Why Catholics Should Vote for Trump article

  • Thread starter Thread starter Limoncello4021
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peeps said:
Even the young, liberal, I-phone addicted Biden/Harris supporters in our lab have been saying that most people who are “dying of COVID” are not REALLY dying of COVID.
Click to expand...
Hospitals did not get overloaded because people who were gonna die anyway just died and coincidentally had Covid. No - covid produces an “excess” of deaths. In the US, that excess is quite a bit larger than in most other developed countries. The predominance of deaths among the elderly, those in nursing homes and those with comorbidities is common around the world.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
So, New York got it under control. But states like Florida and Georgia (with Republican governors) just refuse to learn:
Click to expand...
NY did not get it under control. It ran its course as you can see.
Click to expand...
No, most New Yorker’s never got infected. It did not “run its course”.
 
TC3033 said:
Can you link the study?
Click to expand...

Heterogeneity and herd immunity​

In response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), some politicians have been keen to exploit the idea of achieving herd immunity. Countering this possibility are estimates derived from work on historical vaccination studies, which suggest that herd immunity may only be achieved at an unacceptable cost of lives. Because human populations are far from homogeneous, Britton et al. show that by introducing age and activity heterogeneities into population models for SARS-CoV-2, herd immunity can be achieved at a population-wide infection rate of ∼40%, considerably lower than previous estimates. This shift is because transmission and immunity are concentrated among the most active members of a population, who are often younger and less vulnerable. If nonpharmaceutical interventions are very strict, no herd immunity is achieved, and infections will then resurge if they are eased too quickly.

 
Last edited:
Fr. Frank Pavone

@frfrankpavone](https://twitter.com/frfrankpavone)
6h

The dumbest apologists for the #Democrat agenda are the #Catholic ones, thinking they can shamelessly dupe voters as they use flowery religious language & make the stupid argument that #DEMS allowing baby killing really isn’t that bad because, after all, Trump is “offensive”
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
This is old news . This policy lasted only 2 weeks. Then they learned and now they are a model for the nation.
Click to expand...
The policy was in place for 26 days before Cuomo was asked about it and acted like he knew nothing about it.

The policy then remained on the website until May 10, when new guidance was finally issued.

Over 6 weeks after the policy was issued; over 2 weeks after Cuomo was first asked about it.
 
Last edited:
Peeps said:
There has never been a “perfect” candidate for any elected office in this country–all men and women have flaws and besetting sins, and all the Parties have flaws and and promote platforms with potentially evil outcomes.
Click to expand...
I’m not asking for a ‘perfect’ candidate. I’m asking for candidates that actually seem like they’d be good for the job, where I’d simply be comparing their qualifications, their personality to handle the job position and be asked to look at their strategy for solving problems, comparing the different strategies and deciding which one I feel would be most effective at solving a specific problem.

Instead, both sides insist that I view the other side as evil incarnate. They give arguments over how the other side is violating the basic rights of human individuals . . . and they’re not wrong. Both sides do terrible immoral things. So I end up being told I just need to prioritize which evils are more important to fight against than other evils.

And then, what’s worse, is people start polarizing and ostracizing you for politically disagreeing. They start trying to make your vote an extension of their vote. Because it’s somehow our job to work together to fight the monster that the other side has created.

I’m sorry, but if you think that this is about looking for the perfect candidate, you’ve got a very romantic view of your political party.
 
twoangels said:
I’m not asking for a ‘perfect’ candidate. I’m asking for candidates that actually seem like they’d be good for the job, where I’d simply be comparing their qualifications, their personality to handle the job position and be asked to look at their strategy for solving problems, comparing the different strategies and deciding which one I feel would be most effective at solving a specific problem.
Click to expand...
Here is what I want - a person who votes the way I elected them to.
 
buffalo said:
Here is what I want - a person who votes the way I elected them to.
Click to expand...
So you are saying you want someone who will keep their campaign promises.

Great idea, however since on the national level that person is one of 536 people who get to make decision and decide what happens, it is much more important for someone to be able to actually work with the other 535 people in Washington to get something done. If not, they might as well stay home and bang their head against the wall.
 
Some perspective

Deaths in USA

2014 - 2,626,418
2105 - 2,712,630
2016 - 2,744,248
2017 - 2,813,503
2018 - 2,839,205

2020 - total for 8 months 1,818,702

Projected for 2020 - 2,743,053
 
farronwolf said:
So you are saying you want someone who will keep their campaign promises.

Great idea, however since on the national level that person is one of 536 people who get to make decision and decide what happens, it is much more important for someone to be able to actually work with the other 535 people in Washington to get something done. If not, they might as well stay home and bang their head against the wall.
Click to expand...
Contrast this with those 535 deciding what they think is best for us based on a whole bunch of factors unrelated to what I sent them there to do.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
twoangels:
I’m not asking for a ‘perfect’ candidate. I’m asking for candidates that actually seem like they’d be good for the job, where I’d simply be comparing their qualifications, their personality to handle the job position and be asked to look at their strategy for solving problems, comparing the different strategies and deciding which one I feel would be most effective at solving a specific problem.
Click to expand...
Here is what I want - a person who votes the way I elected them to.
Click to expand...
Right. And what happens when thousands of other people who also elected them want them to vote differently from you?

And what about the people who didn’t vote for them at all , who they also need to represent the interests of because their job is to work for all the people of their electorates?
 
Last edited:
LilyM said:
Right. And what happens when thousands of other people who also elected them want them to vote differently from you?

And what about the people who didn’t vote for them at all , who they also need to represent the interests of because their job is to work for all the people of their electorates?
Click to expand...
Why on earth would they cast a vote for him if they didn’t agree with his promise?

That means the lowest common denominator?
 
buffalo said:
Here is what I want - a person who votes the way I elected them to.
Click to expand...
I agree for Representatives and Senators, and of course, the VP when there is need for him/her to break a tie in the Senage.

But the Prez. doesn’t get a “vote” on legislation. So I’m not sure how your criteria would apply to presidential candidates, unless you tabulate how many of their campaign promises were kept.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top