The Better COVID-19 Candidate.
The 2020 presidential election is one week away and nothing is certain except this election is all about COVID-19. Voters should consider which administration would be better to minimize the impact of COVID-19.
In one corner is the embattled President Donald Trump who has publicly downplayed COVID-19, desperately trying to shift the narrative away from COVID19 to foreign policy, the economy or anything else.
In the other corner is the former Vice President Joe Biden an establishment democrat, who is presidential, experienced and pleasantly predictable. Mr. Biden has pointed voters at the one main issue that voters should consider — COVID-19.
COVID-19 is a major issue, the major issue as I see it. Mr. Biden gets it as do the majority of Americans. Hell, even Borat understands this: “Now vote or you will be execute.” In other words, COVID-19 is a life or death matter and, therefore, so is voting for the right commander-in-chief to contain COVID.
The conventional perception is that if you think the major issue is COVID and you feel we haven’t responded well thus far (given the staggering mortality figures) then you should vote for Biden. As one CNN democrat leaning commentator giddily said, the number one issue in this election is COVID. Number 2 is Covid. Number 3 Covid…
Social media is flooded with similar perspectives. Like Dr. John Talmadge, a psychiatrist who routinely provides psychopathological analysis of Mr. Trump to his 50K+ followers on Twitter, who concludes that:
a new and competent administration will [control Covid-19]
I think this perspective is flawed. While I also believe COVID-19 is the most important issue in the upcoming election, I think when analyzing which candidate will be better the question must consider the contextual and situational variables.
(Let me take a second to disclaim that I am independent and have voted for both sides).
I understand voting Democrat in this election if you consider the 2020 election to be a referendum against President Trump. I also understand voting, in the abstract, for any issue such as who would be the best commander in chief to fight against “a pandemic” by considering the most qualified candidate. However, that isn’t the real question we face, is it? To accurately frame this question we have to face the situational facts — the facts on the ground.
The United States government’s fight against COVID-19 isn’t starting in January 2021. It’s operational. There are already many moving parts at the federal and state levels. Answering which candidate is better for COVID must consider, which candidate’s administration, or which team, is best suited to continue the current process to fight against COVID— the Biden Team or the incumbent Trump Team?
You could consider this as a question that is independent of candidates, one that is related to an incumbent team vs. a new team for any issue, even outside of politics. If you have ever had a job you can appreciate how long it takes to ‘learn the ropes’ or how hard it can be to replace someone.
Even a highly educated and experienced new boss can take a few months to learn how things work. Research shows that turnover leads to reduced productivity. When a new administration replaces an older one, there is a loss in productivity that is magnified by replacing multiple individuals at the same time. This loss of efficiency could be critical in a crisis.
Voters know this is the case which is why no wartime president has ever been defeated. Voters don’t want to change everything up when we are in the middle of a battle. It’s why if you think COVID-19 is the most important issue this election, if you think it is the 1st, 2nd and 3rd most important issue, you might consider voting for the incumbent team, irrespective of how you feel about them.
The alternative is voting for Team Biden, a new team. While acknowledging that a new administration will necessarily disrupt the war against COVID, due to lost productivity, you might still reason that the long-term benefits of Biden’s COVID strategy will outweigh the short-term costs inflicted by lost productivity. That might be possible, if the Biden strategy varies significantly from the government’s current strategy. However, the main bullet points of published about their plans, as provided by the Kaiser foundation and other outlets look substantially similar to those of Trump’s plan.
“Returning to normal by 2021,” for example, would “restore trust and credibility” and require “mount[ing] an effective national emergency.”
According to Monika McDermott, a professor of political science at Fordham University, while Biden has tried to paint Trump as an uncaring leader without a plan, in general, he hasn’t done a good job of explaining how his Coronavirus plan is any different. At Biden’s town hall with ABC News in October, Biden said “you can’t mandate a mask” and avoided advocating for lockdowns.“He didn’t really draw a bright line there to distinguish himself from Trump in my mind,” McDermott says.
Similarly, it won’t be feasible or make sense for a new government to reinvent the wheel. They will have to continue executing the existing plan that has been set into motion by the Trump administration. Meanwhile, they will have to replace all or most of the senior administrative individuals responsible for oversight and execution of a plan they helped design.
Elections aren’t always about logic, a solitary issue or about feelings. As election day approaches, I find myself feeling fatigued with the last four years and concerned about the next four. I’m not endorsing either candidate but don’t see any objective evidence that Joe Biden’s plan will alter the current response to COVID-19. In fact, independent of the involved candidates, switching administrations in the middle of the pandemic may result in a loss of productivity and lives.
