ERICOPOLY

https://twitter.com/raidergyrl/status/1243036665590845440/photo/1

Based on his way of operation so far (everything good is because of him, everything bad is someone else's fault who he then hardly even knew), here's what I think his plan is: He says he wants to reopen. When he can't because governors and cities and companies stay shut, he blames them for the bad economy, says it's not his fault, says they just do it to hurt him, so it shouldn't be held against him in election. Runs election as underdog who's being attacked by all, and all his great plans for the country would happen if not for all the obstruction. If the measures taken work and we beat this thing, he says "see, I was right, it wasn't a big deal, we went through this for nothing, if you had listened to me, everything would've been fine." (like those saying Y2K was no big deal without realizing it was exactly because of all the mitigation efforts... it's anti-vaxxer logic -- "who needs vaccines, there are so few infectious diseases these days?"). If we're lucky (heavy seasonality? great therapeutics?) and can actually reopen quickly after a peak, he also takes credit for having known it (even though it was a pure gamble with the lives of others). If things get really bad, he says he always knew it and it's all the fault of governors/mayors/deep state/democrats/etc who are incompetent/evil, as he's already been doing ("I always knew it was going to be a pandemic" "Cuomo could've bought more ventilators years ago" (everybody could've bought more of everything, that's not even wrong)). He sets things up so that the has something to say whatever happens, even if he's actually not trying to figure out what's best to do to beat this thing as quickly and painlessly as possible, because that may be inconvenient to his election and businesses and he doesn't have the intellectual tools to understand complex problems -- his skills as a salesman/BS artist don't help with pandemics. I think you are right. He can cherry pick later which of his past contradictory actions to bombard his supporters with. For example, he now chooses to bombard them with his support of the airlines' decision to restrict flights out of China, when he could have instead chosen to remind us that he later claimed the virus was a hoax. Further, the major US airlines had actually beaten him to it. (similar to his taking credit for California working with Google on a website)

In a blog post titled “Is God Judging America Today?” a pastor who leads a weekly bible study group for members of President Donald Trump's Cabinet appeared to blame the coronavirus pandemic on several groups, including those who have “a proclivity toward lesbianism and homosexuality.” https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trump-s-bible-teacher-says-gays-among-those-blame-covid-n1168981

Yeah, this is what I meant when I said on the coronavirus thread that Trump was doing the standard playbook, encouraging his supporters to focus on the "us vs them" and rally around him rather than focus on his incompetence. I can't argue with the results.

Trump believes that shelter-in-place is a media plot to undermine his presidency: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242905328209080331?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet This tells us that he is resisting it in order to save his presidency.

The question isn't what Richard would do if he were a psycho, it's what Trump would do if he were a psycho.

Given that Trump's business interests have been directly excluded from the bailout/stimulus, does that make him more or less likely to undermine social distancing?

Well, I'm not recommending it to anyone. I have WFC because I just do.

I don't know about BA / TSLA but WMT going down makes sense. It is over 20x earnings for a retailer. Sure they will get a temporary bump due to hoarding but if the economy gets as bad as people believe, then walmart and competitors will eventually take huge hits as well. Yeah but... I wanted a gift for my son's birthday which is in two days. I want to buy him camping supplies. Can I go to REI? No, it isn't an essential business. Can I go to Walmart? Yes, it is essential because they sell groceries, hardware, and have a pharmacy. And... yes, camping gear. They are going to get so much more business now in all categories -- it's not just about hoarding toilet paper, pasta, and milk.

Great question, with no obvious answers. Assuming there is some limit here, the other alternative is an effectively slow motion default via inflation. But where on whom an increased tax burden would fall is unclear. Well the thing is that it is nothing magical about war time deficits. Deficits are deficits. The economy doesn't care about your intentions. So if you can do it in war-time you can do it in peace time as well. In fact war-time deficits are the worst. In that case you're literally setting money on fire. In this case people are actually gonna benefit from it. The person who makes the gunpowder gets the money. The gunpowder is literally set on fire. Somebody still has the money and it is typically a US munitions manufacturer and remains in the US economy. Kind of like spending extra money on going out to watch a movie or eat at a restaurant when watching one at home is cheaper with home cooking. People panic that it destroys the economy when we don't eat out or go to the movies, but neither is a best use of the dollar.

You're kidding right - did you watch the democratic presidential debates? - Joe Biden AND Bernie Sanders said those bans to China and Europe were xenophobic, if not racist - and they WOULD not have imposed them. Go back and listen. https://www.redstate.com/jeffc/2020/03/14/biden-insists-on-opposing-coronavirus-travel-ban-despite-the-advice-of-experts/ https://thefederalist.com/2020/03/19/neither-biden-nor-sanders-would-have-saved-american-lives-with-travel-bans-like-trump-did/ https://nationalfile.com/flashback-biden-opposed-trumps-chinese-coronavirus-travel-ban-as-xenophobia/ https://nypost.com/2020/03/01/criticisms-of-trumps-coronavirus-response-are-sickening-devine/ 2 points on this: 1. None of the articles you included have Biden or Sanders criticizing the travel ban. The very, very politicized articles twist words to imply that is the case. They called Trump xenophobic but didn't say anything about the travel ban being wrong or inappropriate. 2. Just the publications you have used to try and prove the point....well kinda proves all the points being made here. You are so caught up in Trump-fever and reinforcing views that you have lost all capability to think logically for yourself. At least the people here can admit fault in democrats and hold independent views of their own. Not the case on your end. Yeah sure - tell me about it - and go listen to the debates - it's all on tape. In the end, believe what you want to. Republicans have frequently pointed to former vice president Joe Biden’s comments on the day the restrictions were announced, in which he referenced Trump’s “record of hysteria and xenophobia.” But Biden wasn’t directly talking about the China restrictions, as FactCheck.org has reported. And in fact, Biden was speaking around the same time that Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar first announced the restrictions. When Biden’s event in Iowa began just after 4 p.m. Eastern time, Azar made the announcement at a briefing that started at 3:42 p.m. It’s not even clear Biden knew it had been announced. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/02/trumps-airing-grievances-coronavirus-is-overcooked/ The timeline of that day is also important when it comes to Trump’s claim that this was a bold step. The travel restrictions actually came after the three major carriers who have service to China — American Airlines, Delta and United — had already announced earlier in the day that they would halt that service. As USA Today noted at the time, the move by the airlines “all but rendered White House action moot.” The White House had floated potential travel restrictions earlier in the week, but this was something the airlines jumped on first. Uh, Biden is right here on tape discussing the ban...in the video - January 31st, Then crap like this.. On Thursday, idiot Biden tweeted: “A wall will not stop the coronavirus. Banning all travel from Europe — or any other part of the world — will not stop it. This disease could impact every nation and any person on the planet — and we need a plan to combat it.” Biden was absolutely spot on to blow the whistle on Trump's complacency. Trump was 100% incorrect to believe that his travel ban would protect us (it hasn't) and he did not have the plan that Biden was demanding.

This is why any president should be barred from owning private businesses. Who will ever know that his initial ignoring of the virus wasn't because he had an incentive to keep travel going? Imagine he had reacted faster if he didn't own hotels? Hard to say for sure. He wouldn't let a cruise ship dock here solely because he was afraid it would increase the count of Americans sick and this is an election year. Obviously he tried to sweep things under the rug. His mere reelection prospects have been an incentive against him doing much more than "there is nothing to see here, please disperse". Roll the tape of him arguing that we only have 5 cases.

He sarcastically said "Gee, that's too bad" when he was first told that Romney was being tested and may have the virus. Romney's wife has MS and would almost certainly have been killed by it.

You're kidding right - did you watch the democratic presidential debates? - Joe Biden AND Bernie Sanders said those bans to China and Europe were xenophobic, if not racist - and they WOULD not have imposed them. Go back and listen. https://www.redstate.com/jeffc/2020/03/14/biden-insists-on-opposing-coronavirus-travel-ban-despite-the-advice-of-experts/ https://thefederalist.com/2020/03/19/neither-biden-nor-sanders-would-have-saved-american-lives-with-travel-bans-like-trump-did/ https://nationalfile.com/flashback-biden-opposed-trumps-chinese-coronavirus-travel-ban-as-xenophobia/ https://nypost.com/2020/03/01/criticisms-of-trumps-coronavirus-response-are-sickening-devine/ 2 points on this: 1. None of the articles you included have Biden or Sanders criticizing the travel ban. The very, very politicized articles twist words to imply that is the case. They called Trump xenophobic but didn't say anything about the travel ban being wrong or inappropriate. 2. Just the publications you have used to try and prove the point....well kinda proves all the points being made here. You are so caught up in Trump-fever and reinforcing views that you have lost all capability to think logically for yourself. At least the people here can admit fault in democrats and hold independent views of their own. Not the case on your end. Yeah sure - tell me about it - and go listen to the debates - it's all on tape. In the end, believe what you want to. Republicans have frequently pointed to former vice president Joe Biden’s comments on the day the restrictions were announced, in which he referenced Trump’s “record of hysteria and xenophobia.” But Biden wasn’t directly talking about the China restrictions, as FactCheck.org has reported. And in fact, Biden was speaking around the same time that Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar first announced the restrictions. When Biden’s event in Iowa began just after 4 p.m. Eastern time, Azar made the announcement at a briefing that started at 3:42 p.m. It’s not even clear Biden knew it had been announced. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/02/trumps-airing-grievances-coronavirus-is-overcooked/ The timeline of that day is also important when it comes to Trump’s claim that this was a bold step. The travel restrictions actually came after the three major carriers who have service to China — American Airlines, Delta and United — had already announced earlier in the day that they would halt that service. As USA Today noted at the time, the move by the airlines “all but rendered White House action moot.” The White House had floated potential travel restrictions earlier in the week, but this was something the airlines jumped on first.

Now he wants packed churches in a few weeks: “Wouldn’t it be great to have all of the churches full?" Trump said in a subsequent interview. “You’ll have packed churches all over our country.” https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-nw-coronavirus-trump-restrictions-reopen-20200324-mgnfnxy3xvgpzapcynflxouaga-story.html

Well said Foreign Tuffett - if the opinions expressed don't agree with your viewpoint, I expect you prefer the echo chamber. Pretty simple stuff - silence the opposing viewpoint and carry on. What does that look like exactly? Accuse the opposing view of making money while real people are suffering? Sure, accuse the President of risking 500,000 American lives, just so he can get re-elected. That's what it looks like. Then you don't need to hear any opposing opinion. This: I didn't know I wasn't allowed to express my opinion on disgusting comments like this - obviously that's not allowed - right Eric? Am I not allowed to defend the President? Huh? How does my comment have to do with your defending the President? I quoted what you wrote beforehand about (and to me) an accusation of making money while people are suffering. Later you described such an attack as a strategy so you don't have to hear an opposing opinion. First you did it, then you explained your strategy... but the funny part is you did all of that after bitching that Foreign Tuffet did so to you.

Well said Foreign Tuffett - if the opinions expressed don't agree with your viewpoint, I expect you prefer the echo chamber. Pretty simple stuff - silence the opposing viewpoint and carry on. What does that look like exactly? Accuse the opposing view of making money while real people are suffering? Sure, accuse the President of risking 500,000 American lives, just so he can get re-elected. That's what it looks like. Then you don't need to hear any opposing opinion. This:

What does that look like exactly? Accuse the opposing view of making money while real people are suffering?

He was too busy politicizing it as the "Democrats' new hoax":

The opposition party can certainly be blamed for doing nothing for 3 years - nothing - not governing but destroying the government. Are the states with the largest CV problem (NY, CA, IL, WA) to be blamed because they are run by Democrats? Of course not - it's Trump's fault! You understand that epidemics thrive on population density and international travel and that in the US the densest places that are the most diverse tend to vote for one party over another? Trump shuts down pandemic protection agencies, Trump calls the virus a hoax and no big deal for weeks (WEEKS in a daily exponential problem), Trump waits a long time to use the federal resources (corps of engineers, using private companies to build materials, etc) yet here you are, trying to blame the party that's out of power.. Man, you sound totally delusional. He is defensive of the president, and is deflecting. You can't talk about Trump without him answering back with Biden or Pelosi. https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/psychologists/what-is-deflection-psychology-explains-this-defense-mechanism/ What Is Deflection? In general, deflection means that you're passing something over to someone else in an attempt to draw the attention away from yourself. When you were younger, you may have deflected the blame for a negative activity by pointing out a different negative activity your sibling did

For as much as Trump hates the NYTimes, this is basically what he was advocating yesterday. One thing they mentioned during yesterday's press conference was gradually bringing people back to work by age category. First the under 40s, then the under 60s, and all the while protecting the over 70s. People seem to misunderstand that even if you don't die from this virus, it can get quite bad, and even healthy young adults (not that Americans are that healthy on average) that won't die can end up in the hospital taking space from people that would otherwise be saved, or have permanent damage from the virus (lungs, heart), or they can unknowingly infect people in their social circles/family units that are more at risk of death, or even just that they in turn end up taking even more medical resources when there's few to spare, etc. This is still exponential. We need the R0 to be under 1, ideally way under. Not keep it above 1 until hundreds of thousands are dying and millions have been extremely sick and a large unknown number has died from preventable causes because the healthcare system was destroyed, and how long to rebuild a destroyed healthcare system? You re-open for containment AFTER you have majorly suppressed it, like in SK or China. You don't put an arbitrary deadline on it one week into it without any data on whether the current half-assed measures worked or what the hospital situation will be then. That's BONKERS. I'll keep reposting it because more people need to read it, but this is the way to do it with the least pain, the least economic damage: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56 Easter isn't an arbitrary deadline: if a resurrection happened before and it can happen again. I can totally understand the thinking in hitting that date.

The President is obviously crazy IMO. Why do you take that assessment as scorn? If I were a doctor in a mental hospital, would I need to be scornful to diagnose a patient as having narcissistic personality disorder?

For as much as Trump hates the NYTimes, this is basically what he was advocating yesterday. One thing they mentioned during yesterday's press conference was gradually bringing people back to work by age category. First the under 40s, then the under 60s, and all the while protecting the over 70s.

What if I care about all people but I choose to favor lives that won't come back above jobs that eventually will?

Aaand I'm out. Some people are so easily duped by politics. A classic political trick is to use a crisis to bring a partisan bill to the Senate floor for a vote, ONLY to accuse the other side of wasting precious time in not approving it.