this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
275 points (94.5% liked)

politics

19121 readers
5299 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A Biden administration that vowed to restore Americans’ faith in public health has grown increasingly paralyzed over how to combat the resurgence in vaccine skepticism.

And internally, aides and advisers concede there is no comprehensive plan for countering a movement that’s steadily expanded its influence on the president’s watch.

The rising appeal of anti-vaccine activism has been underscored by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s insurgent presidential campaign and fueled by prominent factions of the GOP. The mainstreaming of a once-fringe movement has horrified federal health officials, who blame it for seeding dangerous conspiracy theories and bolstering a Covid-era backlash to the nation’s broader public health practices.

But as President Joe Biden ramps up a reelection campaign centered on his vision for a post-pandemic America, there’s little interest among his aides in courting a high-profile vaccine fight — and even less certainty of how to win.

“There’s a real challenge here,” said one senior official who’s worked on the Covid response and was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “But they keep just hoping it’ll go away.”

The White House’s reticence is compounded by legal and practical concerns that have cut off key avenues for repelling the anti-vaccine movement, according to interviews with eight current and former administration officials and others close to the process.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 79 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

There’s a pragmatic solution here:

1). Make vaccines free. The government pays.

2). Require vaccines for participation in publicly funded social programs. Schools. Social Security. Etc.

3). Allow doctor authorized health waivers to number 2.

4). Wait.

Most people will get the free vaccines either because they’re reasonable people, because the vaccines are free, or because they want government services. Those that don’t will die earlier. Eventually even stupid people will notice or they’ll be dead.

[–] CobblerScholar 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We are creatures of convenience, the way to make people do anything is by making it easier to comply than not to comply.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I got my first COVID vaccine and the booster at a drive-through clinic. My favorite part was the vibe there. We could finally do something to fight to get things back to normal and everybody was stoked.

[–] 0110010001100010 11 points 1 year ago

Same, it was super chill. People were awesome and I never left my car.

[–] RBWells 3 points 1 year ago

We did too and I remember thinking a drive through shooting was about the most American thing ever.

[–] joekar1990 26 points 1 year ago

1, 2, & 3 have already been going on for a long time with public schools (immunization records) for the most part. The determined anti vax parents will just find a Dr who will sign a waiver for their child so they don't need to be vaccinated.

The problem is so much of anti vax today people will hunker down on their opinion of antivax no matter the truth or information presented to them. It's the same reason people are supporting trump so much still bc they think it "triggers" the opposition so much.

I'm not sure if there is a way to turn things around especially when you have multiple prominent media members questioning vaccines that is constantly being parroted.

At this point anything tried they'll cry about information being suppressed or why is the government trying so hard to do this must mean bad things.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

If enough people don't get the vaccine then a lot more then non vaccinated people will die.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Eventually even stupid people will notice or they’ll be dead.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention to this whole COVID deal? And to the other comments point you need to meet a threshold in the population for a vaccine to do what's intended.

[–] Nurse_Robot 6 points 1 year ago

Tbf, the majority of deaths were in red counties with far higher rates of antivaxers. The stupid people are dying at higher rates, but it's infuriating that they're taking smart people who are vaccine ineligible with them.

[–] LavaPlanet 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And regulate misinformation and disinformation, make social media culpable, they'll quickly change their tune if $ are at stake. The current model wants engagement, and click bait misinformation does wonders for that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Skip the fines entirely and introduce criminal charges for executives of platforms that host anti-vaxx content. Have a complaint about the contents or safety of a vaccine? Feel free to submit your study to a peer-reviewed journal, or shut the fuck up.

[–] utopianfiat 4 points 1 year ago

The antivax base are billionaires though, who can afford to fund their poorer devotees through the worst of their government service martyrdom

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Think about the optics though: if the vaccines are free, WHY are they free?
The answer that group will give: Bill Gates is subsidizing his microchips so we will all be infected with them.

[–] themeatbridge 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's no reasoning with anti-vaxxers, though. So why worry about how it looks to crazy people?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because we’re trying to specifically reach those crazy people who reject even the mention of vaccines in a beneficial light. Everyone else is, for the most part, already vaccinated.

[–] themeatbridge 1 points 1 year ago

We should not reach those people, we should mock them. Demoralize them. Make them ashamed of their stupidity. You can't reason with a crazy person, and attempts to do so legitimize their brand of crazy. They are too dangerous to be ignored, and too far gone to be patient with.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

This is not an optics play, it's a power play. When mandates were first issued to a lot of cops their conservative asses talked a big game about mass resignations and chaos in the streets, then the due date came and went and most just got vaccinated.

[–] Matriks404 2 points 1 year ago

Are vaccines (at least important ones) not free in some countries? WTF.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Eventually even stupid people will notice or they’ll be dead.

Doesn't work. Did early deaths stop all the smokers?

  1. is a problem, because it gives the government more reach to damage people with mistakes. What if the republicans (whom, I assume, you think evil) get in? How much of their policy detail would you like mandated ("for the public interest!") and would you prefer to be able to say, I believe that's harmful in my situation, so I chose to do differently. IMHO that sort of requirement that you've suggested should be very rare indeed - if ever. And wrt COVID specifically, retrospectively the vaccine results were much more muddy than we'd hoped, rather (in my eyes) proving the point.

  2. I like, and 3) whenever something approaching 2) is implemented.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

If it's more convenient for them to do otherwise, you'll end up with a large base of angry, disenfranchised and unvaccinated people that blames all their problems to the other part of the population.

Given how much weapon hoarders tend to fit in that category already, I would advocate towards a more soft approach.

[–] cricket97 -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah forcing mandatory injections is definitely a really cool thing for a government to do. Can't wait to see where that goes.

[–] uberkalden 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We already do it for school children

[–] cricket97 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] uberkalden 1 points 1 year ago

Ok, have fun with stuff like measles smallpox and polio

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  1. Find prominent anti-vaxxers
  2. Kill them
  3. That's it you're done.

Obviously this isn't ethical or practical, but it would result in net fewer deaths than doing nothing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Something something slippery slope something something life starts at conception something something all life has value something something murder bad.

[–] cricket97 -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

15% of US adults are unvaccinated. No, killing them all would not result in fewer deaths. You are a crazy person.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

15% of us adults are not prominent anti vaxxers.

Many people cannot be vaccinated for legitimate reasons. They're fine.

It's the people who go on YouTube or TV or a high office spreading anti vaccine misinformation that need to go in the ground.

[–] cricket97 -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are crazy. Saying stupid shit, even if it's harmful, is not and should not be punishable by death.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah. If we just kill them, and a lot of the Republican party, the world gets markedly better.

We could make a lot of progress on climate change, too!

They're bad people who want to kill me and my loved ones. I don't see why I should treat them as anything less than an existential threat.

[–] cricket97 1 points 1 year ago

You are too far gone. can't believe people like you exist