A month After Emergency Declaration, Trump's Promises Largely Unfulfilled

[LeafByNiggle]

To be technically correct, he holds effective sway over about half of the population.

As we saw in Michigan yesterday, it only takes a few protesters to make a real mess of things. Having any significant fraction of the population unwilling to go along can spell disaster for the kind of measures Michigan is trying to do. And it is no coincidence that Trump has made a big deal recently of how bad he thinks “that woman” (meaning Gretchen Whitmer) is as governor. And that Trump has a large body of true believers in Michigan who take their cues from Trump, going beyond what he actually says in some cases.

 

[PaulinVA]

That would be you editorializing based on your own misperceptions. Not quite the reality. Many of his supporters are critical of this or that. I run across it all the time.

Great. Many of his supporters are critical of this or that but it doesn’t matter. They give him a pass and still support him.

It’s just that his opposition is so extremely tiresome, those who are somewhat supportive get tired of the outlandish criticisms based on nothing.

I could just as easily say that I find the support for Trump extremely tiresome in light of the many things he does that wouldn’t be acceptable in the supporters’ bosses, spouses, associates or anyone else.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

To be technically correct, he holds effective sway over about half of the population.

As we saw in Michigan yesterday, it only takes a few protesters to make a real mess of things. Having any significant fraction of the population unwilling to go along can spell disaster for the kind of measures Michigan is trying to do. And it is no coincidence that Trump has made a big deal recently of how bad he thinks “that woman” (meaning Gretchen Whitmer) is as governor. And that Trump has a large body of true believers in Michigan who take their cues from Trump, going beyond what he actually says in some cases.

Whitmer announced over the weekend an expansion to her state’s stay-at-home orders, which among other things prohibits residents from visiting family or friends with exceptions for providing care, bans public and private gatherings regardless of size or family ties, and places restrictions on what types of businesses may operate and in what capacity.

Drivers swarm Michigan capital to protest coronavirus lockdown measures

Hundreds of cars, trucks and SUVs descended on Michigan’s state capital Wednesday afternoon as part of a noisy protest against Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s social-distancing restrictions that critics say have gone too far.

www.foxnews.com

So you agree with her that seeds and garden supplies are not an essential commodity? Or that the state has a right to decide whether or not you can visit family members irrespective of the risk?

Perhaps people are tired of the political elites deciding on our behalf what they think is absolutely good, true and beautiful.

When people like Pelosi are so out of touch that they share their 15 flavours of ice cream and fancy refrigerators on late night television while people line up in food lines, that says more about the distinction between “the people” and the ruling class than anything Trump has to say.

In any case, perhaps he is right on some things and Governor Whitmer is wrong in this instance. Do people no longer have a right to express their disillusionment without you blaming that on Trump? Perhaps she called this down on her own head with her tyrannical position?

It is government “by the people” still, is it not?

Or do you firmly believe the elites ought to decide everything on our behalf?

I think I know your answer to that, you have stated your faith in the experts numerous times.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

HarryStotle:

To be technically correct, he holds effective sway over about half of the population.

As we saw in Michigan yesterday, it only takes a few protesters to make a real mess of things. Having any significant fraction of the population unwilling to go along can spell disaster for the kind of measures Michigan is trying to do. And it is no coincidence that Trump has made a big deal recently of how bad he thinks “that woman” (meaning Gretchen Whitmer) is as governor. And that Trump has a large body of true believers in Michigan who take their cues from Trump, going beyond what he actually says in some cases.

Whitmer announced over the weekend an expansion to her state’s stay-at-home orders, which among other things prohibits residents from visiting family or friends with exceptions for providing care, bans public and private gatherings regardless of size or family ties, and places restrictions on what types of businesses may operate and in what capacity.

Drivers swarm Michigan capital to protest coronavirus lockdown measures | Fox News

So you agree with her that seeds and garden supplies are not an essential commodity? Or that the state has a right to decide whether or not you can visit family members irrespective of the risk?

Under the current conditions, and for a limited time only, yes.

Perhaps people are tired of the political elites…

Ignoring anything that follows hyperbolic name-calling. The governor is a public servant, not a “political elite.”

When people like Pelosi…

Ignoring anything about people not connected to Michigan.

In any case, perhaps he is right on some things and Governor Whitmer is wrong in this instance.

That’s a matter of opinion.

Do people no longer have a right to express their disillusionment…

When it involves civil disobedience, especially in time of a national emergency, no.

Or do you firmly believe the elites ought to decide everything on our behalf?

Don’t know what you mean by “everything.” But those things that we have empowered them to decide, they ought to decide. And we don’t like it we can vote them out at the next election.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

That would be you editorializing based on your own misperceptions. Not quite the reality. Many of his supporters are critical of this or that. I run across it all the time.

Great. Many of his supporters are critical of this or that but it doesn’t matter. They give him a pass and still support him.

Let’s, then, assume that everyone ought to agree with you on everything you think and are not free to formulate their own opinions without your approval.

By the way, it isn’t so much that those who appear to “agree with Trump” actually do agree with him, it is that they realize the radical left poses a far greater danger to society and that the progressive measures Democrats are advocating will spell disaster. Trump represents the “last hope” for the country, not because he is infallible, but because the political alternative thinks IT is.

Evidence Exhibit #1: Your statement: “…anything Trump says or does, no matter how crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency, is accepted as totally normal and actually good.”

 

[PaulinVA]

Let’s, then, assume that everyone ought to agree with you on everything you think and are not free to formulate their own opinions without your approval.

Not me. 54% of the country.

By the way, it isn’t so much that those who appear to “agree with Trump” actually do agree with him, it is that they realize the radical left poses a far greater danger to society and that the progressive measures Democrats are advocating will spell disaster. Trump represents the “last hope” for the country, not because he is infallible, but because the political alternative thinks IT is.

This is very funny. The alternative to Trump does not have to be a Democrat, of which I am not one.. The alternative to Trump can be a conservative who is not trying to be a dictator with “total power over everything”.

Evidence Exhibit #1: Your statement: “…anything Trump says or does, no matter how crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency, is accepted as totally normal and actually good. ”

I stand by that. Trump’s actions are well documented. His words speak for themselves.

 

[HarryStotle]

In any case, perhaps he is right on some things and Governor Whitmer is wrong in this instance.

That’s a matter of opinion.

Right and the citizens of Michigan have a right to protest what they think are draconian measures without you assuming that they are mindless and are doing so only because Trump has programmed his drones to do so.

A fine opinion you have of your fellow countrymen and women.

When it involves civil disobedience, especially in time of a national emergency, no.

Even the extent of this “national emergency” is a matter of opinion. It might be that in New York City, but far from that in a rural county in Montana or Michigan.

Still isn’t that the protest is against reasonable measures, it is that some of those measures are draconian.

Seeds?

Under the current conditions, and for a limited time only, yes.

As a gardener, I disagree. Many people depend on their own capacity to grow food FOR their food. Do you garden?

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Let’s, then, assume that everyone ought to agree with you on everything you think and are not free to formulate their own opinions without your approval.

Not me. 54% of the country.

So we’ll make note that “tyranny of the majority” is part of your political aspiration, since you are advocating that everyone ought to agree with … [the 54% majority] …on everything you think and are not free to formulate their own opinions without … approval [from the 54%].

This is very funny. The alternative to Trump does not have to be a Democrat, of which I am not one. . The alternative to Trump can be a conservative who is not trying to be a dictator with “total power over everything”.

Ironically, your attitude towards those who disagree with your opinions on Trump seems to peg you as one who is “trying to be a dictator” with “total power over everything” since you completely dismiss the political aspirations of anyone not agreeing with you because they MUST be " *…crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency… despite that the vast majority of that 46% are typically law abiding and decent people.

That is an exceptionally high opinion you have of your own opinion, is it not?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Even the extent of this “national emergency” is a matter of opinion. It might be that in New York City, but far from that in a rural county in Montana or Michigan.

I have family in the Detroit area. I have been following it closely. There is no doubt it is an emergency.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Even the extent of this “national emergency” is a matter of opinion. It might be that in New York City, but far from that in a rural county in Montana or Michigan.

I have family in the Detroit area. I have been following it closely. There is no doubt it is an emergency.

In Detroit or in rural counties?

So some gardener in a rural county ought to be stopped from buying seeds in town because Detroit is going through an emergency?

Oh, I get your thinking now. People are mindless and cannot think for themselves regarding dangers and therefore they must all be treated the same for their own safety. If you permit someone in Frankenmuth, to buy seeds pretty soon the disenchanted in Midtown Detroit will be clamouring for them.

Your thesis that people are sheep and will follow Trump (or some other influential person) like the Pied Piper is thus affirmed.

So the source of your proclivity to support leftist, expanded government policies, has been uncovered. People need protection from themselves.

 

[PaulinVA]

That is an exceptionally high opinion you have of your own opinion, is it not?

You need to decide which argument you’re going to use against me. Is it that my opinion aligns with 54% of the population, and it’s a tyranny of the majority, or is it just me with an inflated view of my own opinion?

since you completely dismiss the political aspirations of anyone not agreeing with you because they MUST be " * …crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency… despite that the vast majority of that 46% are typically law abiding and decent people.

Don’t twist my words. I did not say this about Trump supporters at all. I am sure that they are mostly decent people.

I said that about Trump himself. He, Trump, said that as President he has “total power”, which he does not. He, Trump, is actually talking about adjourning Congress so that he can make recess appointments. That’s the stuff dictators do. His lack of candor is well documented.

So, don’t make personal attacks on me because you don’t like what I post.

 

[HarryStotle]

Uhm, a better way to put it is that 44% of the population is afflicted with Trump Blindness Syndrome, wherein anything Trump says or does, no matter how crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency, is accepted as totally normal and actually good.

You are re-enforcing my original point for me…

To be technically correct, he holds effective sway over about half of the population. The other half (those afflicted with TDS) will do the exact opposite of what he suggests. Ergo, his “net effect” approximates zero.

What you are saying is that 54% of the population understand that whatever Trump says, the wisest course of action would be to do the exact opposite since…

…there is a hardcore group of people who see nothing good coming from Trump, like, ever.

You do realize that you have completely undermined @LeafByNiggle’s point:

Because Trump holds a lot of sway over public opinion. States making rules that the public does not want to follow is a disaster. He could have used the bully pulpit for good, instead of using it as a campaign platform.

In effect, the best way (i.e., 54%) of the time for Trump to use his “bully pulpit” is to say the exact opposite of what should be done because 54% “of people …[will] see nothing good coming from Trump, like, ever.”

Get that Leaf? Trump does not hold “a lot of sway” over public opinion, his “sway” isn’t net zero, it is a negative one (–4% by Paul’s reckoning) . We can be assured by @PaulinVA that Trump will be negatively responded to by the majority of people. Ergo, your point has been disproven. You have Paul to thank for undermining your reasoning.

 

[HarryStotle]

with a bit more knowledge and experience under my belt,… seems we are where we are because of too much consumption and being enticed by slick marketing to believe that consumer goods are the answer to happiness, which has unintended consequences (in this world)

The difficulty with your position regarding the economy is that we live in the real world.

That means a great deal of the “consumption” that occurs on earth is driven by the need to have millions and millions of productive people doing productive things with their lives — i.e., employed in meaningful work.

What would you have all of those people doing if they were not so engaged?

Idleness is the Devil’s workshop was a saying from my childhood.

So, it appears that before you go castigating the idea of consumption you must first address the problem of production. What do you suggest that over 7 billion people do during their 80+ years on earth rather than engaging in productive work?

Now if you have concerns about the kinds of products being produced, we might find some common ground, but the amount of production tends to coincide with the amount of labour being made available by needing to do something with their time — Genesis has something to say about earning a living by the sweat of your brow.

So you appear to be in bit of a quandary.

1. What should 7+billion people do with their time if not to use available resources to produce things that keep 7+billion people alive, housed, clothed and fed?
2. Should the population of the Earth be greatly reduced to accommodate your “too much consumption” concerns? In which case, what exactly are you advocating?

It is fine to live in a delusional utopian dream about “Mother Earth” and delightful humans dancing about everywhere, but someone has to work to provide for those people and the provisions come (by necessity) “from the earth.”

Care to get “down and dirty” with your solutions and hammer out specifics?

Just out of interest…

Do you live in a large city?
Do you garden?
Do you farm?
Do you have children?
Do you work for a living?

 

[HarryStotle]

So, don’t make personal attacks on me because you don’t like what I post.

Hey you made “personal attacks” on 44% of the population, who you claimed were …crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency…

That is a whole lot of personae to attack.

By comparison, my “personal attacking” is miniscule.

We can make a deal, though: you stop then I will.

You could say that I am speaking up for the 44%. Someone has to.

 

[PaulinVA]

Hey you made “personal attacks” on 44% of the population, who you claimed were …crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency…

No, i didn’t. I said they supported someone with those characteristics.

Once again, you’re putting words in my mouth. That’s not right.

I’ve put you on ignore. I won’t be responding to you further.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Hey you made “personal attacks” on 44% of the population, who you claimed were …crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency…

No, i didn’t. I said they supported someone with those characteristics.

Once again, you’re putting words in my mouth. That’s not right.

I’ve put you on ignore. I won’t be responding to you further.

Well, okay. Let’s break this down a bit. Your exact words…

Uhm, a better way to put it is that 44% of the population is afflicted with Trump Blindness Syndrome, wherein anything Trump says or does, no matter how crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency, is accepted as totally normal and actually good.

The implication from your statement is that 44% of the population — those afflicted with Trump Blindness Syndrome — will accept anything “as totally normal and actually good” that he “says or does” and “no matter how crazy or untruthful or against the norms of the American Presidency.”

Ergo, the 44% must be “crazy” or “untruthful” or pathetically irrational to accept so blindly anything he says or does.

How is that not a personal attack on that 44%, if not directly, by implication?

Are you assuming that I can’t, personally, work out the implications of statements that you make because I am suffering from Trump Blindness Syndrome?

I will not put you on ignore because I never do that to people and I never flag posts. My solution is not to treat people as if they don’t exist, and to still think about what they say whether or not I might have some impression that they are “crazy or untruthful” BECAUSE much of the time they aren’t.

It might be me who needs some readjustment and those who don’t see eye to eye with me might be just the people I need to provide an alternative perspective.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I’ll take you at your word and put you somewhere between TBS and the mushy middle.

A disgusting personal insult. No justification for it.

And, the people that backed the Trump casinos, the Trump ventures that all didn’t pan out, the people that enrolled in Trump University, they all thought he was a billionaire and all the things he did were above board and would be successful.

As you might have recalled, everybody gets paid in a Chapter 11 unless the Court determines that their claim is less than believable. And you might have recalled that some people testified that they got a lot of good out of Trump U.

But some claimed they didn’t get paid in the Ch 11 despite the Court’s review, and some claimed they got cheated with Trump U. Probably some people didn’t file claims properly and probably some people really did get a bad deal out of Trump U. But that’s what happens oftentimes in business. I have seen some of the best doctors imaginable get horrible reviews by SOME patients. Same with lawyers. Probably those doctors did do something wrong here and there and the lawyers too. But just because some complain, it doesn’t mean they’re right in a plenary fashion.

You complain and insult me because I don’t attack Trump all the time.

Many of his supporters are critical of this or that but it doesn’t matter. They give him a pass and still support him.

And this says exactly that. “It doesn’t matter” whether people do critique some of what he does. If they “give him a pass” on anything, they’re totally in the wrong from your perspective.

I could just as easily say that I find the support for Trump extremely tiresome

That, I do believe entirely.

 

[PaulinVA]

A disgusting personal insult. No justification for it.

Not trying to insult at all. Sorry you took it that way.

You complain and insult me because I don’t attack Trump all the time.

I don’t insult you. Or at least not on purpose.

And this says exactly that. “It doesn’t matter” whether people do critique some of what he does. If they “give him a pass” on anything, they’re totally in the wrong from your perspective.

Yes. You are right. I think if you give Trump a pass on his behavior you are wrong. That’s my opinion.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I said

If they “give him a pass” on anything, they’re totally in the wrong from your perspective.

You responded

Yes. You are right. I think if you give Trump a pass on his behavior you are wrong. That’s my opinion.

There are those who say, half in jest, that if Trump cured cancer, the anti-Trumpers would still condemn him for it. You just demonstrated that it’s no jest at all.

 

[PaulinVA]

There are those who say, half in jest, that if Trump cured cancer, the anti-Trumpers would still condemn him for it. You just demonstrated that it’s no jest at all.

If Trump somehow cured cancer, I would give him props for it and be very happy for the deaths that would be prevented.

However, that has nothing to do with what I posted.

Conversely, if Trump attempts to adjourn Congress, something no other President has done, will you call him on it?