President Pandemic is With the Band

lol. The WHO was at fault for saying it couldn't pass from human to human in January. The CDC agreed with them and Fauci said it wasn't a big deal.

I went looking for confirmation that the Who had said that Coovid 19 could not pass from persoon to person. In fact, by the end of January, very little was known for sure. There were 13,000 cases in China, under 200 outside of China and less than 10 in the US. January 10, the Chinese reported that there was "no clear evidence," that the virus passed "easily," from person to person. At that point, it was being investigated as another virus caused by local bats. But, by January 24, WHO reporrted that "human to human transmission has been confirmed, largely in Wuhan City." Other WHO reports noted that the reproductive number for the disease, the number of people, on average, each infected person goes on to infect seemed high. At that time,, the reeproducttive number was assessed to be "between 2 and 2.5, which is higher than seasonal flu — about 1.3." With the exception of the one report early on, from China which WHO passed on about there being no clear evidence that the disease easily passed from person to person, I can find no record of a suggestion frorm anyone that it was not passed on this way. Reports that came days after that report, noted a higher than average rate of human to human transmission. It appears that your source may have cherry picked the one report of the dozens, about an emerging pandemic, then misinterpreted it to fit a false narrative. I suggest that you look at all of the information of that time period, not just take the disinformation that defends your position best and report it as fact. It is in fact, as close as you can get to lying, without being a bald faced liie, but not quite a little white lie.

Yes. Look at your dates. January 10, then at the end of the month of January (24th) they changed their tune.
Trump shut down flights from Wuhan right around then.

Closing off flights accomplished almost nothing. That city was shut down at the time, by China. We had already extracted Americans from the region. And, flights were comig in from all over the region, where Covid 19 was known to be spreaking. Like I said. Your memory is littered with disinformation. An example is unfolding as we speak. President Pandemic threatened to cut funding from Michigan (which coincidenally is in the middle of a flooding catastrophe) because of illegal activities surrounding mail in votes. As a supporter of his, I am sure that you are aware of this and support him. After all, why would Michigan break the laws pertaining to mail in voting. Doesn't that support the allegation that mail in voting is fraught with fraud? Well, as a matter of fact, the Pandemic President is unable to identify one example of Michigan actually breaking any law concerning mail in voting. He has removed that allegation from his communications. But, why would he make such a serious accusation without having the facts? Who said he did not have the facts? He knew that no law was broken, before he said that it was. He does this all the time, so that people like you will file away the original accusation for later use. Like when you say that WHO said something it did not say. Read unbiased sources. Get the facts

Let me ask you this, what should Trump have done with the information available at the time?

Should he have shut down the US completely on January 24th?

As to shutting off funding, that doesn't affect FEMA funding which is used for emergencies like the flooding. He's talking about regular funding that all states get.

I think he should just arrest the people that sent out the ballots for sedition myself, I figure if he did that, even if they were found not guilty, that other governors would get the idea.

Traditionally elections are regulated at the state level, but any kind of voter fraud can be punished at the federal level.

On January 24, The Lancet published an editorial by four researchers from China, the UK and USA, who are world experts on pandemics. They decsribed the Coronavirus in great detail, using what we knew about it then and comppared it to SARS MERS and the 1918-1919 Spnish Flu. They closed the editorial with, "We have to be aware of the challenge and concerns brought by 2019-nCoV to our community. Every effort should be given to understand and control the disease, and the time to act is now." Epidemiologists today said that if President Pandemic had taken the actions he took in Mid-March, one week earler, 36,000 fewer Ameicans would have died. If he acted two weeks earler, 83% of deaths would have been prevented.

As for what he should have done, he should have started by helping people who were dealing with the outbreak, insttead of fighting with them. He should have stopped resisting the inevitable, for the sake of saving the stock market gains that he judged the success of his administration by. If he had acted rationally on social distancing, for example,, things would be much better now than they are. He would get the lion's share of the credit, which he would probably deserve. And, he would be looking forward to a landslide victory, instead of a probable loss in the upcoming

Unfortunately social distancing is pseudo science garbage.

Having vulnerable people stay home is one of the only effective ways to keep it from spreading. The other way would be a full level 3 biohazard suit.

He did what he did because he knew "the cure is worse than the disease" by shutting down the economy we are ensuring many more people will die of starvation than could ever have died from covid-19, by factors of 10 or higher.

It is diffficult having an informed conversation with someone who doesn't even understand the basics. Everyone is vulnerable to Covid 19. People in nursing homes have not been hanging out at bars and they have died from it in alarming numbers. Anyway, I am done trying to interact on an informed basis. Have a nice day.