I’d Much Rather Have Bernie In Charge of the Coronavirus Epidemic

Sue Dorfman/ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Over at The Corner, Jim Geraghty talks about who you’d trust most with a public health crisis like the coronavirus epidemic:

I concur with Michael Brendan Doherty’s assessment that the Trump administration’s response is, so far, not entirely reassuring. The markets aren’t going to be reassured by advice to “buy the dip” or talk of tax cuts, and investors are not going to feel confident when the White House chief of staff tells them to turn off their televisions….The prospect of a tanking stock market and genuine public anxiety about a virus might have Democrats feeling better about their chances in the presidential election in November. Big problems usually generate sentiment against the incumbent.

Then again, if it feels like the country is in a really dangerous spot . . . how much do Americans want to entrust everything to Bernie Sanders? Does a public-health crisis make Americans say, “Hey, let’s have a socialist revolution on top of all this?” Sanders believed, into his late forties, that cancer had psychosomatic aspects. Does he seem like the guy you want in charge during a pandemic or some other major public-health crisis?

I think Geraghty misses the point here. No one expects the president of the United States to be an expert on pandemic diseases. Bernie Sanders probably knows no more about them than Donald Trump does. What we do expect is a couple of things. First, we want a president who’s likely to listen to experts and let them speak to the public. Second, we want a president who’s going to appoint the best possible people to deal with the crisis.

Bernie Sanders would almost certainly be far better than Trump on both scores. There’s every reason to think he’d pay close attention to what the experts say. He would encourage someone like Anthony Fauci to hold daily press conferences instead of sidelining him. He would appoint a czar who had a reputation for both aggressiveness and deep knowledge of the federal bureaucracy—definitely not someone like Mike Pence. He would tell the truth when he spoke to the public, and he would mostly care about fixing the problem rather than fretting endlessly about his own reputation.

Even if you think Bernie Sanders has ridiculous ideas about the economy, there’s no reason to think he has weird ideas about how to handle a public health emergency. He would at least handle it normally, and quite possibly handle it well. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has weird ideas about everything and is motivated primarily by a desire to show that he’s not to blame for anything bad. That’s a toxic combination that Sanders can’t come close to matching.

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. It's our first time asking for an outpouring of support since screams of FAKE NEWS and so much of what Trump stood for made everything we do so visceral. Like most newsrooms, we face incredibly hard budget realities, and it's unnerving needing to raise big money when traffic is down.

So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate