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:

  1. The broadcast tells the public that Trump and the task force members want us to be informed. Transparency is critical.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.)
  3. 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?

  1. 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.
  2. Since time will be limited, reporters should be referred to their colleagues for information when they insist on asking duplicate questions.
  3. Limit the number of questions a reporter can ask.
  4. Begin to bring in Mike Pence just after Trump finishes his introduction. He is, after all, heading the Task Force.
  5. 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
  6. 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
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 73 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    My assumption is that this will end in a few weeks, if not he needs to do exactly what you’re suggesting. However, he needs to say “back to work but old folks and the infirm remain isolated” after about a month of this shut down. It will have been no more than a EU vacation stop.

    @iwalton, I’m not sure what you men by “it will end in a few weeks”; if you mean the part I bolded above, I agree. But because people will keep getting sick, and some of those who go back to work will get sick, you can be sure the media will be all over it. So Trump may need to keep his public presence for a while, just to offset the distortions of what is actually happening.

    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.

    It wouldn’t surprise me if in a few weeks we start seeing some states going with targeted reopenings, tied to mandatory mask usage, once the supply of masks gets high enough so that everyone can access them.

    • #61
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    I Walton (View Comment):
    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. 

    Great minds think alike, @iwalton!

    • #62
  3. ToryWarWriter Coolidge
    ToryWarWriter
    @ToryWarWriter

    Trump is going to Trump.  Could he do these better yep.  Will he probably not.

    • #63
  4. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    They, the press and politicians have way too much invested in having this crisis be as bad as possible, last as long as possible and to blame Trump and his administration for as many mistakes as possible.

    @franco, I get your point on all the groups listed except the doctors. Why would they want to make Trump look bad? Won’t that wash over on them?

    Because, Susan, they are scientific bureaucrats. Bureaucrats do not feel the imperative and pressure of immediacy. Trump is our businessman President. As much as he has shown his love for our people and his concern for our pain, he knows the breakdown of our economy will be even worse than the scourge of a virus we now suffer. So while the Doctors want to take months to cautiously approve a treatment, Trump wants to take days because his common sense tells him, as he has said, “What have we got to lose?” He has the courage to take that step as well as many doctors. But the Doctors who have spent most of their career in government are, shall we say, different.

    • #64
  5. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Limestone Cowboy (View Comment):

    Kay of MT (View Comment):

    President Trump is not a smooth, polished, and glib politician and I for one am grateful he is not. He has far too many people advising him, each with a different political view. Not being a world class doctor, scientist, or another “expert” he does the best he can in picking his experts, for us and for the United States of America. So I can forgive him for occasionally making a wrong pick, and for his repetitions. If you can’t stand his voice, don’t listen.

    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”.

    Exactly. For the first month of this scourge, all we heard was NOT ENOUGH VENTILATORS!. The silly little secret all through that insanity was that without a treatment, being put on a ventilator was just a warning for your family to order the coffin. When Chloroquine became known, ever so slightly, and Laura Ingraham and others started introducing us to the French epidemiologist and then to one after another doctor came forward with their positive results, it took President Trump to push the ball over the hill and pressure the FDA to do what they do with all other approved drugs, but wouldn’t do with Chloroquine, that is to allow doctors the regular decisions for off-lable usage. @susanquinn asked why doctors would drag the process down (at least that’s how I understood her), I go back to the difference between the doctors who actually treat patients, and the bureaucrats with MD degrees.

    • #65
  6. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    cdor (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    They, the press and politicians have way too much invested in having this crisis be as bad as possible, last as long as possible and to blame Trump and his administration for as many mistakes as possible.

    @franco, I get your point on all the groups listed except the doctors. Why would they want to make Trump look bad? Won’t that wash over on them?

    Because, Susan, they are scientific bureaucrats. Bureaucrats do not feel the imperative and pressure of immediacy. Trump is our businessman President. As much as he has shown his love for our people and his concern for our pain, he knows the breakdown of our economy will be even worse than the scourge of a virus we now suffer. So while the Doctors want to take months to cautiously approve a treatment, Trump wants to take days because his common sense tells him, as he has said, “What have we got to lose?” He has the courage to take that step as well as many doctors. But the Doctors who have spent most of their career in government are, shall we say, different.

    In a later comment, franco clarified that he hadn’t meant to include the doctors. I think their wanting to follow protocol is different, @cdor, than wanting to damage Trump. Some bad things have happened in the past with drugs that were approved prematurely, although these drugs have been tested against other diseases. Still, do no harm.

    • #66
  7. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    I agree with you, Susan.  I don’t know that it’s so much “Too Much Trump” as it’s “Too Much Teenager.”  Every time I turn on one of the briefings (and admittedly, it’s only been 4 or 5 times), what’s happening at that briefing is some reporter is saying “…but sir, how does that square with what you said back in blah blah blah….” or “…but that’s not the same as what so and so said…”

    Maybe I should watch them more, and there’ll be some real content for me to consume, but I don’t want to watch what I see every day, stuck at home with two teenagers.  

    I find the briefings to be a waste of my time.

     

    • #67
  8. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    Franco (View Comment):

    In the next 10 days, I’m predicting this will fizzle-out. The next phase in the argument will be keeping the mitigation in place so as not to risk a return to high levels ( which doctors and press and skittish or partisan politicians will argue) and opening up ASAP within reason.

    By that time, a good majority of Americans will have had enough of these theatrics and enough of the loss of freedom to agree to open up.

     

    Where I live, this is already happening.  All it took was one headline in the Seattle Times saying “we are cautiously optimistic that the worst is behind us in this state, but…”  And they ignore everything after the but.  Here in my little town, tucked against the border, where the dairy cows outnumber the people, we instinctively know that we are not as much at risk as the folks living downtown New York.  I went to the Taco Truck yesterday and there were people everywhere.  I drove in the Bellingham on Monday afternoon and it was like any other day. 

    But of course our Governor on Monday refused to open recreational fishing, the jackass.

    • #68
  9. She Member
    She
    @She

    I laughed until I cried.  So true, even down to her “concerned” facial expressions, eyerolls, and gestures:

     

    • #69
  10. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    She (View Comment):

    I laughed until I cried. So true, even down to her “concerned” facial expressions, eyerolls, and gestures:

     

    She is hysterical!! I especially liked her question, “Mr. President, why are you so mean to journalists?” Yeah! Why!

    • #70
  11. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    I laughed until I cried. So true, even down to her “concerned” facial expressions, eyerolls, and gestures:

     

    She is hysterical!! I especially liked her question, “Mr. President, why are you so mean to journalists?” Yeah! Why!

    Those are actually good questions, in that they are brief. Stupid, but mercifully brief.

    They have two qualifications for the White House Press Corps:

    1. presentable
    2. dumber than fence posts.
    • #71
  12. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Only take questions from science reporters. Sorry Jim Acosta, you are dumb and your questions just make more dumbness.

    Science reporters suck. No, really, they’ve done more damage to science in the last 30 years than anything any second-rate scientist has done. Science is self-correcting, but not so journalists in general. They have no competing influences. They must be contemporary English lit majors with all the bad fiction they write. “Science reporter” carries a certain prestige that appeals to people who deserve none. 

    And the questions asked by reporters irritate me no end, putting it mildly (it’s more like enrage). There’s nothing informative about them, they’re just gotchas. But, from a strategic perspective, it might be beneficial to let them continue discrediting themselves. The press is the most hated group in America for good reason — they’ve become enemies of the people and our liberty.

    • #72
  13. Housebroken Coolidge
    Housebroken
    @Chuckles

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Only take questions from science reporters. Sorry Jim Acosta, you are dumb and your questions just make more dumbness.

    Science reporters suck. No, really, they’ve done more damage to science in the last 30 years than anything any second-rate scientist has done. Science is self-correcting, but not so journalists in general. They have no competing influences. They must be contemporary English lit majors with all the bad fiction they write. “Science reporter” carries a certain prestige that appeals to people who deserve none.

    And the questions asked by reporters irritate me no end, putting it mildly (it’s more like enrage). There’s nothing informative about them, they’re just gotchas. But, from a strategic perspective, it might be beneficial to let them continue discrediting themselves. The press is the most hated group in America for good reason — they’ve become enemies of the people and our liberty.

    So I take it you aren’t real happy with the press?

    • #73
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.