Q: How could they possibly achieve that?
A: By convincing MAGA that the experimental vaccines are his fault.
Don’t fall for it, patriots.
President Trump did what he had to do re: vaccines. He provided a way out of indefinite lockdowns. The other option was much worse.
I would highly encourage you to watch this 25 minute video from Kyle. Amazing breakdown.
(TheStormHasArrived17)
This movement, at least for many of us, has never had anything to do with Trump. I will support him as long as supporting him is the best path to defeat the enemy. And at this point, there is nobody better equipped to stand up and defeat the deep state.
To me, Trump's support of the vaccines was wrong and he will never get a pass on that. We have been over this so many times on this forum. Trump's unwavering, solid encouragement to get jabbed can not be brushed aside like he had no other choice. We all agree he had no choice other than to produce the jab. There is no point in repeating that again, and it is also not relevant to this discussion.
What is relevant is that he had many, many choices on how he opted to promote the jab. He is a great speaker, intelligent, and with excellent speech writers. There are lots of ways he could have sounded positive while still giving people pause to consider the dangers of an experimental medical procedure. That is the key thing that needs a serious, detailed explanation in a criminal trial. Like it or not, he was responsible for deaths. You can play blame the victim all day long, but I have friends and family who were naive enough to believe him and thought I must be some extremist anti-vaaxer. Trump is not innocent.
All of that said, the only people who think that MAGA can be destroyed by blaming Trump for the vaccines are those that truly don't understand the nature of this movement. His image isn't so lily white that people will run for the hills if it is tarnished.
Trump explained that he made a mistake by saying he wanted a wall. If he had said he absolutely, positively did NOT want a wall, the Democrats would have built the wall for him. He literally states this in speeches, and everyone laughs and assumes it’s a silly joke, but what if he means it? What if the wall showed him that when he comes out strong for a position, it drives the left and the media and thus the centrists further into an anti-Trump position? And what if he actually changed his strategy because of it?
Look at HCQ as a way for him to float this idea. You know what would be easier for Trump (not a scientist) to do than get the entire world to turn on the vaccine industry and medical establishment? Getting people to accept a pill that’s been around over 50+ years, is basically inert, with no serious side effects, that can even be bought over the counter in many countries AND cures Covid, this ending the lockdowns and the pandemic.
Well, how did that turn out?
The Lancet forged a peer-reviewed study to get it banned and pulled off the shelves. Doctors who prescribed it lost their medical license. Talking heads on TV yelled at people that they would die if they tried it. People on the left AND the right told him to shut up and trust the experts. Social media was censored. The drug became HARDER to acquire, not easier.
Now apply this to Trump telling people the vax is poison and the medical establishment is running a genocide/depopulation agenda. You think that ACTUALLY improves our position in any way? And if so, how? Great - Trump told us what we already know. Now what? Now vax mandates and vax passports and eight boosters and lockdowns and variants have just been WILDLY re-energized and re-popularized by Trump’s claim.
But I guess for some people, that was the move. Make it more difficult for us, but Trump gets to look “more clean”. What a patriotic move that would have been!
You are missing the entire point (or I haven't understood anything of what you are saying.) Trump told everyone this was a safe and effective vaccine and he recommended everyone should get it. We agree he needed to produce it for all the reasons you mentioned. The Lancet, HCQ, etc. All of that is not relevant.
NOTHING explains why he promoted it as absolutely safe and effective, rather than some less extreme position that just might have encouraged people to think for themselves. Everything you say could just as easily have been accomplished without Trump shilling and cheerleading for people to walk into a minefield. Yes. He needed to create the minefield. He could have said absolutely nothing and just allowed people to wander into it at their own discretion. But Trump decided he needed to push people into the minefield to kill even more. Why?
That is the issue under discussion.
I think you're missing the point. *Whu flu was a way to control *Communist lockdowns done in the name of national safety was the goal(you have no choice) *A "vaccine" was going to be put into to play regardless(you choose) but after lockdowns and just as deadly.
I don't think I'm missing the point, if the point is what you say here. I'm granting you all of this and even agreeing with you. However, that is irrelevant. The creation of the vaccine is not the problem. We all agree that was necessary and for all the reasons you just mentioned.
The consideration here though, is whether Trump really needed to add to the mounting death toll by not just creating and approving the vaccine but actively shilling for it, reassuring people it was totally safe and effective. Trump's words were not those of someone doing something morally ambiguous out of necessity.
He didn't need to work to maximize the death toll in order to accomplish all the things you state above. Why did he?