newyorker--2020-10-15--Scientific Theories Disproved by 2020

Scientific Theories Disproved by 2020

Scientific theories explain natural phenomena in the physical universe .
Given the current state of the physical universe—what with the raging wildfires and devastating global pandemic—I ’ m wondering : At what point do natural phenomena stop being “ natural ” and start being “ evidence that our smoldering planet is the key ingredient in some intergalactic witch ’ s brew ” ?
Correlation is not causation , but that does little to comfort the people who realize that every time they glance at their phones , an elected official suggests that COVID-19 can be avoided by simply holding your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve left the room and scuttles toward somebody else .
Albert Einstein , best known for starring in countless black-and-white posters , theorized that an object ’ s mass is unable to travel faster than the speed of light .
This theory isn ’ t wrong , but it should make mention of things that can travel faster than the speed of light , such as right-wing Twitter pundits ’ intel that the latest unarmed Black man shot by police had an extremely sharp knife in his kitchen at the time of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the simplest explanation is often the true one .
Thus , we can assume that millions of people are living under an unbreakable curse that forces them to go to night clubs and buffets twice a week .
Otherwise , we ’ d have to reckon with a far more complicated truth : that millions of apex predators picture a lukewarm Bud Light served in a water-stained glass and think , Yeah , that ’ s something I ’ m willing to die for .
The law of conservation of energy states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ destroyed , but rather transfers from one form to another .
Proof that I can destroy your energy with just two words : Remember X Æ A-12 ?
Charles Darwin ’ s theory of evolution famously states that organisms change over time by retaining positive traits and shedding undesirable ones .
And yet , Adele released “ 25 ” in 2015 and wore Bantu knots in 2020 .
Darwin is also known for his theory of natural selection , which states that the strongest , smartest organisms are more likely to survive .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw “ Sonic the Hedgehog ” in theatres during a global pandemic are alive to tell the tale .
Werner Heisenberg ’ s uncertainty principle posits that an object ’ s position and speed can not be measured or predicted , with a hundred per cent accuracy , at the same time .
And yet , nobody batted an eye upon being told that droves of murder hornets were rapidly descending on the nation , because it totally tracked .
If an event can not be replicated , it is likely not real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ water when you consider that 3.3 million acres of California can not simply burn to shreds all over again .
Relatedly , the oxygen theory of combustion states that oxygen is required for a fire to burn .
Quick addendum : decades of treating climate change like a Babadook and hoping that it will vanish if ignored , paired with a penchant for cracking open the planet and sucking out every last drop of oil , is sure to keep the fires burning .
“ The Big Bang Theory , ” postulated by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” creator Chuck Lorre , posits that the universe was created billions of years ago by a massive cosmic explosion .
This would suggest that a small universe was created in September , when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died and every single good thing exploded .
Newton ’ s first law of motion states that an object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by an outside force .
Tell that to anyone who thought that all the positive momentum behind Quibi would only build once everyone was locked indoors with nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ download Quibi .
Newton ’ s second law of motion states that force equals mass times acceleration .
In other words , a basketball being thrown from one player to another will travel in a specific direction and at a specific speed .
But , if this law doesn ’ t account for those eerie , disembodied screams blaring over the loudspeakers in empty N.B.A .
arenas , and the associated likelihood of a player totally botching a pass once he realizes that even basketball has become a dystopian nightmare , does it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s third law of motion states that for every action , there is an equal and opposite reaction .
Either this theory was debunked in 2020 , or we ’ ve discovered that police officers exist on an entirely different astral plane , where the actions of using a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill , falling asleep at a Wendy ’ s , and sleeping in one ’ s apartment are punishable by death .
Some theorize that bats are predisposed to hosting viruses owing to their diet of bugs , blood , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explain the vast majority of COVID-19 cases , it may provide some insight into why Trump and his staff were ideal hosts for the coronavirus .
The theory of heliocentrism posits that we are on the planet Earth , which is revolving around the sun .
Hey , maybe we should see if things are better on the sun .

Scientific theories explain natural phenomena in the physical universe. Given the current state of the physical universe—what with the raging wildfires and devastating global pandemic—I’m wondering: At what point do natural phenomena stop being “natural” and start being “evidence that our smoldering planet is the key ingredient in some intergalactic witch’s brew”?
Correlation is not causation, but that does little to comfort the people who realize that every time they glance at their phones, an elected official suggests that COVID-19 can be avoided by simply holding your breath until the virus thinks you’ve left the room and scuttles toward somebody else.
Albert Einstein, best known for starring in countless black-and-white posters, theorized that an object’s mass is unable to travel faster than the speed of light. This theory isn’t wrong, but it should make mention of things that can travel faster than the speed of light, such as right-wing Twitter pundits’ intel that the latest unarmed Black man shot by police had an extremely sharp knife in his kitchen at the time of the shooting.
Occam’s razor states that the simplest explanation is often the true one. Thus, we can assume that millions of people are living under an unbreakable curse that forces them to go to night clubs and buffets twice a week. Otherwise, we’d have to reckon with a far more complicated truth: that millions of apex predators picture a lukewarm Bud Light served in a water-stained glass and think, Yeah, that’s something I’m willing to die for.
The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but rather transfers from one form to another. Proof that I can destroy your energy with just two words: Remember X Æ A-12?
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution famously states that organisms change over time by retaining positive traits and shedding undesirable ones. And yet, Adele released “25” in 2015 and wore Bantu knots in 2020.
Darwin is also known for his theory of natural selection, which states that the strongest, smartest organisms are more likely to survive. Despite this, six million Americans who saw “Sonic the Hedgehog” in theatres during a global pandemic are alive to tell the tale.
Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle posits that an object’s position and speed cannot be measured or predicted, with a hundred per cent accuracy, at the same time. And yet, nobody batted an eye upon being told that droves of murder hornets were rapidly descending on the nation, because it totally tracked.
If an event cannot be replicated, it is likely not real. That theory doesn’t hold water when you consider that 3.3 million acres of California cannot simply burn to shreds all over again.
Relatedly, the oxygen theory of combustion states that oxygen is required for a fire to burn. Quick addendum: decades of treating climate change like a Babadook and hoping that it will vanish if ignored, paired with a penchant for cracking open the planet and sucking out every last drop of oil, is sure to keep the fires burning.
“The Big Bang Theory,” postulated by the “Two and a Half Men” creator Chuck Lorre, posits that the universe was created billions of years ago by a massive cosmic explosion. This would suggest that a small universe was created in September, when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died and every single good thing exploded.
Newton’s first law of motion states that an object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. Tell that to anyone who thought that all the positive momentum behind Quibi would only build once everyone was locked indoors with nothing else to do but, presumably, download Quibi.
Newton’s second law of motion states that force equals mass times acceleration. In other words, a basketball being thrown from one player to another will travel in a specific direction and at a specific speed. But, if this law doesn’t account for those eerie, disembodied screams blaring over the loudspeakers in empty N.B.A. arenas, and the associated likelihood of a player totally botching a pass once he realizes that even basketball has become a dystopian nightmare, does it really hold true in 2020?
Newton’s third law of motion states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Either this theory was debunked in 2020, or we’ve discovered that police officers exist on an entirely different astral plane, where the actions of using a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill, falling asleep at a Wendy’s, and sleeping in one’s apartment are punishable by death.
Some theorize that bats are predisposed to hosting viruses owing to their diet of bugs, blood, and rotting fruit. Although this does not explain the vast majority of COVID-19 cases, it may provide some insight into why Trump and his staff were ideal hosts for the coronavirus.
The theory of heliocentrism posits that we are on the planet Earth, which is revolving around the sun. Hey, maybe we should see if things are better on the sun.


newyorker--2020-10-15--An Ad-Hoc Group of Activists and Academics Convene a “Real Facebook Oversight Board”

Robinson recounted the experience at the launch , over Zoom , of the Real Facebook Oversight Board , an international , ad-hoc cadre of activists and academics convened by the British investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr .
Cadwalladr was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize last year , for exposing the malpractices of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica , both in the U.S. and abroad .
That reporting led her to the realization that “ journalism alone is not enough.
” Earlier this year , she started a nonprofit called All the Citizens , which is organizing the Real Facebook Oversight Board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , focussed on the American election , ” she told me , a few hours before the launch .
Other members include Maria Ressa , a Filipino journalist and leading critic of Facebook ’ s role in supporting President Rodrigo Duterte ’ s murderous regime ; Derrick Johnson , the president of the N.A.A.C.P .
; Shireen Mitchell , the founder of Stop Online Violence Against Women ; and Roger McNamee , an early Facebook investor .
“ Our group has come together for one purpose , ” Shoshana Zuboff , a Harvard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of “ The Age of Surveillance Capitalism , ” said on the Zoom call .
“ We demand comprehensive action to insure that Facebook can not be weaponized to undermine the vote.
” Jonathan Greenblatt , the director of the Anti-Defamation League , which has been tracking hate groups for decades , observed that Facebook “ actively and knowingly has facilitated the flow of poison into the population , and enabled waves of anti-Semitism and racism , Holocaust denialism and Islamophobic conspiracies , disinformation and extremism.
” The Harvard Law School professor Laurence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook Oversight Board “ probably the most important effort in my fifty-year career in the law.
” The Real Facebook Oversight Board is a self-appointed proxy for the official Facebook Oversight Board , which was designed to function as a kind of independent appeals court , adjudicating various challenges to the company ’ s decisions on whether to remove content .
As Facebook ’ s C.E.O.
, Mark Zuckerberg , wrote in a blog post announcing the official board two years ago , “ The purpose of this body would be to uphold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while also recognizing the reality of keeping people safe.
” It was a widely lauded and unprecedented move—what publicly traded company had ever ceded a degree of control to an independent body ?
But it was also a necessary one .
Most companies are regulated by statutes and laws , whereas Facebook , with its unparalleled reach—McNamee described it to me as having “ more active monthly users than there are notional Christians in the world , and twice as many as there are people living in China ” —operates in a regulation-free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s first twenty members , who were named in May , include Cadwalladr ’ s former boss at the Guardian , Alan Rusbridger .
The body has yet to convene a meeting .
Cadwalladr ’ s board has embraced a broader definition of oversight than the one championed by Zuckerberg .
From now until the election , its members will use their various platforms to expose the many ways in which Facebook ’ s algorithms promote divisive , inflammatory , and extreme content ; amplify disinformation and misinformation ; and promote deceitful political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s victory in 2016 , and have not abated in the years since .
They ’ ve contributed to a proliferation of QAnon , white-supremacist militias , anti-vaccine propaganda , and coronavirus falsehoods .
They have allowed doctored videos of political figures to circulate .
Now , as Trump continues to question , without evidence , the legitimacy of the upcoming election , there is a real danger that his campaign and its followers will use Facebook to sow chaos after the polls close , by challenging the results , posting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s base to violence .
“ The most valuable thing this board can do is to inoculate voters , by giving them the facts , ” McNamee told me .
“ Facebook ’ s model is that everything is content and it ’ s all equally valid .
They call that free speech .
But there is no definition of free speech that has any intellectual value that suggests the systemic destruction of truth , of fact , and of democracy is something that was guaranteed by the First Amendment.
” Two days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public , Britain ’ s Channel 4 News broadcast a segment showing how the Trump campaign had used racial groupings to suppress the vote in battleground states during the 2016 election .
According to a leaked cache of Cambridge Analytica ’ s voter files , which were seeded with data illegally obtained from millions of unwitting Facebook users , individual voters were not only identified by geography , voting history , behavioral proclivities , and personality traits—they were also segmented by race .
And next to a disproportionate number of the names of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to Channel 4 , this was code for the campaign ’ s voter-suppression efforts , much of it delivered through Facebook ads .
This dovetailed with efforts by Russian trolls , as documented in the Mueller report , to dissuade Black Americans from voting at the top of the ticket .
“ We tracked the ninety thousand Black people in Michigan alone who cast a down-ticket ballot but left the top of the ticket blank , ” Mitchell , whose organization runs the Stop Digital Voter Suppression project , said .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes .
“ It was the weaponization of Black identity to suppress the vote.
” In 2018 , Facebook established a searchable “ ad library.
” Anyone can now see who is paying for which ads , and the platform allows individual users to find out if a campaign has assigned them to a particular advertising cohort .
But the ad library doesn ’ t reveal if a particular ad is targeting a particular group , so there is still no way to know if a campaign or a political-action committee is using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote .
“ Facebook allows the advertiser to compose the list by its own criteria , ” David Carroll , a professor of media design at the Parsons School of Design and a member of the Real Facebook Oversight Board , told me .
“ Once it goes to Facebook , it ’ s just a list of Facebook user I.D.s.
” ( Carroll , who spent four years embroiled in a lawsuit to obtain his Cambridge Analytica voter file , was finally able to see it in the leaked cache shared by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him gathered by the Republican National Committee ’ s Data Trust .
Commercial data brokers , such as Experian and Aristotle , listed the ages of his children , linked to his wife ’ s profile , and scored his tendency to neuroticism , extroversion , and other personality traits .
The file did not explicitly identify Carroll by race or ethnicity , however , and it didn ’ t indicate his preferred candidate .
Carroll ventured that this might be because his Brooklyn Zip Code signalled a likely Clinton supporter , on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advertising dollars . )
McNamee , who first met Zuckerberg nearly fourteen years ago , is hopeful that it ’ s not too late for his old friend to become “ the hero of his own story and do the bare minimum ” to preserve democracy .
“ When November 3rd comes , and you ’ ve continued to do what you ’ re doing now , you will have had a key role in destroying the American experiment , ” McNamee said , of Zuckerberg .
“ So we are saying , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pleading with you , do the right thing.
’ ” The Real Facebook Oversight Board ’ s inaugural demands are fairly modest : first , Facebook must remove posts that incite violence , even those from public figures , including the President ; second , Facebook must ban all advertising that mentions Presidential-election results until one person is definitively declared the winner , and his opponent concedes ; and , third , Facebook must label as untrue any post that declares a winner , until the victory is certified and the losing candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the group enumerated these demands , it scored its first win : Facebook announced that it would not allow any ads that delegitimized the election ’ s outcome .
The members of the Real Facebook Oversight Board know , as well as anyone , that Facebook , in the interest of appearing to be a good global citizen , will sometimes respond to public pressure .
That is why the platform created its ad library ; added more content moderators ; agreed to label some controversial posts with warnings about their veracity ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own oversight board .
But the company seems to be resisting the efforts of Cadwalladr ’ s watchdog group .
Last Monday , the Real Facebook Oversight Board ’ s Internet-service providers took down the group ’ s Web sites , because of alleged trademark infringement and phishing .
Cadwalladr showed me e-mails which suggested that Facebook lodged the complaint .
( A spokesperson for Facebook said that the Web sites had been automatically flagged by a vender . )
“ It fits a pattern of behavior , where Facebook is prepared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer cares how that appears , ” Cadwalladr told me .
“ And it exposes its words as a sham .
I literally have an e-mail from a week ago , from the head of communications at the Oversight Board—Mark Zuckerberg ’ s former speechwriter—saying , ‘ We very much welcome your new effort ’ and ‘ if you can shine a greater spotlight on these issues , that is a good thing.
’ ” Read More About the 2020 Election • The fall and rise of Kamala Harris .
• When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sacrosanct American ritual like an election , you should listen .
• To understand the path Donald Trump has taken to the 2020 election , look at what he has provided the executive class .
• What happens if Trump fights the election results ?
• The refusal by Mitch McConnell to rein in Trump is looking riskier than ever .
• Sign up for our election newsletter for insight and analysis from our reporters and columnists .

Two hours before Donald Trump boosted the standing of white supremacists at the last Presidential debate, Facebook told Rashad Robinson, the president of the civil-rights organization Color of Change, that it would not remove a potentially incendiary and racially tinged Trump-campaign post. The message in question showed the President’s eldest son, Donald Trump, Jr., calling upon “an army” of Trump supporters to show up at polls across the country, to “protect” the election. The Black community, Robinson would later say, saw the post as a “threat to our ability to express our will for a better future.” But the company, which has become a de-facto arbiter of political speech, interpreted the takedown request as a matter of semantics; Robinson said that it quibbled over the meaning of “army.”
Robinson recounted the experience at the launch, over Zoom, of the Real Facebook Oversight Board, an international, ad-hoc cadre of activists and academics convened by the British investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr. Cadwalladr was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize last year, for exposing the malpractices of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, both in the U.S. and abroad. That reporting led her to the realization that “journalism alone is not enough.” Earlier this year, she started a nonprofit called All the Citizens, which is organizing the Real Facebook Oversight Board. “This is an emergency intervention, focussed on the American election,” she told me, a few hours before the launch. Other members include Maria Ressa, a Filipino journalist and leading critic of Facebook’s role in supporting President Rodrigo Duterte’s murderous regime; Derrick Johnson, the president of the N.A.A.C.P.; Shireen Mitchell, the founder of Stop Online Violence Against Women; and Roger McNamee, an early Facebook investor.
“Our group has come together for one purpose,” Shoshana Zuboff, a Harvard Business School professor emerita and the author of “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” said on the Zoom call. “We demand comprehensive action to insure that Facebook cannot be weaponized to undermine the vote.” Jonathan Greenblatt, the director of the Anti-Defamation League, which has been tracking hate groups for decades, observed that Facebook “actively and knowingly has facilitated the flow of poison into the population, and enabled waves of anti-Semitism and racism, Holocaust denialism and Islamophobic conspiracies, disinformation and extremism.” The Harvard Law School professor Laurence Tribe called his participation in the Real Facebook Oversight Board “probably the most important effort in my fifty-year career in the law.”
The Real Facebook Oversight Board is a self-appointed proxy for the official Facebook Oversight Board, which was designed to function as a kind of independent appeals court, adjudicating various challenges to the company’s decisions on whether to remove content. As Facebook’s C.E.O., Mark Zuckerberg, wrote in a blog post announcing the official board two years ago, “The purpose of this body would be to uphold the principle of giving people a voice while also recognizing the reality of keeping people safe.” It was a widely lauded and unprecedented move—what publicly traded company had ever ceded a degree of control to an independent body? But it was also a necessary one. Most companies are regulated by statutes and laws, whereas Facebook, with its unparalleled reach—McNamee described it to me as having “more active monthly users than there are notional Christians in the world, and twice as many as there are people living in China”—operates in a regulation-free zone. The Facebook Oversight Board’s first twenty members, who were named in May, include Cadwalladr’s former boss at the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger. The body has yet to convene a meeting.
Cadwalladr’s board has embraced a broader definition of oversight than the one championed by Zuckerberg. From now until the election, its members will use their various platforms to expose the many ways in which Facebook’s algorithms promote divisive, inflammatory, and extreme content; amplify disinformation and misinformation; and promote deceitful political advertising. These methods were crucial to Trump’s victory in 2016, and have not abated in the years since. They’ve contributed to a proliferation of QAnon, white-supremacist militias, anti-vaccine propaganda, and coronavirus falsehoods. They have allowed doctored videos of political figures to circulate. Now, as Trump continues to question, without evidence, the legitimacy of the upcoming election, there is a real danger that his campaign and its followers will use Facebook to sow chaos after the polls close, by challenging the results, posting false information, or inciting Trump’s base to violence. “The most valuable thing this board can do is to inoculate voters, by giving them the facts,” McNamee told me. “Facebook’s model is that everything is content and it’s all equally valid. They call that free speech. But there is no definition of free speech that has any intellectual value that suggests the systemic destruction of truth, of fact, and of democracy is something that was guaranteed by the First Amendment.”
Two days before the Real Facebook Oversight Board went public, Britain’s Channel 4 News broadcast a segment showing how the Trump campaign had used racial groupings to suppress the vote in battleground states during the 2016 election. According to a leaked cache of Cambridge Analytica’s voter files, which were seeded with data illegally obtained from millions of unwitting Facebook users, individual voters were not only identified by geography, voting history, behavioral proclivities, and personality traits—they were also segmented by race. And next to a disproportionate number of the names of African-Americans was the word “deterrence.” According to Channel 4, this was code for the campaign’s voter-suppression efforts, much of it delivered through Facebook ads. This dovetailed with efforts by Russian trolls, as documented in the Mueller report, to dissuade Black Americans from voting at the top of the ticket. “We tracked the ninety thousand Black people in Michigan alone who cast a down-ticket ballot but left the top of the ticket blank,” Mitchell, whose organization runs the Stop Digital Voter Suppression project, said. Trump won Michigan by less than eleven thousand votes. “It was the weaponization of Black identity to suppress the vote.”
In 2018, Facebook established a searchable “ad library.” Anyone can now see who is paying for which ads, and the platform allows individual users to find out if a campaign has assigned them to a particular advertising cohort. But the ad library doesn’t reveal if a particular ad is targeting a particular group, so there is still no way to know if a campaign or a political-action committee is using race in an effort to depress the vote. “Facebook allows the advertiser to compose the list by its own criteria,” David Carroll, a professor of media design at the Parsons School of Design and a member of the Real Facebook Oversight Board, told me. “Once it goes to Facebook, it’s just a list of Facebook user I.D.s.” (Carroll, who spent four years embroiled in a lawsuit to obtain his Cambridge Analytica voter file, was finally able to see it in the leaked cache shared by Channel 4. It contained information about him gathered by the Republican National Committee’s Data Trust. Commercial data brokers, such as Experian and Aristotle, listed the ages of his children, linked to his wife’s profile, and scored his tendency to neuroticism, extroversion, and other personality traits. The file did not explicitly identify Carroll by race or ethnicity, however, and it didn’t indicate his preferred candidate. Carroll ventured that this might be because his Brooklyn Zip Code signalled a likely Clinton supporter, on whom the campaign should not waste its advertising dollars.)
McNamee, who first met Zuckerberg nearly fourteen years ago, is hopeful that it’s not too late for his old friend to become “the hero of his own story and do the bare minimum” to preserve democracy. “When November 3rd comes, and you’ve continued to do what you’re doing now, you will have had a key role in destroying the American experiment,” McNamee said, of Zuckerberg. “So we are saying, ‘Hey, on behalf of everybody pleading with you, do the right thing.’ ” The Real Facebook Oversight Board’s inaugural demands are fairly modest: first, Facebook must remove posts that incite violence, even those from public figures, including the President; second, Facebook must ban all advertising that mentions Presidential-election results until one person is definitively declared the winner, and his opponent concedes; and, third, Facebook must label as untrue any post that declares a winner, until the victory is certified and the losing candidate has conceded. A few hours after the group enumerated these demands, it scored its first win: Facebook announced that it would not allow any ads that delegitimized the election’s outcome.


newyorker--2020-10-15--Maine’s Referendum on Susan Collins’s Reputation

Small and thin and wearing a short navy-blue trenchcoat , Collins gave the mayor of Auburn a dainty elbow bump as she took to the podium .
She carefully removed a face mask emblazoned with the pine tree and North Star of the flag of her state , then gazed at the assembled group , beaming .
“ It is wonderful to be with you today , ” she began , “ at what is truly a joyous celebration.
” The October sun suddenly seemed warmer and more golden ; her audience beamed back .
“ Wasn ’ t it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
” As she said the words , the crowd burst into applause , as if only now realizing that it had indeed been thrilling , that the new bell tower , a scaffold of black steel with a weathervane on top , was , as Collins put it , “ gorgeous , ” and not only an object of exceptional aesthetic merit but “ the second-highest monument in the state of Maine.
” “ Congratulations to all of you , on truly an extraordinary accomplishment , ” she said .
“ You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is sixty-seven years old , was born in the Maine town of Caribou , in Aroostook County , an area near the border with Canada known for its potato farms .
Her parents were the proprietors of a multigenerational lumber business , and were both elected to local political offices in an era when the Republican Party ’ s dominance of state politics was beginning to wane .
She started her own political career as a staff member to William Cohen , a Republican representative from Maine who later became a senator .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , two years before—she ran to succeed him in the Senate , where she has been ever since .
Today , Maine is a state where the numbers of registered Democrats , Republicans , and Independent voters are roughly equal , with Democrats only in the past year overtaking Independents as the largest single group .
Until 2013 , Collins served alongside the moderate Republican Olympia Snowe ; the current junior senator from Maine , Angus King , is a registered Independent .
The political tradition of nonpartisanship seems to be an anachronistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on an affectation .
Collins became known for co-sponsoring bills across party lines and voting against her Party ’ s majority on high-profile bills : she broke with the party line to back the 2009 financial stimulus and the repeal of the “ Don ’ t Ask , Don ’ t Tell ” policy , which discriminated against gay people in the military .
( A study in Roll Call found that , in 2019 , she still voted with her Party majority seventy-eight per cent of the time , although only forty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key votes.
” ) With a population of less than 1.4 million , Maine is small enough to allow Collins a certain intimacy with its small towns and industries .
She has built a career presenting herself less as a politician interested in systemic national problems than as one who can bring funding home : channelling military contracts to her state ’ s shipyards , getting grants for regional airports , and advocating for blueberry farmers , loggers , and lobstermen .
With each reëlection , she earned a broader share of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and commitment .
She is known for never missing a vote in her twenty-three years in the Senate , and has voted more than seven thousand times .
She was unmarried until the age of fifty-nine , and does not have children .
She is the most senior Republican woman , and the only remaining Republican from New England , in Congress .
If reëlected , she will be in line to become the chair of the Appropriations Committee , one of the most powerful positions in Congress .
In 2014 , sixty-eight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballot for her .
As she began her most recent term , she had one of the highest state approval ratings in the Senate , second only to Bernie Sanders .
Then Donald Trump was elected .
At first , Collins , like many Republicans , spoke out against him .
In 2016 , after he became the Party ’ s nominee for President , she published an op-ed in the Washington Post withholding her support , writing that she was “ dismayed by his constant stream of cruel comments and his inability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost Maine to Hillary Clinton by less than three percentage points .
During the first two years of his Presidency , when Republicans had only a narrow majority in the Senate , Collins became one of a small group who were known to cross party lines in decisive votes .
She had voted against the Affordable Care Act in 2009 , and to repeal it in 2011 and 2015 , but in 2017 it was her vote against her Party , along with those by John McCain and Lisa Murkowski , that twice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on her return to Bangor , she was spontaneously applauded in the airport for standing on principle .
But for many supporters in Maine—exactly how many will be made known on Election Day—the A.C.A .
vote would not redeem what came next .
Perhaps it should come as no surprise that a Republican voted for a tax cut , but Collins ’ s support of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act later came to haunt her .
For many Democrats and Independents , the bill was seen as a giveaway to corporations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deficit and threatened the social safety net .
It also repealed the individual-mandate penalty of the A.C.A.
, which left the law open to the legal challenge that it now faces in the Supreme Court .
( More than sixty-two thousand people in Maine received health coverage from the A.C.A.
, and voters indicated their support for the bill by restoring the expansion of Medicaid by popular vote , after the former Republican governor Paul LePage had restricted it . )
Perhaps the most politically contentious vote that Collins cast , however , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Supreme Court , two years ago , after allegations of sexual assault were made against him by Christine Blasey Ford .
Collins was the last undecided senator to announce her decision to confirm Kavanaugh .
In the days leading up to her vote , her office in Washington , D.C. , had been occupied by activists—many of whom had travelled overnight on buses from Maine—who sat under the decorative lobster traps and buoys and told Collins ’ s aides stories of having survived sexual assault .
When Collins finally delivered her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enthusiasm for Kavanaugh seemed so unequivocal ( she found Ford ’ s allegations unsubstantiated by the witnesses who testified in the Senate , and described Kavanaugh as “ an exemplary public servant , judge , teacher , coach , husband , and father ” ) that it became difficult to believe that the delay had ever been a tortured consideration of the circumstances .
Instead , it seemed to be a calculated and successful gamble by Collins to earn the full attention of the national media .
In the days that followed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raised more than three million dollars in so-called rage donations , which would be given to Collins ’ s still-unknown Democratic opponent after the Maine Democratic primary , in July , 2020 .
Whatever her national reputation had been before , Collins now came to be known on “ Saturday Night Live ” for a single quality : a theatrics of thoughtful consideration which covered her role in her Party ’ s refusal to challenge Trump .
( “ Oh , please , the last thing I wanted to do was make this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while playing Collins on “ S.N.L.
, ” following the senator ’ s support for Kavanaugh .
“ That ’ s why I told everyone to tune in at 3 P.M. , so you could watch me tell all my female supporters , ‘ Psych !
’ ” ) The jokes came out again during the impeachment hearings , when Collins , after expressing that she was “ disappointed ” that the Senate did not decide to call more witnesses , concluded that the House of Representatives had not met the burden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President .
The Collins line that many people in Maine , from a high-school student to a farmer , recited back to me , with sarcasm and bitterness , did not come from a speech on the Senate floor but from a CBS interview after the hearings : “ I believe that the President has learned from this case , ” Collins had told Norah O ’ Donnell .
“ The President has been impeached .
That ’ s a pretty big lesson.
” She added , “ I believe that he will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” We were in the rural bedroom community of Dayton , in southern Maine .
The sun was setting over a blissful view of reddening maples , white farmhouses , and newly mown slopes .
An upside of a drought this year in northern New England was a warm , dry fall that made outdoor campaigning less miserable than it might have been .
Under the large white tent , the tables had been placed at six-foot intervals and supplied with tiny bottles of scented sanitizer and packets of Kleenex .
The coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both sides .
With the exception of a bus tour through Maine ’ s sixteen counties , Collins has supplemented her official appearances with small , invitation-only events .
Gideon had resumed a series of “ Suppers with Sara ” in July , but attendance was capped according to limitations on in-person gatherings , and instead of the traditional pot of baked beans voters were eating individually packaged wraps and sandwiches .
Demographically speaking , Maine is the oldest state in the country , and the memory of its voters runs long .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s event expressed their disappointment in Collins by referencing specific historical instances of Maine ’ s political independence : the vote cast by Will Cohen , Collins ’ s former boss and a member of the House Judiciary Committee , to file articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon , in 1974 ; the Declaration of Conscience speech , by Margaret Chase Smith , another Republican from Maine and the nation ’ s first woman to serve in both houses of Congress , who , in 1950 , spoke out against the anti-Communist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was that , in confirming Kavanaugh and voting to acquit Trump , Collins had not met the moment in the way her predecessors had .
Sara Gideon was born in Rhode Island in 1971 , the daughter of an Armenian-American nurse and a pediatrician who had immigrated to the United States from India .
Her husband , Benjamin Gideon , is from Maine , and , as she has explained in her stump speeches , they moved there from New York , in 2004 , to raise a family .
( Collins has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hint of nativism : “ I ’ ve lived in Bangor for twenty-six years .
My family ’ s been in Maine for generations , ” she recently told Politico .
“ She ’ s been in Maine for about fifteen years and lives in Freeport.
” ) Gideon , who now has three children , was a full-time parent in 2009 , when a local Democratic official called to urge her husband , an attorney , to run for the Freeport town council .
Gideon , who had worked in advertising before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to run instead .
From the town council , she proceeded to the Maine House of Representatives , where she has been the speaker for her past two terms .
When she announced her candidacy for the Democratic Senate primary , in 2019 , she quickly became the establishment favorite , securing Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ’ s near-immediate endorsement , eventually winning seventy-two per cent of the vote in the primary , and collecting a jackpot of national donations .

The jokes came out again during the impeachment hearings, when Collins, after expressing that she was “disappointed” that the Senate did not decide to call more witnesses, concluded that the House of Representatives had not met the burden of proof and voted to acquit the President. The Collins line that many people in Maine, from a high-school student to a farmer, recited back to me, with sarcasm and bitterness, did not come from a speech on the Senate floor but from a CBS interview after the hearings: “I believe that the President has learned from this case,” Collins had told Norah O’Donnell. “The President has been impeached. That’s a pretty big lesson.” She added, “I believe that he will be much more cautious in the future.”
“When she said, ‘He learned his lesson’? I just can’t. I just can’t,” a former Collins supporter named Sherri Sawyer told me last week, shaking her head. Sawyer, a retiree and registered Independent from the town of Hollis, was sitting by herself at a table in an open-air wedding tent, awaiting the arrival of Sara Gideon, the Democratic candidate for Collins’s seat. This is the first time since Collins was elected that Sawyer, a lifelong Mainer, would not be voting for her. “She did a lot for the shipyards,” she said, of Collins. “And the fishermen and stuff . . .” She paused and thought for a moment. “It just seems like recently she’s not as much interested in us as she is in being a Republican, and the Republicans have too much control right now. It’s got to be kind of evened off for things to work right.”
We were in the rural bedroom community of Dayton, in southern Maine. The sun was setting over a blissful view of reddening maples, white farmhouses, and newly mown slopes. An upside of a drought this year in northern New England was a warm, dry fall that made outdoor campaigning less miserable than it might have been. Under the large white tent, the tables had been placed at six-foot intervals and supplied with tiny bottles of scented sanitizer and packets of Kleenex. The coronavirus pandemic had limited the campaigning possibilities for both sides. With the exception of a bus tour through Maine’s sixteen counties, Collins has supplemented her official appearances with small, invitation-only events. Gideon had resumed a series of “Suppers with Sara” in July, but attendance was capped according to limitations on in-person gatherings, and instead of the traditional pot of baked beans voters were eating individually packaged wraps and sandwiches.
Demographically speaking, Maine is the oldest state in the country, and the memory of its voters runs long. Certain voters I spoke with at Gideon’s event expressed their disappointment in Collins by referencing specific historical instances of Maine’s political independence: the vote cast by Will Cohen, Collins’s former boss and a member of the House Judiciary Committee, to file articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon, in 1974; the Declaration of Conscience speech, by Margaret Chase Smith, another Republican from Maine and the nation’s first woman to serve in both houses of Congress, who, in 1950, spoke out against the anti-Communist purges of Joseph McCarthy. The sense was that, in confirming Kavanaugh and voting to acquit Trump, Collins had not met the moment in the way her predecessors had.
Sara Gideon was born in Rhode Island in 1971, the daughter of an Armenian-American nurse and a pediatrician who had immigrated to the United States from India. Her husband, Benjamin Gideon, is from Maine, and, as she has explained in her stump speeches, they moved there from New York, in 2004, to raise a family. (Collins has at times treated her opponent with a hint of nativism: “I’ve lived in Bangor for twenty-six years. My family’s been in Maine for generations,” she recently told Politico. “She’s been in Maine for about fifteen years and lives in Freeport.”) Gideon, who now has three children, was a full-time parent in 2009, when a local Democratic official called to urge her husband, an attorney, to run for the Freeport town council. Gideon, who had worked in advertising before having children, decided that she wanted to run instead. From the town council, she proceeded to the Maine House of Representatives, where she has been the speaker for her past two terms. When she announced her candidacy for the Democratic Senate primary, in 2019, she quickly became the establishment favorite, securing Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s near-immediate endorsement, eventually winning seventy-two per cent of the vote in the primary, and collecting a jackpot of national donations.
Gideon, as any Maine politician must, has tried to establish her own bipartisan credentials. In her stump speech, she mentions that her first move as Maine speaker was to end a tradition of divided seating in the House by party, making the representatives sit next to their political opposition, like a well-meaning teacher trying to split up groups of friends on the first day of school. But, for the most part, her platform is in line with that of the Democratic leadership in Congress. She supports expanding access to Medicare through a public option but does not campaign for Medicare for All; she would like to reduce carbon emissions and improve the country’s public-transportation infrastructure but does not use the phrase “Green New Deal.” She supports rolling back the tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy enacted into law under Trump, and says that Maine, like all rural states, needs better access to health care and broadband Internet. She shows awareness of the state’s most pressing problems: its aging population and difficulty attracting a younger generation of workers; the opioid crisis; the effects of climate change on the fishing industry. Her campaign style is not one of theatrics or vaunted rhetoric—she is not a charismatic usurper of establishment politics in the style of Beto O’Rourke or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Her primary selling point seems to be that, in the event that Mitch McConnell or Donald Trump retains power after the election, a Maine senator will no longer cast tie-breaking votes in their support. At the supper in Dayton, dressed in a blazer and jeans, she preceded her speech by walking around the wedding tent and engaging each table in a short conversation. One voter, a gray-haired retired librarian named Margaret Mills, had some thoughts that she wanted to express after watching Gideon debate Collins earlier in the week.
“I came here to say you’re so careful with what you say—it would be nice to have a little more personality,” she told Gideon.
“O.K., thank you,” Gideon said, nodding, her expression hidden behind her mask, as she moved on to the next table. (Mills said that she changed her mind about Gideon after hearing her speak again that evening. “She’s just well spoken. She’s very organized,” Mills said.)
Susan Collins does not want to be remembered for her impeachment vote, or her speech on Kavanaugh, or her support of the 2017 tax act, although those are the issues that a Maine resident will be relentlessly reminded of in ads that air every time a person turns on a television or opens a tab on YouTube. More than a hundred million dollars have been spent on the 2020 Maine Senate race, an astonishing amount considering the state’s small population and the limitations on in-person events. Much of the money has gone to ads, tens of thousands of them; according to the Wesleyan Media Project, Maine’s race has had the most on television in the country. Collins’s ads range from soft appreciation for the essential workers who have endured the pandemic to accusations that Gideon has auctioned herself off to the outside donors who have supported her campaign. In recent weeks, Collins has again voted against the majority of her Party to keep the Affordable Care Act safe from the Supreme Court, and has announced that she will not vote to confirm a new Justice before the election. Ultimately, the A.C.A.-protection bill did not have the supermajority that it needed to pass, and enough Republican senators had pledged to confirm a Court nominee before the election that confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett could begin, so Collins’s gestures were left in the realm of the performative.
This time around, Collins has not said whether she will vote for Trump, and has avoided overt criticism of him. Trump has endorsed her. In a press gaggle after a campaign stop at a converted mill, in the town of Waterville, Collins was asked why Trump was trailing in the polls in Maine. “I think a lot of it may be the style that he uses, that we saw, for example, in the debate—on both sides,” she said. “That does not take away from some of the economic accomplishments the President has had.” Asked how she felt about testimonials from longtime voters who have said that they would no longer be supporting her, she said, “It sounds like you’ve been watching too much television.” She talked about how “inspiring” it is when voters come up to her, as they had that day in Waterville, to take pictures with her and express their support. “Maine is a unique state,” Jason Levesque, the Republican mayor of Auburn, told me. “Everybody gets to meet your senator. If you haven’t met a senator, you’re living under a rock.”
But Collins’s long-term strategy might no longer serve her at a time when tax incentives or one-time grants from the government are insufficient measures to address income inequality, stagnant wages, and the high costs of housing, health care, and education. Willy Ritch, the executive director of the 16 Counties Coalition, a progressive nonprofit group that has often criticized Collins, believes that her approach is inadequate for the state’s current problems. “Senator Collins talks about increasing money for tick-borne-illness research or getting a transportation appropriation, and those are good things, but they just don’t seem to be a good response to the times that we’re in,” he said. “I think the times have tested Senator Collins, and she just hasn’t passed the test. We have a President trying to dismantle our democracy, a pandemic, an environmental crisis, and an economic crisis.”
Collins was a proud sponsor of the Paycheck Protection Program, but congressional relief for businesses affected by the coronavirus pandemic ended in August. In 2014, Collins won the collective endorsement of the four unions of the shipbuilders of the Bath Iron Works—a rare achievement for a Republican. This year, ads featuring testimonies from sandblasters and shipfitters criticized her for taking campaign donations from a rival shipyard in Virginia, and for caring more about the imperatives of corporate owners than the well-being of workers. In July, the Maine State Council of Machinists, which represents the Bath Iron Works, endorsed Gideon; Collins responded with a statement in which she reminded voters that she is a senior member of the Appropriations Committee and, since 2008, has secured sixteen billion dollars’ worth of funding in contracts for the Bath Iron Works. At her recent campaign stops in Waterville and at the bell tower in Auburn, she was happiest when discussing federal economic Opportunity Zones, which were created by the 2017 tax act, or the grants awarded by the Northern Border Regional Commission. She may not have voted to remove Trump from office, but she expresses frustration with reporters for not remembering that she prevailed on budget battles with him over the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and the Weatherization Assistance Program.
After her speech at the bell tower, Collins cut a red ribbon with an oversized pair of scissors, then chatted with city officials and posed for photographs with a baby before taking a moment to speak with reporters, most of whom seemed to be assessing whether she might be at risk for catching the coronavirus, after the outbreak at the White House. I asked Collins about partisanship, and she erupted in vehement condemnation of “the unfortunate lies that have been so prevalent on television for the past two years.” She reminded me that she had voted against many of Trump’s nominees to the bench, and that she has voted to override all of his vetoes. She described herself as “the first Republican senator to speak out against repealing the Affordable Care Act.” She said that liberals have ignored the fact that, during the Presidency of Barack Obama, she voted to confirm Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.


newyorker--2020-10-15--The Remarkable Effectiveness of Pete Buttigieg on Fox News

Lately , Buttigieg has been not taking things personally on Fox News .
Liberals , even those who had grown tired of his dogged reasonableness , have celebrated each of his three recent appearances on the network as a tour de force and a rout .
Just before the Vice-Presidential debate , last Wednesday , Buttigieg was asked on Fox News about the policy differences between Joe Biden and Kamala Harris .
He replied , “ Well , there ’ s a classic parlor game of trying to find a little bit of daylight between running mates , and if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could look into why an evangelical Christian like Mike Pence wants to be on a ticket with a President caught with a porn star.
” Pence , President , porn—he captured the basic deal Republicans had made with power in three tight plosives .
( Slayer Pete , Mary McNamara of the Los Angeles Times named this persona , brilliantly . )
It ’ s tempting to conclude that Buttigieg ’ s recent star turns on Fox News say less about him than they do about the network , whose hosts spend so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can find themselves at a loss when those positions are presented in earnest .
Last week , the “ Fox and Friends ” host Steve Doocy asked Buttigieg about President Trump ’ s choice not to participate in a virtual debate with Biden .
“ All of us have had to get used to virtual formats , ” Buttigieg said , pointing out that parents trying to manage home learning had it much rougher than the President of the United States .
He went on , “ The only reason that we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the President of the United States is still contagious , as far as we know , with a deadly disease.
” That clip , like his response to the question about Harris , went viral , partly because Doocy kept encouraging Buttigieg , as he usually does ideologically friendlier guests , with a series of confident-sounding local-news-anchor noises : “ Sure .
.
.
Right .
.
.
Yeah .
.
.
Sure .
.
.
Right .
.
.
Right .
.
.
Sure.
” Fox News has always been a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that don ’ t have much to do with the dimness of its morning hosts .
Last spring , a Fox audience stood at the end of a town hall with Buttigieg .
“ Wow !
A standing ovation !
” the Fox News anchor Chris Wallace said , apparently surprised by it .
The network ’ s orientation , on both the hyperbolic evening shows and the Doocified morning ones , borrows the spirit , if not the prudity , of religious conservatives : the heartland is virtuous , and the liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Buttigieg has a way of inverting all of that .
On MSNBC on Sunday , in the capstone performance of a very active television week , Buttigieg was asked about a remark that Amy Coney Barrett planned to make during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing—that before finishing any opinion , she reads it from the perspective of the people she is ruling against .
“ Well , ” Buttigieg said , “ two of her would-be colleagues , Justice Alito and Justice Thomas , wrote a memo last week essentially putting marriage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their minds .
So if she really wants to understand the party she might rule against , I guess I would invite her to follow that process and put herself in the shoes of somebody who was married and then was effectively forcibly divorced by judicial fiat .
Told that they were no longer married to their spouse .
Told that their family was no longer a family.
” Buttigieg has always fit most naturally into the political spectrum as a family-values progressive ; his latest book—the ostensible reason for this media tour—is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Best Chance.
” On “ Morning Joe , ” promoting the book , he offered that “ this could actually be a moment of turnaround when it comes to trust .
.
.
but not if we stay on the path that we ’ re on right now.
” ( What plays on Fox News as bracingly moral can play on MSNBC as pious and naïve . )
During his Presidential campaign , Buttigieg ’ s personality was often hard to extricate from his media strategy , which promised a program of “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would take any question , from just about any reporter , and answer it at great length .
This showcased his fluency but also made him seem like a know-it-all .
( Travelling New Hampshire on his bus last November , I remember hearing Buttigieg take a question about his favorite hymn , confidently declare that he recalled it in the original Welsh , and then struggle to conjure the English translation . )
By most standards , his campaign was a wild success : Buttigieg raised almost exactly a hundred million dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won the New Hampshire primary , and subtly updated the image of the establishment Democrat .
All of this was not even ten months ago .
But eventually Buttigieg ’ s failure to win Black political support , which came to shadow his candidacy , and his unpopularity among young progressives ( there was the spectre of his work at McKinsey ) eclipsed the more promising parts of his candidacy .
During the primary campaign , Buttigieg used to mention the juicy fact that the first Presidential debate was scheduled to be held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a corrupt New York casino billionaire who claimed the banner of the heartland being challenged by an actual Midwesterner in his home territory , where he had served as the town ’ s mayor .
The debate was moved from South Bend to the Cleveland Clinic , owing to the pandemic , but lately Buttigieg has been delivering some of what he had suggested .
Less than three weeks from Election Day , Republicans have offered a respite from Trump in two Christian Hoosiers : first , Pence , whose Vice-Presidential debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and now Barrett , whose nomination to the Supreme Court will dominate this one .
It makes sense that the essential contrast has been offered by a progressive from Indiana who shares their themes : home , devotion , sacrifice , family , trust .
Three weeks before the Presidential election , Biden leads President Trump by roughly ten points in the polling , and the Cook Political Report just changed its projection for the Senate from a Democratic gain of two seats , which would leave the Party just short of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which would put it comfortably in control .
Democratic confidence is all over cable television these days , and not just Buttigieg on Fox News .
On Tuesday , Kamala Harris ended her questioning of Barrett by reading a long excerpt from Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s defense of abortion rights during her own confirmation hearings , in 1993 .
Harris contrasted Ginsburg ’ s forthright statement with Barrett ’ s evasions about her anti-abortion convictions : “ I would suggest that we not pretend that we don ’ t know how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to choose.
” Less effectively , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was on CNN the same evening , defending her refusal to cut a deal on pandemic relief with the Trump White House , which had come rushing back to the negotiating table as the President ’ s polls kept getting worse .
Wolf Blitzer noted that , for many Americans , the situation was dire .
Why couldn ’ t she accept the latest offer made by the Treasury Secretary , Steven Mnuchin ?
Pelosi answered , “ His position has no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ values.
” She sounded like a politician sure that if Republicans did not share her values , Americans did .
Buttigieg , just thirty-eight , belongs to a generation of Democratic politicians who came up believing that the underlying political consensus in the country had moved , from center-right to center-left , and that their job was to provide a steady hand to ease the transition .
“ I belong to a generation that is stepping forward right now , ” he said , in announcing his exploratory committee .
That generation spent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent off course by Trump and Bernie Sanders , and the deeper alienation in the country that those politicians represented .
The current mood , of liberal confidence , really dawned only in the past two weeks and could easily be broken .
Nevertheless , a familiar set of scenes is developing .
Sunday was National Coming Out Day , and Buttigieg , on MSNBC , was assuring gay people that , from now on , whenever they choose to come out , they will find a welcoming world : “ I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to think about , because you ’ re often understandably wrapped up in your own fears and concerns , is to remember that when you make a decision to come out—to be who you are , to let others know who you are—someone you might not even realize might be looking to you , might be looking up to you , and might know that they have a better chance of acceptance from seeing you live into who you really are.
” Slayer Pete , with his steady voice and his dogs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his calmly stated rhetorical bombs that fly under Steve Doocy ’ s radar and land later , on Twitter , is a figure for a party that assumes it has a moral majority again .
Read More About the 2020 Election • The fall and rise of Kamala Harris .
• When a sitting President threatens to delay a sacrosanct American ritual like an election , you should listen .
• To understand the path Donald Trump has taken to the 2020 election , look at what he has provided the executive class @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election results ?
• The refusal by Mitch McConnell to rein in Trump is looking riskier than ever .
• Sign up for our election newsletter for insight and analysis from our reporters and columnists .

Television suits Peter Buttigieg. He is a dispassionate figure in an emotional medium. In response to ridiculousness, his face stays largely still, but his peaked eyebrows rise a notch. As a politician, Buttigieg’s great trick (it’s also a flaw) is to never take anything personally: he blinks away the noisy, slanderous business of daily politics in pursuit of what political consultants might call the point of essential contrast.
Lately, Buttigieg has been not taking things personally on Fox News. Liberals, even those who had grown tired of his dogged reasonableness, have celebrated each of his three recent appearances on the network as a tour de force and a rout. Just before the Vice-Presidential debate, last Wednesday, Buttigieg was asked on Fox News about the policy differences between Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. He replied, “Well, there’s a classic parlor game of trying to find a little bit of daylight between running mates, and if people want to play that game we could look into why an evangelical Christian like Mike Pence wants to be on a ticket with a President caught with a porn star.” Pence, President, porn—he captured the basic deal Republicans had made with power in three tight plosives. (Slayer Pete, Mary McNamara of the Los Angeles Times named this persona, brilliantly.)
It’s tempting to conclude that Buttigieg’s recent star turns on Fox News say less about him than they do about the network, whose hosts spend so much time ridiculing liberal positions that they can find themselves at a loss when those positions are presented in earnest. Last week, the “Fox and Friends” host Steve Doocy asked Buttigieg about President Trump’s choice not to participate in a virtual debate with Biden. “All of us have had to get used to virtual formats,” Buttigieg said, pointing out that parents trying to manage home learning had it much rougher than the President of the United States. He went on, “The only reason that we’re here in the first place is that the President of the United States is still contagious, as far as we know, with a deadly disease.” That clip, like his response to the question about Harris, went viral, partly because Doocy kept encouraging Buttigieg, as he usually does ideologically friendlier guests, with a series of confident-sounding local-news-anchor noises: “Sure . . . Right . . . Yeah . . . Sure . . . Right . . . Right . . . Sure.”
Fox News has always been a good venue for Buttigieg, for reasons that don’t have much to do with the dimness of its morning hosts. Last spring, a Fox audience stood at the end of a town hall with Buttigieg. “Wow! A standing ovation!” the Fox News anchor Chris Wallace said, apparently surprised by it. The network’s orientation, on both the hyperbolic evening shows and the Doocified morning ones, borrows the spirit, if not the prudity, of religious conservatives: the heartland is virtuous, and the liberal city sinful. Beamed in from Indiana, Buttigieg has a way of inverting all of that. On MSNBC on Sunday, in the capstone performance of a very active television week, Buttigieg was asked about a remark that Amy Coney Barrett planned to make during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing—that before finishing any opinion, she reads it from the perspective of the people she is ruling against. “Well,” Buttigieg said, “two of her would-be colleagues, Justice Alito and Justice Thomas, wrote a memo last week essentially putting marriage equality back on the table, in their minds. So if she really wants to understand the party she might rule against, I guess I would invite her to follow that process and put herself in the shoes of somebody who was married and then was effectively forcibly divorced by judicial fiat. Told that they were no longer married to their spouse. Told that their family was no longer a family.” Buttigieg has always fit most naturally into the political spectrum as a family-values progressive; his latest book—the ostensible reason for this media tour—is titled “Trust: America’s Best Chance.” On “Morning Joe,” promoting the book, he offered that “this could actually be a moment of turnaround when it comes to trust . . . but not if we stay on the path that we’re on right now.” (What plays on Fox News as bracingly moral can play on MSNBC as pious and naïve.)
During his Presidential campaign, Buttigieg’s personality was often hard to extricate from his media strategy, which promised a program of “radical access” in which the candidate would take any question, from just about any reporter, and answer it at great length. This showcased his fluency but also made him seem like a know-it-all. (Travelling New Hampshire on his bus last November, I remember hearing Buttigieg take a question about his favorite hymn, confidently declare that he recalled it in the original Welsh, and then struggle to conjure the English translation.) By most standards, his campaign was a wild success: Buttigieg raised almost exactly a hundred million dollars, won the Iowa caucuses, nearly won the New Hampshire primary, and subtly updated the image of the establishment Democrat. All of this was not even ten months ago. But eventually Buttigieg’s failure to win Black political support, which came to shadow his candidacy, and his unpopularity among young progressives (there was the spectre of his work at McKinsey) eclipsed the more promising parts of his candidacy.
During the primary campaign, Buttigieg used to mention the juicy fact that the first Presidential debate was scheduled to be held at Notre Dame, evoking a vision of a corrupt New York casino billionaire who claimed the banner of the heartland being challenged by an actual Midwesterner in his home territory, where he had served as mayor. The debate was moved from Notre Dame to the Cleveland Clinic, owing to the pandemic, but lately Buttigieg has been delivering some of what he had suggested. Less than three weeks from Election Day, Republicans have offered a respite from Trump in two Christian Hoosiers: first, Pence, whose Vice-Presidential debate shaped the news all last week, and now Barrett, whose nomination to the Supreme Court will dominate this one. It makes sense that the essential contrast has been offered by a progressive from Indiana who shares their themes: home, devotion, sacrifice, family, trust.
Three weeks before the Presidential election, Biden leads President Trump by roughly ten points in the polling, and the Cook Political Report slightly increased its projection for the Senate to a Democratic gain of two to seven seats; though two seats would leave the Party just short of a majority, seven seats would put it comfortably in control. Democratic confidence is all over cable television these days, and not just Buttigieg on Fox News. On Tuesday, Kamala Harris ended her questioning of Barrett by reading a long excerpt from Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s defense of abortion rights during her own confirmation hearings, in 1993. Harris contrasted Ginsburg’s forthright statement with Barrett’s evasions about her anti-abortion convictions: “I would suggest that we not pretend that we don’t know how this nominee views a woman’s right to choose.” Less effectively, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was on CNN the same evening, defending her refusal to cut a deal on pandemic relief with the Trump White House, which had come rushing back to the negotiating table as the President’s polls kept getting worse. Wolf Blitzer noted that, for many Americans, the situation was dire. Why couldn’t she accept the latest offer made by the Treasury Secretary, Steven Mnuchin? Pelosi answered, “His position has no integrity. They do not share our values.” She sounded like a politician sure that if Republicans did not share her values, Americans did.


newyorker--2020-10-15--Who Is a Domestic Terrorist?

Who Is a Domestic Terrorist?

On August 15 , 2012 , Floyd Lee Corkins II walked into the Washington , D.C. , office of the Family Research Council with fifteen Chick-fil-A sandwiches , fifty rounds of ammunition , and a semi-automatic pistol .
Corkins ’ s goal was to shoot as many employees of the conservative Christian organization as possible and then smear the sandwiches on their faces as they died .
Corkins , a twenty-eight-year-old man from suburban Virginia who had volunteered at a local L.G.B.T.Q .
community center , intended the murders to be a political statement .
He supported gay marriage ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the leaders of the Family Research Council opposed it—the organization further maintains that homosexuality is “ harmful to the persons who engage in it ” and “ to society at large.
” When Corkins arrived at the office , he wounded an unarmed building manager , who managed to wrestle him to the ground and disarm him , before anyone else was hurt .
Corkins had planned to go to another conservative group later that day and carry out a second mass killing .
The F.B.I .
case agent assigned to the shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specialist in investigating violent extremist groups , from the Aryan Nations to Al Qaeda .
In his view , Corkins ’ s act fit the legal definition of domestic terrorism as established by Congress in the Patriot Act , following the 9/11 attacks : a violent crime intended to “ intimidate or coerce a civilian population ” or to “ influence the policy of a government.
” But the new federal law did not specifically designate domestic terrorism a federal crime , and included no penalty .
So Corkins became the first person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ act of terrorism under a District of Columbia law that had also been passed in response to 9/11 .
He expressed remorse , pleaded guilty , and was sentenced to twenty-five years in prison .
O ’ Connor , who was the vice-president of the F.B.I .
Agents Association at the time , began unsuccessfully lobbying members of Congress to enact a law that would designate acts of domestic terrorism a federal crime .
To this day , he supports the idea .
O ’ Connor contends that such a measure would give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ combat the intentional use of violence to achieve political goals .
He also believes that it would further enshrine and encourage peaceful , First Amendment-protected political activity .
“ We should effect change by protests—nonviolent protests—and by voting , ” O ’ Connor told me .
“ Those are the two ways.
” Since the attacks in Charlottesville , Pittsburgh , El Paso , and other cities , the debate over how to respond to domestic terrorism has intensified .
But both Democrats and Republicans in Congress , along with the American Civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal law-enforcement officials the enormous political power that comes with being able to declare an individual a “ terrorist.
” They cite the Bureau ’ s history of illegally surveilling , harassing , and profiling political , racial , and religious groups , from Black civil-rights organizations to the John Birch Society to Muslim Americans .
Opponents also point out that some protest groups on the left and the right , such as Greenpeace and organizations that oppose abortion , intentionally break the law during demonstrations .
Critics say that making domestic terrorism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a recipe for suppressing dissent .
O ’ Connor argues that failing to confront the rising number of perpetrators of political violence carries a different set of risks .
He says that the coronavirus pandemic , mass layoffs , and apocalyptic campaign rhetoric have created the greatest potential for political violence in the United States that he has seen in twenty-three years of investigating extremism .
Mary McCord , a former federal prosecutor who also supports a new domestic-terrorism measure , called the current election season “ hugely dangerous , ” adding , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we should throw up our hands and say we can ’ t trust law enforcement.
” Last week , federal and state officials charged thirteen men with plotting to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer , the Governor of Michigan , and accused them of surveilling her vacation home , conducting tactical training , and discussing an attack on the state capitol .
On Tuesday , reports emerged that the group also considered kidnapping Virginia ’ s Governor , Ralph Northam .
O ’ Connor , who retired from the Bureau last year , said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheme shocked and worried him .
“ Usually , when you have an event that involves extremist ideology , it ’ s one or two people , ” he said .
“ They were going to rallies and asking others to join.
” Earlier this year , Christopher Wray , the director of the F.B.I , announced that the Bureau had more than a thousand investigations into violent extremism under way in all fifty states .
In testimony to Congress in September , he warned that the perception of government overreach , racism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremism—D.V.E.
, in Bureau parlance— “ remain constant.
” He noted , “ More deaths were caused by D.V.E.s than international terrorists in recent years .
In fact , 2019 was the deadliest year for domestic extremist violence since the Oklahoma City bombing , in 1995.
” ( Wray was referring to an attack on a federal building that killed a hundred and sixty-eight people , one of the deadliest acts of domestic terrorism in American history . )
A quarter century later , O ’ Connor and other experts contend that rampant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the radicalization process.
” O ’ Connor , who said he strives to be nonpartisan , accused both political parties of inaction : “ One side wants the white supremacists to be prosecuted , and the other side wants Antifa to be prosecuted .
It should not matter what the person looks like when they commit an act that looks like domestic terrorism.
” He added that individuals on either side of the ideological spectrum have engaged in political violence , but that , statistically , right-wing extremist attacks have been far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more property damage , but , if you look at the death rate , it ’ s not even close , ” he said .
He described the Michigan plot as textbook domestic terrorism .
“ It ’ s extremist violence based on anti-government political views .
It ’ s political violence , ” he said .
“ Call it what it is.
” Matthew Feldman , a professor at the University of York who studies right-wing extremism , said that November 3rd has all the hallmarks of being a potential “ trigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is growing on both sides , but he , too , believes that the far right represents a more lethal threat .
“ At the fringes on the right , a narrative is building that the left is stealing the election , ” he said , warning that extremists may decide that “ their way of life ” will disappear “ if they don ’ t take action.
” But , he added , would-be attackers often await a signal from leaders that violence is acceptable .
“ Scholars have long talked about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the top , ” Feldman told me .
“ One of the surest signs of these trigger events is an increasingly apocalyptic tone .
And , of course , the biggest culprit has been Donald Trump.
” As O ’ Connor put it , “ In my thirty-five years in law enforcement , I ’ ve not seen the country as divided as it is today .
It ’ s amazing times .
It ’ s the perfect storm.
” This week , a federal law-enforcement official acknowledged the danger and told me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” individuals planning or engaging in violence .
“ We ’ ll take appropriate action , ” he said .
The greatest responsibility , though , lies with the President and other elected leaders .
Exhibiting restraint in the weeks ahead will produce more political benefit for themselves , and for the public , than further talk of Armageddon .
Read More About the 2020 Election • The fall and rise of Kamala Harris .
• When a sitting President threatens to delay a sacrosanct American ritual like an election , you should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump has taken to the 2020 election , look at what he has provided the executive class .
• What happens if Trump fights the election results ?
• The refusal by Mitch McConnell to rein in Trump is looking riskier than ever .
• Sign up for our election newsletter for insight and analysis from our reporters and columnists .

On August 15, 2012, Floyd Lee Corkins II walked into the Washington, D.C., office of the Family Research Council with fifteen Chick-fil-A sandwiches, fifty rounds of ammunition, and a semi-automatic pistol. Corkins’s goal was to shoot as many employees of the conservative Christian organization as possible and then smear the sandwiches on their faces as they died. Corkins, a twenty-eight-year-old man from suburban Virginia who had volunteered at a local L.G.B.T.Q. community center, intended the murders to be a political statement. He supported gay marriage; the owners of the restaurant chain and the leaders of the Family Research Council opposed it—the organization further maintains that homosexuality is “harmful to the persons who engage in it” and “to society at large.” When Corkins arrived at the office, he wounded an unarmed building manager, who managed to wrestle him to the ground and disarm him, before anyone else was hurt. Corkins had planned to go to another conservative group later that day and carry out a second mass killing.
The F.B.I. case agent assigned to the shooting was Tom O’Connor, a specialist in investigating violent extremist groups, from the Aryan Nations to Al Qaeda. In his view, Corkins’s act fit the legal definition of domestic terrorism as established by Congress in the Patriot Act, following the 9/11 attacks: a violent crime intended to “intimidate or coerce a civilian population” or to “influence the policy of a government.” But the new federal law did not specifically designate domestic terrorism a federal crime, and included no penalty. So Corkins became the first person to be charged with committing an armed act of terrorism under a District of Columbia law that had also been passed in response to 9/11. He expressed remorse, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to twenty-five years in prison.
O’Connor, who was the vice-president of the F.B.I. Agents Association at the time, began unsuccessfully lobbying members of Congress to enact a law that would designate acts of domestic terrorism a federal crime. To this day, he supports the idea. O’Connor contends that such a measure would give law-enforcement officials additional tools and resources to combat the intentional use of violence to achieve political goals. He also believes that it would further enshrine and encourage peaceful, First Amendment-protected political activity. “We should effect change by protests—nonviolent protests—and by voting,” O’Connor told me. “Those are the two ways.”
Since the attacks in Charlottesville, Pittsburgh, El Paso, and other cities, the debate over how to respond to domestic terrorism has intensified. But both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, along with the American Civil Liberties Union, remain leery of giving federal law-enforcement officials the enormous political power that comes with being able to declare an individual a “terrorist.” They cite the Bureau’s history of illegally surveilling, harassing, and profiling political, racial, and religious groups, from Black civil-rights organizations to the John Birch Society to Muslim Americans. Opponents also point out that some protest groups on the left and the right, such as Greenpeace and organizations that oppose abortion, intentionally break the law during demonstrations. Critics say that making domestic terrorism a federal crime is both unnecessary and a recipe for suppressing dissent.
O’Connor argues that failing to confront the rising number of perpetrators of political violence carries a different set of risks. He says that the coronavirus pandemic, mass layoffs, and apocalyptic campaign rhetoric have created the greatest potential for political violence in the United States that he has seen in twenty-three years of investigating extremism. Mary McCord, a former federal prosecutor who also supports a new domestic-terrorism measure, called the current election season “hugely dangerous,” adding, “I just don’t think we should throw up our hands and say we can’t trust law enforcement.”
Last week, federal and state officials charged thirteen men with plotting to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan, and accused them of surveilling her vacation home, conducting tactical training, and discussing an attack on the state capitol. On Tuesday, reports emerged that the group also considered kidnapping Virginia’s Governor, Ralph Northam. O’Connor, who retired from the Bureau last year, said that the size and the scope of the scheme shocked and worried him. “Usually, when you have an event that involves extremist ideology, it’s one or two people,” he said. “They were going to rallies and asking others to join.”
Earlier this year, Christopher Wray, the director of the F.B.I, announced that the Bureau had more than a thousand investigations into violent extremism under way in all fifty states. In testimony to Congress in September, he warned that the perception of government overreach, racism, and other dynamics fuelling domestic violent extremism—D.V.E., in Bureau parlance—“remain constant.” He noted, “More deaths were caused by D.V.E.s than international terrorists in recent years. In fact, 2019 was the deadliest year for domestic extremist violence since the Oklahoma City bombing, in 1995.” (Wray was referring to an attack on a federal building that killed a hundred and sixty-eight people, one of the deadliest acts of domestic terrorism in American history.)
A quarter century later, O’Connor and other experts contend that rampant online conspiracy theories are “adding gasoline to the radicalization process.” O’Connor, who said he strives to be nonpartisan, accused both political parties of inaction: “One side wants the white supremacists to be prosecuted, and the other side wants Antifa to be prosecuted. It should not matter what the person looks like when they commit an act that looks like domestic terrorism.” He added that individuals on either side of the ideological spectrum have engaged in political violence, but that, statistically, right-wing extremist attacks have been far more lethal. “Leftists have caused more property damage, but, if you look at the death rate, it’s not even close,” he said. He described the Michigan plot as textbook domestic terrorism. “It’s extremist violence based on anti-government political views. It’s political violence,” he said. “Call it what it is.”
Matthew Feldman, a professor at the University of York who studies right-wing extremism, said that November 3rd has all the hallmarks of being a potential “trigger moment.” He told me that polarization is growing on both sides, but he, too, believes that the far right represents a more lethal threat. “At the fringes on the right, a narrative is building that the left is stealing the election,” he said, warning that extremists may decide that “their way of life” will disappear “if they don’t take action.” But, he added, would-be attackers often await a signal from leaders that violence is acceptable. “Scholars have long talked about a kind of license that comes from the top,” Feldman told me. “One of the surest signs of these trigger events is an increasingly apocalyptic tone. And, of course, the biggest culprit has been Donald Trump.”
As O’Connor put it, “In my thirty-five years in law enforcement, I’ve not seen the country as divided as it is today. It’s amazing times. It’s the perfect storm.” This week, a federal law-enforcement official acknowledged the danger and told me that authorities were “looking out for” individuals planning or engaging in violence. “We’ll take appropriate action,” he said. The greatest responsibility, though, lies with the President and other elected leaders. Exhibiting restraint in the weeks ahead will produce more political benefit for themselves, and for the public, than further talk of Armageddon.
Read More About the 2020 Election


newyorker--2020-10-15--Amy Coney Barrett and the Future of Abortion Rights

This week , the Senate held confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett , a conservative judge who clerked for Justice @ @ @ @ @ is appointed , the Supreme Court will include six Justices selected by Republicans , which @ @ @ @ @ Roe v. Wade .
Margaret Talbot , a New Yorker staff writer , joins Dorothy @ @ @ @ @ record on abortion and birth control , the future of women 's reproductive rights in @ @ @ @ @ what strategy pro-choice Democrats should pursue in the coming years .

Download a transcript.
Photograph by Erin Schaff / Pool / Getty
This week, the Senate held confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative judge who clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia. If she is appointed, the Supreme Court will include six Justices selected by Republicans, which could determine the fate of Roe v. Wade. Margaret Talbot, a New Yorker staff writer, joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss Barrett's record on abortion and birth control, the future of women's reproductive rights in the United States, and what strategy pro-choice Democrats should pursue in the coming years.