OT: WI supreme court strikes down governor's stay-at-home order
Posting this since MI (and most other states) have a similar dynamic playing out with respect to the conflict over state executive mandated lockdown/closures (to varying extents).
While there is a marked partisan political overtone to this (especially in WI and MI where Republican legislatures are fighting Democrat governors), nationally this is not an exclusive partisan issue (for example, OH Republican state legislature is fighting similar orders by the Republican governor). It is a more fundamental issue of defining the powers of a state's executive vs legislative branches during times or crisis (as well as what constitutes a time of crisis and how long it can last). This is getting into some uncharted waters since the nation is not at war, nor are the states under martial law - in a murky gray area that hasn't been much of an issue until late, especially at the state level.
I will not comment on whether the WI court's ruling was right or wrong (not sure there even is a "right" answer), but it is interesting to note that neither side in the case wanted to ruling to go into effect - a stay was requested by the plaintiffs in order to negotiate a compromise but the court refused. I'm not a professional legal scholar or practitioner, but I think that this recent health crisis will further define (or redefine) aspects of governing at all levels for years to come - with this ruling being the first of many to come (and many likely to be conflicting).
Interesting times.
Here's the trouble - There's no way to provide real evidence in this case.
Here's a hypothetical - if you were to show me a specific voting district that had the same results every election for 20+ years (within a small margin obviously), and that margin continued after vote-by-mail, then I would be inclined to believe vote-by-mail was being done to a reasonable degree of honesty in that district. I'd have to see this trend in every voting district - and reality is that these trend lines don't always exist. Populations change, people move, all kinds of things happen to change voting patterns.
I don't say that vote-by-mail is inherently corrupt, nothing is. I am saying that there's no way to provide real evidence it ISN'T corrupt, and that I inherently don't trust it because I without even trying can come up with ways to screw with the system and those issues haven't been addressed.
I believe data (as long as I can see the raw data and I'm allowed time to understand the way the data's being presented). I don't believe subjective data, and so all I can do is go with my gut. My gut says that vote-by-mail is corruption in waiting.
LOL but you're OK with voting over the internet?
given that it would be built by the same government that gave us the Obamacare signups, my initial inclination would be no - but I do know that there are ways to make it more secure than vote-by-mail.
Look, there's no foolproof system. Doesn't exist, can't exist.
I'm just one person, with no political clout beyond my own vote, so take this for what you will. When I hear any system get panned by one party and talked up by the other, I get suspicious that it's a bad system that is getting partisan support. When I hear about new ideas, I try to think of how I might break it, because if I can think of it in the minute or two I give these things, I know people with malicious intent will think of it - and if I can't find evidence that the system has already solved for that idea, I will think poorly of it. I can think of several ways off the top of my head for vote-by-mail to go badly wrong, and none of them have been proven. I'd be far more ok with mobile voting, with a 3-4 person voting "team" and a van traveling to subdivisions to allow smaller voting sections in order to keep crowds down - where votes are secured without the mail keepers ever having access to touch them (similar to the boxes found at many MI voting locations now). THAT's vote by "mail" I could get behind. It's not foolproof, but at least it answers most of my concerns.
Why do you feel vote by mail is a fraud nightmare? Is it because Trump and Fox says so? Our military has voted by mail should we not allow that? Have you seen people protesting with no mask, no social distancing, and carrying guns? Assuming a vast majority of grown ups are responsible and reasonable is a joke.
Because I think of easy ways for it to be defrauded that aren't accounted for in anything I've read. Prove to me that someone with a vested interest in one side winning that picks up from the other side's house doesn't "accidentally" lose a few votes? Even 1 is unacceptable.
Assuming a vast majority of grown ups aren't responsible or reasonable means they shouldn't be voting in the first place. I have no choice but to treat them as though they are.
No, I have no interest in knowing how you'd define those that are "responsible and reasonable". We'd disagree. That's why we have to treat people like adults, ask them to act as responsibly as possible, and hope for the best.
Ahhh so you’re a MAGAt. It makes sense now.
It boggles my mind that she is not being practical on this. Another rally/protest happening in Lansing today.
One thing I've learned about this pandemic: AR15's are the only weapon in our inventory that can control and contain Covid-19.
(/S)
She is the highest ranking Karen in America
Limit the state of emergency period to 15 or 30 days and require legislative approval for any extension. If it is a true state of emergency, there should not be a problem getting approval.
Except that a pandemic has been called a hoax by politicians and, thus, are a partisan issue. It would be great if government made decisions based on safety and not optics
Whitmer and many of these governors keep saying "I'm making my decisions based on science and data" but they never actually explain how the "science and data" led them to the decisions they're making.
Cuomo is exhibit A of governors saying "science and data" with no further explanation - "science and data" led him and yet he forced nursing homes to take covid patients. Awful decision with no scientific explanation. I think something similar is happening in PA.
Repeating "science and data" ad naseum does not make your analysis of the science or the data correct.
what politicians called the pandemic a 'hoax'? the closest i heard months ago was POTUS who said it in the context of predicting his political opponents would use it as a hoax to assumedly do some other damage, not that the virus itself was a 'hoax'. and if you don't think either/both major parties haven't used this legit pandemic to further other goals, well, i got a dandy bridge i'd like to sell you.
You get the news in the UP? It seems you might be a few months behind, many politicians have used the term to reduce the sense of risk it presented. then the same people use 12 month illness and death rates to compare to one month illness and death rates. Then they move to the warm weather and sun will kill it. Then you move to injecting sanitizers. Then you resort to I called it from the beginning, lots of people will die but it could have been way worse. So, lets open schools.
You are caught up now.
I am interested in the opening of the state this summer. With the UP and their two dozen ventilators and four dozen ICU beds that have a million visitors from all points of the world and country swinging through. That should be a good test of some of the AR-15 theories out there.
The call of the question was to name politicians who called the virus (and not the potential that the virus would be used for political mischief, as POTUS did) an actual 'hoax'. I don't know of a one, though I suppose you might be able to find a few that nobody has heard of or cares about
your obvious anger is impacting your communication and makes having a substantive discussion unnecessarily difficult.
agreed.
"The Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus," Trump said. "One of my people came up to me and said, 'Mr. President, they tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia.' That did not work out too well. They could not do it. They tried the impeachment hoax. ... They tried anything. ... And this is their new hoax."
Borrowing from Bill Clinton, I guess the argument balances on what your definition of "this" is.
Now do Fauci, Cuomo and Pelosi. Trump may have been a bit slow but he was way ahead of the latter two.
Trump literally ignored advice from his own officials on the severity of the virus as early as January. . It's been documented in dozens of credible news outlets. Not to mention the administration before Trump left them a 69 page pandemic playbook... that they ignored. There was a department called the Pandemic Preparedness Office... that they dissolved. And the global monitoring system (called 'Predict') that they cut by 75%. ... as much these days I can understand the frustration with certain Governors from people, it seems these very same people are the ones that gloss over what went on the months (and years with with the what was cut) before mid-March. Being reactive instead of pro-active to everything like this President has done since he took office 3.5 years ago really bit us in the ass this time and the Biden campaign would be stupid to not keep hammering these things in advertisements and in interviews up until the November election.
Cool, so Donald Trump was like every other Western leader in January and February then right? Who was the Western leader in January who was yelling about millions of tests and closing borders and track and trace? I mean there must be 10+ of them because it was so obvious from the intelligence.
People will say things like "look at Germany!" but their leadership was downplaying this into March as well. Their more effective response might be as simple as their test worked, ours didn't. And the reasons behind that goes well beyond Donald Trump.
And in talking about previous administrations: The Obama administration was left a stockpile of PPE from the Bush Administration. They failed to do the same for the Trump administration. So the "Pandemic Preparedness Office" couldn't even be bothered to live up to their title.
1/29 trump calls for a travel ban from china to stem the spread.
1/29 biden says its 'hysterical xenophobia'
1/29 pelosi brings legislation to the house to prevent the travel ban, called the 'no ban act'
2/4 CDC starts studying in earnest, asks for money
2/28 pelosi is down in chinatown telling everyone to come visit and enjoy the food. is there 'blood' on her hands?
at the same time the house needs to vote on the money for the CDC and she won't bring the bill up. you know what she did bring up to vote? a bill to ban flavored tobacco.
march - you've got cuomo/blasi and others touting NY, come on down, no need to fear. is there 'blood on their hands?'
trump might have had an overly optimistic facade and i can't stand to listen to him, but he and others were working to get things going in the right direction and getting called names and opposed at ever turn for quite a while
.
China isn't the only place it came from. It had already traveled to Europe, so travelers from there were bringing it into New York before the lock down there.
and they opposed him when he proposed that one, as well, didn't they?
Yet he still uses the China partial travel ban to somehow show that he was all over this, yet he only banned China nationals, not people traveling from China who still could have been carrying the virus. He was concerned with the numbers reflecting badly on him, as was witnessed when he said he was going to keep people on the cruise ships to keep the count down. There's not a lot to argue here; it's all out in the open.
You're right in that his ban wasn't effective because it didn't go far enough.
But the point of bringing it up now (and the reaction to it from the left) in my opinion, is that it blows up the idea that everyone was taking this seriously at increasingly earlier dates except for Donald Trump.
I mean really: What would your reaction have been if Donald Trump has closed all international entry on, I dunno, February 20th? And ordered a national 3 week shelter-in-place on February 25th? And nationalized factories to produce PPE the same day?
In hindsight, those would have been great moves! But what leader actually made them that early in the global outbreak? New Zealand closing up shop in late March is a little different than the above.
And do you really think that the left in this country would have been for that? Of course not! They would have screamed about orange Hitler this and Cheeto dictator that.
Christ, when he mentioned quarantining New York/New Jersey the same people that were praising China for doing the same thing in Wuhan flipped out. Suddenly, all the lock down people were telling us why that wouldn't work.
I didn't call out the travel ban to China; Xtramelanin did, as if that was Trump's big effort to staunch the bleeding but it was thwarted by Nancy Pelosi and the libs, so game over. What about his response since then, and his seeming disregard for scientific facts as they've been presented to him by his own people? Defending his response at this point by solely pointing to the travel ban suggests that that was his only recourse as the president. It wasn't. The pandemic continued and he handed over responsibility to the governors. That's what I can't figure out -- why can he say executive privilege on certain occasions, and claim he has ultimate authority, and then call himself a mere cheerleader when it comes to a pandemic? He's selective in what he chooses to deal with and if he feels it might negatively affect his numbers, he chooses to hand over the responsibility to the governors.
Reasoning with MAGAts is a tall order. They can't fathom Dear Leader being wrong and will cling to the one thing he might have done correctly. A broken clock can be correct twice a day after all.
Cognitive dissonance at its finest.
The worst part is, they sold their souls to someone who doesn't have a soul. I haven't once heard him express sympathy for families who have lost loved ones. There's definitely a piece missing there. And a lot of his supporters are religious. How do they square that?
I haven't once heard him express sympathy for families who have lost loved ones.
I have, multiple times. Maybe you should watch something other than far left stations.
Dude, all the stations cover him. The video of him doesn't change from station to station.
My argument isn't that he doesn't deserve blame (he does) or couldn't have done more or couldn't do more now. I think he's been an ineffective messenger and that he should have turned over the press conferences to Pence because he's well-suited for that role. Instead, Trump should have focused on the economic response, which is more in his wheelhouse, especially in dealing with China.
My argument is that there seems to be this narrative being written from hindsight that everyone in the world knew this was coming except Donald Trump and that clearly is not the case.
Yeah why are we still talking about this travel ban. And who cares if some people attacked him for it... The argument is pretty fucking weak if you’re saying Trump handled this awesomely because of something that happened 3 months ago.
Thats basically like saying yeah Michigan had a bad season but remember that sick TD play we had against MTSU? Take that all the negative people on mgoblog who thought we should fire Harbaugh mid season.
I mean you’re touting one bare minimum thing in an ocean of ineptitude, and calling out some people who didn’t really have anything to do with it.
It really amazes me that intelligent people still defend Trump. He's a charlatan and a fraud. He's a carnival-barker. He's an idiot and a nincompoop!
You are describing nearly every politician and "journalist" on TV right now. You realize that, right? Our governor talks about her dislike and distrust of the President, and yet behaves in exactly the same way -- forget about the CV-19 crisis, just look at the MI budget debate and the gas tax issue. Pure bullying, lack of a plan, and devoid of intelligence. Look at the House, Senate, other state Governors. Open your eyes, they are all the same and are currently drunk with power.
No worries Aunt Nancy and uncle Joe promise to fix everything assuming you are unwilling to work, want business to return to China, or if you are an illegal immigrant...or if you need weed...as the new 3T bailout specified such adornments
dude, you are pretty selective in looking over POTUS's handling of COVID.
Read some of these comments:
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/trumps-statements-about-the-coronavirus/
Those all sound good to you too?
Those seem like someone who was "working to get things going in the right direction"?
Or, rather, someone who was golfing?
https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings
You appear to be relying heavily on those ads and interviews for your sources of "information." It wasn't Trump in late Feb, early March who was calling on people to come out to Chinatown in San Franciso, or who was exhorting people to not be scared to join in on the various cultural events in NY. It was Fauci who was on CNN in late Feb telling people that it wasn't anything to be too worried about.
Trump was in fact restricting flights in late Jan when the media was ignoring the Covid story for wall to wall impeachment coverage.
And your alt-right bias based on self-serving motives are obvious. Try viewing resources other than Fox, OANN, Federalist, etc. Visit sites like BBC, Reuters or Wall Street Journal.
I have a full family of people like you who see the world through a narrow and biased view point who refuses to look at the world outside their own experiences. You use distractors like: you are angry. Or, its different so its wrong. I would imagine you have strong feelings about social supports. Strong feelings about marriage. You likely use religion as your shield and rationale for the manipulation of truth.
I'm not angry at all, actually. I have other emotions but not anger. Again, you are looking for a narrow defense of your implied position that politicians are not using the term "hoax" for the pandemic but you ignore the inferencing and behaviors that explicitly communicate that it wasn't a real threat or it was a politically motivated media creation. I'm not the one struggling with communication.
The fact that you responded and tried to minimize me as a person is an indication of whom is angry. Of whom who has an agenda. Of one who is refusing to educate self, acknowledge the truth has evolved to fact. You can live on your farm and assume you are good cause you grow your own, etc. It doesn't change your stance is a biased oriented position that is not evident in data or science. Likely things you minimize with your bible as the rationale. It is a pattern of people with your position. I'm sad for you and your kids, honestly.
XM you can try and spin his words but he definitely said it was a hoax and was made up. He also said and continues to say it will magically disappear. His words carry a lot of weight and he has been dangerous during this whole pandemic.
Yes. There are still 4 counties in Michigan without a single case of Covid.
Treating them the same as metro Detroit is just crazy.
"I'll declare what ever I want fuck head"
Gov. Whitmer probably
IT'S JUDGEMENT DAY, GRETCHEN!!!!
Do you really think taking an issue like “Stay at Home” orders to the floor of the state house in an attempt to make a deal would create a safe environment for citizens. That would make it so political nothing would get done. Delay after delay after delay would only put citizens at risk. In times like this you need leadership and decisive decision making. Not an extended argument between the legislative branch and the executive branch. Think where we would be if the Governor of any state would not be able to create emergency orders to protect the public.
Why don't we just have monarchs then to remove any indecisiveness and delays?
Whitmer should've been able to issue the order to get something enacted immediately. But then she needed to go to the Congress and negotiate something that she will sign. Whitmer seems to just be saying give me whatever I want or I'll just continue doing it anyway with an executive order. She's hid behind "well I'm just trying to save lives" to keep doing whatever she wants. She may be acting with good intentions, but she's been acting in bad faith.
It no longer looks objectively like she is acting with good intentions.
It looks like she’s auditioning to be O’Biden’s running mate.
I don’t think she’s doing a terrible job, given that she’s a complete lightweight who shouldn’t even be a governor.
^says the same person voted and will vote again for Trump and thinks he's qualified to be President^
I didn't vote for Trump, plan to vote for Biden and still think she has been a crappy Gov and has mismanaged some/much of Michigan's COVID response. If she end's up being Biden's VP I will be unhappy.
The problem for any governor is that, ultimately, it is her job to oversee a state's policies on how it treats its citizens. Like, the reason executive orders exist in Us governance is because at times a single leader has to make a decision and enact it without waiting for the larger apparatus to take over. And in this case, the legislature can write a new bill that changes her EO, pass it, then override her veto if one occurs. It's not fun but if a governor is expected to follow a political script then so should the legislature.
Similarly, the GOP in this state doesn't technically represent the majority of voters, an argument I've seen mentioned other places. Due to a level of gerrymandering so egregious the federal government ordered it be re-drawn, the GOP have a majority of the seats in the state senate and house despite losing the popular vote for both.
And when the health “emergency” is over and the state’s economy is in the dumpster and people are finally mad as hell, she will still be saying “I was just trying to keep everyone safe.”