Geraldo Rivera, who somehow went from talk show host to political commentator on Fox News, has had some pretty off-the-wall takes over the years. But this one might take the cake.
On a Fox News segment, Rivera suggested that we help Trump find his big boy pants so he can concede the election by naming the coronavirus vaccine after him.
"I had an idea, with the world so divided, and everybody telling him he's got to give up, and time to leave, and time to transition and all the rest of it. Why not name the vaccine 'The Trump'? You know, make it like, 'Have you gotten your Trump yet?'"
Cue appropriate laughter from one of the hosts—because OMG that's so absurd it's funny—but Rivera was inexplicably serious.
"No, it would be a nice gesture to him. And years from now it would become just a kind of generic name. 'Have you got your Trump yet? Yeah, I got my Trump, I'm fine.' You know, I wish we could honor him in that way because he is definitely the prime architect of this Operation Warp Speed, and but for him, we'd still be wading into the grim winter for these amazing, miraculous medical breakthroughs."
Hoo boy. So much to say here.
First, one big reason the world is so divided is because of Trump's own behavior. What he's doing right now is exactly what many of us predicted before he won the 2016 election, and is the reason the entire resistance movement arose after it. He's a power-hungry malignant narcissist who will do literally anything to avoid having to admit defeat, including destroying the very foundations of our democracy. So framing this bizarre suggestion as a remedy to the division in the country is just...bizarre.
Second, Rivera is suggesting that since poor Mr. President is being told that he has to leave and engage in a peaceful transition of power *like every other president after their term is up* we should appease his hurt feelings by naming a vaccine after him. The idea that a leader of a country needs to have his ego stroked in order to do the right thing is preposterous. And the idea that we should just embrace that need for coddling as if 1) it's perfectly reasonable, and 2) it would even get him to embrace reality, is just dumb.
Third, why on God's green earth would we name a vaccine after a man who botched the response to the virus it was created for so badly that we have nearly 20% of the world's deaths despite having less than 5% of the world's population? Trump's COVID response has been labeled a failure by experts across the field of medicine. He held superspreader events at the White House, refused to lead by example, and ended up hospitalized himself with the disease because he was careless and foolish in his own behavior.
Fourth, Trump was absolutely not the "prime architect" of Operation Warp Speed. First of all, the idea that scientists and pharmaceutical companies were just going to take their sweet time coming up with a vaccine in a global pandemic if it weren't for Trump saying, "Hey, let's do this thing as quickly as possible," is laughable. Every single vaccine maker in the world was on that research immediately, in January, while Trump was busy downplaying the virus to the American people. The coordination between institutions and private companies that Operation Warp Speed helped with is great, no doubt, but it's something that any president with two brain cells would call for. "Let's do what we can to get a vaccine made and distributed as quickly and safely as possible because we're in a global pandemic" is not some stroke of genius—it's common sense.
It's an absolutely absurd suggestion to say that we should name a coronavirus vaccine after Trump. Like, beyond the pale, crazy-even-for-Geraldo, completely alternate reality kind of absurd.
Then again, look at where we are. As crazy as this segment is, it's not even close to the craziest thing we've seen this week. Welcome to America 2020. It's nuts here.
Ultrasound of human baby.Image via 
IVF animated process.Image via 
A couple speaks with a fertility professional.Image via 
Love, Mom.Photo from Heidi Johnson 
A teen boy having a hard time. 
Hands hold a digital representation of the brain.Image via 
Mother and daughter work a puzzle.Image via 
Man and woman connect under the sunshine.Image via 
The obituary paints a comic, if bleak, picture. 
A Facebook post about the obituary.
Why do some folks use social media but don't engage?
Psychologist says people who never comment on social media share these 5 positive traits
For over 20 years, social media has developed into a staple in many people’s day-to-day lives. Whether it’s to keep in communication with friends and family, following the thoughts of celebrities, or watching cat videos while sipping your morning coffee, there seem to be two types of social media users: commenters and lurkers.
The term “lurker” sounds equally mysterious and insidious, with some social media users writing them off as non-participants at best or voyeurs at worst. However, mindfulness expert Lachlan Brown believes these non-commenters have some very psychologically positive and healthy traits. Let’s take a look at how each one of these traits could be beneficial and see how fruitful lurking might be even though it can drive content creators crazy.
1. Cautious about vulnerability
Consciously or not, making a post online or commenting on one puts you and your words out there. It’s a statement that everyone can see, even if it’s as simple as clicking “like.” Doing so opens yourself up to judgment, with all the good, bad, and potential misinterpretation that comes with it. Non-commenters would rather not open themselves up to that.
These silent users are connected to a concept of self-protection by simply not engaging. By just scrolling past posts or just reading/watching them without commentary, they’re preventing themselves from any downsides of sharing an opinion such as rejection, misunderstanding, or embarrassment. They also have more control on how much of themselves they’re willing to reveal to the general public, and tend to be more open face-to-face or during one-on-one/one-on-few private chats or DMs. This can be seen as a healthy boundary and prevents unnecessary exposure.
Considering many comment sections, especially involving political topics, are meant to stir negative emotional responses to increase engagement, being extra mindful about where, when, and what you comment might not be a bad idea. They might not even take the engagement bait at all. Or if they see a friend of theirs post something vulnerable, they feel more motivated to engage with them personally one-on-one rather than use social media to publicly check in on them.
2. Analytical and reflective mindset
How many times have you gone onto Reddit, YouTube, or any other site and just skimmed past comments that are just different versions of “yes, and,” “no, but,” or “yes, but”? Or the ever insightful, formerly popular comment “First!” in a thread? These silent browsers lean against adding to such noise unless they have some valid and thoughtful contribution (if they bother to comment period).
These non-posters are likely wired on reflective thinking rather than their initial intuition. Not to say that all those who comment aren’t thoughtful, but many tend to react quickly and comment based on their initial feelings rather than absorbing the information, thinking it over, researching or testing their belief, and then posting it. For "lurkers," it could by their very nature to just do all of that and not post it at all, or share their thoughts and findings privately with a friend. All in all, it’s a preference of substance over speed.
3. High sense of self-awareness
Carried over from the first two listed traits, these silent social media users incorporate their concern over their vulnerability and their reflective mindset into digital self-awareness. They know what triggers responses out of them and what causes them to engage in impulsive behavior. It could be that they have engaged with a troll in the past and felt foolish. Or that they just felt sad after a post or got into an unnecessary argument that impacted them offline. By knowing themselves and seeing what’s being discussed, they choose to weigh their words carefully or just not participate at all. It’s a form of self-preservation through restraint.
4. Prefer to observe rather than perform
Some folks treat social media as information, entertainment, or a mix of both, and commenting can feel like they’re yelling at the TV, clapping alone in a movie theater when the credits roll, or yelling “That’s not true!” to a news anchor that will never hear them. But contrary to that, social media is a place where those yells, claps, and accusations can be seen and get a response. By its design, social media is considered by experts and the media as performative, regardless of whether it is positive or negative. Taking all of the previously mentioned traits into account, one can see why they would prefer to “observe the play” rather than get up on the stage of Facebook or X.
On top of that, these non-commenters could be using social media differently than those who choose to fully engage with it. Using this type of navigation, there may be nothing for them to comment about. Some commenters are even vying for this for their mental health. There are articles about how to better curate your social media feeds and manipulate algorithms to create a better social media experience to avoid unnecessary conflict or mentally tiring debate.
If you go on a blocking spree on all of your accounts and just follow the posters that boost you, it could turn your social media into a nice part of your routine as you mainly engage with others face-to-face or privately. In terms of commenting, if your curated Instagram is just following cute dogs and all you have to offer for a comment is “cute dog,” you might just enjoy the picture and then move on with your day rather than join in the noise. These non-commenters aren’t in the show and they’re fine with it.
5. Less motivated by social validation
The last trait that Brown showcases is that social media users who browse without posting tend to be independent from external validation, at least online. Social media is built to grow through feedback loops such as awarding likes, shares, and reposts of your content along with notifications letting you know that a new person follows you or wants to connect. This can lead many people to connect their activity on social media with their sense of self worth, especially with adolescents who are still figuring out their place in the world and have still-developing brains.
Engaging in social media via likes, shares, comments, and posts rewards our brains by having them release dopamine, which makes us feel good and can easily become addictive. For whatever reason, non-commenters don’t rely on social media as a means to gauge their social capital or self worth. This doesn’t make them better than those who do. While some non-commenters could have healthier ways to boost their self worth or release dopamine into their systems, many get that validation from equally unhealthy sources offline. That said, many non-commenters’ silence could be a display of independence and self confidence.
Whether you frequently comment online or don’t, it’s good to understand why you do or don’t. Analyzing your habits can help you determine whether your online engagement is healthy, or needs to be tweaked. With that information, you can then create a healthy social media experience that works for you.