Simon

Seriously hate to do this, but I'm not sure that the dog bit is anything really bad on Cruz' part.  He went on vacation (given the timing, that was _bad_)...and he had people keeping an active (supposedly 24hr) eye on his home...and taking care of his dog.  That's inline with what I normally do, except that the folks I have watch our dogs typically stay inside the house.
 
Not defending the "vacation" or Cruz (perish the thought), but I think the dog is the wrong angle of attack.
 
 

Seriously hate to do this, but I'm not sure that the dog bit is anything really bad on Cruz' part.  He went on vacation (given the timing, that was _bad_)...and he had people keeping an active (supposedly 24hr) eye on his home...and taking care of his dog.  That's inline with what I normally do, except that the folks I have watch our dogs typically stay inside the house.
 
Not defending the "vacation" or Cruz (perish the thought), but I think the dog is the wrong angle of attack.
 
 

Perseverance has touched down on Mars and is communicating.

Perseverance has touched down on Mars and is communicating.

Perseverance has touched down on Mars and is communicating.

Perseverance has touched down on Mars and is communicating.

Perseverance has touched down on Mars and is communicating.

Perseverance has touched down on Mars and is communicating.

Darkwing Duck will no longer be joining this conversation.

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

To quote the late, great Constitutional scholar, Trace Adkins:  "First Amendment?  The First Amendment protects you from the government, not from me."

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

Darkwing Duck will no longer be joining this conversation.

Darkwing Duck will no longer be joining this conversation.

Ok, this is just trolling and I'm out.

Darkwing Duck will no longer be joining this conversation.

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator' (snopes.com)

I'm going to go under the assumption that your initial question (and responses) are not disingenuous -- but be careful.
 
You are correct, we don't know how many would have died under Biden...hell, we don't know how many actually died under Trump because he managed to politicize a pandemic and usher in a post-truth era (the actual numbers are looking to be significantly higher).  What we do know is that the numbers under Biden would have been significantly less since there has been zero indication that he would have dismissed the pandemic...much to the contrary, he and Obama prepared for one. Any response would have been better than what we had and we had the potential to be world leaders in response (vs. leading the world in dismissing the pandemic as a "non-concern").
Those are not mutually exclusive factoids...and I would strongly encourage you not to post intentionally misleading graphics like that.

When you are dealing with a predecessor who implemented massive policy changes through executive order and dealing with an immediate massive humanitarian crisis (the pandemic, which we have bungled on an epic scale) executive orders are needed to both reverse prior policy shifts by Trump (not Congress) and to bring the immediate action required to start bringing the pandemic under some modicum of control.

Folks, keep current/real world politics to the Political Discussion thread, please.

Sorry, Dan. It wasn't my intention to discuss those matters here at all. The whole point of the thread was to provide an alternative.