The all-new "US Politics and coronavirus" thread

[Meadmaker]

The media includes Fox News etc., so you are partly right. But it isn't a monolithic entity, and since it consists almost entirely of private for-profit businesses I can't see how they are 'to blame' for giving us the news we ask for.

That is certainly true, and the same for politicians.

We have met the enemy, and they are us.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Then it wasn't a good test anyway. Covid has a long incubation period, so they need to reach way back and sample next week's sneeze to be sure.

As I discovered.

I've advised others if at all possible to churn up some lung crud and blast it up and out through the nose while idling in the line of cars. Get a nice sample ready :9.

 

[lomiller]

Very interesting article in National Review about tests, and how the United States ramped up production as much as it did.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/coronavirus-media-wrong-about-trump-testing-strategy/


Lowry's (the author's) take on it is that the administration did a great job, and the media refused to tell the story.

No, they didn't do a great job. By the time testing ramped up it was too late for more testing to make a significant difference.

By the time someone tests positive they are already spreading the virus. The point of testing is that once you identify a positive case you can track down everywhere that person has been and everyone they have had contact with and quarantine those people as well. The benefit comes from the fact that you can now quarantine these people before they start to spread the virus. If you are overloaded on the contact tracing side of things more testing isn’t going to help. Likewise if you have so many cases that infected people have been virtually everywhere you are better off just locking down everything.

The US had no testing whatsoever in Feb/Mar when if could have made a big difference. Sure testing ramped up later but it was already WAY too late for it to make much difference in infection rates. When it mattered the tests were not available, and this is the story the media should report on.

 

[pgwenthold]

I find it funny (not really) that more is not made of Trump's "Anyone who wants a test can get ine" statement is not constantly mentioned.

You know, like how they bring up "if you like your plan you can keep it" is always mentioned as evidence Obama was a liar. I mean, seriously, whenever someone claims Obama is a liar, this will be the example given. The only one they will give, but there you go.

Trump says something at least equally as false, and it's forgotten. My wife's doctor tried to get her an antibody test last week and couldn't get it. And that is months after his assertion that anyone who wants a test can get one.

But the NR says he's done a good job.

 

[Meadmaker]

No, they didn't do a great job. By the time testing ramped up it was too late for more testing to make a significant difference.

But that would mean that more testing won't make a significant difference now, so why bother? I don't think that's the case.

I agree that they didn't do a great job. I think I said that. (See "Hell no" in my post about the article.) They did do.....something. There really has been a huge ramp up in available tests. That's good. And that's the point of the rest of my post. Sure that's good, but is it good enough? Is it part of a plan that has a defined goal? They are doing things, but they are not communicating any of the whys or hows. They are just saying "Look at us. We're awesome."

The US had no testing whatsoever in Feb/Mar when if could have made a big difference. Sure testing ramped up later but it was already WAY too late for it to make much difference in infection rates. When it mattered the tests were not available, and this is the story the media should report on.

I agree they should report on that story, but that isn't the only story they ought to report on.

Sometimes, the news is more than just, "This group of politicians sucks." There's a story about coronavirus testing that is not a story about Donald Trump, but both the left and right media report on what Trump is doing, and whether he did it well.

To the point made previously, that seems to be what the public demands, so we get what we pay for.

 

[Meadmaker]

I find it funny (not really) that more is not made of Trump's "Anyone who wants a test can get ine" statement is not constantly mentioned.

You know, like how they bring up "if you like your plan you can keep it" is always mentioned as evidence Obama was a liar. I mean, seriously, whenever someone claims Obama is a liar, this will be the example given. The only one they will give, but there you go.

Trump says something at least equally as false, and it's forgotten. My wife's doctor tried to get her an antibody test last week and couldn't get it. And that is months after his assertion that anyone who wants a test can get one.

But the NR says he's done a good job.

To be fair, I have seen that quote in several political advertisements, and I assume we will see it a lot more in the ramp up to election day, along with "I don't take any responsibility." and several other of Trump's greatest coronavirus hits.

One of the problems in the United States is the "If you like your plan you can keep your plan" was echoed again and again by the right wing pseudo-news crowd, especially Limbaugh and Hannity, hammered into the brain again and again. On the left, there isn't any group to do that. CNN can try, and MSNBC, but they haven't hit on the formula for success the way the right wingers have.

Personally, I don't want a left wing counterpart to Rush Limbaugh, what I want is a strategy to dull the effectiveness of Hannity and the other right wing liars.

Also to be fair, I have read some truly scathing critiques of Trump in National Review, going so far as encouraging people to dump Trump as a presidential candidate, this time around. That's unprecedented for a Republican incumbent. They have to print some pro-Trump stuff to stay in business, but the fact that they are willing to print really hard hitting anti-Trump material speaks to a real weakness of this president. I hope that turns into electoral defeat, but I gave up making predications about what the American electorate will actually do back on November 9, 2016. I still hazard a guess every now and then, but I don't pretend to actually understand why people vote how they do, or what they'll do next. My predictions lack confidence.

 

[Bob001]

....
CNN can try, and MSNBC, but they haven't hit on the formula for success the way the right wingers have.
....

CNN and MSNBC are legitimate news organizations. They don't aspire to function as state media for anybody, as Fox does. They're not going to "hit on the formula" to deliver a partisan message, except to the degree that the facts speak for themselves.

 

[lomiller]

There really has been a huge ramp up in available tests.

Setting aside for a moment that the US still lags much of the world in tests per capital, what is it you think the media should be reported about testing?

The only story lines I can see would be things that do no put the administration in a good light:
1) It happened to late to be really useful
2) It’s not a viable way to get the virus under control
3) It would help keep the virus under control in areas that did what was necessary to bring new cases WAY down first, but the administration is trying to use it as an alternative to bringing cases counts down.
I just don’t get the rational behind saying the Trump administration should be praised for something that hasn’t been a useful tool in combatting the virus.

 

[Aridas]

I just don’t get the rational behind saying the Trump administration should be praised for something that hasn’t been a useful tool in combatting the virus.

Err... Testing is foundational for any decent response, and "Better Late than Never" really is a thing.

 

[Meadmaker]

Setting aside for a moment that the US still lags much of the world in tests per capital, what is it you think the media should be reported about testing?

The only story lines I can see would be things that do no put the administration in a good light:
1) It happened to late to be really useful
2) It’s not a viable way to get the virus under control
3) It would help keep the virus under control in areas that did what was necessary to bring new cases WAY down first, but the administration is trying to use it as an alternative to bringing cases counts down.
I just don’t get the rational behind saying the Trump administration should be praised for something that hasn’t been a useful tool in combatting the virus.

Among the things the media ought to be reporting is the actual state of testing, and its relation to efforts to get the virus under control. (Testing actually is a viable way to the virus under control, if you have enough of it, and if it is sufficiently accurate.)

Among the things they ought to be reporting is the state of the virus and efforts to control it, with no mention at all of the word "Trump". Not every story ought to be about the politics of the situation. It is the media's role in society to critique the performance of the incumbent politicians, and report the statements and proposals of candidates, but that is not the only thing they ought to do. Actually delivering useful information is something the media is equipped to do, should they choose to take on that responsibility.

How many tests per day can we do today? How many do epidemiologists think are necessary as part of a testing and contact tracing program that will keep the virus at some level of control. It is possible to answer both of those questions without using the word "Trump" or "administration".

 

[Segnosaur]

Looks like Trump and the republicans want to end a program that provides extra unemployment benefits to workers affected by the pandemic....

From: CNBC
Federal coronavirus relief legislation enacted in March authorized jobless Americans to receive an extra $600 a week in unemployment benefits...The administration supports replacing the enhanced benefits, which are paid on top of traditional state-level benefits, with a cash bonus encouraging people to rejoin the workforce.

Ummm... I don't think the problem right now is that people are turning down jobs. The problem right now is that there isn't as much work available now as their used to be. Not sure how giving people incentives is going to help them go back to jobs that don't exist.

 

[Meadmaker]

Ummm... I don't think the problem right now is that people are turning down jobs.

I don't know if it is "the" problem, but it is "a" problem.

Stories abound of businesses with low wage employees who have been upset that the business reopened, because going back to work would mean a pay cut for them.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm in Missouri.

eTrueNorth may be the provider.

The testing portal is at doineedacovid19test.com

I see 42 states and D.C. listed.

Did you say you got a drive through test? Because none of what is posted on the link differs from what I posted.

The eTrueNorth site says this:

drive-thru and by appointment only. There is no out-of-pocket cost for the test. Testing follows CDC Guidelines to determine eligibility. Currently eligible:

Healthcare workers and first responders.
Other individuals with symptoms.
Other individuals without symptoms, in accordance with state and local plans and for public health monitoring.

And:

If you receive an appointment, it is VERY IMPORTANT that you PRINT and bring your test voucher with you on the day of your test

You can't just call for an appointment. You need a provider to order the test.

I didn't look into the "at-home test".

 

[carlitos]

In Illinois, you can just walk into any of the state testing centers. No appointment needed at most of them, and if one is needed, they just give you one and you come back then.

ETA - for example, I received text reminding me to go get tested 5-7 days later if I attended a “large gathering” http://bit.ly/il-covid-test

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

But that would mean that more testing won't make a significant difference now, so why bother? I don't think that's the case.

I agree that they didn't do a great job. I think I said that. (See "Hell no" in my post about the article.) They did do.....something. There really has been a huge ramp up in available tests. That's good. And that's the point of the rest of my post. Sure that's good, but is it good enough? Is it part of a plan that has a defined goal? They are doing things, but they are not communicating any of the whys or hows. They are just saying "Look at us. We're awesome."

I agree they should report on that story, but that isn't the only story they ought to report on.
Sometimes, the news is more than just, "This group of politicians sucks." There's a story about coronavirus testing that is not a story about Donald Trump, but both the left and right media report on what Trump is doing, and whether he did it well.

To the point made previously, that seems to be what the public demands, so we get what we pay for.

I agree there is some bad reporting. But this was not something the news media didn't report on.

Instead that paper by the HHS lackey is typical Trump BS claiming the fake news isn't reporting on his great accomplishments.

As for a "ramp up", Trump's been claiming that over and over. It hasn't panned out in the real world. Maybe just now we are getting more testing out there. It's still not enough to do proper contact tracing despite Trump bragging about his great-self solving the testing and PPE problems.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Among the things the media ought to be reporting is the actual state of testing, and its relation to efforts to get the virus under control. (Testing actually is a viable way to the virus under control, if you have enough of it, and if it is sufficiently accurate.)

Among the things they ought to be reporting is the state of the virus and efforts to control it, with no mention at all of the word "Trump". Not every story ought to be about the politics of the situation. It is the media's role in society to critique the performance of the incumbent politicians, and report the statements and proposals of candidates, but that is not the only thing they ought to do. Actually delivering useful information is something the media is equipped to do, should they choose to take on that responsibility.

How many tests per day can we do today? How many do epidemiologists think are necessary as part of a testing and contact tracing program that will keep the virus at some level of control. It is possible to answer both of those questions without using the word "Trump" or "administration".

I don't know about where you are, but the testing issue has been reported on daily here on my local news coverage.

I'll see what I can find for you nationwide but I can guarantee you that HHS lackey was painting the situation in bright rose color.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Looks like Trump and the republicans want to end a program that provides extra unemployment benefits to workers affected by the pandemic....

From: CNBC
Federal coronavirus relief legislation enacted in March authorized jobless Americans to receive an extra $600 a week in unemployment benefits...The administration supports replacing the enhanced benefits, which are paid on top of traditional state-level benefits, with a cash bonus encouraging people to rejoin the workforce.

Ummm... I don't think the problem right now is that people are turning down jobs. The problem right now is that there isn't as much work available now as their used to be. Not sure how giving people incentives is going to help them go back to jobs that don't exist.

Well you know, GOP legislators are pressuring Trump to stop payments to those welfare queens.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't know if it is "the" problem, but it is "a" problem.

Stories abound of businesses with low wage employees who have been upset that the business reopened, because going back to work would mean a pay cut for them.

Yep, lots of stories like that. Got any actual numbers? Or are we talking about anecdotal stories the alt-right is amplifying?

And there are people waiting to go back to their old jobs when those businesses open back up. Self-employed people are still expecting their businesses to get back on track.

And then there is the issue that Trump wants and some GOP legislators are re-opening their states despite the obvious, it's too soon. They would love to claim unemployment is actually lower than it is but all those welfare queens don't want to go back to work.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In Illinois, you can just walk into any of the state testing centers. No appointment needed at most of them, and if one is needed, they just give you one and you come back then.

ETA - for example, I received text reminding me to go get tested 5-7 days later if I attended a “large gathering” http://bit.ly/il-covid-test

Yes, just today I've been seeing "attended a large gathering" added to the list of people eligible for testing.

Nursing home I work with still can't get a second round of testing for staff. Dental office still can't find a place to have the staff all tested despite having a job where there will be a lot of face to face contact.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In Illinois, you can just walk into any of the state testing centers. No appointment needed at most of them, and if one is needed, they just give you one and you come back then.

ETA - for example, I received text reminding me to go get tested 5-7 days later if I attended a “large gathering” http://bit.ly/il-covid-test

More devil's advocate here: how accessible are the "state testing centers"?