thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--The 2020 Election: Another Case For Getting Rid Of The Electoral College

As mail-in and absentee ballots , which tend to lean Democrat , continue to come in , Biden ’ s margin could grow to as much as 6 million — roughly double the margin Hillary Clinton won in 2016 .
That ’ s more votes than any presidential candidate in history has received and , by any other standard , a decisive showing of who most Americans want to be president .
And yet , as usual , the election result will come down to just a few precincts in a few states .
The Supreme Court , with six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deciding who wins .
The Electoral College is becoming increasingly indefensible , a prominent symbol of America ’ s obsolete , anti-democratic structures at every level of government .
The system was born of racism and leaves the country vulnerable to rogue electors who could shift the results with little accountability .
Since 2000 , there have been five presidential contests .
In two of them , the Electoral College has awarded the presidency to the loser of the popular vote .
Since 1992 , Republicans have won the popular vote for president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put it lightly , a problem .
All of America ’ s majority-thwarting procedures favor white , rural and Republican voters .
In the 2018 midterms , Democrats won nearly 60 % of the popular vote — and still lost two Senate seats .
Thanks to the Electoral College , every vote in Wyoming is four times more powerful than a vote in California .
Despite four out of five Americans living in heavily Democratic urban areas , for the last two decades , every presidential contest has come down to a tiny @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rural and suburban counties in the same small number of midwestern states .
This year , according to the widest definition of the term , roughly 100 million Americans live in swing states .
That means candidates ’ attention was almost exclusively focused on winning the votes of less than one-third of the country .
The Electoral College is why 96 % of campaign events took place in just 12 states .
It is why fracking in Pennsylvania came up at two presidential debates , and why months of wildfires along the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the arguments in favor of the Electoral College almost exclusively consist of explicit or implicit arguments against democracy itself .
In a livestream last night , Glenn Beck said that if Democrats win , America would “ fundamentally transform into a democracy.
” Trump didn ’ t like the Electoral College , until he did .
In 2019 , Marco Rubio said that the Electoral College “ makes sure interests of less populated areas aren ’ t ignored at the expense of densely populated areas ” — i.e .
that land area @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on it .
Conservative commentators have also typically defended the Electoral College with lofty-sounding appeals to tradition and American values .
In an infamous 1992 column , George Will argued that America ’ s founders didn ’ t want majority rule but rather “ wanted rule by majorities of a particular character : moderation.
” Whatever that means .
On the bright side , calls to abolish the Electoral College have started to show up in campaign speeches and policy promises .
Numerous presidential candidates , including Sens .
Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) and Cory Booker ( D-N.J. ) , included the abolition of the Electoral College in their 2020 platforms .
( Biden , ironically , didn ’ t . )
The National Popular Vote compact , under which states agree to give their Electoral College votes to whichever candidate wins the most votes overall , has 15 signatories totaling 196 electoral college votes .
Last night , thanks to a ballot initiative , Colorado appears to have joined them .
It ’ s going to be an uphill battle .
According to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans favor getting rid of the Electoral College .
Supporters included 89 % of Democrats , 68 % of independents — and just 23 % of Republicans .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The 2020 election shouldn’t be a nail-biter. As of Wednesday morning, Democrat Joe Biden had earned 69 million votes, or 50.1% of those cast. President Donald Trump had earned 66.3 million votes, or just 48.2%.
As mail-in and absentee ballots, which tend to lean Democrat, continue to come in, Biden’s margin could grow to as much as 6 million — roughly double the margin Hillary Clinton won in 2016. That’s more votes than any presidential candidate in history has received and, by any other standard, a decisive showing of who most Americans want to be president.
Advertisement
And yet, as usual, the election result will come down to just a few precincts in a few states. The Supreme Court, with six Republican-appointed justices, may ultimately end up deciding who wins.
The Electoral College is becoming increasingly indefensible, a prominent symbol of America’s obsolete, anti-democratic structures at every level of government. The system was born of racism and leaves the country vulnerable to rogue electors who could shift the results with little accountability. Since 2000, there have been five presidential contests. In two of them, the Electoral College has awarded the presidency to the loser of the popular vote. Since 1992, Republicans have won the popular vote for president just once.
This is, to put it lightly, a problem. All of America’s majority-thwarting procedures favor white, rural and Republican voters. In the 2018 midterms, Democrats won nearly 60% of the popular vote — and still lost two Senate seats. Thanks to the Electoral College, every vote in Wyoming is four times more powerful than a vote in California.
Despite four out of five Americans living in heavily Democratic urban areas, for the last two decades, every presidential contest has come down to a tiny fraction of voters in a handful of rural and suburban counties in the same small number of midwestern states.
Advertisement
“The arguments in favor of the Electoral College almost exclusively consist of explicit or implicit arguments against democracy itself.”
This year, according to the widest definition of the term, roughly 100 million Americans live in swing states. That means candidates’ attention was almost exclusively focused on winning the votes of less than one-third of the country. The Electoral College is why 96% of campaign events took place in just 12 states. It is why fracking in Pennsylvania came up at two presidential debates, and why months of wildfires along the entire West Coast were barely mentioned.
Meanwhile, the arguments in favor of the Electoral College almost exclusively consist of explicit or implicit arguments against democracy itself. In a livestream last night, Glenn Beck said that if Democrats win, America would “fundamentally transform into a democracy.” Trump didn’t like the Electoral College, until he did. In 2019, Marco Rubio said that the Electoral College “makes sure interests of less populated areas aren’t ignored at the expense of densely populated areas” — i.e. that land area should amplify the votes of people living on it.
Conservative commentators have also typically defended the Electoral College with lofty-sounding appeals to tradition and American values. In an infamous 1992 column, George Will argued that America’s founders didn’t want majority rule but rather “wanted rule by majorities of a particular character: moderation.” Whatever that means.
On the bright side, calls to abolish the Electoral College have started to show up in campaign speeches and policy promises. Numerous presidential candidates, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.), included the abolition of the Electoral College in their 2020 platforms. (Biden, ironically, didn’t.) The National Popular Vote compact, under which states agree to give their Electoral College votes to whichever candidate wins the most votes overall, has 15 signatories totaling 196 electoral college votes. Last night, thanks to a ballot initiative, Colorado appears to have joined them.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Facebook Adjusts Policy Letting Candidates Prematurely Claim Victory In Pivotal States [UPDATE]

As President Donald Trump actively tries to undermine Tuesday ’ s election results , it has become clear that Facebook will allow presidential candidates to prematurely declare victory in any state without a disclaimer or removal — a key distinction the platform did not publicize when it rolled out several election-related initiatives earlier this fall .
The tech giant announced in September that posts from campaigns or candidates attempting to “ declare victory before the final results are in ” would be appended with context labels directing people to official polling results .
But that rule only applies for posts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not individual states — The Wall Street Journal reported early Wednesday morning , revealing a loophole in the platform ’ s election integrity policy .
This discrepancy , which Facebook confirmed to HuffPost , opens the door for Trump to spread election misinformation on the world ’ s biggest social media platform in the midst of a critical and uncertain period .
With neither Trump nor Democratic nominee Joe Biden yet projected to have 270 electoral votes , and with ballots still being counted in several swing states , any premature declaration by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is tantamount to falsely claiming he won the entire election .
But Facebook will not treat any such declarations that way .
Trump implied that he had won the election in a Facebook post early Wednesday declaring , “ A big WIN !
” Facebook added a label to that post clarifying that a winner “ has not been projected.
” In a Facebook video shared soon after , Trump claimed , “ Frankly , we did win this election.
” Facebook added a label stating that “ ballot counting will continue for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But if Trump prematurely or falsely claims victory in Pennsylvania , for example — a state that could determine the entire election — Facebook will not necessarily take any action , per its policy .
A company spokesperson declined to answer why state races are exempted from the policy , which was enacted in early September purportedly to reduce the risk of civil unrest amid the fallout of Election Day .
At the time , Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said , “ I ’ m ... worried that with our nation so divided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even weeks to be finalized , there could be an increased risk of civil unrest across the country.
” Twitter , by contrast , has not only added labels to Trump ’ s deceptive election-related tweets — which explicitly describe them as potentially “ misleading ” or “ disputed ” — it has also restricted the tweets ’ visibility and ability to be reposted .
Both companies spent months working to assure the public that they had strong plans in place to prevent the spread of false , misleading and unsubstantiated information about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook in particular has stumbled from the start .
On the morning of Election Day , users of Facebook-owned Instagram reported that the app showed them a notification stating , “ Tomorrow Is Election Day.
” In a series of tweets , Instagram said that the notice , which ran on Monday , “ was cached for a small group of people if their app hadn ’ t been restarted , ” adding that the issue is “ resolving itself as people restart.
” It is unclear how many users were affected .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ preceding the vote .
In addition to its commitment to flag posts prematurely declaring electoral victory , Facebook also announced on Sept. 3 that it would stop accepting all new political ads during the week leading up to the election .
The goal , Zuckerberg said , was to prevent political advertisers from spreading new messages to targeted audiences before fact-checkers and journalists had time to scrutinize them .
The ban was initially set to end after Election Day .
But just hours after the news outlet Fast Company pointed out one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a candidate could still declare victory in an ad before the results are known — Facebook introduced a new rule prohibiting “ political ads that claim victory before the results of the 2020 election have been declared , ” and later extended the ban indefinitely .
Thousands of previously approved ads from Democratic nominee Joe Biden ’ s campaign and multiple progressive groups were wrongly blocked for days due to what Facebook later called a “ technical flaw.
” Trump ’ s campaign managed to launch new ads post-ban .
And in violation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ads from the president ’ s campaign prematurely declaring victory , as well as hundreds of ads bearing the misleading text “ ELECTION DAY IS TODAY ” or “ Vote Today.
” “ For more than a year , our campaign has engaged with Facebook in good faith to both better understand their shifting policies around elections and to push for equal and measurable enforcement of those rules , ” Rob Flaherty , digital director of the Biden campaign , said at the time .
“ It is currently unclear to us whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an unfair electoral advantage in this particular instance , but it is abundantly clear that Facebook was wholly unprepared to handle this election despite having four years to prepare .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
UPDATE: Following the publication of this article, Facebook changed its policy on allowing presidential candidates to prematurely declare victory in state races. Posts making such claims will now be subject to labels noting that the votes are still being counted.
PREVIOUSLY:
As President Donald Trump actively tries to undermine Tuesday’s election results, it has become clear that Facebook will allow presidential candidates to prematurely declare victory in any state without a disclaimer or removal — a key distinction the platform did not publicize when it rolled out several election-related initiatives earlier this fall.
Advertisement
The tech giant announced in September that posts from campaigns or candidates attempting to “declare victory before the final results are in” would be appended with context labels directing people to official polling results. But that rule only applies for posts claiming victory in the overall election — not individual states — The Wall Street Journal reported early Wednesday morning, revealing a loophole in the platform’s election integrity policy.
This discrepancy, which Facebook confirmed to HuffPost, opens the door for Trump to spread election misinformation on the world’s biggest social media platform in the midst of a critical and uncertain period. With neither Trump nor Democratic nominee Joe Biden yet projected to have 270 electoral votes, and with ballots still being counted in several swing states, any premature declaration by Trump that he won those individual states is tantamount to falsely claiming he won the entire election. But Facebook will not treat any such declarations that way.
Facebook
Trump implied that he had won the election in a Facebook post early Wednesday declaring, “A big WIN!” Facebook added a label to that post clarifying that a winner “has not been projected.” In a Facebook video shared soon after, Trump claimed, “Frankly, we did win this election.” Facebook added a label stating that “ballot counting will continue for days or weeks after polls close.”
Advertisement
But if Trump prematurely or falsely claims victory in Pennsylvania, for example — a state that could determine the entire election — Facebook will not necessarily take any action, per its policy. A company spokesperson declined to answer why state races are exempted from the policy, which was enacted in early September purportedly to reduce the risk of civil unrest amid the fallout of Election Day.
At the time, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said, “I’m ... worried that with our nation so divided and election results potentially taking days or even weeks to be finalized, there could be an increased risk of civil unrest across the country.”
Twitter, by contrast, has not only added labels to Trump’s deceptive election-related tweets — which explicitly describe them as potentially “misleading” or “disputed” — it has also restricted the tweets’ visibility and ability to be reposted.
Both companies spent months working to assure the public that they had strong plans in place to prevent the spread of false, misleading and unsubstantiated information about the election on their platforms. But Facebook in particular has stumbled from the start.
On the morning of Election Day, users of Facebook-owned Instagram reported that the app showed them a notification stating, “Tomorrow Is Election Day.” In a series of tweets, Instagram said that the notice, which ran on Monday, “was cached for a small group of people if their app hadn’t been restarted,” adding that the issue is “resolving itself as people restart.” It is unclear how many users were affected.
Advertisement
Chaos ensued even in the days immediately preceding the vote. In addition to its commitment to flag posts prematurely declaring electoral victory, Facebook also announced on Sept. 3 that it would stop accepting all new political ads during the week leading up to the election. The goal, Zuckerberg said, was to prevent political advertisers from spreading new messages to targeted audiences before fact-checkers and journalists had time to scrutinize them.
The ban was initially set to end after Election Day. But just hours after the news outlet Fast Company pointed out one of the policy’s glaring flaws — a candidate could still declare victory in an ad before the results are known — Facebook introduced a new rule prohibiting “political ads that claim victory before the results of the 2020 election have been declared,” and later extended the ban indefinitely.
Still, things did not go as planned.
Thousands of previously approved ads from Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s campaign and multiple progressive groups were wrongly blocked for days due to what Facebook later called a “technical flaw.” Trump’s campaign managed to launch new ads post-ban. And in violation of its own rules, Facebook approved ads from the president’s campaign prematurely declaring victory, as well as hundreds of ads bearing the misleading text “ELECTION DAY IS TODAY” or “Vote Today.”
Biden’s team said Facebook’s bungled ban rollout cost the campaign an estimated $500,000 in donations.
“For more than a year, our campaign has engaged with Facebook in good faith to both better understand their shifting policies around elections and to push for equal and measurable enforcement of those rules,” Rob Flaherty, digital director of the Biden campaign, said at the time.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Mondaire Jones And Ritchie Torres To Become First Black Gay Congress Members

Mondaire Jones and Ritchie Torres , both of New York , made history Tuesday night as the first two openly gay Black men to be elected to Congress .
The Democratic representatives-elect will enter the House in January .
Jones won a June primary to replace retiring Rep. Nita Lowey in New York ’ s 17th District .
Torres , who is also of Latino heritage , won his primary to replace Rep. José Serrano , a 16-term Democrat who was retiring from his seat in the 15th District .
Seven years ago , Torres became the first openly gay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York City Council .
Jones , 33 , said early Wednesday that he was “ grateful to serve the community that raised me ” ― specifically , the towns of Westchester and Rockland , New York .
I am humbled by the trust voters in Westchester and Rockland have placed in me , and grateful for the opportunity to serve the community that raised me — the community that just sent an openly gay , Black guy who grew up in Section 8 housing and on food stamps to Congress .
https : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) November 4 , 2020 Their wins were praised by fellow lawmakers as well as LGBTQ advocacy groups like GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign .
Many interpreted the news as two high points in a contentious election season with a presidential race that remained undecided as of Wednesday evening .
“ Mondaire and Ritchie have shattered a rainbow ceiling and will bring unique perspectives based on lived experiences never before represented in the U.S. Congress , ” LGBTQ Victory Fund President Annise Parker said in an email statement .
“ Their elections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Black LGBTQ men to our nation ’ s highest legislative body .
It will also inspire more young LGBTQ leaders and leaders of color to run and serve.
” “ Representation matters , and our community is making history , ” National Black Justice Coalition Executive Director David Johns said .
“ We all need windows and mirrors to help us make sense of who we are and how we show up in the world , and this is especially true for Black trans , queer , and non-binary people who rarely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world.
” Jones and Torres were just two of what ’ s been described as a “ rainbow wave ” of LGBTQ officials who swept to victory Tuesday .
Also making history was Delaware ’ s Sarah McBride , who became the highest-ranking openly transgender official in the U.S. after winning a seat in her state Senate .
“ Growing up poor , Black , and gay , I never imagined someone like me could run for Congress , let alone win , ” Jones told The New York Times in June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in the 244-year history of the United States , there has never been an openly gay , Black member of Congress .
That changes this year .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Mondaire Jones and Ritchie Torres, both of New York, made history Tuesday night as the first two openly gay Black men to be elected to Congress.
The Democratic representatives-elect will enter the House in January. Jones won a June primary to replace retiring Rep. Nita Lowey in New York’s 17th District. Torres, who is also of Latino heritage, won his primary to replace Rep. José Serrano, a 16-term Democrat who was retiring from his seat in the 15th District. Seven years ago, Torres became the first openly gay elected official to serve on the New York City Council.
Advertisement
Both men expressed gratitude for their respective victories on social media.
“Tonight, we made history,” Torres, 32, tweeted. “It is the honor of a lifetime to represent the essential borough, the Bronx.”
Thank you.
Tonight, we made history.
It is the honor of a lifetime to represent the essential borough, the Bronx. pic.twitter.com/9ykMiWgYk3 — Ritchie Torres (@RitchieTorres) November 4, 2020
Jones, 33, said early Wednesday that he was “grateful to serve the community that raised me” ― specifically, the towns of Westchester and Rockland, New York.
I am humbled by the trust voters in Westchester and Rockland have placed in me, and grateful for the opportunity to serve the community that raised me — the community that just sent an openly gay, Black guy who grew up in Section 8 housing and on food stamps to Congress. https://t.co/O88nA5LN5q — Mondaire Jones (@MondaireJones) November 4, 2020
Advertisement
Their wins were praised by fellow lawmakers as well as LGBTQ advocacy groups like GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign. Many interpreted the news as two high points in a contentious election season with a presidential race that remained undecided as of Wednesday evening.
“Mondaire and Ritchie have shattered a rainbow ceiling and will bring unique perspectives based on lived experiences never before represented in the U.S. Congress,” LGBTQ Victory Fund President Annise Parker said in an email statement. “Their elections will end any doubts about the electability of Black LGBTQ men to our nation’s highest legislative body. It will also inspire more young LGBTQ leaders and leaders of color to run and serve.”
“Representation matters, and our community is making history,” National Black Justice Coalition Executive Director David Johns said. “We all need windows and mirrors to help us make sense of who we are and how we show up in the world, and this is especially true for Black trans, queer, and non-binary people who rarely see affirming examples of ourselves reflected in the world.”
Jones and Torres were just two of what’s been described as a “rainbow wave” of LGBTQ officials who swept to victory Tuesday. Also making history was Delaware’s Sarah McBride, who became the highest-ranking openly transgender official in the U.S. after winning a seat in her state Senate.
“Growing up poor, Black, and gay, I never imagined someone like me could run for Congress, let alone win,” Jones told The New York Times in June after winning the primary. “Indeed, in the 244-year history of the United States, there has never been an openly gay, Black member of Congress. That changes this year.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Judge Wants Postmaster General To Answer Questions On Delay In Ballot Sweep

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) - A U.S. judge on Wednesday said Postmaster General Louis DeJoy must answer questions about why the U.S .
Postal Service failed to complete a court-ordered sweep for undelivered ballots in about a dozen states before a Tuesday afternoon deadline .
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said at a hearing Wednesday that DeJoy “ is either going to have to be deposed or appear before me and testify under oath about why some measures were not taken.
” The Postal Service , or USPS , disclosed on Wednesday it had completed the sweeps late on Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania .
Sullivan had ordered the sweeps in response to lawsuits by groups including Vote Forward , the NAACP , and Latino community advocates .
The USPS told Sullivan it could not meet his 3 p.m. EST ( 2000 GMT ) Tuesday deadline for completing the checks , saying it was not logistically possible .
“ The court has been very clear that it expects total compliance , ” Sullivan said on Wednesday .
“ I was just as shocked to hear that nothing else was done after the injunction was issued.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday about 300,000 ballots that were received for mail processing did not receive scans confirming their delivery to election authorities .
In a court filing Wednesday , the Postal Service said “ the lack of a destination or finalization scan does not mean that the ballots were not delivered.
” Sullivan was to hear testimony on the issue from another postal official at 1:30 p.m. EST ( 1830 GMT ) Wednesday on the 300,000 ballot scan issue .
Sullivan ’ s order covered processing centers in central Pennsylvania , northern New England , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Colorado , Wisconsin and parts of Illinois , Arizona , Alabama and Wyoming , as well as the cities of Atlanta , Houston , Philadelphia , Detroit .
A senior postal inspection official said Wednesday officials in Pennsylvania had found 10 ballots in Lancaster and three delayed ballots in Johnstown during the sweeps and they were referred to management for delivery .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Wednesday said Postmaster General Louis DeJoy must answer questions about why the U.S. Postal Service failed to complete a court-ordered sweep for undelivered ballots in about a dozen states before a Tuesday afternoon deadline.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said at a hearing Wednesday that DeJoy “is either going to have to be deposed or appear before me and testify under oath about why some measures were not taken.”
Advertisement
The Postal Service, or USPS, disclosed on Wednesday it had completed the sweeps late on Tuesday and turned up just 13 ballots in Pennsylvania.
Sullivan had ordered the sweeps in response to lawsuits by groups including Vote Forward, the NAACP, and Latino community advocates.
The USPS told Sullivan it could not meet his 3 p.m. EST (2000 GMT) Tuesday deadline for completing the checks, saying it was not logistically possible.
“The court has been very clear that it expects total compliance,” Sullivan said on Wednesday. “I was just as shocked to hear that nothing else was done after the injunction was issued.”
Advertisement
Postal Service data showed that as of Sunday about 300,000 ballots that were received for mail processing did not receive scans confirming their delivery to election authorities.
In a court filing Wednesday, the Postal Service said “the lack of a destination or finalization scan does not mean that the ballots were not delivered.”
Sullivan was to hear testimony on the issue from another postal official at 1:30 p.m. EST (1830 GMT) Wednesday on the 300,000 ballot scan issue.
Sullivan’s order covered processing centers in central Pennsylvania, northern New England, greater South Carolina, south Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin and parts of Illinois, Arizona, Alabama and Wyoming, as well as the cities of Atlanta, Houston, Philadelphia, Detroit.
A senior postal inspection official said Wednesday officials in Pennsylvania had found 10 ballots in Lancaster and three delayed ballots in Johnstown during the sweeps and they were referred to management for delivery.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Twitter Repeatedly Flags Trump For Misinformation Over Election Lies

As of Wednesday afternoon , the president had tweeted seven times since midnight following a day of Americans voting across the country .
Twitter has flagged at least four of them with a warning that the content shared in Trump ’ s tweets “ is disputed and might be misleading about an election or other civic process.
” Trump claimed without evidence that his advantage in Democrat-led states “ started to magically disappear as surprise ballot dumps were counted , ” referring to the completely democratic act of the tally of legal mail-in ballots .
Later , the president baselessly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make up 500,000 vote advantage in Pennsylvania disappear.
” Another tweet that got flagged concerned content he quote tweeted .
The shared material used a manipulated or misleading screenshot of a map from a results-reporting outlet to suggest that 100 % of a new count of votes in Michigan went to Democrat Joe Biden .
That did not happen , and the screenshot Trump shared has since been deleted .
Trump has particularly focused on casting doubt on the results from Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin ― three battleground states that have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Election officials were barred by state law from starting to count mail-in ballots prior to Election Day in a year where an unprecedented number of people chose to vote by mail due to the coronavirus pandemic .
Since the start of the campaign , those three states have been recognized as crucial to the outcome of the presidential race .
As the counts continue in them , Biden was projected to win Wisconsin and Michigan while Trump leads in Pennsylvania .
Mail-in ballots take longer to process than in-person ballots because they must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ checked against voter rolls before being scanned and counted .
Trump is incorrectly telling supporters that officials are “ finding ” ballots in these states , when really they are just continuing to count them .
Nor were the ballots were not cast after Election Day like Trump and his allies are alleging .
“ As votes are still being counted across the country , our teams continue to take enforcement action on Tweets that prematurely declare victory or contain misleading information about the election broadly , ” Twitter spokesperson Nicholas Pacilio told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our teams continue to monitor Tweets that attempt to spread misleading information about voting , accounts engaged in spammy behavior , and Tweets that make premature or inaccurate claims about election results .
Our teams remain vigilant and will continue working to protect the integrity of the election conversation on Twitter.
” Twitter released a tweet defending its decision immediately after flagging Trump ’ s first tweet at midnight , which baselessly claimed that Democrats are trying to “ steal ” the election .
The platform cited its Civic Integrity Policy , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use our services to manipulate or disrupt civic processes , including through the distribution of false or misleading information about the procedures or circumstances around participation in a civic process.
” The policy also says that Twitter may label tweets to provide additional context “ in instances where misleading information does not seek to directly manipulate or disrupt civic processes , but leads to confusion on our service.
” Facebook engaged in similar actions to label identical posts on its platform .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Twitter has spent election week repeatedly flagging President Donald Trump’s tweets for misinformation over his questioning the election’s legitimacy.
As of Wednesday afternoon, the president had tweeted seven times since midnight following a day of Americans voting across the country. Twitter has flagged at least four of them with a warning that the content shared in Trump’s tweets “is disputed and might be misleading about an election or other civic process.”
Advertisement
Trump claimed without evidence that his advantage in Democrat-led states “started to magically disappear as surprise ballot dumps were counted,” referring to the completely democratic act of the tally of legal mail-in ballots. Later, the president baselessly alleged that Democrats are “working hard to make up 500,000 vote advantage in Pennsylvania disappear.”
Another tweet that got flagged concerned content he quote tweeted. The shared material used a manipulated or misleading screenshot of a map from a results-reporting outlet to suggest that 100% of a new count of votes in Michigan went to Democrat Joe Biden. That did not happen, and the screenshot Trump shared has since been deleted.
Trump has particularly focused on casting doubt on the results from Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin ― three battleground states that have taken much longer to produce outcomes. Election officials were barred by state law from starting to count mail-in ballots prior to Election Day in a year where an unprecedented number of people chose to vote by mail due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Since the start of the campaign, those three states have been recognized as crucial to the outcome of the presidential race. As the counts continue in them, Biden was projected to win Wisconsin and Michigan while Trump leads in Pennsylvania.
Advertisement
Mail-in ballots take longer to process than in-person ballots because they must be physically opened and flattened, and checked against voter rolls before being scanned and counted. Trump is incorrectly telling supporters that officials are “finding” ballots in these states, when really they are just continuing to count them. Nor were the ballots were not cast after Election Day like Trump and his allies are alleging.
“As votes are still being counted across the country, our teams continue to take enforcement action on Tweets that prematurely declare victory or contain misleading information about the election broadly,” Twitter spokesperson Nicholas Pacilio told NBC News in a statement. “Our teams continue to monitor Tweets that attempt to spread misleading information about voting, accounts engaged in spammy behavior, and Tweets that make premature or inaccurate claims about election results. Our teams remain vigilant and will continue working to protect the integrity of the election conversation on Twitter.”
Twitter released a tweet defending its decision immediately after flagging Trump’s first tweet at midnight, which baselessly claimed that Democrats are trying to “steal” the election. The platform cited its Civic Integrity Policy, which says that Twitter prohibits “attempts to use our services to manipulate or disrupt civic processes, including through the distribution of false or misleading information about the procedures or circumstances around participation in a civic process.”
The policy also says that Twitter may label tweets to provide additional context “in instances where misleading information does not seek to directly manipulate or disrupt civic processes, but leads to confusion on our service.” Facebook engaged in similar actions to label identical posts on its platform.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Twitter Unloads On The Gap For Obnoxious 'Unity' Post During Tense Election

On Wednesday — amid a tense presidential election in which President Donald Trump has falsely declared himself the victor — the Gap decided to publish a trite post about Democrats and Republicans being , shucks , friends again .
The post , which has since been deleted , included a GIF of a Gap hoodie in which one side was blue and the other red , which could be “ united ” by zipping it closed .
“ The one thing that we know , is that together we can move forward , ” the GIF was captioned with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clueless statement .
New York Times business reporter Sapna Maheshwari took a screenshot of the post and reported that a “ spokesperson told me that it was not a real hoodie for sale.
” “ The intention of our social media post , that featured a red and blue hoodie , was to show the power of unity .
It was just too soon for this message .
We remain optimistic that our country will come together to drive positive change for all , ” the company said .
Regardless of whether the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create some kind of a unity on Twitter at least .
And by unity , we ’ re talking Twitter users uniting in their disgust at the brand for offering its shallow take on a tense political divide brimming with deceit .
To read the funniest “ not now , brands ” responses to the Gap ’ s post , just hate scroll your way down .
thanks @ gap i ’ m gon na wear this on the battlefield in the civil war to symbolize how we should all be getting along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ JoshuaRush ) November 4 , 2020 I find it beautiful that we can all take a break from this anxious hellscape to come together and hate the Gap sweatshirt .
— Lauren Alexis Fisher ( @ LaurenAlexis ) November 4 , 2020 Now is really not the time @ gap for this corporate Karen bullshit .
A coup attempt is not a fucking marketing opportunity to push product .
pic.twitter.com/w2KTHu3e97 — Christopher Wylie 🏳🌈 ( @ chrisinsilico ) November 4 , 2020 Cool of the Gap to give us a sweatshirt that says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ privilege to see what 's at stake here '' — Gabi Moskowitz ( @ gabimoskowitz ) November 4 , 2020 funniest genre of brand scandals are the tweets no one asked for that gets them in trouble .
why did gap feel it was best suited to calm a nation on edge in the first place https : //t.co/paUUptZR6N — Steadman™ ( @ AsteadWesley ) November 4 , 2020 they only deleted the GAP tweet so they could stitch sweatshirt back together and have the A line up properly this time — Madison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 , 2020 This Tweet from the Gap was n't just a spur of the moment post from a social media manager who could n't read the room .
It went through layers of approval & was put on a content calendar for today .
They were going to post this regardless of the results .
And that makes it even worse pic.twitter.com/BPDxE4qlgz — Jon-Stephen Stansel ( @ jsstansel ) November 4 , 2020 the Twelfth Amendment clearly states that an Electoral College tie will be broken by The Gap 's board of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bated breath to hear where they stand — Andrew Marantz ( @ andrewmarantz ) November 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Gap has displayed a serious gap in judgment.
The post, which has since been deleted, included a GIF of a Gap hoodie in which one side was blue and the other red, which could be “united” by zipping it closed.
Advertisement
“The one thing that we know, is that together we can move forward,” the GIF was captioned with a red and blue heart emoji capping the clueless statement.
Gap has now deleted this tweet. A spokesperson told me that it was not a real hoodie for sale. pic.twitter.com/CDV18Zaz48 — Sapna Maheshwari (@sapna) November 4, 2020
New York Times business reporter Sapna Maheshwari took a screenshot of the post and reported that a “spokesperson told me that it was not a real hoodie for sale.”
Maheshwari added more comment from the company in a follow-up tweet:
“The intention of our social media post, that featured a red and blue hoodie, was to show the power of unity. It was just too soon for this message. We remain optimistic that our country will come together to drive positive change for all,” the company said.
Advertisement
Regardless of whether the hoodie could be purchased, it did create some kind of a unity on Twitter at least. And by unity, we’re talking Twitter users uniting in their disgust at the brand for offering its shallow take on a tense political divide brimming with deceit. To read the funniest “not now, brands” responses to the Gap’s post, just hate scroll your way down.
I will take my anxiety out on The GAP — JP (@jpbrammer) November 4, 2020
thanks @gap i’m gonna wear this on the battlefield in the civil war to symbolize how we should all be getting along better pic.twitter.com/vWUbo8aSzb — joshua rush (@JoshuaRush) November 4, 2020
I find it beautiful that we can all take a break from this anxious hellscape to come together and hate the Gap sweatshirt. — Lauren Alexis Fisher (@LaurenAlexis) November 4, 2020
Now is really not the time @gap for this corporate Karen bullshit. A coup attempt is not a fucking marketing opportunity to push product. pic.twitter.com/w2KTHu3e97 — Christopher Wylie 🏳🌈 (@chrisinsilico) November 4, 2020
Advertisement
Cool of the Gap to give us a sweatshirt that says "I am too sheltered by my privilege to see what's at stake here" — Gabi Moskowitz (@gabimoskowitz) November 4, 2020
funniest genre of brand scandals are the tweets no one asked for that gets them in trouble. why did gap feel it was best suited to calm a nation on edge in the first place https://t.co/paUUptZR6N — Steadman™ (@AsteadWesley) November 4, 2020
The Gap is day-drinking, I guess https://t.co/Fm5DoSV9Hw — Taffy Brodesser-Akner (@taffyakner) November 4, 2020
they only deleted the GAP tweet so they could stitch sweatshirt back together and have the A line up properly this time — Madison Malone Kircher (@4evrmalone) November 4, 2020
Advertisement
This Tweet from the Gap wasn't just a spur of the moment post from a social media manager who couldn't read the room.
It went through layers of approval & was put on a content calendar for today.
They were going to post this regardless of the results.
And that makes it even worse pic.twitter.com/BPDxE4qlgz — Jon-Stephen Stansel (@jsstansel) November 4, 2020
i will take a fit pic in the gap hoodie and unite this country — L.A.S. (@SartoriallyInc) November 4, 2020
the Twelfth Amendment clearly states that an Electoral College tie will be broken by The Gap's board of directors. an anxious nation waits with bated breath to hear where they stand — Andrew Marantz (@andrewmarantz) November 4, 2020
still irritated they discontinued my favorite jeans so might as well stay irritated — Sarah Weinman (@sarahw) November 4, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--GOP Climate Denier Prevails In Critical Texas Energy Regulator Race

The race for the open slot on the three-seat commission ― which , despite its name , oversees the Lone Star State ’ s vast oil , gas and mining industries ― had been widely seen as Democrats ’ best chance to win a statewide election there in nearly three decades .
Earlier this year , Wright defeated Ryan Sitton , the better-funded and respected Republican incumbent , in a surprise upset during the GOP primary .
A relative unknown facing fines from the very commission he ’ ll now join ― as well as lawsuits accusing him of fraud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Democratic challenger Chrysta Castañeda , an engineer and energy attorney who ran on curbing pollution that even big oil and gas giants support regulating .
Her moderate , technocratic approach won endorsements from major metro daily newspapers in Texas and a last-minute $ 2.6 million campaign infusion from billionaire donor Michael Bloomberg .
But that wasn ’ t enough to sway voters in a state that remains a Republican stronghold , particularly when fewer voters than at any point in recent history are casting ballots for candidates from both parties .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking for somebody who is going to take a really adversarial stance toward the industry , ” said Gabriel Collins , the Baker Botts Fellow in energy and environmental regulatory affairs at Rice University in Houston .
“ What most voters probably want is to try to get somebody who they think is going to be a referee to call a fair game and is not too close to industry , nor too close to environmental pressure groups.
” Not only has Wright claimed he ’ s unconvinced by the scientific reality that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he told an oil industry podcast last month that “ solar , wind and all those ” actually “ harm the environment worse ” than natural gas .
Moreover , he said , renewables are only “ good when technology is there to make sure they ’ re good.
” “ Today , I don ’ t think the technology truly exists .
It was an idea .
It caught on and hey , we ’ re going to save the planet because our icebergs aren ’ t going to melt anymore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at all of that , ” Wright said on the podcast “ Digital Wildcatters.
” “ I don ’ t see the research that proves that .
Again , my own theory is , I think the Earth continues to evolve just like we have for millions of years , and we ’ re gon na go through different times.
” During the campaign , Castañeda zeroed in on flaring ― the process by which oil drillers burn off excess methane , a super-potent greenhouse gas , from wells ― as the key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for change .
Texas flares nearly as much gas each year as all of its households consume , wasting some $ 750 million worth of the fuel in the state ’ s Permian Basin in 2018 alone .
Flaring worldwide contributes about 1 % of the man-made carbon dioxide emissions causing climate change .
And recent studies using satellites have found that emissions of unburned methane over the Permian Basin , which stretches from West Texas to eastern New Mexico , are significantly higher than what the Environmental Protection Agency estimates ― suggesting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than previously understood .
Industry giants such as Exxon Mobil Corp. , Royal Dutch Shell and BP have called for increased regulation of methane , and invested in equipment to capture gas and plug leaks .
But smaller drillers , particularly those owned by private equity firms that took risky bets before oil prices plummeted this year , have less incentive to make those changes .
“ You ’ re getting investor pressure on the oil industry itself so the oil industry wants to change , ” said Marianne Kah , the former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who now serves on the advisory board of Columbia University ’ s Center on Global Energy Policy .
“ The biggest problem is the smallest players who don ’ t want to do these things ... and even though the majors are making the investment to try to stop flaring , without regulation you don ’ t stop this.
” “ I ’ m not saying that that flaring doesn ’ t have some impact , but does it have the true impact that you see in media today ?
I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the podcast .
“ Can you tell me of any exact research that really says that flaring is actually harming our atmosphere and any worse than emissions from a car , or anything else that they ’ re claiming is making changes to our climate that we see today ?
” The other two Republican commissioners largely share Wright ’ s views .
In 2018 , Commissioner Wayne Christian wrote an op-ed arguing that the “ science on climate change is not settled.
” Commissioner Christi Craddock has routinely railed against regulations on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connect 2016 flooding in Texas and Louisiana to climate change an “ incredibly inappropriate appeal ” to “ emotions on behalf of the climate agenda .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Jim Wright, a hardcore climate change denier and owner of an oil-field services company, is projected to win the race to be Texas’ next energy regulator, preserving the Republicans’ quarter-century hold on the Texas Railroad Commission and defeating a better-funded Democrat.
The race for the open slot on the three-seat commission ― which, despite its name, oversees the Lone Star State’s vast oil, gas and mining industries ― had been widely seen as Democrats’ best chance to win a statewide election there in nearly three decades.
Advertisement
Earlier this year, Wright defeated Ryan Sitton, the better-funded and respected Republican incumbent, in a surprise upset during the GOP primary. A relative unknown facing fines from the very commission he’ll now join ― as well as lawsuits accusing him of fraud ― Wright seemed like a prime target for Democratic challenger Chrysta Castañeda, an engineer and energy attorney who ran on curbing pollution that even big oil and gas giants support regulating.
Her moderate, technocratic approach won endorsements from major metro daily newspapers in Texas and a last-minute $2.6 million campaign infusion from billionaire donor Michael Bloomberg. But that wasn’t enough to sway voters in a state that remains a Republican stronghold, particularly when fewer voters than at any point in recent history are casting ballots for candidates from both parties.
With 92% of the vote counted, Wright had a 10-point lead over Castañeda by Wednesday.
“I don’t think voters are looking for somebody who is going to take a really adversarial stance toward the industry,” said Gabriel Collins, the Baker Botts Fellow in energy and environmental regulatory affairs at Rice University in Houston. “What most voters probably want is to try to get somebody who they think is going to be a referee to call a fair game and is not too close to industry, nor too close to environmental pressure groups.”
Flared natural gas is burned off at Apache Corporations operations at the Deadwood natural gas plant in the Permian Basin in Texas. Spencer Platt via Getty Images
Advertisement
Voters certainly got the latter in Wright.
Not only has Wright claimed he’s unconvinced by the scientific reality that fossil fuel emissions are causing climate change, he told an oil industry podcast last month that “solar, wind and all those” actually “harm the environment worse” than natural gas. Moreover, he said, renewables are only “good when technology is there to make sure they’re good.”
“Today, I don’t think the technology truly exists. It was an idea. It caught on and hey, we’re going to save the planet because our icebergs aren’t going to melt anymore. You haven’t convinced me at all of that,” Wright said on the podcast “Digital Wildcatters.” “I don’t see the research that proves that. Again, my own theory is, I think the Earth continues to evolve just like we have for millions of years, and we’re gonna go through different times.”
During the campaign, Castañeda zeroed in on flaring ― the process by which oil drillers burn off excess methane, a super-potent greenhouse gas, from wells ― as the key policy area where she’d push for change. Texas flares nearly as much gas each year as all of its households consume, wasting some $750 million worth of the fuel in the state’s Permian Basin in 2018 alone.
Flaring worldwide contributes about 1% of the man-made carbon dioxide emissions causing climate change. And recent studies using satellites have found that emissions of unburned methane over the Permian Basin, which stretches from West Texas to eastern New Mexico, are significantly higher than what the Environmental Protection Agency estimates ― suggesting more is leaking from wells and pipelines than previously understood.
Industry giants such as Exxon Mobil Corp., Royal Dutch Shell and BP have called for increased regulation of methane, and invested in equipment to capture gas and plug leaks. But smaller drillers, particularly those owned by private equity firms that took risky bets before oil prices plummeted this year, have less incentive to make those changes.
Advertisement
“I don’t think voters are looking for somebody who is going to take a really adversarial stance toward the industry.” - Gabriel Collins, energy and environmental regulatory affairs fellow at Rice University
“You’re getting investor pressure on the oil industry itself so the oil industry wants to change,” said Marianne Kah, the former chief economist at drilling giant ConocoPhillips, who now serves on the advisory board of Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. “The biggest problem is the smallest players who don’t want to do these things... and even though the majors are making the investment to try to stop flaring, without regulation you don’t stop this.”
The Trump administration rescinded federal rules on methane emissions in August. Wright is unlikely to support a new crackdown on flaring.
“I’m not saying that that flaring doesn’t have some impact, but does it have the true impact that you see in media today? I don’t believe that,” he said the podcast. “Can you tell me of any exact research that really says that flaring is actually harming our atmosphere and any worse than emissions from a car, or anything else that they’re claiming is making changes to our climate that we see today?”
The other two Republican commissioners largely share Wright’s views. In 2018, Commissioner Wayne Christian wrote an op-ed arguing that the “science on climate change is not settled.” Commissioner Christi Craddock has routinely railed against regulations on greenhouse gases, and called attempts to connect 2016 flooding in Texas and Louisiana to climate change an “incredibly inappropriate appeal” to “emotions on behalf of the climate agenda.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-05--Election Observation Team Says No Evidence For Trump's Fraud Claims

BERLIN ( AP ) — The head of an international delegation monitoring the U.S. election says his team has no evidence to support President Donald Trump ’ s claims about alleged fraud involving mail-in absentee ballots .
Michael Georg Link , a German lawmaker who heads an observer mission of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe , told German public broadcaster rbb Thursday that “ on the election day itself , we couldn ’ t see any violations ” at the U.S. polling places they visited .
Link said he was “ very surprised ” by Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States has a long history of this method of voting going back to the 19th century .
“ We looked into this .
We found no violations of the rules whatsoever , ” Link told rbb .
He said neither U.S. election observers nor media found any evidence of fraud either , though the OSCE team on Wednesday repeated long-standing concerns about disenfranchisement of some voters and the distorting effects of campaign finance laws .
Link said there were some instances of errors being made “ but no systemic interference or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump has for weeks argued that mail voting is prone to fraud .
On Wednesday morning , with his lead in key battlegrounds slipping , Trump claimed efforts were being made to steal his victory and prematurely declared himself the winner .
“ That is something that does need to be described as breaking a taboo , ” Link said of Trump ’ s effort to stop the count .
“ He has neither the right nor the possibility to do this .
Responsibility for the count lies exclusively with states.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States is a member , conducts observer missions at major elections in all of its member countries .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
BERLIN (AP) — The head of an international delegation monitoring the U.S. election says his team has no evidence to support President Donald Trump’s claims about alleged fraud involving mail-in absentee ballots.
Michael Georg Link, a German lawmaker who heads an observer mission of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, told German public broadcaster rbb Thursday that “on the election day itself, we couldn’t see any violations” at the U.S. polling places they visited.
Advertisement
Link said he was “very surprised” by Trump’s claims about postal ballot fraud because the United States has a long history of this method of voting going back to the 19th century.
“We looked into this. We found no violations of the rules whatsoever,” Link told rbb.
He said neither U.S. election observers nor media found any evidence of fraud either, though the OSCE team on Wednesday repeated long-standing concerns about disenfranchisement of some voters and the distorting effects of campaign finance laws.
Link said there were some instances of errors being made “but no systemic interference or even manipulation with the postal ballots whatsoever.”
Trump has for weeks argued that mail voting is prone to fraud. On Wednesday morning, with his lead in key battlegrounds slipping, Trump claimed efforts were being made to steal his victory and prematurely declared himself the winner.
Advertisement
“That is something that does need to be described as breaking a taboo,” Link said of Trump’s effort to stop the count. “He has neither the right nor the possibility to do this. Responsibility for the count lies exclusively with states.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-05--Jimmy Fallon Spots The Utterly Unsurprising Contradiction In Trump's Election Playbook

Jimmy Fallon flagged on Wednesday how President Donald Trump once again tried to have it both ways when he falsely @ @ @ @ @ already won the 2020 election while millions of votes were still left to be counted @ @ @ @ @ of Wednesday morning , Trump alleged mass voter fraud and told supporters in a televised @ @ @ @ @ that “ we did win this election ” and “ as far as I ’ @ @ @ @ @ have won.
” Fallon pointed out an utterly unsurprising contradiction in the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ ’ re keeping track , in the same speech , Trump claimed the election was @ @ @ @ @ and then declared victory , ” he said .
The comedian suggested why people should @ @ @ @ @ slide this time .
“ I don ’ t think we should correct Trump .
@ @ @ @ @ Fallon joked .
“ Put him in the fake White House and let him spend @ @ @ @ @ him think he ’ s in charge .
Who cares , right ?
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Jimmy Fallon flagged on Wednesday how President Donald Trump once again tried to have it both ways when he falsely claimed that he’d already won the 2020 election while millions of votes were still left to be counted.
In the early hours of Wednesday morning, Trump alleged mass voter fraud and told supporters in a televised speech from the White House that “we did win this election” and “as far as I’m concerned, we already have won.”
Advertisement
Fallon pointed out an utterly unsurprising contradiction in the president’s address.
“If you’re keeping track, in the same speech, Trump claimed the election was a fraud and an embarrassment and then declared victory,” he said.
The comedian suggested why people should let Trump’s lie slide this time.
“I don’t think we should correct Trump. Just nod along,” Fallon joked. “Put him in the fake White House and let him spend the next four years letting him think he’s in charge. Who cares, right?”
Check out Fallon’s monologue here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-05--Trevor Noah Reveals How Donald Trump Flipped A Racist Insult On Its Head

Trevor Noah on Wednesday said President Donald Trump had reached a new level of stupidity “ that I did not @ @ @ @ @ declaration of victory in the 2020 election .
“ Sometimes it feels like Trump is @ @ @ @ @ the “ Daily Show ” host said .
Noah asked viewers to “ take a @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s demand for states to stop counting votes while he is in the @ @ @ @ @ “ This is a textbook authoritarian move , which is impressive coming from a guy @ @ @ @ @ a textbook , ” the comedian cracked .
“ For a guy who hates ‘ @ @ @ @ @ really likes to jack their style , ” Noah added .
“ I never thought @ @ @ @ @ day when someone yelling at me to ‘ go back to Africa ’ sounded more @ @ @ @ @ rights than a threat.
” Check out the video here :

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Trevor Noah on Wednesday said President Donald Trump had reached a new level of stupidity “that I did not expect” with his premature declaration of victory in the 2020 election.
“Sometimes it feels like Trump is an actual toddler,” the “Daily Show” host said.
Noah asked viewers to “take a moment to admit” that Trump’s demand for states to stop counting votes while he is in the lead is “insane.”
Advertisement
“This is a textbook authoritarian move, which is impressive coming from a guy who’s never read a textbook,” the comedian cracked.
“For a guy who hates ‘shithole countries,’ Trump really likes to jack their style,” Noah added. “I never thought I’d see the day when someone yelling at me to ‘go back to Africa’ sounded more like a concern for my rights than a threat.”
Check out the video here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-05--Jimmy Kimmel Points Out Trump’s Biggest Post-Election Hypocrisy

America might need some medical help as a result of the still-unresolved election battle between President Donald Trump and Democratic @ @ @ @ @ Kimmel said .
“ I thought if your election lasted more than 48 hours you @ @ @ @ @ medical attention , ” the host of “ Jimmy Kimmel Live !
” said .
@ @ @ @ @ “ closer than Donald and Ivanka at a father-daughter dance.
” Trump has threatened to @ @ @ @ @ in Pennsylvania , where he is ahead , but wants it to proceed in Arizona @ @ @ @ @ behind .
“ Right .
Stop counting the votes , ” Kimmel said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ the states where I ’ m ahead , in the states we ’ re not @ @ @ @ @ ?
” Check out the rest of his monologue below :

LOADING ERROR LOADING
America might need some medical help as a result of the still-unresolved election battle between President Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Joe Biden, Jimmy Kimmel said.
“I thought if your election lasted more than 48 hours you’re supposed to seek medical attention,” the host of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” said. Instead, the race remains “closer than Donald and Ivanka at a father-daughter dance.”
Advertisement
Trump has threatened to sue to stop the vote-counting in Pennsylvania, where he is ahead, but wants it to proceed in Arizona, where he’s behind.
“Right. Stop counting the votes,” Kimmel said. “Stop counting the votes in the states where I’m ahead, in the states we’re not, keep tallying, OK?”
Check out the rest of his monologue below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-05--Seth Meyers Shreds The 'Ghouls' At Fox News And Their 'Evidence-Free Musings'

Seth Meyers on Wednesday went to town on the “ ghouls ” at Fox News , hammering the conservative network @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump as the 2020 election remained undecided .
The host of NBC ’ s @ @ @ @ @ the network had “ picked up on Trump ’ s line of bullshit ” after @ @ @ @ @ the early hours of Wednesday , with host Dana Perino backing up the president ’ @ @ @ @ @ discovery of dumped ballots .
“ That doesn ’ t belong in the news , @ @ @ @ @ how some personalities at Fox News had spent months priming their audience to believe conspiracy @ @ @ @ @ were a viable threat to Trump ’ s chance of reelection .
Check out the @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Seth Meyers on Wednesday went to town on the “ghouls” at Fox News, hammering the conservative network for its stumping for President Donald Trump as the 2020 election remained undecided.
The host of NBC’s “Late Night” noted the network had “picked up on Trump’s line of bullshit” after he falsely declared victory in the early hours of Wednesday, with host Dana Perino backing up the president’s baseless claims about the discovery of dumped ballots.
Advertisement
“You ghouls loved your evidence-free musings don’t you?” said Meyers.
“That doesn’t belong in the news,” he continued, explaining how some personalities at Fox News had spent months priming their audience to believe conspiracy theories of widespread voter fraud were a viable threat to Trump’s chance of reelection.
Check out the full video here:
And watch Meyers’ monologue here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-05--Stephen Colbert Has Some Blunt Words For Texas And Florida After They Voted For Trump

“ Late Show ” host Stephen Colbert had a few thoughts about how some of the states voted this year @ @ @ @ @ which flipped from President Donald Trump in 2016 to Democratic candidate Joe Biden this year @ @ @ @ @ ’ s famous “ hand map ” to give Trump a message from the voters @ @ @ @ @ fond words for two other states : Texas and Florida , both of which were @ @ @ @ @ went for Trump .
“ Florida ’ s officially America ’ s cheating boyfriend , @ @ @ @ @ Why do we always think we can change him ?
” Colbert lit into Texas @ @ @ @ @ his bungling of the coronavirus pandemic .
“ Texas may remember the Alamo , ” @ @ @ @ @ apparently , they have forgotten the 230,000 .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“Late Show” host Stephen Colbert had a few thoughts about how some of the states voted this year, starting with Michigan, which flipped from President Donald Trump in 2016 to Democratic candidate Joe Biden this year.
Colbert used the state’s famous “hand map” to give Trump a message from the voters:
Advertisement
Colbert had some less fond words for two other states: Texas and Florida, both of which were expected to be competitive yet went for Trump.
“Florida’s officially America’s cheating boyfriend,” Colbert said. “Why do we always think we can change him?”
Colbert lit into Texas for voting for Trump despite his bungling of the coronavirus pandemic.
“Texas may remember the Alamo,” he said. “But apparently, they have forgotten the 230,000.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Denver Voters Repeal Pit Bull Ban, 9 Months After Mayor Vetoed Last Try

The city of Denver has voted to repeal its 30-year ban on pit bulls , and unlike a similar bill that was passed by its council earlier this year , the city ’ s mayor said he won ’ t try to stop it .
Roughly 65 % of the voters in Colorado ’ s capital approved a ballot measure on Tuesday that will allow residents , beginning Jan. 1 , to secure a provisional permit to own the dogs , which have long been stigmatized for violent behavior .
Denver ’ s City Council had voted 7-4 in February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measure was vetoed by Mayor Michael Hancock .
The council failed to override his veto , prompting Councilman Chris Herndon , who sponsored the bill , to bring it to a public vote this week .
Hancock , speaking with to CBS Denver , said he would not get in the way of the voter decision .
A pit bull stands on its hind legs at the Denver Animal Shelter .
For the past 30 years , the city has banned pit bulls , forcing owners to either turn the animals into authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limits or hide them from detection .
Hancock said he has favored retaining the ban because of “ Denver ’ s experience with pit bulls.
” But he also said his position has always been that if the issue was taken “ to the vote of the people , we would honor the vote of the people.
” Herndon has argued no credible evidence shows that pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds , and that responsible ownership is more of an indicator of whether a dog will bite or not , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The city ’ s ban was enacted in 1989 after 20 people had been attacked by pit bulls in the previous five years .
Supporters of the ban have noted that no fatalities from pit bulls have been reported since the ban ’ s enforcement .
Hancock had also voiced concern that pit bull owners would not properly license their dogs , since less than 20 % of Denver pets are licensed .
To secure a permit , prospective dog owners will have to register their pet with the Denver Animal Protection agency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that include having the dog microchipped and either spayed or neutered .
If after three years no issues with a dog have occurred , the restricted license , which has an annual fee , would be removed and the dog would be licensed in the same way as any other breed .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The city of Denver has voted to repeal its 30-year ban on pit bulls, and unlike a similar bill that was passed by its council earlier this year, the city’s mayor said he won’t try to stop it.
Roughly 65% of the voters in Colorado’s capital approved a ballot measure on Tuesday that will allow residents, beginning Jan. 1, to secure a provisional permit to own the dogs, which have long been stigmatized for violent behavior.
Advertisement
Denver’s City Council had voted 7-4 in February to end the ban, but that measure was vetoed by Mayor Michael Hancock. The council failed to override his veto, prompting Councilman Chris Herndon, who sponsored the bill, to bring it to a public vote this week.
Hancock, speaking with to CBS Denver, said he would not get in the way of the voter decision.
A pit bull stands on its hind legs at the Denver Animal Shelter. For the past 30 years, the city has banned pit bulls, forcing owners to either turn the animals into authorities, move them out of the city limits or hide them from detection. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Hancock said he has favored retaining the ban because of “Denver’s experience with pit bulls.” But he also said his position has always been that if the issue was taken “to the vote of the people, we would honor the vote of the people.”
Herndon has argued no credible evidence shows that pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds, and that responsible ownership is more of an indicator of whether a dog will bite or not, not the dog’s breed.
Advertisement
The city’s ban was enacted in 1989 after 20 people had been attacked by pit bulls in the previous five years. Supporters of the ban have noted that no fatalities from pit bulls have been reported since the ban’s enforcement. Hancock had also voiced concern that pit bull owners would not properly license their dogs, since less than 20% of Denver pets are licensed.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Philadelphia Police Pledge To Release Walter Wallace Jr. Shooting Video

Philadelphia police on Wednesday promised to release body camera footage captured in the police shooting death of Walter Wallace Jr. on Oct. 26 , and named the officers involved in the shooting .
Wallace ’ s family said they called 911 to request an ambulance and medical assistance for the 27-year-old , who was having a mental health crisis .
Instead , police officers Thomas Munz and Sean Matarazzo responded .
After Wallace approached them holding a knife , they fired at least 14 shots , killing him .
Wallace ’ s pregnant wife , Dominique , told officers that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in crisis , according to family attorney Shaka Johnson .
A bystander video of the encounter went viral almost immediately , fueling protests across the city .
The demonstrations — and occasional civil unrest — were the latest in a series of protests demanding police accountability and decrying racism that began after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police in May .
District Attorney Larry Krasner said the city decided not to release all the footage at the request of the Wallace family , who asked it be truncated .
In the widely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a house with a knife in his hand .
Family members in the background can be heard shouting about his mental health as he approaches the officers , who instruct him to “ drop the knife.
” Wallace ’ s mother trails behind him , pleading with Wallace to listen to the officers .
Wallace instead holds onto the knife and walks toward the officers , who open fire .
The family has not pushed for the officers to be charged with murder , instead pointing out structural problems in the police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deal with mental health crises and inadequate resources , like stun guns .
The Philadelphia Police Department only has 2,300 tasers , commissioner Danielle Outlaw said .
To outfit every officer with one , the department needs 4,500 .
Shaka Johnson , the family attorney for # WalterWallace Jr , says he doesn ’ t think the family wants the officers who killed their son to be charged with murder because they were “ improperly trained and did not have the proper equipment ” pic.twitter.com/dyGxWLoQQ4 — philip lewis ( @ Phil_Lewis_ ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come to a scene where somebody is in a mental crisis , and the only tool you have to deal with it is a gun ... Where are the proper tools for the job ?
” Johnson asked at a news conference on Oct. 27 .
Whatever the family ’ s wishes , however , the charging decision ultimately lies with Krasner .
Johnson said the family does intend to file a wrongful death suit .
Philadelphia ’ s mayor , district attorney and police commissioner pleaded for calm in a joint statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ body camera footage the day after the election .
“ The collective hope of our local government and the Wallace family is that releasing the recordings on November 4 will provide enough time to calm tensions and for the recordings to be released in the most constructive manner possible .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Philadelphia police on Wednesday promised to release body camera footage captured in the police shooting death of Walter Wallace Jr. on Oct. 26, and named the officers involved in the shooting.
Wallace’s family said they called 911 to request an ambulance and medical assistance for the 27-year-old, who was having a mental health crisis. Instead, police officers Thomas Munz and Sean Matarazzo responded. After Wallace approached them holding a knife, they fired at least 14 shots, killing him.
Advertisement
The officers have been pulled from street duty, pending an investigation.
Wallace’s pregnant wife, Dominique, told officers that her husband had bipolar disorder and was in crisis, according to family attorney Shaka Johnson.
A bystander video of the encounter went viral almost immediately, fueling protests across the city. The demonstrations — and occasional civil unrest — were the latest in a series of protests demanding police accountability and decrying racism that began after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police in May.
District Attorney Larry Krasner said the city decided not to release all the footage at the request of the Wallace family, who asked it be truncated.
In the widely circulated social media video, Wallace emerges from a house with a knife in his hand. Family members in the background can be heard shouting about his mental health as he approaches the officers, who instruct him to “drop the knife.”
Advertisement
Wallace’s mother trails behind him, pleading with Wallace to listen to the officers. Wallace instead holds onto the knife and walks toward the officers, who open fire.
The family has not pushed for the officers to be charged with murder, instead pointing out structural problems in the police force, like the lack of training to deal with mental health crises and inadequate resources, like stun guns.
The Philadelphia Police Department only has 2,300 tasers, commissioner Danielle Outlaw said. To outfit every officer with one, the department needs 4,500.
Shaka Johnson, the family attorney for #WalterWallace Jr, says he doesn’t think the family wants the officers who killed their son to be charged with murder because they were “improperly trained and did not have the proper equipment” pic.twitter.com/dyGxWLoQQ4 — philip lewis (@Phil_Lewis_) October 29, 2020
“When you come to a scene where somebody is in a mental crisis, and the only tool you have to deal with it is a gun ... Where are the proper tools for the job?” Johnson asked at a news conference on Oct. 27.
Advertisement
Whatever the family’s wishes, however, the charging decision ultimately lies with Krasner. Johnson said the family does intend to file a wrongful death suit.
Philadelphia’s mayor, district attorney and police commissioner pleaded for calm in a joint statement last Friday and pledged to release the body camera footage the day after the election.
“Philadelphians are experiencing an immense amount of pain, and significant unrest persists throughout the entire city,” the statement said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Wilbur The French Bulldog Declared 'Mayor' Of Tiny Kentucky Town

In the midst of all the uncertainty surrounding the 2020 election , one bright spot emerged on Tuesday as Wilbur , a French bulldog , won mayorship of Rabbit Hash , a tiny community in Kentucky ’ s Boone County .
The jury ’ s still out on what Wilbur ’ s policies are going to be , but the handsome pup was a popular choice , claiming 13,143 out of 22,985 votes in a new record .
According to local reports , he will be replacing Mayor Brynneth Pawltro , a pit bull who has dutifully served since 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jack Rabbit , a beagle , and Poppy , a golden retriever .
Lady Stone , a border collie that serves as the ambassador of the town , will be keeping her position and announced news of Wilbur ’ s win on her Facebook page .
The Frenchie has his own Facebook page as well , showing images of his hard-won campaign to become mayor of “ the most magical place on Earth.
” Rabbit Hash — a census-designated place by the Ohio River consisting mainly of a general store — chooses its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willingness to have their belly scratched , ” according to the community ’ s website .
These four-legged public officials promote the town , which is owned by the Rabbit Hash Historical Society , and locals can “ vote ” for candidates every four years by donating to the society .
Wilbur ’ s campaign for mayor raised $ 6,165 on an online fundraising page .
The first mayor of Rabbit Hash was Goofy Borneman , a dog born of “ unknown parentage ” who entered office in 1998 when Boone County held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Rabbit Hash started .
Despite an alleged tendency to poach chickens , Goofy won the position with gusto , and Rabbit Hash ’ s mayorship has been held by canines ever since .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In the midst of all the uncertainty surrounding the 2020 election, one bright spot emerged on Tuesday as Wilbur, a French bulldog, won mayorship of Rabbit Hash, a tiny community in Kentucky’s Boone County.
The jury’s still out on what Wilbur’s policies are going to be, but the handsome pup was a popular choice, claiming 13,143 out of 22,985 votes in a new record. According to local reports, he will be replacing Mayor Brynneth Pawltro, a pit bull who has dutifully served since 2017.
Advertisement
Wilbur’s closest opponents were Jack Rabbit, a beagle, and Poppy, a golden retriever. Lady Stone, a border collie that serves as the ambassador of the town, will be keeping her position and announced news of Wilbur’s win on her Facebook page. The Frenchie has his own Facebook page as well, showing images of his hard-won campaign to become mayor of “the most magical place on Earth.”
Rabbit Hash — a census-designated place by the Ohio River consisting mainly of a general store — chooses its mayors “based on the candidates’ willingness to have their belly scratched,” according to the community’s website. These four-legged public officials promote the town, which is owned by the Rabbit Hash Historical Society, and locals can “vote” for candidates every four years by donating to the society. Wilbur’s campaign for mayor raised $6,165 on an online fundraising page.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--California Votes Down Proposition That Would Have Eliminated Cash Bail

Californians voted against Proposition 25 in the Nov. 3 general election , which would have made the state the first in the nation to completely eliminate cash bail .
As of Wednesday , with more than 11 million votes counted , 55 % of Californians rejected the measure , versus 45 % who supported it , The Associated Press reported .
By voting against Prop 25 , Californians shot down SB 10 , a 2018 law that eliminated cash bail but never went into effect due to a bail bond industry campaign against it .
Critics had raised concerns that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — using risk-assessment tools and giving judges more discretion — could further perpetuate racism and other inequities in terms of who gets held in pretrial detention .
Prop 25′s opponents included Human Rights Watch and the ACLU of Southern California .
The groups warned about the racial bias embedded in risk-assessment tools that rely on data already skewed by the criminal justice system ’ s disproportionate criminalization of communities of color .
Cash bail is meant , in theory , to ensure that people show up to trials and do not commit crimes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has long been criticized for exacerbating socioeconomic injustice , allowing rich defendants to pay for their release while poorer defendants , still presumed innocent , await trial in jail simply because they can ’ t afford to pay bail .
There is also racism in the cash bail system , as in the criminal justice system as a whole .
Studies have found that bail is systematically set at higher amounts for Black defendants than for white defendants facing similar charges and with similar criminal histories .
With the law seeking to eliminate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no longer the option to end bail entirely in California by law .
But criminal justice reform groups will certainly try other methods to change the current bail system , while also trying to avoid replacing it with other harmful approaches .
The law Californians struck down would have replaced the state ’ s cash bail system with one that limited pretrial detention for many misdemeanors .
For other misdemeanor or felony charges , judges would have evaluated defendants ’ flight risk or threat to public safety using an algorithm-based risk-assessment tool @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrest records — and people of color , specifically Black people , are more likely to be arrested than whites for similar behavior .
In July , Human Rights Watch slammed approval of Proposition 25 and the law it upholds as replacing “ the injustice of money bail with an even more discriminatory pretrial system ” that “ uses racially biased risk assessment tools ” and “ gives judges nearly unlimited discretion to incarcerate.
” An August analysis from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found that the law “ would likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sooner , but it would not address longstanding inequities in bookings and arrests.
” The institute predicted that about 40 % of people booked with misdemeanors who , under the current system , are held for over two days would instead get out in under 12 hours .
However , it also predicted that about 49 % of Black people booked would be held for risk assessment , versus 37 % of whites .
New Jersey , which significantly reduced the use of money bail starting in 2017 , has seen results that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report found that the number of people held pretrial dropped significantly , but the racial disparities in who is held largely stayed the same .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Californians voted against Proposition 25 in the Nov. 3 general election, which would have made the state the first in the nation to completely eliminate cash bail.
As of Wednesday, with more than 11 million votes counted, 55% of Californians rejected the measure, versus 45% who supported it, The Associated Press reported.
Advertisement
By voting against Prop 25, Californians shot down SB 10, a 2018 law that eliminated cash bail but never went into effect due to a bail bond industry campaign against it.
Critics had raised concerns that the system that would replace cash bail — using risk-assessment tools and giving judges more discretion — could further perpetuate racism and other inequities in terms of who gets held in pretrial detention.
Prop 25′s opponents included Human Rights Watch and the ACLU of Southern California. The groups warned about the racial bias embedded in risk-assessment tools that rely on data already skewed by the criminal justice system’s disproportionate criminalization of communities of color.
Cash bail is meant, in theory, to ensure that people show up to trials and do not commit crimes until then. However, the system has long been criticized for exacerbating socioeconomic injustice, allowing rich defendants to pay for their release while poorer defendants, still presumed innocent, await trial in jail simply because they can’t afford to pay bail.
Advertisement
There is also racism in the cash bail system, as in the criminal justice system as a whole. Studies have found that bail is systematically set at higher amounts for Black defendants than for white defendants facing similar charges and with similar criminal histories.
With the law seeking to eliminate cash bail now struck down, there is no longer the option to end bail entirely in California by law. But criminal justice reform groups will certainly try other methods to change the current bail system, while also trying to avoid replacing it with other harmful approaches.
"We must end cash bail by addressing the deeper systemic problems, not by replacing it with automated bias and expanding law enforcement. Algorithms or cash bail is a false choice—we can and must do better." #noonprop25 🚫25
Read our full statement: https://t.co/ZMwcR5Fa6Q pic.twitter.com/cDEtLdeOFy — The Bail Project (@bailproject) October 6, 2020
The law Californians struck down would have replaced the state’s cash bail system with one that limited pretrial detention for many misdemeanors. For other misdemeanor or felony charges, judges would have evaluated defendants’ flight risk or threat to public safety using an algorithm-based risk-assessment tool.
Risk-assessment tools factor in things like arrest records — and people of color, specifically Black people, are more likely to be arrested than whites for similar behavior.
Advertisement
In July, Human Rights Watch slammed approval of Proposition 25 and the law it upholds as replacing “the injustice of money bail with an even more discriminatory pretrial system” that “uses racially biased risk assessment tools” and “gives judges nearly unlimited discretion to incarcerate.”
Similarly, while the American Civil Liberties Union’s Northern California branch remained “neutral” on Prop 25, its Southern California branch vehemently opposed it, condemning “racist algorithms that do not improve pretrial justice.”
An August analysis from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found that the law “would likely achieve the goal of releasing more people sooner, but it would not address longstanding inequities in bookings and arrests.”
The institute predicted that about 40% of people booked with misdemeanors who, under the current system, are held for over two days would instead get out in under 12 hours. However, it also predicted that about 49% of Black people booked would be held for risk assessment, versus 37% of whites.
Other regions have previously implemented some degree of bail reform, including New York, New Jersey, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-04--Rhode Islanders Vote To Remove 'Plantations' From State's Official Name

Rhode Island voters have approved a ballot measure to remove “ plantations ” from the state ’ s official name , reported The Associated Press .
This year ’ s Question 1 ballot proposition asked voters whether to amend the state ’ s constitution to change Rhode Island ’ s official name from “ State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations ” to simply “ State of Rhode Island.
” Advocates of the amendment say the word “ plantations ” is irrevocably linked to the country ’ s legacy of slavery .
Those opposing the change say the word had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s founder , Roger Williams , settled in Providence in 1636 .
Rhode Island voted to abolish slavery in 1652 , though the law was not enforced .
The colony played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade and once had the highest percentage of enslaved people in New England .
The question of whether to strike “ Providence Plantations ” from the state ’ s official name was on the ballot once before in 2010 , but an overwhelming percentage of voters ― nearly 78 % ― decided against the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Black man killed by a white police officer in May , sparked a reckoning with institutional racism and renewed the push to ditch the word “ plantations.
” Democratic lawmakers introduced the amendment in the state ’ s legislature in June .
Some state and local leaders have already removed “ Providence Plantations ” from official communications .
In June , Democratic Gov .
Gina Raimondo issued an executive order striking the phrase from state documents and websites .
“ We have to acknowledge our history , that ’ s true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without elevating a phrase that ’ s so deeply associated with the ugliest time in our state and in our country ’ s history , ” Raimondo said at the time .
“ We can ’ t ignore the image conjured by the word plantation , ” she added .
“ We can ’ t ignore how painful that is for Black Rhode Islanders to see that and have to see that as part of their state ’ s name .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rhode Island voters have approved a ballot measure to remove “plantations” from the state’s official name, reported The Associated Press.
This year’s Question 1 ballot proposition asked voters whether to amend the state’s constitution to change Rhode Island’s official name from “State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations” to simply “State of Rhode Island.”
Advertisement
Advocates of the amendment say the word “plantations” is irrevocably linked to the country’s legacy of slavery. Those opposing the change say the word had no association with slavery when the state’s founder, Roger Williams, settled in Providence in 1636.
Rhode Island voted to abolish slavery in 1652, though the law was not enforced. The colony played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade and once had the highest percentage of enslaved people in New England.
The question of whether to strike “Providence Plantations” from the state’s official name was on the ballot once before in 2010, but an overwhelming percentage of voters ― nearly 78% ― decided against the change.
The death of George Floyd, a Black man killed by a white police officer in May, sparked a reckoning with institutional racism and renewed the push to ditch the word “plantations.” Democratic lawmakers introduced the amendment in the state’s legislature in June.
Advertisement
Some state and local leaders have already removed “Providence Plantations” from official communications. In June, Democratic Gov. Gina Raimondo issued an executive order striking the phrase from state documents and websites.
“We have to acknowledge our history, that’s true, but we can acknowledge our history without elevating a phrase that’s so deeply associated with the ugliest time in our state and in our country’s history,” Raimondo said at the time.
“We can’t ignore the image conjured by the word plantation,” she added. “We can’t ignore how painful that is for Black Rhode Islanders to see that and have to see that as part of their state’s name.”
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.