[Goose]

Honestly, I doubt there are very few on this Board who would have given two hoots for any “soft leadership” by the president in February.

Possibly true, but I am wildly optimistic and still believe (despite lots of evidence to the contrary) that there are many people on this board that would have dispassionately considered what the President said and supported it if they thought it was appropriate. Unfortunately, the President has lost the confidence of many because of his erratic behavior and because (my opinion here, sorry) he is apparently incapable of reasoning. But he does have some good, competent people that can advise him, and when he takes that advise the results can be good. Or he gets lucky, take your pick.

In any case, even if I thought the President was a genius and I had great confidence in him, he would need to present the case for his suggested actions and allow me to consider it. I wouldn't support or oppose it just based on the fact the President said it. I would listen because of the source, but I wouldn't support or oppose based on the source. Those that would do so are IMHO part of the problem.

[Goose]

Honestly, I doubt there are very few on this Board who would have given two hoots for any “soft leadership” by the president in February.

Possibly true, but I am wildly optimistic and still believe (despite lots of evidence to the contrary) that there are many people on this board that would have dispassionately considered what the President said and supported it if they thought it was appropriate. Unfortunately, the President has lost the confidence of many because of his erratic behavior and because (my opinion here, sorry) he is apparently incapable of reasoning. But he does have some good, competent people that can advise him, and when he takes that advise the results can be good. Or he gets lucky, take your pick.

In any case, even if I thought the President was a genius and I had great confidence in him, he would need to present the case for his suggested actions and allow me to consider it. I wouldn't support or oppose it just based on the fact the President said it. I would listen because of the source, but I wouldn't support or oppose based on the source. Those that would do so are IMHO part of the problem.

[oldalum]

 Honestly, I doubt there are very few on this Board who would have given two hoots for any “soft leadership” by the president in February.

If true, that would be sad given the lives and livelihoods at stake. But I don't think it's true. Rooting against the president in his response to the pandemic is just wrong. Criticizing his response for being short of what is required, let alone detrimental, seems entirely appropriate.

[oldalum]

 Honestly, I doubt there are very few on this Board who would have given two hoots for any “soft leadership” by the president in February.

If true, that would be sad given the lives and livelihoods at stake. But I don't think it's true. Rooting against the president in his response to the pandemic is just wrong. Criticizing his response for being short of what is required, let alone detrimental, seems entirely appropriate.

[76lsjumb]

Honestly, I doubt there are very few on this Board who would have given two hoots for any “soft leadership” by the president in February.

Possibly true, but I am wildly optimistic and still believe (despite lots of evidence to the contrary) that there are many people on this board that would have dispassionately considered what the President said and supported it if they thought it was appropriate. Unfortunately, the President has lost the confidence of many because of his erratic behavior and because (my opinion here, sorry) he is apparently incapable of reasoning. But he does have some good, competent people that can advise him, and when he takes that advise the results can be good. Or he gets lucky, take your pick.

In any case, even if I thought the President was a genius and I had great confidence in him, he would need to present the case for his suggested actions and allow me to consider it. I wouldn't support or oppose it just based on the fact the President said it. I would listen because of the source, but I wouldn't support or oppose based on the source. Those that would do so are IMHO part of the problem.

Excellent post. I agree with everything you said ... including that you’re likely wildly optimistic about the number of dispassionate people on the Board. :-)

[76lsjumb]

Honestly, I doubt there are very few on this Board who would have given two hoots for any “soft leadership” by the president in February.

Possibly true, but I am wildly optimistic and still believe (despite lots of evidence to the contrary) that there are many people on this board that would have dispassionately considered what the President said and supported it if they thought it was appropriate. Unfortunately, the President has lost the confidence of many because of his erratic behavior and because (my opinion here, sorry) he is apparently incapable of reasoning. But he does have some good, competent people that can advise him, and when he takes that advise the results can be good. Or he gets lucky, take your pick.

In any case, even if I thought the President was a genius and I had great confidence in him, he would need to present the case for his suggested actions and allow me to consider it. I wouldn't support or oppose it just based on the fact the President said it. I would listen because of the source, but I wouldn't support or oppose based on the source. Those that would do so are IMHO part of the problem.

Excellent post. I agree with everything you said ... including that you’re likely wildly optimistic about the number of dispassionate people on the Board. :-)

[stupac2]

I find it odd how many people consider themselves arbiters of the rationality of others. Especially on this topic, given that there are various actions that the administration has taken recently that have been praised, such as the recent push for a "Manhattan project" for a vaccine, or the plan for reopening, to name two that immediately come to mind.

It's also a bizarre counterfactual to play, what difference does it make? We got what we got.

[stupac2]

I find it odd how many people consider themselves arbiters of the rationality of others. Especially on this topic, given that there are various actions that the administration has taken recently that have been praised, such as the recent push for a "Manhattan project" for a vaccine, or the plan for reopening, to name two that immediately come to mind.

It's also a bizarre counterfactual to play, what difference does it make? We got what we got.

[Mick]

I find it odd how many people consider themselves arbiters of the rationality of others.

Oh, I don't know.  Everyone considers themselves the baseline, and the majority of other people deviate from one's own baseline.

[Mick]

I find it odd how many people consider themselves arbiters of the rationality of others.

Oh, I don't know.  Everyone considers themselves the baseline, and the majority of other people deviate from one's own baseline.

[pefloresjr]

I think it's likely true that most people see themselves as the reasonable baseline, regardless of the context.  What is not helpful to a rational discussion is speculation about the way any perceived group or person on the Cardboard would react or would have reacted to actions that never happened.  The fact is that sometimes I consider myself to be the only person keeping his rational mind somewhere between the extremes and other times I think I am the only renegade who hasn't fallen into the common emotional traps that other have.  NONE of that matters.  This is the Cardboard.  Bring the evidence that is focused on relevant issues or be prepared to be called on the carpet.  It is the only Thunderdome that really matters to me other than the peer review process.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

I think it's likely true that most people see themselves as the reasonable baseline, regardless of the context.  What is not helpful to a rational discussion is speculation about the way any perceived group or person on the Cardboard would react or would have reacted to actions that never happened.  The fact is that sometimes I consider myself to be the only person keeping his rational mind somewhere between the extremes and other times I think I am the only renegade who hasn't fallen into the common emotional traps that other have.  NONE of that matters.  This is the Cardboard.  Bring the evidence that is focused on relevant issues or be prepared to be called on the carpet.  It is the only Thunderdome that really matters to me other than the peer review process.  

Cheers,
Pete F.