BuffaloHokie13

Based on her policies she really isn't all that moderate, but she is principled and that has no place in the current democratic party.

There's a change . org petition to overrule the decision. A very anti-trump NYC based friend of mine linked it earlier on social media with the commentary 'this is inexcusable, this is bull####'

I'm fairly confident that 350° oil for a few minutes would kill it... if not then perhaps the Frank's will!

I will say, there are two things I'm very excited to see once Trump is out of office. 1. Him not being mentioned in dating profiles 2. Who will people blame for everything? Seriously, I think many people have lost the ability to identify issues and properly assess blame because it's significantly easier to just point at the orange man and pout.

That's a Croc. No k.

I voted for Gary Johnson last time and I am undecided at this point. I am absolutely not voting Biden though, I know that.

Susan B. Anthon.... err Rice. Rice? Is she Asian? I thought we were going to stick with a different demo... *escorted off camera and feed is cut*

No, I only defend Trump when you're wrong. Unfortunately that is incredibly often...

That's pretty dumb, but I don't know what it has to do with my post...

The irony ?? I hope you have a lovely day. Go Bills!

Part 1, I understand that. Still lower than initial projections of spread, and still not the negative message attempting to be portrayed in the post I quoted. Part 2, when I say people here I mean PPP. The task force appears to have had pretty good projections pretty early, and quite a few other folks felt like they were completely unrealistic and downplaying it because that one model assumed 80% of the country would get it and 2% of those who got it would die before we knew anything about the virus.

He mentions, specifically towards the folks who just presented, that the disinfectant wipes [coronavirus] out in less than a minute [on surfaces]. He then says "And is there a way we can do something like that, uh, by injecting inside, or, or almost a cleaning?" And then goes on to talk about how it targets the lungs. Do you comprehend how that question is not in any way a suggestion to inject anything? Even your response is a major backstep. You went from 'Trump supporters believed he thought injecting poison into your body was a solution' to 'he suggested doctors look into injecting people with disinfectant'. Now, when you look at the actual quote, what you find is that he saw the results that disinfectants can have on surfaces and asked the team to work with medical professionals to research ways to apply that to people instead of surfaces. The only way he could think of on the spot was injection, which is a silly proposition, before clarifying that he wanted them to find a method to clean the lungs in a manner that is as effective as disinfectant on surfaces. Most logical people saw that his train of thought was - it works great on surfaces, now how can we make it work great on people.

So we're 6 months in and 1.5% of our population has had it? I remember when people here were suggesting that many people may die from it by now.

Quite frankly, no. Nobody I know experienced any of those things. The first two were generally taken as a hopeful message to keep the public panic down - not some sort of guarantee. He called their politicization of it a hoax. He did not call the virus a hoax. If he thought the virus was a hoax you know he would've called it the China Hoax and not the China virus. Mask messaging was very mixed from February through June. Depending on what your goal is, they may not work. It's that simple. Judging past statements on present knowledge is a pretty futile exercise. The heat of April is literally the same as the it will magically disappear. It was the same statement. It was absolutely never suggested that anyone inject anything into themselves. There was a presentation about how certain cleaners are highly effective at eliminating the virus on surfaces and he commented that, while that is helpful, it'd be more helpful if it could eliminate the virus in people - and then opined that perhaps that would be via injection. I think you have a caricature of what you think 'his followers' are that is as gullible as you. They aren't for the most part.

Most likely demographic to be killed per violent crime rate and most likely to suffer from a language barrier issue - which may factor into the first part. Mostly just guessing though.

It makes me cringe. Anyone who says that in the context you did (I know you weren't) obviously never understood what the phrase meant.

This story and the talk about trafficking died off faster than Epstein in a federal prison... I truly hope this issue doesn't get buried.

I'm still blown away that two elections in a row the best potential leaders we, a country of 331,000,000 people, could come up with are steaming piles of trash that nobody feels good voting for.

Maybe it's just how that image comes through on my phone, but the last one looks like a memoji and not a photo.

Right. That's my understanding as well and what I was referring to. If the suspected fraud was isolated to a few states and their electoral votes could not be assigned I assumed that would trigger this provision.

I'm pretty sure that at a certain point House Delegates determine the winner (GOP has more, but some could defect). That's my understanding anyway.

Okay, here's a question. Let's assume mail in voting does provide the opportunity to commit voter fraud and you're able to rig the election without obvious detection. What is more damaging: Rig in Biden's favor or Rig in Trump's favor and frame him for the fraud?

I think he's referring to politicians on both sides being terrified. One of the rare times I agree with him if I read it right.

They should be terrified if they are involved in anything like this.

Agreed! The task ahead is daunting, but these fiends must be brought to light, ousted, and judged.