Публицистический перевод (первый иностранный (английский) язык) ответы на практикум СИНЕРГИЯ

ОТВЕТЫ на 5 практикумов по предмету Практикум по культуре речевого общения – второй ин.яз. (испанский)

Год сдачи -2018-2021.

После покупки Вы получите файл готовыми практикумами

***(Если нужна помощь с другими предметами или сдачей тестов онлайн, пишите в личные сообщения https://studwork.ru/info/147162

ПРАКТИКУМ 1

Описание

Российский президент отправил «из России с любовью» в Италию, Сербию и США самолеты с помощью. Но теперь и Россию настигла жестокая реальность эпидемии, пишет датский журналист. Неужели в Москве будет как в Нью-Йорке? Плотность населения и образ жизни в этих городах похожи.

Коронавирус может превратить Москву в новый Нью-Йорк

Жесткий экономический кризис и усилившаяся эпидемия коронавируса подрывают популярность Путина

Йорген Уллеруп

Всего несколько недель назад Владимир Путин объявил, что эпидемия коронавируса в России под контролем благодаря своевременным мерам властей.

После этого президент взял на себя роль мирового спасителя и отправил «из России с любовью» в Италию, Сербию и США самолеты с помощью в виде медицинского оборудования.

Но теперь мрачная реальность догнала и авторов этих самоуверенных заявлений и акций помощи, задуманных как кампания доброй воли от имени Путина и его обложенной санкциями страны.

Эпидемия далеко не под контролем. Кривая количества зараженных, например, в Москве, неуклонно идет вверх, и российский эксперт опасается, что пандемия ударит по столице с той же силой, что и по Нью-Йорку.

«В Нью-Йорке скученность на улицах, особенно в Манхэттене, такая же, как в Москве внутри Садового кольца. Люди контактируют очень активно: жители города привыкли по два-три раза в день ходить в кафе или ресторан», — сказал вирусолог Сергей Нетёсов из Новосибирского университета Moscow Times.

Скоро будет нехватка мест

Jyllands-Posten уже писала, как машины скорой помощи в Москве стоят в длинных очередях, чтобы передать врачам своих пациентов. Один водитель скорой помощи рассказал, что ему пришлось 15 часов ждать с пациентом у дверей больницы.

Пресс-секретарь Путина Дмитрий Песков признал, что, хотя цифры в России не достигли пока того же уровня, что в США и многих европейских странах, резкий рост количества зараженных создал напряженную ситуацию как в Москве, так и в Санкт-Петербурге.

И хотя у России в распоряжении есть едва ли не больше всех в мире аппаратов искусственной вентиляции легких, московский департамент здравоохранения предостерегает, что в столичных больницах скоро закончатся места в отделениях интенсивной терапии.

Сам президент на видеоконференции в понедельник признал, что ситуация день ото дня становится все хуже, и что у России множество проблем.

От кризиса страдает и сам Путин. Опрос, проведенный независимым центром «Левада», свидетельствует, что популярность президента упала до 29%.

Татьяна Становая из московского отделения аналитического Центра Карнеги считает, что эпидемия лишь подчеркнула, насколько Путин далек от рядовых граждан.

Президент решил держаться в тени, предоставив сообщать дурные новости местным лидерам вроде московского мэра Сергея Собянина.

«Никакой драматургии, эмпатии или попыток мобилизации», — написала она.

Плата продуктами питания

В попытке ограничить распространение заразы и оказать россиянам материальную помощь, чтобы те смогли пережить кризис, Путин отправил большую часть работающего населения России на неделю в оплачиваемый отпуск, который затем продлили на весь апрель.

Но российское правительство критикуют за то, что оно не предоставляет достаточно финансовых ресурсов компаниям, которым надо чем-то оплачивать счета.

После объявления Путина примерно половина руководителей российского бизнеса начали закрывать свои компании, из-за чего по стране пошла волна массовых увольнений. Других сотрудников отправили в неоплачиваемые отпуска.

По информации интернет-издания «Медуза», более 15 миллионов россиян могут лишиться доходов, поскольку пакетов помощи не хватает для обеспечения занятости.

После того как Путин пообещал всем месячный оплачиваемый отпуск, многие работодатели вынуждают сотрудников добровольно написать заявление об уходе. Других уволили или урезали им зарплату примерно на треть, свидетельствует проведенное исследование.

Особенно сильно все это затронуло работников туристической индустрии, ресторанного бизнеса и фирм, которые зависели от приостановленного сотрудничества с иностранными предприятиями. Некоторые работодатели даже хотят платить сотрудникам продуктами вместо рублей.

Популярность Путина

Популярность Путина достигала 87% после аннексии Крымского полуострова в 2014 году. Затем она начала падать из-за пенсионной реформы, экономического кризиса, намерений остаться у власти до 2036 года, обвинений в подтасовке результатов выборов, а теперь и из-за коронавируса.

Апрель 2017 года: 42%.

Апрель 2019 года: 32%.

Апрель 2020 года: 29%.

Однако лишь 8% населения относятся к президенту негативно. 60% равнодушны, а 13% называют Путина истинным народным лидером.

ПРАКТИКУМ 2

Описание

Размышляя о будущем России, эксперт приходит к выводу, что никакие кризисы сути России не изменят, будет меняться только «упаковка». Доказательством этой «аналитической мысли» ему служит теория польского геополитика Феликса Конечного о принадлежности России к степной милитаризированной туранской цивилизации с лидерами-деспотами.

Коронавирус ослабил Россию, но не изменил ее

Михаил Брушевский

Когда цена барреля нефти падает до рекордно низкого значения, а в итоге картелю ОПЕК приходится садиться за стол переговоров, это значит, что Москву ждут проблемы. Нефтяной кризис в сочетании с пандемией коронавируса многие эксперты называют землетрясением, которое очень скоро обернется для царя и бояр новым Смутным временем. Мы не можем получить подтверждение или опровержение новостей о том, что после встречи с зараженным коронавирусом врачом Владимир Путин не заболел, а самоизоляция была его добровольным выбором, но можем поразмышлять о будущем России в контексте пандемии. Тем, кто считает, будто кризис способен изменить ее, следует задаться вопросом, кто в конечном итоге за все заплатит.

Видный специалист по российской тематике Марек Будзищ (Marek Budzisz) выдвинул тезис, что настоящий кризис Москву еще только ждет. С его трезвыми аналитическими выкладками, предшествующими вышеупомянутому выводу, можно только согласиться. Будзиш прав.

Нет нужды повторять здесь тезисы, которые звучат из уст экспертов, занимающихся изучением конъюнктуры в Кремле, но я не был бы собой, если бы, как циник, вдающийся в малейшие детали, не задумался о сегодняшней и будущей ситуации Москвы в более широком, цивилизационном смысле. Ударит ли Россию по карману сочетание двух кризисов, пандемического и нефтяного, не предмет для обсуждения: это уже произошло. Решение отложить военный парад, который обычно проходит 9 мая, до греческих календ станет (вне зависимости от обстоятельств в которых оно было принято) символическим пятном на имидже Кремля. Дело не в дате, ведь Октябрьская революция, например, вспыхнула в ноябре, а в самом содержании этого мероприятия.

Ежегодный Парад Победы был демонстрацией военной мощи Российской Федерации и, в сущности, самым важным моментом, когда новый-старый президент Путин мог на глазах всего мира играть мускулами. О российских фальсификациях истории и том, чем на самом деле была Великая Отечественная война, я уже много писал раньше. Для порядка достаточно будет напомнить, что 9 мая 1945 года (если ориентироваться на московское время) завершилась Вторая мировая война, развязал которую не только Адольф Гитлер, но и Иосиф Сталин. Гордый День Победы стал одновременно Ночью Поражения для Центральной Европы. Дело не в том, что Третий рейх не следовало разбить, а в том, что в процессе борьбы с ним некоторые народы лишили свободы. Об этом на Красной площади, однако, не упоминают. Сейчас культурно-геополитический спектакль перенесли.

Вернемся к прогнозам на будущее. Двойной российский кризис склоняет задаться вопросом, изменится ли что-нибудь в России? В этом контексте я бы не советовал выдавать желаемое за действительное. Эта страна пережила множество кризисов, но они меняли лишь некоторые детали, а не метаполитическую суть Москвы. Времена изменились, кремлевские политики стали носить бейсболки вместо шапки Мономаха, но это лишь «упаковка», а их внутренняя сущность осталась прежней. Под слоем, имитирующем одну фигуру, словно в матрешке, прячется другая.

Размышляя о Востоке, стоит обратится к наследию забытого гиганта польской геополитической мысли Феликса Конечного (Feliks Koneczny). Меня очень огорчает то, что этого связанного с национал-демократической мыслью историософа отодвинули на периферию польской науки, навесив на него стигматизирующий ярлык. В его поразительно актуальной теории цивилизации Москва относится к туранской группе. Это происходящее из степи милитаризованное сообщество, в которой народ позволяет властителю безраздельно управлять собой и действовать аморально, при этом форму общественных отношений задает не религия, а кастовая военно-племенная структура. Идеал лидера в туранской цивилизации — деспот, правящий сильной рукой, самодержец, в собственности которого находится все государство.

Кто-то может назвать теорию Конечного несправедливой, устаревшей и даже русофобской или расистской, однако, фактические доказательства в виде очередных войн и политических шагов стран, которые ученый отнес к «разным цивилизациям», к сожалению, подтверждают универсальность сформулированных им тезисов.

Опосредованным образом Конечному вторит Александр Дугин, который говорит об особой российской цивилизации, выступающей евразийским детищем Великой Степи. Так что Кремлю пришлось бы обвинять в русофобии своего недавнего советника.

Может ли нефтяно-пандемический кризис пошатнуть туранскую основу описываемой цивилизации, то есть изменить ее форму? Россия была и будет самодержавной. За редкими исключениями (царь Павел I или вечно нетрезвый Борис Ельцин) на протяжении истории тенденции в этом всерусском мире не менялись, они выглядели сходно при опричниках, охранке, КГБ. А в кризисах недостатка не было. У россиян есть даже такая пословица: снявши голову, по волосам не плачут.

Неважно, что будет с нефтью и бюджетом, ущерб в любом случае придется покрывать тем, кто всегда платил в России за все. Это бывали крестьяне, кулаки, граждане в целом. Самое страшное в том, что каждый раз, когда царь и бояре уже ничего не могут этому крестьянину предложить, они вручают ему винтовку и указывают на врага.

ПРАКТИКУМ 3

Описание

Nova Scotia Shooting Kills at Least 16, Police Say

One Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer was killed and another was wounded, officials said.

By Dan Bilefsky and Johnny Diaz

MONTREAL — A gunman killed at least 16 people in a shooting rampage in a rural community in Nova Scotia, Canada’s national broadcaster said late Sunday, in what was among the country’s worst mass killings in recent memory.

The police said the killing spree, which began in the town of Portapique on Saturday night, ended about 12 hours later at a gas station about 22 miles away in Enfield, north of Halifax, where the gunman died. The police would not elaborate on how he died, though witnesses told local news outlets that they heard gunfire leading up to his death.

A police officer was among those killed, officials said. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the national broadcaster, citing commissioner Brenda Lucki of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, said the 16 figure did not include the gunman.

He was previously identified by the authorities as Gabriel Wortman, 51.

A motive for the mass shooting was not immediately clear. The police said that it did not begin as a random act but that the killings became random as the spree progressed.

The commissioner said the police did not consider the killings to be an act of terrorism.

Officials said Mr. Wortman, a denturist from Nova Scotia, had a relationship to some of the victims and was not known to the police. They said one line of investigation would be whether the coronavirus pandemic had anything to do with the killing spree.

Chief Superintendent Chris Leather, the officer responsible for criminal investigations for the Nova Scotia Royal Canadian Mounted Police, said the episode began on Saturday night when the police were called to a home, where they discovered dead bodies inside and outside the residence.

He said a suspect was nowhere to be found. Over the next 12 hours, the police pursued Mr. Wortman across the province.

Commissioner Lucki said the crime scene stretched over a 50 kilometer, or 31-mile, area.

Chief Leather said Mr. Wortman appeared to be dressed as a police officer and was driving a vehicle made to resemble an R.C.M.P. car. The authorities said that Mr. Wortman then switched vehicles and was seen driving a silver Chevrolet Tracker in the Milford area. The authorities emphasized that he was not an R.C.M.P. employee.

The chief said the bodies of victims were discovered in multiple locations and that several structures were set on fire.

Lee Bergerman, the assistant commissioner, appearing visibly shaken at a news conference on Sunday, said the killing spree would haunt Nova Scotia.

“Today is a devastating day for Nova Scotia and will remain etched in the minds of many for years to come,” she said.

During the manhunt, the authorities warned residents that Mr. Wortman was armed and dangerous, and told them to stay inside.

Frightened residents locked their doors and many hid in their basements — and stayed there overnight — as news of the shooting spread through the close-knit community.

Among the victims was Heidi Stevenson, a veteran R.C.M.P. officer and mother of two with 23 years experience on the force. Another police officer was injured.

Stephen McNeil, the premier of Nova Scotia, said it was “one of the most senseless acts of violence in our province’s history” at a time when the province was already being buffeted by the coronavirus.

“To the families of the victims and to those still feeling afraid, my heart goes out to you,” he said. “Know that all Nova Scotians are with you.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada thanked the police for their work. “Our hearts go out to the people who have lost loved ones,” he said.

The authorities said the rampage was one of the worst in the province’s history.

In July 2018, a man wielding a gun in Toronto walked down a busy street and randomly shot two people and injured 13, before killing himself.

One year earlier, in late January, Canada was deeply shaken when a political science student entered a mosque in Quebec City during prayers, killing six people and wounding many more.

One of the worst mass shootings in recent Canadian history occurred on Dec. 6, 1989: Fourteen women were killed in a violent anti-feminist attack at the École Polytechnique engineering school in Montreal. Fourteen others were injured, and the gunman killed himself.

In the most recent violence, the authorities said they responded to reports of a shooting about 10:30 p.m. on Saturday in the area of Portapique Beach Road, Bay Shore Road and Five Houses Road in Portapique, a small rural community about 35 miles from Truro, Nova Scotia.

Canadians and residents of Nova Scotia, a province on the Atlantic coast known for its fishing industry, and Halifax, a port city, were shocked by the violence in a small, sleepy, rural area.

Tom Taggart, a council member in Colchester, which includes Portapique, lives two miles from the rural community.

“It’s really cottage country,” he said on Sunday, adding that the community was home to about 50 to 60 residents and as many as 200 during the summer.

Like other residents, he said he had heard the updates from the police on Sunday about a gunman on the loose.

“It just escalated from there,” he said. “People live here because it is safe and secure, we think. This stuff is not supposed to happen here.”

He added: “These are real people that just went to bed last night thinking that everything is another day and now things are just — I can’t imagine. It’s tragic.”

ПРАКТИКУМ 4

Описание

Protesting for the Freedom to Catch the Coronavirus

The reopen America protests are the logical conclusion of a twisted liberty movement.

By Charlie Warzel

Mr. Warzel is an Opinion writer at large.

At a string of small “reopen America” protests across the country this week, mask-less citizens proudly flouted social distancing guidance while openly carrying semiautomatic rifles and waving American flags and signs with “ironic” swastikas. They organized chants to lock up female Democrat governors and to fire the country’s top infectious disease experts. At one point during protests at the Michigan Capitol, the group’s orchestrated gridlock blocked an ambulance en route to a nearby hospital.

For those who’ve chosen to put their trust in science during the pandemic it’s hard to fathom the decision to gather to protest while a deadly viral pathogen — transmitted easily by close contact and spread by symptomatic and asymptomatic people alike — ravages the country. But it shouldn’t come as a surprise. This week’s public displays of defiance — a march for the freedom to be infected — are the logical conclusion of the modern far-right’s donor-funded, shock jock-led liberty movement. It was always headed here.

Few demonstrate this movement better than Alex Jones of Infowars — one of the key figures of Saturday’s “You Can’t Close America” rally on the steps of the Capitol building in Austin, Tex. For decades, Mr. Jones has built a thriving media empire harnessing (real and understandable) fear, paranoia and rage, which in turn drive sales of vitamin supplements and prepper gear in his personal store. The Infowars strategy is simple: Instill a deep distrust in all authority, while promoting a seductive, conspiratorial alternate reality in which Mr. Jones, via his outlandish conspiracies, has all the answers. He’s earned the trust of a non-trivial number of Americans, and used it to stoke his ego and his bank account. And he never lets reality get in the way (case in point, holding a stay-at-home order protest in Texas the day after the state announced it would begin efforts to carefully reopen in coming weeks).

Former employees have described Mr. Jones to me as master of manipulating the truth into a convenient worldview in which Infowars and its listeners are constantly victimized by powerful institutional forces. “We kept saying ‘We’re the underdogs’ — that was our mantra,” one former employee told me in 2017. To make this work, Mr. Jones molds the day’s news into conspiratorial fables.

A novel virus — about which so much is unknown and where expert opinion is constantly shifting — is a near perfect subject for Infowars to fit the news to its paranoid narrative. Uncertainty over the virus’s origins in China is a springboard to float unproven theories about bioweapons. Discussions about a vaccine to end the epidemic become conspiracies about billionaire tech leaders pushing population control. Changing epidemiological models that show fewer projected Covid-19 deaths (because social distancing has worked to slow infections) provide an opening for Mr. Jones to rant about stay-at-home lockdowns. Genuine fears about deeply unfair job losses and economic recession become reckless theories about Democrat-led plans to punish American citizens by driving them into poverty.

Jones’ opportunistic rantings fit neatly into a larger right-wing strategy, which has grown alongside Infowars. Just as Infowars rallies are tied to the media outlet’s financial interest in antigovernment paranoia, a few of this week’s rallies have been underwritten by political organizations with ties to the Republican Party and the Trump administration. Regardless of who’s behind them, the intent is to sow division and attempt to reshape public opinion. As Vox’s Jane Coaston wrote, they’re “designed to pit Republican-voting areas of states against their Democratic-voting neighbors, even rural Republicans against urban Republicans.”

It’s important to note that the reopen protests have been generally small (at most, hundreds of people in states of millions of citizens responsibly staying at home) and don’t even reflect the polled opinions of many conservatives. But they fit neatly into a larger campaign playbook and take on outsize importance. They take place frequently in swing states or states with Democratic governors and are plastered across social media, reported in mainstream organizations, openly cheered on by Fox News and right-wing media, and ultimately end up amplified (tacitly or explicitly) by the president. The strategy has worked well in recent years, consolidating support among the Trump base.

As a political movement, the Make America Great Again crowd relishes turning criticism from ideological opponents into a badge of honor. Confrontation of any kind is currency and people taking offense to their actions is a surefire sign that they’re correct. The MAGA mind-set prioritizes freedom above all — especially the freedom from introspection, apologizing or ever admitting defeat. But the movement, which has been building since the Tea Party protests, has created a reflexive response among both Jones’s audience and far-right Trump supporters.

This response is disguised as an expression of liberty, but it’s a twisted, paranoid and racialized version. Slate editor Tom Scocca defined it recently as a political ideology where supporters are “conditioned to believe that thinking about other people’s needs or interests in any way is tyranny by definition.” This wholesale rejection of collective thinking is, as Vice’s Anna Merlan notes, the cornerstone of the anti-vaccine and “health freedom” movements, which reject public health because they “don’t think their choices affect other people.”

Unmentioned by the protesters are the workers actually keeping America open, many of them afraid for their health, with no choice and in communities devastated by the virus. The result, as my Times colleagues described Saturday, is “images of nearly all-white protesters demanding the governor relax restrictions while hoisting Trump signs and Confederate battle flags, as the virus disproportionately impacts Michigan’s black residents.”

This coronavirus protest movement is merely the confluence of this perverted liberty ideology — honed and pushed by Mr. Jones, right-wing interest groups and pro-Trump media — and the dynamics of an online information ecosystem that prioritizes conflict to generate attention. When Infowars-style tactics meet online platforms the result is a flattening of all nuanced arguments of science and politics into a simplified struggle between patriots and tyrants. Small protests incorrectly blossom into a false national narrative.

And so here we are in 2020, protesting statewide lockdowns intended to save lives while thousands of Americans across the country grow sick and die each day. That a virus that demands a united front — where our public health is only as strong as our least vigilant citizens — should come at a moment of extreme polarization is a tragedy. But this moment is what we’ve been headed toward for years. And so the “reopen America” protests feel unconscionable and yet completely predictable. The playbook isn’t new. The only thing that’s changed are the stakes, which get higher every day.

ПРАКТИКУМ 4

Описание

‘Wartime President’? Trump Rewrites History in an Election Year

The president is brazenly grabbing his only clear option to bolster his re-election hopes, portraying himself as a take-charge leader the country can’t afford to lose.

By Annie Karni, Maggie Haberman and Reid J. Epstein

March 22, 2020

WASHINGTON — With the economy faltering and the political landscape unsettled as the coronavirus death toll climbs, a stark and unavoidable question now confronts President Trump and his advisers: Can he save his campaign for re-election when so much is suddenly going so wrong?

After three years of Republicans’ championing signs of financial prosperity that were to be Mr. Trump’s chief re-election argument, the president has never needed a new message to voters as he does now, not to mention luck. At this point, the president has one clear option for how to proceed politically, and is hoping that an array of factors will break his way.

The option, which he has brazenly pushed in recent days, is to cast himself as a “wartime president” who looks in charge of a nation under siege while his likely Democratic opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., is largely out of sight hunkered down in Delaware. This gambit, however, requires a rewriting of history — Mr. Trump’s muted approach to the virus early on — and it’s far from clear if many voters will accept the idea of him as a wartime leader.

Then there are other variables that he and his allies hope will fall in their favor: that the outbreak of the virus will slow and, in the warmer months, dissipate; that the states will get it under control; that the federal government’s steps taken so far will flatten the curve; that Mr. Biden and the Democrats will look impotent and inconsequential by comparison; and that enough voters will move past his initial efforts to play down the virus’s dangers.

The great unknown, of course — and the tremendous risk to Mr. Trump’s political fate, no matter what he says or does — is that the human cost, the economic toll, and the longevity and course of the pandemic are all X factors that will most likely play out for months and could be strongly salient if not severe by the time of the November general election.

In perhaps the best-case scenario for Mr. Trump, the patina of a “wartime president” could prove to be influential with casual voters who don’t dig into the details of his belated response to the coronavirus, which included dismissing the criticism of his handling of the threat as a Democratic “hoax” and contributing to a slow start in testing for the virus.

“He is counting on people being so traumatized on a day-to-day basis that they will forget his inaction,” said Douglas Brinkley, a professor of history at Rice University. “It’s better for him to be a wartime commander in chief than someone who, when the big crisis hit, misread it completely.”

Politically, Mr. Brinkley said, the new posture made sense. “He can claim credit for the curve flattening at some point,” he said, “and hope people will be afraid to push a leader out of office if the crisis pushes into the fall.”

The president’s course correction showed some quick results that were seized on by his political advisers. An ABC News poll released last week showed that 55 percent of Americans approved of Mr. Trump’s response to the pandemic, up from 43 percent the week before.

Rarely have incumbent presidents seen their arguments for re-election evaporate so quickly. Mr. Trump and his advisers had planned to argue that the strong economy warranted a second term and that supporters and detractors alike wanted their 401(k)’s in the Trump-era stock market; that has now become an impossible sell. And as the administration negotiates an enormous bailout package with Congress for multiple industries, his strategy of caricaturing Democrats as “socialists” is not tenable either.

So Mr. Trump is trying to mount a new version of his old argument: that “I alone can fix it,” as he said at the 2016 Republican convention about the nation’s problems. He is counting on enough voters believing they have to stick by a leader in the midst of an immense global crisis.

Addressing fearful Americans, Mr. Trump said on Sunday evening: “You have a leader that will always fight for you and I will not stop until we win. This is going to be a victory.” He added at another point, “No American is alone as long as we’re united.”

But shortly after reading his new script on Sunday night, Mr. Trump mocked Senator Mitt Romney of Utah for self-quarantining. “Romney’s in isolation? Gee, that’s too bad,” he said sarcastically at the briefing room podium.

Mr. Trump is on uncertain political ground. His poll numbers in critical swing states like Pennsylvania and Michigan have been wavering, with most surveys showing him behind Mr. Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Republican officials are banking on voters seeing him as take-charge in contrast to Mr. Biden and Mr. Sanders, who have been following the government’s guidance about staying indoors but have not yet found memorable ways to show how they would lead in this crisis.

Mr. Biden and Mr. Sanders have held news conferences from remote locations, and Mr. Biden has participated in “virtual” fund-raisers. While Mr. Biden has an all but insurmountable lead in the race for the Democratic nomination, he has no real ability to steer events because he is not officially the presumptive nominee, and therefore is not the head of the party either.

As a result, Mr. Biden finds himself with far fewer options than Mr. Trump or Democratic governors like Andrew M. Cuomo of New York, who have real authority and are holding news conferences often broadcast live.

In turn, Republican officials and Sanders allies are pushing out attacks on Mr. Biden’s low profile, asking “Where’s Joe?” in emails to supporters and the news media. (A spokesman, T.J. Ducklo, said Sunday that Mr. Biden had not been tested for the virus because he had shown no symptoms.)

But the “wartime” strategy also presents risks to Mr. Trump. In his new posture, he is trying to rewrite recent history, erasing his comments from as recently as a week ago when he told Americans that they needed to “just relax” because “it all will pass.” It is also undercut by his resistance to calls for additional federal action from governors in hard-hit states.

Mr. Trump’s temperament is also dissimilar to “wartime presidents” with whom he is seeking to compare himself. Over the course of his presidency, Mr. Trump has struggled to stick to any bipartisan message, or speak emotionally to the pain and fear of Americans during crisis points like natural disasters or mass shootings.

“That’s why it’s so hard to be a wartime president,” said Michael Beschloss, the historian and author of “Presidents of War.” “Not only are you coming up with a strategy and tactics, but at the same time you have to let Americans know that you know how hard this is for them.”

Mr. Trump, so far, has struggled to feel anyone’s pain, unlike past presidents, while continuing to play out the fights with the news media that enliven his base. Last week, he lashed out at a journalist who had prompted him to explain what his message was to the millions of Americans watching him from home, who felt scared.

The president has also continued to credit his own administration’s response. But Mr. Beschloss added that “part of being a wartime president is being willing to give people bad news,” a job Mr. Trump has mostly left to others.

At the same time, he has been timid of using wartime powers to fight what he has called an “invisible enemy.” Last week, for instance, he resisted invoking the Defense Production Act, a federal law that grants presidents extraordinary powers to force American industries to ensure the availability of critical equipment.

Mr. Trump’s allies are aware that his re-election now hangs almost entirely on how he handles the crisis. And the question is whether he will be seen as President George W. Bush was in the immediate aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when he was widely viewed as bringing the nation together, or if he will be compared to Mr. Bush amid the fallout from Hurricane Katrina, when he tried to minimize a crisis that eventually became too big for him to ignore, and during which Mr. Bush praised cabinet officials even as the federal government bungled the response.

Aides said that how Mr. Trump ends up being perceived would also depend on Mr. Trump’s own disposition during the crisis. It is not clear to them whether he will be able to maintain his focus on the crisis for months, especially as the economic situation worsens. Over the weekend, some Trump advisers weren’t ready to accept the likelihood of jobless claims climbing into the millions by next month.

The White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, defended Mr. Trump’s response as apolitical. “While it seems many in the media continue to use every opportunity to destroy this president, the fact remains that he has risen to fight this crisis by taking aggressive historic action to protect the health, wealth and well-being of the American people,” Ms. Grisham said in an email.

Some Democrats, meanwhile, said the mistakes made at the beginning of the response had already colored how Mr. Trump would be remembered both in the history books and at the ballot box in November. “At the end of the day, this will be Katrina with the waters at a much higher level, and lasting a longer time,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster.

But there is an emerging split in Democratic circles about whether to attack Mr. Trump’s response to the virus in real time, or whether the gravity of the moment calls for a pause in negative political advertising and attacks.

Some of Mr. Trump’s highest-profile political adversaries leading states that have become epicenters of the virus have been striking conciliatory notes as they seek federal assistance. Mr. Cuomo said the president was “fully engaged” on the crisis. Gov. Gavin Newsom, Democrat of California, described a recent phone conversation with Mr. Trump as “a privilege.”

Other antagonists have continued to criticize him. Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York tapped into one of Mr. Trump’s greatest fears when he referred to him on CNN as the “Herbert Hoover of his generation,” comparing him to a president who failed to recognize or take bold actions to stave off the stock market crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression.

The debate about whether to embrace or attack Mr. Trump in a national emergency played out most succinctly on Twitter between David Axelrod and David Plouffe, the two men who led Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns.

Mr. Axelrod said that voters would have plenty of time to judge Mr. Trump’s handling of the coronavirus crisis, “but now doesn’t seem the moment for negative ads.” Mr. Plouffe responded that time was of the essence, and that Democrats couldn’t afford to “disarm” and let Mr. Trump create his own reality.

Veterans of John Kerry’s 2004 campaign said Mr. Biden was in a stronger position against Mr. Trump than they were when they faced an election against Mr. Bush. Back then, Mr. Bush still basked in good will from his performance in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Some Democratic Party officials said a comparison between Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump at a moment of crisis only helped Mr. Biden.

“You can see the contrast between the steady, assured, informed and strong leadership that Vice President Biden has shown and the bungling, chaotic and dishonest start-stop approach that Mr. Trump has shown us since the beginning of this crisis,” said Gilberto Hinojosa, chairman of the Texas Democratic Party.