Debate night again
Pinning one's expectations on poll numbers is a recipe for a daily headdesk, so I'm glad I've already made my decision on this point, though it's little bother to me that more recent polls have showed closer numbers than usual. However, I disagree about the use of "complacency" in relation to lessening the importance of polls. I've found that it's about whether or not these polls are worthwhile information to support a decision, considering they've reported every result possible, it seems, between a landslide and a tight race. There's always more to see than just these numbers.
What I've seen recently is an older man who got sick, got better, and got back to campaigning. I'll allow that he has better healthcare than most, but I'll also see it as proof that, despite the risks, one can survive this disease. My masks are in the laundry for my next outing, but it's news on medications (good news breaking!) and lifting lockdowns that reassure me more about making that next outing.
I also see a contrast between two adult children working with their parents. One set of family members is considerably more visible about their work together. Another is not. (Seriously, first I'd ever heard of the guy was the investigation on him.)
These articles display a bit more information on the hole in the challenger's tax plan. This article sounds rather supportive of that plan, but the information within is from the challenger's own site and a media outlet that supports him. This one is considerably more skeptical, with information from a businessman and a news outlet that don't support the challenger. I was surprised to find coverage on this topic from an outlet I didn't expect to cover it, but it's where I found one prominent voice expressing reservations on the challenger's tax plan. If this is true, how many more voices can one expect in addition to wanna-keep-that-30?
Expecting objectivity in this situation is an idea on the same level as relying on polls for certainty. Is the challenger among those who find an idea is (not was) worth fighting for, considering he's running for the top seat of that idea?
From what I see of 'corruption standard' being acknowledged as "corruption light," perhaps it's time to re-evaluate some choices before heading further down a slippery slope. Then again, maybe mounting a defense against accusations based on limited information is taking up the bandwidth required to make that sort of decision.
Who's fearmongering now?
Are the folk who took seriously the advice on injecting bleach the same folk who ate soap?
Nice try - there's been enough coverage on whose obstinacy showed on those bills.
Doesn't directly address school shutdowns, that answer.
What, are there loans for small businesses to add protective measures? (OK, that answered it.)
Panic? Two words - toilet paper.
Hasn't the head of that regime already mentioned how many values he shares with your party, challenger?
More than a single penny, then?
Less brawly, this.
Like you wouldn't game the system either if you could benefit through legal means? (Wouldn't? Haven't?) Come on.
This only mentions a connection to who "the big guy" is, nothing definite about funds.
There's at least one other country hit by the dumped steel issue as well, I think.
Speaking of hometowns...
I wonder if that old internet rule still applies about he who mentions 1940's Germany first.
No, he's running against your veep.
Plagiarism, bribery, nepotism.
Sounds like there are people getting sick of this export.
Plagiarism, bribery, nepotism. (Was that repetitive?)
No comments, no chyrons. Until next.