At 100 days, economic anxieties come alive in Michigan: ‘I wish the message was clearer'
President Donald Trump is taking a self-described victory lap on Tuesday as he returns to one of the biggest battleground states for the first time since taking office, basking in the glow of 100 days back in the White House.
For Pashko Ujkaj, who can feel the economic pressures at his Dodge Park Coney Island diner, it's far too early to measure the success – or bemoan the failure – of Trump's second term.
'I think it's too early to give him a grade,' Ujkaj said. 'If he puts this economy back on track and wins these tariffs to our advantage, I think people will feel more comfortable. If he doesn't, it's not going to be good. It's not going to be good.'
The economic headwinds and their accompanying hardships weigh heavy on the minds of voters who supported Trump – and those who did not – as his presidency hits 100 days. It's an arbitrary, yet inescapable, milestone for early assessments of his whirlwind return to power.
In 2016, Ujkaj voted for Trump. Four years later, he did not. When asked whom he supported in 2024, he paused for an uncomfortably long moment as customers sat within earshot, before replying: 'Let's just say you're putting me on the spot.'
Like many business owners, he would rather listen to opinions than offer his own, considering he is as likely to serve breakfast to Trump-voting Republicans as he is lunch to Democrats who backed Kamala Harris at his Macomb County diner north of Detroit.
But after absorbing the last few months of those conversations, he is certain of one thing: The economy and a promise of lowering costs, which helped propel Trump to the White House, now stand as one of the president's biggest challenges.
'I think the fair thing to give him a grade – if you want to really give him a true grade – is by the end of the year,' Ujkaj said. By then, he added, 'I want to see this economy better.'
For all the carefully watched national economic indicators, including a University of Michigan survey this month that showed consumer sentiment fell to 52% from 57% in March, Ujkaj has also noticed a telling metric inside his diner.
'Instead of coming out three or four times a week, people might only come out one or two times,' Ujkaj said in an interview Monday before the lunch crowd arrived. 'We have a lot of seniors. They're on fixed incomes. And when you see those prices skyrocket, they feel it the most, right?'
In Michigan, where one in five jobs are linked in some way to the auto industry, fallout from the Trump administration's tariff policy comes up in one conversation after another. The on-again, off-again duties – on neighboring Canada, Mexico and beyond – have roiled markets and frustrated John Walus, a three-time Trump voter, Army veteran and retired autoworker.
'I just wish the message was clearer on where he's going with the tariffs,' Walus said. 'I think that would settle a lot of the turmoil right now, especially with the stock market. There's been a lot of uncertainty right now regarding that.'
As he paused for a moment to talk Monday afternoon while walking in downtown Mt. Clemens, Walus added: 'How is he going to get from here to there? I think he needs to do a better job of explaining how that's going to be done.'
As the president was set to make his way to Michigan on Tuesday for an evening rally at Macomb Community College in Warren, the White House signaled another modification on auto-related tariffs, responding to fears from the nation's biggest automakers about economic consequences.
The president is poised to sign an executive order Tuesday that will lay out a three-year plan that breaks down different phases of the auto tariffs – a decision that came after Trump fielded calls from multiple automaker CEOs, White House officials familiar with the conversation told CNN.
Chris Vitale, a retired Michigan auto worker who was in the Rose Garden on April 2 as Trump announced the sweeping tariffs in an event the White House hailed as 'Liberation Day,' said he applauded the president's approach to tariffs to revive American manufacturing.
'I know how our industry has been disadvantaged, for the last 60 years,' Vitale said. 'The tariffs, in effect, got people's attention and brought them to the negotiating table, which is probably the goal all along.'
Vitale spent three decades at Chrysler, which is now Stellantis, before retiring at the end of last year. He is among the many rank-and-file auto workers and retirees who have spoken out in favor of Trump's tariffs, one of many things he says he supports about Trump's second term.
'For the first time in four years, I don't have a feeling of dread,' Vitale said. 'It's like that weight, that dread, of what new regulation, what new law, what experimental vaccine, what mandate is going to get imposed next.'
Before administration officials previewed their latest tariff pause on Tuesday, the whiplash and uncertainty has become a growing point of frustration to Michael Taylor, the mayor of Sterling Heights, a Republican who supported Trump in 2016 but has since twice voted against him.
'The tariffs are on, then they're off, then they're changed,' Taylor said in an interview. 'Business owners, they really struggle when they don't have a certain landscape ahead of them. These tariffs have created chaos in that regard.'
The promise of reviving American manufacturing by imposing steep tariffs is overstated, he said, and far more complicated than the Trump administration has indicated or explained.
'He's not just misleading. He's lying,' Taylor argued about a tariff strategy Trump has long believed in, with visions of factories suddenly roaring back to life. 'It's frustrating because he has a lot of supporters who believe him even though he knows he's not telling the truth.'
'Small businesses are the backbone of America,' Gibson said. 'How can that be if tariffs are brought into play? Then, little people, businesses like mine, are going to struggle and may not even exist because we cannot afford to pay those kind of prices and absorb it into our little business.'
Naszreen Gibson, who owns The Rendezvous with Tea, said she is bracing for the impact of Trump administration's tariffs on tea imports from Sri Lanka, China and other countries around the world. She said she did not vote for Trump, but many of her customers did.
Her sales are down from a year ago, she said, which she attributes to economic anxiety and belt-tightening before a possible recession.
'Every time someone talks about the tariffs, the stock market goes crazy,' Gibson said. 'It goes up and down, people have their retirement funds there, their 401(k)s and so on.'
The president's visit to Michigan on Tuesday marks a rare moment of taking his economic agenda on the road for the first campaign-style rally of his second term.
While he has flown to his homes in Florida or New Jersey most weekends since returning to office, the term-limited Trump has logged virtually no travel during the week. It's a far different pattern than during his first term, when he delivered speeches in several battleground states during his first 100 days.
For a president who campaigned on lowering costs for Americans and ushering in what he promised would be a new 'Golden Age,' the economic concerns reverberating through conversations with voters across Macomb County are a potential warning for his administration at this stage.
The signs of unease are palpable, even for optimistic business owners like Ujkaj at Dodge Park Coney Island.
'Right now, I don't think it's where he wants it to be,' Ujkaj said of the president's performance after 100 days in office. 'Do I think it's going to get better? Yes. I do think he wants his legacy to be known for something great.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hamilton Spectator
23 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C. to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. The laws are a bit vague Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. Instead, he relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. The role of the National Guard troops will be limited Notably, Trump's proclamation says the National Guard troops will play a supporting role by protecting ICE officers as they enforce the law, rather than having the troops perform law enforcement work. Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website . 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. Troops have been mobilized before The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. Trump is willing to use the military on home soil In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back , saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals , and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .


San Francisco Chronicle
30 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C. to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. The laws are a bit vague Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. The role of the National Guard troops will be limited Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website. 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. Troops have been mobilized before The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. Trump is willing to use the military on home soil In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back, saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals, and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.'


Hamilton Spectator
41 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Travel ban may shut door for Afghan family to bring niece to US for a better life
IRMO, S.C. (AP) — Mohammad Sharafoddin, his wife and young son walked at times for 36 hours in a row over mountain passes as they left Afghanistan as refugees to end up less than a decade later talking about their journey on a plush love seat in the family's three-bedroom suburban American home. He and his wife dreamed of bringing her niece to the U.S. to share in that bounty. Maybe she could study to become a doctor and then decide her own path. But that door slams shut on Monday as America put in place a travel ban for people from Afghanistan and a dozen other countries. 'It's kind of shock for us when we hear about Afghanistan, especially right now for ladies who are affected more than others with the new government,' Mohammad Sharafoddin said. 'We didn't think about this travel ban.' President Donald Trump signed the ban Wednesday. It is similar to one in place during his first administration but covers more countries. Along with Afghanistan, travel to the U.S. is banned from Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Trump said visitors who overstay visas, like the man charged in an attack that injured dozens of demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado, earlier this month, are a danger to the country. The suspect in the attack is from Egypt, which isn't included in the ban. The countries chosen for the ban have deficient screening of their citizens, often refuse to take them back and have a high percentage of people who stay in the U.S. after their visas expire, Trump said. The ban makes exceptions for people from Afghanistan on Special Immigrant Visas who generally worked most closely with the U.S. government during the two-decade war there. Thousands of refugees came from Afghanistan Afghanistan was also one of the largest sources of resettled refugees, with about 14,000 arrivals in a 12-month period through September 2024. Trump suspended refugee resettlement on his first day in office. It is a path Sharafoddin took with his wife and son out of Afghanistan walking on those mountain roads in the dark then through Pakistan, Iran and into Turkey. He worked in a factory for years in Turkey, listening to YouTube videos on headphones to learn English before he was resettled in Irmo, South Carolina, a suburb of Columbia. His son is now 11, and he and his wife had a daughter in the U.S. who is now 3. There is a job at a jewelry maker that allows him to afford a two-story, three-bedroom house. Food was laid out on two tables Saturday for a celebration of the Muslim Eid al-Adha holiday . Sharafoddin's wife, Nuriya, said she is learning English and driving — two things she couldn't do in Afghanistan under Taliban rule. 'I'm very happy to be here now, because my son is very good at school and my daughter also. I think after 18 years they are going to work, and my daughter is going to be able to go to college,' she said. Family wants to help niece It is a life she wanted for her niece too. The couple show videos from their cellphones of her drawing and painting. When the Taliban returned to power in 2021, their niece could no longer study. So they started to plan to get her to the U.S. at least to further her education. Nuriya Sharafoddin doesn't know if her niece has heard the news from America yet. She hasn't had the heart to call and tell her. 'I'm not ready to call her. This is not good news. This is very sad news because she is worried and wants to come,' Nuriya Sharafoddin said. While the couple spoke, Jim Ray came by. He has helped a number of refugee families settle in Columbia and helped the Sharafoddins navigate questions in their second language. Ray said Afghans in Columbia know the return of the Taliban changed how the U.S. deals with their native country. But while the ban allows spouses, children or parents to travel to America, other family members aren't included. Many Afghans know their extended families are starving or suffering, and suddenly a path to help is closed, Ray said. 'We'll have to wait and see how the travel ban and the specifics of it actually play out,' Ray said. 'This kind of thing that they're experiencing where family cannot be reunited is actually where it hurts the most.' Taliban criticizes the travel ban The Taliban itself criticized Trump for the ban, with leader Hibatullah Akhundzada saying the U.S. was now the oppressor of the world. 'Citizens from 12 countries are barred from entering their land — and Afghans are not allowed either,' he said on a recording shared on social media. 'Why? Because they claim the Afghan government has no control over its people and that people are leaving the country. So, oppressor! Is this what you call friendship with humanity?' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .