newyorker--2020-10-06--Just How Disastrous Are the Latest Polls for Donald Trump?

The interviews for most of these surveys were carried out after last Tuesday ’ s chaotic Presidential debate , in Cleveland , Ohio , but before Trump was admitted to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after testing positive for the coronavirus .
( Questioning for the CNN poll took place over the weekend , when Trump was in the hospital . )
To get a better idea of what the latest polling portends for the election , and whether Trump ’ s illness is likely to change things much , I spoke on Monday with two veteran polling experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic polling firm Hart Research , which helps to carry out NBC News and Wall Street Journal polls , and Whit Ayres , the founder and president of North Star Opinion Research , a well-connected Republican firm .
When I interviewed Hart for an earlier piece , he thought that the first debate would be a critical moment for both candidates , but particularly for Biden , whom voters would be sizing up as a potential President .
Hart likened the situation to 1980 , when the contest between Ronald Reagan and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incumbent , was pretty close until Reagan ’ s performance in the first debate dispelled some voters ’ doubts about him .
On Election Day , Reagan carried forty-four states and won the popular vote by almost ten points .
During our conversation on Monday , Hart said that the Cleveland debate—which he called a “ critical threshold ” —could prove equally important for this year ’ s election .
“ It ’ s really pretty simple , ” Hart said .
“ For the voters , I think what they discovered about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I think for Biden it was ‘ good enough.
’ ” Going into the debate , Hart explained , Trump ’ s strategy was obviously to “ destroy Biden ” by throwing a whole bunch of things at him simultaneously , and trying to “ get into his grill , ” but the plan didn ’ t work out .
“ Biden didn ’ t crack or seem short of answers , ” Hart said .
“ And he spoke directly to the camera , which was a big plus for him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is , essentially , people said , ‘ Biden ’ s safe , or good enough .
If I thought I was taking a chance ” —in voting for him— “ I don ’ t think it ’ s as much of a question mark as I was concerned about.
’ ” The numbers from the new national polls support Hart ’ s analysis .
In the CNN poll , fifty-eight per cent of respondents said they thought that Biden did a better job in the debate , and twenty-seven per cent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll were similar : forty-nine per cent of respondents said they thought that Biden did a better job , compared to twenty-four per cent for Trump .
And , for the first time in this poll since Trump took office , fifty per cent of respondents said that they had a “ very negative ” view of him .
Hart also pointed to another question from the survey—the “ feeling thermometer ” —which involves asking people about their feelings toward the two candidates .
In each of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surveys from this year , Biden recorded a negative score , meaning that there were more people with negative feelings about him than people with positive feelings .
In the post-debate poll , however , that changed .
Biden ’ s feeling thermometer registered positive by two percentage points : forty-three per cent of respondents said that they felt positively about him , versus forty-one per cent who said that they had negative feelings .
“ Now , you may say that finding isn ’ t all that impressive , ” Hart said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ underwater by twenty points , it is more than enough.
” Trump ’ s admission to the hospital knocked the debate from the headlines and upended his own campaign .
I asked Hart if he thought that Trump , assuming he makes a rapid recovery , might conceivably be able to use his illness to his advantage .
Hart said that this was possible but unlikely .
“ What would work for him best is what he can do least , ” he said .
“ Which is to have a Damascene conversion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say , ‘ I don ’ t recognize that .
He really has turned over a new leaf .
Having gone through this , he recognizes the challenge and is turning all his attention and energy toward safety and getting rid of the virus.
’ That ’ s what would be best , but that ’ s sort of like teaching an elephant to do gymnastics.
” The new CNN poll , which was published after I spoke with Ayres , appears to confirm the message of the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t sound at all sanguine about Trump ’ s political predicament .
In fact , he volunteered that the debate in Cleveland had been “ disastrous.
” When I asked him if there was data to back that up , he replied , “ I don ’ t know I would say it was established by data .
I would say it belongs in the realm of the self-evident.
” Some Trump aides have sought to downplay recent polls , particularly the battleground-state polls , saying that they are undercounting some Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ayres about these polls , he said that they were probably more reliable this year than in 2016 , because most pollsters now adjust their samples to account for the balance between voters with a college education and those without one .
In the Trump era , he said , making this adjustment “ has become absolutely critical , particularly amongst women.
” Playing devil ’ s advocate , I brought up the Trump campaign ’ s argument that it can still overcome its deficit in the polls by turning out droves of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a college degree .
“ That ’ s correct , ” Ayres said .
“ There are a lot of non-college voters , particularly in the Midwest , who didn ’ t vote ” in previous elections .
“ The problem is , ” he continued , “ it ’ s incredibly difficult to get unregistered , nonparticipating voters registered and to the polls in any significant numbers , and that ’ s not how Trump won in 2016 .
Trump won by flipping voters that had voted before from Obama to Trump.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ raising turnout on November 3rd , Ayres added , his opponent is likely to do the same thing .
“ Democrats are at a fever pitch , ” he said .
“ We may well have the highest turnout we have ever had in a Presidential election.
” Throughout our conversation , Ayres traced many of Trump ’ s problems to his handling of the coronavirus , which appears to have alienated older voters in particular .
In 2016 , Trump carried this crucial demographic by seven per cent , according to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the New York Times and Siena College poll show Biden leading among voters aged sixty-five and older by eleven points in Pennsylvania , by two points in Florida , and by one point in Arizona .
“ None of that is a real surprise , given that seniors are the most vulnerable to the coronavirus , ” Ayres said .
“ It ’ s difficult to isolate any one factor and say it ’ s all due to that .
[ Trump ’ s ] style may have something to do with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that the group most vulnerable to the coronavirus went the most negative on his handling of it.
” Rather than focussing on the virus , the Trump campaign has sought to direct attention to other issues , such as “ law and order ” and the economy .
I asked Ayres if he thought that it was too late for this strategy to start working .
“ It ’ s not too late , but you can ’ t simply argue that we ’ ve got to focus on the economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s problems are caused by the pandemic , ” he said .
“ So you ’ ve got to have a more sophisticated , interrelated message about how a particular candidate would be better able to get the economy going while we battle the coronavirus .
It can ’ t just be one or the other.
” When I spoke to Ayres , the news had broken that Trump was about to return to the White House .
I asked him what advice he would offer the President and his campaign managers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a well-thought-out , well-documented plan , complete with various markers of progress , for addressing the pandemic , ” he said .
“ That lies at the heart of all our problems—the economy , our education system , our health care , our sports life , everything.
” I asked Ayres if he had any confidence that the Trump campaign would follow this advice once the President gets out of the hospital .
“ I ’ d better not say anything about that , ” he replied .

The past few days have brought a series of alarming polls for President Donald Trump, including a new national poll from CNN that was released on Tuesday morning, which shows Joe Biden leading him by sixteen points: fifty-seven per cent to forty-one per cent. Another national poll from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which was released on Sunday, showed Biden with a fourteen-point lead: fifty-three per cent to thirty-nine per cent. At the state level, a New York Times and Siena College survey of likely voters in Arizona, a state that the Democrats have only carried once since 1948, showed Trump trailing Biden by eight percentage points. This finding came a day after the same polling team released a pair of polls which indicated that Biden has comfortable leads in Florida and Pennsylvania, two key battleground states.
The interviews for most of these surveys were carried out after last Tuesday’s chaotic Presidential debate, in Cleveland, Ohio, but before Trump was admitted to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after testing positive for the coronavirus. (Questioning for the CNN poll took place over the weekend, when Trump was in the hospital.) To get a better idea of what the latest polling portends for the election, and whether Trump’s illness is likely to change things much, I spoke on Monday with two veteran polling experts: Peter D. Hart, who founded the Democratic polling firm Hart Research, which helps to carry out NBC News and Wall Street Journal polls, and Whit Ayres, the founder and president of North Star Opinion Research, a well-connected Republican firm.
When I interviewed Hart for an earlier piece, he thought that the first debate would be a critical moment for both candidates, but particularly for Biden, whom voters would be sizing up as a potential President. Hart likened the situation to 1980, when the contest between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, who was an unpopular incumbent, was pretty close until Reagan’s performance in the first debate dispelled some voters’ doubts about him. On Election Day, Reagan carried forty-four states and won the popular vote by almost ten points. During our conversation on Monday, Hart said that the Cleveland debate—which he called a “critical threshold”—could prove equally important for this year’s election.
“It’s really pretty simple,” Hart said. “For the voters, I think what they discovered about Trump is ‘enough already,’ and I think for Biden it was ‘good enough.’ ” Going into the debate, Hart explained, Trump’s strategy was obviously to “destroy Biden” by throwing a whole bunch of things at him simultaneously, and trying to “get into his grill,” but the plan didn’t work out. “Biden didn’t crack or seem short of answers,” Hart said. “And he spoke directly to the camera, which was a big plus for him. What happened out of all of this is, essentially, people said, ‘Biden’s safe, or good enough. If I thought I was taking a chance”—in voting for him—“I don’t think it’s as much of a question mark as I was concerned about.’ ”
The numbers from the new national polls support Hart’s analysis. In the CNN poll, fifty-eight per cent of respondents said they thought that Biden did a better job in the debate, and twenty-seven per cent said that Trump did. The findings of the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll were similar: forty-nine per cent of respondents said they thought that Biden did a better job, compared to twenty-four per cent for Trump. And, for the first time in this poll since Trump took office, fifty per cent of respondents said that they had a “very negative” view of him. Hart also pointed to another question from the survey—the “feeling thermometer”—which involves asking people about their feelings toward the two candidates. In each of the previous NBC and Wall Street Journal surveys from this year, Biden recorded a negative score, meaning that there were more people with negative feelings about him than people with positive feelings. In the post-debate poll, however, that changed. Biden’s feeling thermometer registered positive by two percentage points: forty-three per cent of respondents said that they felt positively about him, versus forty-one per cent who said that they had negative feelings. “Now, you may say that finding isn’t all that impressive,” Hart said. “But when the President is underwater by twenty points, it is more than enough.”
Trump’s admission to the hospital knocked the debate from the headlines and upended his own campaign. I asked Hart if he thought that Trump, assuming he makes a rapid recovery, might conceivably be able to use his illness to his advantage. Hart said that this was possible but unlikely. “What would work for him best is what he can do least,” he said. “Which is to have a Damascene conversion on the coronavirus. One where voters say, ‘I don’t recognize that. He really has turned over a new leaf. Having gone through this, he recognizes the challenge and is turning all his attention and energy toward safety and getting rid of the virus.’ That’s what would be best, but that’s sort of like teaching an elephant to do gymnastics.”
Ayres, the Republican strategist and pollster, has advised numerous candidates, including Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida. In our conversation, I began by asking him about the NBC News and Wall Street Journal poll, which received a lot of attention. Not surprisingly, perhaps, he was considerably more cautious than Hart in reaching conclusions. He pointed to possible issues with the survey’s sample, which, out of a hundred, contained nine more self-identified Democrats than Republicans, compared to a margin of five more Democrats in the group’s previous survey. “It does indicate that the debate may have helped Biden,” Ayres said of the poll. “But it’s too early to reach a definitive judgment on that.”
The new CNN poll, which was published after I spoke with Ayres, appears to confirm the message of the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. In any event, Ayres didn’t sound at all sanguine about Trump’s political predicament. In fact, he volunteered that the debate in Cleveland had been “disastrous.” When I asked him if there was data to back that up, he replied, “I don’t know I would say it was established by data. I would say it belongs in the realm of the self-evident.” Some Trump aides have sought to downplay recent polls, particularly the battleground-state polls, saying that they are undercounting some Trump voters. But, when I asked Ayres about these polls, he said that they were probably more reliable this year than in 2016, because most pollsters now adjust their samples to account for the balance between voters with a college education and those without one. In the Trump era, he said, making this adjustment “has become absolutely critical, particularly amongst women.”
Playing devil’s advocate, I brought up the Trump campaign’s argument that it can still overcome its deficit in the polls by turning out droves of new voters, particularly white voters without a college degree. “That’s correct,” Ayres said. “There are a lot of non-college voters, particularly in the Midwest, who didn’t vote” in previous elections. “The problem is,” he continued, “it’s incredibly difficult to get unregistered, nonparticipating voters registered and to the polls in any significant numbers, and that’s not how Trump won in 2016. Trump won by flipping voters that had voted before from Obama to Trump.” Even if Trump does succeed in raising turnout on November 3rd, Ayres added, his opponent is likely to do the same thing. “Democrats are at a fever pitch,” he said. “We may well have the highest turnout we have ever had in a Presidential election.”
Throughout our conversation, Ayres traced many of Trump’s problems to his handling of the coronavirus, which appears to have alienated older voters in particular. In 2016, Trump carried this crucial demographic by seven per cent, according to the network exit poll. The new surveys from the New York Times and Siena College poll show Biden leading among voters aged sixty-five and older by eleven points in Pennsylvania, by two points in Florida, and by one point in Arizona. “None of that is a real surprise, given that seniors are the most vulnerable to the coronavirus,” Ayres said. “It’s difficult to isolate any one factor and say it’s all due to that. [Trump’s] style may have something to do with it. But the most obvious explanation is that the group most vulnerable to the coronavirus went the most negative on his handling of it.”
Rather than focussing on the virus, the Trump campaign has sought to direct attention to other issues, such as “law and order” and the economy. I asked Ayres if he thought that it was too late for this strategy to start working. “It’s not too late, but you can’t simply argue that we’ve got to focus on the economy and not the pandemic, because the economy’s problems are caused by the pandemic,” he said. “So you’ve got to have a more sophisticated, interrelated message about how a particular candidate would be better able to get the economy going while we battle the coronavirus. It can’t just be one or the other.”
When I spoke to Ayres, the news had broken that Trump was about to return to the White House. I asked him what advice he would offer the President and his campaign managers. “The most critical need is for a well-thought-out, well-documented plan, complete with various markers of progress, for addressing the pandemic,” he said. “That lies at the heart of all our problems—the economy, our education system, our health care, our sports life, everything.” I asked Ayres if he had any confidence that the Trump campaign would follow this advice once the President gets out of the hospital. “I’d better not say anything about that,” he replied.


newyorker--2020-10-06--A Bernstein-Lerner Broadway Standard Warns Anew of a White House in Peril

With words by Alan Jay Lerner and music by Leonard Bernstein , it ’ s a song from one of the most famously misbegotten productions in the history of American musical theatre , the bicentennial musical “ 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
” Impeccably credentialled though it was , the show , which sought to tell the story of the White House ’ s first century , failed miserably , first out of town , in Washington , D.C. , and then after only seven performances on Broadway .
The failure was the consequence of reasons as simple as an awkward narrative— @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aside , it ’ s always hard to tell a story on stage that , as they used to say , spans centuries—and as complexly alchemical as the mysteries of collaboration always are .
( Lerner , after his triumphs with Frederick Loewe , never did write another truly successful show , and neither did Bernstein . )
Yet the show ’ s emphasis on the experiences not only of the white First Families who lived in the house but of the Black people who built it , served in , and ran @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paper at least—there was never a cast recording—prescient and brave , and worth reviving .
This one song , however , survived to creep into the language of standards , as good songs from failed shows will .
( Any musical-theatre maven can name a hundred , beginning with the perfect “ All the Things You Are , ” from a short-lived Oscar Hammerstein-Jerome Kern show . )
It marries a lovely Bernstein hymn-tune to one of Lerner ’ s most meticulous and sincere lyrics : “ Take care of this house / @ @ @ @ @ @ @ break in , sound the alarm .
.
.
.
/ Be careful at night , check all the doors / If someone makes off with our dream / The dream will be yours.
” Take care of this house .
Listening to the song now , performed by a wonderful concert of Americans , one is thrown back to the scene on the last night of the Republican National Convention , when Donald Trump , against all precedent and even evident legality , turned that house into a background set for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right .
Of course , even to mention in October what happened back in August risks irrelevance .
One unimaginable event succeeds the next , and October ’ s White House has now become a swamp of infection and illness , pushing August ’ s White House into what seems like distant memory .
But to refuse to recollect , rather than just to react , is to serve Trump ’ s purpose .
Autocrats and authoritarians depend on the amnesia of exhaustion .
Their end is to replace reason with reflexes ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rest of us judge ruthlessness to be a bad strategy , since it will ultimately rebound against us when the balance of power alters .
But , if you have no intention of ceding power , ruthlessness is an optimal strategy .
Trump ’ s genius since 1980 , when he destroyed the façade of the old Bonwit Teller building to make way for Trump Tower , has been to understand that , if you do an indecent thing with enough indifference , decent people will usually be too shocked to resist you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s assaults on decency and the rule of law not only exhausts the citizenry but outpaces the media , which has no previous categories or concepts with which to deal with the new reality—and so returns each day , trying to fit the overflowing refuse into old-fashioned bins .
And so , back to the house .
Anyone who remembers the fateful White House Correspondents ’ Dinner of 2011 , when President Obama hilariously mocked Trump , while , ironically , perhaps motivating him toward the Presidency , will also recall that Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would turn the White House into .
With a kitsch chandelier on the north portico and the promise of a casino inside , the image was wholly , though merely , vulgar .
Even the imagination of parody couldn ’ t foresee Trump lighting up the Mall with fireworks spelling out his own name , as he did on the last night of the Convention .
That spectacle was absurd , but it was also terrifying .
We can recover from bad policy and cruel policy , from White House rooms , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can not recover from seeing the foundation of our system—the house itself—destroyed .
The American republic , with all its flaws and failings and incomplete achievements , does rest on an idea that , as the great historian Gordon Wood showed nearly thirty years ago , in his book “ The Radicalism of the American Revolution , ” was in its time truly radical and revolutionary .
“ You start with a monarchical society in a world of monarchies , a society which was hierarchical , ” Wood said in an interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transformed by the Revolution.
” The Revolution proposed something unknown since classical times : namely , the idea that power should flow not from an individual chosen by God or by birth but—a thought so audacious that , taking it for granted , we now deprecate it—from politics , from a free and open debate between different sides that results in a temporary disposition of power .
Louis XIV said , “ L ’ etat , c ’ est moi.
” The state is me .
The whole premise of American democracy was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was a formal principle reinforced by personal conduct , beginning when George Washington readily and amiably stepped down from power , when he had the choice .
We live by , in effect , a paradoxical principle : that the White House is not a home , that power resides in the house itself , which rests it for a brief time on one occupant before passing it on to the next .
Democratic practices are meaningless without that constitutional underpinning .
“ Take care of this house / Be always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ / It ’ s the home of us all , ” Lerner ’ s lyric ends .
It isn ’ t merely a sentiment ; it ’ s a neat encapsulation of a principle .
The White House is never to be taken for a palace .
Many countries—Russia , most notably—now have ostensible democracies that are really autocracies , because the line between the state and the me has been erased .
They are ever more brutally vertical .
That Trump has so far erased that line only fitfully , though every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the evidence that this is the condition of government that he and his Attorney General would impose on us if they could .
Not the temporary political triumph of one party over an organized opposition but the replacement of the rule of law with the whims and rages of one man .
That ’ s what is suggested when you use the people ’ s house as your product-placement background and light up the sky above it with your name .
The degradation of the White House was only deepened by the recklessly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ held there just over a week ago for Trump ’ s Supreme Court nominee , Amy Coney Barrett .
It was a way of owning the libs by owning the garden .
The theme is simple , repetitive , and toxic : We can ignore the rules made for other people .
This notion has now apparently played havoc not just with the ever-longer list of people close to the President who have been infected by the coronavirus—running from not only Trump and the First Lady to Republican senators to the press secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the largely helpless and invisible service people in the White House , suggesting another sad “ downstairs ” scene for a new edition of the Lerner-Bernstein musical .
The White House that Trump returned to on Monday evening has been a dignified place of convalescence before : most tragically , for Abraham Lincoln ’ s son Willie ; most bizarrely , for Woodrow Wilson , with his effective substitution by his wife , Edith .
As Trump returns to our house for his convalescence , the one wish that all decent people have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his reform .
We wish that the ghosts of Pandemics Past , Pandemics Present , and of Pandemics Yet to Come may have visited the President in Walter Reed and made him , like Ebenezer Scrooge , more broadly compassionate about other people ’ s suffering through seeing some of his own .
Though , on Monday , the odds looked long on that having happened .
He tweeted , “ Feeling really good !
Don ’ t be afraid of Covid .
Don ’ t let it dominate your life ” —a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
Well , to vary a Trumpism , we are where we are .
The country is in a crisis of a kind unknown since the Civil War , an existential crisis of liberal democracy itself .
When the British set fire to the as yet unfinished Capitol and to the White House , their leader cried , “ Shall this harbor of Yankee democracy be burned ?
” A harbor is an odd image , but , however evil its speaker ’ s intentions , a good one for our houses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place where boats rest before moving on ; it is an image of the transience of power that is essential to the democratic vision .
Right now , the harbor is burning , the house is on fire , and we have almost no time left to save it .

An extraordinary and beautifully various group of artists, ranging from Yo-Yo Ma to Judy Collins, has come together, under the direction of the pianist Lara Downes (with whom I have been lucky enough to collaborate in the past), to make a video recording of an often overlooked song, one that could serve as an alternative national anthem, at least for the Broadway-bound part of the country: “Take Care of This House.”
With words by Alan Jay Lerner and music by Leonard Bernstein, it’s a song from one of the most famously misbegotten productions in the history of American musical theatre, the bicentennial musical “1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.” Impeccably credentialled though it was, the show, which sought to tell the story of the White House’s first century, failed miserably, first out of town, in Washington, D.C., and then after only seven performances on Broadway. The failure was the consequence of reasons as simple as an awkward narrative—“The Skin of Our Teeth” aside, it’s always hard to tell a story on stage that, as they used to say, spans centuries—and as complexly alchemical as the mysteries of collaboration always are. (Lerner, after his triumphs with Frederick Loewe, never did write another truly successful show, and neither did Bernstein.) Yet the show’s emphasis on the experiences not only of the white First Families who lived in the house but of the Black people who built it, served in, and ran it, makes it seem, on paper at least—there was never a cast recording—prescient and brave, and worth reviving.
This one song, however, survived to creep into the language of standards, as good songs from failed shows will. (Any musical-theatre maven can name a hundred, beginning with the perfect “All the Things You Are,” from a short-lived Oscar Hammerstein-Jerome Kern show.) It marries a lovely Bernstein hymn-tune to one of Lerner’s most meticulous and sincere lyrics: “Take care of this house / Keep it from harm / If bandits break in, sound the alarm. . . . / Be careful at night, check all the doors / If someone makes off with our dream / The dream will be yours.”
Take care of this house. Listening to the song now, performed by a wonderful concert of Americans, one is thrown back to the scene on the last night of the Republican National Convention, when Donald Trump, against all precedent and even evident legality, turned that house into a background set for his coronation as the leader of the American right. Of course, even to mention in October what happened back in August risks irrelevance. One unimaginable event succeeds the next, and October’s White House has now become a swamp of infection and illness, pushing August’s White House into what seems like distant memory.
But to refuse to recollect, rather than just to react, is to serve Trump’s purpose. Autocrats and authoritarians depend on the amnesia of exhaustion. Their end is to replace reason with reflexes; the chaos is the point. The rest of us judge ruthlessness to be a bad strategy, since it will ultimately rebound against us when the balance of power alters. But, if you have no intention of ceding power, ruthlessness is an optimal strategy. Trump’s genius since 1980, when he destroyed the façade of the old Bonwit Teller building to make way for Trump Tower, has been to understand that, if you do an indecent thing with enough indifference, decent people will usually be too shocked to resist you properly. The relentlessness of Trump’s assaults on decency and the rule of law not only exhausts the citizenry but outpaces the media, which has no previous categories or concepts with which to deal with the new reality—and so returns each day, trying to fit the overflowing refuse into old-fashioned bins.
And so, back to the house. Anyone who remembers the fateful White House Correspondents’ Dinner of 2011, when President Obama hilariously mocked Trump, while, ironically, perhaps motivating him toward the Presidency, will also recall that Obama showed a picture of what Donald Trump would turn the White House into. With a kitsch chandelier on the north portico and the promise of a casino inside, the image was wholly, though merely, vulgar. Even the imagination of parody couldn’t foresee Trump lighting up the Mall with fireworks spelling out his own name, as he did on the last night of the Convention.
That spectacle was absurd, but it was also terrifying. We can recover from bad policy and cruel policy, from White House rooms, so to speak, badly vandalized. But we cannot recover from seeing the foundation of our system—the house itself—destroyed. The American republic, with all its flaws and failings and incomplete achievements, does rest on an idea that, as the great historian Gordon Wood showed nearly thirty years ago, in his book “The Radicalism of the American Revolution,” was in its time truly radical and revolutionary. “You start with a monarchical society in a world of monarchies, a society which was hierarchical,” Wood said in an interview. “That vertically organized society was transformed by the Revolution.” The Revolution proposed something unknown since classical times: namely, the idea that power should flow not from an individual chosen by God or by birth but—a thought so audacious that, taking it for granted, we now deprecate it—from politics, from a free and open debate between different sides that results in a temporary disposition of power. Louis XIV said, “L’etat, c’est moi.” The state is me. The whole premise of American democracy was to divorce the state from the moi. It was a formal principle reinforced by personal conduct, beginning when George Washington readily and amiably stepped down from power, when he had the choice. We live by, in effect, a paradoxical principle: that the White House is not a home, that power resides in the house itself, which rests it for a brief time on one occupant before passing it on to the next. Democratic practices are meaningless without that constitutional underpinning. “Take care of this house / Be always on call / Care for this house / It’s the home of us all,” Lerner’s lyric ends. It isn’t merely a sentiment; it’s a neat encapsulation of a principle. The White House is never to be taken for a palace.
Many countries—Russia, most notably—now have ostensible democracies that are really autocracies, because the line between the state and the me has been erased. They are ever more brutally vertical. That Trump has so far erased that line only fitfully, though every day demonstrably more, does not alter the evidence that this is the condition of government that he and his Attorney General would impose on us if they could. Not the temporary political triumph of one party over an organized opposition but the replacement of the rule of law with the whims and rages of one man. That’s what is suggested when you use the people’s house as your product-placement background and light up the sky above it with your name.


newyorker--2020-10-06--Pence Grateful That Plexiglass Shield at Debate Will Protect Him from Woman

WASHINGTON ( The Borowitz Report ) —Mike Pence said that he was “ extremely grateful ” that the organizers of @ @ @ @ @ debate would be providing a plexiglass shield to protect him from a woman .
Speaking @ @ @ @ @ that the Commission on Presidential Debates had taken “ appropriate measures ” to shield him @ @ @ @ @ during the Salt Lake City face-off .
“ I ’ ve read all the relevant @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve learned a plexiglass shield provides adequate protection from a woman , ” @ @ @ @ @ that this barrier exists between me and a member of the opposite sex , I @ @ @ @ @ with the debate.
” The Vice-President added that , if he makes it through Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ exposed to a woman , he may start bringing a portable plexiglass shield with him @ @ @ @ @ “ Despite all of my precautions , in my travels across this great land of @ @ @ @ @ women , ” Pence said .
“ Plexiglass might be the answer .
”

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Mike Pence said that he was “extremely grateful” that the organizers of Wednesday night’s Vice-Presidential debate would be providing a plexiglass shield to protect him from a woman.
Speaking to reporters, Pence said that the Commission on Presidential Debates had taken “appropriate measures” to shield him from exposure to a female during the Salt Lake City face-off.
“I’ve read all the relevant literature, and from what I’ve learned a plexiglass shield provides adequate protection from a woman,” he said. “Knowing that this barrier exists between me and a member of the opposite sex, I feel comfortable about moving forward with the debate.”
The Vice-President added that, if he makes it through Wednesday’s debate without being exposed to a woman, he may start bringing a portable plexiglass shield with him on the campaign trail.
“Despite all of my precautions, in my travels across this great land of ours I have unfortunately encountered women,” Pence said. “Plexiglass might be the answer.”


newyorker--2020-10-06--How to Update Your Wardrobe for the Fall

The first step in updating your wardrobe is figuring out your personal style .
It took a little soul-searching , but now I know that mine is “ theatre stagehand with a Target gift card.
”  Defining my style has helped me discover my perfect color palette  ( varying shades of black ) and also the kind of silhouette I prefer ( virtually amorphous ) .
Nothing adds intrigue to a look quite like a vintage garment .
Sometimes , when I visit my mom , she ’ ll hand me a sweater and say , “ Do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but it shrank in the wash. ” I always say yes .
Some years , when she shrinks enough clothes , I can replace my entire wardrobe this way .
Every so often , I ’ ll decide that it ’ s time to retire my old Target wardrobe and replace it with a new Target wardrobe .
I ’ ll catwalk over to the juniors section and try on the first thirty-seven things that catch my eye .
I will hate all of them , except for one plain T-shirt that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was already wearing .
I ’ ll buy it in three colors ( charcoal , soot , and tar ) .
Adding a statement piece is my favorite way to level up a look. That ’ s why , this year , I bought a medical-alert bracelet for my Cefzil allergy .
I wear it with every outfit , and , believe me , it makes quite a statement .
The statement is : “ If you give me Cefzil , I will die.
” With this plated metal bracelet dangling from my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of confidence—the kind that comes with knowing that I won ’ t suffer a grisly histamine death from an obscure antibiotic .
Sometimes , when my mom comes to visit , she ’ ll pull a pair of clogs from her deceptively large purse and say , “ Do you want these ?
I bought them for your sister , but she hates them.
” Jackpot !
Fashion is supposed to make people uncomfortable—or , in my sister ’ s case , make them “ literally wan na vom.
” Maintain the items @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a big city , my boots get pretty worn out .
So I ’ ll take them to my local shoe guy , who will tell me that it ’ ll be seventy-eight dollars for a polish and reheeling , and I ’ ll blink back tears as I reply , “ What if we skip the polish ?
” Then he ’ ll say , “ Seventy-three dollars.
” At this point , I ’ ll tell him that the shoes cost me only twenty-two dollars , and he ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me like a guillotine .
I ’ ll slink out of there with my boots in hand and head over to Target to buy a bottle of shoe glue , for eight dollars .
It won ’ t work at all .
Last week , when I was visiting my mom , she handed me a cute little quilted jacket and said , “ Do you want this ?
It was the dog ’ s , but it shrank in the wash. ” Bingo !
( That ’ s the name of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yell when I ’ ve just scored the perfect fall coat . )
This particular jacket has a Velcro neck strap and hangs down my back like a tiny cape .
I ’ m certain that I ’ ll get lots of remarks when I strut around town in it , and , when I do , I ’ ll think , “ Bingo ’ s loss.
” That may sound a bit cold , but that ’ s what it takes to stay ahead of the trends .

Identify your personal style.
The first step in updating your wardrobe is figuring out your personal style. It took a little soul-searching, but now I know that mine is “theatre stagehand with a Target gift card.” Defining my style has helped me discover my perfect color palette (varying shades of black) and also the kind of silhouette I prefer (virtually amorphous).
Incorporate vintage items.
Nothing adds intrigue to a look quite like a vintage garment. Sometimes, when I visit my mom, she’ll hand me a sweater and say, “Do you want this? It was mine, but it shrank in the wash.” I always say yes. Some years, when she shrinks enough clothes, I can replace my entire wardrobe this way.
Splurge a little.
Every so often, I’ll decide that it’s time to retire my old Target wardrobe and replace it with a new Target wardrobe. I’ll catwalk over to the juniors section and try on the first thirty-seven things that catch my eye. I will hate all of them, except for one plain T-shirt that looks a lot like the one I was already wearing. I’ll buy it in three colors (charcoal, soot, and tar).
Invest in a statement piece.
Adding a statement piece is my favorite way to level up a look. That’s why, this year, I bought a medical-alert bracelet for my Cefzil allergy. I wear it with every outfit, and, believe me, it makes quite a statement. The statement is: “If you give me Cefzil, I will die.” With this plated metal bracelet dangling from my wrist, I have a newfound sense of confidence—the kind that comes with knowing that I won’t suffer a grisly histamine death from an obscure antibiotic.
Choose accessories that evoke a strong reaction.
Sometimes, when my mom comes to visit, she’ll pull a pair of clogs from her deceptively large purse and say, “Do you want these? I bought them for your sister, but she hates them.” Jackpot! Fashion is supposed to make people uncomfortable—or, in my sister’s case, make them “literally wanna vom.”
Maintain the items you already own.
Because I live in a big city, my boots get pretty worn out. So I’ll take them to my local shoe guy, who will tell me that it’ll be seventy-eight dollars for a polish and reheeling, and I’ll blink back tears as I reply, “What if we skip the polish?” Then he’ll say, “Seventy-three dollars.” At this point, I’ll tell him that the shoes cost me only twenty-two dollars, and he’ll give me a look that cuts through me like a guillotine. I’ll slink out of there with my boots in hand and head over to Target to buy a bottle of shoe glue, for eight dollars. It won’t work at all.
Break all the rules.
Last week, when I was visiting my mom, she handed me a cute little quilted jacket and said, “Do you want this? It was the dog’s, but it shrank in the wash.” Bingo! (That’s the name of our German shepherd, but also what I yell when I’ve just scored the perfect fall coat.) This particular jacket has a Velcro neck strap and hangs down my back like a tiny cape. I’m certain that I’ll get lots of remarks when I strut around town in it, and, when I do, I’ll think, “Bingo’s loss.” That may sound a bit cold, but that’s what it takes to stay ahead of the trends.


newyorker--2020-10-06--David Rabe Reads “Suffocation Theory”

David Rabe Reads “Suffocation Theory”

David Rabe reads his story from the October 12 , 2020 , issue of the magazine .
Rabe is the @ @ @ @ @ dozen plays , including “ Hurlyburly , ” “ In the Boom Boom Room , @ @ @ @ @ “ Sticks and Bones.
” His novels include “ Recital of the Dog ” and @ @ @ @ @ at Night .
”

Photograph from Alamy
David Rabe reads his story from the October 12, 2020, issue of the magazine. Rabe is the author of more than a dozen plays, including “Hurlyburly,” “In the Boom Boom Room,” and the Tony Award-winning “Sticks and Bones.” His novels include “Recital of the Dog” and “Girl by the Road at Night.”


Does Door-Knocking Matter?

Whether or not to knock on the doors of prospective voters has become one of the most contentious strategic questions of the 2020 election .
For much of the season , in swing states such as Pennsylvania , Florida , Arizona , and Texas , Republicans went door to door , and Democrats didn ’ t .
This reflected the opposing attitudes each party holds about the seriousness of the pandemic : Democrats worry that significant face-to-face contact could increase the spread of the virus ; Republicans think that the danger is overblown .
This summer , the Trump campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million doors a week , whereas the Biden campaign is knocking on zero .
( Some have argued that the Trump campaign is likely inflating its numbers .
“ This is an illusion being propagated by Trump 2020 and the R.N.C.
, ” Jeff Timmer , a political strategist with the Lincoln Project , recently tweeted .
Still , it ’ s certain that the Trump campaign is doing significantly more in-person outreach . )
“ The only way you can win a race is by showing up , ” John Pence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boasted , while canvassing in Florida .
On October 1st , the Biden campaign announced that it would reverse course and begin in-person campaigning in some swing states ; it remains unclear how extensive the new effort will be and whether other candidates will follow suit .
Leland is running to unseat Kristine Howard , who won her seat in 2018 .
In January , 2020 , Leland began attending local fund-raising lunches , giving speeches and collecting signatures to get on the ballot .
When the pandemic hit , in March , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sat at her kitchen island , trying to reach people through phone calls , e-mails , and Facebook .
But , in August , Leland began going door to door again .
The strategy was controversial among her informal advisers .
“ I had friends who were saying , ‘ Wendy , it ’ s too soon .
Don ’ t go , don ’ t go , ’ ” she told me .
But she was also under pressure from fellow Republicans , some in the capitol .
“ I have Harrisburg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there , you got ta meet voters , you need to do something.
’ ” Most of her meet-and-greets had been cancelled , and her campaign was stalled , owing to her inability to host large fund-raising events .
She felt that she needed to get back to talking to voters .
Since then , she has set up an online “ Where ’ s Wendy ?
” update , which allows people to follow her as she campaigns .
“ I ’ ve gotten about thirty-nine hundred doors in about six weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t go home until I ’ ve hit at least one hundred houses a day or it ’ s dinnertime.
” Howard , Leland ’ s opponent , has refused to go door to door , out of safety concerns .
“ I ’ ve been a stalwart supporter of Governor Wolf ’ s science-based pandemic responses , ” she said .
“ Making the decision not to go door to door or have volunteers canvas was an easy one.
” Leland has tried to develop her own safety protocols @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump campaign gave no guidelines . )
“ I feel very confident that I ’ m respecting people ’ s health concerns , and mine , ” she said .
On the Saturday I visited , she proceeded up the stone walk to the first house on Green Hills Lane and ran down her list of precautions .
Before knocking , she hangs the baggie containing her flyer on the front doorknob .
“ That way , they can ’ t say no , ” she told me .
Then she raps on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the front step , usually into the boxwood or other shrubbery , to maintain at least six feet of distance .
She can sometimes tell that someone is home—if his garage door is open , say , or if his dog glances at him hiding behind the door .
But if no one comes outside , she doesn ’ t poke around ; she doesn ’ t want to be intrusive during a pandemic .
“ We don ’ t want to sneak up on anybody , ” she told me .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Green Hills Lane , so she turned back down the walk .
Leland considers herself a moderate Republican .
The area is politically mixed , and sometimes her encounters are unpleasant .
Recently , she knocked on what she believed would be a friendly door .
“ I thought , My people !
Republicans !
” she said .
But the man who opened the door was irate .
He said that he was a banker who ’ d worked in New York with Donald Trump and that she was a “ crook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President .
This was fairly common .
“ They hate Donald Trump so much—and that I represent him , ” she told me .
Leland tries to avoid talking about Presidential politics .
“ People will plain ask me if I ’ m a Trump supporter , and I will not answer that question , ” she told me .
At the next house , a red-brick colonial , James Arnold , who worked in financial services , opened the door .
“ I ’ ll vote for you !
” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Trump .
He had put up a sign in 2016 but wouldn ’ t put one up now : he worried that liberal activists were “ bad news ” and would steal it .
“ I ’ m mad as hell that they ’ re intimidating people , ” he went on .
“ You can ’ t put a bumper sticker on .
The Democrats are so damn nasty.
” ( There is little evidence that Democrats in the area are pulling down Trump signs . )
Arnold believed that current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like him , were afraid to speak openly about their beliefs .
He repeated a Trump talking point about how some recent polls that used recordings instead of live callers to ask their questions have found Trump ahead .
He was happy to put Leland ’ s sign in his yard as a placeholder and to lay low on his support for the President .
“ Make your statement on November 3rd , ” she said .
“ That ’ s the best we can do.
” For much of the twentieth century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Candidates focussed instead on tactics intended to woo undecided voters , especially high-value TV ads .
But by the early two-thousands , the country had become more politically polarized , and there were fewer persuadable moderates .
Turnout was dwindling again , and elections were increasingly decided not by who could appeal to those in the middle but by who could mobilize a faithful base .
At the time , Karl Rove , the Republican strategist , was searching for ways to get more conservatives to the polls in swing states .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between George W. Bush and John Kerry , he revived the strategy of having volunteers go door to door .
“ As the parties focus more on mobilization and less on persuasion , they don ’ t have to compromise , ” Green told me .
“ Next thing you know , you have a lot of canvassing.
” Over the past few election cycles , Democrats have been playing catch-up .
Obama employed an analytics team that was highly skilled at deploying canvassers to key districts and precincts .
In the 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increased in response to Trump , liberal organizations even started busing people from blue states into swing states .
“ What ’ s curious here in Pennsylvania is that many of the people going door to door are from New York City , ” Christopher Borick , a political analyst at Muhlenberg College , told me .
The efficacy of this method has yet to be fully analyzed ; some experts think that broad mobilization could help the Democratic Party reach more voters , but others think that out-of-town door-knockers , arriving in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March T-shirts , could alienate locals .
Regardless , progressive door-knocking was on the rise until this year , when the pandemic shut it down .
Medical experts disagree about how dangerous in-person canvassing is .
Several I spoke to thought that the danger was minimal .
“ The risks are likely quite low , going door to door , if people are masked and standing a respectful six feet from one another and outside , ” William Schaffner , who studies infectious diseases at Vanderbilt , told me .
“ It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to the supermarket.
” Marc Lipsitch , an epidemiologist at Harvard , said that , if precautions were followed , the risk would be very small , “ like a long walk in the park.
” But others worried that it would be difficult to make sure that people followed precautions , especially among right-wing volunteers , who are more likely to dismiss the severity of the illness .
“ Some Republicans are campaigning on platforms that masks aren ’ t necessary , ” Angela Rasmussen , a virologist at Columbia University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic , you should limit your interaction with anyone outside your household.
” In any case , the strategic calculation may be different for the Parties .
Democratic voters might be put off by a stranger knocking on their door during a pandemic , but Republicans might not .
As a result , Republicans have continued aggressive in-person campaigning .
Trump has held indoor rallies in Oklahoma and Nevada .
Other candidates have followed suit , holding rallies and mobilizing supporters to go door to door .
In Colorado , the campaign rallied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Arizona the President ’ s supporters walked the streets in Trump-branded masks .
In Texas , canvassing has become a campaign issue : Beth Van Duyne , a Republican candidate for Congress , recently tweeted at her opponent , Candace Valenzuela , who is not going door to door , “ Even Joe Biden , who has barely left his basement in months , is out campaigning now.
” The Democrats have countered with a series of remote campaigning efforts , including virtual town halls , Zoom meetings , and postcard-writing campaigns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a tactic called “ deep canvassing , ” which encourages volunteers to have long conversations with voters and to primarily listen to the voters ’ concerns without interjecting : if the opportunity arises , volunteers share personal stories that have helped shape their views , but they never become argumentative .
Josh Kalla , a professor at Yale who studies deep canvassing , told me that this practice of “ nonjudgmental listening ” has proven effective not only in political campaigns but also in changing people ’ s thinking in the longer term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration .
In the past , these conversations have been held largely in person .
But Kalla pointed out that , during the pandemic , people are sitting at home and eager for connection , which could be a boon for Democrats .
“ There are so many tools in the voter-mobilization toolbox , and the fact that one of them is basically out of commission doesn ’ t mean that get-out-the-vote efforts will fail , ” Melissa Michelson , a political-science professor at Menlo College , told me .
Much as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online existence , get-out-the-vote campaigns have become virtual also .
“ The idea that somebody would reach out to you and have a conversation with you on Zoom or through a screen , through your cell phone , that ’ s COVID life , ” she said .
Michelson has been consulting with several progressive organizations , including Black Girls Vote , a group that hosts live d.j .
events on Facebook and sends boxes of balloons , cookies , and T-shirts to voters in battleground states .
Research has shown that networks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are already trying to address hunger and joblessness during the economic crisis , can be mobilized to get out the vote as well .
Michelson told me that the initial response was “ Hey , we can ’ t canvas .
Holy crap !
” but that this has “ turned into ‘ Wow , look what we can do now .
’ ”

On a recent Saturday afternoon, in Chester County, Pennsylvania, Wendy Graham Leland, a Republican running for state representative, parked her black Sebring convertible at the end of a leafy cul-de-sac. Chester County, which sits just outside of Philadelphia, is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats and has been one of the most closely watched counties in the lead-up to the 2020 election; its votes will decide several close state races and will help determine whether Pennsylvania’s electoral votes fall to Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Leland, who is fifty-eight and a retired army colonel, was wearing an army cap and blue sneakers covered in white stars. She tucked her ears into the holes of a black mask emblazoned with her name and, from the back seat, grabbed a stack of campaign flyers encased in plastic bags. “I spent three hours last night sitting on the floor and stuffing these myself,” she told me. For public-health reasons, she didn’t let anyone else touch them before she handed them out to prospective voters. “I approach every door like it’s my mom and dad’s,” she told me.
Whether or not to knock on the doors of prospective voters has become one of the most contentious strategic questions of the 2020 election. For much of the season, in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Florida, Arizona, and Texas, Republicans went door to door, and Democrats didn’t. This reflected the opposing attitudes each party holds about the seriousness of the pandemic: Democrats worry that significant face-to-face contact could increase the spread of the virus; Republicans think that the danger is overblown. This summer, the Trump campaign claimed that it was knocking on a million doors a week, whereas the Biden campaign is knocking on zero. (Some have argued that the Trump campaign is likely inflating its numbers. “This is an illusion being propagated by Trump 2020 and the R.N.C.,” Jeff Timmer, a political strategist with the Lincoln Project, recently tweeted. Still, it’s certain that the Trump campaign is doing significantly more in-person outreach.) “The only way you can win a race is by showing up,” John Pence, Mike Pence’s nephew, recently boasted, while canvassing in Florida. On October 1st, the Biden campaign announced that it would reverse course and begin in-person campaigning in some swing states; it remains unclear how extensive the new effort will be and whether other candidates will follow suit.
Leland is running to unseat Kristine Howard, who won her seat in 2018. In January, 2020, Leland began attending local fund-raising lunches, giving speeches and collecting signatures to get on the ballot. When the pandemic hit, in March, she stopped campaigning in person; she sat at her kitchen island, trying to reach people through phone calls, e-mails, and Facebook. But, in August, Leland began going door to door again. The strategy was controversial among her informal advisers. “I had friends who were saying, ‘Wendy, it’s too soon. Don’t go, don’t go,’ ” she told me. But she was also under pressure from fellow Republicans, some in the capitol. “I have Harrisburg saying, ‘Wendy, get out there, you gotta meet voters, you need to do something.’ ” Most of her meet-and-greets had been cancelled, and her campaign was stalled, owing to her inability to host large fund-raising events. She felt that she needed to get back to talking to voters. Since then, she has set up an online “Where’s Wendy?” update, which allows people to follow her as she campaigns. “I’ve gotten about thirty-nine hundred doors in about six weeks,” she told me. “I don’t go home until I’ve hit at least one hundred houses a day or it’s dinnertime.”
Howard, Leland’s opponent, has refused to go door to door, out of safety concerns. “I’ve been a stalwart supporter of Governor Wolf’s science-based pandemic responses,” she said. “Making the decision not to go door to door or have volunteers canvas was an easy one.” Leland has tried to develop her own safety protocols. (The local Party and the Trump campaign gave no guidelines.) “I feel very confident that I’m respecting people’s health concerns, and mine,” she said. On the Saturday I visited, she proceeded up the stone walk to the first house on Green Hills Lane and ran down her list of precautions. Before knocking, she hangs the baggie containing her flyer on the front doorknob. “That way, they can’t say no,” she told me. Then she raps on the door and steps back off of the front step, usually into the boxwood or other shrubbery, to maintain at least six feet of distance. She can sometimes tell that someone is home—if his garage door is open, say, or if his dog glances at him hiding behind the door. But if no one comes outside, she doesn’t poke around; she doesn’t want to be intrusive during a pandemic. “We don’t want to sneak up on anybody,” she told me. No one came to the first door on Green Hills Lane, so she turned back down the walk.
Leland considers herself a moderate Republican. The area is politically mixed, and sometimes her encounters are unpleasant. Recently, she knocked on what she believed would be a friendly door. “I thought, My people! Republicans!” she said. But the man who opened the door was irate. He said that he was a banker who’d worked in New York with Donald Trump and that she was a “crook and a liar,” just like the President. This was fairly common. “They hate Donald Trump so much—and that I represent him,” she told me. Leland tries to avoid talking about Presidential politics. “People will plain ask me if I’m a Trump supporter, and I will not answer that question,” she told me.
At the next house, a red-brick colonial, James Arnold, who worked in financial services, opened the door. “I’ll vote for you!” he said. He was an ardent supporter of Trump. He had put up a sign in 2016 but wouldn’t put one up now: he worried that liberal activists were “bad news” and would steal it. “I’m mad as hell that they’re intimidating people,” he went on. “You can’t put a bumper sticker on. The Democrats are so damn nasty.” (There is little evidence that Democrats in the area are pulling down Trump signs.) Arnold believed that current polling underrepresented Trump voters because many, like him, were afraid to speak openly about their beliefs. He repeated a Trump talking point about how some recent polls that used recordings instead of live callers to ask their questions have found Trump ahead. He was happy to put Leland’s sign in his yard as a placeholder and to lay low on his support for the President. “Make your statement on November 3rd,” she said. “That’s the best we can do.”
One of the strangest features of the 2020 election has been the asymmetry of its campaigning. It’s difficult to know what effect this will have, because there is little precedent in modern electoral history. In-person canvassing dates back to at least the nineteen-twenties, when voter turnouts hit alarmingly low levels nationwide. The canvassing did little to change people’s minds, but it powerfully mobilized the forces of accountability and social pressure to bring people to the polls. “It was primarily about getting your loyalists to vote,” Don Green, a professor of political science at Columbia University and the author of “Get Out the Vote,” told me.
For much of the twentieth century, door-to-door canvassing was rarely employed. Candidates focussed instead on tactics intended to woo undecided voters, especially high-value TV ads. But by the early two-thousands, the country had become more politically polarized, and there were fewer persuadable moderates. Turnout was dwindling again, and elections were increasingly decided not by who could appeal to those in the middle but by who could mobilize a faithful base. At the time, Karl Rove, the Republican strategist, was searching for ways to get more conservatives to the polls in swing states. In the lead-up to the 2004 election, between George W. Bush and John Kerry, he revived the strategy of having volunteers go door to door. “As the parties focus more on mobilization and less on persuasion, they don’t have to compromise,” Green told me. “Next thing you know, you have a lot of canvassing.”
Over the past few election cycles, Democrats have been playing catch-up. Obama employed an analytics team that was highly skilled at deploying canvassers to key districts and precincts. In the 2016 and 2018 elections, as progressive activism increased in response to Trump, liberal organizations even started busing people from blue states into swing states. “What’s curious here in Pennsylvania is that many of the people going door to door are from New York City,” Christopher Borick, a political analyst at Muhlenberg College, told me. The efficacy of this method has yet to be fully analyzed; some experts think that broad mobilization could help the Democratic Party reach more voters, but others think that out-of-town door-knockers, arriving in their expensive clogs and Women’s March T-shirts, could alienate locals. Regardless, progressive door-knocking was on the rise until this year, when the pandemic shut it down.
Medical experts disagree about how dangerous in-person canvassing is. Several I spoke to thought that the danger was minimal. “The risks are likely quite low, going door to door, if people are masked and standing a respectful six feet from one another and outside,” William Schaffner, who studies infectious diseases at Vanderbilt, told me. “It’s certainly no different in concept than going to the supermarket.” Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at Harvard, said that, if precautions were followed, the risk would be very small, “like a long walk in the park.” But others worried that it would be difficult to make sure that people followed precautions, especially among right-wing volunteers, who are more likely to dismiss the severity of the illness. “Some Republicans are campaigning on platforms that masks aren’t necessary,” Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University, told me. “During a pandemic, you should limit your interaction with anyone outside your household.” In any case, the strategic calculation may be different for the Parties. Democratic voters might be put off by a stranger knocking on their door during a pandemic, but Republicans might not.
As a result, Republicans have continued aggressive in-person campaigning. Trump has held indoor rallies in Oklahoma and Nevada. Other candidates have followed suit, holding rallies and mobilizing supporters to go door to door. In Colorado, the campaign rallied its “foot soldiers,” and in Arizona the President’s supporters walked the streets in Trump-branded masks. In Texas, canvassing has become a campaign issue: Beth Van Duyne, a Republican candidate for Congress, recently tweeted at her opponent, Candace Valenzuela, who is not going door to door, “Even Joe Biden, who has barely left his basement in months, is out campaigning now.”


newyorker--2020-10-05--The Recklessness of Trump’s Return to the White House

The President ’ s discharge from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center is the latest development in an unprecedented medical and political saga .
Over the weekend , as positive test results trickled in from across the Administration and the Republican establishment , two narratives about his illness coalesced .
The first , informed by medical experience and common sense , held that Trump was in real danger ; the second , shaped by politics , proposed that he was basically fine .
On Monday afternoon , Trump tried to lend momentum to the second story .
“ I will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center today at 6:30 P.M. , ” he wrote , on Twitter .
“ Feeling really good !
” He added some advice that seemed not just ludicrous but—in light of the fact that more than two hundred and ten thousand Americans have died of the coronavirus—deranged : “ Don ’ t be afraid of Covid .
Don ’ t let it dominate your life .
We have developed , under the Trump Administration , some really great drugs & knowledge.
” Almost certainly , Trump ’ s team will now describe him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his way to defeating the virus , or who has already defeated it—an executive ready to lead , with COVID-19 firmly behind him .
His opponents , by contrast , are sure to cast the discharge as another example of careless behavior from a reality-TV star who is more concerned with optics than science .
Many Americans , meanwhile , may be understandably confused .
Discharge certainly sounds good .
It ’ s reasonable to imagine that , if the President is leaving the hospital , he must be O.K .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discharge doesn ’ t mean—and has never meant—full recovery .
In general , a discharge signifies only that a patient is no longer ill enough to require hospitalization and the continuous monitoring and ready access to therapy that hospitalization offers .
When deciding whether it ’ s safe to discharge a patient , physicians consider many variables .
They ask where a patient is being discharged to , and what level of support he ’ ll have there .
They ask about the chance that his medical condition could worsen abruptly before he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ An elderly patient being sent home alone to recover from pneumonia is one thing ; an athlete being discharged to a rehabilitation center after knee surgery is another .
Trump ’ s case falls somewhere in between .
He is an older man with a serious condition that we ’ re told is improving , he is in the middle of an illness that could get much worse in the next week , and he is also leaving the hospital for the world ’ s most secure and responsive home .
There , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closely by physicians working in the White House Medical Unit , an on-site facility with substantial resources .
If his condition does worsen at the White House , he will have no difficulty gaining readmission to Walter Reed .
From a purely medical perspective , then , caring for Trump at the White House instead of the hospital may not be a wildly irresponsible decision .
Not all patients with fevers , abnormal blood tests , or even lung damage need to—or should—remain hospitalized until they fully recover .
In general , doctors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospital for any longer than absolutely necessary , because hospitalization disrupts sleep , risks new infections , and can lead to elevated stress and other problems .
Doctors also sometimes compromise in the face of patient preferences .
( A person who may benefit from further monitoring may ask to be discharged early to attend her grandson ’ s high-school graduation , for example . )
The risks of hospitalization may be of less concern to the President , who enjoys V.I.P .
treatment at Walter Reed—and he is , of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about looking “ weak ” during an election .
Without access to important details about his illness , it ’ s hard to judge the risks of discharge with confidence ; I would probably recommend against it , if the President were under my care .
Still , on medical grounds , it is not outlandish .
From here , a few scenarios are possible .
In the worst case , Trump might have to return to the hospital after his condition abruptly deteriorates .
If that were to happen , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dire outcome or at least a prolonged illness .
It ’ s more likely that he ’ ll continue to improve .
But that doesn ’ t necessarily mean that he ’ ll quickly return to normal .
Many COVID-19 patients , especially those with severe illness , experience fatigue , shortness of breath , cardiovascular problems , and cognitive issues that persist for months after infection .
Some report “ COVID fog ” —they have problems with thinking , and suffer from anxiety and depression .
Even among patients with less severe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to report symptoms weeks later .
These problems don ’ t require hospitalization , but they can interfere with a person ’ s ability to engage in everyday activities , to say nothing of governing a country .
A discharged President isn ’ t necessarily a healthy President .
The real recklessness of Trump ’ s discharge is not personal ; it ’ s the rest of us that he ’ s putting in harm ’ s way .
By spinning his own illness , and denying its seriousness— “ I feel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
” he tweeted—he encourages his followers to deny reality ; while receiving the world ’ s best medical care , he tells other Americans to embrace risk .
After his discharge , Trump arrived at the White House , where he posed , maskless , on a balcony overlooking the South Lawn .
He is in the midst of an active coronavirus infection—and so , in the coming days , there ’ s a good chance that he will pass the virus on to others who work at the White House , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ zone .
He seems determined to be the Superspreader-in-Chief .
Sean Conley , the White House physician , has assured Americans that Trump “ is back.
” In a way , Conley is right .
The President is spreading the virus and misinformation , as usual .
This post has been updated to include news developments .
• Surviving a severe coronavirus infection is hard .
So is recovering .
• Some hospitals have postponed cancer surgeries because of the coronavirus crisis .
How do doctors assess urgency during a pandemic ?
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the offense against the coronavirus .
This five-part public-health plan may be the key .
• The loneliness and solidarity of treating coronavirus patients in New York .
• To fill the vacuum left by the federal government , doctors are relying on informal networks to get the information and support they need .
• Conflict and confusion reign at New York hospitals over how to handle childbirth during the pandemic .
• In countries where the rate of infection threatens to outstrip the capacity of the health system , doctors are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their training prepared them .

The President’s discharge from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center is the latest development in an unprecedented medical and political saga. Over the weekend, as positive test results trickled in from across the Administration and the Republican establishment, two narratives about his illness coalesced. The first, informed by medical experience and common sense, held that Trump was in real danger; the second, shaped by politics, proposed that he was basically fine. On Monday afternoon, Trump tried to lend momentum to the second story. “I will be leaving the great Walter Reed Medical Center today at 6:30 P.M.,” he wrote, on Twitter. “Feeling really good!” He added some advice that seemed not just ludicrous but—in light of the fact that more than two hundred and ten thousand Americans have died of the coronavirus—deranged: “Don’t be afraid of Covid. Don’t let it dominate your life. We have developed, under the Trump Administration, some really great drugs & knowledge.”
Almost certainly, Trump’s team will now describe him as a man who’s well on his way to defeating the virus, or who has already defeated it—an executive ready to lead, with COVID-19 firmly behind him. His opponents, by contrast, are sure to cast the discharge as another example of careless behavior from a reality-TV star who is more concerned with optics than science. Many Americans, meanwhile, may be understandably confused. Discharge certainly sounds good. It’s reasonable to imagine that, if the President is leaving the hospital, he must be O.K.
In fact, as doctors know, hospital discharge doesn’t mean—and has never meant—full recovery. In general, a discharge signifies only that a patient is no longer ill enough to require hospitalization and the continuous monitoring and ready access to therapy that hospitalization offers. When deciding whether it’s safe to discharge a patient, physicians consider many variables. They ask where a patient is being discharged to, and what level of support he’ll have there. They ask about the chance that his medical condition could worsen abruptly before he’s able to get help. An elderly patient being sent home alone to recover from pneumonia is one thing; an athlete being discharged to a rehabilitation center after knee surgery is another. Trump’s case falls somewhere in between. He is an older man with a serious condition that we’re told is improving, he is in the middle of an illness that could get much worse in the next week, and he is also leaving the hospital for the world’s most secure and responsive home. There, Trump’s condition will be watched closely by physicians working in the White House Medical Unit, an on-site facility with substantial resources. If his condition does worsen at the White House, he will have no difficulty gaining readmission to Walter Reed.
From a purely medical perspective, then, caring for Trump at the White House instead of the hospital may not be a wildly irresponsible decision. Not all patients with fevers, abnormal blood tests, or even lung damage need to—or should—remain hospitalized until they fully recover. In general, doctors prefer not to keep patients in the hospital for any longer than absolutely necessary, because hospitalization disrupts sleep, risks new infections, and can lead to elevated stress and other problems. Doctors also sometimes compromise in the face of patient preferences. (A person who may benefit from further monitoring may ask to be discharged early to attend her grandson’s high-school graduation, for example.) The risks of hospitalization may be of less concern to the President, who enjoys V.I.P. treatment at Walter Reed—and he is, of course, worried not about a family event but about looking “weak” during an election. Without access to important details about his illness, it’s hard to judge the risks of discharge with confidence; I would probably recommend against it, if the President were under my care. Still, on medical grounds, it is not outlandish.
From here, a few scenarios are possible. In the worst case, Trump might have to return to the hospital after his condition abruptly deteriorates. If that were to happen, it would be an alarming sign, portending a dire outcome or at least a prolonged illness. It’s more likely that he’ll continue to improve. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that he’ll quickly return to normal. Many COVID-19 patients, especially those with severe illness, experience fatigue, shortness of breath, cardiovascular problems, and cognitive issues that persist for months after infection. Some report “COVID fog”—they have problems with thinking, and suffer from anxiety and depression. Even among patients with less severe disease—those who never need hospital-level care—a third continue to report symptoms weeks later. These problems don’t require hospitalization, but they can interfere with a person’s ability to engage in everyday activities, to say nothing of governing a country. A discharged President isn’t necessarily a healthy President.
The real recklessness of Trump’s discharge is not personal; it’s the rest of us that he’s putting in harm’s way. By spinning his own illness, and denying its seriousness—“I feel better than I did 20 years ago!” he tweeted—he encourages his followers to deny reality; while receiving the world’s best medical care, he tells other Americans to embrace risk. After his discharge, Trump arrived at the White House, where he posed, maskless, on a balcony overlooking the South Lawn. He is in the midst of an active coronavirus infection—and so, in the coming days, there’s a good chance that he will pass the virus on to others who work at the White House, which has now become a viral hot zone. He seems determined to be the Superspreader-in-Chief. Sean Conley, the White House physician, has assured Americans that Trump “is back.” In a way, Conley is right. The President is spreading the virus and misinformation, as usual.
This post has been updated to include news developments.
More Medical Dispatches


newyorker--2020-10-07--You’ve Matched! Now Chat

You’ve Matched! Now Chat

Will has matched with Alex .
You may start the conversation .
Will : Hey , Alex !
That ’ s one cool dog in your profile .
🐶 What ’ s his name ?
😎 Will : *Or her name !
Will : Not my place , could be either .
Will : Just didn ’ t want you to think I was bro-ey and assumed it was a guy , ha ha .
Will : *THEY was a guy .
Will : *They WERE a guy .
Will : Think I ’ ll cut my losses here—have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually normal and nice about gender stuff , though .
I wasn ’ t trying to make a big deal of it either way , either in terms of , like , “ You can ’ t joke about real guy stuff anymore , ” or , like , “ Ahh , you said the wrong word , you should kill yourself.
” Will : It was a nonissue for me .
I assume it is for you .
Will : And if it isn ’ t , could be the start of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Will : Open to that in theory , all I ’ m saying .
Will : O.K.
, too much .
Will : Ta-ta for now .
Will : On closer inspection , I do think that you can see the dog ’ s penis .
Will : Or some sort of sac .
Will : O.K.
, BACK TO “ TIGER KING ” !
Will : I ’ m late on it , I know , but it ’ s truly nuts .
Will : Assume you saw it when everyone else @ @ @ @ @ @ @ named Joe Exotic ( srsly ) runs this zoo for tigers , and he ’ s legit borderline insane , but hilarious , in almost a “ Joe Dirt ” sorta way ( David Spade movie ) .
Anyway , his nemesis is this lunatic crazy woman named Carole Baskin ( who I personally think may have killed her husband ?
?
Who knows ) .
Will : I could go on but .
.
.
Will : Just watch it .
Will : Not in , like , a commanding , sexy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voice* UNLESS YOU GON DO IT .
Will : Or not !
Who knows .
Will : You tell me where the line is .
Will : It ’ s 2020 , # MeToo , all that jazz .
Will : Not tryna cross no lines over here !
Will : Eh , maybe not great for me to use that kinda slang now , actually .
Will : Not the sexiest thing to bring up on a dating app .
LOL .
Will : Not that sex is even on the table @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ya if it was , though !
Will : But it ain ’ t necessary !
Will : God , I ’ m so sick of Trump .
Alex : Hey !
Sorry , I was on a run .
Alex : His name is Hugo !

Will has matched with Alex. You may start the conversation.
Will: Hey, Alex! That’s one cool dog in your profile. 🐶 What’s his name? 😎
Will: *Or her name!
Will: Sorry, LOL.
Will: Not my place, could be either.
Will: (Or both/neither/whatever.)
Will: Just didn’t want you to think I was bro-ey and assumed it was a guy, ha ha.
Will: *THEY was a guy.
Will: *They WERE a guy.
Will: SORRY.
Will: Ha ha wow O.K.
Will: Think I’ll cut my losses here—have a good night.
Will: I am actually normal and nice about gender stuff, though. I wasn’t trying to make a big deal of it either way, either in terms of, like, “You can’t joke about real guy stuff anymore,” or, like, “Ahh, you said the wrong word, you should kill yourself.”
Will: It was a nonissue for me. I assume it is for you.
Will: And if it isn’t, could be the start of a healthy dialogue. Who knows?
Will: Open to that in theory, all I’m saying.
Will: Wouldn’t be a deal-breaker.
Will: O.K., too much.
Will: Ta-ta for now.
Will: Sorry.
Will: Bye!
Will: (More normal LOL.)
Will: On closer inspection, I do think that you can see the dog’s penis.
Will: Or some sort of sac.
Will: Doesn’t matter.
Will: O.K., BACK TO “TIGER KING”!
Will: I’m late on it, I know, but it’s truly nuts.
Will: Assume you saw it when everyone else did.
Will: But this guy named Joe Exotic (srsly) runs this zoo for tigers, and he’s legit borderline insane, but hilarious, in almost a “Joe Dirt” sorta way (David Spade movie). Anyway, his nemesis is this lunatic crazy woman named Carole Baskin (who I personally think may have killed her husband?? Who knows).
Will: Anyway.
Will: I could go on but . . .
Will: Just watch it.
Will: Not in, like, a commanding, sexy way. LOL.
Will: Ha ha.
Will: *Nelly voice* UNLESS YOU GON DO IT.
Will: My bad, crossed a line.
Will: Or not! Who knows.
Will: You tell me where the line is.
Will: It’s 2020, #MeToo, all that jazz.
Will: Not tryna cross no lines over here!
Will: Eh, maybe not great for me to use that kinda slang now, actually.
Will: (I’m white.)
Will: Not the sexiest thing to bring up on a dating app. LOL.
Will: Not that sex is even on the table!
Will: Wouldn’t judge ya if it was, though!
Will: But it ain’t necessary!
Will: O.K.
Will: God, I’m so sick of Trump.
Alex: Hey! Sorry, I was on a run.
Alex: His name is Hugo!
Will: not interested good luck
You have unmatched Alex.


newyorker--2020-10-07--On Sunflowers, with Love and Hate

On Sunflowers, with Love and Hate

I remember vividly the first time I saw a sunflower .
It was during a family holiday in my childhood , in the middle of a hangry evening walk to a crêperie in the dullest part of rural France .
We rounded a corner , and there it was , blazing against a bright blue sky , with uncountable numbers of siblings : big , comforting golden petals , head like a dinner plate , all modestly looking down : the Princess Diana of oil-producing agronomy .
Who could not be charmed by such a look of shy self-protection ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , had too many sisters ( one ) .
The sunflower seemed almost human , just like me .
On closer acquaintance , sunflowers came to seem lovelier still .
Unlike other , fancier-sounding plants—lady ’ s mantle , love-lies-bleeding , guelder rose—the sunflower , without apparent effort , conjures up a world of warmth and light with two and a half simple syllables .
And its face is , in a mathematical sense , perfect .
I only dimly understand the golden ratio , but I know that the sunflower exhibits it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is reminiscent of a human fingerprint and follows the Fibonacci sequence , with each seed set at an angle from its neighbor , to allow for maximum seed quantity .
Its patterns are also reassuringly consistent : from the heat of Tuscany to humid central Ukraine , the sunflower usually has fifty-five , eighty-nine , or a hundred and forty-four petals .
Which other human-height flower can claim that ?
That sunny yellow is the embodiment of cheerfulness , but , unlike its closest happy-plant rival , the gerbera daisy , it isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or with that terrible range of sugar-colors ( tartrazine orange , Nerds scarlet , Pepto Bismol pink ) .
Maybe that ’ s why the sunflower is such a familiar sight ; what flower is as easily recognized ?
It is the face we all remember , the archetype of a flower .
Any young child , however ungifted , can manage its portrait : sturdy stalk , round middle , yellow scribble round the edge—voilà , it ’ s done .
My school emblem was a sunflower , embossed in velvety abstract @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll buy a bunch for an old schoolmate , for some hilarious light triggering .
Other plants loll around , good for nothing except a couple weeks of decorativeness .
The sunflower has always been so hardworking , so uncomplaining .
Pollinators love them ; bees can shelter in their dried-out hollow stems ; even their petals can be eaten .
Soppier plants die at the first sign of chill , but sunflowers can last into fall .
And then there are its seeds .
From North America , where the sunflower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where by the early nineteenth century commercial growing was common practice , the seeds are valued as useful and delicious .
For decades , I munched dutifully through handfuls , confident that those magical fatty acids were percolating straight through to my brain .
Like Agent Mulder in “ The X-Files , ” I could barely think without them .
But it was only when , under the dome of Moscow ’ s Danilovsky food market , I first tasted barely processed sunflower oil , dripping off an Uzbek tomato , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I admit that there can be something slightly oppressive about that huge dark eye at the center of such very , very bright petals .
My sunflowers , grown from seed and standing proud among my dumpy black-currant bushes and rampaging mint , do rather dominate my garden .
Yellow and black are the colors of warning signs , CCTV notices , wasps ; besides , aren ’ t the proportions off , a little bit panopticon ?
Do I want to be watched by an all-seeing pupil wherever I stand ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The irritatingly named Earthwalker and come-hither Velvet Queen sunflowers both do it for me : their terra-cotta bronze petals remind me of my eighties childhood , and the contrast between ruff and center is less eye-watering .
In truth , though , I ’ m drawn to so many other plants as I roam and graze : squash blossom ; ginger rosemary ; coconut-vanilla fig leaves and lemony vine leaves ; rampaging oregano and weirdly perennial Cape gooseberries ; mustard greens , magenta raspberries , and nasturtium petals the color of flame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I assumed that the sunflowers were oblivious to my ambivalence , yet , moments after finishing a draft of this piece , I went outside and discovered that pigeons had beheaded two of my three surviving flowers .
Their remaining sister gazes at me reproachfully through its omniscient eye .
It ’ s uncomfortable , possibly dangerous .
I ’ m locking the door tonight .

I remember vividly the first time I saw a sunflower. It was during a family holiday in my childhood, in the middle of a hangry evening walk to a crêperie in the dullest part of rural France. We rounded a corner, and there it was, blazing against a bright blue sky, with uncountable numbers of siblings: big, comforting golden petals, head like a dinner plate, all modestly looking down: the Princess Diana of oil-producing agronomy. Who could not be charmed by such a look of shy self-protection? I, too, hated the sun, had too many sisters (one). The sunflower seemed almost human, just like me.
On closer acquaintance, sunflowers came to seem lovelier still. Unlike other, fancier-sounding plants—lady’s mantle, love-lies-bleeding, guelder rose—the sunflower, without apparent effort, conjures up a world of warmth and light with two and a half simple syllables. And its face is, in a mathematical sense, perfect. I only dimly understand the golden ratio, but I know that the sunflower exhibits it: the spiral symmetry of its seeds is reminiscent of a human fingerprint and follows the Fibonacci sequence, with each seed set at an angle from its neighbor, to allow for maximum seed quantity. Its patterns are also reassuringly consistent: from the heat of Tuscany to humid central Ukraine, the sunflower usually has fifty-five, eighty-nine, or a hundred and forty-four petals. Which other human-height flower can claim that?
That sunny yellow is the embodiment of cheerfulness, but, unlike its closest happy-plant rival, the gerbera daisy, it isn’t cursed with Volkswagen Beetle overbranding or with that terrible range of sugar-colors (tartrazine orange, Nerds scarlet, Pepto Bismol pink). Maybe that’s why the sunflower is such a familiar sight; what flower is as easily recognized? It is the face we all remember, the archetype of a flower. Any young child, however ungifted, can manage its portrait: sturdy stalk, round middle, yellow scribble round the edge—voilà, it’s done. My school emblem was a sunflower, embossed in velvety abstract on our sweatshirts; even now I’ll buy a bunch for an old schoolmate, for some hilarious light triggering.
Other plants loll around, good for nothing except a couple weeks of decorativeness. The sunflower has always been so hardworking, so uncomplaining. Pollinators love them; bees can shelter in their dried-out hollow stems; even their petals can be eaten. Soppier plants die at the first sign of chill, but sunflowers can last into fall.
And then there are its seeds. From North America, where the sunflower was born and domesticated, to Russia, where by the early nineteenth century commercial growing was common practice, the seeds are valued as useful and delicious. For decades, I munched dutifully through handfuls, confident that those magical fatty acids were percolating straight through to my brain. Like Agent Mulder in “The X-Files,” I could barely think without them. But it was only when, under the dome of Moscow’s Danilovsky food market, I first tasted barely processed sunflower oil, dripping off an Uzbek tomato, that I understood the sunflower-seed magic in full.
I admit that there can be something slightly oppressive about that huge dark eye at the center of such very, very bright petals. My sunflowers, grown from seed and standing proud among my dumpy black-currant bushes and rampaging mint, do rather dominate my garden. Yellow and black are the colors of warning signs, CCTV notices, wasps; besides, aren’t the proportions off, a little bit panopticon? Do I want to be watched by an all-seeing pupil wherever I stand? I have tried to shake things up. The irritatingly named Earthwalker and come-hither Velvet Queen sunflowers both do it for me: their terra-cotta bronze petals remind me of my eighties childhood, and the contrast between ruff and center is less eye-watering. In truth, though, I’m drawn to so many other plants as I roam and graze: squash blossom; ginger rosemary; coconut-vanilla fig leaves and lemony vine leaves; rampaging oregano and weirdly perennial Cape gooseberries; mustard greens, magenta raspberries, and nasturtium petals the color of flame.
2020 is the year of paranoia. I assumed that the sunflowers were oblivious to my ambivalence, yet, moments after finishing a draft of this piece, I went outside and discovered that pigeons had beheaded two of my three surviving flowers. Their remaining sister gazes at me reproachfully through its omniscient eye. It’s uncomfortable, possibly dangerous. I’m locking the door tonight.