I don't think it's that hard to spin it to be less offensive.

Plus, we all know Trump wouldn't lower himself to appeal to white anxiety.

Yeah, I agree. Trump is an unpopular incumbent and in a pretty precarious situation. He's vulnerable and pretty much every one of the major Democratic primary candidates has a fair chance at taking him down if he/she runs a smooth campaign.

Nonethless, I think that Biden or Klobuchar would stand a much better chance against Trump than Harris or Warren. The topics Harris if focusing on play into Trump's hands, while the main focus of Biden/Klobuchar, but also Sanders, would not. Not quite sure yet what to make of Beto, the guy is pure optics with no substance whatsoever behind it. Cory "Spartacus" Booker might also be a strong candidate, even though he's not getting as much buzz atm. Gillibrand's campaign gaining no traction so far, I think she's already done.

So... if I had to put numbers to it, I'd say that if all macro variables (economy, foreign policy, natural disasters) remain calm and stay where they stand now, and factoring in how I assume the general election campaign to play out, then Biden would be an 80/20 favorite against Trump, Klobuchar a 70/30 favorite, Booker and Sanders would be 55/45, Beto 45/55, Harris would be 40/60, Warren and Gillibrand would be 30/70.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 22 2019 10:43am

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/hoyer-delivers-strong-defense-of-us-israel-alliance-in-veiled-rebuke-of-rep-omar/2019/03/24/1757d8aa-4e75-11e9-8d28-f5149e5a2fda_story.html

“I stand with Israel, proudly and unapologetically. So, when someone accuses American supporters of Israel of dual loyalty, I say: Accuse me. I am part of a large, bipartisan coalition in Congress supporting Israel. I tell Israel’s detractors: Accuse us,” Hoyer said at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual conference at Washington’s Convention Center.

J'accuse.

"Self harm" vs "Creating mutations among bacteria that make them next to impossible to cure" is a thing.

You realize that suicide isn't illegal, right? It's merely life insurance fraud that is illegal. It's ATTEMPTING suicide that's illegal, and that's primarily due to the cost to rehabilitate you.

You want to harm yourself? Go ahead. Nobody cares. Everyone does their own thing. They don't give a fuck about you.

Now, zap yourself with 20 doses of antibiotics a year, end up with a set of bacteria that your immune system views as a cold, sneeze in somebody else's face, and give them a respiratory infection that is untreatable by any means, and they die, who's at fault?

Let's take it a step further. Back in the day, a cow or chicken or sheep was only given antibiotics to treat actual illness. Now, they're batch fed antibiotics on a schedule. Most waterways, according to the CDC, are polluted with antibiotics that are expelled in the waste of these animals. Our filtration systems aren't designed to filter out antibiotics.

Wait, this is an ACTUAL environmental issue I'm referring to here. I'd better stop. Your view of me being some far right conservative might be damaged.

[/post]

A world with lots of antibiotic resistant bacteria is basically a return to preantibiotic days, not a world where antibiotic reisstant superbugs wipe out half the population.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Mar 25 2019 07:04pm

The great plagues of history occurred during "pre-antibiotic days". Discounting AIDS, there are still in the arena of 300-400 million dead from the great Pandemics, all of which can be treated by simple antibiotics.

Antibiotics are a fucking miracle drug that save more lives per year than literally ANYTHING else mankind has created. Why the ever loving fuck would you support a return to "preantibiotic days"? Are you high?

THIS is why antibiotics should be regulated. Full stop.

I've never taken the position they shouldn't be regulated.

I've taken the position that it's ridiculous to think antibiotics should be regulated but opiates shouldn't be.

You're basically just ignoring the effects of opiates and hyping up the effects of antibiotics.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Mar 25 2019 08:24pm

Wait, what impact does Opiates have where hundreds of millions die from a single pandemic? What effect do opiates have where one person overusing them will potentially make millions of other people die due to their overuse?

False equivalency, mate. And again, why would you seek to outlaw "self-harm"? Regulate it to the point where actions in public (like driving) can be criminal, prevent children from the [unprescribed] use, otherwise, make it safe, legal, and cheap, and you empower people to make their own decisions, and disempower criminals from pushing something harmful on those who're the most vulnerable.

And I'd add that just like with Cigarettes and Pot, no TV or radio advertisements. Let's not normalize opiates or meth or anything else. Just have it as something that is as safe as it can be made to be, legal and obtainable, but not glorified.

Were in a different world than when we had pandemics. Were beyond the point that a single disease is going to wipe out such large swaths of the population. Pandemics come from animal transmission to humans and improved sanitation and food standards have nearly eliminated that risk.

Still, viral infections (spanish flu, smallpox, etc) are far more contagious and dont give a damn about antibiotics so your "we might have a pandemic" argument falls flat.

The truth is that a world without antibiotics is a world where pneumonia becomes more deadly, and opportunistic infections become worse, but to the laymen who wont experience that until old age the world is fairly unchanged.

As for opiates if you think addiction is only a problem of self harm I advise you to do some research because your deficit of knowledge is large enough that a conversation is fairly pointless.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Mar 25 2019 10:11pm