Orange_Crush
Resident windbag genius
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 38,870
- Likes
- 79,034
No, that's not the point of the analogy. Reagan was asking people to compare where they were at the beginning and end of the Carter's term and see if they were better off at the beginning or end of that term. What happens in between is not relevant. In the same way, whether you're better off at the end of the game than the beginning of the game turns on the result of the game, not how many you were up by in the 3rd quarter.
That's politicking, no more; no less. Of course what happens between is relevant. Reagan was pointing toward the outcomes of policy. Carter was an abortion when it came to economic policy, and his term showed it. You're pointing to a worldwide pandemic that's killing people and financially ruining others, in efforts to keep it from killing more. And your excusal for doing so aside, you're literally painting it as the momentum flip your team can benefit from to win a game.
You're a stain.