WE NEED CHINESE ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN FLORIDA. HERE’S WHY | LETTERS

Higher gas prices convince Tampa Bay drivers to buy EVs | April 12

Chinese EVs

The Chinese people can buy a fine electric vehicle for the equivalent of $8,500-$17,000. We could invite them to ship EVs here, built to U.S. specs, or build a factory to make and sell them here. In either case, they would probably cost a fraction of a Tesla and sell as fast as they hit the lots, if not before.

The internal combustion engine is on its way out. President Donald Trump is fighting a losing battle.

Pete Wilford, Holiday

I walked all of St. Petersburg’s Central Avenue and you should too | April 6

Thanks for the memories

The reporter‘s account of her 9-mile trek on Central Avenue to Treasure Island made me smile and feel happy amidst our current stresses of war and economic woes. I grew up in St. Pete in a calmer, less populated time when walking and bike riding were fairly safe for any age. The photo of the iconic Thunderbird sign brought back memories of sunny days spent on the wide expanse of Treasure Island’s municipal beach as a carefree teenager. I was glad the Times gave space to an entertaining, uplifting story.

Christine Vaughn, Tampa

You ‘selfish louses’ should support President Trump | Column, April 10

Not getting it

I read this guest column and had to double-check that it wasn’t filed under comedy rather than commentary. For those of us capable of recognizing satire, it was a sharp and entertaining jab at the cult of personality surrounding the current occupant of the White House. For others — namely those who rely exclusively on the Fox opinion channel as their primary (and perhaps only) source of “news” — it was likely received as a sincere rallying cry, despite clearly not being written for them.

That, of course, is the real punchline. What reads as laugh-out-loud absurdity to some is taken as an undeniable truth by millions who have been marinating in a steady diet of outrage, grievance and alternative facts courtesy of that same Fox opinion bubble. The idea that every action taken by this administration is somehow in their personal best interest is accepted without question, while anyone who dares to disagree is dismissed as elitist, un-American, or woke.

Guest columnist Daniel Ruth’s intended audience clearly understands satire and appreciates the critique. Unfortunately, those most in need of that critique are often the least likely to recognize it, particularly when it runs counter to the narratives reinforced nightly on Fox News. Keep up the sharp work, Mr. Ruth. Just don’t expect the satire to land where it’s needed most.

David Burg, Tampa

You ‘selfish louses’ should support President Trump | Column, April 10

Offensive hyperbole

Daniel Ruth’s column is nothing more than a stream of offensive sarcasm, substituting insult for substance. It caricatures both Donald Trump supporters and ordinary Americans, but never actually engages with policy realities. Mocking concerns about gas prices, childcare, or healthcare doesn’t invalidate them; it just avoids addressing why those concerns exist.

The article leans heavily on exaggeration, suggesting Americans are being told to sacrifice basic needs for war spending, yet offers no factual grounding for claims like “$2 billion a day” or broad assertions about policy priorities. That’s not analysis, it’s hyperbole. Serious discussion would compare budgets, legislation, and outcomes, not invent irrational extremes to ridicule.

It also tries to discredit through personal attacks, calling the president names, referencing family members, and inserting unrelated scandals. That tactic may entertain readers who already suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome and agree, but it contributes nothing to an informed debate. Public discourse requires evidence and reasoning, not mockery.

Most importantly, the column presents a false binary: that national defense and domestic programs cannot coexist. In reality, U.S. policy has always involved balancing competing priorities. Reasonable people can disagree on where that balance should be struck, but dismissing one side as selfish or ignorant shuts down meaningful conversation.

In the end, the piece reveals more about the author’s disdain than about the issues themselves. It’s his opinion wrapped in mockery, persuasive only if you accept its premises without question.

Mark Khan, Tampa

Speed cameras in Tampa Bay school zones: What’s your opinion? | April 9

‘How bonkers’

I was glad to read the column on speed cameras and the approving comments. Hopefully, the tide of public opinion is turning away from selfishness and self-indulgence on the matter and toward these cameras and the safety they clearly promote.

The comments reminded me: How bonkers is it for our state government to paint over LGBTQ rainbow-painted intersections using an obviously false “safety” rationale claiming they’re distracting to drivers, while at the same time allowing speeding vehicles on the roads and highways festooned with giant flags emblazoned with obscenities directed at politicians and candidates, which surely do incite and distract drivers? They do this while declining to install more speed cameras to ensure the safety of millions of people, including kids.

What does the militantly bigoted law commanding that driver’s license exams only be conducted in English “for safety’s sake” gain for us when the same government only snickers and winks at habitual speed offenders? This inconsistency is completely nuts. We don’t have to be slaves to the irrationality of some scofflaw faction. In fact, it’s the government’s charge to see to it that we’re not.

Steve Douglas, St. Petersburg

Four takeaways from Rays stadium economic impact report | April 10

A lot of money

I’m thinking of maybe opening up a supermarket somewhere in Tampa. Think I can get the government to go halfsies in on it?

Tomas Negron, San Antonio

• • •

Submit letters at www.tampabay.com/opinion/submit-letter/. Letters are edited for clarity and length.

2026-04-15T09:20:04Z