Replies

I think it would be worth a paltry 55 million dollars if the price tag could be strictly kept at that figure, not a dollar more.

It is clearly stated in the article that the number is going to go much higher. Even if a deal was struck at that number, they would surely come back crying for more money at some later time.

The "not a dollar more" pledge would be quickly broken after an onslaught of negative press blaming Trump for being heartless, racist, and organizing the effort to line his pockets and those of his cronies.

This would set a very bad example as other woke/broke cities line up at the trough demanding bailouts. They will complain of political favoritism in choosing Minneapolis, the largest city in a state the Trump would really like to carry in November.

You can't beat liberals at their own game because they constantly change the rules to always give themselves the advantage.

This is a state issue. It needs to be dealt with at the state level. Trump made that point repeatedly during the panicdemic response.

The federal government is broke, and has been for a long, long time. Printing Monopoly money is not a valid long-term solution, nor is running to China for bailouts.

Did you notice that the call for Federal aid to help state and local governments in the COVID-19 fiasco had diminished even before this rioting began? The reason for that was simple: The conditions attached to the aid proposed in the Senate bill were so onerous that most “blue” states would have faced a lot of internal pressure to turn down the money.

I’d say the same thing could happen here. Simply offer a trillion of recovery assistance, but make any state or city ineligible if they didn’t call out their National Guard to help maintain law and order. THAT would send a great message — both to the state/local governments as well as their voters.