The real source of 'vaccine hesitancy', it wasn't Republicans.
To say she (and other Democrats) is the source is disingenuous at best.
Anyone hesitant about it is unlikely a devotee of Harris.
The real source of 'vaccine hesitancy', it wasn't Republicans.
Piling on....This is the main point that people struggle with mentally. Go ahead and flip that switch! Everything will make a lot more sense once you do. I know it's tough believing that TPTB are trying to destroy everything, take away your freedoms, develop more systems for individual control, and really don't care about you and actually want to take you out! Tons of evidence for this and a lot of it in writing.When are we gonna learn.....this has NOTHING....NADA to do with vaccines and helping people! It has everything to do with control and destroy this great nation; in the name of science - using the alleged pandemic.
It is becoming more apparent every day.
"Now get vaxxed"?Thanks for your service, heroes, now get ****ed.
Sorry, you can't defend your fellow democrats on this one, own it.To say she (and other Democrats) is the source is disingenuous at best.
Anyone hesitant about it is unlikely a devotee of Harris.
Fellow Democrats? Who do you think you're talking too?Sorry, you can't defend your fellow democrats on this one, own it.
If you're not a democrat then quit acting like one and defending everything they do, just because you might be slightly right of Alpo doesn't make you a conservative. Democrats absolutely did create the initial vaccine hesitancy with their political nonsense. Then once they won the election the vaccine was the best thing ever and they doubled down on it to the extreme. They are still responsible for any hesitancy through their poor messaging, flip-flopping, and draconian policies.Fellow Democrats? Who do you think you're talking too?
In the last twenty years of voting in every election, I only can recall voting for one Democrat.
And I'm not defending her, I'm pointing out a logical fallacy.
My point is that anyone hesitant can't say, "Kamala is the reason I'm not taking the vaccine". Is she the reason you're hesitant (making an assumption here)? If not, then she's not the source.
I thought is conservatives were suppose to be the logical ones.
These ideas that, "it's about control" have less basis in reality than the ideas that, "it's systematic racism".When are we gonna learn.....this has NOTHING....NADA to do with vaccines and helping people! It has everything to do with control and destroy this great nation; in the name of science - using the alleged pandemic.
It is becoming more apparent every day.
Right. It didn't illustrate hesitancy. It illustrated hypocrisy. Trump pushes it "No way we'll take it!" Biden pushes the exact same vaccine, "Everyone should take it!"To say she (and other Democrats) is the source is disingenuous at best.
Anyone hesitant about it is unlikely a devotee of Harris.
If you're not a democrat then quit acting like one and defending everything they do, just because you might be slightly right of Alpo doesn't make you a conservative.
I'll agree with that.Democrats absolutely did create the initial vaccine hesitancy with their political nonsense. Then once they won the election the vaccine was the best thing ever and they doubled down on it to the extreme. They are still responsible for any hesitancy through their poor messaging, flip-flopping, and draconian policies.
See, when you say things like this, it kind of proves your detractors' point. There is absolutely no proof of systemic racism; it is an absolute provable falsehood. There is, however, a body of evidence that the coercive nature of covid policy is as much as, or more about control than they are about health. This has been hashed an rehashed; dismissing it doesn't make it untrue.These ideas that, "it's about control" have less basis in reality than the ideas that, "it's systematic racism".
Any time it's mentioned the answer is always, "just open your eyes fit the proof." and " if you don't see it, then I can't tell you."
It's all just conjecture that clouds judgement.
People do weird things when confronted with the unexpected.
One of those things is to repeat a motion that the body has frequently performed.
that’s like the most common objections i heard to trump - his personality, his brusqueness, his mean tweets.
i don’t care about that! i don’t need to be friends with the guy, i want a tough guy in charge. not unlike how a father needs to be the tough parent at home.
i’ll never forget an eye-opening moment when bill clinton was running for president and there was some “man in the street” interview on the news with a young dip**** about my age who said how he was voting for clinton because he seemed like a cool guy you could have a beer with. what the ****? that’s how to determine who’s best for the job? he shouldn’t even having beers with ANYbody. you know who else was cool to have a beer with? my uncle eddie. cool as hell, but that loser couldn’t manage his way out of a paper bag.
unfortunately we’ve lost a considerable amount of testosterone in this country, and popular decisions requiring logic are more likely these days to be made with those estrogen-driven emotions and you get what we’ve got. couple that with (at least) two generations of coddled kids raised to believe they’re special and the center of the universe and therefore can’t admit error, and it’s no surprise the social FUBAR situation we’re in.
/rant off
Completely agree. I had no problem at all with Trump tweeting stuff people didn't like. He put America first and wasn't afraid to make that center stage with everything he did.
I hear you on the Clinton thing. I hated how many young people were so enamored of him due to his Mtv interview when they asked him hard hitting questions like boxers or briefs and he played the sax...
You're making my point.See, when you say things like this, it kind of proves your detractors' point. There is absolutely no proof of systemic racism; it is an absolute provable falsehood. There is, however, a body of evidence that the coercive nature of covid policy is as much as, or more about control than they are about health. This has been hashed an rehashed; dismissing it doesn't make it untrue.
I think you are making his point...You're making my point.
Oh, he has no room in my head. I only need to signon to INGO to find the acolytes.How much are you charging for rent? You must be making a fortune with him in your head all the time. It’s over. The bad orange man is out. You can let him go.
Sorry to correct you, but their message is "Everyone WILL take it...or else!""Everyone should take it!"
I guess I’m one of those because I don’t loathe him.Oh, he has no room in my head. I only need to signon to INGO to find the acolytes.
This is verging on straw-manish. The dissension is not over a wish to force doctors to prescribe Ivermectin against their will, it is over people having a prescription allowing them to use it and not being allowed to do so by the institution they are hospitalized within. The hospital is asserting primacy without any evidence of superior kniowledge, as well as more than a faint whiff of politics in the processI don’t see the issue with doctor-prescribed Ivermectin. Maybe it works, and maybe it doesn’t. The only part I disagree with is people saying “so-and-so took it and survived Covid,” which is meant to imply the IM worked. I’ve seen it repeated here on INGO numerous times that this virus has a 99%+ survival rate. As I’ve joked before, if 100 people eat green Skittles everyday and 99 of them survive Covid, because they would have anyway, does that mean it was the Skittles? By the same argument, I understand why doctors are hesitant to be forced to prescribe something they might think is equally silly. The line between your rights as a patient and the doctor’s right not to be forced to do something they think is wrong seems a rather fine one.
If the person is standing on death’s doorstep, I’d give it a shot if I were a doctor. But, I understand both sides of this debate. Maybe a large-scale study showing some sort of benefit might tip the scales toward patient rights.