Coronavirus & 2020

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

He has an opportunity to actually look Presidential for once, but he's already failing.

1) He started off by pretending this was no big deal.  Those clips are going to haunt him.

2) I don't think any of us know if the administration as a whole has been incompetent in terms of testing kits and response, etc., but he hasn't looked serious enough about it.  He basically deferred this to Pence.  That doesn't look like leadership.

3) This is yet one more instance where he seems to focus on punishing Europe, our greatest allies, above all else.  No travel to the US from Europe for 30 days?  That's ridiculous.  There's already over 1,000 cases here.  

4) Whether he is blamed or not, this is tanking the economy, which was his one good talking point.  Sure he's not really to blame for that, but it's definitely hurting his re-election chances profoundly.  

He has to stop the spread this will result in better economic news later on . The europe move was bold and necessary they have a bigger issue there than here.

Cutting off travel from Europe was, in a way, the easy part.  The difficulty will come in trying to stem the internal spread of the virus here in the States.  

And because  of a number of factors (not everybody will not follow basic rules of hygiene, lack of a proper reagent for testing, etc.), this is going to be a tall order.  

The virus isn't Trump's fault.  But his actions across the coming weeks will be telling as to how much of a grip he has on this situation (if any).  Frankly, the response from his administration and other government organizations has been piss-poor, so I'm not brimming with confidence. 

[Lord Halifax]

3) This is yet one more instance where he seems to focus on punishing Europe, our greatest allies, above all else.  No travel to the US from Europe for 30 days?  That's ridiculous.  There's already over 1,000 cases here. 

^ This is the worst criticism in this thread --

 "The virus is already here. So no reason to keep out more potentially infected people. What difference does it make if 150 people die next month instead of 120? Not like the rate of infection makes a difference, when Italy hospitals are overwhelmed to the point of near-collapse. "

?

It's doubtful whether such small differences in the rate of infection matters at this point since we're clearly past the point where the US can avoid a major epidemic (and yes, 30 extra deaths are peanuts in a population of more than 320 mio.), but if he were to do it efficiently he shouldn't have exempted the UK, which clearly has lots of cases and is major airline hub. That undermines the whole point and reduces it to mere symbolism.

[brucejoel99]

After last night & this morning, we're at a point where the country would be right in blaming Trump for further causing the market to crash, yes.

[SN2903]

After last night & this morning, we're at a point where the country would be right in blaming Trump for further causing the market to crash, yes.

The economy will suffer short term to stop the spread he has to contain a further spread . He can worry about the market later

[Inmate Trump]

Trump will absolutely be blamed for both his handling of this crisis, and the impact of it on the economy.

Whether or not it costs him the election is a different story.  But yes, he will be blamed.

[Amtrak Joe]

LOL as if Americans actually care about the nuances of why the economy is tanking.

It tanked in 2001 2002 and Bush still got re-elected Einstein

You also had 9/11 which was at the forefront of everyone’s mind. Bush was actually competent at handling terrorism. Trump is handling the coronavirus in the worst way possible.

[brucejoel99]

After last night & this morning, we're at a point where the country would be right in blaming Trump for further causing the market to crash, yes.

The economy will suffer short term to stop the spread he has to contain a further spread . He can worry about the market later

The American people won't.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Yes, he will be blamed and he should be blamed.

If he did show good leadership on this issue, he should be credited.  But he has shown terrible leadership, and nothing in his character or history suggests he will be able to be a good leader going forward.

His speech last night showed that he has absolutely no clue about what is needed to mitigate the effects of the virus.

He should have led with -testing-.  Instead, of course, he led with xenophobia.

There are probably 100,000 Americans who have coronavirus right now and have no idea they have it.  A ban on European travel will do nothing about this.  The solution is to test them.

The disparity here is especially stark when you consider that Korea is doing this so much better than we are and it seems like they are seeing almost miraculous results.  But of course Trump will never admit that a foreign country is doing something better than us.

[Oryxslayer]

Yes, he will be blamed. Remember, the individual voter is smart and tends to think through their vote for several reasons, but voters en masse are stupid. There are peer-reviewed papers and analysis out there that proves voters blame the executive, be it the governor or the president depending on the ticket, for crises and their response. Everything including droughts, disease, financial issues, natural disasters, and most funnily - shark attacks (a chapter in here), all find some way to filter their way upwards in affected localities. Despite the executive having little or no control over whether such events occur, they get the blame/reward because they are the executive who oversaw the period of crisis.

Trump's problem then is not the markets, it is the disease. Remember, there are 8 months until November. If the worst passes and the virus is on it's way to being controlled/vaccinated by then, people will reward Trump despite him having only a little control over it's spread. If it is still raging at large, people will blame him despite the fact that Clinton would have suffered the same situation. Remember, voters are dumb. The last few months sticks in people's minds far easier then the last year, which sticks in peoples minds far easier than the last years, etc. The only exception to this rule is that voters remember the peak/trough of the regime's period in office, and if that is sufficiently large it will override ones immediate memory. If the country is recovering and on it's way 'up' in the last months before the election, then people will reward Trump even though it was hectic only a few months ago. If it is not, he will be blamed.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Don’t you love when OP makes a question thread and proceeds to argue with every poster who doesn’t share his pro Trump opinions? If he doesn’t want to hear diverse opinions then he shouldn’t make his title or OP a question

[Lord Halifax]

3) This is yet one more instance where he seems to focus on punishing Europe, our greatest allies, above all else.  No travel to the US from Europe for 30 days?  That's ridiculous.  There's already over 1,000 cases here.  

^ This is the worst criticism in this thread --

 "The virus is already here. So no reason to keep out more potentially infected people. What difference does it make if 150 people die next month instead of 120? Not like the rate of infection makes a difference, when Italy hospitals are overwhelmed to the point of near-collapse. "

?

It's doubtful whether such small differences in the rate of infection matters at this point since we're clearly past the point where the US can avoid a major epidemic (and yes, 30 extra deaths are peanuts in a population of more than 320 mio.), but if he were to do it efficiently he shouldn't have exempted the UK, which clearly has lots of cases and is major airline hub. That undermines the whole point and reduces it to mere symbolism.

1). On the bolded -- nope. If even one person dies, then that's a big deal.

2). You belittle the significance of 30 extra deaths in a country that has a population > 320 million. Right now, only 38 people have died from coronovirus in the United States. 38 people in a country with > 320 people. That stat hasn't made coronavirus any less of a big deal to you and others, right?

3). The reason he exempted UK is because of the Schengen Agreement, which UK didn't agree to (unlike the other European countries). The idea is that UK is better equipped to screen anyone coming in from other European countries. The possibility remains that they'll ban travel from UK, but there's a chance we can get by without it. Hence, you hold off the ban.  

4). Additionally, the UK is more important to our economy than the other European countries.

5). You say travel from Europe would create a small difference in the rate of infection. It's mathematics. The less people with the virus, the less likelihood of people getting infected. Of the 35 states with coronavirus outbreaks, 30 of them can trace the contact to someone in Europe. The less people with the virus, the less it spreads and the better our chances of containment.

1) It's completely meaningless to say it's a "big deal" if only one person dies, just think of how many tens of thousands are killed in traffic easy year and we don't ban cars just because of that. You have to take the economic and social consequences into consideration.

2) I do think the threat from Corona virus is exaggerated. It's not exactly the Black Death and simply isn't dangerous enough to warrant curtailing basic rights and liberties.

3) Holding off a UK ban makes the whole exercise pointless. It doesn't matter than they aren't in Schengen since you can get a connecting plane from a UK airport without entering UK territory.

4) That's BS. The EU is far more important to US economy than the UK, Germany alone is a lot more important than that little foggy island off the coast of France.

[Agonized-Statism]

Yes, but he has a chance to turn it around depending on his response. This would be the perfect time to act on the more isolationist and nationalist of his campaign promises. Not looking good so far, though.

[indietraveler]

Trump is trash. He should be blamed for his response. I don't have a problem with the travel ban but it's way too late. The virus is here and his lack of response early on will and should be used in ad after ad this fall. Stocks are falling hard, and while, yes, they will certainly bounce back and go even higher in time the rise is never as fast as the fall. It's likely they don't fully recover by election day. If he was taking credit for the rise I would totally use clips of his bragging about it against him.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Yes, he will be blamed and he should be blamed.

If he did show good leadership on this issue, he should be credited.  But he has shown terrible leadership, and nothing in his character or history suggests he will be able to be a good leader going forward.

His speech last night showed that he has absolutely no clue about what is needed to mitigate the effects of the virus.

He should have led with -testing-.  Instead, of course, he led with xenophobia.

There are probably 100,000 Americans who have coronavirus right now and have no idea they have it.  A ban on European travel will do nothing about this.  The solution is to test them.

The disparity here is especially stark when you consider that Korea is doing this so much better than we are and it seems like they are seeing almost miraculous results.  But of course Trump will never admit that a foreign country is doing something better than us.

The ban on travel from Europe = xenophobia?

It’s not so much that the travel ban is xenophobic, though I think it is likely to be ineffective, and the fact that the UK is exempted does call into question its motivation.

The whole tone and emphasis of the speech was xenophobic.  Within the first minute of the speech, he describes it as “coming from China” and “a foreign virus” and talks about the failures of the European Union.  These are all dog whistles to his xenophobic and racist supporters.

And the travel ban is the policy that Trump discussed first, longest, and in the greatest detail.  Whether or not it is justified, it is clearly not the MOST important thing the government should be doing.

The most important thing the government should be doing is much, much, much, more testing.  Trump barely discussed this at all because he knows his supporters would like this crisis to be addressed with racism rather than more (necessary) government involvement in their daily lives.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I don’t tend to put much stake in the prediction markets, but for those who do, it is notable that Trump’s reelection price on PredictIt has dropped from 53% to 44% in the last 5 days.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Yes, for two reasons:

1. Trump's response to the pandemic, at least so far, has genuinely been lackluster and even cavalier.
2. American voters attribute almost thaumaturgical powers over the economy to the incumbent President.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Yes, he will be blamed and he should be blamed.

If he did show good leadership on this issue, he should be credited.  But he has shown terrible leadership, and nothing in his character or history suggests he will be able to be a good leader going forward.

His speech last night showed that he has absolutely no clue about what is needed to mitigate the effects of the virus.

He should have led with -testing-.  Instead, of course, he led with xenophobia.

There are probably 100,000 Americans who have coronavirus right now and have no idea they have it.  A ban on European travel will do nothing about this.  The solution is to test them.

The disparity here is especially stark when you consider that Korea is doing this so much better than we are and it seems like they are seeing almost miraculous results.  But of course Trump will never admit that a foreign country is doing something better than us.

The ban on travel from Europe = xenophobia?

It’s not so much that the travel ban is xenophobic, though I think it is likely to be ineffective, and the fact that the UK is exempted does call into question its motivation.

The whole tone and emphasis of the speech was xenophobic.  Within the first minute of the speech, he describes it as “coming from China” and “a foreign virus” and talks about the failures of the European Union.  These are all dog whistles to his xenophobic and racist supporters.

1). Those are accurate statements. It did come from China. It is a foreign virus. (but please, tell me if I am inaccurate; please let me know if the disease didn't come from China)

2).The West Nile virus got its name because it was first spotted in the West Nile area of Uganda. Similarly, the Ebola virus got its name because it was discovered near the Ebola river in the Congo.

Was it racist and insulting to the people of Africa when we named it "West Nile Virus" and "Ebola Virus"?

Whether something is accurate doesn’t determine whether or not it is xenophobic.  If every time Trump criticized the Senate Minority Leader, he described him as “the Jewish Chuck Schumer”, that would be an accurate statement, but it would also obviously be an anti-Semitic dog whistle, as it is certainly not relevant. 

Describing the virus a “coming from China” and “foreign” is not relevant to how people should be responding to the threat of the virus in their daily lives; it will only make them likely to discriminate against foreigners and Chinese people specifically.

In any case, this is all much less important than substance of the fact that Trump has chosen to respond to the virus by discriminating against foreigners rather than testing the tens of thousands of Americans who likely already have the virus and are spreading it without knowing it.

[elcorazon]

He didn't create this crisis. If he shows good leadership even if things slow down I don't see the public blaming him for it.

hahahahahahaha

[elcorazon]

1. Jimmy Carter didn't cause his economic crisis, but it got Reagan elected.
2. the notion of Trump handling it well is laughable.
3. This has been botched worse than anything I can recall - America is proving that China has their sh**t together much more than we do, same with South Korea. It's a disaster, as the doofus in chief would say.

[SN2903]

Don't think the average American is paying any attention to politics right now.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Tell that to the President

[Bidenworth2020]

No not really. Biden has actually seized on the moment by addressing the nation about the virus.

[DrScholl]

Not at all. If anything there will be more attention paid to it because of the terrible handling of the response.

[It’s so Joever]

Nope, true Americans are outraged at this farce of a response from the president. At least he seems to be acknowledging it now, but it’s very late.

[Mr. Smith]

The last candidate to "suspend" their campaign over a big issue got walloped something bad for it.