Disturbing trend of Trump voters rejecting Covid vaccines

For sure.

I do not subscribe to the theory that South Koreans are simply better than us.

South Koreans, to my knowledge, were not bombarded with a steady stream of lies and misinformation from their government and media.

A substantial part of the reason we did not have a well organized and effective COVID reponse like Korea and some other developed nations, is because we had an administration, a rightwing media, and their enablers in the GOP which willfully sowed misinformation, propagated bad science and pseudoscience, and made masks and social distancing guidelines into a supposed harbinger of an impending communist takeover.

Nailed it.
 
For sure.

I do not subscribe to the theory that South Koreans are simply better than us.

South Koreans, to my knowledge, were not bombarded with a steady stream of lies and misinformation from their government and media.

A substantial part of the reason we did not have a well organized and effective COVID reponse like Korea and some other developed nations, is because we had an administration, a rightwing media, and their enablers in the GOP which willfully sowed misinformation, propagated bad science and pseudoscience, and made masks and social distancing guidelines into a supposed harbinger of an impending communist takeover.




What do you mean "for sure"? I never made any claim even remotely close to what Owl claimed. Nor did I say or do I think that S. Korean are better than us. They are culturally different than us and their government is far more statist. You claimed you had a list, where is it?



furthermore, the states with the worst covid cases are solid blue states, how do you blame the right for all the covid deaths etc, especially when 40% of all deaths happened in nursing homes in blue states.
 
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the federal government's top infectious disease expert, on Sunday lamented the "disturbing" trend of people refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine if they voted for former President Donald Trump.

NBC's Chuck Todd asked Fauci about a recent poll which found that 47% of Trump voters said that they would not get the vaccine, while only 10% of Biden voters rejected inoculations.

"Do you think [President Donald Trump] needs to be enlisted here at all to get his voters to take this vaccine?" Todd wondered.

Chuck, I hope he does because the numbers that you gave are so disturbing," Fauci replied, "how such a large proportion of a certain group of people would not want to get vaccinated merely because of political consideration. It makes absolutely no sense and I've been saying that for so long."

"We've got to dissociate political persuasion from what's common sense, no-brainer public health things," he added. "The history of vaccinology has rescued us from small pox, from polio, from measles, from all of the other diseases. What is the problem here? This is a vaccine that is going to be life saving for millions of people. How some groups would not want to do it for reasons that I just don't understand."

Sorry you are disturbed. Avoui hald American voters and you will be fine. You will find them outside having fun with their friends.
 
shortly after Biden was elected, you posted that sentiment. no, i don't have the link and i'm not going to search for it. I remember you posted it. you should as well

You don't remember correctly. Shortly after Biden was elected the Cult and the gun-humpers started screaming about "Biden gonna take our guns, must run out and buy more now". I merely laughed at them and pointed out that they said the exact same scheiss when Obama was elected, yet here we are with even more gun ownership than ever. I get that you're butthurt about the background checks law that recently passed the House. There is nothing in it that says you can't continue to lovingly stroke your barrels, or get on the Innernetz and tell us how you can't wait to use them in the coming civil war. :awesome:
 
Another fallacy, much like those subscribed to by our very own Oath Keeper, STY.



Oath keepers may have some libertarians in it, but they themselves are not libertarian. I am not sure what you mean by "Fallacy", sty? what do you mean "same to you" in regards to me?


I don't view libertarianism as a death pact, or a cult. There are various degrees one can believe in the party platform and the philosophy just like liberalism and conservatism.
 
Oath keepers may have some libertarians in it, but they themselves are not libertarian. I am not sure what you mean by "Fallacy", sty? what do you mean "same to you" in regards to me?


I don't view libertarianism as a death pact, or a cult. There are various degrees one can believe in the party platform and the philosophy just like liberalism and conservatism.

STY = Smarter Than You, the other libertarian poster discussing right now.
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,

My titers 1:1590

Here is an article so you can have better understanding of the efficacy of preventing and neutralizing the COVID virus.

https://www.infectiousdiseaseadviso...ivalent-to-high-neutralizing-antibody-titers/




The CDC is as much a political entity as it is a scientific one. as you see above, there is clear science regarding the level of neutralizing antibodies required. yet the CDC is not sharing or informing people of this, or in many cases the information like I posted above is presented by the CDC and the agitating media ignores it as it does not fit the narrative. This is why I feel it highly important to find source materials for debate and information, not news sites who sell a narrative that often is not the truth.


regarding July 4th, that's an arbitrary date and we are going to be fine much sooner than that.





Science says I am not killing anyone with the titer level I have above and that I am immune from Covid. so no it is not logical it is emotional your position. Life is risk, there is something called "acceptable risk" statistically I am more likely to die or kill someone driving to get the vaccine at this point than I am from getting covid and/or passing it on to someone else.


That's just reality, facts, and science.

I do not see that as "just reality, facts, and science" at all.

What I see is someone who has a predetermined position; and then searches until they find what supports that position.
 
STY = Smarter Than You, the other libertarian poster discussing right now.




Ahh, I thought it was some txt lingo. anyway, he is different than I on several issues from my observations, proving my point that libertarians are not a monolithic death cult and can have various viewpoints much like liberals or conservatives.
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,



I do not see that as "just reality, facts, and science" at all.

What I see is someone who has a predetermined position; and then searches until they find what supports that position.




I literally linkes you to the science. you choose at this point then "not to see it". so a respected trade journal referencing peer reviewed studies is not adequate for you? What then would be? seems there would be nothing I could say to you, given you just rejected actual science from an actual professional medical journal. So I think we are done here given you reject facts and science.
 
Ahh, I thought it was some txt lingo. anyway, he is different than I on several issues from my observations, proving my point that libertarians are not a monolithic death cult and can have various viewpoints much like liberals or conservatives.

Where on Earth are you getting this "death cult" thing from? I don't know anyone who thinks that (L)s are a death cult. In fact, I've even voted for an (L) candidate on occasion.

This kind of goes back to my prior assertion that people who ascribe to outlier stuff like conspiracy theories and/or off-brand ideas and/or religious extremism tend to believe that they are somehow smarter and/or more aware of things than everyone else.
 
Where on Earth are you getting this "death cult" thing from? I don't know anyone who thinks that (L)s are a death cult. In fact, I've even voted for an (L) candidate on occasion.

Why from you madam,

LMAO -- yeah, that's fairly typical for those who claim to be libertarians. Basically they don't want to abide by the norms and rules of civilization. They also tend to be very Q-like or cult-like, in that they believe that they are superior, know better than the rest of us, and are destined for whatever they believe is greatness/heaven.


This kind of goes back to my prior assertion that people who ascribe to outlier stuff like conspiracy theories and/or off-brand ideas and/or religious extremism tend to believe that they are somehow smarter and/or more aware of things than everyone else.


how so? I don't follow. you suggested we were like a cult, I expounded on it pointing out in various ways that libertarianism like liberalism and conservatism is not an all or nothing philosophy.







"death cult" refers the comments that some have made calling libertarians cultist, "Qanon" types and a
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,

I literally linkes you to the science. you choose at this point then "not to see it". so a respected trade journal referencing peer reviewed studies is not adequate for you? What then would be? seems there would be nothing I could say to you, given you just rejected actual science from an actual professional medical journal. So I think we are done here given you reject facts and science.

I read the link. It doesn't say you are good to assume you have immunity. It talks about a standard for using plasma for plasma therapy. You have drawn conclusions from the link which were not intended and forced them into your narrative.

If you're looking for me to approve of your conclusions it won't happen with this much information. I am taking the antagonist position, which is good because it serves as a verification. On the other hand, if you could convince me, then you could probably convince anyone, and there would be very little doubt remaining. I am taking the 'play it safe' position, while you are taking the 'get me out of this' position.

You do get credit for being very analytical and searching very reputable information to support your narrative.
 
Oh, I thought the masks and social distancing worked? What happened to all that, dicksucker? Or, most likely, is all that part of your fake reality?

They do work, but your kind doesn't worry about either masks or social distancing. You always know better than science or the doctors.
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,



I read the link. It doesn't say you are good to assume you have immunity. It talks about a standard for using plasma for plasma therapy. You have drawn conclusions from the link which were not intended and forced them into your narrative.

If you're looking for me to approve of your conclusions it won't happen with this much information. I am taking the antagonist position, which is good because it serves as a verification. On the other hand, if you could convince me, then you could probably convince anyone, and there would be very little doubt remaining. I am taking the 'play it safe' position, while you are taking the 'get me out of this' position.

You do get credit for being very analytical and searching very reputable information to support your narrative.



I dont need your approval for anything. and I didn't realize I would have to link you to the actual study that is linked prominently at the end of the artice.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/223/1/47/5940177


Your "playing it safe" is not based on actual science. neutralizing Abs is the key word to focus on in the two links.



I have drawn the same conclusion as the study, based on said study that as long as my titer levels remain above a certain threshold, I am every bit as good as vaccinated. every individual would differ of course. You can see in this additional study that my titer level is exponentially better than the Janssen vaccine for example.

https://www.jnj.com/johnson-johnson...ial-of-its-janssen-covid-19-vaccine-candidate


Here are more references I would suggest.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867420316858
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777598
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,

I dont need your approval for anything. and I didn't realize I would have to link you to the actual study that is linked prominently at the end of the artice.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/223/1/47/5940177

" not all high-titer sera contained neutralizing antibody at FDA recommended levels, particularly at high stringency. These results underscore the value of serum characterization for neutralization activity."


Your "playing it safe" is not based on actual science. neutralizing Abs is the key word to focus on in the two links.



I have drawn the same conclusion as the study, based on said study that as long as my titer levels remain above a certain threshold, I am every bit as good as vaccinated. every individual would differ of course. You can see in this additional study that my titer level is exponentially better than the Janssen vaccine for example.

https://www.jnj.com/johnson-johnson...ial-of-its-janssen-covid-19-vaccine-candidate


Here are more references I would suggest.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867420316858
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777598

Well, I hope you're right or lucky because if you're wrong or unlucky it could lead to death.

Dr Fauci was specifically asked if someone had COVID-19 and survived if they should get the vaccine and the answer was yes.

You are basically taking the position that you know better. And it is just some kind of lucky coincidence that this is what you wanted to do in the first place?

I'm gonna take the 'yeah, right' position.

But, of course, I am going to do it in the most respectful way possible. :)
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,



" not all high-titer sera contained neutralizing antibody at FDA recommended levels, particularly at high stringency. These results underscore the value of serum characterization for neutralization activity."


Right, not all, so how many then a lot, a little? you have to get more granular on this.



Well, I hope you're right or lucky because if you're wrong or unlucky it could lead to death.

Dr Fauci was specifically asked if someone had COVID-19 and survived if they should get the vaccine and the answer was yes.

You are basically taking the position that you know better. And it is just some kind of lucky coincidence that this is what you wanted to do in the first place?

I'm gonna take the 'yeah, right' position.

But, of course, I am going to do it in the most respectful way possible. :)



St Fauci first told us not to wear a mask, I thought that was nonsense, then he admitted he lied and we all had to wear masks, then he said that cloth masks worked, I thought that was nonsense based on the below peer reviewed study on the efficacy of cloth masks, several weeks ago suddenly we are being told to where 2 masks, which really was saying "wear an n95 under your cloth mask", this is also the guy who admitted he lied when asked about herd immunity requirements so fauci is not someone I take his word at face value.


https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27531371/


Fauci may have been a brilliant scientist doctor in the past, today he's a word mincing beurocrat.
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,

Right, not all, so how many then a lot, a little? you have to get more granular on this.







St Fauci first told us not to wear a mask, I thought that was nonsense, then he admitted he lied and we all had to wear masks, then he said that cloth masks worked, I thought that was nonsense based on the below peer reviewed study on the efficacy of cloth masks, several weeks ago suddenly we are being told to where 2 masks, which really was saying "wear an n95 under your cloth mask", this is also the guy who admitted he lied when asked about herd immunity requirements so fauci is not someone I take his word at face value.


https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27531371/


Fauci may have been a brilliant scientist doctor in the past, today he's a word mincing beurocrat.

I disagree with your characterization. It is a rather blatant attempt to discredit Dr Fauci in order to support ignoring his recommendations, which is what you want to do anyway.

Looks to me like you've got this all figured out to reach your forgone conclusion.

You don't appear to be the slightest bit concerned with others' lives. You just wish to make sure you are going to be OK to do it the way you want to.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could even find a doctor out there somewhere who would tell you what you want to hear if you shop around enough.

I should add that this didn't have to be all about you. You are the one who made it all about you. I would be just as happy having a conversation in the academic sense.
 
Hello Big Money Dolla,



I disagree with your characterization. It is a rather blatant attempt to discredit Dr Fauci in order to support ignoring his recommendations, which is what you want to do anyway.

Looks to me like you've got this all figured out to reach your forgone conclusion.

You don't appear to be the slightest bit concerned with others' lives. You just wish to make sure you are going to be OK to do it the way you want to.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could even find a doctor out there somewhere who would tell you what you want to hear if you shop around enough.

I should add that this didn't have to be all about you. You are the one who made it all about you. I would be just as happy having a conversation in the academic sense.



1. incorrect. did he or did he not do all those things regarding masks that I posted?

2. I reached my personal decision based on the plethora of peer reviewed scientific studies not by what some guy told me as you seem to have with yours.

3. That is a gross and unfair characterization and one that could only be uttered by one choosing to be ignorant..

4. I know several medical professionals who would say this, including the esteemed medical professional in the first article I posted as well as my wife who is a nurse practitioner, my personal physician as well, etc. I bet if you asked your doctor he would agree with me. see they tell you this crap not because its right, it's because they think you are stupid.

5. I don't mind, I have approached this from both a scientific and academic standpoint. I provided links to numerous peer reviewed studies and you have responded dismissing all of them without any counter other than "st fauci said". so the problem isnt I as an example but your lack of scientific and academic contribution.
 
Back
Top