[76lsjumb]

Even if you think he's right, this is an irresponsible thing to say, because it will make his followers think not wearing a mask is a way to signal support for him, against nearly (now) universal public health recommendations to the contrary. He simply should not be second-guessing this the way he is, let alone politicizing it.

Can we please finally put to rest that he isn't a major part of the problem here?

I have no problem agreeing that he is a major part of the problem, but I have this question.  Wouldn't you also agree that a major part of the problem is the following?  

For several weeks, folks were told that large gatherings of people to express certain viewpoints -- or, indeed, just to socialize -- was horrible and irresponsible and people who did it were evil.  Then, for about 2 weeks just recently, those folks watched as massive crowds gathered to protest [which protests sometimes provided the occasion for resulting riots] with no social distancing at all and mask-wearing that was spotty at best, yet those crowds met with virtually no condemnation at all for their behavior [and, indeed, were often praised by the media and others, including various "public health officials" on the grounds that taking the risk to express that viewpoint was good, right, and courageous].  Now, however, with those protests generally [although not entirely] decreasing, those folks are being told once again that, if you don't wear a mask, you're evil and irresponsible.  And, besides, those folks are routinely criticized as being the "political" devils, not the "public health" angels.

I would hope you could understand that one doesn't have to be "Trump follower" at all to see this position as hypocritical, political, and just as problematic as Trump's position.  Otherwise put, why did the "nearly [now] universal public health recommendations to the contrary" appear to go completely silent for one group but not the other?  And, understand, I'm not arguing over whether one group's cause is better or worse than the other's -- that is not a relevant "public health" point when it comes to face masks and social distancing...unless, of course, you believe that those actions are political in nature.  Which, as I understand it, you don't.

[76lsjumb]

Even if you think he's right, this is an irresponsible thing to say, because it will make his followers think not wearing a mask is a way to signal support for him, against nearly (now) universal public health recommendations to the contrary. He simply should not be second-guessing this the way he is, let alone politicizing it.

Can we please finally put to rest that he isn't a major part of the problem here?

I have no problem agreeing that he is a major part of the problem, but I have this question.  Wouldn't you also agree that a major part of the problem is the following?  

For several weeks, folks were told that large gatherings of people to express certain viewpoints -- or, indeed, just to socialize -- was horrible and irresponsible and people who did it were evil.  Then, for about 2 weeks just recently, those folks watched as massive crowds gathered to protest [which protests sometimes provided the occasion for resulting riots] with no social distancing at all and mask-wearing that was spotty at best, yet those crowds met with virtually no condemnation at all for their behavior [and, indeed, were often praised by the media and others, including various "public health officials" on the grounds that taking the risk to express that viewpoint was good, right, and courageous].  Now, however, with those protests generally [although not entirely] decreasing, those folks are being told once again that, if you don't wear a mask, you're evil and irresponsible.  And, besides, those folks are routinely criticized as being the "political" devils, not the "public health" angels.

I would hope you could understand that one doesn't have to be "Trump follower" at all to see this position as hypocritical, political, and just as problematic as Trump's position.  Otherwise put, why did the "nearly [now] universal public health recommendations to the contrary" appear to go completely silent for one group but not the other?  And, understand, I'm not arguing over whether one group's cause is better or worse than the other's -- that is not a relevant "public health" point when it comes to face masks and social distancing...unless, of course, you believe that those actions are political in nature.  Which, as I understand it, you don't.