Protest in Michigan Today Over Lockdown

[exchemist]

In other words, when they agree with you they are “protesters” but when they don’t they are a “mob”.

You have such a strong opinion about Michigan politics for someone from over the pond.

I’m confident the voters will be remembering many things when they vote. Including that their governor was still drawing her salary while dictating that they must stay home without theirs.

Yes. I see this sort of thing and I am disgusted by your president.
Governor accuses Trump of stoking violence and 'fomenting domestic rebellion'

Is this what national leadership looks like, in modern America?

 

[McBell]

Yes. I see this sort of thing and I am disgusted by your president.
Governor accuses Trump of stoking violence and 'fomenting domestic rebellion'

Is this what national leadership looks like, in modern America?

As a matter of fact, yes.
Cause Trump is the leader and that is how he acts.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes. I see this sort of thing and I am disgusted by your president.
Governor accuses Trump of stoking violence and 'fomenting domestic rebellion'

Is this what national leadership looks like, in modern America?

Great minds think alike.
Our governor is also fomenting domestic rebellion.
So it's not limited to just great minds, eh.

 

[oldbadger]

In the news, protests are growing.
(No paywall here.)
Scattered protests push back on U.S. coronavirus stay-at-home orders

At 0300hrs in the UK the BBC is reporting that President Trump has tweeted 'LIBERATE MICHIGAN' together with two other States.
Well, that won't chuck any fuel on the flames, anyway.

The UK has just extended its lockdown to the end of May, and just like Michigan, you cannot go out to buy paint and stuff while you can go out to buy, say, fence posts to repair a broken fence. Why? The rule is 'STAY AT HOME'

This kind of mixed messaging from your countries' leaders could possibly contribute to the pandemic's horrors in your part of the World. Good luck with that.

 

[Revoltingest]

At 0300hrs in the UK the BBC is reporting that President Trump has tweeted 'LIBERATE MICHIGAN' together with two other States.
Well, that won't chuck any fuel on the flames, anyway.

I'd rather that Trump not say anything about Michiganistan.

 

[oldbadger]

I'd rather that Trump not say anything about Michiganistan.

I get the impression that a lot of Americans would rather that Trump said nothing......... at all.

Ah...... President Obama........ where did you go?

 

[exchemist]

Great minds think alike.
Our governor is also fomenting domestic rebellion.
So it's not limited to just great minds, eh.

This is what is reported by NBC about these protests. In Trump's 'LIBERATE' tweets, extremists see a call to arms

I don't know who your governor is. Can you post a link, from a reputable source, illustrating how he or she might be fomenting rebellion in a comparable manner, as you state?

Or was it a joke?

 

[Revoltingest]

I get the impression that a lot of Americans would rather that Trump said nothing......... at all.

Ah...... President Obama........ where did you go?

Yet another Prez I'd rather not hear speak.
Without a teleprompter, he's...uh....tongue...uh...uh...tied..uh.

In order to judge politicians by what they do,
it's useful to not hear them speak, which
could color one's impressions.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is what is reported by NBC about these protests. In Trump's 'LIBERATE' tweets, extremists see a call to arms

I don't know who your governor is. Can you post a link, from a reputable source, illustrating how he or she might be fomenting rebellion in a comparable manner, as you state?

Or was it a joke?

I've been posting about specific policies Whitmer has imposed upon us.
Some have been oppressive without enhancing safety.
Others have been lax regarding safety.
She's been inconsistent.

What's going on in Michiganistan isn't about Trump.
Neither is it about the governor's party.
We're trying to safely expand our economy.
Trump's rantings are irrelevant to us.

 

[oldbadger]

I've been posting about specific policies Whitmer has imposed upon us.
Some have been oppressive without enhancing safety.
Others have been lax regarding safety.
She's been inconsistent.

But that has been happening all over.... everywhere.
It has happened here (UK) but the majority, while calling for various important corrections, are not chucking political muck at our leaders. In fact the majority of us hold our PM, Med Chief and Science Chief in admiration and endearment.
I think it's different here. I'm even seeing analogies between Boris and Churchill..... the good bits, mostly.

 

[exchemist]

I've been posting about specific policies Whitmer has imposed upon us.
Some have been oppressive without enhancing safety.
Others have been lax regarding safety.
She's been inconsistent.

What's going on in Michiganistan isn't about Trump.
Neither is it about the governor's party.
We're trying to safely expand our economy.
Trump's rantings are irrelevant to us.

To you, I don't doubt, but to that group carrying out that demo, I think it is clear from the link I supplied they were very relevant. Your governor may have been inconsistent (who hasn't been, at some point during this crisis?), but inconsistency in an evolving crisis can't be compared to a president stirring up people against the very control measures advocated by his own epidemic advisers and sanctioned by the president himself.

He is quite transparently getting the state governors to take the flak for all the hard decisions on controlling the outbreak, while trying to associate himself with those opposing them, so he can be popular when the controls are lifted. What a creep.

This is not, in any way, the leadership one expects from an executive head of state in a crisis, least of all from the President of the United States of America.

 

[Revoltingest]

But that has been happening all over.... everywhere.

Doesn't make it right though, eh.

It has happened here (UK) but the majority, while calling for various important corrections, are not chucking political muck at our leaders. In fact the majority of us hold our PM, Med Chief and Science Chief in admiration and endearment.
I think it's different here. I'm even seeing analogies between Boris and Churchill..... the good bits, mostly.

Well, you Limeys are accustomed to doing as you're told.
Criminy, you still bow & scrape to a queen.
(I see how things go at Downton Abbey.)

Lefties want to make our objections to overbearing restrictions about
something other than the restrictions. It's easier to attack if they can
call us white supremacists (on NPR) or decry the protests as "chucking
political muck". That's ad hominem distraction....& less than accurate.

 

[Revoltingest]

To you, I don't doubt, but to that group carrying out that demo, I think it is clear from the link I supplied they were very relevant.

If this is the link you mean...
Governor accuses Trump of stoking violence and 'fomenting domestic rebellion'
....then I missed the part in the article where Trump has
influenced the demonstrators to do anything untoward.
It was a peaceful demonstration...not "domestic rebellion".

There's certainly bad blood between the Governor &
the Prez, but that is irrelevant to us here in this state.

....but inconsistency in an evolving crisis can't be compared to a president stirring up people against the very control measures advocated by his own epidemic advisers and sanctioned by the president himself.

I'm not defending Trump's behavior.
But I do say that not everything is about Trump.

He is quite transparently getting the state governors to take the flak for all the hard decisions on controlling the outbreak, while trying to associate himself with those opposing them, so he can be popular when the controls are lifted. What a creep.

This is not, in any way, the leadership one expects from an executive head of state in a crisis, least of all from the President of the United States of America.

Our governor deserves some flak for what she's
done....not for what Trump says about her.

The protests should not be attacked using Trump's antics.
This reminds me of Vietnam War protests being attacked
as fomented by communist agitators. When protests have
merit, they're not invalidated by ad hominem criticism.

 

[exchemist]

If this is the link you mean...
Governor accuses Trump of stoking violence and 'fomenting domestic rebellion'
....then I missed the part in the article where Trump has
influenced the demonstrators to do anything untoward.
It was a peaceful demonstration...not "domestic rebellion".

There's certainly bad blood between the Governor &
the Prez, but that is irrelevant to us here in this state.

I'm not defending Trump's behavior.
But I do say that not everything is about Trump.

Our governor deserves some flak for what she's
done....not for what Trump says about her.

The protests should not be attacked using Trump's antics.
This reminds me of Vietnam War protests being attacked
as fomented by communist agitators. When protests have
merit, they're not invalidated by ad hominem criticism.

I was referring to this one as well, which I posted from NBC: In Trump's 'LIBERATE' tweets, extremists see a call to arms

I quite agree there is a discussion to be had about what degree of restriction is needed to get R<1 in rural or suburban America, vs. the crowded cities. It seems to be quite likely to me that the spread-out lifestyle and the use of cars rather than public transport may allow fewer restrictions outside the cities than within them. But then the governor has to make another tough calculation, namely whether the city dwellers will abide by it, if those in suburbia and the countryside don't have to. And what would be the effects on the epidemic of interchange of people, between those inside the zone of tougher control and those outside?

These are very hard choices for a governor who, as Trump makes plain, will be damned for a high death toll, or damned for damaging people's livelihoods. Trump, meanwhile, stands outside all these tough choices, seems to be only helping those governors who are sufficiently obsequious to him personally (even though people's lives are at stake), and increases the political pressures on these governors by supporting these demonstrations, instead of helping to reduce them. This is not just an absence of national leadership. It is its antithesis.

However to me, as an outsider who has admired the statesmanship of so many US presidents, throughout the Cold War and afterwards, the most appalling aspect of this lamentable situation is the apparently large number of Americans who seem think this divisive and buck-passing behaviour is OK for the President of the USA, in the middle of the gravest national crisis since WW2. I hasten to add that I don't include you in this, but I am really worried that US democracy has somehow become seriously perverted and is no longer capable of making sensible choices.

 

[Revoltingest]

I was referring to this one as well, which I posted from NBC: In Trump's 'LIBERATE' tweets, extremists see a call to arms

I quite agree there is a discussion to be had about what degree of restriction is needed to get R<1 in rural or suburban America, vs. the crowded cities. It seems to be quite likely to me that the spread-out lifestyle and the use of cars rather than public transport may allow fewer restrictions outside the cities than within them. But then the governor has to make another tough calculation, namely whether the city dwellers will abide by it, if those in suburbia and the countryside don't have to. And what would be the effects on the epidemic of interchange of people, between those inside the zone of tougher control and those outside?

These are very hard choices for a governor who, as Trump makes plain, will be damned for a high death toll, or damned for damaging people's livelihoods. Trump, meanwhile, stands outside all these tough choices, seems to be only helping those governors who are sufficiently obsequious to him personally (even though people's lives are at stake), and increases the political pressures on these governors by supporting these demonstrations, instead of helping to reduce them. This is not just an absence of national leadership. It is its antithesis.
However to me, as an outsider who has admired the statesmanship of so many US presidents, throughout the Cold War and afterwards, the most appalling aspect of this lamentable situation is the apparently large number of Americans who seem think this divisive and buck-passing behaviour is OK for the President of the USA, in the middle of the gravest national crisis since WW2. I hasten to add that I don't include you in this, but I am really worried that US democracy has somehow become seriously perverted and is no longer capable of making sensible choices.

Odd.....you have both a higher opinion of our Presidents than do I,
& yet you have more pessimism for how our democracy is faring.
Trump won't be around forever.

About statesmanship....I see so little of that. Typically, it just strikes
me as pandering or floundering. Reagan was one who stood above
the others in that regard. And yet, he pursued one of the most evil
agendas of all time, ie, the use of WMDs in the proxy war against
Iran, killing many hundreds of thousands..

 

[exchemist]

Odd.....you have both a higher opinion of our Presidents than do I,
& yet you have more pessimism for how our democracy is faring.
Trump won't be around forever.

About statesmanship....I see so little of that. Typically, it just strikes
me as pandering or floundering. Reagan was one who stood above
the others in that regard. And yet, he pursued one of the most evil
agendas of all time, ie, the use of WMDs in the proxy war against
Iran, killing many hundreds of thousands..

I'm not a cynic when it comes to politicians. I honestly believe that most of them try to do a good job and have some ideals they want to apply to the world. From an EU perspective there have been a lot of really capable US presidents. Eisenhower, Kennedy, LBJ in some ways, Nixon, as an international statesman at least, Reagan (who although he always seemed a bit out-to-lunch picked a first rate team to work for him). I thought Bush the Elder was good, too, and Clinton. And they needed to be, to be the leaders of the free world, which is what they were. Most of these people had the gift of being able to keep the country united, more or less - though that can't be said of LBJ, I suppose, because of Vietnam.

Trump seems to me definitely in a new and sinister class of his own, though. I see real parallels with 1930s Germany in the destruction of faith in the media, the co-opting or undermining of institutions of the state, sacking or bullying those with enough integrity to resist, the attempts at extending power by testing, retreating and testing again, the normalising of brutal dialogue, the dog-whistling and encouragement of extremist groups, the demonisation of other countries, and above all by the turning of one part of the population against another. History never repeats itself exactly, so it is a stretch to call these demonstrators Trump's brownshirts, but similar ends may be being gradually achieved, using an Al-Qaeda type of decentralised approach, made possible by the internet. And people seem to be reacting in the same way as in Germany on the 1930s, with a degree of misgiving at each new outrageous statement or action, but then a shrug of the shoulders.

I look at this with European eyes and I am appalled and just a bit frightened. I don't find it funny any more.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not a cynic when it comes to politicians. I honestly believe that most of them try to do a good job and have some ideals they want to apply to the world. From an EU perspective there have been a lot of really capable US presidents. Eisenhower, Kennedy, LBJ in some ways, Nixon, as an international statesman at least, Reagan (who although he always seemed a bit out-to-lunch picked a first rate team to work for him). I thought Bush the Elder was good, too, and Clinton. And they needed to be, to be the leaders of the free world, which is what they were. Most of these people had the gift of being able to keep the country united, more or less - though that can't be said of LBJ, I suppose, because of Vietnam.

Trump seems to me definitely in a new and sinister class of his own, though. I see real parallels with 1930s Germany in the destruction of faith in the media, the co-opting or undermining of institutions of the state, sacking or bullying those with enough integrity to resist, the attempts at extending power by testing, retreating and testing again, the normalising of brutal dialogue, the dog-whistling and encouragement of extremist groups, the demonisation of other countries, and above all by the turning of one part of the population against another. History never repeats itself exactly, so it is a stretch to call these demonstrators Trump's brownshirts, but similar ends may be being gradually achieved, using an Al-Qaeda type of decentralised approach, made possible by the internet. And people seem to be reacting in the same way as in Germany on the 1930s, with a degree of misgiving at each new outrageous statement or action, but then a shrug of the shoulders.

I look at this with European eyes and I am appalled and just a bit frightened. I don't find it funny any more.

I don't share the perspective of really-good-vs-really-sinister.
They're all a mix of good & evil.
So the people who see Trump as Hitleresque....I just
roll me peepers at their...uh....special perspective.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Money or death-- take your pick?

We must and shall gradually open up, but if we do this in a haphazard and careless manner we could pile up deaths in the low millions, and this isn't a joke if one listens to what some of the virus experts are largely saying.

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize in Economics recipient, said that it is best economically to very slowly open up the economy because quickly opening and then having to shut down if numbers of casualties then shoot up would be far more harmful economically in the long run.

Finally, I'm pleased that states are grouping together by region and letting their governors make the decisions versus a "one-size-fits-all" approach.

I'm pretty sure without access to any money and no feasible way of maintaining a quality standard of life, all because of a Democrat king**** governor who enjoys making dictatorial decrees, you're going to wish you were dead.

 

[exchemist]

I don't share the perspective of really-good-vs-really-sinister.
They're all a mix of good & evil.
So the people who see Trump as Hitleresque....I just
roll me peepers at their...uh....special perspective.

I don't say really good vs really evil. I'm 65 years old and not that naive.

I do say Trump is in a class of his own, compared to other US presidents. And I do say I think he is both systematically undermining the unity of the country and systematically damaging its institutions. This is unprecedented and very dangerous for American democracy.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't say really good vs really evil. I'm 65 years old and not that naive.

I do say Trump is in a class of his own, compared to other US presidents. And I do say I think he is both systematically undermining the unity of the country and systematically damaging its institutions. This is unprecedented and very dangerous for American democracy.

Trump is indeed very different.
But so far, he hasn't been the worst...based upon effect in government.
To some extent, this is just the random luck of not facing events which inspire
catastrophic behavior. Dubya was worse than Trump, what with starting 2
devastating wars. Would Trump have handled it better? I doubt it. A side
note....Hillary participated in starting & continuing those wars.
Nixon...he was a dirtbag, but he did end the Vietnam War & the military draft.
The others all have their qualities & warts too.

I expect vehement disagreement on this. I'm judging based upon effect.
But many judge a leader based upon likability, ie, how they feel about him.
And in that regard, I can see why they judge him as the worst.