Discussion in 'Current Events' started by WalterSobchak, Nov 20, 2020.
That certainly is true.
WHEN Trump leaves (next Jan. 20th), America will truly realize just how Toxic and Destructive that he was.
In Historical Terms (as far as "Destroying America") Donald Trump (and his Administration) will be mentioned with Pearl Harbor and 9/11.
Domestically, as far as the "Enemy Within" (Destroying America):
Trump's Desecration will go down as the Greatest Domestic Debasement since the Civil War.
Quite a "Legacy".
It's because in Trump's view, he hadn't been given credit for...much of anything. Think about it personally, have you been even satiated once with the state of affairs in 4 years? No, you hadn't.
Trump's had to deal with one of the most toxic, devoted oppositions possibly in American history. And as a result, a lot of opportunities were lost, that now Biden has to pick up and hopefully we see some success.
I have given trump credit a few times, but he has not done much deserving of credit sadly
also many times I have given him credit, he often changes his mind shortly after though or never comes through with the things he said he has done, that turns out he was just trying to pre-claim credit for stuff he had not done yet or deals he had not made yet and never woud
This is a fair criticism. Which brings the question: Where was this particular tone, during his administration? It would have made a difference, however slight if Liberals didn't treat everything as the end of the world and made the criticism to be fairly and evenly weighted.
I don't dispute he's done awful things, I don't even dispute that he's acting pathetically and shamefully. I just think, it didn't have to come to this and that all parties own everything. Trump does, and so do we as a nation. We all brought his Presidency down, and I hope we don't do the same to Biden's.
it was there, just not when Trump constantly tweeted his nonsense or tried to claim mission accomplished when no mission had been accomplished, of gaslighting us on this or that
Trump wasted his time attacking black football players and other stupid stuff, when he should have been working the art of the deal
this was some of my early posts about Trump before I realized what a self center narcissist he was - he had a lot of potential, his ego was just too fragile to get anything done - dems would work out a deal and some republicans would call him weak or whatever and Trump would freeze up as he could not take the heat, Trump never realized you can't please everyone all the time, especially when you have a divided congress - Trump wanted to be the only winner, not how it works, both sides have to be able to say they won somethign
I do recognize some of the many faults. As an example, because of Trump's recent behavior(as well as the election results), it's now possible for us(as Americans) to talk to each other again, rather than the near-civil war that we were headed in. And I think Biden can continue to make gains on this as the chaos subdues and dies down.
I also think, it might have been more personal for me than I had realized. Not that I personally liked(or disliked) him, again that wasn't it. I think for me, I have always in my life sought to defend people who I thought either couldn't defend themselves or were being bullied. Not that I saw myself as a strongman or a savior, but rather that I thought unfairness, as a principle should be countered with fairness.
So to me, it wasn't that we shouldn't criticize him, but that the criticism shouldn't be such that the basic functions of the office(not that he obviously cares for those with his behavior, so to that extent I won't fight the charge I was 'duped' to believing he cared, even a little) should be paralyzed.
Government should work, it's supposed to work. It 'worked'(relatively speaking) through the Clintons to the Bushes to the Obama's. In these four years, for various reasons we chose not to try and make this government work. That doesn't matter, for it's in the past except as a lesson to not do the same to the Biden Government.
For the purposes of non-partisanship, I will defend a Biden Government with the same gusto and vigor, and a fight for inherent fairness.
He’s just projecting what he would have done given the chance.
He doesn’t care about people’s lives, just his own, and he’ll throw everyone else under the bus to save his own skin.
Maybe Moderna and Pfizer should offer him the placebo instead since that’s all he ever offered the American people.
The most disgusting maggot ever to hold the job, and good riddance.
And he got the rest of the world to develop their own vaccines in record time as well.
What a superman.
Give him the Nobel prize for medicine.
Lol...Hitler built the autobahn and Mussolini got the trains to run on time, but they were toxic for their countries because of their malignant personalities.
You people think we rejected trump for his policies.
We rejected him for his character, which should have never been anywhere near our Oval Office.
Until you people realize that, you will continue to pretend that trump was treated poorly instead of acknowledging that it was trump that treated America poorly and betrayed his oath of office.
Maybe then you will apologize to the country for your poor judgement.
Sadly, trump is a cult, like Hitler was, so I don’t expect cultists to learn from their mistakes.
On the other hand, it turns out that the demographic that put Biden over the top was actually white men.
They voted for trump in 2016, but they saw that he had soiled our country with his personality so they put principle and patriotism ahead of race and partisanship and helped to fire trump in 2020.
I applaud all you white men who saw the light and did the right thing.
You are a credit to your race.
This is patently false. There has been fierce opposition all throughout history.
He checks EVERY box:
Traits of a Narcissistic Sociopath
How do you spot a sociopathic narcissist? Watch for certain traits:
A driven quest for power. If a narcissistic sociopath cares about anything other than himself, it is destructive power and control over people.
Behaviors that seek love and admiration. To be sure, this isn't needy love. It's not even emotional love. It's superficial. A narcissistic sociopath sees love and admiration as power tools to manipulate and dominate (Do Sociopaths Even Have Feelings?).
No apologies, no guilt, no remorse under any circumstance. A sociopathic narcissist believes that she is a gift to the world who makes it richer and more colorful. Therefore, her calculated, even cruel actions are always justified.
Invincibility. The narcissistic variety of sociopath believes he is indomitable. Even punishment and prison can't stop him. They're merely part of the game.
Wholly self-serving. The needs and wants of others are insignificant and undeserving of consideration.
Act as the producer, director, and only actor of his own show. The narcissistic sociopath casts people in roles that increase his power and sense of importance and when bored, casts them aside.
"Tyrant Nero might have burned Rome to the ground, but credit where it's due, he played nice tunes on his fiddle!"
So you do think it's a coincidence. I dont.
To be fair you should understand that Trump's lawyers haven't been to court yet.
Blah blah blah, TDS, blah blah blah.
Yes, Obama doesn't get credit for an economy years after he is out of office.
You want to give Obama credit for the economy under Trump, but hold Trump responsible for the bad part.
So, if he was just printing money, inflation would be rising.
Economic experts agree Trump grew the economy. Not artificially as you are suggesting. You TDS prevents you from admitting it.
The problem is the average Trumper sees this as true.
Problem was that Trump had a history BEFORE he ever came to office, and that history wasn't pretty.
His lies about his solvency in Atlantic City really hurt a lot of employees and sub-contractors.
His lies about his University hurt a lot of students.
His lies to his own family are well documented.
So Trump built this distrust over decades with his own actions - it didn't just suddenly appear when he became President.
Karma is a bi-otch.
Trump's GDP numbers were worse than Carter's. And that was before Covid.
Agreed. This is, of course, utterly ridiculous. It betrays a lack of knowledge of how these things go (or if they know what the reality is, the willful distortion of it, to fuel politically-motivated conspiracy theories).
Please allow me to educate the posters here who agree with Trump that this was some nefarious plot against him. On this, I'll be long because the matter is complex, but please bear with me if you all really want to lean what happens in the real world rather than in Trump's fantasy LaLaLand.
Of course my explanations although 100% accurate won't dissuade the conspiracy theorists; facts don't matter to these people; they live in the "alternative facts" universe. But for what it's worth, here is what it is:
Phase 3 double-blind clinical trials are monitored by an INDEPENDENT and EXTERNAL monitoring board called a DSMB, or Data and Safety Monitoring Board. This is a REQUIREMENT and regulatory agencies WON'T CONSIDER drugs and vaccines that might want to apply for approval, without doing this. So the trial is double-blind for researchers and volunteers, but not blind for the DSMB because someone needs to be monitoring things; after all, this involves real human lives.
Double-blind means that neither the volunteers being vaccinated nor the company's researchers know who received the real vaccine, and who received a placebo shot. So the company DOESN'T KNOW how the efficacy trial is going. That information is kept for the eyes of the DSMB only, in sealed envelopes. The DSMB can unseal the information secretly anytime there is a concerning event. Say, a member of the trial dies or develops a severe complication (we saw it happening in the Oxford/AstraZeneca, the Johnson and Johnson, and the Sinovac/Butantan trials). The DSMB then halts the trial and opens the envelopes to verify if the adverse event happened in someone who got the vaccine, or the placebo. If it's the latter, the DSMB allows the trial to continue. If it's the former, the DSMB investigates if the adverse event was an unrelated coincidence, or caused by the vaccine. After the investigation the trial may resume, or be cancelled for good. Examples, the three trials above resumed after the halt, but a HCQ trial in Brazil that resulted in cardiac arrests was cancelled for good by the DSMB.
So, if a trial runs with no incidents, the DSMB keeps the envelopes sealed UNTIL THE TRIAL REACHES A PRELIMINARY ENDPOINT.
What is this? An endpoint is an outcome that is being measured. When there is a raging pandemic and an Emergency Authorization Use is considered to be in the horizon, the DSMB establishes a point when even if the full data are not in yet, they will be looking at what is going on, to see for example if efficacy seems sufficient and safety seems solid, so that the company can apply for the EUA, which indicates that the likelihood of benefit outweighs the likelihood of risk.
So what was the endpoint settled IN ADVANCE for the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid-19 experimental vaccine? 95 (or something like this, I don't recall the exact number) confirmed infections with the Covid-19 virus, among the trial participants.
Why? Because when you reach a certain number of infections, you can then plot efficacy predictions. If the infections occurred massively in the placebo arm but not in the vaccine arm, it suggests that the vaccine is effective. However the number of infections needs to be set as a preliminary end-point at a certain number, for statistical power. Too low a number, and the result is inconclusive (could be a fluke).
So, are you with me so far? End points are set BEFORE the trial even starts, to preserve the integrity of the data. You can't move the goal posts during the trial. It smells of bad form and attempt to manipulate the data. For this reason, this is set in stone IN ADVANCE.
So, since the preliminary end point HADN'T BEEN REACHED before the elections, the company DIDN'T KNOW if their vaccine was efficacious or not. Including, because the Pfizer trial, unlike the three I quoted above, showed no concerning adverse reaction. So, their envelops REMAINED SEALED.
Pfizer has an interest in moving fast because the company that crosses the line first and wins the race will collect BILLIONS in contracts. Pfizer's obligation towards its shareholders is to get to the finishing line as fast as possible, with competitors Moderna, AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson, and Novavax in hot pursuit.
But they CAN'T control the day on which they'll reach the preliminary end point. It depends on REAL PEOPLE in the trials actually CATCHING THE DISEASE. They can't infect infect people to expedite things (which is called a Human Challenge and is ethically controversial)... they need to wait for natural infections to occur among the participants. So, with the pandemic waxing and waning, it trickles... one guy gets it... then three more... then two more... etc.
So, what Pfizer's CEO said in the past (and Trump lashed out about) is that he EXPECTED to reach the preliminary end-point in October, given the rate of infections they were seeing among the participants. That's merely an EXPECTATION, not a certain date because it doesn't depend on what the company does; it depends on people naturally catching the disease. Well, it didn't happen in October. They did NOT reach the 95 infections in October. So the trial continued, with the company remaining 100% BLIND to the efficacy data.
AS SOON AS THE NUMBER WAS REACHED, that is, coincidentally, a few days after the election, the company notified the DSMB and the envelopes were opened. It was then, and only then, verified that the vast majority of cases had happened in the placebo arm, with the calculation at the time pointing to 90% efficacy. Then some more days later, the company reached the final end point, that is, all 43,000 and change participants had been vaccinated, and 2 months have passed since the first dose, a rule that the FDA negotiated with all 9 frontrunners, which is the minimum one can expect to ensure safety (to verify if there weren't any scary late adverse reactions).
So with the end of the phase 3 trial, the full set of data was looked at, and it happened that some additional people caught Covid-19 by then (it's accelerating, if you haven't noticed), improving the safety data to 95% for the full phase 3 trial. With this information in hands, the company immediately applied for the EUA (the application was filed with the FDA yesterday).
Pfizer had no interest in delaying things and NO CONTROL over when the preliminary end point would be reached, and had NO KNOWLEDGE of how things were going, which is the point of a double BLIND study.
So Trump's claim is not only preposterous, but IGNORANT. Why am I not surprised? Trump is clueless regarding the sciences. He is the guy who thought that injecting bleach or UV lights into people would be a good treatment for Covid-19.
Pfizer is a MULTINATIONAL company. They aren't applying for the EUA only in the United States (they have filed with the European agency and the UK agency too, and elsewhere). They aren't selling their Covid-19 vaccine just in the United States. Actually they are selling 100 million doses to us... and another 1.5 billion doses elsewhere, to countries all over the planet, where there ISN'T a presidential candidate called Donald J. Trump. In all of this, they wanted to be the first.
Why is it so important to be the first? Because not only all of their contracts depends on efficacy and safety being proven and are future intention-to-buy contracts that are no good if there is no approval, but because being the first SCREWS THE COMPETION. Why?
Because of the Phase 3 trials. See, a lot of people enroll in these trials in the hope of getting vaccinated sooner (minus a few idealistic ones who just want to contribute to science; but most human beings are selfish bastards as we all know, so people go to trials to earn an advantage for themselves).
But what happens if a vaccine is then approved as safe and efficacious, and gets distributed, and is available in your friendly neighborhood pharmacy? Well, people drop out of trials. Why in the hell would the selfish bastard want the 50-50 lottery of not knowing it he/she is being given the real thing or a placebo, plus all the hassle of multiple trips to the testing sites to get tested for antibodies and checked up for adverse reactions, and this, for a product still experimental and with no proven efficacy, if he/she can simply walk into their friendly neighborhood pharmacy and get FOR SURE the active vaccine (no placebo there) that is already proven to be efficacious and safe???
So, the front runner not only confirms contracts and starts profiting from sales, but ALSO, they make the road much harder for the competitors. If people start dropping out of trials or not enrolling because they already have the first company's certified product, the other companies will have A LOT OF TROUBLE IN REACHING THEIR ENDPOINTS so that they can also apply for authorization, launch into the market, and become real competitors.
Pfizer was in a race for their lives (as a way of speaking... actually, a race for the lavish livelihood of their shareholders, and for a fat bonus for its CEO). I GUARANTEE that they notified the DSMB of reaching the preliminary end point AS SOON AS IT HAPPENED, because, my dears, filling their pockets with a lot of money is MUCH more important to the CEO and the shareholders of this MULTINATIONAL company, than whether or not a guy called Donald J. Trump in one country out of 215, is given a pre-election boost (by the way, from a company that did NOT participate in the Warp Speed Initiative funding).
You can be assured that Pfizer's executives had a champagne-driven toasting party when they reached the preliminary endpoint, especially because Moderna was VERY HOT in pursuit. Remember, Moderna initially got a leg over them. They were the first ones to get their first prototype vaccine going, 44 days after the virus' genome got sequenced, back in January/February. They finished recruiting their phase 3 volunteers slightly ahead of Pfizer. Their preliminary data showed 94.5% efficacy, above Pfizer's then 90%.
AND TWO OTHER ADVANTAGES: their people who got infected despite being in the active vaccine arm, did not develop serious disease, while one of Pfizer's did. And MOST IMPORTANTLY, their product does not require a deep cold chain at -70C which can only be maintained by abundant dry ice or special freezers; it requires -20C which is easy for regular medical freezers and even most household freezers. Also, their vaccine is more stable and lasts 30 days in a refrigerator, unlike Pfizer's which spoils much faster and once opened needs to be used in six hours.
So, had Pfizer allowed Moderna to get to the finish line ahead of them, they would be screwed. Countries would massively opt for the Moderna product (especially the less developed countries that would struggle more with the deep cold chain which results in logistic nightmares), people might flock out of their phase 3, and they might be lingering behind and unable to get to the line faster.
In this business, time is money.
Pfizer is now in a frantic race to get the EUA and immediately distribute their product in their newly designed cold boxes (they said, in 24hrs), with fancy GPS systems that broadcast the internal temperature, so that everybody gets reassured that despite the deep cold requirements, their product is viable. This is one of the reasons why Pfizer declined to participate in the Warp Speed Initiative's distribution scheme with McKesson (supply managers selected by Warp Speed). Pfizer went through the expenses of doing their own distribution. Why? Because they are afraid of any bureaucratic hold-ups if they go with McKesson. They want to get their cold boxes to vaccination points (hospitals, clinics, health departments, pharmacies) AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Why? Because they are counting on a lot of people dropping out of competitors' phase 3 trials and delaying things for the other guys, who have significant assets and advantages over them; Pfizer's best advantage is having crossed the line first, given that their product isn't very compelling with its deep cold requirement and easy spoilage). Novavax for example has a product that doesn't even require a freezer. Johnson and Johnson has a product that only requires one dose (unlike Pfizer's two doses) and is also stable under refrigerator temperatures, for six months.
So, Pfizer's lead, with their deep cold requirement, two-doses requirement, and unstable product that spoils in days/hours, is fragile. They want to establish themselves in this multi-billion dollar market as soon as possible, to have as few viable competitors as possible.
Each day of delay is worth millions of dollars... and you can be assured that THAT'S what is important to the CEO and the shareholders... not if Trump loses an election, which he was predicted to lose anyway (it got closer than predictions, but the companies didn't know that in advance).
The bottom line is, it is PREPOSTEROUS to suggest that they would intentionally delay their finishing line (this, if they had any control over it, which they didn't, like I showed above).
Doesn’t sound like you’ll trust the vaccine
Rudy isn’t his lawyer?
Rudy with his dripping shoe polish sideburns is now the official face of the trump campaign.
God works in mysterious ways.
LOL, love the sarcasm. Welcome to the forum, mate. It seems like you'll be a great poster.
Another item, in addition to what I have just (in my verbose ways) posted about why it is preposterous to think that Pfizer would delay:
No fewer than 6 leading vaccine candidates were developed just as fast or faster than the ones sponsored by the Warp Speed initiative, despite having NOTHING to do with the WSI.
The Coronavac developed by Sinovac and the Instituto Butantan, a very promising inactivated virus vaccine (a true and tried traditional platform).
Two from Sinopharm (Beijing and Wuhan branches)
One from Cansino
One from Gamaleya
And the Pfizer/BioNTech
The above vaccines relied on a combination of self-funding, and governmental funding from the governments of Germany, India, China, Russia, and two state governments in Brazil (São Paulo and Paraná).
You can add to this that the Novavax which was partially helped by the WSI with a future purchase contract (but no R&D funding) was ALSO helped (with funding) by the CEPI initiative and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
This is to say, many of the vaccines would have been developed just as fast without the Warp Speed Initiative. This is a PANdemic. There are MANY countries in the world, many foreign scientists, and many founding sources equally interested in developing vaccines ASAP, not for electoral purpose, but for the purpose of saving the lives of their citizens and protecting their economies.
I do value the Warp Speed Initiative and I believe that it greatly helped some companies including Novavax, and particularly Moderna (Moderna's product is actually better than Pfizer's, would be my first choice to be personally vaccinated, and will supply a significant number of vaccines for Americans so I'm thankful for that - Moderna indeed would NEVER have crossed the finishing line without the help of the WSI and the NIH - up to that point, Moderna had NEVER had a successful product approved and placed in the market; they didn't even know how to run a phase III trial, which they had never done before; the NIH's expert scientists helped them with that). It also helped AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson and Sanofi/GSK although these were probably opportunistic because as the Big Pharma companies that they are, just like Pfizer they didn't really need the help. But hey, why not take the grant money that we American taxpayers are providing? Anyway, the WSI helped Regeneron and Eli Lilly with their monoclonal antibodies, and it is and will be helping with distribution and supplies (glass vials, etc.). So, the Warp Speed Initiative is commendable and I congratulate Trump for it. But while credit needs to be given where credit is due, no, the WSI wasn't the only player, and companies would have succeeded without it, too.
Without the WSI, maybe the only thing that would change, is that we'd be needing to purchase a... gasp... CHINESE VACCINE!!! LOL. Can you imagine Trump's head catching fire and and issuing black smoke if we had to vaccinate all Americans with a Chinese vaccine???
We would be well-served, though. The CoronaVac looks great. Uncertain about the mRNA platform (before it showed the excellent results just diffused) I was actually considering a trip to Brazil (where I have friends and colleagues I'm in touch with) to get vaccinated with the CoronaVac. Well, now that the mRNA platform does look excellent and in the brink of being approved, I'll save myself the trip (and its risks) and will take either the Pfizer vaccine or the Moderna one, whichever reaches my hospital first.
But no, we'd have had the vaccines in the same time frame without the Warp Speed Initiative. Just, the brand names would be different.
Separate names with a comma.