Dems pressured the FDA to delay the COVID vaccine to hurt Trump

[probinson]

I'd be very curious to see a timeline of this alleged flipping, with sources included.

No you wouldn't.

I've provided multiple links for you to see for yourself what happened. If you wanted to see what happened, you would have looked at them.

 

[loveofourlord]

Do you remember just two years ago when Democrats were saying they would not trust a 'Trump Vaccine'? I do.

well duhh, given trumps desire for more of a publicity stunt then science, tehre was concern he would push it out before ready and fully tested, once it was tested and shown to be good the wories were gone, whats the trouble? Oh and trump did try a few times to get it out before ready.

 

[loveofourlord]

Having lived through it, it was the Democrats initially. Trump wanted to impose travel restrictions in the earliest days of Covid and Nancy Pelosi called him a racist for wanting to slow the initial spread of the disease. It's been political ever since, and both sides have played. Covid was used politically to defeat Trump, whether you like that result or not.

yes he was racist for chosing only china, at a point it had already left the country, and the racist part was also attacking her for going to CHINA TOWN.

 

[probinson]

well duhh, given trumps desire for more of a publicity stunt then science, tehre was concern he would push it out before ready and fully tested, once it was tested and shown to be good the wories were gone, whats the trouble? Oh and trump did try a few times to get it out before ready.

This concern still exists today with Biden. The Biden administration has proven that they are more interested in being able to say they have boosters than they are in understanding if they provide any additional clinical benefit. Consider the new bivalent boosters, tested in eight mice, and then "recommended" for everyone over the age of 12, despite no data showing they will confer any additional benefit.

To understand just how much the Biden administration rushed boosters, check out this article that details the timeline. It's also worth noting that this rushing of booster approval resulted in the top two vaccine regulators at the FDA resigning in protest;

Boosters for Men 16-40: A Regulatory Gamble

 

[Vylo]

Then why did they flip while Trump was still in charge?

What you're saying is not logical. If the vaccine could not be trusted on November 8, then there's no reason it should have been trusted on November 9. The only thing that changed was that they knew Biden would be in office in January.

I didn't see such a flip, at least in the people I knew.

 

[probinson]

I didn't see such a flip, at least in the people I knew.

Do you know any of the people listed in the long list of links I posted? I mean, I know they're very obscure democrats. I mean who has actually heard of;

• Joe Biden
• Symone Sanders
• Kamala Harris
• Ron Klain
• Andrew Cuomo
• Jay Inslee
• Ilhan Omar
• Sheldon Whitehouse
• Richard Blumenthal
• Patty Murray
• Tina Smith
• Katie Hill
• Cal Cunningham

Now granted, some of the democrats on this list are more obscure than others, but there were plenty of high profile democrats on this list that you "knew" that did nothing but sow doubt and skepticism about the vaccines right up until it was confirmed that Biden had won the election, and then amazingly, not one of them EVER expressed any doubt and skepticism again, despite having nothing to go on but a press release from Pfizer. The suddenly and conveniently forgot all about all of their concerns and statements about independent verification, and overnight went from being vaccine skeptics to vaccine zealots.

If you "didn't see such a flip", you just weren't paying attention.

 

[KCfromNC]

No you wouldn't.

I've provided multiple links for you to see for yourself what happened. If you wanted to see what happened, you would have looked at them.

Might want to try a different excuse - there were zero links in the post I quoted.

 

[probinson]

Might want to try a different excuse - there were zero links in the post I quoted.

I've posted the list of links TWICE in this thread. Might want to pay attention to the whole discussion...

 

[KCfromNC]

Do you know any of the people listed in the long list of links I posted? I mean, I know they're very obscure democrats. I mean who has actually heard of;

• Joe Biden
• Symone Sanders
• Kamala Harris
• Ron Klain
• Andrew Cuomo
• Jay Inslee
• Ilhan Omar
• Sheldon Whitehouse
• Richard Blumenthal
• Patty Murray
• Tina Smith
• Katie Hill
• Cal Cunningham

Now granted, some of the democrats on this list are more obscure than others, but there were plenty of high profile democrats on this list that you "knew" that did nothing but sow doubt and skepticism about the vaccines right up until it was confirmed that Biden had won the election, and then amazingly, not one of them EVER expressed any doubt and skepticism again, despite having nothing to go on but a press release from Pfizer. The suddenly and conveniently forgot all about all of their concerns and statements about independent verification, and overnight went from being vaccine skeptics to vaccine zealots.

If you "didn't see such a flip", you just weren't paying attention.

Or "you" don't think that a list of names followed by assertions is particularly convincing.

 

[KCfromNC]

I've posted the list of links TWICE in this thread. Might want to pay attention to the whole discussion...

Was that the one with the quotes like the vaccine should go through trials before we assume it is safe, and then after it did that they had more confidence in it? I had hoped there was some actual evidence of some kind of flipping based on political nonsense rather than something as benign as waiting for trials to finish before making up their minds.

 

[probinson]

Was that the one with the quotes like the vaccine should go through trials before we assume it is safe, and then after it did that they had more confidence in it? I had hoped there was some actual evidence of some kind of flipping based on political nonsense rather than something as benign as waiting for trials to finish before making up their minds.

Oh my goodness. These democrats said they needed someone other than "this FDA or CDC" to look at the data and evidence before they'd trust it, and then as soon as Biden was confirmed as the winner of the election, all of those concerns went right out the window. It was the same FDA, the same CDC, and even though democrats had spend months questioning the vaccine, the FDA and the CDC, now that their guy was in office, they simply did not care any more. This is plain for everyone to see.

All of the caution they advised completely vanished the moment Pfizer put out a press release 2 days after Biden was officially named the next President of the United States. Now you can pretend like that isn't "political nonsense", but it's not very compelling.

 

[The Barbarian]

NY Post is a pretty unreliable source.

And Democrats had no special power over the FDA.

You're messing up another perfectly good conspiracy theory by resorting to facts. Looking at the conspiracy buffs denouncing the vaccine, I don't see many democrats. Trump admitted that he knew the pandemic was going to be bad, but lied about how bad it was to "avoid panic."

So he told us that it was controlled and was going to "go away like magic." And over a million Americans died, many of them because they trusted him.

The one thing Trump did right about all of this, was to encourage the vaccine. And he was with the democrats on the need to speed up the process. Can't blame him on that.

 

[The Barbarian]

Oh my goodness. These democrats said they needed someone other than "this FDA or CDC" to look at the data and evidence before they'd trust it

Sounds interesting. Would have been more believable if you had some checkable sources. And explain to us how a skeptical democrat kept Trump's people from doing the right thing.

 

[rambot]

COVID 19 and the response to it. There are criticisms everywhere. But does the quality of a criticism count? Well, to me it does. When I see implications instead of stated facts, I'm far less inclined to listen to or believe what is being presented. And so I present:
A tale of two threads.

1) This thread where the critique provide an opinion piece with about the LEAST convincing title you could muster ("It seems clear..."....really? THAT's news?) An article with implications and insinuations and not too much substance.

2) A thread about political pressure from the WH. SEVERAL articles, heavily cited. Quotes from people who were present there. Generally, a decent amount of support behind the title of a rather condemning piece.

Political infighting contributed to subpar pandemic response, officials tell House committee

Former CDC director Robert Redfield, former top deputy Anne Schuchat and others described how the Trump White House and its allies repeatedly “bullied” staff, tried to rewrite their publications and threatened their jobs in an attempt to align the CDC with the more optimistic view of the pandemic espoused by Donald Trump, the House select subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis concluded in a report released Monday.

Several public health officials detailed a months-long campaign against Schuchat sparked by Trump appointees’ belief that her grimassessments of the pandemic reflected poorly on the president, leading Schuchat, a 32-year CDC veteran, to openly wonder if she would be fired in the summer of 2020, her colleagues told the panel.

The report also details how Trump appointees at the Department of Health and Human Services worked to wrest control of the agency’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports (MMWRs), which offer public updates on scientists’ findings and had been considered off-limits to political appointees for decades.

...

But Alexander’s messages [calling to change reports] continued until mid-September 2020, when his emails leaked to the press and Caputo subsequently accused CDC scientists of sedition in a Facebook Live video. Caputo took a medical leave on Sept. 16, and Alexander left the agency the same day.

see also:
FOIA results, Congressional probe show Trump appointees pressuring health experts regarding pandemic
GAO to Investigate Trump's Political Interference with CDC and FDA
Trump trashes CDC's fact-based guidance on reopening schools; CDC will rewrite them (or will it?)
CDC reports altered
Trump Admin may enact 'term limits' for scientists at FDA, CDC
CDC changed COVID-19 testing guidance due to pressure from Trump Administration

Does the quality of an argument matter or is it important just to make one?