(20a) No-one was completely prepared for this coronavirus crisis and thus mistakes were made

Again a journalist who may think that President Trump may not survive the coming presidential elections by repeating he didn't do enough to halt the coronavirus crisis. I'm not sure this is a good strategy from opponents as he can repeat again and again what he did before any other country.

Indeed, at the end of January President Trump ordered the closing of USA's borders for people coming from China and later acted on Americans returning from China. And yes, he had to defend this decision as not everyone agreed. And again and again because opponents can't say this was good.

Later when the catastrophe in certain European countries became clear, President Trump ordered on March 12 the closing of the USA for Europeans, a move condemned by the EU that only a few weeks earlier ruled out to close Europe's Schengen borders although the virus was already obvious in Italy. A few days later the EU was forced to close its external borders while one country after another closed their own borders because the coronavirus became a disaster in a number of European countries. 

The worst affected in the USA is New York, the most populous US city so a virus can spread easily. It is located closest to Europe and thus we can expect most of the virus entered the USA via Europe, either Americans returning from holiday and work in Europe or Europeans visiting NY and some other US cities. 

We now also know that for instance Austria had cases as early as February in Tirol, a popular sky resort, but didn't inform other countries until in March and thus the virus could spread to many places. Icelanders told their government end of February that they became ill after they returned from their sky holiday so Iceland called Tirol a risk area and warned other European countries who ignored it. And yes, Europeans on holiday in Tirol are furious this was not told to them.

Thus, attack President Trump's approach and very likely he becomes more popular with supporters and even others as he can repeat what he did and others didn't. Criticise him for what he did right and people will conclude others wouldn't do what he did such as closing borders. I'm almost thinking whether the president hires those journalists to repeat those questions so he can repeat what he did right. We should stop thinking that Trump supporters are stupid because most are not as many are businesspeople, lawyers,... while it angers ordinary people that other politicians still refuse to take them more serious and therefore will not vote for someone else.

Further, we don't need an angry or panicking president so he will more likely refuse to listen to experts but do what he thinks is best for the country such a ending immigration for a certain time. Can anyone disagree without losing support? But he may now promote too early the reopening of states although also in other parts of the world countries are thinking of reactivating their economy and if not people start to protest as companies and many people suffer. Still, I see how journalists are impolite and treating him worse than most journalists did who opposed President Obama; this is also seen by Trump supporters while you would expect those journalists are different. Stop focussing on what he may have done wrong in the past and focus on what he now plans to do.

Further, President Trump wants to save the economy and thus drafted an exit plan in which he says that states can decide whether to open up their state while scientists and Democrats are accused of destroying the economy. Of course, this reopening of states can go too fast when he's in a hurry so the virus can return. Unless that happens before he presidential elections, we can't be sure President Trump may lose those elections.

Yes, I understand he may have closed the borders because of racist motives, still, he did it and others didn't so people praise him for that and it showed the virus while he was probably too slow in closing the country for Europeans. Try to convince people he was wrong and fail. Present plans how you would try to save the economy may convince people you are better than President Trump.

As a note, compare President Trump's plan with the EU where certain countries are delaying actions because they consider the cost in money more important than the cost in lives as a result of a virus. As the EU doesn't act quickly, individual countries are taken steps to ensure their economy will not collapse; indeed, as Mr Farage foretold when the UK left the EU and as I wrote before, it may be the starting point of the end of the EU. Germany may seem to be ready to help Italy, it also says "... that Italy already had substantial structural problems before the virus struck and they may need to be addressed once it has passed". Yes, we can fear that the EU will demand after the crisis that budgets are balanced, further alienating its citizens. Already struggling countries are remembering again how Germany, the country that started WWII during which tens of millions of people died and countries destroyed, received after the war financial support from the USA that understood it had to prevent Germany's (and other nations) collapse but now it seems to be reluctant to help other countries and thus possibly prevent instability. 

I think this plan should be discussed in the EU parliament and not by countries who indeed need to think about their own country. Thus, something similar as President Trump's plan: EU money helps EU countries that need help while individual countries can still decide to invest extra money in their own economy or help other countries. Such a plan should allow countries to take necessary actions to reopen their economy or not yet while they receive help in order to combat the virus so they don't rush towards the wrong decision to try to save their economy but with the risk it restarts the epidemic. On the other hand, when thre economy of Italy and Spain collapse, two of the main economies in the EU than the eurozone may follow, impoverishing those who oppose to help countries. And thus a kind of Marshall plan may be very wise to prevent civil unrest.