Will Donald Trump or Joe Biden be better for the coronavirus pandemic?

Donald Trump's personal experience with the virus will increase his vigilance in responding to the pandemic

Question: Will Donald Trump or Joe Biden be better for the coronavirus pandemic?
Position1 of 2›: Donald Trump will be better for the coronavirus pandemic
Argument‹2 of 4›: Donald Trump's personal experience with the virus will increase his vigilance in responding to the pandemic

Having personally experienced the healthcare problems associated with the virus, Donald Trump will be more sympathetic to those experiencing it personally and be more determined to successfully eradicate the virus.

The argument

Having personally experienced the healthcare problems associated with the virus, Donald Trump will be more sympathetic to those experiencing it personally and will design policy targeted towards fighting the disease specifically. Just as Boris Johnson did after being ill with coronavirus, Trump will be more determined to successfully eradicate COVID-19.

Premises

[P1]Proponents argue that having personally experienced the virus's healthcare problems, Trump will be more sympathetic to those suffering from it and more motivated to design policy targeted specifically at fighting the disease. [P2] They point to Boris Johnson, who became more determined to defeat coronavirus after his own illness, as a model for how personal experience increases a leader's vigilance. [C] Therefore proponents conclude Trump's personal experience with the virus will make him the better choice for the pandemic response.

Counter-arguments

American citizens may vote out of sympathy for Trump having contracted the virus rather than for his policies addressed at targeting the virus once and for all.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Sympathy and policy are separate claims and the premise offers nothing linking them; a prediction about how illness changes a leader's approach can only be tested against what that leader subsequently did. [Rejecting P2] A single comparison case cannot establish a general effect of illness on leaders, and the two situations differ in their politics as much as in their medicine — while the counter's point, that public sympathy rather than policy may be doing the work, goes unaddressed.