesn't read began on 1-3 2020 and there were a TOTAL OF 13 OF THOSE BRIEFINGS before he took any action. Alex Azar, Mick Mulvaney, really the list goes on warned him to take action.Mulvaney was fired for his efforts and Azar is hanging by a thread.As a matter of fact Trump downplayed it many times both publicly and privately which has surely cost an unknown number of lives.

IN the period of time from rumps first briefing he had time for 8 rounds of golf including March 7-8 when most of europe was in lockdown, also 9 campaign rallies.Statements he made to his assembled guests made clear he was well aware of recommendations that sheltering and separation was the only solution left to save lives and he waited 2 weeks at least after that in a nation of 327 million. With 1 asymptomatic person infecting 2 to 4 others its ridiculous to say he couldn't have slowed it.

The flat boat disaster in Guam partly due to this administration ineptitude demonstrated that as many as 60% of carriers are totally asymptomatic and this country had no masks , our initial guidelines were weak or dishonest regarding masks .The rest of it as far as managing the crisis is dreadful from mixed messages, inept management at every level , quackery from the podium, engaging in petty fights, lamenting his economy while spending almost no time focusing on the victims other than perfunctory written opening remarks.https://dnyuz.com/2020/04/30/amid-a-ris ... to-others/
He launched 55 tweets IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT a couple of days ago attacking among other Jim Comey.....

He established guidelines for separation, finally admitted its the governors job to decide but supports skinheads cramming a capitol building brandishing assault weapons protecting the right to kill other for their "freedom"

I dont support Inslee politically but commend his early actions as did the guy who should be president Mike Pence. I agree with Inslee Trump is fomenting civil unrest. Its bizarro world. Hell asea if you think Im full of hate read some George Conway, husband of Kellyane. That's probably a fun dinner table although I've read reports she has said she feel like she needs to take a shower after defending Trump. Read Max Boot, Republican conservative and presidential historian who wrote an article entitled "the worst president ever". Hear hear. Ask Bob Corker R senator from Tennessee Who called the WH an "adult day care" YEARS AGO and Jeff Flake R Senator who publicly criticized Trump, both willing to lose their seats over it. Ask Joe Scarborough, staunch conservative and former republican congressman in the gingrich revolution (and Trump acquaintance ) who knew from experience Trump was not presidential timbre and left the party shortly after his election when the man's bizarre unhinged behavior made obvious he was a threat to the entire planet as we now see he was if we are not blind sheep..

Ask Bill Krysol who was willing to lose his publication the weekly standard rather than acquiesce to madness. Richard Steele, first African American party chairman, Sam Schmitt who was a major player in 2 presidential campaigns, John Heilman. Justin Amash of michigan who left the party over Trump's criminal treasonous acts and is contemplating a libertarian run.
I could go on. The badge of #NEVERTRUMPER# is one I wear with both pride and deep sadness.We hate this miserable POS worse than any democrat ever could. I sensed big trouble when he was halfway down the escalator and boy howdy I've been sadly far more correct than I ever wanted to be whether you're ever going to admit it or not asea. You're smarter than the position you have taken.

Houston we have a problem

[RiverDog]

I'm not sure what your talking about saying we make stuff up, that being the majority of americans BTW because we hate trump.Hes about 42 % in a crisis at the point of which GW was 90% and and even Carter was still in the 70s with the Iran hostage crisis There's something worth hating and its a sad commentary on what america has become that anyone supports him at this point.

This is a quite different crisis than either of those you referenced, different than any other we've seen in our lifetimes. First off, those were singular events, not one stretched out over 3 months. Secondly, there are far more experts involved in this that people look to for guidance, in particular, Dr. Fauci. He's much more looked to than someone like Colin Powell was during the Gulf War. That's exactly why Trump should keep his cake hole shut. Any politician is going to look bad trying to discuss things on the same level Fauci is, and as we know, Trump isn't that sharp and anytime he tries to act like an expert, it exposes his lack of intellect.

Our intelligence was aware of a weird flu in China in november at the latest. Trump intelligence briefings he doesn't read began on 1-3 2020 and there were a TOTAL OF 13 OF THOSE BRIEFINGS before he took any action. Alex Azar, Mick Mulvaney, really the list goes on warned him to take action.Mulvaney was fired for his efforts and Azar is hanging by a thread.As a matter of fact Trump downplayed it many times both publicly and privately which has surely cost an unknown number of lives.

Unfortunately this has a very high probability of being true.

He established guidelines for separation, finally admitted its the governors job to decide but supports skinheads cramming a capitol building brandishing assault weapons protecting the right to kill other for their "freedom"

That's what's bothering me. More and more businesses, retail stores, airlines, etc, that are requiring masks. The far right still believes that this is a big hoax. Medical workers are staging counter protests. We could see some violent incidents break out this summer when people start getting denied access into stores and onto airlines because they're not wearing masks.

[Hawktawk]

My popularity #s for GW and Carter as well as Obama following the death of UBL were stratospheric compared to the Trump bump. Trumps apex was 56% approval handling this early on with a job approval around 50 but it collapsed within weeks as his lying, unhinged behavior attacking the press and other adversaries, his inability to show genuine compassion etc became plain for all to see.
Currently he's at 40 to 45% according to the polls, right back to the same trumpanzee base that's brandishing weapons in state houses and flying MAGA flags. The majority of American voters see this and they get it too. His campaign chair Brad Pasquale gave him the low down on polls showing him getting killed all over the country and dropping worse ever time he opened his yap in these briefings.He threw a fit of rage , threatened to sue Pasquale . There were 4 people in the room and someone leaked it like always in this bismark of a white house.See not even trump's poll numbers are his fault. Nothing is. The buck doesn't stop at his desk . As I heard a commentator say the other day the fact this guy is still president means the 25th amendment is as useless as Impeachment.Come on Nov.6

[RiverDog]

My popularity #s for GW and Carter as well as Obama following the death of UBL were stratospheric compared to the Trump bump. Trumps apex was 56% approval handling this early on with a job approval around 50 but it collapsed within weeks as his lying, unhinged behavior attacking the press and other adversaries, his inability to show genuine compassion etc became plain for all to see.
Currently he's at 40 to 45% according to the polls, right back to the same trumpanzee base that's brandishing weapons in state houses and flying MAGA flags. The majority of American voters see this and they get it too. His campaign chair Brad Pasquale gave him the low down on polls showing him getting killed all over the country and dropping worse ever time he opened his yap in these briefings.He threw a fit of rage , threatened to sue Pasquale . There were 4 people in the room and someone leaked it like always in this bismark of a white house.See not even trump's poll numbers are his fault. Nothing is. The buck doesn't stop at his desk . As I heard a commentator say the other day the fact this guy is still president means the 25th amendment is as useless as Impeachment.Come on Nov.6

The amazing thing about Trump's job approval is that it never changes by much. It always seems to hover between 42% and 48% no matter how good or bad the news is.