Everything COVID-19

[Bob In PA]

Fair points Bob and there is no doubt CNN and others over report on Covid. I've have one question in response to your last post. If everything you say is true, is 800 deaths in a day something we just accept as the new normal until we get a vaccine? What's the death rate for a really bad day during flu season.

umass: Absolutely not.  One death per day is "too many."  You're correct in the implication that a lot more people are going to die.  Can you imagine the daily consternation and hand-wringing in every mayor's office, in every State House and in the White House over this?  Elected officials are in a tough spot (but I don't feel sorry for them - they sought elective office).  However, I do adamantly object to the daily criticism which is ever-present and constant.  The general public is already scared beyond belief, and overdoing the criticism is not helping.  Elected executives (i.e., Trump, all 50 Governors, mayors, county execs, etc.) are charged with the duty to do what's best for the group they govern.  That includes issues beyond just the virus (unfortunately) and that is why I say they're all in a tough spot.  Being a chief executive always means "striking a balance" and while the virus is super-important (obviously), other related and unrelated health issues, economic well-being, and many other issues must be weighed as well.  All I can say is I'm glad I'm not in charge, and I'm rooting for each and every one of them to succeed.  Bob

[MightyGiants]

umass: Absolutely not.  One death per day is "too many."  You're correct in the implication that a lot more people are going to die.  Can you imagine the daily consternation and hand-wringing in every mayor's office, in every State House and in the White House over this?  Elected officials are in a tough spot (but I don't feel sorry for them - they sought elective office).  However, I do adamantly object to the daily criticism which is ever-present and constant.  The general public is already scared beyond belief, and overdoing the criticism is not helping.  Elected executives (i.e., Trump, all 50 Governors, mayors, county execs, etc.) are charged with the duty to do what's best for the group they govern.  That includes issues beyond just the virus (unfortunately) and that is why I say they're all in a tough spot.  Being a chief executive always means "striking a balance" and while the virus is super-important (obviously), other related and unrelated health issues, economic well-being, and many other issues must be weighed as well.  All I can say is I'm glad I'm not in charge, and I'm rooting for each and every one of them to succeed.  Bob

However, I do adamantly object to the daily criticism which is ever-present and constant.

Unless that criticism is directed at the governors of NY and NJ for nursing homes, but who have done the best job fighting Covid (even Trump admitted NJ has done an excellent job)

The general public is already scared beyond belief, and overdoing the criticism is not helping.

Is that why so many of them are saying it's a "hoax" and refusing to social distance or wear a mask?


Still, what I found interesting is that Bob's comments supports an assertion in an article I posted (in the History Buff thread)

One of the hardened realities of the modern red-blue map is that scientists have assumed a place on the blue team in the minds of both sides. A Pew survey this spring confirmed it again. About three-quarters of Democrats, but only 43 percent of Republicans, agree that scientists should take an active role in science-policy debates. Three-fifths of Democrats, but only one-third of Republicans, believe scientific experts are usually better than others at making policy decisions about scientific issues. A pile of research has found that conservatives are more distrustful than liberals of scientific forms of knowledge and are prone to believe conspiracy theories about scientists. And liberals do dominate the academy and the world of scientific research, alienated by the growing strain of know-nothing-ism in the other party.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/07/republican-response-coronavirus.html

[T200]

umass: Absolutely not.  One death per day is "too many."  You're correct in the implication that a lot more people are going to die.  Can you imagine the daily consternation and hand-wringing in every mayor's office, in every State House and in the White House over this?  Elected officials are in a tough spot (but I don't feel sorry for them - they sought elective office).  However, I do adamantly object to the daily criticism which is ever-present and constant.  The general public is already scared beyond belief, and overdoing the criticism is not helping.  Elected executives (i.e., Trump, all 50 Governors, mayors, county execs, etc.) are charged with the duty to do what's best for the group they govern.  That includes issues beyond just the virus (unfortunately) and that is why I say they're all in a tough spot.  Being a chief executive always means "striking a balance" and while the virus is super-important (obviously), other related and unrelated health issues, economic well-being, and many other issues must be weighed as well.  All I can say is I'm glad I'm not in charge, and I'm rooting for each and every one of them to succeed.  Bob

Bob,

How do you feel Trump has done in striking a balance?

[Bob In PA]

Bob,

How do you feel Trump has done in striking a balance?

Tim: Acceptable.  This is the same rating I give to all other elected chief executives (Governors, county commissioners, mayors, etc.) as of today.  Eventually, we can and will look back on their efforts and learn from the errors and find the "best" approach to use in the next pandemic, but I think it's utterly unfair to engage in daily, repetitive, and sometimes purely partisan, criticism of any of them at this time.  After all, we are still only in THE MIDDLE of this progression of the plague that has been visited upon us.  The good news is that we have 50 different state approaches to study as well as the numerous local governments.  The TRUE ERROR would be failure to learn a lot about how to respond in the future.

As for Trump (and this is a just repetition of some of my prior posts) he did what he is supposed to do.  He gave heavy weight to the Federal health agencies, who recommended closing most of the economy down, so he did so and for a while stood firmly behind them.  Then, after waiting until he thought the situation with the economy prevented any further waiting, he left it to the individual Governors to each do what they thought best for their states, but continued to present the views of the Federal health officials at his press conferences, even if they were not in total agreement with his views. This enabled the American people to see the whole picture and consider the differences, as well as the areas in which there was total agreement.

Bob

[T200]

Tim: Acceptable.  This is the same rating I give to all other elected chief executives (Governors, county commissioners, mayors, etc.) as of today.  Eventually, we can and will look back on their efforts and learn from the errors and find the "best" approach to use in the next pandemic, but I think it's utterly unfair to engage in daily, repetitive, and sometimes purely partisan, criticism of any of them at this time.  After all, we are still only in THE MIDDLE of this progression of the plague that has been visited upon us.  The good news is that we have 50 different state approaches to study as well as the numerous local governments.  The TRUE ERROR would be failure to learn a lot about how to respond in the future.

As for Trump (and this is a just repetition of some of my prior posts) he did what he is supposed to do.  He gave heavy weight to the Federal health agencies, who recommended closing most of the economy down, so he did so and for a while stood firmly behind them.  Then, after waiting until he thought the situation with the economy prevented any further waiting, he left it to the individual Governors to each do what they thought best for their states, but continued to present the views of the Federal health officials at his press conferences, even if they were not in total agreement with his views. This enabled the American people to see the whole picture and consider the differences, as well as the areas in which there was total agreement.

Bob

Fair enough.

We've been dealing with this virus and the subsequent economic fallout and racial tension since March. Looking back at the game tape, what feedback and recommendations would you give Trump?

[MightyGiants]

Tim: Acceptable.  This is the same rating I give to all other elected chief executives (Governors, county commissioners, mayors, etc.) as of today.  Eventually, we can and will look back on their efforts and learn from the errors and find the "best" approach to use in the next pandemic, but I think it's utterly unfair to engage in daily, repetitive, and sometimes purely partisan, criticism of any of them at this time.  After all, we are still only in THE MIDDLE of this progression of the plague that has been visited upon us.  The good news is that we have 50 different state approaches to study as well as the numerous local governments.  The TRUE ERROR would be failure to learn a lot about how to respond in the future.

As for Trump (and this is a just repetition of some of my prior posts) he did what he is supposed to do.  He gave heavy weight to the Federal health agencies, who recommended closing most of the economy down, so he did so and for a while stood firmly behind them.  Then, after waiting until he thought the situation with the economy prevented any further waiting, he left it to the individual Governors to each do what they thought best for their states, but continued to present the views of the Federal health officials at his press conferences, even if they were not in total agreement with his views. This enabled the American people to see the whole picture and consider the differences, as well as the areas in which there was total agreement.

Bob

I bolded the part where I see the fatal flaw in Bob's position.   When you are dealing with a short term disaster, days or even a week or two, there is little time to look back assess mistakes and make corrections.  In those cases it's usually best (or at least easiest) to wait for an lessons learned in an after action report.

However, when you are dealing with a crisis that spans months not days, you need to be able to look back learn lessons and adapt moving forward.  You can literally kill people if you needlessly make the same mistake more than once and that is what will happen if you are unwilling (often motivated by partisan support of Trump and his same party governors) assess and criticize until the crisis is over.   There needs to be a continual hard critical assessment of performances and choices and failings (as well as successes) and they need to be incorporated in decisions moving forward.   That is what we need to do if you want to make the best decisions moving forward.    In my opinion the worst possible thing you could do is toss all the leaders into a pot and say "they all did their best" and have zero accountability and zero adapting and learning.

[Bob In PA]

I bolded the part where I see the fatal flaw in Bob's position.   When you are dealing with a short term disaster, days or even a week or two, there is little time to look back assess mistakes and make corrections.  In those cases it's usually best (or at least easiest) to wait for an lessons learned in an after action report.

However, when you are dealing with a crisis that spans months not days, you need to be able to look back learn lessons and adapt moving forward.  You can literally kill people if you needlessly make the same mistake more than once and that is what will happen if you are unwilling (often motivated by partisan support of Trump and his same party governors) assess and criticize until the crisis is over.   There needs to be a continual hard critical assessment of performances and choices and failings (as well as successes) and they need to be incorporated in decisions moving forward.   That is what we need to do if you want to make the best decisions moving forward.    In my opinion the worst possible thing you could do is toss all the leaders into a pot and say "they all did their best" and have zero accountability and zero adapting and learning.

Rich: You have a point, but I'm not advocating closing our eyes as we pass through this tunnel.  Constant adjustments in the science do occur (sometimes daily), so there's no reason not to make "course corrections" as soon as we determine that they are necessary.  However, I don't think it dispels my view that it's bad to engage in daily, persistent, and repetitive criticism of the response to a long-term pandemic.  I can't see how it helps us in any manner.  Bob

[MightyGiants]

Rich: You have a point, but I'm not advocating closing our eyes as we pass through this tunnel.  Constant adjustments in the science do occur (sometimes daily), so there's no reason not to make "course corrections" as soon as we determine that they are necessary.  However, I don't think it dispels my view that it's bad to engage in daily, persistent, and repetitive criticism of the response to a long-term pandemic.  I can't see how it helps us in any manner.  Bob

With an election coming up in November, do you think it's fair to look at Trump's performance in a little more critical eye than "well, I am positive he did the best he could and everything in the best interest of the nation and I won't criticize him"?    It seems to me you go out of your way to shield Trump's Covid performance despite the nation having done poorly by every metric I could think of.    Maybe people wouldn't feel the need to repeat if you didn't refuse to acknowledge that there are things that Trump should be justifiably criticized for.   To date you have not said one negative thing about his performance (while on at least two occasions criticizing the Democratic Governor of NJ and NY over nursing homes).   

Serious question, is there anything Trump could say or do that would elicit a negative comment from you about him?  Is there anything that Trump has done throughout this Covid crisis, which you would say was a mistake or at least not the best choice?    You have criticized me for "changing the subject" but Bob, I have noticed you tend to ignore a lot of questions.    If you are going to discuss a topic it only seems like common courtesy to at least answer questions and not just pretend they were never asked.   In the slight hope that you might answer, do you think that Florida, Texass, Arizona, and California made a mistake in rushing to open up?    I mean you frequently talk about "Trump smartly switching to a state based decision approach" (even though diseases have a bad habit of not respecting state borders).  Do you appreciate that one of the reasons he did that was to bypass the guidance document that his people produced and he named after himself? 

[LennG]

 I read your assessment of how you feel Trump handled the virus. If I can take it one step further. In the early stages, you said he listened to his medical people. Fine. as he should. But we all know now, more than we knew before about the virus, what we can and cannot do. The medical people have adjusted to this new knowledge, yet it doesn't seem Trump has. he keeps referring to the past where he claims they were wrong. In today's light, they probably were wrong on many things, and, as I have said, adjusted their recommendations and treatments. yet, now Trump basically dismisses them as being wrong, yet who is he getting this advice from now?. I fully understand he feels he knows better than everyone else about everything, but is he using just instinct now? We all know, with science, things evolve and science has to be adjusted. Yet Trump seems not to care about that right now. He harps on what was wrong in the beginning, yet fails to embrace the new facts.
When we put on ANY news station, it is a fact more and more people are testing positive, and it seems as if most of these states are also refusing to follow the same recommendations that the doctors have been making and they are stumbling, yet, like Trump, they refuse to believe their eyes and ears from doctors trying to help them. Why are they not embracing the new guidelines and same for Trump? Why does he insist that he is right and everyone else is wrong?
You just cannot keep living on past wrongs when science has shown that there are better ways now.

[Bob In PA]

With an election coming up in November, do you think it's fair to look at Trump's performance in a little more critical eye than "well, I am positive he did the best he could and everything in the best interest of the nation and I won't criticize him"?    It seems to me you go out of your way to shield Trump's Covid performance despite the nation having done poorly by every metric I could think of.    Maybe people wouldn't feel the need to repeat if you didn't refuse to acknowledge that there are things that Trump should be justifiably criticized for.   To date you have not said one negative thing about his performance (while on at least two occasions criticizing the Democratic Governor of NJ and NY over nursing homes).   

Serious question, is there anything Trump could say or do that would elicit a negative comment from you about him?  Is there anything that Trump has done throughout this Covid crisis, which you would say was a mistake or at least not the best choice?    You have criticized me for "changing the subject" but Bob, I have noticed you tend to ignore a lot of questions.    If you are going to discuss a topic it only seems like common courtesy to at least answer questions and not just pretend they were never asked.   In the slight hope that you might answer, do you think that Florida, Texass, Arizona, and California made a mistake in rushing to open up?    I mean you frequently talk about "Trump smartly switching to a state based decision approach" (even though diseases have a bad habit of not respecting state borders).  Do you appreciate that one of the reasons he did that was to bypass the guidance document that his people produced and he named after himself?

Do whatever you see fit with your vote. 

[MightyGiants]

Do whatever you see fit with your vote.

Why wouldn't you answer any of my questions?   Is that how you want people to treat you?

[Bob In PA]

I read your assessment of how you feel Trump handled the virus. If I can take it one step further. In the early stages, you said he listened to his medical people. Fine. as he should. But we all know now, more than we knew before about the virus, what we can and cannot do. The medical people have adjusted to this new knowledge, yet it doesn't seem Trump has. he keeps referring to the past where he claims they were wrong. In today's light, they probably were wrong on many things, and, as I have said, adjusted their recommendations and treatments. yet, now Trump basically dismisses them as being wrong, yet who is he getting this advice from now?. I fully understand he feels he knows better than everyone else about everything, but is he using just instinct now? We all know, with science, things evolve and science has to be adjusted. Yet Trump seems not to care about that right now. He harps on what was wrong in the beginning, yet fails to embrace the new facts.
When we put on ANY news station, it is a fact more and more people are testing positive, and it seems as if most of these states are also refusing to follow the same recommendations that the doctors have been making and they are stumbling, yet, like Trump, they refuse to believe their eyes and ears from doctors trying to help them. Why are they not embracing the new guidelines and same for Trump? Why does he insist that he is right and everyone else is wrong?
You just cannot keep living on past wrongs when science has shown that there are better ways now.

Lenn: The answers to your four questions are I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, and I don't know.  As for your opinions, I disagree.  Bob

[Bob In PA]

Why wouldn't you answer any of my questions?   Is that how you want people to treat you?

The answers to your questions are yes; yes; too soon to know; no; and I don't know.  As for your opinions, I disagree.  Bob

[LennG]

Lenn: The answers to your four questions are I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, and I don't know.  As for your opinions, I disagree.  Bob

But, as someone who is going to vote for the next leader of this country, shouldn't you know some of these answers? I know I would want to know the thinking of my candidate and not just follow blindly down some dark alley,w which is where Trump is steering this country and no one asks why, at least on the GOP side.

And, I believe the only opinion I gave was You just cannot keep living on past wrongs when science has shown that there are better ways now, and you say you can? WOW

[MightyGiants]

The answers to your questions are yes; yes; too soon to know; no; and I don't know.  As for your opinions, I disagree.  Bob

Okay so you acknowledge it's fair to have a critical assessment of Trump's Covid performance, that's good and I agree

For your second yes, has Trump said or did something already that you feel was negative, and if so what?   If he hasn't done anything bad yet, what would he need to do to elicit criticism from you?

To your "no" answer how do you reconcile Dr Fauci attributing the spikes some states are seeing to opening to fast? 

To the don't know, did you read the excellent NYT's article I posted that gave you an inside look into the Trump's adminstration's response to Covid (as it provided the answer)?