Trump Tests Positive for Coronavirus

[JWeinCom]

EricHiggin said:

JWeinCom said:

Yes. It goes both ways. 

The cameraman should have definitely been wearing a mask. He was deservedly called out. And, I'm happy to say fuck him.

Difference is though, that the cameraman isn't the President of the US. The only people he's putting at risk are those around him. Don't get me wrong, that's absolutely disgusting, and again fuck him for that. But beyond the people he might affect and the people who he might influence (which since he's a cameraman is probably not a huge amount of people) he's not causing a massive amount of harm.

Trump on the other hand has a tremendous amount of power and influence. As Uncle Ben says, with great power comes great responsibility. His actions, I'm sure you would agree, have a much bigger impact than the cameraman. So, he deserves much more of the blame. 

Also, a cameraman's job isn't to manage a pandemic. So, again, he should be held accountable for the risk he's posing to those around him, but he doesn't bear a responsibility for the national response to the pandemic, while Trump does.

As for the reporter in the first video, I don't see any reason to condemn him without more evidence. He can't really control his cameraman. Maybe he personally doesn't believe in wearing masks and is a hypocrite. It's also possible that he told his cameraman to wear a mask, and the cameraman said "fuck you". The reporter can't control the cameraman. Without knowing more, I can't say anything negative about the reporter in the first video. I had to go somewhere with my cousin, and she refuses to wear a mask and thinks the pandemic is a hoax. I tried my best to convince her, but she I couldn't. But it was important, and I had to go, so what am I gonna do?

On that subject I feel the next question is what can Trump do if people don't wear masks... And if Trump was doing everything he could to promote the views of the experts and some people still didn't listen (which some people wouldn't no matter what like my cousin whose decision to not wear a mask has nothing to do with Trump) then I would have no problem with him (for this at least). But he's actively fighting against the best advice of the experts. 

In the second video, same thing mostly applies. But I'm not going to say fuck her just yet. It's hard to tell from the angle she's at, but I'm not sure how close she is to anyone else, and she was leaving so maybe she didn't plan on being near anyone else. I definitely think she should be wearing the mask at all times when she's outside to protect herself and others, but I don't know if she was really putting many people at risk here. I'm not expecting perfection. 

So, it was a bad decision. But... it's not on the level of holding rallies with no protection or getting into a hermetically sealed vehicle when you actually have the fucking disease.

Basically the question is this. If the reporter and cameraman had been wearing their masks appropriately, would it have made a significant impact in the way the country as a whole viewed masks and how the virus progressed? I think no. 

If Trump had been advocating the positions of the experts, who he had access to, and advising people to listen to the scientists and follow their recommendations on masks, would that have made a difference? I think you'd have to admit that there's at least a chance it would have.

As for the conspiracy theory, I really don't buy it. I would absolutely not put it past Trump to lie about this, but I have more respect for people around him, who I tend to think would not try to deceive the public in such a way (not that they wouldn't lie at all). I don't think the doctors at the hospital would be complicit. Just too many people involved. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. 

As for whether it will help him, we'll see, but I really don't think anyone who wasn't already on his side is going to be swayed by this or be galvanized really. I think it's more likely that Democrats, who mostly see Covid as the #1 issue in the election, will be more motivated to vote. And I think undecided voters will view this more as a failure than a success. But who knows. My opinion is probably skewed because most people I know tend to think like me. And at least 40% of the country or so sees things very differently.

Trump, Biden, Senators, Governors, etc, have been telling people what to do, and what not to do, and some listen, and some don't. Even in places that mandate masks, the people who tend to agree with their leaders, don't always wear masks. While at home in ON, Canada, our specific county mandates masks, and I know more than a few people who think they're a good idea in general, but don't always wear it all the time as they're supposed to. Some businesses, who aren't suppose to allow you entry without a mask, are doing so anyway as well. Our P.M. has been pushing masks a long time, and some people just don't care.

Not everyone spreads the illness the same from what I understand. So one person could not wear a mask and never spread it, while someone else with a mask could spread it much more so than you may anticipate. It's incredible Giuliani doesn't have it, though some people aren't as susceptible to it. The mask may help, but wearing one doesn't mean you're automatically saving more lives than others. Every little bit is supposed to help no matter who you are, because every last life is supposed to matter. Some on both sides unfortunately seem to disagree with that.

If Trump had come out in the first place and said it spreads like wildfire and you really should be wearing a mask, some people would get them, others wouldn't due to hoarding or low stock in general, and the medical personnel would end up in big trouble because of shortages. If hospitals ended up way worse off than they already were because of lack of PPE, since citizens were grabbing it up, who would've got that blame? Would this have created some level of mass panic? Violence? Destruction? Who would take the blame for that? Would it have been better or worse than what played out? Did all the professionals tell Trump to tell the people the truth, and did Trump go against them all? If you make a bad decision because either way you're basically screwed, but one way seems less harmful than the other, can that ever be considered a good decision?

I doubt it as well, for the same reasons, but it could even be something like he had a positive test, and got away without testing again to verify. Just use that for political means, if he thought it would help him. It's quite unlikely though as we all know. Having it regardless doesn't mean he wouldn't decide to use it if he could. Trump likes to play games, especially when it comes to screwing with his image as per the media.

It's one big mess and the world was ill prepared. You can't prep for what you can't see coming, and you can't fully prep for whatever you think may come to pass. Not without completely changing how things work that is, and what exactly would that be like? Better or worse? Who knows?

Again, I'm not holding Trump responsible every time someone catches the virus or anytime someone defies the safety advice.

I'm holding him accountable for his actions which either directly spread the virus, or encouraged the public to be less safe. From what I can see, it's clearly the case his actions were negligent at best, and more likely should be considered to be intentionally endangering the public. I think I've made it abundantly clear what they are, and I think some are completely indefensible.

I would absolutely love for a task force to be set up, where experts will analyze the situation, and come up with a more scientific analysis of exactly how much Trump's actions caused the virus to spread (or for that matter if they actually saved lives which I can't fathom is true).