Bobo The Clown’s Revenge? How The Media Is Reelecting Donald Trump

Screen Shot 2020-05-17 at 3.29.14 PM
YouTube Screenshot (Stanford Experiment)

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on how the media seems confused by polls that not only fail to show former Vice President Joe Biden surging but some showing Trump pulling ahead with voters.  The problem is that the media has never shown any real interest in understanding Trump voters, preferring to stereotype them as racists, as done in a recent Washington Post column.  The truth might be found in a famous Stanford experiment called “Bobo the Clown.”

Here is the column:

Various media outlets are struggling with recent polls that not only show President Trump at the same popularity as this time last year but actually rising in states like Ohio. When one poll found him leading by 7 points in battleground states, John King cautioned viewers to “be careful not to invest too much in any one poll” especially amid the coronavirus. It was a CNN poll and, while Biden leads in other polls, it is not unique.

The media seems honestly confused. It was not supposed to work this way. With unrelentingly negative coverage of an impeachment, a pandemic, and an economic collapse, voters were supposed to be angry. There is even a psychological model for such social cognitive learning or conditioning called “Bobo the Clown” and, while this experiment by psychologist Albert Bandura focused on children, these polls suggest that conditioning does not work nearly as well in politics as it does on playgrounds.

In 1961, Bandura used a goofy inflatable clown named Bobo and had children watch adults as they acted aggressively toward it. Soon the children followed the adults’ example and beat the clown. Conversely, when children watched the clown being treated without aggression, they were less aggressive toward it.

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedFor many voters, Donald Trump and Joe Biden are not so funny clowns, and voters are being conditioned by some in the media to treat one aggressively and the other not aggressively. It is not the first attempt at media conditioning: In 2016, when every poll indicated that voters wanted outsider candidates, Democratic leaders pushed through one of the two most unpopular presidential candidates in history, Hillary Clinton.

She was beaten by the other most unpopular figure on the Republican side, Trump. Yet, after largely positive treatment of Clinton and correspondingly negative coverage of Trump, the election results stunned experts who predicted an easy win for Clinton — and why not? Voters had been exposed to unyielding, continual media conditioning against Trump.

The conclusion of the media today appears to be that the scathing treatment in 2016 was not aggressive enough. Trump is routinely called an actual clown by some in the media. More importantly, there are now consistent attacks on Trump supporters. Washington Post “conservative columnist” Jennifer Rubin has declared that Trump supporters as a whole are racists. That common stereotyping of Trump supporters is uncontested, even as the media objects to Trump’s generalizations about other groups.

Columnist Leonard Pitts wrote a recent column entitled, “No, it’s not the economy, stupid. Trump supporters fear a black and brown America.” The narrative has moved beyond Clinton’s description of Trump supporters as a “basket of deplorables” to now portraying all Trump supporters as open racists. “Make America Great Again” hats are denounced by academics as the symbol of “modern day hitlerjugend” and hate speech.

It is all part of media-cognitive learning, and it is working in a curious way. Recent polls show Trump at the exact same spot as he was last year, with roughly 43 percent support. In Ohio he actually is ahead by 3 percentage points in a survey from Emerson College and Nexstar Media; he and Biden are in a statistical dead heat in Wisconsin. In other words, as in 2016, the media campaign is forcing Trump supporters into the closet, but not away from Trump.

220px-Biden_2013Meanwhile, the media has been working hard at non-aggressive treatment of Biden. His frequent gaffes are quickly dismissed; when he was accused of sexual assault, the media reluctantly noted the story. Even when Biden recently espoused a conspiracy theory that Trump was going to halt the November election, the media called it a “prediction” and ignored that it was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution.

At the end of last year, the Media Research Center found that network evening news was 96 percent negative against Trump. The drumbeat has only increased with impeachment and pandemic coverage this year. Despite such saturated messaging, polls show that the number of voters expressing strong “enthusiasm” for Biden is wallowing at just 24 percent, while Trump remains at 53 percent. Biden is just 3 points ahead of Trump in the most recent polls, actually behind where Clinton was in 2016. The reason may be that the anti-Trump narrative is so overwhelming that voters feel they are being played like the kids in the Bandura experiment.

Consider again the recent attack of the Post’s Rubin on most Republicans. Rubin lashed out at the immigration freeze ordered by Trump during the pandemic; however, she was not satisfied with denouncing the policy as a political stunt to appeal to the unemployed. She declared: “No doubt Trump’s base is primarily motivated by racism. This is why Trump does this.” The statement captures the accepted, unhinged bias against all Trump supporters in the mainstream media.

I did not vote for Trump, and I have regularly criticized him in columns and blog posts. However, I have watched the stereotyping of Trump supporters at media conferences for years. It suggests that roughly 63 million people in this country who voted for Trump in 2016 are knuckle-dragging racists. It ignores the fact that Hillary Clinton had record negative polling before the nomination and was widely viewed as pathologically inauthentic.

Recently, polls show 85 percent of Republicans support Trump. Thus, according to Rubin, 85 percent of Republicans (and roughly 10 percent of Democrats and 47 percent of independents) — in other words, almost half of America — are primarily motivated by racism. Does that track with any sense of reality? There are a host of reasons for these voters to support Trump other than racism.

What is not being discussed much in the media is that people might have non-racist reasons for supporting Trump. The fact is that Trump has a curious record: He has been repeatedly (and correctly) chastised for untrue statements, and yet he has one of the best records for actually keeping campaign promises — the crackdown on immigration, building of the border wall, pro-life policies and appointments, selection of conservative jurists, tax cuts, regulation rollbacks, opening up areas to oil drilling.

These and many other aspects of his administration are the most controversial but also are the long-held wish list of conservatives going back to Ronald Reagan. Indeed, while 85 percent of Republicans support Trump, a new poll shows that 23 percent would like to see someone else as their nominee. Yet, Rubin and others simply dismiss all Trump supporters as monolithic, pathological racists.

Thus, polls indicate that the unending attacks on Trump and his supporters in the media are not conditioning but, instead, are repelling voters. They are fulfilling his narrative that voters cannot trust the media. Many voters may still view both Trump and Biden as over-inflated clowns, but they resent being continually conditioned to hit one clown and hug the other. Indeed, if Trump is reelected, he may have the media to thank.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.

274 thoughts on “Bobo The Clown’s Revenge? How The Media Is Reelecting Donald Trump”

  1. 15 Attorneys General unite in an amicus brief urging Sullivan to dismiss charges against Flynn without commentary “because such punditry disrobes the judiciary of its cloak of impartiality.”

    Very good advice but I doubt Judge Sullivan is stable enough to take it and get out clean while he can. He is already disrobed of his cloak of impartiality and stands nakedly biased before us.

    Still waiting to see how Super Attorney Powell handles this.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-attorneys-general-unite-to-file-amicus-brief-in-support-of-flynn-as-judge-suggests-keeping-case-alive

    1. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3599674

      “Abstract
      The conventional view of Rule 48(a) dismissals distinguishes between two types of motions to dismiss: (1) those where dismissal would benefit the defendant, and (2) those where dismissal might give the Government a tactical advantage against the defendant, perhaps because prosecutors seek to dismiss the case and then file new charges. In United States v. Flynn, the Department of Justice argues that Rule 48(a)’s “leave of court” requirement applies exclusively to the latter category of motions to dismiss; where the dismissal accrues to the benefit of the defendant, judicial meddling is unwarranted and improper. In support, the Government relies on forty-year-old dicta in the sole U.S. Supreme Court case interpreting Rule 48(a), Rinaldi v. United States. There, the Court stated that the “leave of court” language was added to Rule 48(a) “without explanation,” but “apparently” this verbiage had as its “principal object . . . to protect a defendant against prosecutorial harassment.”

      But the Government’s position—and the U.S. Supreme Court language upon which it is based—is simply wrong. In fact, the “principal object” of Rule 48(a)’s “leave of court” requirement was not to protect the interests of individual defendants, but rather to guard against dubious dismissals of criminal cases that would benefit powerful and well-connected defendants. In other words, it was drafted and enacted precisely to deal with the situation that has arisen in United States v. Flynn: its purpose was to empower the Judiciary to limit dismissal in cases where the district court suspects that some impropriety prompted the Executive’s decision to abandon a case….”

    2. As noted in the paper I quoted and linked, most states require “leave of the court” judgments. For instance, here’s the Ohio law, since one of the AG’s hypocritically signing this letter is the Ohio AG:

      “2941.33 Nolle prosequi how entered.
      The prosecuting attorney shall not enter a nolle prosequi in any cause without leave of the court, on good cause shown, in open court. A nolle prosequi entered contrary to this section is invalid.”

      The paper recites the history of the commission which wrote rule 48 and SC input. The debate had nothing to do with protecting defendants and everything to do with guarding against corrupt interference in favor of connected defendants. In other words, exactly like the Flynn case.

  2. I voted for Trump, I’m very well-educated, and post-racial in my thinking and behavior. There is only only one “hard” aspect to my post-racial mindset, and that is a state of vigilance looking for any global racial-ethnic group that takes the post-racial ethic as “a green light for my ethnic superiority to emerge unchallenged”. 15 year ago, the challenge was a surge of Islamist Supremacism….today it’s Han Superiority melded with Communist militancy.

    I was a lifelong Democrat, and had volunteered for a few Congressional campaigns of centrist Dems. Everything changed in Obama’s 2nd term.

    A very negativistic, accusatory, ad-hominem neurosis overtook the progressive wing of the Dems, fueled by lurid, fictional-narrative-driven sensationalism in the MSM. For me, things came to a crescendo when, on March 4, 2016, Jackson MI mayor Charles Evers endorsed Donal Trump, and the MSM hid it from the country.
    Why? A good guess is because the narrative de jour was “Trump is a racist” and certain facts would undercut the message. This is how Pravda.ru approaches news selection.

    I already had solid evidence that Trump was not a racist, based on his July 15th 2015 rally in Phoenix AZ, where he handed the mic over to Jamiel Shaw Sr. to tell everyone watching about how a Latino gang put a pledge up to murdering his son (“any young black man”) as an initiation rite — and how progressives were determined to ignore such blatant Latino-on-black racist violence in order to advance their naively-idealistic Sanctuary Cities policies. It was under that L.A. policy that Jamiel’s illegal immigrant murderer was able to get out of jail and not be deported. This all took place while Jamiel’s mother was serving in the Army in Iraq.
    Jamiel Jr. was planning on applying to Stanford.

    Why would a racist care to expose the injustice levied on the Shaw family? The MSM ignored the Jamiel Shaw story, and Trump’s willingness to make a black family’s tragedy a national cause. Again, fiction over facts had swept over the Dems and their media surrogates.

    Think about the absurdity of the emotion at the core of progressivism: “Only we progressive Dems can truly help black Americans advance — we have an exclusive on that role”. Think about how that attitude strips black Americans of their political choice — and denudes them of the power to hold back support and make the 2 parties compete for their votes.

    Draw you own conclusion about latent racism, and who harbors it.

    1. pbinca– excellent post, thank you. I’ve asked what I think is a simple question several times of friends who are Democrats and have not gotten much of an answer. Now 60+ years after the Civil Rights Act and all that it brought with it, is there any justification still to have affirmative action? Or is saying that we must have affirmative action also saying that blacks are inferior? That is why I concluded in my own mind that Democrats who insist on giving blacks special treatment are acting as racists in doing so because they are saying that blacks are incapable of performing as well as other races or ethnic groups. If I am missing something, I would love to be educated. Equal opportunity is America’s promise and I think we have delivered.

      1. Affirmative action is as unconstitutional as quotas, welfare, food stamps, rent control, social services, forced busing, minimum wage, utility subsidies, WIC, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.

        The entire American welfare state is unconstitutional.

        Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax for “…general Welfare…” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual or specific welfare or charity or redistribution of wealth.

        Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to regulate only money, the flow of commerce and land and naval Forces, denying Congress any power to regulate anything else.

        The 5th Amendment right to private property is unqualified by the Constitution and is absolute, denying Congress any power to regulate or claim or exercise dominion over private property.

        Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.

    2. PBINCA IS A FRAUD!

      Pbinca wrongly identifies Charles Evers as the mayor of Jackson Mississippi, that state’s capitol and largest city. But Evers was NEVER mayor of Jackson despite PBINCA’s claim of being ‘educated’.

      Evers, who was 93 at the time he endorsed Trump, was mayor of Fayette, a small town. But he hasn’t held that office since the 1980’s. NO WONNDER MAINSTREAM MEDIA DIDN’T REPORT EVER’S ENDORSEMENT!

      One can conclude that PBINCA is one of our stupid puppets with NO credibility.

    3. You could make a nice straw mattress out of all those straw men you expose. Your view is ridiculous as is your example.

  3. Brilliant as always except the last sentence omitted one word at the end:

    Indeed, if Trump is reelected, he may have the media to thank . . . .AGAIN

  4. Joe Biden is joining Liz Warren in doing campaign videos of their phone calls to contributors. Joe says, “hey don’t worry, we are going to take this country back, and build a better country with your help”

    Yikes and…Nope. We do not want Joe Biden and the corrupt criminal Obama cabal to “take this country back”…..not on your life….the crimes, corruption and damage done this country by Obama/Biden should – to use their words, “never rise again”…..

    Just Say No! to Joe!

    On that note…..get out the vote for TRUMP 2020! Because everything is on the line. Everything.

  5. First of all, equating Trump with Bozo or any other clown for that matter, is an insult to clowns, some of whom are very beloved for the laughter and joy they gave, such as the real Bozo the Clown, Emmett Kelly and Red Skelton. Trump’s just a fat, lying narcissist who is a fool to be sure, but not bright or caring enough to be a clown, which requires self-effacement, wearing funny clothes and make up and doing silly things to make people laugh.

    Turley decries the: “unrelentingly negative coverage of an impeachment, a pandemic, and an economic collapse”. Please tell us what about Trump is positive that media should cover? He was impeached for trying to leverage aid to an ally in exchange for ginning up false evidence against a political rival. 48 U.S. Senators voted to remove him from office. These are hard facts.

    We are in the middle of a pandemic, one which Trump called “a hoax”, said it was one person from China, said it would magically disappear in April, said 15 cases would soon be 0 cases, said anyone who wants a test can get a test, said we’d have a vaccine very quickly, and numerous other lies. Despite having only 4.3% oft the world’s population, we have 29% of all COVID-19 cases. That is clear evidence of a lack of leadership. Other countries have done much better, most of which have fewer resources.

    We are in the middle of an economic collapse, primarily because of Trump’s lack of leadership. Because we didn’t have a strategic pandemic response plan or team in place, or enough PPE, which Trump had 3 years to procure, plus the lack of testing, everyone except vital workers had to self-quarantine, which caused schools and businesses to be forced to close just to prevent hospitals from being over-capacity. This Is Trump’s fault. Trump has consistently lied about creating the best economy in the history of the world, but Obama’s job creation numbers were better, real wages, adjusted for inflation, were better under Obama than Trump, and GDP was a statistical tie. Now we are on the verge of a full-blown depression. The national debt is frightening. Trump’s fault.

    Turley claims, in regard to Hillary Clinton: “She was beaten by the other most unpopular figure on the Republican side, Trump.” Hillary was NOT beaten: she won 3 million more votes than Trump. Trump’s “victory” was the product of strategic cheating by his campaign coupled with help from Russia. Read the Mueller Report. Republicans ignore these hard truths to their peril.

    Turley has the idea that somehow people without TDS, that is, the non-disciples who don’t watch Fox, will somehow get sick of hearing bad things about Trump and decide that media are lying. The only media who accuse other media of lying is Fox. Problem is, there aren’t any good things to say about him. He wanted the office for the perceived glory, attention and adulation, not the responsibility. Whenever he flops, he either tries to lie his way out of trouble or pivot to blame someone else. The duty of the fourth estate is to speak truth to power. Trump is the worst POTUS in modern history. There’s no way to soft-pedal that truth.

    1. “We are in the middle of a pandemic, one which Trump called “a hoax”, said it was one person from China, said it would magically disappear in April, said 15 cases would soon be 0 cases, said anyone who wants a test can get a test, said we’d have a vaccine very quickly, and numerous other lies. ”

      You mean like here?

      https://twitter.com/funder/status/1258742453441617920

      1. Anon – Trump never called it a hoax, the vaccine is ready for human trials today and we are working down to zero.

      2. Continue to blame Trump instead of China for the pandemic, and you will seal your own fate.

        As if having a Democratic candidate who clearly has Dementia isn’t bad enough.

    2. If Trump tried to blackmail Ukraine why did Adam Shitt lie about what was said during the ph call? Why did the President of Ukraine say there was no pressure? Every witness questioned had only second and third hand info and some clearly stated that nothing illegal happened. Ill touch on the phony impeachment/ russian hoax just long enough to say that its a travesty of the justice that the true perpetrators havent been charged. There was and still is overwhelming evidence that points directly at those responsible. And after three and a half years Democrats are still crying over an election they lost fair and square and now what to change the rules because of that. Whether you agree with it or not Presidents are elected by the electoral college and always have been. I think its safe to say that had Hillary won the electoral vote instead of Trump they would support it 100%. The hypocrisy and double standards of the democratic party has become sickening but keep it up because you’re guaranteeing the reelection of the man you claim to hate.

      1. Schiff did not lie about the QPQ phone call. Several witnesses were listening in on the call as was their job. John Bolton was a 1st hand witness to discussions about Trump’s strategy but the Senate GOP members refused to call witnesses for the 1st time ever in an impeachment hearing.

        The EC was not designed to be state winner take all, nor was it originally of that type. States have that option, since they design them, but this is a system that increases each states leverage but is to the detriment of the will of the people, who rejected Trump. They also rejected W, and of the last 7 elections, the GOP has won the vote in only 1 of them, W’s 2004 re-election in the middle of a war. We now have a conservative SC majority from a party and presidents that never should have been in the WH, and when they weren’t in the WH, stole another seat.

    3. I want to add Bello Knock to the list of clowns who wear funny clothes and use their talent to make others laugh.

  6. New york sent Covid infected patients into nursing homes the way smallpox infected blankets were given to the Indians.

    It was a crime against humanity, essentially using a form of germ warfare against the elderly by neglect or on purpose.

    While weaked seniors were being killed (murdered?) with horrendous infections, the beds in a mercy ship and Samaritan’s Purse hospital were unused.

    Was it a political decision? An attempt to avoid giving Samaritan’s Purse and Trump any credit for saving the lives of the elderly patients New York killed?

    Don’t expect our corrupt media to ask any questions.

    1. Young, tell us where New York was ‘supposed’ to send those elderly residents. ‘To hotels’..??

      Are hotel Housekeeping staffs trained to care for the elderly?? Are Room Service staffs??

      Here you present this indignation bomb without no alternate solutions.

        1. Honest Lawyer — Cuomo didn’t need the field hospital nor the hospital ship because for some reason he wanted to send people infected with a deadly disease into nursing homes where the first cases in Washington State showed they were likely to be lethal to unprepared staff and vulnerable patients.

          If Cuomo were a Republican wild dogs would already be dragging his guts down Fifth Avenue for that evil decision. But, as we are also learning in Washington, DC, Democrat crimes aren’t actually crimes.

        2. Honest Lawyer, you seem halfway credible, tell us what the Federal Policy is for discharging elderly patients during this pandemic.

          1. Another ridiculous remark by Paint Chips. The feds don’t control nursing homes unless they are federal and the nursing homes in question were controlled by the state. It was a NYState directive. They had a similar one in Democrat NJ and another one in Democrat Pennsylvania. Other Democrat states might have had the same directives as well.

        3. honestlawyer – first he wanted them, then he didn’t use them, then he didn’t want them.

      1. ‘where New York was ‘supposed’ to send those elderly residents. ‘To hotels’..??’

        Already answered:
        ‘the beds in a mercy ship and Samaritan’s Purse hospital were unused.’

        Fail

        1. MNG – Yes, I mentioned the ship and the field hospital as alternatives to killing the elderly in nursing homes in my first post. Thanks to you and Honest Lawyer for repeating it. No idea how long it will take for the idea to get across to Coffee. Coffee needs to take a cup before posting and wake up.

          1. Young, tell us how many beds were on that ship and field hospital. Then tell us how many elderly people needed care.

            One might point out that the ship, and tent in Central Park, were intended as only emergency hospitals. They weren’t designed to accomodate seniors for longterm care. One could also point out that the seniors in question lived all over the New York Metro region. Therefore transporting them all to the ship or tent may not have been practical.

            Young, tell us what the Federal Guidelines are regarding seniors recovering from Covid 19. Has the Trump administration issued any guidelines?

              1. It’s an issue for Cuomo. He announced nobody should be prosecuted for sending highly infectious people into nursing homes. He knows it is wrong. He reversed the order. He is concerned about liability; and he should be.

                1. He could have used the ship and only he can tell us why he didn’t but, to his credit, he reversed the policy. It’s my understanding that even before the reversal that nursing homes were told that they shouldn’t accept patients unless they had “a safe facility with proper staffing and protective equipment.”

                  Azzopardi reiterated prior statements from the governor that the nursing homes can only accept coronavirus patients if they have a safe facility with proper staffing and protective equipment.

                  https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Churchill-New-York-s-tragic-nursing-home-mistake-15273400.php

                  ‘If there’s a silver lining to all this, it’s that the deaths have focused attention on an industry that should have been spotlighted long ago. Some lawmakers, including Assemblyman Richard Gottfried, a Democrat from Manhattan, are even calling for an independent probe of the state’s nursing-home policies.

                  ‘”The problems in nursing homes have been there for decades,” Gottfried told me Friday. “COVID-19 made them worse — and made them much more obvious.”‘

            1. Coffee — They didn’t need to send the regular nursing home patients to the field hospital or to the ship; it was announced they were prepared to take Covid patients. Lives could have been saved.

              I think you must be Seth. Your protests have a familiar brainless quality.

              1. Young, we’re talking a out seniors who had the virus and were later released. Their numbers surpassed the number of beds on the ship. And again, these seniors were all over the New York Metro region including New Jersey which had similar issues. If all those seniors could have gone to the ship, I’m sure they would have.

                And you failed to a answer the question, ‘What is federal policy on this matter’??

            2. More idiocy from Paint Chips. They could have kept the Covid + seniors until they turned Covid negative which would have been a week or two. There was no major problem transporting these people to the Kravis or hospital ship and there were more beds available than needed even for many multiples of the problem.

              This comes from an individual that shouldn’t even be voting. No wonder he changes his name so frequently.

                1. “Alan, how do you know any of these things? What are your sources?”

                  Paint Chips, you only read Fake News. You have to read and listen to news on all sides. It is clear there were plenty of beds available for the nursing home Covid positive patients. I also know NYC quite well along with the surrounding areas. If there is something you find difficult to believe post it as a question and skip your passive aggressive wording.

      2. “Young, tell us where New York was ‘supposed’ to send those elderly residents. ‘To hotels’..??”

        The idiocy of this remark can only be from Paint Chips. NY had at least 1,000 beds at the Kravis and nearly an empty hospital ship (Comfort) converted for Covid. This is an example of leftist thinking. Take note, not one leftist corrected him.

  7. Look who is failing on testing in the country….DOCTOR Ralph Northam was busted by The Atlantic for lying to Virginians about the state’s failed response to testing for SARS-CoV-2

    Maybe Ralph was wearing his white KKK hood and chugging beers while whistling Dixie

    Criticism mounts as Virginia includes 15,000 antibody results in COVID-19 testing data

    State officials faced additional pressure on Thursday, when the national news magazine The Atlantic highlighted the practice, and disputed claims by Virginia officials that many other states were also including antibody tests in their total testing counts.

    The inclusion of antibody tests highlighted the state’s ongoing testing woes. As the state begins reopening on Friday — except for Northern Virginia, the city of Richmond and Accomack County on the Eastern Shore — it has yet to meet key testing goals set by its own officials and public health experts, per a Times-Dispatch analysis.

    On Monday, Northam’s chief of staff, Clark Mercer, said the state decided to conflate the two types of results to improve Virginia’s testing rankings, suspecting that other states were doing the same.

    https://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/criticism-mounts-as-virginia-includes-15-000-antibody-results-in-covid-19-testing-data/article_93dab6f0-4e03-59b0-aa10-41cf33808930.html

      1. You wont understand it, Peter. Words in the article have more than 2 letters, many have diphthongs, multi-syllabic words and they use complete sentences complete with adverbs. You should let the adults discuss it as you play in your room with your Barbie and Ken figures. New outfits even!

        1. Here we go again. More nonsense from the good Catholic and ‘doctor’ who calls himself Estovir.

        2. Estovir, you’re a worthless debater. You want to dominate these threads but you can’t argue sh!t. So you try to cover up with stupid youtube videos; as though no one’s going to notice.

          1. Paint Chips, Estovir has brought interesting and accurate information to the blog making it more worthwhile. What have you provided?

              1. I haven’t noted any videos that weren’t acceptable. I don’t know your problem with gays, but you should get over it. For all I know you are a closeted gay or have significant gay tendencies you are trying to keep hidden. That is the only explanation for your exaggerated responses to gay comments.

                Gays are a part of society as are heterosexuals. You can openly join either side or even be in the middle. There is and should be no line between the two. No one cares about your choices. We care about your disturbing actions.

    1. Estovir, what are the federal guidelines for testing as put forth by the Trump Administration.

      1. Roy, the data reflects the following. Get back to us on your analysis and conclusions. Lives are depending on it

        NB: if you screw this up Roy, we will have to ask you to stop getting your nails done in West Hollywood by nail salon owner who uses the color Fuchsia.

        Initial PaO2/FiO2 ratio was calculated by estimating the PaO2 from the first recorded oxygen saturation available and then dividing by the estimated FiO2 for that oxygen delivery method (0.21 for room air, 0.21 + (oxygen flow rate * 0.03) for
        nasal cannula, 0.80 for non-rebreather mask or the recorded FiO2 for non-invasive or invasive ventilation)

        The multivariable Cox models were estimated by adjusting for baseline covariates (or using strata as appropriate). In IPW analysis, Cox models were estimated with case weights based on the stabilize weights. Since multiple imputation was applied to fill in missing data, the final standard error was obtained using Rubin’s rule based on the robust variance estimator in Cox regression.

        We applied nonparametric bootstrap to construct confidence intervals for the IPW Kaplan-Meier curves. For each bootstrap sample obtained from sampling the original 1376 subjects with replacement, we imputed ten datasets, fitted the propensity score model and estimated the curves on each imputed dataset, and then averaged the ten estimated values to obtain the pooled estimate for the bootstrap sample. The confidence intervals are estimated based on 200 bootstrap samples using the normal approximation.

  8. MORE ON TURLEY’S CLOWN STATEMENT:

    Hundreds Of Veterans Given Anti-Malaria Drug Despite Serious Questions

    In his column above, Professor Turley makes this assertion: “Trump is routinely called an actual clown by some in the media”.

    Last night, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Rick Bright. Mr Bright is the former director of the Biomedical Research And Development Authority who has filed a whistleblower complaint alleging he was recently transferred out of his position for his warnings about the Coronavirus and his opposition to off-label use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine.

    Bright told “60 Minutes” that at one point his unit was ordered to halt all research to speed approval of the the Anti-Malaria drug. Bright knew upfront the effort to approve said drug would be a waste of crucial time. Bright’s attitude got him demoted to a marginal position. Yet no study so far has confirmed that the hydroxychloroquine is safe and effective against Covid 19. To the contrary, studies suggest the drug is unsafe for general use.

    Yet below we learn that Department Of Veterans Affairs has been using hydroxychloroquine on veterans with highly mixed results. One can only guess this use is the result of political pressure.
    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Facing growing criticism, the Department of Veterans Affairs said Friday that it will not halt use of an unproven malaria drug on veterans with COVID-19 but that fewer of its patients are now taking it.

    In responses provided to Congress and obtained by The Associated Press, the VA said it never “encouraged or discouraged” its government-run hospitals to use hydroxychloroquine on patients even as President Donald Trump heavily promoted the drug for months without scientific evidence of its effectiveness.

    Still, it acknowledged that VA Secretary Robert Wilkie had wrongly asserted publicly without evidence that the drug had been shown to benefit younger veterans. The VA, the nation’s largest hospital system, also agreed more study was needed on the drug and suggested its use was now limited to extenuating circumstances, such as last-ditch efforts to save a coronavirus patient’s life.

    In the first week of May, 17 patients had received the drug for COVID-19, according to VA data obtained by the AP. The department declined to say how many patients had been treated with hydroxychloroquine for the coronavirus since January, but a recent analysis of VA hospital data showed that hundreds of veterans had taken it by early April.

    “VA has not endorsed nor discouraged the use of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients and has left those decisions to providers and their patients,” the VA said. “While all drugs have the potential for adverse events and some drugs in particular, like hydroxychloroquine, are known to have specific risks, when they are used carefully and judiciously, they can be managed safely.”

    As of Friday, 11,883 veterans had been confirmed to be infected with the virus and 985 had died, according to VA statistics.

    Responding to written questions from Sen. Jon Tester, the top Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, the department admitted it had no studies or evidence to back up Wilkie’s claim that hydroxychloroquine had shown effectiveness in younger veterans in particular.

    “The use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID has dropped off dramatically,” the VA said.

    Trump repeatedly has pushed the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine with or without the antibiotic azithromycin, but no large, rigorous studies have found them safe or effective for COVID-19, and they can cause heart rhythm problems and other side effects. The Food and Drug Administration has warned against the drug combination and said hydroxychloroquine should only be used for the coronavirus in formal studies.

    Edited from: “Veteran’s Affairs Will Continue To Use Unproven Drug Promoted By Trump Despite Growing Concern”

    Time Magazine, 5/16/20

    1. “Yet no study so far has confirmed that the hydroxychloroquine is safe and effective against Covid 19.”

      The studies did not use zinc in conjunction with the zinc ionophore hydroxychloroquine. That is what doctors using it successfully are doing. If a patient is deficient in zinc, which many elderly people and people with comorbidities are, then this drug will not work right. Where will it get zinc as it tries to increase zinc uptake into cells? The limited stores in the body. If zinc is further depleted,then it’s no wonder basic body functions become dysfunctional.

      1. Rose, if the Malaria drug ‘is’ effective, show us a recent article from a recognizable source that confirms that. Because last week a number of articles reported that researchers now have strong doubts about that drug’s safety and effectiveness.

        1. Roy,
          Here’s one:

          “The antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine has shown mixed results against the coronavirus in early studies, but a new paper out of New York suggests combining it with the dietary supplement zinc sulfate could create a more effective treatment.

          The research by the NYU Grossman School of Medicine was posted on a medical preprint site on Monday, meaning it hasn’t yet been peer reviewed.

          Records of about 900 COVID-19 patients were reviewed in the analysis, with roughly half given zinc sulfate along with hydroxychloroquine and the antibiotic azithromycin.

          The other half only received hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin.

          Those receiving the triple-drug combination had a 1.5 times greater likelihood of recovering enough to be discharged, and were 44 percent less likely to die, compared to the double-drug combination.”

          https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/20200511-zinc-hydroxychloroquine-found-effective-in-some-covid-19-patients-study

          1. Rose, you might find the following study helpful as to explaining a possible mechanism of action (MOA) for Zinc in overall health (not in COVID-19)

            Zinc status is associated with inflammation, oxidative stress, lipid, and glucose metabolism
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5754376/

            a few caveats:

            The study was done in Russia. That matters. There is data and then there is data. Experience has shown that some countries produce impressive, unassailable studies while others…meh.

            Additionally, one well done study does not produce a treatment paradigm shift, which is what you are proposing

            Tx paradigm shifts occur when landmark studies are done. The latter are rarely done because they take years, literally thousands of patients and methodologies must be impeccable. Unassailable studies are really difficult and costly.

            There is nothing as of yet that proves one therapy is effective compared to another when it comes to COVID-19. In truth, it is a ripe moment, a golden opportunity, to discover such a treatment. Many researchers across the globe are busy doing just that. Many of us are experiencing evidence whiplash because there is a monstrosity of data being published weekly. So your data has got to be top notch to compete against the others.

            Provide a double blind, randomized study using thousands of patients, demonstrating the MOA of Zinc when it comes to SARS-CoV-2, and meet your end points of reduced mortality by significant metrics, and you will be golden. Until then, your above link from france24 does not support what you think it does. The article undercuts your very arguments.

            Zinc may have anti-viral activity for the common cold (Coronavirus). However, that is a mild illness, and end points arent taken seriously because the common cold isnt a big deal. If Zinc can be shown mechanistically to reduce deaths by 30%-50% in severely diseased COVID-19 patients, you might have something. Otherwise what you are producing with your links is anecdotal, not peer reviewed, and otherwise not helpful in discussing how to treat this illness. This is why I havent responded. While your passion is admirable, you have to show evidenced based data in scholarly peer reviewed medical journals. You haven’t produced these to date

            Keep searching. Many of us are.

            1. Estovir,
              Thank you for the link. It actually looks like a fairly decent article after a quick skim. It was cited by another paper that became a JAMA article, so that isn’t too shabby. I will have to read it more closely later this evening.

              “There is nothing as of yet that proves one therapy is effective compared to another when it comes to COVID-19.”

              Of course not. Inexplicably, the large investigations I have looked at have not bothered trying to even see if HCQ+zinc is effective.

              There are other zinc ionophores (such as quercetin and the green tea derivative epigallocatechin-3-gallate that could be of benefit, as well).

              “In truth, it is a ripe moment, a golden opportunity, to discover such a treatment.”

              Perhaps I am misreading you. This statement sounds geared toward a ‘silver bullet’ approach.

              While HCQ+zinc might be effective at interfering with SARS-Cov2 replication, other mechanisms need support, as well. Cilia in the lungs which clear mucous require ATP to function. ATP is not biologically active without Mg. The populations hardest hit by SARS-Cov2 often have subpar intracellular Mg. B12 is important for white blood cell production, which is something a commenter noted on that preprint paper highlighted by France24. It’s absorption is also affected by low stomach acid and may be of subpar status in the elderly.

              “Provide a double blind, randomized study using thousands of patients, demonstrating the MOA of Zinc when it comes to SARS-CoV-2, and meet your end points of reduced mortality by significant metrics, and you will be golden.”

              You’re funny. I cannot conduct such a trial. The best I can do is a review of relevant research. You, on the other hand, a professional researcher, could certainly do so. I hope you are. That would be great!

              I thought a MOA of zinc on SARS coronaviruses had already been partially established. You even posted this one:

              PLoS Pathog. 2010 Nov 4. Zn(2+) Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity in Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture. Aartjan J W te Velthuis 1, Sjoerd H E van den Worm, et al.

              ACE2 is also a zinc metallopeptidase. If SARS-Cov2 binds to ACE2, that would further deplete zinc.

              “Until then, your above link from france24 does not support what you think it does. The article undercuts your very arguments.”

              How does it undercut my argument? If people read the paper and find it to be sound, then shouldn’t it be part of the discussion?

              “Otherwise what you are producing with your links is anecdotal, not peer reviewed, and otherwise not helpful in discussing how to treat this illness.”

              I am perplexed. Other than one or two preprint articles on the most recent research, nearly all of the papers I have posted about have been from well-regarded research journals and have additional positive citations made of them.

              Are you referring to the commentary about myself and the conditions that went away after I received care from a functional medicine doctor?

        2. Darren,
          It seems WordPress is hungry today. Sorry to be a bother. Could you see if my comment was eaten?

          1. I checked in the filter traps. I found and restored one, the comment beginning with ““The antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine…”.

      2. read this Rose. It should be free access

        Observational Study of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19

        https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410

        STUDY END POINTS
        Among the 1376 patients included in the analysis, the primary end point of respiratory failure developed in 346 patients (25.1%); a total of 180 patients were intubated, and 166 died without intubation. In the crude, unadjusted analysis, patients who had received hydroxychloroquine were more likely to have had a primary end-point event than were patients who did not (hazard ratio, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.84 to 3.02) (Table 2). In the primary multivariable analysis with inverse probability weighting according to the propensity score, there was no significant association between hydroxychloroquine use and the composite primary end point (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.32) (Figure 2). There was also no significant association between treatment with azithromycin and the composite end point (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.31).

        1. JOURNAL FOR AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION..

          Reports on study finding Anti-Malaria drug is an ineffective treatment.

          amanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766117

          1. Will Kane,
            The authors neglected to mention a rather profound limitation of their study–they did not co-administer zinc along with the zinc ionophore hydroxychloroquine.

            Also, as with the article Estovir shared, many of the co-morbidities in the group receiving HQ are associated with marginal zinc status.

            “Adverse events examined were clinical evidence at any time during hospitalization of cardiac arrest or abnormal ECG findings (QT prolongation, other arrhythmias), as well as diarrhea and hypoglycemia.”

            Zinc is important for properly dealing with blood sugar. Diarrhea can also be associated with marginal zinc status, with the WHO even recommending zinc supplementation for children under 5 who have diarrhea.

            The paper also mentions that the HQ group also presented more frequently with liver problems, yet again something associated with low zinc.

            Why did they not co-administer zinc to support the function of a zinc ionophore?

        2. Estovir,
          They did not co-administer zinc along with the hydroxychloroquine. I am not surprised at the results.

          Interesting set of co-morbidities (several are associated with poor zinc status). Also, the use of statins might indicate some degree of marginal zinc status as well.

          After looking at the table, it also looks like they gave hydroxychloroquine (without zinc) to patients most likely to have a marginal zinc status overall (based on age, comorbidities, medications, demographics), which likely led, in part, to the negative outcomes.

          Why did they not co-administer zinc?

      1. Zachinoff:

        On April 30 the FDA issued a warning that Hydroxychloroquine was causing irregular heart beats, which jibes with the Time Magazine story. What’s more, that piece you posted is ‘not’ a conclusive study. The initial introduction ends with the phrase “may increase effectiveness”.

        da.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-cautions-against-use-hydroxychloroquine-or-chloroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or

      2. Zach,

        medrxiv is a fun website to view woulda, coulda, shoulda studies but alas none of the papers are peer reviewed. That puts them on the same level as New YorkThymes, Washington Compost and China News Network

        On the bright side, there are many reported cases of the treatment of Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin is effective in some cases. However so far no one has done a double blind, randomized study of Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin +/- Zinc so it is all a matter of maybe….maybe not. Keep digging!

        Late-Onset Neonatal Sepsis in a Patient with Covid-19

        On day 2 after admission, the hypotension resolved. A pneumothorax that developed on the right side (Figure 1C) was successfully treated by tube thoracostomy. The patient was extubated on day 5 and was transferred out of the PICU. The results of reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction testing to detect SARS-CoV-2 on admission were positive on day 7; he completed the 5-day course of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. The patient was discharged on day 9 without supplemental oxygen.

        https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2010614

      3. Anti-Malaria Drug Not All It Was Cracked Up To Be, Yet Trump Is Now Taking It

        For two months, President Trump repeatedly pitched hydroxychloroquine as a safe and effective treatment for coronavirus, asking would-be patients “What the hell do you have to lose?”

        Growing evidence shows that, for many, the answer is their lives.

        Clinical trials, academic research and scientific analysis indicate that the danger of the Trump-backed drug is a significantly increased risk of death for certain patients. Evidence showing the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treating covid-19 has been scant. Those two developments pushed the Food and Drug Administration to warn against the use of hydroxychloroquine outside of a hospital setting last month, just weeks after it approved an emergency use authorization for the drug.

        Alarmed by a growing cache of data linking the anti-malaria drug to serious cardiac problems, some drug safety experts are now calling for even more forceful action by the government to discourage its use. Several have called for the FDA to revoke its emergency use authorization, given hydroxychloroquine’s documented risks.

        “They should say, ‘We know there are harms, and until we know the benefits, let’s hold off,’ ” said Joseph Ross, a professor of medicine and public health at Yale University, who added that the original authorization may have been warranted but new evidence has emerged about the drug’s risks.

        “I’m surprised it hasn’t been revoked yet,” said Luciana Borio, who served as director for medical and biodefense preparedness of the National Security Council and was acting chief scientist at the FDA.

        Edited From: “Drug Promoted By Trump As Coronavirus ‘Game Changer’ Increasingly Linked To Deaths”

        The Washington Post, 5/15/20
        ………………………………………………..

        UPDATE: News reports this afternoon say that Donald Trump is now using the drug after 2 White House staffers tested positive to the virus.

        1. Captain,
          If he is indeed taking HQ, he should also be taking it with zinc.

          “Growing evidence shows that, for many, the answer is their lives.”

          Their doctors should be prescribing it with zinc just like their fellow doctors who are using it successfully.

          1. Prairie, I am sure you realize that when you talk to Captain Lochart, Will Kane, Seth Warner, John Russell, John Elder, July Johnson and even some of the anonymous posters along with many other fictitious names you are speaking to Paint Chips much earlier known as Peter Hill or Peter the Shill. I am sure everyone realizes why he has resorted to so many different identities.

  9. With all the leftist talk of Republicans being racist, one should remember:

    The KKK was almost exclusively Democrats.

    Senator Byrd, praised by sittng Democrats, was a member of the KKK.

    Segregationist Governor George Wallace was a democrat.

    Segregationist Bull Connor was a Democrat.

    Confederate President Jeff Davis was a Democrat.

    All slaveholding states were Democrat.

    Essentially all slavery abolitionists were Republican.

    Democrats were the pro-slavery party.

    Republicans were the anti-slavery party.

    1. REGARDING ABOVE:

      Young is one of those Rip Van Winkles who’s been asleep the last 70 years. He completely missed the entire Civil Rights Movement and thinks Dixiecrats still control the old Confederacy. Apparently no one has told Young yet that White southerners today are largely Republican.

        1. July– Yes, Republicans control the South now and it is no longer pro-slavery.

          Go back to you twinkle-toes nail shop Seth.

          1. Young,

            Are you a one-trick pony?? It seems every time your arguments are exposed as baseless, you resort to stupid smears. Which goes to show what a gutless, stupid coward you are.

        2. you should be very careful when discussing who controls the South and failing to insert she who should remain nameless.

          1. Although I cannot imagine voting for a Biden/ Abrams ticket, especially given Biden’s apparent mental condition, Abrams is far more qualified that President Obama ever dreamed of being and she, unlike him, actually has some pretty good accomplishments under her belt. She also demonstrated an ability to work with a Republican Governor. All that said, she is strongly in favor of many things I strongly oppose and tends to dwell on party-line racial issues like Voter ID.

    2. What a massive logical fallacy you have thrown out here Young. Pinning the sins of the ancestors on their descendants. As if this is true today. And most, if not all, of those Democrats of the time periods you speak of would today likely be Republicans. Recall that Strom Thurmond, also a racist southern Democrat in the 1960s, left the Democratic Patty and became a. …. wait for it….. REPUBLICAN. Were Bull Conner and George Wallace alive today they would almost certainly be Republicans. And to which party is a KKK member today most likely to belong? There probably are some democratic racists around today. But their numbers are most probably small compared to the number of racists who today align themselves with Trump and the Republican Party. Which presidential candidate is receiving the greatest amount of support from the white nationalists, white supremacists, neo-nazis and fascist elements of our political culture today. It isn’t Joe Biden or the Democratic Party. I agree that not all Republicans and/or Trump supporters are racists. But there are far more racists who are Trump supporters than any of the other candidates. There must be a reason for that. They must certainly see something in the actions, policies, conduct, and rhetoric of Trump that appeals to their views.

Leave a Reply