Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump: Too Much of a Good Thing?
Let me begin by saying that I am very glad, on so many levels, that Trump has been holding his daily updates for the COVID-19 Task Force. Here are some of the reasons I think they are a good idea:
- The broadcast tells the public that Trump and the task force members want us to be informed. Transparency is critical.
- In spite of the confusion and inconsistencies of the models, the Task Force is determined to give us the best and most up-to-date information available.
- The Task Force members, even if we don’t always agree on how they arrive at policy, or about their refusal to give the available drugs their full endorsement, have been clear about their reasons.
- It is a healthy sign to see that Trump is not always in lock-step with the Task Force members.
So what’s the problem? My biggest issue is Trump himself.
I don’t mind his going after reporters; they are asking repetitive, foolish, and manipulative questions. I think that Trump’s pointing out this irresponsible behavior to the public is valuable. I also think the public benefits by seeing him daily as a reminder that he’s in charge of the country, and knowledgeable about the situation; when he’s not, he defers to his Task Force members. His praise of those on the front line is admirable and positive.
But he is proceeding in a number of ways that I think will damage his credibility and the appreciation of the public:
- He is spending far too much time speaking at these forums. I realize that the people who are watching don’t view these presentations every day, but he not only repeats information that is dated, he does it several times during his time at the dais.
- He needs to remember that he is speaking to the general public, not just his supporters. His bad habit of overusing certain words—incredible, perfect, and other superlative terms reflects a lack of imagination. It starts to grate on the nerves after a while. (This effect would be reduced by less time to speak, not more discipline.)
- The overall time for this forum should be reduced. People will begin to tire from the length of these forums, and may very well turn them off completely—and be “turned off” to their purpose. It also gives reporters more time to try to trap Trump into a response that can be distorted.
So how could these opportunities be improved?
- Limit the President’s time at the beginning to 10 minutes, with 10 minutes for questions. Include the most important highlights, rather than trying to cover every topic.
- Since time will be limited, reporters should be referred to their colleagues for information when they insist on asking duplicate questions.
- Limit the number of questions a reporter can ask.
- Begin to bring in Mike Pence just after Trump finishes his introduction. He is, after all, heading the Task Force.
- The doctors seem to be using their speaking time effectively. We may not like everything they’re telling us, but they seem to be building credibility with the public
- These are not campaign rallies where Trump is speaking only to his base. This is the American public. But his speaking can certainly influence public perception of Trump and their decisions for the upcoming election.
Trump should use his time, and the public’s time, well.
Published in General
He is who he is.
But how long before you-know-who coopts this conversation to tell us Orange-man-bad?
Rule: Never put the word “Trump” in the subject header. That’s like a dog whistle.
I fully expect some people to want to treat COVID-19 like polo or smallpox, to where any new case once the restrictions are eased is a sign of failure and a cause of outrage. It’s why, flaws aside, Trump has to remain engaged at the press conferences.
The wording wasn’t clear, …and for the press and political opponents to blame…
Not medical personnel ( other than those who are political opponents, I wonder about Fauci myself)
Please note that I did not say he should not be engaged!! (In case that was directed at the OP)
Several thoughts:
I agree that he should be a little harder to draw off the target and agree with #17 that his answer to the question about the Captain should have been much shorter.
At the same time, the medical team has a very narrow view and Trump has responsibility for everything and needs to show that we aren’t letting things slip through the cracks. A good example of that is showing last week how the drug interception is not stopping.
He is also somewhat of a “cheerleader” for the country. It is important to know that someone has the importance of the economy in their mind.
One of his larger functions has been to get the private sector involved in the solutions. It is probably important to the various CEO’s that Trump is the one to point their efforts out (as much as I think of Pence)
If Trump’s role was predictable – either start or end the session, I think the media would adapt to that and cut him out completely. Another reason for him to stay for the duration is to act as a block on the tactics of the media. I can’t imagine Fauci or Brix telling a reporter that the question has already been answered or doesn’t make sense. Trump will do that (and I sense he is getting a little short tempered with dumb/antagonistic questions)
Thanks, @franco, for clarifying. Re Fauci, I don’t think he likes to be challenged publicly, and probably rarely experiences that behavior from anyone. But I think he and Birx know who they’re working with, and that stuff comes with the territory. I hope.
Very good points, @willowspring. I’d be okay with his staying the whole time, but I think he doesn’t need to intervene as often as he does. He is working with adults, after all. Referring to the docs, not the media!
There is much truth in the fable of the scorpion and the frog.
Trump is holding court, every day, for 90+ min. His energy is amazing for a man his age, and the longer he is out there, the more he seems to have.
Gang, these are all rallies. He is making Joe Biden look really low energy. Look at the contrast he is building.
Susan not saying you do but many live in a bubble. Not speaking about the great unwashed doesn’t make them go away. I would absolutely win the bet that everyone on Ricochet, all your friends, all your family live at least 20 points to the right side of the intellectual bell curve. Remember the mean is 100, that leaves a bunch of people most of the aforementioned rarely associate. They may see or hear a headline but really don’t know the facts. BTW great unwashed is a metaphor although being drafted into the Army introduced me to a whole new crowd.
Polls polls polls . . .
True, I thought of that, but he started humble, not ivy league and worked in something besides politics. George Bush also had private business, but came from political stock; grew up in it. Interestingly, a historian (I can’t remember where I saw it) said only Bill Clinton and DJT had the skill sets to deal with this crisis.
Trump did start out privileged, and is Ivy League — UPenn. It didn’t take. I’d put that down more to Trump than to UPenn.
What the two of them truly share is the ability to communicate with the people despite media interference.
I told a friend the other day: Trump is impossible to poll correctly
His approval rating in currently at 49%?
That means his ‘real’ approval rating is 51% imo…
Well there are two ratings that are taken: the rating of his overall performance, and the rating of how he’s handling the virus crisis. Then again, who believes polls anymore?!
The main thing going forward I hope with Fauci is that he realizes that ‘aspirational’ goes both ways. He used that term a couple of weeks ago to describe Trump’s hope of reopening businesses by Easter, at a time when the media was all-in on trying to promote a feud between him and Trump. But on the other side, a shutdown of the economy until COVID-19 is wiped out is also ‘aspirational’, because it would set the bar for a highly communicable virus far above what we’ve ever set before, in terms of winter viral outbreaks that claim lives. (I’d assume as a physician dealing with viral outbreaks since the Reagan Administration, he knows that better than anyone here does, but I don’t know how much he’s going to support a targeted reopening of activities across the country, versus a one-size-fits-all that bases any return to normal on when the most severely affected areas can afford to do it.)
exactly
Depends on what the say.
What KofMT said!
With a slight addition. During so called “Black Swan” events there are no overall experts.
Almost by definition these are unprecedented, which means that we may have expertise available in individual aspects of response (pharmacology, therapeutics, device manufacturing etc.), we don’t have overall experience in how best to set priorities. Or to resolve competing claims.
The things that I most like about Trump’s responses are his frequent use of phrases like:
-we don’t know if it will work
-we’ll give it a try
-we’ll see what works
He thinks like a good engineer dealing with uncertanty.
It’s also what bothers me about some of Dr. Fauci’s comments about chloroquine efficacy against COVID19 as merely anecdotal and not proven in clinical trials. Sorry, but it’s no time to be discussing the efficacy of different fire retardants when the building is on fire. Go with what you have at hand and learn from it. If the building is still standing that is evidence of efficacy, albeit merely “anecdotal”. Besides what better alternatives exist in the situation?
As engineers have known for many years, “perfect” is the mortal enemy of “good enough”.
PredictIt.org is more reliable in real time than polls.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/04/07/breaking-trump-wants-a-hold-on-who-funding-n2566530
However, your recommendation would mean a huge loss, as CNN and the usual suspects want to cut away as soon as the ratings driver, President Trump, is off camera. He has to be there to keep the cameras feeding unfiltered content to America.
His lane: Commander in Chief. One of 12 super carriers, the most potent non-ballistic missile platform in the world, which with 1/3 refit, 1/3 train, 1/3 on station is really one of 4 immediately available and in the region with the greatest threat, the Chinese naval and air forces. And his civilian point man, the acting SecNav, had thoroughly fouled up with a rant captured by every crewman’s smart phone!
This intemperate public intervention by the secretary polluted any uniformed military review with his undo command influence. Arguably, that dumped the action in the SecDef lap, with the president left to review the decision. President Trump chose to fix the mess, showing he had already reviewed a summary of the officer’s record and balancing the SecNav rant with a very balanced consideration of the great good done by the captain, combined with a repetition that his conduct was wrong in this instance.
I prefer tea leaves or coffee grounds. At least I get a good cuppa first.
SQ – another excellent post. I will say that the briefings have changed my perspective of the President, in a positive way.
Okay, Clifford. Certainly your military background lends credibility to your statement! So (and I’m asking sincerely), you’re saying that the SecNav’s rant warranted his being essentially fired. And Trump was the only one authorized to do it. Right?
I’m glad to hear that, BW. I think I probably need to take @kayofmt‘s advice and limit my time listening to him.
Susan Quinn: I don’t mind his going after reporters; they are asking repetitive, foolish, and manipulative questions.
I think we’ll end the wholesale shut down in a few weeks. We have to. Folks can behave carefully, more so than in past epidemics that have been just as bad. He should sustain frequent press conferences but exactly as you’ve suggested, less Trump and shorter.