Unlike the film, most definitely not light comedy.
There are no good choices, no easy decisions, no Pareto-optimal solutions.
Instead the federal executive branch acted in a worse than useless manner by being actively counterproductive, while various state governors refused to do anything because acting sensibly contradicted their political beliefs.
Aaand yet all the worst outbreaks early on were in the bluest parts of blue-or-purple states, and were under the control of Democrat mayors and governors. Who are also the ones with real authority, incidentally.
Now, the red parts of the map aren't exactly doing well right now either - but let's not pretend that only the Republicans fucked up on this one.
> have a national lockdown for 1-2 months or so with everyone paid to stay home so that total number of new cases drops very low, then remove the lockdown and use comprehensive contact tracing and testing to quickly respond to new outbreaks.
I honestly think that Trump could not have done this. If he had tried - which would have taken a large expansion of executive power - at a time that this would have helped, I wouldn't be surprised if he was impeached. You might remember what happened when Trump banned (a lot of) travel from China - it wasn't people saying that this was insufficient, it was people saying that it was racist and unconstitutional. Do you really think that a response a thousand times as intense would have gotten a positive response?
Here is a clear example of the federal government siding against state’s lockdown mandates
https://www.vox.com/covid-19-coronavirus-us-response-trump/2...
“ The Justice Department is pressuring state and local officials over lockdown orders The DOJ is questioning the legal authority of top officials in California and Illinois to extend stay-at-home orders.”
https://www.foxnews.com/media/georgia-mask-mandate-lawsuit-k...
Nobody has hit 1000. It's a long game, and we don't even know if Sweden's approach is the right one or not. There is not much room for political mud-slinging, unless one backs a candidate that has not yet spoken.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/bill-gates-says-school...
Honestly, I'd love to hear what circumstances people would accept opening schools in. Would "COVID is 10x less deadly than chicken pox for children under 15" be enough, if there was some way to protect teachers? What about "less deadly than driving to school for a year"?
To my knowledge, the grand-parents have a much greater role in child-care in Spain and Italy, than in Germany and Sweden. To complicate matters, closing all schools and kindergardens even increased their importance, as parents still had to work somehow. Probably, closing the schools _might_ have even made things worse, as someone has to take care of them.
But that is not necessarily an argument in favour of opening them again. It shows, how children, while largely unaffected, have potentially a huge impact on the spread of the virus.
If you're looking for case studies... Well, Sweden is the one everyone seems to be eyeing.