Coronavirus

Trump Worries That More Coronavirus Testing Makes America Look Bad

Testing provides clarity and critically useful evidence about the spread of the disease that the president doesn’t seem to want.

|

The single biggest failure of the Trump administration's response to the coronavirus was the delayed rollout of testing, which left both policy makers and the public flying blind for months on end, unable to gauge the extent of the virus's spread, and thus flailing in response. Testing provides clarity, evidence, and critical information without which an effective response cannot be devised. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention repeatedly botched the development and delivery test kits, and the Food and Drug Administration wasted precious early weeks before approving private companies to deploy their own tests, as other countries had already done successfully, and as former Trump administration health officials had proposed early on. 

This set of failures can be blamed at least in part on bureaucratic inertia and agency culture, in particular on the prevailing belief inside the U.S. health apparatus that the federal government should serve as a centralized clearinghouse for testing. The desire to serve as a single point of control meant that federal health agencies ended up being a single point of failure.

That failure that had predictably catastrophic results, for it meant that U.S. officials had limited visibility about the spread and nature of the disease. If more testing capacity had been deployed earlier, government officials—as well as private companies and individuals—would have been better equipped to respond to the virus. Indeed, testing continues to be an area where the U.S. has sometimes fallen short; although nationwide testing capacity has risen to about 500,000 per day, which many experts consider an important benchmark, some states are still struggling with their testing regimes. 

Yet in President Donald Trump's telling, more testing is actually a problem. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal last week, Trump said he "personally think[s] testing is overrated" and that, because more testing reveals more confirmed cases, "in many ways, it makes us look bad." Trump repeated a version of this opinion at a campaign rally over the weekend, saying, "When you do testing to that extent, you're going to find more people, you're going to find more cases. So I said to my people, 'Slow the testing down, please.'" 

This comment understandably raised questions about whether Trump had, in fact, intentionally slowed down testing in order to preserve the appearance of less viral spread.

Trump's flacks argued that he was merely joking. "It was a comment that he made in jest," said White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Monday. Trump, however, quickly insisted otherwise. When reporters asked him yesterday whether the remark was meant as a joke, he said, "I don't kid. Let me just tell you. Let me make it clear," adding once again that more testing means finding more cases. 

(As is often the case with Trump, it's not clear whether his words have resulted in any actions, or whether they were merely an empty threat. Talking Points Memo reports that the administration is moving to end federal support for some testing sites. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, meanwhile, has told Congress that testing has not slowed down, and in fact is on track to increase. Meanwhile, total case numbers are up across the country, but deaths, while still high, are trending downward on a daily basis.)

It is true that all else being equal, a much broader testing regime will mean finding and confirming more cases. And some reports of rising cases have mistakenly been based on the deployment of more widespread testing. It is probable, however, that the recent rise in confirmed cases is not solely a result of increased testing, but a result of increased viral spread and an outbreak that remains uncontrolled, as evidenced by the rising positive test rate in states like Arizona and Florida. 

But these nuances are mostly irrelevant in this instance since Trump's personal view appears to be altogether simpler—and more troubling. 

Trump's remarks over the last week make clear that he sees increased testing negatively simply because it results in a higher number of confirmed cases, which makes the country look bad. Nor is this a new view for Trump; in March, he pushed to keep the passengers of a cruise ship where the virus had broken out quarantined because allowing them to disembark would raise the country's official infection count. "I like the numbers being where they are," he said

What Trump has repeatedly communicated is that he dislikes testing precisely because it makes clear the scope of the problem; his frustration is with the evidence and information testing provides. 

He appears to be irritated by the idea of object permanence, the notion that something that can't be seen at the moment yet still continues to exist. But just as cancer does not go away if you do not test for it, and the world does not disappear if you close your eyes, slowing the pace of testing does not actually reduce the spread of the disease, even if official confirmation numbers do not go as high. 

Refusing to look at the full extent of a problem does not make the problem go away. Instead, it limits our ability to see its spread and understand its consequences. That ability was already dangerously crippled by a series of bureaucratic failures, which have largely (though not entirely) been corrected. What is still worrying is that the president is saying he would rather we all be flying blind.

NEXT: The New York Times's Inconsistent Standards Drove Slate Star Codex To Self-Cancel

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. He appears to be irritated by the idea of object permanence, the notion that something that can’t be seen at the moment yet still continues to exist.

    Um, what? So in effect, you’re calling Trump a baby. I imagine in some addled compartment of your brain, you find that ever so clever.

    1. Living up to that username huh?

      1. I have no doubt you thought that was a clever and original riposte.

        1. ★My last month paycheck was for 1500 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour.

          See—>More here

      2. I think wearingshit is trying to make fun of your name, NSD.

        1. I don’t know why, but that made my laugh out loud. I guess I love antihumor.

          1. Make $6,000-$8,000 A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. VZs
            Be Your Own Boss And for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot just open this link…………………………Go to this link

    2. It’s a pretty accurate assessment of Trump.

  2. I’m sure his mindless lemmings won’t be bothered if he were to cull testing. After all, putting paint on a wall that’s falling down solves everything.

    1. Speaking of walls, I’ll be laughing my butt off when the stories of how easily it is breached start coming out.

      1. Of course you will, you’re a retard who is easily led and thinks the purpose is to stop all traffic.

        God how do you people feed yourselves.

        1. Yes, yes, I’ve heard all the arguments here about how The Wall is only supposed to slow them down. I’ll still be laughing my butt off at how easily the wall is breached.

          1. Low T likes flushing money down the drain then tries to convince us that it cleans the pipes as it goes through!

    1. Hopefully John is writing a guest column with how analysis of the decision even as we speak.

      1. his analysis*
        Freaking autocorrect.

  3. Have you been alive for the last 3 months of context free reporting of deaths/hospitilizations/positive testing from the irresponsible media Suderman? Literally we’ve had a decline of deaths since april and since than it’s just been talk about how positives are spiking with no context. He’s right we’d be better off as a society not knowing given what we know about who this kills/hospitilized. If you are under 55 there’s not point of even getting tested unless you are hospitilized.

    1. You have to admit that there is a cost benefit analysis of the media flogging fear porn vs the benefit of higher levels of testing no? You are a rational person still right?

    2. 2 days ago on Tucker Carlson’s show, a guest ran down the statistics – 55% of deaths are nursing home related, and it’s probably higher than that (NY’s stats don’t include patients who caught COVID in a nursing home, but died in a hospital).

    3. Perhaps a person under 55 may want to know whether or not they have the contagious virus that’s killed 120k+ people so that they can avoid giving it to other people. Just a thought.

      1. no one is stopping them from being tested. I don’t like mandated testing as a requirement, I’m all in favor of voluntary testing for the curious i would but now its still limited to only those showing symptoms .

        1. Why? Because you care more about Trump poll numbers than solving a pandemic?

          1. Testing doesn’t stop pandemics.

            1. It’s definitely an important component. This hurts recovery, but in the short term maybe it makes the numbers look better. Trump only cares about perception. That pattern is well established.

    4. 25 years ago, this would have been just a bitch of a viral pneumonia year, and life would have gone on. No trillions of dollars wasted, no 20 percent and up unemployment.

      I really wonder whether the PLA inspector general equivalent who looked at those Wuhan labs after the first couple of cases got into the wild, saw that it could have been a far worse bug that go out, and they couldn’t tell that it hadn’t, and that caused their complete crazy reaction to what is, at best, a 2-3X more dangerous flu virus?

    5. “What Trump has repeatedly communicated is that he dislikes testing precisely because it makes clear the scope of the problem; his frustration is with the evidence and information testing provides.”

      Actually, it exaggerates the scope of the problem, which is problematic if, say, those exaggerated numbers lead to a second economic lockdown.

      Asymptomatics who test positive will often be tested multiple times until they test negative (or for confirmation of 1st test). Until recently the CDC was not distinguishing between actual cases and positive tests. Guess which number the media reports.

      From the point of Suderman’s article I quoted to the end, he’s just sniffing his own farts.

    6. Also, hospitals in AZ test admitted patients multiple times over the course of the admit; each positive test is thrown into the pile, failing to account for multiple positives being from a single infection. This type of accounting does precisely the opposite of “mak[ing] clear the scope of the problem.” Of course, the solution is not less testing (quarantined patients need to know when they are negative), but better accounting methodology.

      Can Reason afford such nuance amidst the Pandemania? Not in an election year, apparently.

      “Mediocre”
      -Immortan Joe

  4. “Testing provides clarity and critically useful evidence about the spread of the disease that the president doesn’t seem to want.”

    There is no evidence of this claim.

    1. Welcome to the Reason website.
      You aren’t new here, so what’s up? Been alone too long?

  5. Cases are going up in the U.S. because we are testing far more than any other country, and ever expanding. With smaller testing we would show fewer cases!

    How is that saying he is worried that it makes the US look bad? I think Suderman and his dingbat wife need to have someone else read things for them and explain it to them before they write anything.

    1. Suderman’s wife has completely lost it. I actually used to like her better. Covid fever has destroyed her mind.

      1. She lost it about 2008. Obama broke her mind. And Trump smashed it into a million pieces. God what a half wit.

        1. Yet, a dingbat writing for The Atlantic, which is probably a much better gig. There seems to be a lesson in that…

  6. Said it once, and I’ll say it, again. Trump fans should learn not to rush to defend the things he says. He’ll undermine you.

    1. Okay. how about you try understanding what he said. Not understanding what he said seems to be your and Suderman’s problem here.

      1. Trump is actively trying to slow testing. He just made another announcement of shutting down federal programs for testing. EU has a travel ban on us now. Chinese can travel to europe, we can’t.

        USA! USA! USA! So. Much. Winning.

        1. Why do I give a fuck about testing for a virus that is barely capable of killing people? Especially when that testing will be used to gin up more lockdown panic from you spergs?

          Think hard before you embarrass yourself again

          1. Because now we will be economically and just plain old freedom of movement limited due to this idiocy. Real consequences. Turns out you can’t just bluff and bluster your way through a real crisis. Turns out having political leadership who occupies actual reality is important.

            1. “Because now we will be economically and just plain old freedom of movement limited due to this idiocy.”

              No that’s because of innumerate pant shitting cowards like you, and testing would only fuel that cowardly pant shitting. History shows I’m right.

              Really? THAT was your reason?

            2. Could you outline your idea of wise leadership further for me?

              Like the kind of leadership that stuffs nursing homes to the brim with pre-infected patients?

              Like the kind of leadership that runs completely scientifically dubious “models” to predict the spread of the virus based on a coding language that’s slightly newer than code written on punch cards to justify completely new unconstitutional powers for themselves? The kind of leadership that plugs wildly speculative numbers into such a model and declares it science?

              The kind of leadership that doesn’t bother running any economic models (or doesn’t advertise the results) before granting themselves extraordinary new powers to shut down the entire world’s economy?

              The kind of leadership that prints trillions in new currency and gifts it directly to the banks and well connected firms while telling small businesses that they’ll need to take on new loans if they want to keep operating?

              The kind of leadership that has been giving billions to the CDC for decades and yet despite being warned about a potential novel virus pandemic for decades did nothing to either stockpile PPE themselves or promote the private stockpiling of PPE by the entities that would need it to respond thoroughly or safely?

              All of the above?

          2. The lockdown was not the result of testing but rather the lack of testing. Had we had better testing we could done tracing and had smaller more directed isolation. You need to think harder.

            1. No the lockdown was the result of pant shitting cowards like you and testing would only fuel your cowardice.

              1. You’re wasting your breath. Not only is Pedo Jeffy a lying sophist. He is also incapable of learning anything.

              2. Now pretend the president has a (D) after his name. How would you feel about the status quo then, you obvious partisan golem?

            2. You’re arguing with Tulpa. That’s a waste of time.

        2. Let’s see – COVID originated in China, and most cases came here from Europe…I’m ok with the travel ban.

    2. “Said it once, and I’ll say it, again”

      and still no one will care

  7. “in many ways, it makes us look bad.”…This comment understandably raised questions about whether Trump had, in fact, intentionally slowed down testing in order to preserve the appearance of less viral spread….Trump’s flacks argued that he was merely joking. “It was a comment that he made in jest,”

    This is just a perfect summary of this admin.

    His first comment is EXACTLY how an extreme narcissist will view everything. ‘Does option A make me look good’ There is nothing else that matters or that could possibly enter the mindset.

    Whether Trump has ‘slowed down anything’ or not is irrelevant and I don’t get why the media is so obsessed with that. Trump is an extreme narcissist. Everyone who works for him knows that. But no one alive is as narcissistic about Trump as Trump is about himself. So maybe some total toady will actually try to implement exactly what Trump says. But most professionals will simply ignore the narcissistic shit and focus on their jobs. Which of course will be spun by his toadies here as evidence of the Deep State undermining his presidency as if his presidency = his narcissism.

    And hey – his narcissism is not to be taken literally but seriously. Or maybe not taken literally or seriously. Or maybe taken with a grain of salt and some tequila thrown over your shoulder. Or whatever. Trump isn’t really even narcissistic. To say so is the first symptom of TDS.

    1. >>But no one alive is as narcissistic about Trump as Trump is about himself.

      can’t be, narcis is internal. enthusiastic a better word.

    2. We remember you shitting your pants and losing your mind and will never stop laughing at you for it.

      1. ‘We’? You speaking for yourself and your syphilitic infection?

        1. Technically it’s your mom’s infection, guy who the commentariat laughs at constantly.

    3. Or maybe you are just a fucking moron who has very little understanding of what is going on in the world. I am going to go with that. Now go cower in the corner afraid of the KungFlu, you lying sack of shit.

  8. So as a leader, Suderman will never again publish or discuss the meaningless ‘number of cases’, and only report and discuss the percentage of test that are positive (with full disclosure of that test’s specific false result rates) or the number of hospitalizations. He will always include the extremely significant breakdown of the numbers by age groups. He will forever in the future also include the comparable number of ‘real’ flu victims to provide a context, and always discuss the CDC’s conflicting stand on the use of masks/cloth face coverings for ‘real; flu in contrast to the Communist Chinese Virus.
    Right?

  9. Shouldn’t Trump be bragging about the “yuge number of tests, more than any other country, we do the greatest job, tremendous testing, yada yada yada”??

    1. He’s a confused old man with early signs of memory loss who can figure out if he’s coming or going.

      1. Pretty much sums it up. Fred Trump died of Alzheimer related health problems. Not sure if his son is on the same path.

        1. I wouldn’t pull too hard on that thread considering who the presumptive democrat nominee is. You do realize Biden’s second aneurysm surgery technically lobotomized him, right?

          1. I am not happy that my choice for President will be between two men in their 70’s. That said Biden shows far fewer symptoms of dementia. Trump had trouble mixing words, a short attention span, and bouts of anger. Also he is showing sign of stroke, trouble walking and holding objects.

            1. Biden shows fewer symptoms of dementia? You’re either very sheltered, or being dishonest with yourself if you believe that

              1. Ok, I say Trump shows three, what you got for Biden?

            2. You have another choice. A sane choice. But you’re a partisan shill, so you won’t mention her.

              1. You are right and if this was another election I might consider Jo Jorgenson. But I will not take the chance of 4 more years of Trump. Biden will be President for 4 years and in 2024 I will reconsider my choices, but not for now. Jo Jorgensen will not win and I will not waste this vote.

    2. That’s so – March 1

      When the CDC gets caught with its pants down and no testing then that makes him look bad. So its – “Importantly: Anybody, right now, and yesterday, anybody that needs a test gets a test. They’re there. They have the tests. And the tests are beautiful,” Trump said. Didn’t matter that it wasn’t true then. Doesn’t matter that it is kind of true now but that the results ‘don’t make him look good’.

      Now – testing is crypto-commie. Surrender to China. Just like masks. Real Americans don’t get tested or wear masks. They gobble quinine and zinc by the ton. The new MAGA hats indeed have two pockets inside – one for quinine and one for zinc – with two straws leading straight to the nose. They’re on special. Today only. And they’re Made in America. Or at least that’s what the label says – “Not made in some Shithole country by rapists”

      Of course – this is an arduous long-term battle against the left. So it is possible that the fight against testing will have to move to higher ground if it doesn’t work. Real Americans have gotta stop pussying out and going to hospital if they’ve got the kung flu. It’s just surrendering to China. Man up. Trump will join us in this fight shortly. Just has to fix his bone spurs first. Biggest bone spurs ever. But hopefully we Americans can hang on until God returns.

      1. Bro we remember you clowning yourself and shitting your pants over a cold, no one cares what you bleat.

        1. So that’s where all the toilet paper went!

    3. I’m pretty sure he did just that in the same speech that Suderman quoted.

  10. Trump’s flacks argued that he was merely joking. “It was a comment that he made in jest,”

    Last time I checked, yelling fire in a crowded building without there actually being a fire could land you in some legal trouble. I don’t agree with that notion but, whatever!

    1. He “clarified” that he “does not kid.”

      There goes the excuse that he was joking when he lobbied Russia for illegal campaign assistance. Woops!

    2. “Last time I checked, yelling fire in a crowded building without there actually being a fire could land you in some legal trouble.”

      Maybe you should have checked again in the last 50 years.

      1. Hell, it wasn’t even true before the case was overturned in the late 60s.

        That quote is taken from a footnote as a potential example. It was never against the law to scream fire in a crowded theater.

  11. Testing asymptomatic young people is only being used to curtail our freedoms, something I thought Suderman would be about defending.

    If I go fly to Florida and get tested and it shows antibodies, I’ll be counted as a new case in Florina.

  12. Reporting numbers without context is completely misleading. It does make it look worse than it is.

    1. You would think journalists could grasp this 5th grade concept.

      1. Only if you have the naive, 5th grade notion that propagandists are journalists.

    2. In Spokane, All the progtards are shitting their pants about all the new cases we have. Even though the increase in cases scales proportionally with the increase in testing, and we have the same overall 7% positive result we’ve consistently had for over three months. And for the last month Spokane has had less than ten people hospitalized for for Kung Flu at any given time. With only a handful of new deaths.

      But because of progtards, we have to have half our business and industry shut down.

  13. There’s been no action, or attempted action, to reduce testing. Meanwhile, because Trump said this, every left-wing talking head is telling their audience about how a dramatic increase in testing has occurred. This undercuts their prior talking point that Trump had failed to provide adequate testing, and it undercuts the talking point that cases are up.

    Both of those things benefit Trump.

    There is no 4-D chess needed here. Trump simply plays the media like a fiddle using an extremely simple formula: Say something outlandish that causes the media to tell the truth about a subject that Trump wants the public to know the truth about.

    1. Trump down 14 points to Biden. Maybe he should try chess.

      1. That only matters if we switch to the popular vote counting for anything.
        You have to look at the polls state by state, in order of electoral votes.
        And remember, Trump supporters do not talk to pollsters.

        #remember2016

        1. I see a common theme: Trumpers hate data. Also democracy, but that’s only because it doesn’t favor them and never will again.

          1. We don’t have a democracy. We have a constitutional republic. Learn some civics FFS.

            And I happen to love data. Unlike you I understand it, and am not a disingenuous shitweasel.

            1. Tony just can’t help himself.

  14. It’s been a wrench seeing this wonderful publication fall to ravages of TDS. I’m not a Trump fan either but spending all your words to whine and whine about Trump minutia does not make interesting articles nor informative reading. I’ll check back after the Trump presidency.

    Maybe Reason will come back, maybe it will be forever lost like the ACLU.

    1. Why would a libertarian magazine want to report on the incompetence and abuses of power of the US head of government, after all?

      1. Tony, take the twelve inch black dildo out of your ass and pay attention. Hillary LOST in 2016. We’re not talking about her.

        1. You are such a basic bitch.

          1. I’m not far from the truth there, am I Tony. Although I make room for the fact that your dildo could be pink too.

            1. I’m sorry your Team can’t get people who made more than a D in college to run for important jobs, but that’s not my problem.

  15. Like moths to a flame, or horseflies to shit, you people are preternaturally drawn to defend Trump no matter what. Sad!

    1. Its TDDS, Trump Denial and Defense Syndrome.

      1. No, he just isn’t wrong here. You will attack him no matter what. If there are more tests, there will logically be higher WuFlu numbers. So you blame him for that. If there isn’t more testing, you blame him for that too. Which was his point.

        You progs are intellectually dishonest, and only care about restoring Progressives to power. So please, cut the bullshit.

        1. WuFlu? What is that?

          1. Another name for the KungFlu.

            1. There is no such thing and I read the journals on a regular basis.

              I do know a little about Kung fu as I grew up on those Bruce Lee movies.

              There is Kung Pao which is a way to cook chicken or shrimp.

              So the chief executive of the United States of America talks about a serious infectious disease in our country and affecting our lives every day. Big joke, no it was not. There is nothing funny about it.

        2. Do you ever consider the possibility of Trump being good at his job? Is that one of the options?

          1. He is reasonably good at his job, considering the massive level of treason and sedition leveled at him and this country daily.

            1. Always with a fucking pussy-ass excuse.

  16. Trump is the driver that started a race with all of the advantages pole position (good and early intel, and geographic separation), the best pit crew (medical experts and infrastructure), and best car (America), and Trump is still in dead last place.

    America has, by far, the most cases and most deaths in the world.

    Testing is a constant reminder to Trump that he is in dead last place lapped by every decent driver and country and behind, even, all of the drivers of and those “shit-hole countries.”

    1. Well said.

    2. Man, it sure would suck if most of those numbers came out of Democrat strongholds that did everything in their power to get more people sick and kill them. Oh wait…..

  17. Eh, he probably realizes that more testing will show more positive tests, which will then be blamed on him. Given that, I can’t entirely blame him for not wanting more testing. Any self interested politician in an election year would probably feel the same.

    1. How terrible does Trump have to be before he gets excused on the theory that other politicians would be just as terrible in his place?

      Imagine he had a D after his name and was letting Americans die in a futile attempt to improve his poll numbers.

      1. Tony, Trump doesn’t have the power to save or condemn Americans when it comes to a virus. You’re just being disingenuous and hyperbolic. Again.

        And I don’t think you want to start getting into the lack of action from your pal Obama in reaction to the pandemics he faces during his tenure. Besides, a large portion of deaths are the direct result of democrat governors Putting WuFlu patients in nursing homes. Which is pretty much murder when you think about it.

        So really, you and your de oral friends have an ocean of blood on your hands, as usual.

        1. So do politicians have any role to play or no? It seems to depend on what letter they have after their name. (R) means all is excused, no matter what, and (D) means the lizard people are drinking your man juices, or what the fuck ever you read at American Thinker today.

          1. You’re projecting. I condemn bad republicans and bad republican decisions all the time. Whereas you have entire industries like the media and Hollywood that do just what you describe to protect democrats, and attack republicans.

      2. Works both ways.

        “I would vote for Joe Biden if he boiled babies and ate them. He wasn’t my candidate, but taking back the White House is that important.
        [progressive Katha Pollitt’s opinion piece in The Nation]

        Representative Ilhan Omar said that even though she believes the accusations of Tara Reade, she is still going to vote for Joe Biden for President.

        Omar: “I Do Believe [Her]”

        “Believing survivors is consistent with my values. Yes, I endorsed against Biden and I didn’t pick him as our nominee. With that said, in this interview I did on May 6th, we talked about that and quotes aren’t always in context. I will vote for him and help him defeat Trump.

        I Believe Tara Reade. I’m Voting for Joe Biden Anyway.
        The importance of owning an ugly moral choice.
        By Linda Hirshman [In NY Times]

      3. If Hillary had been President would the WHO have still lied about the severity and spread of the virus for two months? Would you have bleated about our wanting to shut down international travel and immigration? Would Cuomo have still put positive patients back in nursing homes? Would the media be breathlessly quoting positive cases or would they be a little more nuanced in their reporting?

        The honest truth is I didn’t say dick about how Obama handled the pandemics that happened on his watch and I wouldn’t say anything about Hillary (unless she tried to do some kind of EO to shut the economy down). Mostly because the president can do fuck all about the spread of a goddamn virus.

  18. Kung flu was a nice touch, with John dutifully parroting it as if, in conservatardia, repeating other people’s jokes makes them funnier. And how is it that Republicans can inject racism even into an issue that has literally nothing to do with race? Is it a compulsion or what?

    1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new.DXs after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do………………Home Profit System

    2. Of what race do you speak of Tony? China is a country, not an ethnicity unto itself. And Wuhan is a small portion of that country.

      But we get it. You have no real arguments. You really never do. So race baiting is a go to move for you. So you won’t be forced to admit how wrong you are.

      1. Kung flu isn’t racist at all. Nope.

        It’s only racism if a black person does it to a white person, am I right?

        1. You talk about “kung flu” and SofW responds with something about “Wuhan”. That’s how much thought he put into his knee-jerk reply.

          1. Nothing you or Tony can say inspires much thought. As neither of you are capable of any significant level of cognition.

        2. Another straw man. As I never said any such thing. Now answer the question. How is ‘WuFlu’ or ‘KungFlu’ racist?

          1. First I need to understand something. Do you or do you not believe that all Asian men are experts at martial arts?

  19. The problem is that the media is ginning up hysteria again, which could very well lead into another shutdown

    He does not want this, obviously.

  20. You cannot even travel freely in America as of now. We are

    Any self interested politician….

    Can you name any others calling for less testing? They are all self interested.

    Not only that. The US does not test “far more than any other country”.

    https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing

    1. Looking at the daily vs total number of deaths chart I have to wonder when the other countries that bent the curve earlier shut down their borders.

      Also, what does America look like without New York?

  21. Of all of the dumb things I have heard Trump say over the years this is by far the dumbest.

    1. Trump’s doubts about the utility and efficacy of testing are reasonable. It’s your unquestioning acceptance of the premise that more testing is a good thing that’s “dumb”.

  22. Let’s see a graph of the percent of positive tests vs. total tests from February to now.

    1. They are available.

  23. Trump is a salesman and like many salesmen he only wants to sell blue sky and never, ever discuss the problems. It’s a form of fraud.

  24. “Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive”.

    1. That will look great on a tombstone for Reason and the rest of the media in general with how they’re acting these days.

  25. Totally off topic. i just learned that there is spiny anteater RNA in the covid virus. So i googled it. There is nothing, and i mean NOTHING, but bullshit about how in the wet market, bats that weren’t in the wet market gave the virus to anteaters that weren’t in the wet market, who then gave it to humans. Not a fucking word about the bio lab which was working with both. It was just ABSOLUTELY certain that the virus, if it came from China at all, originated in the wet market. i went thru several pages, but it was all the same bullshit. i knew that google was a bunch of motherfucking lefties, but i naively thought that if you dug down just a bit, you could find opposing viewpoints. i was wrong. So, my question; what search engine has some semblance of balance, or even where can i find something i can fucking believe? In a way, i envy Tony, who has the luxury of pulling all his info directly out of his well-worn ass. He is supremely confident that all his shit is reliable. So, could i have some suggestions about search engines, and i’ll work thru them to see who might have the lowest level of bul shit. Many Thanks, my friends.

  26. Nice Article just do one thing visite mine website.
    https://mkvmad.online

  27. Trump isn’t wrong here. The only thing that widespread public testing does is feed into the panic porn that gets plastered onto the news every night.

    It’s pretty clear at this point that the prevalence of infections is likely dozens or hundreds of times higher than the actual rate of tested and confirmed cases, why do we need to test people who aren’t in the hospital or seeking medical treatment? It’s not what we do with the flu.

    The genie is out of the bottle. Unless it’s randomized and compulsory – and we can’t do that – there’s no statistical need now for testing the public unless we just want to stoke panic.

    1. I’ve assumed for months now that the actual infection rate would be between 10 and 20 percent of the entire population.

  28. “Worrying” about something isn’t the same as “refusing” to do it. AFAIK, testing is going ahead for now.

    But it is reasonable to make a cost/benefit analysis for medical tests; often, the costs and risks outweigh the benefits. That may well be the case for COVID-19 testing as well.

Please to post comments