Post by sharksrog on Nov 17, 2021 15:35:35 GMT -5
Everyone agree that one of the traits Donald Trump's base likes about him most is that he isn't going to be intimidated? We almost always admire someone who has the courage not to be intimidated. But I believe it is that very trait that prevented Donald from stopping COVID back in January and early February of 2020 when he had the power and more importantly the time to do so.
Anthony Scaramucci, who was appointed by Trump and briefly served as Donald's communications director says "...He did not want to close that economy, because when you're thinking about T-R_U-M-P closing the economy, you're gonna have growth slippage, you're going to have higher unemployment." Donald says "You may hate me, but you like your 401(k) and you like the economy and you like the stock market where it is. And so you're gonna vote for me anyway." Not being intimidated had worked exceptionally well for Donald in his career.
So even though he knew enough about the virus in mid-January that had he been pro-active, he could have shut the virus down from the United States and even though he was told by his top national security advisors on January 28th that the virus was the worst threat to national security he would face, Donald wasn't going to be intimidated by a virus, even though he knew as he said privately on February 7th that it was far worse than even the most stringent flu.
But finally the stock market dictated to Trump that he needed to act. Per Scaramucci, on the weekend following the March 12th selloff of the market, "a couple of very senior guys from Wall Street met with him" and told him that if he didn't act on the virus, "you're going to have hundreds of thousands of people die. And you're going to have a nightmare in the economy."
On the night of March 16th, two White House staffers called Andy Slavitt, the former acting head of the Centers for Medicaire and Medicaid Services under President Obama, and went over the COVID manifesto he had published in "USA Today," and "the three of us walked through how to work it into guidelines the president could release," according to Slavitt's book "Preventable."
Tuesday, March 17th, "the president announced at a press briefing that for the next 15 days, 'we're asking everyone to work at home, if possible, postpone unnecessary travel, and limit social gatherings to no more than 10 people.'"
By then, it was too late, of course, and we still have wound up with "hundreds of thousands of people (dead)" and "a nightmare in the economy," as Wall Street had warned the president. It is true that had Trump not acted on March 17th, the situation would have been many times worse. It is equally true that had he acted two months, even a month, heck, even a week or two sooner, the situation could have resulted in just thousands or tens of thousands of deaths, depending on how quickly the president had reacted.
Just as Donald can't be intimidated, he also can't admit defeat (or had you noticed?). This, as things got worse and worse, he felt he had to distance himself. At least he stopped supporting the actions of the Chinese leader, actions of his buddy he originally praised as he downplayed the virus even though he knew how deadly it was. Donald had been highly successful in using mind over matter in his career, and he hoped this would be no different. But just as he wouldn't let the virus intimidate him, he couldn't intimidate the virus, which was far more powerful even than Donald.
So that is how a deadly worldwide virus could have been slowed down before it got out of control, as was the case in South Korea and a few other countries. If the United States had limited the per capita death rate from COVID as well as South Korea did, we would have about 20,000 dead instead of over three-quarters of a million and rising by about 1000 per day.
And that is why Donald Trump didn't accomplish it.
I welcome the questioning of any facts here by anyone, even if you're not a regular contributor to this board. My goal is that we all learn and understand the truth. I am quite happy to be proven wrong -- in part or even in whole -- if we can learn from it.
Anthony Scaramucci, who was appointed by Trump and briefly served as Donald's communications director says "...He did not want to close that economy, because when you're thinking about T-R_U-M-P closing the economy, you're gonna have growth slippage, you're going to have higher unemployment." Donald says "You may hate me, but you like your 401(k) and you like the economy and you like the stock market where it is. And so you're gonna vote for me anyway." Not being intimidated had worked exceptionally well for Donald in his career.
So even though he knew enough about the virus in mid-January that had he been pro-active, he could have shut the virus down from the United States and even though he was told by his top national security advisors on January 28th that the virus was the worst threat to national security he would face, Donald wasn't going to be intimidated by a virus, even though he knew as he said privately on February 7th that it was far worse than even the most stringent flu.
But finally the stock market dictated to Trump that he needed to act. Per Scaramucci, on the weekend following the March 12th selloff of the market, "a couple of very senior guys from Wall Street met with him" and told him that if he didn't act on the virus, "you're going to have hundreds of thousands of people die. And you're going to have a nightmare in the economy."
On the night of March 16th, two White House staffers called Andy Slavitt, the former acting head of the Centers for Medicaire and Medicaid Services under President Obama, and went over the COVID manifesto he had published in "USA Today," and "the three of us walked through how to work it into guidelines the president could release," according to Slavitt's book "Preventable."
Tuesday, March 17th, "the president announced at a press briefing that for the next 15 days, 'we're asking everyone to work at home, if possible, postpone unnecessary travel, and limit social gatherings to no more than 10 people.'"
By then, it was too late, of course, and we still have wound up with "hundreds of thousands of people (dead)" and "a nightmare in the economy," as Wall Street had warned the president. It is true that had Trump not acted on March 17th, the situation would have been many times worse. It is equally true that had he acted two months, even a month, heck, even a week or two sooner, the situation could have resulted in just thousands or tens of thousands of deaths, depending on how quickly the president had reacted.
Just as Donald can't be intimidated, he also can't admit defeat (or had you noticed?). This, as things got worse and worse, he felt he had to distance himself. At least he stopped supporting the actions of the Chinese leader, actions of his buddy he originally praised as he downplayed the virus even though he knew how deadly it was. Donald had been highly successful in using mind over matter in his career, and he hoped this would be no different. But just as he wouldn't let the virus intimidate him, he couldn't intimidate the virus, which was far more powerful even than Donald.
So that is how a deadly worldwide virus could have been slowed down before it got out of control, as was the case in South Korea and a few other countries. If the United States had limited the per capita death rate from COVID as well as South Korea did, we would have about 20,000 dead instead of over three-quarters of a million and rising by about 1000 per day.
And that is why Donald Trump didn't accomplish it.
I welcome the questioning of any facts here by anyone, even if you're not a regular contributor to this board. My goal is that we all learn and understand the truth. I am quite happy to be proven wrong -- in part or even in whole -- if we can learn from it.