8 ms·

>You're just witnessing the old joke IRL: If Trump could walk on water, the Left would complain that he can't swim. The skepticism is due to false claims like

>You're just witnessing the old joke IRL: If Trump could walk on water, the Left would complain that he can't swim. The skepticism is due to false claims like "anybody that wants can get a test" [1] But as you say, maybe they shouldn't blame Trump since he says it's not his responsibility [2] Anyway, why do any treatment if the virus is a hoax[3], hype[4] and fake news[5] Or at worst, it is only one person coming from China and is totally under control [6] Certainly the president is not concerned at all about the White-house [7] And all this must be true because has has known it was a pandemic all along [8] [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-tour-centers-disease-control-prevention-atlanta-ga/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-pres... [2] https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=102 https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=102 [3] https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=57 https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=57 [4] https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1236975196642390022 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/12369751966423900... [5] https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237004509156642816 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/12370045091566428... [6] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/22/trump-on-coronavirus-from-china-we-have-it-totally-under-control.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/22/trump-on-coronavirus-from-ch... [7] https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=78 https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=78 [8] https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=109 https://youtu.be/NezEbDx4B9A?t=109

m0zg 7y ago
He never called virus itself a hoax. He called the accusations that the administration's response was ineffective a "hoax". There's a difference. Didn't read the rest of your partisan drivel, sorry.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  Why (from his point of view) would it be either/or? The latter claim could overlap with or imply the former. In principle, it doesn't have to, but saying the response was adequate certainly doesn't imply that liberals were correct about the magnitude of the threat.
  - m0zg 7y ago
    Mind reading isn't a thing.
    - perl4ever 7y ago
      Right, so based on what I know, I can't speak to the state of his mind or all the things he said that indicate it. So if you think some people are wrong and your opinion is right, you might consider explaining why.
- IAmEveryone 7y ago
  You were extremely lucky to read only the one point that has been in the news as not entirely correct, missing the other dozen or so that are difficult or impossible to refute.
  - m0zg 7y ago
    #1: in context is a clearly forward looking statement, since the text surrounding it speaks of significant testing capacity coming online in the near future. Which it did. Currently labs in e.g. WA (original epicenter of the infection) are operating under capacity: https://twitter.com/UWVirology/status/1241953101076037632 https://twitter.com/UWVirology/status/1241953101076037632. NY is still challenging, but ramped up tremendously since then. I mean, you can armchair quarterback all you want, but those are facts. Capacity was promised, capacity is being delivered. #2. Yeah, I will concede that this one wasn't the best wording. That's how he deals with clearly partisan hacks in the audience. If you think anybody in his opposition would publicly accept blame for _anything_ you're sorely mistaken. Do I need to remind you what the Congress has spent the entire January and half the February on? #3. We've been over this. #4. He's right, they are doing whatever they can to freak people out as much as possible, whether or not there's a reason to freak out. The risk was low to the average American at the time, and at below 150 cases per million it remains so even now. Moreover, if you conservatively (by which I mean all the currently active cases there end in a fatality, which is unlikely) extrapolate S. Korea numbers to 7x the population, you'll end up with fewer than 50K deaths. We could realistically end up in that situation, given that we have a comparable level of medical care, and given that Korea is perhaps the only country for which extensive, reliable test data is available. #5. He's right. There's a ton of fake news, even from previously reputable sources. So much so in fact, that people are already writing papers about this: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/eci.13222 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/eci.13222 #6. This is from Jan 22. First case in the US was identified just 3 days before: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191. It did at the time seem that this could be "under control", especially considering that he was planning to shut down flights just 9 days later (something he was called a "racist" for at the time). You can say it ain't so with the benefit of the hindsight, but I bet you didn't think of this much in January, and if I told you several states would be in full lockdown, you wouldn't believe me. 7. In terms of the number of infections per million, the level of response, and the number of fatalities, we are in a "great" shape compared to most other places, including Korea, which is widely acknowledged to be a "success" as far as response measures and containment go. One thing we did fuck up is testing. That's being fixed as quickly as humanly possible: https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testing-by-state-chart-of-new-cases/ https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testi... 8. Meh. Weak sauce. Anything else?

m0zg 7y ago

He never called virus itself a hoax. He called the accusations that the administration's response was ineffective a "hoax". There's a difference. Didn't read the rest of your partisan drivel, sorry.

perl4ever 7y ago
Why (from his point of view) would it be either/or? The latter claim could overlap with or imply the former. In principle, it doesn't have to, but saying the response was adequate certainly doesn't imply that liberals were correct about the magnitude of the threat.
- m0zg 7y ago
  Mind reading isn't a thing.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    Right, so based on what I know, I can't speak to the state of his mind or all the things he said that indicate it. So if you think some people are wrong and your opinion is right, you might consider explaining why.
IAmEveryone 7y ago
You were extremely lucky to read only the one point that has been in the news as not entirely correct, missing the other dozen or so that are difficult or impossible to refute.
- m0zg 7y ago
  #1: in context is a clearly forward looking statement, since the text surrounding it speaks of significant testing capacity coming online in the near future. Which it did. Currently labs in e.g. WA (original epicenter of the infection) are operating under capacity: https://twitter.com/UWVirology/status/1241953101076037632 https://twitter.com/UWVirology/status/1241953101076037632. NY is still challenging, but ramped up tremendously since then. I mean, you can armchair quarterback all you want, but those are facts. Capacity was promised, capacity is being delivered. #2. Yeah, I will concede that this one wasn't the best wording. That's how he deals with clearly partisan hacks in the audience. If you think anybody in his opposition would publicly accept blame for _anything_ you're sorely mistaken. Do I need to remind you what the Congress has spent the entire January and half the February on? #3. We've been over this. #4. He's right, they are doing whatever they can to freak people out as much as possible, whether or not there's a reason to freak out. The risk was low to the average American at the time, and at below 150 cases per million it remains so even now. Moreover, if you conservatively (by which I mean all the currently active cases there end in a fatality, which is unlikely) extrapolate S. Korea numbers to 7x the population, you'll end up with fewer than 50K deaths. We could realistically end up in that situation, given that we have a comparable level of medical care, and given that Korea is perhaps the only country for which extensive, reliable test data is available. #5. He's right. There's a ton of fake news, even from previously reputable sources. So much so in fact, that people are already writing papers about this: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/eci.13222 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/eci.13222 #6. This is from Jan 22. First case in the US was identified just 3 days before: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191. It did at the time seem that this could be "under control", especially considering that he was planning to shut down flights just 9 days later (something he was called a "racist" for at the time). You can say it ain't so with the benefit of the hindsight, but I bet you didn't think of this much in January, and if I told you several states would be in full lockdown, you wouldn't believe me. 7. In terms of the number of infections per million, the level of response, and the number of fatalities, we are in a "great" shape compared to most other places, including Korea, which is widely acknowledged to be a "success" as far as response measures and containment go. One thing we did fuck up is testing. That's being fixed as quickly as humanly possible: https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testing-by-state-chart-of-new-cases/ https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testi... 8. Meh. Weak sauce. Anything else?