Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Univision Poll Wants To Know: ‘Have You Died Because Of Coronavirus?’
The Federalist ^ | September 29, 2020 | Jordan Davidson

Posted on 09/29/2020 12:13:22 PM PDT by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last
To: Kaslin

Sorry that’s privileged information.....


41 posted on 09/29/2020 2:42:35 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Tax cuts is what got me.


42 posted on 09/29/2020 2:49:02 PM PDT by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I died once.
Nurse OD’d me with morphine.

So does that I’m immortal now?


43 posted on 09/29/2020 3:29:11 PM PDT by SantosLHalper (Eat some bacon.No, I got no idea if it'll make you feel better, I just made too much bacon.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Have you been playing Oregon Trail again?


44 posted on 09/29/2020 4:54:43 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (A Psalm in napalm...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I don’t see the problem.

If the dead can vote they can respond to surveys.


45 posted on 09/29/2020 5:06:52 PM PDT by zencycler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
“In 2016, Republicans blocked Obama from appointing a justice to the SCOTUS when Scalia died, saying in an election year the next president should pick. However, Trump and Republicans are planning to place a new justice on the Court now, before this election. With the additional Trump justice, the new Court could strike down DACA. If Trump replaces Ginsburg with a new justice in the next few weeks, will that make you more likely to support Trump or more likely to support Biden in the presidential election?” question three of the Supreme Court Supplement to the poll asked.

They should have framed it this way:

Conclusion. Conclusion. Conclusion, conclusion. Conclusion. Conclusion?

46 posted on 09/29/2020 5:24:55 PM PDT by Lazamataz (The NYT commits acts of violence with their words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

We have the card game.


47 posted on 09/29/2020 6:48:40 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("What we can see of God's canvas is laughably small." ~Bp. Barron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; All

ROFLLLLLL It goes to show that people lie in polls.

Off topic, kind of, but speaking of dying, I was watching Channel 6 this morning, and they said people who had COVID, and had a higher zinc level (63), did far better than COVID patients who had a low zinc level (43). I’ve been taking zinc supplements myself, and you can also get it in certain foods like shell fish, beef, many nuts, and more (if you want to look up more foods). Most of the patients with the higher level of zinc lived, according to this report.

Of course, like anything, too much zinc can cause side effects.


48 posted on 09/29/2020 8:31:28 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlo

Now this is where Trump unfairly gets attacked by being accused for not understanding nuance....Trump doesn’t want to see young folks who grew up in this nation but who are considered illegal aliens to be sent back. He wanted a legislative fix from first the Republicans and then the Dems. He was stuck with this memoranda which isn’t even a full EO and he was goin to end it but the courts said he had to treat it like it was a full law that could be stopped if he ran thru a number of hoops like all federal rules have to be before they can be ended.(it wasn’t a true EO so the courts decided to treat it like it was a “rule” under immigration policy that needed a full vetting or ‘unvetting” in this case before it could be ended. I think they were wrong but congress was also no help by not setting up a law to guide the president.) It’s a catch 22.


49 posted on 09/29/2020 9:58:56 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem

No, November 3!


50 posted on 10/01/2020 3:18:47 AM PDT by Biggirl ("One Lord, one faith, one baptism" - Ephesians 4:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem

No, November 3!


51 posted on 10/01/2020 3:27:57 AM PDT by Biggirl ("One Lord, one faith, one baptism" - Ephesians 4:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof
I told them I couldn’t guarantee this.

So, did you get the apartment, since you couldn’t guarantee that you would let them know if you died?

52 posted on 10/01/2020 3:29:00 AM PDT by Mark17 (USAF Retired. Father of a US Air Force commissioned officer, and trained Air Force combat pilot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mark17

Thankfully, it was a renewal and when I showed it to the manager, she shrugged and said she wouldn’t hold me to this and we lined it out of the contract. The next time, the clause wasn’t there anymore. You figure some lawyer got it added to try to protect their client but it was just so absurd as to cause ridicule.


53 posted on 10/01/2020 10:42:15 AM PDT by OrangeHoof (COVID infects the Democrat brain and makes them drunk with power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
"...but the courts said he had to treat it like it was a full law that could be stopped if he ran thru a number of hoops like all federal rules have to be before they can be ended.(it wasn’t a true EO so the courts decided to treat it like it was a “rule” under immigration policy that needed a full vetting or ‘unvetting” in this case before it could be ended. I think they were wrong but congress was also no help by not setting up a law to guide the president.) It’s a catch 22."

There's no Catch-22. Trump can at any time restart the process of rescinding DACA while complying with the Administrative Procedures Act. Congress is not needed. In fact he could have done so pre-emptively once the first lawsuit was filed and evaded the entire issue. For some reason he doesn't. I don't know why.

54 posted on 10/01/2020 12:01:12 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: mlo

He doesn’t because he doesn’t want to send a bunch of Mexican young adults who grew up in the US and while illegal, never had ties to Mexico. He can’t give them citizenship so they are stuck in limbo until a law can be passed. The optics are horrible if he does send them back and Trump is really not that mean of a guy. It needs a legislative fix and Trump has many battles on his plate!


55 posted on 10/01/2020 2:00:03 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
"He doesn’t because he doesn’t want to send a bunch of Mexican young adults who grew up in the US and while illegal, never had ties to Mexico. He can’t give them citizenship so they are stuck in limbo until a law can be passed. The optics are horrible if he does send them back and Trump is really not that mean of a guy. It needs a legislative fix and Trump has many battles on his plate!"

But he already attempted to rescind DACA. Are you suggesting he did so in bad faith, knowing it would fail in court?

56 posted on 10/01/2020 2:10:08 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: mlo

No. The DACA had expired and it was just a memoranda of rules not a true EO. It really has no force of law. Trump was trying to adhere to the expiration date and trying to get congress to make it into law. Ryan’s congress and Pelosi’s congress would not do it.

it’s a mess!


57 posted on 10/01/2020 2:48:44 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
It does have the force of law as it's still in effect. It doesn't matter what the precise form of DACA was. It wasn't a matter of dealing with an expiration date.

Trump issued an order to rescind DACA. He apparently really meant to end it. Yet when he was sued over the procedure, and even after fighting that case all the way to the Supreme Court and losing, he never bothered to correct the procedural question and move forward with rescinding DACA.

No court has said he can't, they simply said he has to follow procedure. Saying he didn't want to rescind DACA makes no sense, since he issued an order to do just that.

58 posted on 10/01/2020 2:57:05 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: mlo

He has said he wanted a legislative solution for the Dreamers...and hasn’t been able to get it.


59 posted on 10/01/2020 3:55:49 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
"He has said he wanted a legislative solution for the Dreamers...and hasn’t been able to get it."

Yes, I know. But that is a separate issue. He tried to rescind DACA once, but once the procedural issue arose he never tried to correct that, even after fighting for it all the way to the Supreme Court. It's something he can do any time. It's also the only leverage he has to get a legislative deal. So why doesn't he try to do it again in the way the court said he should? Doesn't that seem like a strange oversight?

60 posted on 10/01/2020 10:20:54 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson