Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 6, 2020 - The Ben Shapiro Show

01:02:56

The Longest Week | Ep. 987

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	As the holidays approach, Americans batten down the hatches for a brutal week of coronavirus numbers, doctors and politicians bat around solutions, and President Trump and Joe Biden go at it.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by ExpressVPN's Surf the web with peace of mind.
	Sign up right now at expressvpn.com.
	I hope that you had a wonderful, relaxing weekend, which was exactly the same as your weekday now.
	I mean, it is incredible how all the days just sort of meld into one another.
	Particularly if you have children, then there is no day.
	We are all just living one long day.
	That is all that is happening right now.
	Just the longest day.
	And this is supposed to be the longest week.
	And pretty much everybody is in agreement that this week is going to be very, very bad in terms of the coronavirus numbers.
	We've seen over a thousand deaths, most of those in New York City, over the course of the last three or four days.
	Our current coronavirus account right now It's well over 9,000 deaths.
	Have we surpassed 10,000 deaths in the United States at this point?
	If not, then we will today.
	The United States is standing, as of yesterday, at 9,679 deaths.
	There were about 1,100 to 1,200 deaths yesterday in the United States from coronavirus.
	There's a little bit of good news, and that is if you look at some of the models that are being used here, They're being revised downward.
	So the model that comes from University of Washington, that's the model, the so-called Murray model that was being used by the White House.
	That model has now been revised up in terms of peak and down in terms of duration, which is overall not a horrible thing, given the fact that they've actually lowered their death estimate fairly tremendously over the last four days.
	Last week, I read to you from the model and they said there were going to be about 94,000 deaths in the United States by August 1st, 2020.
	Now they are suggesting there will be 82,000 COVID-19 deaths by August 4th, 2020.
	Now, what's amazing about that modeling is which factors are changing.
	What exactly is changing?
	It's hard to tell.
	So it is not that people are staying home more.
	That was already taken into account in the model.
	What it is suggesting is that it's raging like wildfire where it's raging, and then after that, it stops raging.
	And this is the estimate that is being put forward, not by me, but by a scientist over at East Anglia University.
	He's suggesting that people have been underestimating how fast this thing is going to burn, and the good news on that is that you're going to see it burn out more quickly.
	According to the scientist at East Anglia University, which by the way, University of East Anglia in Britain is one of the places that the left loves to cite with regard to climate change models.
	So this is not some fly-by-night organization.
	Many of the models being used to forecast the COVID-19 epidemic give poor predictions of both the epidemic's peak and its duration, according to an academic at the University of East Anglia.
	Comparison of a new approach with a published model of COVID-19 in Wuhan before isolation and social distancing measures were imposed shows that the standard model underestimates the peak infection rate by a factor of three, meaning it will be three times higher and substantially overestimates how long the epidemic will continue after the peak.
	In other words, it rages through the population and then it seems to sort of stop.
	And that is why you are seeing the models change in real time.
	The model that's being used, the Murray model, has been wrong on a wide variety of bases.
	So for example, as of yesterday, So yesterday was what?
	April 6th?
	So yesterday, they were expecting there would be 98,000 beds across the United States that would be needed.
	Hospital beds needed from COVID-19.
	The same day, the estimate that was being put forward by the CDC was somewhere on the order of 40,000 beds.
	So the number of beds estimated was actually significantly lower than the number of beds that actually were needed.
	The number estimated was much higher than the number that were actually needed.
	When it came to ICU beds, as of yesterday, the IMHE study from University of Washington was suggesting that there would be 19,316 beds needed.
	That was as of yesterday.
	But the number of people who are actually in critical condition, according to the Johns Hopkins statistics, the number of people in critical in the United States is significantly lower than that.
	The number of critical is like 8,700.
	So you assume that most of the people in critical, virtually all of them presumably, are on intubators, are on the, I'm sorry, ventilators.
	They're intubated for ventilators.
	The number of people in critical right now is 8,700.
	So that is an order of two lower than the number of people who are expected to be on ventilators if we are getting complete information.
	So that doesn't suggest that this thing isn't really virulent and really terrible.
	It does suggest that these models are going to be constantly And they need to be constantly updated because the fact is that if they're not constantly updated, then they're getting it wrong.
	That's not a problem with how the models work.
	It is a problem with taking the models at complete face value, which is what I was saying last week as of Friday, that nobody was giving the inputs, nobody was giving the outputs, nobody was giving the amount of time, nobody was explaining whether there was going to be a second wave in the fall.
	If there is going to be a second wave in the fall, how is that going to be prevented?
	If there's going to be a second wave in the fall, maybe the best thing that we can do is just increase the number of ICU beds and ventilators and then put everybody who's over the age of 65 or with a pre-existing health condition under warning and say to them you need to basically stay indoors.
	By the way, By the data, the number of people who are dying are still largely over the age of 65.
	We don't have the average age from the CDC.
	We do know that virtually everybody who's being hospitalized has a pre-existing condition, and nearly everybody who is dying has some sort of pre-existing condition.
	One of the problems is the government has not been forthcoming with the data as to what the average age of people are, what are their actual pre-existing health conditions.
	This is a question I get a lot.
	If I have high blood pressure and I am just on a statin, does that count as a pre-existing health condition?
	If I have sleep apnea, is that a pre-existing health condition?
	What exactly is a pre-existing health condition?
	There are certain pre-existing health conditions that you know are more likely to land you in the hospital.
	If you've got a kidney condition, for example, that is much more likely to land you in the hospital if you have a pre-existing lung condition.
	If you have asthma or if you have lung cancer or something, if you have an immunological problem, that's more likely to land you in the hospital.
	But the government has not been supremely forthcoming with all of this.
	So there's a lot of play in the stats.
	And I want to get back to this, because this really is the point.
	We cannot make plans for the future until we have the stats, until we have the data.
	And this has led to this really interesting philosophical and political impasse, where there are certain people saying, well, the data aren't in, and we are destroying 28 million jobs over the course of three weeks for the sake of data that we don't have.
	And the other side saying, well, yeah, but if an asteroid is headed for Earth, then we have to shut everything down until we have more data.
	Now, the happy medium of those positions is, okay, how about we shut everything down temporarily until we have the data, and then we ramp up the data right now, right?
	The data is what we need.
	And as we will see, this is the solution that is now being proposed by a wide variety of people ranging from Scott Gottlieb over at the FDA to business leaders all around the country, who, by the way, if they're so selfish, why are they so eager to save 40,000 jobs, 100,000 jobs, and 120,000 200,000 jobs at their company.
	The people who are the most active in this sphere in terms of public health and testing are the people running major corporations that employ tens and hundreds of thousands of people.
	Those are the people who are kept up most at night by this because they recognize how many lives are on the line.
	We're gonna get to more of this in just one second.
	First, let's talk about the reality of the fact that you're online right now, and that means that malware is a supreme threat.
	Malware is a really bad threat, and it's constantly morphing.
	You can download some of the antivirus programs on your computer, and they're just not that good because they're only updated like once every three years.
	And that means that as these viruses change online, they can grab your data.
	They can, one of the things that they've been doing is actually locking you out and taking hostage your own data.
	What they'll do is they'll actually hack your computer and then the malware will lock you out of your data unless you pay a ransom, it's called ransomware.
	Well, there's a better solution than going and downloading some crappy free antivirus thing for your computer Instead, what you need is actual security software from PCmatic.
	It's a whitelist next-generation antivirus designed to stop modern threats like ransomware.
	Independent testing firm AV-Test just named PCmatic as a top performer in the cybersecurity industry, giving it the best performance award for 2019.
	And again, it's a whitelist.
	Right, not a blacklist.
	Traditional security software relies on a blacklist of known malware, but that list is always changing.
	PCmatic is that whitelist next-generation antivirus.
	PCmatic's competition is made in foreign countries, many where the viruses originate.
	A lot of them, the viruses come from there.
	They're like, hey, we have a program for you to stop the virus.
	How nice.
	PCmatic, however, is made in the United States.
	It blocks annoying malicious ads for hassle-free web browsing, makes your computer faster and more reliable even after years of use.
	If you've ever had malware on your computer, it's just a nightmare.
	Get PCmatic and prevent it from happening right now.
	PCmatic is just 50 bucks for five devices for one year, which is really not a lot of money to pay for the security of knowing that you're not going to have malware on your computer and have to take it down to the struts.
	With a full 30-day money-back guarantee, if you act right now, PCmatic has offered my listeners a free month of security protection With the purchase of an annual license.
	To access the offer, head on over to PCmatic.com slash Ben.
	That's PCmatic.com slash Ben.
	Again, get that world-class security that keeps your computers running great.
	Go to PCmatic.com slash Ben.
	I love it.
	It's on my computer now.
	I've started using it.
	It keeps me safe and I really appreciate that.
	Alrighty, so back to some of the information about the modeling.
	So when it comes to how we model this sort of stuff, there's a few statistics that we absolutely need that we don't actually have right now, and they can only be achieved if we go heavy on the data.
	Right?
	That's it.
	Right now, our number one priority, other than just increasing ICU beds and ventilators and making sure the people who need the care get the care, should be the randomized testing.
	It should be developing a serology test that can tell us how many people actually have this thing.
	Because that's going to wildly change your strategy.
	What if 50% of the American population already has this thing?
	Right?
	If 50% of the American population already has this thing, then you kind of just want people to go back to work, because then if they infect a few more people, you get herd immunity.
	Right?
	If only 10% of the American population has this thing, Maybe that changes your strategy in the other direction.
	Or maybe you look at the infection rates versus the death rates and you say, okay, well, the death rates are actually not that high.
	So we need to protect the most vulnerable and just assume that everybody's going to get it over the course of the year.
	All of these questions cannot be answered absent the data.
	So, as I've discussed before, when it comes to the case fatality rate, when it comes to how many people are dying from this and how communicable it is, we don't know the actual numerator.
	There's an article in the Wall Street Journal today talking specifically about the fact that we actually don't know how many people have died from this thing.
	We still are unclear on exactly how bad this thing could be.
	Actually, the New York Times reports the U.S.
	The U.S. is undercounting the number of people who have died in the pandemic, according to experts.
	Quote, hospital officials, public health experts, medical examiners say official tallies of Americans said to have died in the pandemic do not capture the overall number of virus related deaths, leaving the public with a limited understanding of the outbreaks.
	Limited resources and a patchwork of decision making from one state or county to the next have contributed to the undercount.
	With no uniform system for reporting coronavirus-related deaths in the United States and a continuing shortage of tests, some states and counties have improvised, obfuscated, and at times backtracked in counting the dead.
	Adding to the complications, different jurisdictions are using distinct standards for attributing a death to the coronavirus and, in some cases, relying on techniques that would lower the overall count of fatalities.
	So people are dying, we're not actually testing them after they are dead.
	Also, it's possible that we misidentified some people as having influenza or having pneumonia.
	At the same time, it's possible that we're reclassifying in the other direction.
	People who normally died of the flu, for example, do you classify them if they're 85 and they died after acquiring pneumonia after having the flu?
	Do they die of pneumonia, the flu, or old age?
	How you classify deaths actually makes a fairly large-scale difference in what these numbers look like.
	If somebody is 91 and they pass away from shortness of breath and then afterward they are tested for coronavirus, did they die from coronavirus or did they die of the fact that they were extremely vulnerable to begin with?
	Now normally we wouldn't bother testing those people but right now we are testing so it's possible that we are under counting.
	It's also possible that we are over-counting by comparison with past death rates, meaning that, yeah, people are dying of coronavirus, but we're being very meticulous and overly meticulous maybe in how we count the coronavirus deaths as compared to past countings of deaths.
	So the numerator is in controversy when we talk about how many people have actually died.
	Then you have to worry about the denominator, and that's the one I've been focused on.
	How do we know how many people have been infected?
	You are seeing the case fatality rate, and the case fatality rate is how many people who are diagnosed with having this thing die.
	And right now in the United States, the case fatality rate, as of over the weekend, was something we have like 9,600 people who have died in the United States, and we have, as a total number of infections, total cases, 338,899.
	So just typing this into the computer, what you get is 388,899.
	Basically, the case fatality rate in the United States is somewhere in the order of 2.5%, which sounds super duper high.
	The problem is, a lot of people are asymptomatic.
	A lot of people are not coming into the hospital.
	The people who are coming in for the testing are the people with the most severe symptoms.
	So, what exactly is the case fatality rate?
	Case fatality rate is a bad measure.
	In fact, number of cases identified is a bad measure.
	Hospitalizations is a better measure, because it actually means an actual hard fact, how many people are going to the hospital.
	But the denominator is in question.
	So the numerator, how many people dead, is in question.
	The denominator, how many people actually have this thing, is in question.
	And then, we actually don't know how the virus is spread, because you're hearing everything from, if somebody breathes on you, within a 15 mile radius, you're gonna die.
	Or you could be just walking along the street and you slip and your hand touches a pole and suddenly there's coronavirus on your hand, you wipe your mouth and you're dead.
	We just don't know exactly how well this thing is spread.
	Best available data seems to suggest that you're basically okay unless someone coughs directly in your face and you're within six feet.
	Or unless you are wiping your face constantly, if you're taking your hands and putting them on your face constantly.
	So if you hand wash a lot and you don't touch your face, your chances of getting this thing are extraordinarily low.
	Unless someone spits or coughs directly in your face.
	One of the bad cases of an outbreak actually happened at a choir practice in Washington state.
	The reason being at a choir practice, what is everybody doing, right?
	Everybody is projecting, everybody is singing very, very loudly.
	They're spitting, right?
	That's like, you should see my screen after the show, right?
	There's a lot of saliva on the screen.
	Because when you project over the course of three hours, what you end up with is having to wipe down your screen.
	Well, if you're singing in a crowded area, that's a problem.
	So all of this will lead to better methods.
	But what we need right now is knowing exactly how this is done.
	First of all, better reporting methods from the states and localities.
	We need to know how many people are actually dead of coronavirus and how those numbers are reached.
	We have to fix the denominator.
	We now have apparently approved and verified antibody tests.
	We could get randomized antibody tests and that would tell you how many people have already had it.
	So if you combine antibody tests with the actual coronavirus test and you did it in a randomized sample size, you can actually tell how far, how fast this thing is spreading, particularly in urban areas.
	And they're saying these antibody tests are pretty good.
	They're saying they're about 95% effective.
	By the way, it's a lot more effective than the actual virus test.
	The actual virus tests apparently have like a 20% false positive rate or a false negative rate, which is really insane.
	You could go in with coronavirus, take a test, they tell you you're all good to go.
	You go home and you infect your entire family.
	So that would tell you exactly, once you have the denominator number, then you can actually tell what are the hospitalization rates versus the overall number.
	And it's based on that number that people are now making projections as to how many ICU beds and ventilators are going to be needed.
	Let's say right now that Andrew Cuomo, Governor Cuomo in New York, He's saying that he needs 30,000 ventilators.
	That he desperately needs 30,000 ventilators.
	And he is calculating that by looking at the case fatality rate, and he's saying that's the entirety of everybody who's been infected.
	So we have 300, let's say that in New York State, we have... I can actually check the statistic really quickly as to how many people have been confirmed to have coronavirus in the state of New York.
	In New York, that number at the moment, according again to the Johns Hopkins modeling and reporting, they say there are about 120,000 cases in New York.
	And they've had a grand total of 4,159 deaths.
	Right, so let's say that, how many people are in New York State?
	What's the total population of New York?
	Population of New York is...
	The total population of New York State is 8.6.
	Well, is that the city?
	That's the city, New York State.
	The total population of New York State is 20 million.
	It's about 20 million.
	So you figure 120,000 people have been confirmed to have this thing in a state of 20 million people.
	The case fatality rate right now is approximately 4,100.
	So the case fatality rate in New York City, in New York State right now is about 3.3%.
	So if you figure 3.3% times 20 million, then what you end up with is a need for, you know, tens and tens and tens of thousands of ventilators.
	He figured that everybody who died needed a ventilator, so if that case fatality rate is 20 million times .03, then you are talking about a need for 600,000 beds probably?
	Okay, so he's figuring that not everybody is going to get it.
	Still, If you figured that only the people who are tested were the ones who are going to get it, you're going to end up with this extraordinarily high-end estimate for how many beds and ventilators you need.
	But what if that statistic isn't showing that tons of people in New York have already had this thing?
	Then you could actually lower the number of beds and ventilators that are necessary, and it doesn't look like 30,000.
	Instead, it looks like a lot lower than that, right?
	If you knew that the true number of New Yorkers infected is already 20 times higher than the number of people who they think are infected, Well, that would completely lower the number of ventilators and beds you need.
	So all of this data is super important and the government needs to do it now.
	We need large-scale antibody testing.
	We need large-scale serology.
	We need large-scale baseline coronavirus testing and randomized across the country so we actually can do it like polling, right?
	We actually need it in different places in the country so we can tell how fast this thing is spreading.
	And we need to know this stuff yesterday, right?
	And you're starting to see that this call is going out from pretty much everybody.
	Again, Bill Gates has been suggesting that he thinks, actually, that fewer people than the models show are going to die because he thinks that we're being pretty successful at, quote unquote, flattening the curve.
	Here was Bill Gates yesterday saying that, well, we all need to stay home.
	The outbreak, you know, he thinks it'll get worse, but it doesn't mean that the numbers are going to be as bad as we've been led to believe.
	If we continue countrywide, and we're testing the right people to understand what's going on, which is not the case yet, those numbers will start to go down, and then...
	We can look at some degree of opening back up.
	President Trump's top health advisors are talking about somewhere between 100 and 240,000 deaths over the next two months.
	Does that sound about right to you in terms of the lethality and the length of the outbreak here in the U.S.? ?
	Well, if we do the social distancing properly, we should be able to get out of this with a death number well short of that.
	Okay, now Gates has been calling for this 10-week shutdown, but the truth is that Gates isn't the one paying the economic price on that on a personal level.
	I mean, his company, obviously, is just like all major companies are.
	We all want to get out of this thing as fast as possible, I would hope, and that means that you need all of this testing ASAP.
	Okay, we're going to get to some of these methodologies and what this week is supposed to look like.
	We'll get to all of that in just one second.
	Let's talk about the fact that you are sitting at home right now, looking at those walls, and you're thinking, man, I wish I had a little bit nicer artwork.
	Or maybe you're looking to get an amazing gift for your parents, for example.
	Like now would be a great time to show your parents how much you care.
	Here is a fantastic gift for them.
	I'm talking about Paint Your Life.
	PaintYourLife.com.
	With everything going on right now, it's difficult to know if you're going to be with your mom for Mother's Day.
	But if you're looking for a great way to feel connected to your loved ones, here's a great thing you can do.
	Go to paintyourlife.com.
	You get a professional hand-painted portrait created from any photo at a truly affordable price.
	You can send any picture of yourself, your kids, your family, a special place, a cherished pet.
	You can even combine photos as well.
	You pick your artist, you work with the artist until it looks absolutely awesome.
	Mother's Day is May 10th.
	Order before Easter.
	Like, make it happen in the next couple of weeks.
	It is a great gift.
	It comes directly to you.
	You can do it all online.
	And, I mean, you want to do something that really makes sense for your mom or your dad.
	They're in quarantine, right, and you're all locked down.
	Right now is a great time to do this.
	You can make all the art better in your house, but you can also make it better for your parents.
	It's a great, great gift for your parents.
	At PaintYourLife.com, there is no risk.
	If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded guaranteed.
	We have a painting of my wife, me, two of our three children.
	We're going to have to do a new one now because we have a new baby.
	And I can't wait to do it at Paint Your Life.
	They do an amazing job.
	You get 20% off right now, your painting, 20% off plus free shipping when you text the word Ben to 64000.
	Text Ben to 64000.
	Ben to 64000.
	Paint your life.
	Celebrate the moments that matter most.
	Paintyourlife.com.
	What a fantastic gift and what a nice thing you can do for somebody at a time of year when everybody is kind of down.
	Go check it out right now.
	Paintyourlife.com.
	Text Ben to 64000 for that special 20% off deal.
	Okay, so where are things going to go in the near future?
	Well, As I say, the curve is being bent.
	There is some good news.
	There is some news out of Italy that it looks like they may have already hit their height.
	The Dow has jumped pretty significantly this morning, thanks to news that people may be looking at different countries coming out of this thing.
	Apparently, the situation in Italy is starting to look a hell of a lot better.
	According to Reuters, Italy reported its lowest daily COVID-19 death toll for more than two weeks on Sunday as authorities began to look ahead to a second phase of the battle against the new coronavirus once the lockdown imposed almost a month ago is eventually eased.
	The toll from the world's deadliest outbreak reached 15,887, which is a quarter of the global death toll, but the rise of 525 from a day earlier was the smallest daily increase since March 19.
	The number of patients in badly stretched intensive care units fell for a second day running.
	Silvio Brusaferro, the head of the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy's top health institute, I'm sure I botched that, says, the curve has reached a plateau and begun to descend.
	It is a result that we have to achieve day after day.
	He says, if this is true, we need to start thinking about a second phase and keep down the spread of the disease.
	So you're starting to see that in Italy.
	You're starting to see that in France, apparently.
	You're starting to see it in Spain as well.
	Meanwhile in Great Britain, in bad news, Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, has been hospitalized.
	Now they say that that is more precautionary than anything else.
	He's the Prime Minister.
	And so they want to make sure that he has all of the needs that he has at his disposal.
	This actually led Queen Elizabeth to speak.
	This is only the fourth time she's given a public speech in her entire career.
	So it shows you how severe the folks in the British government think this is.
	Here's Queen Elizabeth basically telling everybody to hold it together.
	I hope in the years to come, everyone will be able to take pride in how they responded to this challenge.
	And those who come after us will say the Britons of this generation were as strong as any.
	That the attributes of self-discipline, of quiet, good-humoured resolve and of fellow-feeling still characterise this country.
	The pride in who we are is not a part of our past.
	It defines our present and our future.
	You gotta love her.
	She's terrific.
	You gotta love the Brits.
	And obviously, everybody's saying prayers for Boris Johnson and for everybody who is suffering under this epidemic.
	Now, in Japan, they are worried about a critical situation.
	They may declare an emergency as early as Tuesday.
	The early news from Japan was they'd held this thing down well.
	But again, a hotspot can rage this thing out of control fairly quickly.
	We'll bring you all the news from New York and from the White House in just one second.
	First, however, let us talk about the fact that right now, if your car is having trouble, I have something that's an absolute godsend for you.
	It's RockAuto.com.
	Right now, do you really want to be walking into stores and having conversations about auto parts?
	Or would you prefer to sit at home and just get that auto part, put it in your car, and be good to go?
	The RockAuto.com catalog is unique and remarkably easy to navigate.
	RockAuto.com has everything from engine control modules and brake parts to tail lamps, motor oil, even new carpet.
	Whether it's for a classic or a daily driver, get everything you need in a few easy clicks delivered directly to your door.
	RockAuto.com always offers the lowest prices possible rather than changing prices based on what the market will bear, like the airlines do.
	There's no reason to spend up to twice as much for the same parts.
	For example, the Delphi FG 1456 fuel pump assembly for the 2005-2010 Honda Odyssey will cost you like $354 at Advance, which is a big chain store.
	It'll only cost you $217 at RockAuto.com.
	RockAuto is a family business.
	They serve auto parts customers.
	They've been doing it online for 20 years.
	Head on over to RockAuto.com right now.
	See all the parts available for your car or truck.
	In some cases, we're telling governors, we can't go there because we don't think you need it and we think someplace else needs it.
	parts, write Shapiro in there.
	How did you hear about us, Box?
	So they know that we sent you.
	Okay.
	So the prediction in the United States, of course, is this is going to be a really bad week.
	President Trump, over the weekend, he said there is going to be a lot of death this week.
	In some cases, we're telling governors, we can't go there because we don't think you need it, and we think someplace else needs it.
	And pretty much so far, we've been right about that.
	And we'll continue to do it as it really gets This will be probably the toughest week between this week and next week.
	And there'll be a lot of death, unfortunately, but a lot less death than if this wasn't done.
	But there will be death.
	Well, Anthony Fauci says the same thing.
	He says this is indeed going to be a very bad weekend.
	And of course, these projections, we'll see how bad the actual death tolls are.
	Do they match up with the projections, right?
	The projection from that University of Washington model that I spoke about before, which says higher peak but lesser duration, they suggest that 10 days away, there will be about over 3,000 Americans will die in one day, according to that data.
	In New York, however, they're suggesting that as early as Thursday, there will be a pinnacle in New York City.
	That's what Andrew Cuomo has suggested.
	He says there will be 878 deaths that day.
	Of course, we'll see how the models hold up in the midst of all of this.
	Here's Anthony Fauci suggesting that this will indeed be a very bad week.
	Well, this is going to be a bad week, Margaret, unfortunately.
	If you look at the projection of the curves, of the kinetics of the curves, we're going to continue to see an escalation.
	Also, we should hope that within a week, or maybe a little bit more, we'll start to see a flattening out of the curve and coming down.
	The mitigation that we're talking about that you just mentioned is absolutely key to the success of that.
	So, on the one hand, things are going to get bad and we need to be prepared for that.
	It is going to be shocking to some.
	Surgeon General Jerome Adams said the same thing.
	He compared this week to 9-11 or Pearl Harbor, suggesting that Americans are going to see mass death and really bad numbers.
	And again, those are the best available studies.
	That is the suggestion.
	We will see, you know, how long the duration is or whether the numbers end up looking exactly like that University of Washington model, which by the way, I will say overall, again, has been reduced down from 94,000 dead by August.
	I mean, it's hard to say these are good numbers because they're not.
	But has been reduced down from 94,000 dead expected by the beginning of August to 81,000 dead and that happened just over the course of the weekend.
	Here's the Surgeon General.
	Well, it's tragically fitting that we're talking at the beginning of Holy Week, because this is going to be the hardest and the saddest week of most Americans' lives, quite frankly.
	This is going to be our Pearl Harbor moment, our 9-11 moment, only it's not going to be localized.
	It's going to be happening all over the country, and I want America to understand that.
	But I also want them to understand that the public, along with the state and the federal government, have the power to change the trajectory of this epidemic.
	Meanwhile, states are suggesting that they are running low on supplies across the board.
	That has to be top priority, is making sure that the states get those supplies.
	Again, the whole purpose of flattening the curve is to get it underneath that line.
	Here's Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York, suggesting that they are running short on supplies across the board, although he did say that they're not short on hospital beds.
	He was asked about hospital beds.
	He said, we don't have a problem with hospital beds.
	We do have a problem with ICUs and we have a problem with ventilators.
	We're running short on supplies all across the board.
	Some hospitals happen to have a greater supply of one thing or another.
	One hospital has a greater supply of masks.
	One hospital has a greater supply of gowns.
	And when we're talking about supply, hospitals are accustomed to dealing with 60-day supply, 90-day supply.
	90-day supply.
	We're talking about two or three or four-day supply, which makes the entire hospital system uncomfortable, which I also understand, because we're literally going day-to-day with our supplies, with our staff, etc. because we're literally going day-to-day with our supplies, with our The Louisiana governor has said the same thing as well, by the way.
	John Bel Edwards.
	He says we could run out of ventilators this week.
	Every day we get new information that informs our modeling.
	We now think it's probably around the 9th of April before we exceed our ventilator capacity based on the current number on hand, and that we're a couple of days behind that on ICU bed capacity being exceeded.
	So as we achieve success in slowing the rate of spread, we also push out that date and Critically important is the number of people who will present to the hospital and not be able to get a vent or a bed is a smaller number.
	Okay, meanwhile, the economy obviously has been taken completely offline.
	According to the Wall Street Journal, we've actually seen one quarter of the entire American economy taken offline simply by the state shutdowns.
	They say at least one quarter of the U.S.
	economy has suddenly gone idle amid the coronavirus pandemic.
	According to analysis conducted by the Wall Street Journal, An unprecedented shutdown of commerce that economists say has never occurred on such a wide scale.
	8 out of 10 U.S.
	counties are under lockdown orders.
	This represents nearly 96% of national output.
	The study was done by Moody's Analytics.
	The counties that have not been put under shutdown order tend to be the ones that are less urban, a little bit more rural.
	41 states have ordered at least some businesses to close to reduce the spread of coronavirus, according to Moody's.
	Restaurants, universities, gyms, movie theaters, public parks, boutiques, millions of other non-essential business quote-unquote non-essential businesses have shut off the lights as a result.
	And we have seen one loss of the estimate is 25% of the American economy right off the top.
	The unemployment statistics are absolutely astounding.
	We are expected to hit 28 million unemployed over the course of the next three to four weeks.
	And then the question becomes, okay, when can we all go back to work?
	That is the big question.
	I suggested early on that We are going to know the answer to that when we have more data.
	And once we have that data in, then we're going to have to start making trade-offs and calculations.
	That is the reality of the situation.
	Right now, basically the case for us all staying home is asteroid headed for Earth could kill 2.2 million Americans based on that Imperial College model.
	That was the initial estimate.
	And so the idea was, okay, if we have to shut down for a month to prevent one in 150 Americans from dying, then let's go ahead and do that.
	But as more data pours in, And as the numbers show that they are significantly less than 2.2 million, right?
	We are going to have to figure out exactly what we are willing to sacrifice as a society on an economic level and on a lifestyle level and on a freedom level.
	Because freedom does matter, by the way.
	Right, I mean, let's put this in a slightly different way.
	If the United States were invaded, and the people who were invading were going to suggest that from now on, you were not able to go to public events and you were going to be confined to your home for the foreseeable future, and it was going to cost us a certain number of lives in order to prevent that invasion, what number of lives would you actually sacrifice in order to do that?
	Now, this is not that, because again, the hope is that we don't end up in that situation.
	The hope is that this is not indefinite, that this is actually quite definite.
	And as the data comes in, that's why we have to have a plan to get out of this, because the more it looks indefinite, the more it looks like we're going to have to make hard trade-offs.
	Right now, this is why you need to gather data, because you don't want to have to make those choices between how many lives we have to sacrifice and how many people can we allow to go back to work and lead their lifestyle and go out and be free in a free society.
	You don't want to have to make those calculations.
	And so the first priority of the Trump administration, aside from just ensuring that whatever ventilators are out there get to the right places, the first priority is the data.
	And if governors and states and the federal government are not prioritizing the data, it's because they don't care enough about your freedoms.
	Okay, the data are key.
	Absolutely key.
	We'll get to more of this in just one second.
	Because look, we all know what the government has to do when it comes to mobilizing the resources.
	We're all on the same page here.
	The question is how we get out of this thing now, and how we make the calculations as to how we get out of this thing.
	So now I'm back where I was on Friday, where I was saying we don't have the data to know how to get out of this thing.
	They better come up with it forthwith, because as this thing begins to look indefinite, as this begins to look like, okay, we're gonna lock down indefinitely until a vaccine is developed next year, And it could be seasonal, and it comes back in the fall, and we're gonna lock back down, and what does a non-lockdown America even look like?
	More and more Americans are gonna say, hold up a second, you expect me to indefinitely give up my freedom?
	And you expect me to do that on the basis of what now?
	And how many lives?
	And from whom?
	Because, by the way, that does make a difference.
	Every life matters, but on an economic level, somebody passing away at the age of 95 is not quite the same thing as somebody passing away at the age of 20.
	If this were striking children, I think the amount of panic in the United States would be eight times the amount of panic that exists right now, and there's a fair amount of panic right now.
	And to pretend, by the way, that these calculations don't go on on a daily basis by the government is just silly.
	Literally every public policy professional makes these sorts of calculations on an economic GDP level and on a lifestyle level, because economics is a real life factor.
	For those who don't believe that, I suggest that you hand out your bank account number right now, and then we'll see if the economy actually affects you or not.
	All right, public bank account number and your PIN.
	And then we'll see if you think that economics is real or if it's just a social construct.
	We'll get to more of this in just one second.
	First, let's talk about the fact that it's hard to come by sleep these days.
	I have a brand new baby.
	I have two other kids.
	They've been sick, actually, over the course of the last three weeks.
	That means I'm not getting enough sleep.
	When I do sleep, I want to be on my Helix Sleep mattress because it is made just for me.
	It's like a cloud created just for me.
	Helix Sleep has a quiz.
	It takes just two minutes to complete, matches your body type and sleep preferences to the perfect mattress for you.
	Whether you're a side sleeper, a hot sleeper, whether you like a plush or a firm bed, with Helix there's no more confusion and no more compromising.
	Helix Sleep is rated the number one mattress by GQ and Wired Magazine, and CNN called it the most comfortable mattress they've ever slept on.
	Head on over to helixsleep.com.
	Take their two-minute sleep quiz.
	They will match you to a customized mattress that will give you the best sleep of your life.
	They have a 10-year warranty.
	You get to try it out for 100 nights risk-free.
	They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it.
	But indeed, you will.
	Why?
	Because it's made just for you.
	What's not to love?
	Helix right now is offering up to $200 off all mattress orders for our listeners.
	Get up to $200 off at helixsleep.com slash Ben.
	That is helixsleep.com slash Ben.
	Go check them out right now.
	Helixsleep.com slash Ben.
	Take the two-minute quiz.
	My wife and I have.
	The mattress is fantastic.
	Again, get $200 off at helixsleep.com slash Ben.
	Alrighty, in just one second, we are going to get to more of the proposed solutions, plus President Trump going at it with the media.
	When it comes to politics, the real question is going to become how much of this is permanent and how much of this is temporary, because Conservatives slash libertarians like me, even I am willing to go along with the temporary.
	I am not willing to go along with the permanent.
	And I'm not willing to go along with the idea that we're going to radically transform America's economy, our relationship with the government on the basis of uncertain data.
	I mean, I'll let you have the period of time to get your data together, guys.
	I'm willing to trust the experts until you get the data together.
	But you can't keep kicking it down the road.
	You can't keep telling me it'll take you six months to gather the data.
	Because at that point, you're looking at the making permanent of things that were once temporary.
	I understand the idea of temporary.
	Most people do.
	In the middle of a war, people make sacrifices.
	But that's with the understanding that the war eventually ends.
	If the war never ends, people are gonna start rethinking that stuff pretty damn fast.
	And we're gonna get to more of this in just one second because this does implicate some broader conversations about the future of the country and where we go from here.
	If you haven't had a chance to see some of our new content called the All Access Live, you should head over to dailywire.com and check it out.
	Jeremy Boring and I kicked it off a few weeks ago.
	All of the other hosts have done live streams over at dailywire.com.
	We're gonna continue all this week at 8 p.m.
	Eastern, 5 p.m.
	Pacific.
	All Access Live is a lot more relaxed than our normal programming.
	It is less focused on bringing you news and information, more about sitting down with you at the end of a long day and just hanging out with you.
	I'm going to be doing at least one of these this week.
	Head on over to All Access Live right now at dailywire.com.
	All of our members get to check it out right now because we all want to just hang out together.
	We're all stuck in our houses anyway.
	Go check us out at dailywire.com if you're around at 8 p.m.
	Eastern, 5 p.m.
	Pacific.
	Join us on All Access Live.
	You're listening to the largest growing, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
	So as Scott Gottlieb is saying, one of the other solutions that needs to be brought to Bayer here is not just ICU beds and ventilators, but new treatments.
	Gottlieb says some imagine coronavirus will run its tragic course in the spring with direct the diverse results avoided by intense social distancing and then our lives can more or less return to normal.
	He says that's not realistic.
	Even if new cases start to stall in the summer heat, the virus will then return in the fall.
	So the fresh risk of large outbreaks and even a new epidemic, people will still be reluctant to crowd into stores, restaurants or arenas.
	Schools may remain closed.
	The public's fears won't relent simply because there are fewer new cases.
	We'll be running an 80% economy.
	He says the only way out is with technology.
	Aggressive surveillance and screening can help warn of new infection clusters that could turn into outbreaks, but that won't be enough.
	A vaccine could beat the virus.
	There won't be one this year.
	The best near-term hope is an effective therapeutic drug.
	That would be transformative.
	It's plausible as soon as this summer, but the process will have to move faster.
	There are a few different possibilities.
	Dozens of promising antiviral drugs, says Gottlieb, are in various stages of development, could be advanced quickly.
	The one furthest along is remdesivir from Gilead Sciences.
	There's evidence from clinical experience with COVID-19 patients it could be effective.
	The other approach involves antibody drugs, which mimic the function of immune cells.
	Antibody drugs are based on the same scientific principles that make convalescent plasma one interim tactic for treating the sickest COVID-19 patients.
	The biotech company Regeneron successfully developed an antibody drug to treat Ebola as well as one against MERS, and they're working on one that could hit human trials as soon as June.
	But we're going to need to see all of this speed up.
	Also, there's talk About hydroxychloroquine, the media again trying to generate all sorts of controversy about this.
	Anthony Fauci apparently got in a big argument with the head of trade, Peter Navarro, who again, like I'm not sure what he has to say about hydroxychloroquine.
	Fauci correctly says that the data is anecdotal at this point and people are upset with Fauci for saying that.
	The data can be anecdotal and also it might be the best option we have.
	Both of those things could be true, right?
	Just because there has been no large-scale clinical trial and very small-scale clinical trials.
	Just because there's been no large-scale clinical trial does not mean that when people are losing lung function, they're going to sit around going, oh, well, you know, I think that maybe I need the clinical trial before you give me the hydroxychloroquine.
	That's not how any of this is working.
	Again, the measures that have to be taken, ICU beds, ventilators, new drugs developed.
	And then the question becomes, if that's not going to happen by the fall, how do we reopen the economy?
	The question right now is not why there is no... Everyone's focused on the here and now.
	I get it.
	Everybody is focused on Should we have a national lockdown order?
	Should we batten down the hatches like totally right now?
	And the answer is, I don't think so on the national lockdown order because every area of the United States is different.
	And I'm not going to treat a rural area the same that I would treat an urban area.
	They're not quite the same.
	And they're not quite the same.
	And the level of transmission from rural to urban right now is actually fairly low.
	I saw this bizarre map that somebody was putting out the other day about the distances from their homes that people were driving.
	And in the South, people are driving longer distances away from their homes.
	The suggestion being that they were going and like, what, were they going and spitting on people?
	I went for a drive with my kids yesterday.
	We probably drove for 45 minutes.
	So what?
	We didn't get out of the car.
	It doesn't mean that we're going around infecting people.
	With all of that said, the priority has to be reopening the economy as soon as we have the data to suggest exactly how we make that happen.
	So here's President Trump over the weekend again getting bashed for this.
	He says we have to reopen our economy.
	It does matter.
	Of course it matters.
	And anybody who pretends it doesn't matter is really making me suspicious at this point.
	Trump is not saying when we reopen our economy.
	Trump is not saying that we're going to reopen our economy tomorrow.
	He is saying that he has to have that first and foremost in his mind.
	By the way, one of the reasons why he is saying this is because on the back of every crisis, there is an attempt to radically transform America.
	This happened in the aftermath of the Great Depression, a radical transformation in the lives of Americans between the relationship between government, federal, state, local, and human beings.
	This happened in the aftermath of 9-11 with regard to our security.
	Right?
	Suddenly people were just willing to accept a lot more surveillance in their lives than ever they had been willing to accept before.
	And now, they're starting to backtrack that, right?
	Now people are like, oh, well, maybe that wasn't such a great idea.
	In the aftermath of every crisis, there is an attempt to radically grow government on a permanent level.
	And that's just a normal human response, because you want to prevent the bad thing from happening again.
	Well, in this case, where you have the largest government reaction in the history of the United States, The prospect of that being made into a permanent feature of the American landscape is pretty scary, and it's one of the reasons why we should be looking to get out of this as fast as humanly possible.
	Let me give you an example.
	So, Andrew Yang, right?
	My boy, Andrew Yang.
	I like Andrew, right?
	Andrew's a really good guy.
	He was promoting universal basic income, like, two, like, years ago, right?
	He comes on the Sunday special, we have a full hour-long conversation.
	And the case that Andrew is making is that technology is going to put every low-wage worker out of work, and so we have to provide a universal basic income for those people so they have something to live on.
	And I said to him at the time, there's not a lot of evidence this is happening.
	We have a 4% unemployment rate in the country.
	We have more jobs open than there are people to fill those jobs.
	We do not have this vast underclass of people who are unemployable or unemployed.
	In fact, wages were rising fastest for people at the bottom in terms of blue collar wages as a percentage.
	They're rising very quickly for people at the bottom under President Trump's presidency up until this point.
	Now you have this vast shutdown.
	Nearly everybody who's losing their job is somebody who's in a blue collar job.
	Somebody who's earning not a lot of money.
	People who work at restaurants.
	People who are working in domestic industries.
	People who are working at hotels.
	All those people are out of work right now.
	You just threw 30 million people out of work.
	Of those 30 million people, probably 25 million of those people were lower wage, mid to low wage, or lower income workers.
	So you just accomplished, in literally a week, what Andrew Yang was predicting was going to happen over the course of 10 years.
	Okay, so if you don't want to see a vast underclass of Americans who are just supported purely by the government, you need this economy up and running fast.
	And not only that, you need people to rely on capitalism.
	You need people to get back to the model of, yeah, capitalism is great.
	It's what allows me to work.
	It's what allows me to get out there and earn.
	What you don't want is the government coming in, forcibly shutting down the entire economy, throwing 30 million people out of work, and then all those people have no choice but to vote for bigger governments.
	They have no choice but to vote for a government that's going to fill the gap created by the government in the first place.
	I've been willing to go along this whole time with the government drives that Ford F-150 through the front wall of your house, now they got to repay you for that?
	That's fine.
	But what if the government just leaves the Ford F-150 there?
	What if the damage done by the Ford F-150 is so grave to the front wall of your home that the government isn't going to offer you a repayment to rebuild your home?
	They're not going to allow you to rebuild your home, in fact, because the economy's been stalled for too long.
	And because they need these temporary shutdowns that become permanent shutdowns.
	And so instead what they say is, okay, we're going to put you up in government housing.
	Sorry, you're going to have to move out of that house that we wrecked, but we've got this really nice housing tenement in the project and you're going to have to go there.
	And people say, okay, well, I have no alternative.
	So I guess I am going to have to take that, right?
	That is the danger here is that people start to radically rethink capitalism, even though it wasn't capitalism that failed here.
	What failed here was a global health shock followed by heavy government action.
	And if that becomes permanent, that is a real danger.
	And so, I am not willing to allow that to become permanent.
	I'm not willing to allow the government to become the chief breadwinner for all Americans and do so off the back of the people who are going to be left in the economy earning.
	Not when the government created this situation in the first place.
	I'm not willing to allow that to happen on a long-term basis.
	Again, on a short-term basis, sometimes you got to do what you got to do, right?
	Sometimes you got to shut down the schools.
	Sometimes you got to shut, although I think there are serious questions as to whether that should have been done.
	Sometimes you have to, you have to shut things down because you don't have any other better data.
	But if it turns out that the data gathering is taking a year and this is becoming a permanent feature and that the idea is that we are now going to be levying wealth taxes on people and destroying entrepreneurial activity in this country and destroying every business in the country on the basis of we threw 30, 40, 50 million people out of work and the only place we can get the wealth because we can't sell our bonds anymore because nobody is buying bonds.
	The only way to raise the money is either inflation or to confiscate wealth from the people who are going to produce all of the best products and hire all of these people back.
	That's a radical reshift.
	Okay, so Trump is not wrong.
	When he says we have to reopen the economy, he is exactly right.
	This is correct.
	We will continue to use every power, every authority, every single resource we've got to keep our people healthy, safe, secure, and to get this thing over with.
	We want to finish this war.
	We have to get back to work.
	We have to get, we have to open our country again.
	We have to open our country again.
	We don't want to be doing this for months and months and months.
	We're going to open our country again.
	This country wasn't meant for this.
	Few were.
	And President Trump continues.
	He says the cure can't be worse than the problem.
	And he's getting all sorts of flack for this.
	I don't understand how this is even remotely controversial.
	Of course the cure can't be worse than the problem.
	The question is, how bad is the problem going to be?
	And we don't know yet, right?
	Once we know how bad the problem is going to be, then we know whether the cure is worse than the problem.
	Right?
	If you go into the doctor's office and you say, listen, I've been having some shortness of breath.
	And the doctor says, okay, well, I'm going to need to put you on an anti-malarial drug and we're going to ventilate you.
	And you're like, well, hold on.
	You didn't even give me a coronavirus test yet.
	I don't even know, like, what are you saying now?
	Is the cure worse than the problem?
	Who the hell knows?
	We don't know the scope of the problem.
	It could be you just had an asthma attack.
	It could be that you got COVID, right?
	Until we know the scope of the problem, it's hard to say whether the cure is worse than the problem.
	Here's President Trump saying the cure can't be worse than the problem, which of course is true.
	Get the data.
	Get the data.
	This is on the Trump administration.
	Get the data.
	I want to see antibody tests all over the country.
	Randomized antibody tests all over the country.
	We need randomized tests.
	Coronavirus tests all over the country.
	You're telling me that we're going to be able to roll out 750,000 tests every week and you can't spare 10,000 of those tests for just a randomized polling sample?
	Or that you can't open up a data center where we actually learn what the conditions are of people who are dying from this thing?
	Better data, better data, better data.
	You don't want the cure to be worse than the problem.
	We got to identify the problem.
	You can do it fast.
	It doesn't take that long.
	Here's President Trump saying the cure can't be worse than the problem.
	We have to open our country.
	You know, I had an expression, the cure can't be worse than the problem itself, right?
	I started by saying that.
	And I continue to say it.
	The cure cannot be worse than the problem itself.
	We got to get our country open.
	Okay, President Trump also says that he wants fans back in the arenas, which is true.
	And then he's asked specifically like the media are they want they want Trump to—it's amazing.
	At the same time, they're saying that Trump is completely incompetent and horrible at everything.
	They're like, but what if you took everything over?
	Could you make that happen?
	Why don't you just nationalize the industries?
	Why don't you just issue a national lockdown?
	And Trump's like, we have something called the Constitution.
	I'll tell you—I'm going to let Trump say this, and then I'm going to point something out, which should frighten everybody.
	Okay, here's President Trump talking about the Constitution.
	We have a thing called the Constitution, which I cherish, number one.
	Number two, those governors, I know every one of them.
	They're doing a great job.
	They're being very, very successful in what they're doing.
	And as you know, I want the governors to be running things.
	Now, in some cases, we'll supersede.
	But in this case, it's not.
	I think it depends.
	It depends on the individual state that you're talking about.
	But they're doing very well and they're doing a magnificent job in running their states.
	Okay, so, you know, he is not wrong about this.
	I mean, a lot of these states are doing a good job and, you know, Ron DeSantis has been dragged over the coals because Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, refused a statewide shutdown.
	There were shutdowns in place for three of the biggest counties in Florida.
	I mean, that's a reality.
	That's true.
	Okay, so it's...
	So here's the thing that should scare you.
	If a Democrat were in charge right now, there's been a lot of talk about the political divide in the country.
	If a Democrat were in charge right now and using this as an opportunity to make permanent all of this stuff, the amount of blowback would be intense.
	The only reason there has not been the amount of blowback from Republican states that I think you would see if a Democrat were president is because people have the basic idea that Trump does not actually want the consequences of this stuff.
	He doesn't want the government taking over the economy.
	He doesn't want a complete radical rethink of the relationship between government and the economy.
	The more that Democrats talk about how they want to radically reshift how all of this works, the more Democrats talk about how they want crisis politics to become the norm.
	The more people are going to resist what needs to be done in the here and now.
	So I think even Democrats should probably be grateful that a Republican is president right now, because whether you like Trump or not, the fact is that if you want people to lock down, they have to trust the leadership.
	People have talked about, I don't trust Trump to handle this thing.
	I think he's incompetent.
	I think he's a blowhard.
	Fine.
	But there's one thing that most Americans do trust Trump with, and that is that he doesn't have the desire to watch the government completely take over American life.
	And that is not something that most Americans think, I think, about Democrats.
	I think that if Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden were president right now and talking about radically reshaping the nature of the American economy, the blowback would be a lot more severe.
	The attempts to avoid the sort of necessaries here would be a lot more severe.
	And it would be half right and half wrong.
	It'd be wrong because you got to pay attention to the social distancing and you got, I mean, we're doing it in my house, right?
	You got to pay attention to all of this stuff.
	You got to follow the best advice.
	You got to stop the spread and all of the rest.
	But at the same time, they'd be half right in being a lot more impatient about how this thing has gone.
	So I'm going to be consistent.
	I'm very impatient with how this thing is going.
	I want the data and I want it now.
	Okay, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
	So things that I like.
	Right now is a time where you're just stuck inside watching kids movies, as I've mentioned.
	There's a great kids movie that just came out.
	It's been really underrated because it came out, like, right directly before the virus hit and shut down all the theaters.
	But the last 30 minutes of this thing are just a killer.
	It's Onward by Pixar.
	And it wasn't rated super highly by critics.
	Like, it did well with critics, but they were like, oh, this isn't in the top tier of Pixar films.
	There are some moments in this that are on par with some of the best stuff in Op.
	There's really some really good stuff here.
	So the movie is onward, it's about basically a pair of brothers who are elves, and their dad died a while ago, and they are able to bring him back for a day, but they screw up the spell.
	They're unable to actually bring his entire body back, and so they only bring back his legs, basically.
	And so they have to go on a quest to bring back the rest of their dad before the day ends, and he can only come back for the day.
	So it's actually pretty emotional.
	Here's a little bit of the trailer.
	Oh, feet!
	It's getting harder to hold!
	Ah, he's just legs!
	I definitely remember Dad having a top part.
	Oh, what did I do?
	We only have 24 hours to bring the rest of him back.
	Until then... Ta-da!
	Oh, that's great!
	Dad, you look just like I remember.
	you got a problem chain if it's adventure you seek you've come to the right tavern Oh, my God.
	Oh no.
	So, the movie's actually really fun.
	There's a lot to it, and it's fairly deep, so it's definitely worth checking out.
	And one thing about Pixar is, again, when you watch the movies with your kids, you're enjoying it on one level, they're enjoying it on another, and it's pretty great.
	Okay, time for some things that I hate.
	So as I mentioned, one of the things that the Democrats are trying to do here, and it really is pretty gross, is that they are trying to mix two messages.
	Message number one is that Trump is bad at this and incompetent, and message number two is that we need a permanent reshaping of the relationship between government and the American people.
	So that's hard to do while Trump is president, because on the one hand you're saying he's incompetent, and on the other hand you're saying he should take ultimate power over everybody's destiny.
	And that's a really hard message.
	So instead, what they have said is, he's incompetent.
	If he were competent, things would be great, which is why when you give us power, we're going to take over everything, and then we'll be competent, and then everything will be great.
	Now, as I've pointed out, everybody was getting this wrong for, like, weeks on end.
	Right?
	Like, everybody was getting this wrong for a very long time.
	And then, in early March, when the testing started to ramp up and it started to become clear what exactly was happening, then everybody started to take this a lot more seriously.
	And that is because failures of information exist on the private level.
	They exist in the public level.
	I mean, the testing information as of late February was pretty nebulous.
	I was saying that there wasn't a lot of evidence that a pandemic was in the offing like late February.
	And I was saying that because the testing information at that point did not have tons of evidence that a pandemic was in the offing.
	I said, things could change.
	They did change.
	A pandemic was in the offing, obviously.
	The WHO had not declared it a pandemic at that point.
	So when it comes to competence, everybody Right-left center is fairly equally incompetent, right?
	Everybody gets things wrong.
	But Democrats want to make the case that government is uniquely good at things.
	It's just that Trump is uniquely bad at things.
	Because if they say that government is uniquely good at things, then people go, wait, but aren't you also saying that the government is sucking this up like being terrible?
	And the Democrats' answer is, no, no, no.
	If it weren't for Trump, government would be doing an excellent job.
	And that's why you're seeing them point to Cuomo, because Cuomo keeps saying, yeah, sure, like, New York is a hotspot and a hotbed, and de Blasio blew it in the city, and my policies may not have been all that great.
	But Trump, but Trump, but Trump is an all-purpose defense for the fact that government generally, right, left, and center, is not very good at things.
	So they've been pushing this dual message, which is Trump is incompetent, and also we need to radically reshift how things are done in the United States.
	So Rahm Emanuel, the former Obama chief of staff, former mayor of Chicago, he says that this really is just a matter, Biden versus Trump is really just competence versus incompetence.
	This is revealed character.
	And in many ways, while you can have a lot of different policies, it's going to be the qualities of the individual come forward.
	And I think in the contrast here, and this is not just because I'm a Democrat, you have competence versus incompetence.
	You have trustworthiness versus actually constantly spin.
	And you have actually the most important quality, which is the ability of a president to be empathetic to the people that they lead versus, I think, something coming out of the White House of constant indifference and constant conflict and fighting.
	Okay, so again, it's competence versus incompetence.
	There's only one problem.
	The Democrats have been incompetent on this all the way through, too.
	Again, de Blasio was mayor of New York.
	The mayor of New Orleans was telling people to go out and celebrate Mardi Gras.
	Nancy Pelosi, in late February, was telling people they ought to go down to Chinatown and hang out.
	Like the incompetence runs across the island.
	If you want to say that Joe Biden is supremely competent, again, I'm not seeing the evidence on this.
	Over the weekend, Joe Biden was criticizing Donald Trump for being too slow on the China travel ban.
	In January, he was ripping him as a xenophobe for it.
	In January, Joe Biden was saying that Trump never should have had any sort of travel ban from China.
	For weeks, he has been, as Guy Benson says at town hall, reactive, repeatedly, almost comically recommending courses of action the Trump administration had already pursued or implemented.
	Well, on Friday, the former VP supported, he actually turned and supported Trump's January 31st decision to ban foreign nationals.
	Suddenly, Kate Bedingfield, Biden's deputy campaign manager, said, He opposed the European travel ban.
	He opposed the China travel ban.
	And now he's trying to shift it and say, Oh, well, you know, it's just, I was just upset that Trump didn't do it sooner.
	What the living hell?
	Here's Joe Biden being incompetent and proving the point.
	Everybody's incompetent.
	You have to move swiftly and we have to move more rapidly.
	You have to implement the Defense Production Act, empower a supply commander, create a Defense Production Act for banks to get out small business loans, ramp up testing, a whole range of things.
	You got to go faster than slower and we started off awfully slow.
	You know, 45 nations had already moved to keep, block China's personnel from being able to come to the United States before the president moved.
	So it's just, it's about pace.
	It's about, it's about the urgency.
	And I don't think there's been enough of it.
	Switched it, right?
	He's switching it.
	He opposed it.
	And now it's like, oh, he didn't do it sooner.
	Right, because if Trump had said he wanted to ban travel from China, like early January, I'm sure Biden would have been all over that.
	Okay, bottom line is incompetence is bipartisan.
	That's one thing you can guarantee about human beings, no matter their industries, they will make mistakes.
	But, I mean, speaking of incompetence, by the way, and just sheer political brazenness, Biden, over the weekend, he was ripping into Trump because the Defense Department fired this Navy captain.
	Why?
	Because he decided to email everybody on his email chain and say, we need to shut down this entire battle carrier.
	That's the reason he was fired.
	Not because he was recommending up the chain that they needed to control the COVID situation on this battle carrier, but because He was emailing everybody outside the chain of command.
	You can't do that.
	You can't do that.
	If somebody, even at my company, okay, we're not the national defense sector.
	If somebody at my company had a recommendation for how the show could be better, and then they rounded up the chain, that's totally fine.
	We do that all the time here.
	If that person then copied the entire mainstream media and was like, by the way, this place is a bleep show.
	You know what happens?
	That person, they get fired.
	That's the way this works.
	But here's Joe Biden suggesting that it is criminal how Trump was treating this Navy captain.
	I think it's close to criminal the way they're dealing with this guy.
	Not his conduct.
	The idea that this man stood up and said what had to be said, got it out that his troops, his Navy personnel were in danger.
	In danger.
	Look how many have the virus.
	I think the guy should have a commendation rather than be fired.
	He should get a commendation for copying people outside the chain of command?
	It's a very weird way to run a military.
	Okay, so the point here is that, proof positive, competence, not great across the aisle when it comes to government, but the Democrats have a stake in claiming that they are great at government.
	Why?
	Because what they actually want is to transform the relationship between Americans and the government, which should scare everybody, and again, actually drives a wedge in a time when we don't need a wedge.
	Right, so you get Bernie, who's out there still, and Biden is still trying to capitulate to him.
	Here's Bernie saying, we still need fundamental socialist change in the United States.
	You want to scare people into saying, okay, screw all of this, I'm going back out and I'm working?
	This is pretty much how you do it.
	Younger people in this country understand that we need fundamental change in the structure of American society.
	And instead of having society which glamorizes billionaires and says that we're all in this, the only thing that we should be doing is trying to make huge amounts of money, there is an entire younger generation that says, well, you know what?
	Maybe we should work together to create an economy that works for all, a health care system that works for all.
	Okay, so that's going to scare everybody.
	Because again, the combined argument, Trump's incompetent, therefore put Bernie or Biden in charge.
	And they're not only going to fix this thing and make sure there's no pandemic, they're going to completely reshape how American government is done.
	It's pretty astonishing.
	By the way, I just got to point out this irony.
	Bernie Sanders yesterday, he says that Trump is going to cause thousands of people to die.
	Also, do you remember Bernie cancelling any of his rallies like February, early March?
	I do not remember that.
	Do you?
	Because it didn't happen.
	Also, my favorite here is that Bernie says that Trump is going to hand out money to people to help his re-election.
	Does Bernie not see the irony of being a socialist claiming that somebody else is going to hand out somebody else's money in order to help their re-election?
	Here's Bernie.
	We have a president who has done so much harm in this entire process Who has downplayed the crisis from day one, which will cost us.
	And his actions, or inactions, in not listening to the scientists and spouting off ridiculous ideas is in fact going to cost the lives of many thousands of Americans.
	If you think that during a campaign You're not going to see a lot of money from the Trump administration going to battleground states, to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida.
	You would be grossly underestimating the venality of this president.
	I'm really enjoying Bernie Sanders explaining that if you give people checks, that they are going to vote for you.
	I'm really enjoying that.
	Bernie, a socialist, claiming that he is above reproach, but his entire program is steal money from some people and give it to other people for their votes, but it's bad when Trump signs the checks because everybody's unemployed.
	Alrighty, well we'll be back here later today with two additional hours of content, and we'll bring you some more experts, we'll talk to some doctors, you know, we're constantly trying to bring you information.
	If you didn't have a chance, listen to our Sunday special.
	Yesterday it was really good.
	We spoke to a couple of different doctors, one from University of California San Francisco, the other from Hoover Institution.
	We also spoke to Mohamed El-Erian from Allianz about the economic fallout from all of this.
	It's really worth the listen, so go check that out.
	Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow.
	I'm Ben Shapiro, this is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
	Directed by Mike Joyner.
	Executive producer Jeremy Boring.
	Supervising producer Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
	Assistant director Pavel Lydowsky.
	Technical producer Austin Stevens.
	Playback and media operated by Nick Sheehan.
	Associate producer Katie Swinnerton.
	Edited by Adam Sajovic.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
	Hair and makeup is by Nika Geneva.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
	Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
	You know, the Matt Wall Show, it's not just another show about politics.
	I think there are enough of those already out there.
	We talk about culture, because culture drives politics, and it drives everything else.
	So my main focuses are life, family, faith.
	Those are fundamental, and that's what this show is about.

▲