Corvid-19 and its impact (name edit)

[Trunkage]

So Trump cut funding to the World Health Organisation.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/donald-trump-halts-funding-to-world-health-organization-over-handling-of-coronavirus-outbreak??&fbclid=IwAR3CuDIcBO_hLV5qoK7xReuYxbKFI4RJycudk_7o_I15Mj9YK8H08sM4Ues

Bro. Ripping the floor out from under an entire organisation currently fighting the pandemic because you don't like a couple of their leaderships decisions? This is crazy. By all means when the dust settles figure out whose fault it was and hold everyone accountable but now? You wanna do this right NOW?!? Good God!

But, the WHO just followed China's lead about advice for the pandemic. That clearly means they are in bed and trying to take out the US. Because listening to QANON hasn't made anyone paranoid in the White House.

Anyway, are you surprised. The number one trait everyone knows about Trump is that he doesn't take responsibility for negative things. The only difference is whether you think that is a positive or a negative.

 

[Agema]

So Trump cut funding to the World Health Organisation.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/donald-trump-halts-funding-to-world-health-organization-over-handling-of-coronavirus-outbreak??&fbclid=IwAR3CuDIcBO_hLV5qoK7xReuYxbKFI4RJycudk_7o_I15Mj9YK8H08sM4Ues

Bro. Ripping the floor out from under an entire organisation currently fighting the pandemic because you don't like a couple of their leaderships decisions? This is crazy. By all means when the dust settles figure out whose fault it was and hold everyone accountable but now? You wanna do this right NOW?!? Good God!

Blame game.

It is fair to say that the WHO's response to coronavirus was less than perfect. On the other hand, the WHO is to some extent at the mercy of member states: China barred the WHO from access to some time. The WHO did however manage to talk China round. After that, the WHO can send recommendations, but it patently has no power and authority to do much of anything else. It can't close borders, stop flights; it doesn't order PPE and ventilators, design vaccines.

The issue for Trump is that it is looking like storm clouds are gathering over his handling of covid-19.

I don't know if anyone watched Trump's coronvirus briefing yesterday, but he achieved another small first by playing a video trying to blame a poor response to covid-19 on the media. It involved selected clips of talking heads from news channels saying they didn't think it would be that bad, then a timeline of Trump's actions against covid-19. This video was actually a tactical error, because it actually shone a light on Trump's biggest problem: he didn't do anything at all about it in February. (And reports are coming through that warnings from health officials were growing strident in their warnings about it over that period.) One of the journalists homed in on this and pressed, and so of course Trump went into tantrum mode.

Perceptions of how the administration handled covid-19 are critical to the election later this year, and the gaping hole for the Trump administration that is the wasted weeks February into early March is unanswerable. Consequently, they're frantically tring to distract and scapegoat: they've already gone for China, then the media, and the WHO is an incredibly easy whipping boy to add in, especially to a portion of the electorate inclined to distrust of international organisations and, well, foreigners generally.

Yes, it's sick, perverse and counterproductively stupid to target the WHO in this manner on a human level. But all politics is domestic politics in the end, and they may as well fuck over even more people worldwide if it scrapes them more votes - that's just how the electoral arithmetic works.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

So Trump cut funding to the World Health Organisation.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/donald-trump-halts-funding-to-world-health-organization-over-handling-of-coronavirus-outbreak??&fbclid=IwAR3CuDIcBO_hLV5qoK7xReuYxbKFI4RJycudk_7o_I15Mj9YK8H08sM4Ues

Bro. Ripping the floor out from under an entire organisation currently fighting the pandemic because you don't like a couple of their leaderships decisions? This is crazy. By all means when the dust settles figure out whose fault it was and hold everyone accountable but now? You wanna do this right NOW?!? Good God!

Blame game.

It is fair to say that the WHO's response to coronavirus was less than perfect. On the other hand, the WHO is to some extent at the mercy of member states: China barred the WHO from access to some time. The WHO did however manage to talk China round. After that, the WHO can send recommendations, but it patently has no power and authority to do much of anything else. It can't close borders, stop flights; it doesn't order PPE and ventilators, design vaccines.

The issue for Trump is that it is looking like storm clouds are gathering over his handling of covid-19.

I don't know if anyone watched Trump's coronvirus briefing yesterday, but he achieved another small first by playing a video trying to blame a poor response to covid-19 on the media. It involved selected clips of talking heads from news channels saying they didn't think it would be that bad, then a timeline of Trump's actions against covid-19. This video was actually a tactical error, because it actually shone a light on Trump's biggest problem: he didn't do anything at all about it in February. (And reports are coming through that warnings from health officials were growing strident in their warnings about it over that period.) One of the journalists homed in on this and pressed, and so of course Trump went into tantrum mode.

Perceptions of how the administration handled covid-19 are critical to the election later this year, and the gaping hole for the Trump administration that is the wasted weeks February into early March is unanswerable. Consequently, they're frantically tring to distract and scapegoat: they've already gone for China, then the media, and the WHO is an incredibly easy whipping boy to add in, especially to a portion of the electorate inclined to distrust of international organisations and, well, foreigners generally.

Yes, it's sick, perverse and counterproductively stupid to target the WHO in this manner on a human level. But all politics is domestic politics in the end, and they may as well fuck over even more people worldwide if it scrapes them more votes - that's just how the electoral arithmetic works.

And even if the WHO did make a few God almighty fuck ups, how does he think removing America's funding is going to help? That's going to put them further into the pockets - willingly or otherwise - of countries like China and Russia and any number of state actors the U.S. has less than stellar diplomatic relations and philosophical issues with. Its essentially taking away the bargaining power they have within the organisation.

 

[Agema]

And even if the WHO did make a few God almighty fuck ups, how does he think removing America's funding is going to help? That's going to put them further into the pockets - willingly or otherwise - of countries like China and Russia and any number of state actors the U.S. has less than stellar diplomatic relations and philosophical issues with. Its essentially taking away the bargaining power they have within the organisation.

Well, yes. If the USA withholds funding from a body like the UN as the single biggest contributor, it can make a sort of statement that the UN needs to work for the US more. Kind of thuggish, but there's at least a logic. However the WHO doesn't really have that sort of power or remit - I don't see what it can achieve for the USA. It's self-destructive, because coronavirus indicates the threat of global viruses... so do you really want to cut funding to a body that improves international healthcare? The USA can distribute health aid itself and give it favourably to its allies, but unfortunately diseases don't pay attention to global borders and alliances.

It makes no sense except as a way to deflect blame from US voters, even if at the cost of making people's lives around the world worse. But then, I guess, the logic goes that they're foreigners so f*** 'em, they get what they deserve for being born in a "shithole country".

 

[Trunkage]

And even if the WHO did make a few God almighty fuck ups, how does he think removing America's funding is going to help? That's going to put them further into the pockets - willingly or otherwise - of countries like China and Russia and any number of state actors the U.S. has less than stellar diplomatic relations and philosophical issues with. Its essentially taking away the bargaining power they have within the organisation.

Well, yes. If the USA withholds funding from a body like the UN as the single biggest contributor, it can make a sort of statement that the UN needs to work for the US more. Kind of thuggish, but there's at least a logic. However the WHO doesn't really have that sort of power or remit - I don't see what it can achieve for the USA. It's self-destructive, because coronavirus indicates the threat of global viruses... so do you really want to cut funding to a body that improves international healthcare? The USA can distribute health aid itself and give it favourably to its allies, but unfortunately diseases don't pay attention to global borders and alliances.

It makes no sense except as a way to deflect blame from US voters, even if at the cost of making people's lives around the world worse. But then, I guess, the logic goes that they're foreigners so f*** 'em, they get what they deserve for being born in a "shithole country".

As far as I've seen, this move is seen as very positive by his supporters. Getting rid of that globalist curroptive influences. It plays into his base

 

[Agema]

As far as I've seen, this move is seen as very positive by his supporters. Getting rid of that globalist curroptive influences. It plays into his base

Yeah, if anyone in the administration has any sense - and at least a few of them do - they'll have checked this stunt through a few focus groups first before announcing it.

 

[tstorm823]

And even if the WHO did make a few God almighty fuck ups, how does he think removing America's funding is going to help? That's going to put them further into the pockets - willingly or otherwise - of countries like China and Russia and any number of state actors the U.S. has less than stellar diplomatic relations and philosophical issues with. Its essentially taking away the bargaining power they have within the organisation.

The news by and large have missed something on this. In articles about Trump cutting WHO funding because of their treatment of China, they note gleefully that Trump himself praised China's efforts early on. Why was Trump doing that? He was repeating what WHO was telling him.

Early on, he compared it to the flu. Why did Trump do that? He was repeating what experts in the White House and on tv were saying.

So now, he's being Trump. He's going "I trusted you people and got screwed, so I'm not trusting you again."

 

[Kwak]

And even if the WHO did make a few God almighty fuck ups, how does he think removing America's funding is going to help? That's going to put them further into the pockets - willingly or otherwise - of countries like China and Russia and any number of state actors the U.S. has less than stellar diplomatic relations and philosophical issues with. Its essentially taking away the bargaining power they have within the organisation.

The news by and large have missed something on this. In articles about Trump cutting WHO funding because of their treatment of China, they note gleefully that Trump himself praised China's efforts early on. Why was Trump doing that? He was repeating what WHO was telling him.

Early on, he compared it to the flu. Why did Trump do that? He was repeating what experts in the White House and on tv were saying.

So now, he's being Trump. He's going "I trusted you people and got screwed, so I'm not trusting you again."

Could you give some citation for that rancid bullshit you're selling? Preferably with dates.

 

[Trunkage]

As far as I've seen, this move is seen as very positive by his supporters. Getting rid of that globalist curroptive influences. It plays into his base

Yeah, if anyone in the administration has any sense - and at least a few of them do - they'll have checked this stunt through a few focus groups first before announcing it.

I mean, he's been deliberately taking out people and putting in yes men. I don't think that's possible anymore

Also, I see Bill Gates is the centre of a potential investigation. Becuase vaccines are bad

 

[tstorm823]

Could you give some citation for that rancid bullshit you're selling? Preferably with dates.

I mean, I guess?

Today, claims that Trump blames WHO for covering for China when it was really him praising them: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/14/trump-world-health-organization-funding-186786
"Trump on Tuesday accused WHO of ?severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus.?
"Trump himself, who did not declare a national emergency until mid-March, had hailed China?s early response to the pandemic until just a few weeks ago."

Jan 12, WHO puts their stamp of approval on Chinese information they hadn't vetted: https://www.who.int/csr/don/12-january-2020-novel-coronavirus-china/en/
"WHO is reassured of the quality of the ongoing investigations and the response measures implemented in Wuhan, and the commitment to share information regularly."
"WHO advises against the application of any travel or trade restrictions on China based on the information currently available on this event."

Jan 24, Trump praises China, because he believed they were containing it based on information like shown above: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1220818115354923009
"China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!"

Jan 28, CDC experts say flu is more dangerous: https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-lesser-threat-to-americans-than-flu-2020-1

Feb 26, now the experts say Trump's dangerously misinforming people by comparing to the flu: https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/26/trump-mixed-messages-on-coronavirus/

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/china-waited-6-days-to-warn-about-likely-coronavirus-pandemic/:
In contrast to the credibility lent to China that they were transparent, they could have acted much sooner and instead covered up the pandemic for at least a week before taking any strong action.

And when Trump found out that China had lied and exacerbated the situation, and that WHO had been less useful than Peter Navarro [https://www.axios.com/exclusive-navarro-deaths-coronavirus-memos-january-da3f08fb-dce1-4f69-89b5-ea048f8382a9.html] at informing Trump accurately about the threat of a health crisis, he turned on the people who had been wrong. Trump's not smart enough to do it all himself, he relies on other people to have the answers. That's actually a pretty good thing. But when they give him the wrong answers, he takes it personally, and lashes out. That's a bad thing.

So like, sure sources. But I'm not sure what you were upset at, I was ultimately saying that Trump wasn't trying to make things better by cutting off WHO, he was just trying to punish people for not making him look good. That's not exactly a defense of the action.

 

[CaitSeith]

So now, he's being Trump. He's going "I trusted you people and got screwed, so I'm not trusting you again."

So whom is he going to trust? It would be one thing if he had a competent team for handling global pandemics, but he doesn't. The only American team that could had potentially handled this crisis more competently than the WHO was dissolved by his administration almost 2 years ago.

 

[Kwak]

Could you give some citation for that rancid bullshit you're selling? Preferably with dates.

I mean, I guess? ...

So, at what point did the WHO provide advice it knew was false? And what Chinese information from that period was shown to be knowingly misleading, and not just the current state of consensus knowledge?

 

[tstorm823]

So whom is he going to trust? It would be one thing if he had a competent team for handling global pandemics, but he doesn't. The only American team that could had potentially handled this crisis more competently than the WHO was dissolved by his administration almost 2 years ago.

I mean, he's appointed a task force for it. That's pretty obviously who he trusts on the subject now.

The best part of that wild press conference the other day was not the highlight reel of media malfeasance. That was pretty meh, to be honest, though I like the sentiment, execution was medium. The best part was when Fauci took the stage and laid out how every time he went to the Oval office and made a recommendation to Trump, Trump listened to him. And one of the reporters, I swear to God, asked Dr. Fauci if he was being compelled to say that against his will. That is earth-shattering levels of cringe. And like, when Trump accuses people of asking nasty questions, it's a little satisfying to me. When Dr. Fauci condemns a reporter for even asking him that question, that's an art piece.

Start of relevant section: https://youtu.be/lSrD3MAjcA8?t=281
"Don't even imply that": https://youtu.be/lSrD3MAjcA8?t=409

 

[CaitSeith]

Jan 28, CDC experts say flu is more dangerous: https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-lesser-threat-to-americans-than-flu-2020-1

Just a nitpick here: CDC said nothing of the sort. The article cites the CDC with the quote "the immediate health risk from 2019-nCoV to the general American public is considered low at this time", (taken from Jan 24th CDC's press release https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0124-second-travel-coronavirus.html ), however the rest didn't came from the CDC, but from other sources (Kaiser Health News to be more precise). In other words: the statement that the flu is more dangerous than the coronavirus was never said by the CDC.

I'm not blaming anyone here; just stating the facts.

 

[tstorm823]

In other words: the statement that the flu is more dangerous than the coronavirus was never said by the CDC.

I'm not blaming anyone here; just stating the facts.

That's fair. I did the stupid and trusted the top of the article too much, and genuinely should know better.

 

[Kwak]

Jan 28, CDC experts say flu is more dangerous: https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-lesser-threat-to-americans-than-flu-2020-1

Feb 26, now the experts say Trump's dangerously misinforming people by comparing to the flu: https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/26/trump-mixed-messages-on-coronavirus/

Trump 10th March -

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!

 

[Trunkage]

So whom is he going to trust? It would be one thing if he had a competent team for handling global pandemics, but he doesn't. The only American team that could had potentially handled this crisis more competently than the WHO was dissolved by his administration almost 2 years ago.

I mean, he's appointed a task force for it. That's pretty obviously who he trusts on the subject now.

The best part of that wild press conference the other day was not the highlight reel of media malfeasance. That was pretty meh, to be honest, though I like the sentiment, execution was medium. The best part was when Fauci took the stage and laid out how every time he went to the Oval office and made a recommendation to Trump, Trump listened to him. And one of the reporters, I swear to God, asked Dr. Fauci if he was being compelled to say that against his will. That is earth-shattering levels of cringe. And like, when Trump accuses people of asking nasty questions, it's a little satisfying to me. When Dr. Fauci condemns a reporter for even asking him that question, that's an art piece.

Start of relevant section: https://youtu.be/lSrD3MAjcA8?t=281
"Don't even imply that": https://youtu.be/lSrD3MAjcA8?t=409

I mean, Trump has stopped Fauci from talking at conferences. His message contridicts some of Trumps messages. Fauci also doesn't blame everyone, Trump does, including Fauci. It doesn't suprise me that people are thinking this

I don't know why a reporter would ask Fauci during that media conference. He seems to be doing lots of media at the moment and is very willing to contridict wrong info. Why wouldn't you ask him then?

Also, journalists, why would you think Fauci would give the correct answer on this? Fauci clearly thinks get information out is important and the best way to do that is through his current position. Even if he can't tell the whole truth because of his boss. He is not willing to jeopardize that.

And if Fauci was fired, then you'd just get someone like Manuchin in the IRS, who is right now okaying DT request to have his name placed on all cheques going out soon. Even though 1. It's supposed to go out tomorrow and he only told them yesterday so Trump is delaying ALL cheques just to get his name on them and 2. It's incredibly galling and hyper-partisan that something like this would happen. Bush was blocked from doing something similar by the IRS. Because that is blatant corruption. But installing a buddy to do what you want is Trump's MO. Imagine a Yes Man in Fauci's position right now

 

[Agema]

I mean, I guess?...

You're kidding us.

This argument asks us to believe that Trump is reading and relying on WHO reports and China. What nonsense. He's being told stuff by his officials. His officials will be collecting info from all sorts of places. The US intelligence services, which it is said knew of covid-19 as early as November, and certainly would have been all over the small explosion in Chinese media generated by the opthalmologist Li Wenliang at the beginning of January. It has the CDC and it's own health advisors, protocols, etc. that put in travel warnings against Wuhan in early January.

The WHO could be criticised for being too permissive towards China, but its advice was measured, fair, reasonable and proportionate enough to what was known at the time, and certainly still clear enough for Western countries to have weeks of preparation... which plenty of them such as the USA squandered.

China can be criticised for insufficient transparency and have almost certainly under-reported deaths, but Trump was publicly congratulating Xi Jinping up to the end of Feb, by which point people had been aware for about a month that China had dragged it heels. And even then, what difference did it really make to the USA when the potential threat was known at the start of February, and the government did next to nothing throughout all of February? There were officials ringing alarm bells all throughout Feb, and the president is out about telling the country everything's fine and the stock market's doing well.

The best part was when Fauci took the stage and laid out how every time he went to the Oval office and made a recommendation to Trump, Trump listened to him. And one of the reporters, I swear to God, asked Dr. Fauci if he was being compelled to say that against his will. That is earth-shattering levels of cringe.

Stop and ask yourself: why did the journalist ask that question?

The answer is because it's a rational one, as Trump had just the previous day retweeted a comment with the hastag #FireFauci. That's the atmosphere Donald Trump has created around the US government, with his authoritarian airs and constantly firing people.

 

[Silvanus]

And one of the reporters, I swear to God, asked Dr. Fauci if he was being compelled to say that against his will. That is earth-shattering levels of cringe.

With any other President, it would be (including any other Republican President; this isn't a party smear). But this is the man who dictated his own doctor's note to the doctor. This is a man who jealously controls any public message about himself, and will fire people for going off-message or contradicting him.

 

[tstorm823]

The answer is because it's a rational one, as Trump had just the previous day retweeted a comment with the hastag #FireFauci. That's the atmosphere Donald Trump has created around the US government, with his authoritarian airs and constantly firing people.

You're not that dumb, Agema.

Series of events:

1) News asks Fauci if things could have been done better, and paints it as a betrayal of Trump when he gives the only correct answer.
2) Someone on Twitter implies that Trump should fire Fauci for betraying him.
3) Trump responds calling the original reports Fake News.

He responded to a tweet that said firefauci with literally "Sorry Fake News". That's not saying he wants to fire Fauci. That is some of the dumber spin I've seen lately, and that's a high bar.

This comes back to the "hard questions" vs "dishonest questions" argument we had a couple weeks ago. Here, they're asking Fauci a dishonest question. Any variation of "couldn't we have done better?" is a dishonest question. The answer is almost always yes in literally any situation. It's not hard to answer that question with the truth, but it's impossible to answer without validating a dishonest premise. And like, it's not a partisan thing, it's just the media being jerks to make headlines. Andrew Cuomo in New York was asked basically the same question about his own response as governor. The national news didn't pick that story up because they only care to attack Republicans, but the people there still asked the stupid question to cudgel him with later, because if you say yes it can be taken as an admission of guilt, and if you say no it will be seen as refusing to admit guilt. Because, at the root of it, they're presuming guilt and trying to put a quote on top. It would be less loaded a question if they asked Fauci "why does Donald Trump suck so much?"

The entire story of Trump and Fauci fighting was fake news.