[Goose]

Again, leadership means taking an unpopular position, and convincing others that the danger is real and to take it seriously, not waiting until others have come to that conclusion on their own volition.


BC

Yes, that is true. But even great leaders have to work with the public as it is, not the public as they wish it were. While I get it that it would be wonderful for the leaders to recognize the "correct" course and bring the people to it, it is not in evidence that this is always possible. In fact, I would argue that experience shows us that it basically never happens that way. I certainly believe that Trump made many errors by minimizing the problems the virus could inflict upon the public. That was plain stupid. What a better leader might have accomplished is an open question, but I doubt it would have included much faster action than actually occurred.

If one wants to look for real "leadership", one could ask why various administrations at all levels did not create a track and trace capability that could handle an epidemic caused by a novel agent. One might also ask why the CDC did not put in place a better level of cooperation with PCR machine manufacturers, commercial testing labs and hospital testing labs to allow rapid distribution of new PCR based testing. They have publications discussing the need for it that date back many years. These would have been programs that nobody would oppose except on the basis of cost. That is where "leadership" could have moved the meter. It didn't happen. If it had, we wouldn't have needed to convince the entire nation to SIP. We could have contained the outbreak, like Taiwan did, or at least had a chance of doing so.

[Goose]

Again, leadership means taking an unpopular position, and convincing others that the danger is real and to take it seriously, not waiting until others have come to that conclusion on their own volition.


BC

Yes, that is true. But even great leaders have to work with the public as it is, not the public as they wish it were. While I get it that it would be wonderful for the leaders to recognize the "correct" course and bring the people to it, it is not in evidence that this is always possible. In fact, I would argue that experience shows us that it basically never happens that way. I certainly believe that Trump made many errors by minimizing the problems the virus could inflict upon the public. That was plain stupid. What a better leader might have accomplished is an open question, but I doubt it would have included much faster action than actually occurred.

If one wants to look for real "leadership", one could ask why various administrations at all levels did not create a track and trace capability that could handle an epidemic caused by a novel agent. One might also ask why the CDC did not put in place a better level of cooperation with PCR machine manufacturers, commercial testing labs and hospital testing labs to allow rapid distribution of new PCR based testing. They have publications discussing the need for it that date back many years. These would have been programs that nobody would oppose except on the basis of cost. That is where "leadership" could have moved the meter. It didn't happen. If it had, we wouldn't have needed to convince the entire nation to SIP. We could have contained the outbreak, like Taiwan did, or at least had a chance of doing so.