Trump Threatens to Send Federal Officers to Other Cities in Wake of Portland

After receiving serious pushback for federal actions in Portland, President Trump continued to escalate the tension—threatening to expand his actions to other cities.

“We’re not going to let New York and Chicago and Philadelphia, Detroit and Baltimore and all of these, Oakland is a mess. We’re not going to let this happen in our country. All run by liberal Democrats,” Trump said.

In Portland last week, federal agents dressed in military gear took to the streets of Portland, using tear gas and force, causing protesters to be injured, while pulling some people into unmarked vans in what Gov. Kate Brown of Oregon has called “a blatant abuse of power.”

Governors and other officials predictably reacted angrily to the president’s move, some calling it an election-year ploy, while others saw it as a much deeper threat.

The president cast this in deeply and overtly political terms.  He assailed “liberal Democrats” running American cities while seemingly attacking his fall opponent over it.

“Look at what’s going on—all run by Democrats, all run by very liberal Democrats. All run, really, by radical left,” Trump said.

The reaction figures to be interesting.  Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon vowed on Monday to introduce legislation limiting the role of federal troops in local communities.

“This isn’t just an Oregon crisis,” he said. “It’s an American crisis. We need to stop Trump before this spreads.”

He added, “We won’t let these authoritarian tactics stand.”

Senator Merkley and Senator Ron Wyden sent a letter to AG William Barr and Acting Secretary Wolf demanding that they remove any Special Operating Group (SOG), US Custom and Border Protection Tactical Unit (BORTAC), and Homeland Security Investigations Special Response Team (HSI SRT) agents and other federal agents from Oregon immediately.

The four Congress members accuse the federal government of 1) “deploying federal agents without identifying insignia,” 2) “snatching people off the streets with no apparent reason for apprehension,” and 3) “using potentially deadly munitions to harm peaceful protesters.”

In the letter, they refer to several cases of unlawful violence by federal agents against innocent civilians, which occurred quite recently. One of the most viral cases was that of innocent civilians being arrested and put into unmarked military cars by camouflaged military soldiers.

While there has been an uptick in levels of crime in some places since the protests last month, it also true that many major cities remain safer than they were decades ago, despite the recent uptick in crime.

One of the targets of Trumps’ declaration is Chicago.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago said on Monday that the federal troops would be no more welcome in Chicago than they were in Portland.

“We don’t need federal agents without any insignia taking people off the street and holding them, I think, unlawfully,” she said at a morning news conference. “That’s not what we need.”

In a letter to the President, Mayor Lightfoot said if the president really wanted to help, he could enact gun control and do more to combat the spread of COVID while investing in community programs.

“Any other form of militarized assistance within our borders that would not be within our control or within the direct command of the Chicago Police Department would spell disaster,” she wrote in a four-page letter.

There are legality questions.  For example, University of Texas Law Professor Stephen Vladeck is quoted in media accounts questioning how federal troops could occupy streets of a city that is primarily not on federal property.

“It’s of course the prerogative of the federal government to enforce federal law and protect federal property,” Professor Vladeck said. “It is not the job of the federal government to be a general police force for all crimes.”

“The idea that there’s a threat to a federal courthouse and the federal authorities are going to swoop in and do whatever they want to do without any cooperation and coordination with state and local authorities is extraordinary outside the context of a civil war,” said Michael Dorf, a professor of constitutional law at Cornell University.

“It is a standard move of authoritarians to use the pretext of quelling violence to bring in force, thereby prompting a violent response and then bootstrapping the initial use of force in the first place,” Dorf said.

Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner, whose city is also a potential target, said, “My dad volunteered and served in World War II to fight fascism, like most of my uncles, so we would not have an American president brutalizing and kidnapping Americans for exercising their constitutional rights and trying to make America a better place, which is what patriots do.”

He warned: “Anyone, including federal law enforcement, who unlawfully assaults and kidnaps people will face criminal charges from my office. At trial, they will face a Philadelphia jury. It’s the least we can do to honor those who fought fascism, including those who are fighting it even now.”

In California, where Oakland is also a potential target, Governor Newsom during his noon press conference said, “The answer is no, and we would reject it,” on whether the state would accept “federal law enforcement.”

Mayor Libby Schaaf via email said, “Oakland needs COVID relief – not troops – from our President. He should stop slandering diverse, progressive cities like Oakland in his racist dog whistles and divisive campaign tactics.”

Schaaf added, “While we are not experiencing any civil unrest right now, I can think of nothing more likely to incite it than the presence of Trump-ordered military troops into Oakland.”

The moves by the president also alarmed civil liberties advocates.

The ACLU sent out a statement: “What is happening now in Portland should concern everyone in the United States. Usually when we see people in unmarked cars forcibly grab someone off the street we call it kidnapping. The actions of the militarized federal officers are flat-out unconstitutional and will not go unanswered.

“Under the direction of the Trump administration, militarized federal agents have flaunted court orders protecting the rights of protesters, used sharpshooters to deliberately maim people, and deployed indiscriminate weapons of war — including sonic weapons and dangerous tear gas formulations.”

Those who have feared the worst, in case of a Trump defeat in November, now have ample reason on which to base that concern.

—David M. Greenwald reporting


Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$USD
Sign up for

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

78 Comments

  1. Keith Olsen

    The Portland protests/riots have been ongoing every night for two months before this and now all of a sudden it’s Trump’s fault when he sends in the Feds to protect Federal Property.

    “I was born and raised here, and I’m a graduate of the local public school system. I chose to make my livelihood here, I chose to raise my daughter here,” said Mayor Ted Wheeler, who has faced criticism from all sides. “And in all the years that I have lived here, I have never seen the community more divided. Nor have I seen it look worse.”

    Small groups of protesters have set fires, launched fireworks and sprayed graffiti on public buildings, including police precincts and the federal courthouse, leading to nearly nightly clashes with police who have used force that’s caused injuries.

    “The impact is terrible because what people have seen on the TV … has scared people who live outside the downtown. They feel it’s that way 24 hours a day,” said David Margulis, who said the protests have caused sales at his jewelry store to drop more than 50%. “I talk to people, on the phone, who tell me: ‘I don’t know if I’ll ever come downtown again.’”

    This is about anarchy, and people are taking advantage of the demonstrations for their own reasons that have nothing to do with social justice,” said Ron Herndon, a prominent civil rights activist. “Any support you think you could get, you probably have lost from a lot of people because you have negatively impacted their lives.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/chaotic-protests-prompt-soul-searching-052608304.html

    1. David Greenwald

      What’s really weird is that they’ve been going for a long time, they were dying down, Trump intervened, and he injected new energy into them while increasingly alienated the swing voters in the suburbs who he’s now scaring the hell out of.

      1. Keith Olsen

        That’s the spin being pushed now anyway by the media.  Do you think the swing voters liked seeing Portland destroyed in the first place while the mayor and the governor stepped back and let it happen?

        1. David Greenwald

          I doubt they were paying any attention before. Now they see troops marching on the city, they see riots, and they say local officials were not consulted complaining about federal overreach. Not a good scene. We have rules of law in this country and the government Hass to follow them. When they don’t it starts to look like tyranny . And that’s what a lot of people are fearing.

        2. Keith Olsen

          We have rules of law in this country and the government Hass to follow them.

          LOL, how about the rule of law being used to stop protesters from ruining downtown Portland?  I see it differently and I think most sane people see it the same way, you can’t just let a group of anarchists continue destroying things.  At some point an adult has to step up and put a stop to it.

          1. David Greenwald

            Let me explain this to you – the word is OVERREACH.

            Let’s say you want to actually solve the problem. This is how you do it, you come in, meet with the local leaders, find out what they need from their perspective, and partner on a solution.

            What he did was go in without talking to anyone, without consulting congress, and put troops in riot gear. That’s not a way to solve any problem. That’s a way to inflame the situation.

            Are you really defending this or do you have literally nothing left at this point?

        3. Keith Olsen

          Not OVERREACH at all, more like finally someone doing something to stop the destruction of Federal property.  You can’t let anarchists run wild and do whatever they want, it has to stop at some point otherwise society goes to Hell.

          1. David Greenwald

            It’s not how you operate in a democratic society. We are a nation of laws, not an individual.

        4. Tia Will

          Do you think the swing voters liked seeing Portland destroyed in the first place while the mayor and the governor stepped back and let it happen?”

          If the “destruction of Portland” were truly what was, occurring, don’t you think after more than 50 nights of nightly protests they wouldn’t have achieved far more destruction than graffiti, some broken windows & doors? Speaking of political hyperbole.

          I received a message from Portland from a friend there assuring me the protests were mostly peaceful albeit noisy, the damage limited, but that the streets are indeed being patrolled by unidentified armed men in unmarked vehicles. It was precisely this type of governmental overreach at Kent State that hastened my conversion from a conservative as raised, to the progressive/liberal I am today. So I wouldn’t take bets on which way those swing voters might lean.

        5. Keith Olsen

          Funny but I also have a friend who lives in Portland and he says he no longer goes downtown because it has become blighted and unsafe because of the protesters.

          Different strokes for different folks.

           but that the streets are indeed being patrolled by unidentified armed men in unmarked vehicles

          It’s my understanding that the feds are wearing identifying patches but no name tags as to keep the anarchists from posting their names and addresses on social media.  The vehicles are unmarked for obvious reasons as I would guess you have seen the many law enforcement vehicles damaged and set afire by the protesters/rioters.

        6. Keith Olsen

           Speaking of political hyperbole.

          Then Tia states:

           It was precisely this type of governmental overreach at Kent State

           

          Speaking of political hyperbole.

           

           

        7. Keith Olsen

          After complaints surfaced over the weekend of “secret” operations, DHS noted that officers assigned to Portland are wearing branch insignia on their uniforms and that an “unmarked” vehicle was used only when officers felt they were in danger from a “mob.”
          Cline went a step further in explaining that officers are not wearing badges bearing their names out of concern for their families, a sentiment Acting CBP Commissioner Mark Morgan echoed in a wide-ranging interview with Fox News on Wednesday.

          “That’s another thing that’s absolutely disgusting,” Morgan said, referring to protesters’ efforts to spread personal information about federal officers assigned to Portland. “So they’re not only jeopardizing the lives of the agents, they’re also jeopardizing the lives of their families as they’re putting out their home information and they’re suggesting that individuals go to their homes.

          ”https://www.dailywire.com/news/dozens-of-federal-law-enforcement-agents-doxed-amid-portland-riots?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro&fbclid=IwAR35lLTRDgv3iKEfTeMIInUjU-QNe7r97LLg_wcRpp3e020jm-fqj755Ipc

          1. David Greenwald

            Maybe that suggests that the feds shouldn’t have come to the protest – especially since the community didn’t want them to

            That said I have seen hundreds of cop cars at protests I have personally covered go untouched by protesters

          1. Don Shor

            Are you two really going to deny that police vehicles got burned in the BLM riots?

            Did we?

          1. Don Shor

            just in case you’re in denial.

            Are we in denial, Keith?

            I can post dozens more if you need more confirmation.

            Actually, I’d rather have you address the constitutional implications of an acting, unconfirmed head of the Department of Homeland Security sending troops into an American city to arrest American citizens without due process, over the objections of the local elected leaders. Also please be sure to explain how you think these actions are reducing violence and keeping people safe. I don’t really need to see your videos and links. I’d really prefer for you to write a full paragraph, for once, that actually addresses the issues of David’s topics.

        8. Eric Gelber

          None of this justifies what is happening in Portland and being threatened in other cities: Unidentifiable military in unmarked vehicles detaining nonviolent protesters without probable cause or explanation. This is very secret police/Gestapo-like.

    2. Eric Gelber

      I’m not sure how anyone can defend the administration’s response here. Unidentifiable federal troops in unmarked cars are indiscriminately picking up and detaining people peacefully exercising their First Amendment rights, without probable cause or explanation.  This is real Gestapo stuff and should be concerning to everyone. It’s just another attempt by Trump to distract from his botched handling of the COVID-19 crisis.

  2. Bill Marshall

    There is a ‘clear and present danger’ residing @ 1600 Pennsylvania… efforts put into ‘law and order’ vs. reform of same and Covid?  Possible nullification of Nov elections due to VBM ‘fraud’?

    25th Amendment might be ‘in play’?

      1. Bill Marshall

        Alas… Republican Cranial Inversion (RCI) is rampant… as is a similar ailment that a lot of Democrats have… both parties are losing voter registrations in CA…

      2. Keith Olsen

        Don’t count your chickens, Biden “might” have the lead now but soon he will have to climb out of the basement and debate Trump where the world will see Biden drooling.

        1. Bill Marshall

          Have to ask you a question, KO… you need not answer… do you believe the current POTUS is God’s gift to America, or do you view him as the “lesser of two evils”?

          I remember a pair of ‘slogans’ from the 1964 election…

          “In your heart, you know he’s right” (nice double entendre re:  Barry Goldwater)

          “In your guts, you know he’s nuts” (Democrats’ response)

          But, sending in feds, when not asked by the Cities/States, and publicly stating he is seriously considering doing the same in other States/Cities because they are “too liberal” should be a cause of serious concern… to any rational individual…

          Kristallnacht?  ‘Purges’? ‘Political cleansing’?

          The proposed, somewhat activated course proposed by POTUS, sure looks unconstitutional to me…

        2. Eric Gelber

          Here’s hoping Trump underestimates Biden in the way you do. The Chris Wallace Trump interview on Sunday is no doubt a preview of how Trump will handle any debates—with lies and BS.

          1. David Greenwald

            At the point Trump has created a very low bar, Biden only needs to check the NBSC box and he’s over it.

          2. Don Shor

            NBSC?
            Acronym Definition
            NBSC National Bank of South Carolina
            NBSC National Bureau of Statistics of China (business data)
            NBSC National Board for Safeguarding Children (Ireland; est. 2006)
            NBSC National Black Sisters’ Conference (Catholic women’s group; Washington, DC)
            NBSC No Borders Show Chorus (EU)
            NBSC New Bridge Street Consultants LLP (London, UK)
            NBSC Nitride Bonded Silicon Carbide
            NBSC New Brunswick Safety Council (Canada; now Safety Services New Brunswick)
            NBSC New Bedford Seafood Consulting (Massachusetts)
            NBSC New Business Steering Committee

        3. Bill Marshall

          Also… no worries Keith… it appears that if Trump doesn’t win the election outright, he’ll try to nullify it due to VBM’s… in 2016, he attempted to question the popular vote (where he lost) by saying many votes were illegal… even after he won the Electoral College… one small step to question the 2020 election… one big step to being ‘der President’…

          VBM’s are at least as secure against voter fraud than in-polling place… every signature on VBM’s are checked before they are even opened… actually, a higher level of security against voter fraud… and as a poll-worker (but only for 25+ years, [yeah, a ‘newbie’]), VBM’s were first embraced by conservative, older, Republicans… now, am thinking the VBM’s are pretty much ‘across the board’ as to party, and as to no party preference voters…

           

        4. Keith Olsen

          At the point Trump has created a very low bar, Biden only needs to check the NBSC box and he’s over it.

          It’s going to be more difficult to cover up and hide [edited] Biden the closer the election gets.

          1. David Greenwald

            It doesn’t matter. Unless the facts change – COVID, economy, race – Trump is sunk.

        5. Ron Oertel

          It doesn’t matter. Unless the facts change – COVID, economy, race – Trump is sunk.

          Famous last words.  Sure seems that way though, doesn’t it?

          Don’t tell anyone, but I’ve heard that Trump *might* lose California, Oregon, and Washington (and some other states, as well).  But as long as folks in these states vote “extra-hard” for Biden, then Trump doesn’t have a chance.  😉

        6. Keith Olsen

          There’s a video out there David should watch where just about everyone predicted Trump’s loss in 2016.  Trump might lose but don’t underestimate the number of voters who want law and order and not what we’re seeing now.

          1. David Greenwald

            We can run through all the differences between then and now. The facts on the ground are as bad as I have ever seen for an incumbent president. If you want to hold onto the hope of 2016 as your reed, that’s up to you.

        7. Ron Oertel

          There’s a video out there David should watch where just about everyone predicted Trump’s loss in 2016.

          Yeap – the one where he rode down an escalator to announce his candidacy, in Trump tower.  😉

          But regardless of that, there’s a strong tendency to dismiss all of his support (and supporters) in a completely negative manner.

        8. Ron Oertel

          We can run through all the differences between then and now. 

          In my opinion, the Democrats had a smarter, more capable candidate in 2016.  Though not as personable.

          1. David Greenwald

            Biden has about half the negative rating that Hillary did. In 2016, Hillary and Trump were almost evenly unpopular, but Trump had a large advantage among people who hated them both. Meanwhile Biden is much less unpopular than Trump and has a large advatnage over Trump among people who hate them both. That right there is a huge difference.

        9. Keith Olsen

          We can run through all the differences between then and now. The facts on the ground are as bad as I have ever seen for an incumbent president. If you want to hold onto the hope of 2016 as your reed, that’s up to you.

          Like I said, you may be right.  I’m not going to predict.  I do know that when polling is performed often times Trump supporters won’t admit it to pollsters.  We’ll see, but in the meantime I’m going to save your comment so I can have it handy if I get a “I told you so” moment.

          1. David Greenwald

            To understand what’s going on you look in my view at three things: (1) the situation on the ground, (2) body language, and (3) polling. Right now, all three things are lining up which gives me confidence that the polls are probably right. In 2016, there were factors that were being ignored that shouldn’t have been.

        10. Keith Olsen

          Okay, I’ll save this post too.  I still remember Obama, Clinton, Pelosi and many actors saying the same sort of things and laughing about Trump’s chances in 2016.

          1. David Greenwald

            Don’t get me wrong – I was not expecting Trump to win in 2016. However, this is not 2016.

        11. Keith Olsen

          Except Nate Silver and 538 got it wrong in 2016 too:

          FiveThirtyEight hit its first major data gaff in the 2016 elections, proving that creating statistical models behind closed doors does not necessarily lead to the best outcome. As he had done in the 2008-2014 elections, Silver set out to predict first the outcome 2016 Republican Presidential Primary and then the results of the Presidential race. Unfortunately for Silver, the moat he had created meant that he was subject to only his own inputs, and not necessarily feedback from “the crowd.” Although Silver used a wide range of data: from gallup polls to election day weather forecasts, his data models missed the rise and triumph of Donald Trump.

          https://digital.hbs.edu/platform-digit/submission/fivethirtyeight-and-the-big-data-fail-election-2016/

  3. Ron Glick

    Sending Federal police into a situation of chaos around a Federal Courthouse might be reasonable, you can argue both sides. Sending unidentified police, in unmarked cars, who are arresting citizens without probable cause, away from Federal property is something un-American and makes me wonder if it violates the Posse Comitatus Act.

    I wonder what provocations will cause the President to order his storm troops into other cities? Its a slippery slope. It starts on the border and then its the cities. How long before its the suburbs? How long before they come for loud mouths like me and you writing on the Vanguard?

    1. Alan Miller

      As we saw with the protests, it was pretty easy to take out bystanders and journalists when they wanted.

      This is true.  And a tactic of the progressive left — especially the extreme smallish percentage with anarchist tendencies — is to remove journalists recording events – somewhat forcefully at times.  Numerous vids online.  I witnessed it in person during Occupy, the first I was aware of this, and it has grown in ‘popularity’.  Not saying it doesn’t happen on the other side as well nor trying to do the “they do it way more than we do” thing — just trying to be ‘fair and balanced’ 😉

  4. John Hobbs

    Told ya so, over and over again. Everything I posted (and you deleted) in 2016 has been proven true. The phony POTUS has said he won’t accept the election results if he loses. [edited] Mitch and the GOP [edited] are backing him up. Now he is putting secret police in the streets to intimidate his opponents and sycophants are drooling at the hope of a white power dictatorship. The time for quiet opposition has passed and now we must actively resist. The police have no constitutional power to detain, question or arrest you without articulable suspicion that you’ve committed a crime. If one of Trump’s gestapo agents tries it with me, there will be trouble. I’m old and out of shape, but I will not go quietly.  When the light of democracy shines again, we should not forget who the traitors and collaborators were. We must demand justice.

    1. Bill Marshall

      Actually John H, not ‘gestapo’… not sure what the Italian equivalent was called…  compare pics of POTUS and Benito Mussolini… look at the ‘smile’… the latter didn’t have a bad hairpiece/comb-over… I sincerely hope that Melania won’t have the same fate as Benito’s GF/wife/lover had… she has shown some class, and even disagreed publicly with some of the POTUS’ actions/policies…

      Patrick Henry had it right… but he was accused of treason for what he said about,

      Caesar had his Brutus, Charles the First his Cromwell; and George the Third — [‘Treason!’ cried the Speaker] — may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most of it.”

  5. Ron Glick

    “’In your heart, you know he’s right’ (nice double entendre re:  Barry Goldwater)”

    Trump’s slogan in 2020 could be a variation “In your heart you know he’s white.”

    Its crude, its direct. It speaks directly to his base.

    1. Bill Marshall

      Perhaps… but doesn’t ‘speak’ to this white male… careful, you are on the edge of  ‘profiling’…

      I will assume you are speaking about folk other than me… free pass…

      Or, is my reaction an example of ‘white fragility’?

  6. Ron Oertel

    There are reports of black business owners in Portland who are becoming quite irritated with some of the white “protesters”.  With comments such as, “you don’t represent BLM”.

    I can probably find those citations, if needed.

    1. Ron Oertel

      Thought I’d search for an article to back-up that statement.  Here’s one that popped up, which is somewhat similar.  There’s a video included within the article:

      https://www.businessinsider.com.au/video-black-man-portland-protesters-dont-represent-black-lives-2020-7

      Can’t say that this was a particularly wise thing to do, either. But, I suspect that it represents a lot of views – regardless of skin color. Maybe those are the folks that Trump will appeal to (regarding this issue, at least)?

    2. Ron Oertel

      But, he does say this:

      We shouldn’t have paramilitary forces in our streets,” he said.

      In addition to things like this:

      “I support the city. I support the police. I support us coming together because it’s about time. It’s been 50-plus days of us being out in the street – and what’s been accomplished?” Johnson asked.

  7. Don Shor

    It doesn’t matter to them that the semi-auto ban gives jack-booted government thugs more power to take away our Constitutional rights, break in our doors, seize our guns, destroy our property, and even injure or kill us…..Not too long ago, it was unthinkable for Federal agents wearing Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms to attack law-abiding citizens.Not today, not with Clinton.

    — Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president, NRA, March 1993.

    I guess we can cross “jack-booted government thugs” off the list of things conservatives are concerned about, so long as they’re occupying “Democrat” cities on behalf of a Republican president.

     

  8. Ron Glick

    “Well, we know that it won’t be developers or their associates (at least) coming after you.  ”

    But it might be the powerful coming after the environmentalists with all their frivolous lawsuits.

    After they take out the radical muslims and the illegals and the thugs and the left leaning professors ruining our university curricula and the peaceful protestors disrupting business who is going to be left to protect those extremist environmentalists?

    1. Ron Oertel

      The terms “powerful”, “developer”, “Trump”, the “Chamber of Commerce” and “The Vanguard” are pretty much aligned regarding development issues, already. They’re already on the same team.

      And, throw in the College Democrats (and perhaps some associated with the school district), as well.  😉

      Not very many advocating for burrowing owls, these days.  Or even climate change, in regard to development proposals.

      Or social concerns, in regard to restrictive developments such as WDAAC (and even Affordable housing, at times).

      It’s all just “lip service”, in regard to these issues – if in the way of a development proposal.

  9. Bill Marshall

    The facts on the ground are as bad as I have ever seen for an incumbent president.

    Yeah you’re too young, not grounded in history…

    Think Truman vs. Dewey… yeah polling was in its infancy, but still…

  10. Ron Oertel

    The facts on the ground are as bad as I have ever seen for an incumbent president.

    Sounds like someone hasn’t been paying attention to the recovery of the stock market (and the impact on 401ks and other retirement benefits), the stimulus checks (with another possible round), or the extra unemployment benefits.  With these actions supported by Trump.

    This ain’t 1929, so far. Nor have the Republicans shied-away from supporting Democrat-type stimulus, so far.

    I believe the first round of stimulus checks (purposefully) had Donald Trump’s name on them.

    In my opinion, Trump’s actions regarding the protesters aren’t much of a factor either way, for those who haven’t already made up their minds. And for that matter, neither are his actions regarding Covid – given that it’s a global epidemic.

    Who was it that said, “it’s the economy, stupid”? (Something like that.)

    1. Don Shor

      “Sounds like someone hasn’t been paying attention to the recovery of the stock market….”

      The status of the stock market doesn’t matter to a very high percentage of Americans. If anyone has significant stock holdings, they’re probably in the higher income brackets.

      According to Torsten Sløk of Deutsche Bank, the distribution is quite astounding: 84% of stocks in the USA are owned by the Top 10% of households.

      While half of the US population own equities directly or indirectly (i.e. in pension accounts), it is only a modest share: The bottom 90% of households owns only 16% of all equities. Note the bottom 50% own practically none at all.

      If you choose to focus on the stock market as a measure of how well the US economy is doing, you are missing a huge part of the picture. This is especially true for gig economy workers, younger workers, areas outside of the wealthy coasts and cities, and workers displace by technology and globalization.

      With re: “In my opinion, Trump’s actions regarding the protesters aren’t much of a factor either way, for those who haven’t already made up their minds. And for that matter, neither are his actions regarding Covid – given that it’s a global epidemic.”

      Polling indicates that Trump’s actions regarding COVID-19 are a major reason for his continued decline in the polls.

    2. Chris Griffith

      Keith,

      Just pay attention to that good old stock market. If it starts to look like the socialist party may win you better pull your money out cuz that  stock markets going to go to zero. Put all your money in a mattress cuz the economy is going to get really really ugly.

      1. Keith Olsen

        Chris, it’s becoming more apparent that it’s everyone for themselves.  I’m going to buy a gun because this is going to get much worse before it gets better.  You can’t rely on law enforcement anymore, especially if the Democrats end up in charge.

    3. Richard McCann

      1929 wasn’t too bad for the economy until the President and Congress got into the act in 1930, between the Smoot-Hawley tariffs and Hoover’s attempt to rebalance the budget in the face of plunging tax revenues. We’re not that far into this one yet in comparison. Even the Great Recession took almost a year to unfold.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for