Trump's Rally Waivers: A Culture Clash

Recent events have brought to light a conversation about the methods and logic behind the attendees of Trump rallies signing liability waivers regarding the contraction of the coronavirus. This practice stands in stark contrast to the eagerness with which Trump advocates for the reopening of America, even without specific guidelines for safety measures.

Contradictory Public Health Measures

My recent visit to a rally in Des Moines showed that the reality on the ground can differ greatly from the rhetoric. The rally was held outdoors amidst a 40 mph wind, eliminating some indoor risks. Attendees were subjected to temperature checks, provided with masks and hand sanitizer, and weapons screens were conducted by TSA. Despite these precautions, the rally organizers asked attendees to sign a waiver. The signing of these waivers serves as a legal safeguard, absolving the organizers of any liability if attendees contract the virus during the event.

Given Trump's stance on reopening without significant concern for public health, the necessity for liability waivers might seem the only logical approach to protect the rally organizers and the campaign from potential lawsuits.

Standard Practice in Industry and Home Life

The practice of signing waivers is, however, not unique to political rallies. People sign waivers when participating in various activities, including using a gym or even engaging in family activities with children. This is a standard industry practice aimed at mitigating the environmental and individual risks associated with an event or activity.

Psychological Factors and Political Manipulation

The willingness of attendees to sign these waivers might be rooted in a deeper psychological phenomenon rather than a matter of public health best practices. It appears that many who support Trump are in the thrall of a cult of personality that prioritizes loyalty over personal and public safety. This mindset, termed the 'Trump Death Cult of Personality,' might explain why so many are willing to overlook or dismiss significant public health risks.

The recent billboard warning attendees of the rally being a superspreader event highlights the contradictory messaging from the Trump Administration. While the government advises social distancing and safety measures, a rally advocating for these very measures might themselves be contrary to them.

Public Perception and Repercussions

Supporters of reopening without significant health measures are taking a risk not just for themselves but also for others. This stance can be seen as an attempt to challenge the emerging public health consensus rather than work within it. In the case of the Tulsa rally, low turnout suggests that not everyone is buying into the 'hoax' theory without clear evidence to support it.

The stakes are high, and the consequences of ignoring public health guidelines can be severe. The idea that people are 'choosing danger' by participating in such rallies is not far-fetched, given the risks and the magnitude of the current public health crisis.