wnd--2020-09-09--Go inside meeting where leftist 'cancel culture' attacks one of its own

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]
There have been many strange scenes in this era of coronavirus pandemic , anti-racism unrest , and woke recriminations , but perhaps none have been stranger than one that took place on Zoom late last month , when 115 people , appearing in little squares on computer screens , held a kind of trial , a somewhat secret one at that , closed to the press , its participants barred from talking about it to outsiders afterwards .
The episode illustrates the tense workings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the dock , and visible in his own little square , was Carlin Romano , a writer , philosopher , book critic and , off and on for 35 years , a member of the executive board and former president of the National Book Critics Circle , known for the prestigious literary prizes it gives every year .
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move The Zoom meeting 's purpose was not to award Romano a lifetime achievement award ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a motion to expel him from the critics ’ board .
Eighteen people spoke over the course of the two-hour Zoom meeting .
Twelve of them argued that Romano should be ousted from his elected position because he lacked “ collegiality ” ; his behavior was “ intimidating ” ; he 'd threatened to sue ; he made people “ uncomfortable.
” Romano said his personality and “ blunt ” manner of debate have been known for decades , and were n't the real reason he was under attack .
In fact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some criticisms he forcefully expressed three months earlier of some parts of an anti-racism pledge drawn up for the critics circle to show support for the Black Lives Matter movement .
In a series of private emails among board members , Romano said the pledge went too far in finding the entire publishing industry , and the critics group itself , deeply implicated in the American system of “ white supremacy and institutional racism.
” In other words , what Romano did was offer some criticism , which is what critics in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do , and what he was being asked to do as the draft of the anti-racism pledge was circulated for members ' comment .
The fact that he was soon raked over the coals for “ racism ” led many people to bemoan an especially blatant incident of “ culture cancellation.
” Even though the vote fell just short of the two-thirds majority needed to expel a person from the board , 62 % of the voting members did favor ousting Romano , who , for the three months preceding the Zoom event @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barrage of attacks – for “ blatant racism ” and “ misogyny ” – all because he dissented from a certain orthodoxy on the trinity of race , class , and gender .
The funny thing about the affair , but also telling , is that the 66-year-old Romano has for his long professional life been a quintessential liberal intellectual .
He 's critic-at-large for the Chronicle of Higher Education and teaches at the University of Pennsylvania .
He was book critic at the Philadelphia Inquirer for 28 years and wrote “ America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of American thought noted for its breadth and inclusiveness – the Wall Street Journal called it “ a roll call for identity politics.
” So the vilification of Carlin Romano is a useful case study in the galloping and enforced intolerance on the left for dissenting points of view .
In fact , it shows several things .
One of them is the trend , originating in the academic world but now spreading to the other elite institutions of American life , to ferret out “ microaggressions ” – the unintentional impression left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member or members of an underrepresented group ( at least one person invoked that word to criticize Romano during the Zoom trial ) .
The episode also signaled the repudiation of an honored and admired intellectual archetype – the curmudgeon .
I 'm not a close friend , but , as a book writer and former critic myself , I 've encountered Romano over the years , and I 'd describe him as something of a throwback to an earlier era , when a crusty , Socratic , erudite style carried with it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the ways Romano seems no longer to fit in .
One critics circle board member , Columbia University professor John McWhorter , an African American , agreed with him on the substance of the anti-racism pledge , but told the website Vulture that Romano 's way of expressing his dissent was a bit tone-deaf .
He “ was not being a modern person in the way he responded ” to the anti-racism pledge , McWhorter said , perhaps referring to Romano ’ s charge that some of the arguments of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the Romano incident also highlighted another , perhaps more far-reaching , aspect of the ongoing culture wars , namely how the “ woke ” left seems to be devouring old school liberals .
While liberals and conservatives still battle on the largest political stage , the Critics Circle fight illustrates the arcane factional struggle within the left , in which the radical faction takes on comparatively easy targets like Romano because they are accessible and vulnerable in a way that actual racists and other non-insiders are not .
Here 's what happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on May 25 while in police custody , the critics circle ’ s board of directors created a committee to draft an anti-racism pledge , headed by Hope Wabuke , a Ugandan-American poet , essayist and assistant professor of English and creative writing at the University of Nebraska .
“ White gatekeeping stifles black voices at every level of our industry , ” said a draft , circulated internally to the board members and asking for their comment .
“ We [ members of the critics group ] admit our culpability in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Indigenous People of Color ] voices in the cultural and intellectual conversation.
” The statement cited a 2019 survey that found just 5 % of the staff in the entire publishing industry to be black and only 4 % of on-staff reviewers .
“ This is a system of white supremacy and institutional racism , ” the statement said .
There were a number of comments on the draft , but Romano seems to have been alone among the board 's 24 members to object to phrases like “ system of white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ industry or to accept the notion of critics ’ “ culpability in the system of erasure of BIPOC voices.
” In an email to other members that was supposed to be internal and confidential , he wrote , “ Equating American book publishing with American police departments , as this claim suggests , is ridiculous.
” He supported Black Lives Matter , he said , but the draft statement was unfair to the “ white publishers that have been working to elevate Black writers , and Black voices , for years.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's email on Twitter even as she announced her resignation from the board because , as she put it , “ it is not possible to change these organizations from within , and the backlash will be too dangerous for me to remain.
” Soon thereafter , 15 of the board ’ s members resigned , some out of solidarity with Wabuke , but others apparently did so because of their disillusionment with what seemed to be the organization 's unstoppable descent into acrimony , and to the fact that Wabuke had herself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making the emails public .
Soon emails began calling for Romano 's resignation .
Twitter went wild with accusations of racism and bigotry against him .
A change.org petition was started by a freelance writer , Emma Eisenberg , who cited Romano 's “ racist remarks ” and his “ sustained campaign of targeting black people and women ” at the Critics Circle , demanding that he be fired from his Annenberg School of Communication teaching job at the University of Pennsylvania .
All of this might suggest Romano is more a grand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply a dissenter to portions of the anti-racism pledge .
What he found to be “ nonsense ” was n't the pledge 's citing of surveys showing the dominance of whites in publishing ; it was the suggestion that these whites are exemplars of “ white supremacy , ” when , in fact , American publishing has been a traditionally liberal institution , and over the decades , many editors have been in the forefront of efforts to find , publish , and promote black writers .
“ I once spent a day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ praised his old friend , first editor , and high-school buddy Sol Stein , and subsequent editor Jim Silberman , for all they ’ d done for him , ” Romano wrote in an “ open letter ” to the Critics Circle before his “ trial.
” “ I watched as Toni Morrison took her ‘ white gatekeeper ’ John Leonard to the Nobel Prize ceremony , and appreciated her white gatekeeper editor Robert Gottlieb at Knopf.
” “ It seemed to me , ” he continued , explaining his reasons for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a few Board members drafting these claims remained too ignorant of real-world publishing history to get their generalizations right.
” Complaints about cancel culture tend to focus on the idea of freedom of speech , the John Stuart Mill idea that nobody should be silenced for their views , no matter what they are .
But the Romano matter shows that the real harm is to the suppression of ideas and arguments that might actually be true .
For example , the anti-racism pledge cited a survey showing only 5 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be black , but it ignores the fact that an additional 19 % of jobs are held by Asians , Latinos and other people of color .
As for the National Book Critics Circle , actual facts and statistics show something more subtle than simple “ culpability in the system of erasure of BIPOC voices.
” The anti-racism pledge itself acknowledges that last year 30 % of the finalists and winners of the six critics circle book prizes were minorities , up from 22 % in 2008 .
In the seven years since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for best first book , five winners have been people of color -- two black women , two Latinas , and one Native American man .
Perhaps this is not enough , and some board members , disappointed over the reaction to the anti-racism pledge , have tried to explain the way subtle biases are at work inside the group .
The writer Yahdon Israel , who resigned from the board well before the Romano furor , told the website Lit Hub that during the group ’ s book prize deliberations , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a book , it became the very thing that undermined the integrity of the book itself.
” But once the charge of racism is leveled , civil debate is over , which is what happened once Romano 's comments had been made public and the inevitable outrage emerged .
Almost immediately , a move to expel him from the board gathered momentum , and that led to the Zoom meeting to consider the ouster motion .
At the direction of a lawyer hired by the group ( reportedly paid $ 10,500 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the press and a gag order on discussing it with outsiders afterwards was imposed .
When Romano asked the lawyer , Steven Hunter of the Chicago firm Quarles & Brady , before the meeting why an organization dedicated to the free exchange of ideas should adopt such restrictions , Hunter responded by asking Romano where he went to law school .
When Romano repeated his question , Hunter repeated his response .
I was provided access by a source on condition that this person not be identified , and was under none @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Though a former book critic myself , I have never been a member of the NBCC .
A few people at the meeting defended Romano and defined the issue as one of free speech .
One of them , Dan Cryer , a former book critic for Newsday , said , “ I 'm very much concerned with the party line being established by the NBCC.
” Philip Kopper , publisher of Posterity Press and a book reviewer for the Washington Times , said , “ The organization should stand for open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the anti-Romano speakers , who included all of the younger members , even mentioned the anti-racism pledge .
Instead , their main focus was complaints that Romano was “ not collegial , ” that he was “ intimidating , ” or that he made people “ uncomfortable.
” It seemed at times as if the demand made on college campuses for “ safe spaces ” and “ trigger warnings ” to protect people from hearing views that might offend them had spread to an organization of literary critics , whose very stock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was to be critical .
Several also argued that Romano should be expelled for saying he might sue the board if it dismissed him .
`` Threats of lawsuits to nonprofit volunteer board members are egregious , ” said Lisa Von Drasek , the curator of children 's literature at the University of Minnesota , Twin Cities .
“ This is certainly cause for removal . ''
Romano countered by saying , “ People go to a court to make sure that rules are observed .
... People do that when they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treating them unfairly.
” Indeed , one Romano supporter noted that when women have sued organizations over unequal treatment , they too might have made people “ uncomfortable , ” but they were right to do what they did .
Many of the statements made at the meeting were convoluted and hard to follow , but there seemed to be among some members an assumption that the Twitter vitriol about Romano 's alleged racism was based in truth , or even if it was n't true , keeping him on the board would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the reputations of its members .
One speaker , Letitia Montgomery-Rodgers , who does book reviews to several publications , said that Romano 's “ position as director to deliver personal remarks about political and cultural issues ... directly threatens my ability to do my work and be part of that cultural conversation as a book critic.
” The poet Rebecca Morgan Frank said , “ How can I convince my diverse young people to come to this organization when we have leadership like this ?
” “ The main bad stuff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speaking of the consequences if he were expelled , “ would be the stigma on the NBCC as a censorious organization that can not bear a dissenting voice.
” In the actual voting at the meeting , 72 % of the 115 attending voted to remove him from the board .
But Romano had collected proxy ballots from other members before the meeting and carried the day , by just a few percentage points .
Romano will remain on the board for the duration of the current term , until 2022 .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pleased that the expulsion vote failed , but the loudest opinions were of anger and outrage .
Some members declared their intention of resigning from the organization because Romano would remain in it .
“ Carlin Romano is racist garbage ” read a tweet from writer Julia Cohen : “ Wow , ” she wrote .
“ What does the award mean to anybody if we know a blatant racist is on the board ?
” The irony here is that supposed efforts to “ intimidate ” the board were one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for favoring his ouster .
But the accusations of racism and misogyny so freely and casually bandied about seemed pretty intimidating in themselves , and suggest that , whatever the outcome of the vote , the cancel culture won this battle .
Certainly it will be more difficult for people in the liberal press , universities , and the nonprofit world to express doubts about what has emerged as the mandatory view on racism — that it is “ systemic , ” that it is the abiding and chief feature of all American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all culpable in it , and that to deny that culpability is itself racist .
“ What struck me as distinctive about this , as opposed to other cancel culture incidents , is the NBCC is an organization of critics , ” Romano said in a phone interview with RCI .
“ This is not a friendly book club whose members only say nice things to each other .
We 're critics .
We 're supposed , by definition to say , 'That 's not true ; that 's not good . '
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a critics ' organization , where can you have it ?
” [ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]
By Richard Bernstein
Real Clear Investigations
There have been many strange scenes in this era of coronavirus pandemic, anti-racism unrest, and woke recriminations, but perhaps none have been stranger than one that took place on Zoom late last month, when 115 people, appearing in little squares on computer screens, held a kind of trial, a somewhat secret one at that, closed to the press, its participants barred from talking about it to outsiders afterwards. The episode illustrates the tense workings of cancel culture preoccupying an American institution.
In the dock, and visible in his own little square, was Carlin Romano, a writer, philosopher, book critic and, off and on for 35 years, a member of the executive board and former president of the National Book Critics Circle, known for the prestigious literary prizes it gives every year.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The Zoom meeting's purpose was not to award Romano a lifetime achievement award; it was to debate and vote on a motion to expel him from the critics’ board.
Eighteen people spoke over the course of the two-hour Zoom meeting. Twelve of them argued that Romano should be ousted from his elected position because he lacked “collegiality”; his behavior was “intimidating”; he'd threatened to sue; he made people “uncomfortable.” Romano said his personality and “blunt” manner of debate have been known for decades, and weren't the real reason he was under attack.
In fact, the attacks on Romano went back to some criticisms he forcefully expressed three months earlier of some parts of an anti-racism pledge drawn up for the critics circle to show support for the Black Lives Matter movement. In a series of private emails among board members, Romano said the pledge went too far in finding the entire publishing industry, and the critics group itself, deeply implicated in the American system of “white supremacy and institutional racism.”
In other words, what Romano did was offer some criticism, which is what critics in an organization of critics are generally expected to do, and what he was being asked to do as the draft of the anti-racism pledge was circulated for members' comment. The fact that he was soon raked over the coals for “racism” led many people to bemoan an especially blatant incident of “culture cancellation.” Even though the vote fell just short of the two-thirds majority needed to expel a person from the board, 62% of the voting members did favor ousting Romano, who, for the three months preceding the Zoom event, had been subject to a steady barrage of attacks – for “blatant racism” and “misogyny” – all because he dissented from a certain orthodoxy on the trinity of race, class, and gender.
The funny thing about the affair, but also telling, is that the 66-year-old Romano has for his long professional life been a quintessential liberal intellectual. He's critic-at-large for the Chronicle of Higher Education and teaches at the University of Pennsylvania. He was book critic at the Philadelphia Inquirer for 28 years and wrote “America the Philosophical,” a maverick interpretation of American thought noted for its breadth and inclusiveness – the Wall Street Journal called it “a roll call for identity politics.”
So the vilification of Carlin Romano is a useful case study in the galloping and enforced intolerance on the left for dissenting points of view. In fact, it shows several things.
One of them is the trend, originating in the academic world but now spreading to the other elite institutions of American life, to ferret out “microaggressions” – the unintentional impression left by words and actions that offend a member or members of an underrepresented group (at least one person invoked that word to criticize Romano during the Zoom trial).
The episode also signaled the repudiation of an honored and admired intellectual archetype – the curmudgeon. I'm not a close friend, but, as a book writer and former critic myself, I've encountered Romano over the years, and I'd describe him as something of a throwback to an earlier era, when a crusty, Socratic, erudite style carried with it a certain charm. But that's one of the ways Romano seems no longer to fit in. One critics circle board member, Columbia University professor John McWhorter, an African American, agreed with him on the substance of the anti-racism pledge, but told the website Vulture that Romano's way of expressing his dissent was a bit tone-deaf. He “was not being a modern person in the way he responded” to the anti-racism pledge, McWhorter said, perhaps referring to Romano’s charge that some of the arguments of the anti-racism pledge were “absolute nonsense.”
But the Romano incident also highlighted another, perhaps more far-reaching, aspect of the ongoing culture wars, namely how the “woke” left seems to be devouring old school liberals. While liberals and conservatives still battle on the largest political stage, the Critics Circle fight illustrates the arcane factional struggle within the left, in which the radical faction takes on comparatively easy targets like Romano because they are accessible and vulnerable in a way that actual racists and other non-insiders are not.
Here's what happened: After the death of George Floyd on May 25 while in police custody, the critics circle’s board of directors created a committee to draft an anti-racism pledge, headed by Hope Wabuke, a Ugandan-American poet, essayist and assistant professor of English and creative writing at the University of Nebraska. “White gatekeeping stifles black voices at every level of our industry,” said a draft, circulated internally to the board members and asking for their comment. “We [members of the critics group] admit our culpability in this system of erasure of BIPOC [Black, Indigenous People of Color] voices in the cultural and intellectual conversation.”
The statement cited a 2019 survey that found just 5% of the staff in the entire publishing industry to be black and only 4% of on-staff reviewers. “This is a system of white supremacy and institutional racism,” the statement said.
There were a number of comments on the draft, but Romano seems to have been alone among the board's 24 members to object to phrases like “system of white supremacy” to characterize the whole publishing industry or to accept the notion of critics’ “culpability in the system of erasure of BIPOC voices.” In an email to other members that was supposed to be internal and confidential, he wrote, “Equating American book publishing with American police departments, as this claim suggests, is ridiculous.” He supported Black Lives Matter, he said, but the draft statement was unfair to the “white publishers that have been working to elevate Black writers, and Black voices, for years.”
The response was furious. Wabuke posted Romano's email on Twitter even as she announced her resignation from the board because, as she put it, “it is not possible to change these organizations from within, and the backlash will be too dangerous for me to remain.” Soon thereafter, 15 of the board’s members resigned, some out of solidarity with Wabuke, but others apparently did so because of their disillusionment with what seemed to be the organization's unstoppable descent into acrimony, and to the fact that Wabuke had herself violated the group's customary procedures by making the emails public.
Soon emails began calling for Romano's resignation. Twitter went wild with accusations of racism and bigotry against him. A change.org petition was started by a freelance writer, Emma Eisenberg, who cited Romano's “racist remarks” and his “sustained campaign of targeting black people and women” at the Critics Circle, demanding that he be fired from his Annenberg School of Communication teaching job at the University of Pennsylvania.
All of this might suggest Romano is more a grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan than simply a dissenter to portions of the anti-racism pledge. What he found to be “nonsense” wasn't the pledge's citing of surveys showing the dominance of whites in publishing; it was the suggestion that these whites are exemplars of “white supremacy,” when, in fact, American publishing has been a traditionally liberal institution, and over the decades, many editors have been in the forefront of efforts to find, publish, and promote black writers. “I once spent a day with James Baldwin in which he endlessly praised his old friend, first editor, and high-school buddy Sol Stein, and subsequent editor Jim Silberman, for all they’d done for him,” Romano wrote in an “open letter” to the Critics Circle before his “trial.” “I watched as Toni Morrison took her ‘white gatekeeper’ John Leonard to the Nobel Prize ceremony, and appreciated her white gatekeeper editor Robert Gottlieb at Knopf.”
“It seemed to me,” he continued, explaining his reasons for his criticism of the anti-racism pledge, “that a few Board members drafting these claims remained too ignorant of real-world publishing history to get their generalizations right.”
Complaints about cancel culture tend to focus on the idea of freedom of speech, the John Stuart Mill idea that nobody should be silenced for their views, no matter what they are. But the Romano matter shows that the real harm is to the suppression of ideas and arguments that might actually be true. For example, the anti-racism pledge cited a survey showing only 5% of the staff in the publishing industry to be black, but it ignores the fact that an additional 19% of jobs are held by Asians, Latinos and other people of color.
As for the National Book Critics Circle, actual facts and statistics show something more subtle than simple “culpability in the system of erasure of BIPOC voices.” The anti-racism pledge itself acknowledges that last year 30% of the finalists and winners of the six critics circle book prizes were minorities, up from 22% in 2008.
In the seven years since it began awarding the John Leonard Prize for best first book, five winners have been people of color -- two black women, two Latinas, and one Native American man.
Perhaps this is not enough, and some board members, disappointed over the reaction to the anti-racism pledge, have tried to explain the way subtle biases are at work inside the group. The writer Yahdon Israel, who resigned from the board well before the Romano furor, told the website Lit Hub that during the group’s book prize deliberations, “any time race became the central focus of a book, it became the very thing that undermined the integrity of the book itself.”
But once the charge of racism is leveled, civil debate is over, which is what happened once Romano's comments had been made public and the inevitable outrage emerged. Almost immediately, a move to expel him from the board gathered momentum, and that led to the Zoom meeting to consider the ouster motion. At the direction of a lawyer hired by the group (reportedly paid $10,500 in fees), the meeting was closed to the press and a gag order on discussing it with outsiders afterwards was imposed. When Romano asked the lawyer, Steven Hunter of the Chicago firm Quarles & Brady, before the meeting why an organization dedicated to the free exchange of ideas should adopt such restrictions, Hunter responded by asking Romano where he went to law school.
When Romano repeated his question, Hunter repeated his response.
I was provided access by a source on condition that this person not be identified, and was under none of the secrecy strictures imposed on members. Though a former book critic myself, I have never been a member of the NBCC.
A few people at the meeting defended Romano and defined the issue as one of free speech. One of them, Dan Cryer, a former book critic for Newsday, said, “I'm very much concerned with the party line being established by the NBCC.” Philip Kopper, publisher of Posterity Press and a book reviewer for the Washington Times, said, “The organization should stand for open differences of opinion.”
Surprisingly, none of the anti-Romano speakers, who included all of the younger members, even mentioned the anti-racism pledge. Instead, their main focus was complaints that Romano was “not collegial,” that he was “intimidating,” or that he made people “uncomfortable.” It seemed at times as if the demand made on college campuses for “safe spaces” and “trigger warnings” to protect people from hearing views that might offend them had spread to an organization of literary critics, whose very stock in trade, as Romano pointed out, was to be critical.
Several also argued that Romano should be expelled for saying he might sue the board if it dismissed him. "Threats of lawsuits to nonprofit volunteer board members are egregious,” said Lisa Von Drasek, the curator of children's literature at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. “This is certainly cause for removal."
Romano countered by saying, “People go to a court to make sure that rules are observed. ... People do that when they feel others are attacking them, or treating them unfairly.” Indeed, one Romano supporter noted that when women have sued organizations over unequal treatment, they too might have made people “uncomfortable,” but they were right to do what they did.
Many of the statements made at the meeting were convoluted and hard to follow, but there seemed to be among some members an assumption that the Twitter vitriol about Romano's alleged racism was based in truth, or even if it wasn't true, keeping him on the board would tarnish both the Critics Circle's reputation and the reputations of its members. One speaker, Letitia Montgomery-Rodgers, who does book reviews to several publications, said that Romano's “position as director to deliver personal remarks about political and cultural issues ... directly threatens my ability to do my work and be part of that cultural conversation as a book critic.” The poet Rebecca Morgan Frank said, “How can I convince my diverse young people to come to this organization when we have leadership like this?”
“The main bad stuff,” Romano said in response, speaking of the consequences if he were expelled, “would be the stigma on the NBCC as a censorious organization that cannot bear a dissenting voice.” In the actual voting at the meeting, 72% of the 115 attending voted to remove him from the board. But Romano had collected proxy ballots from other members before the meeting and carried the day, by just a few percentage points. Romano will remain on the board for the duration of the current term, until 2022.
Some people on Twitter and other forums were pleased that the expulsion vote failed, but the loudest opinions were of anger and outrage. Some members declared their intention of resigning from the organization because Romano would remain in it. “Carlin Romano is racist garbage” read a tweet from writer Julia Cohen: “Wow,” she wrote. “What does the award mean to anybody if we know a blatant racist is on the board?”
The irony here is that supposed efforts to “intimidate” the board were one of the chief reasons cited by Romano's detractors for favoring his ouster. But the accusations of racism and misogyny so freely and casually bandied about seemed pretty intimidating in themselves, and suggest that, whatever the outcome of the vote, the cancel culture won this battle. Certainly it will be more difficult for people in the liberal press, universities, and the nonprofit world to express doubts about what has emerged as the mandatory view on racism — that it is “systemic,” that it is the abiding and chief feature of all American history and life, that we are all culpable in it, and that to deny that culpability is itself racist.
“What struck me as distinctive about this, as opposed to other cancel culture incidents, is the NBCC is an organization of critics,” Romano said in a phone interview with RCI. “This is not a friendly book club whose members only say nice things to each other. We're critics. We're supposed, by definition to say, 'That's not true; that's not good.' If you can't have criticism in a critics' organization, where can you have it?”
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]


wnd--2020-09-09--Mark Meadows: Additional documents spell 'real trouble' for top FBI officials

Additional documents have surfaced that spell trouble for top FBI officials involved in the Obama administration 's probe of Trump-Russia collusion , according to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows .
Meadows told Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo on Tuesday the FBI officials are in `` real trouble , '' the Washington Examiner reported .
`` Additional documents that I ’ ve been able to review say that a number of the players , the Peter Strzoks , the Andy McCabes , the James Comeys , and even others in the administration previously are in real trouble because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ act and I use the word unlawful at best , it broke all kinds of protocols and at worst people should go to jail as I mentioned previously , '' Meadows said .
The comments follow Strzok 's insistence in media interviews promoting his new book that the FBI 's probe of the Trump campaign was legitimate and that the president was `` compromised '' by Russia .
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move But Meadows said the documents do n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2018 after the disclosure of anti-Trump text messages .
Meadows said the president has `` encouraged not only declassification , but full transparency '' on the issue .
`` I can tell you , it ’ s real easy for Peter Strzok to go on '60 Minutes ' when he doesn ’ t have to raise his right hand and tell the truth .
In all of this interview , I can tell you this .
It ’ s not backed up by the facts .
It ’ s not backed up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And ultimately , his house of cards will come falling down , '' Meadows said .

Additional documents have surfaced that spell trouble for top FBI officials involved in the Obama administration's probe of Trump-Russia collusion, according to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
Meadows told Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo on Tuesday the FBI officials are in "real trouble," the Washington Examiner reported.
"Additional documents that I’ve been able to review say that a number of the players, the Peter Strzoks, the Andy McCabes, the James Comeys, and even others in the administration previously are in real trouble because of their willingness to participate in an unlawful act and I use the word unlawful at best, it broke all kinds of protocols and at worst people should go to jail as I mentioned previously," Meadows said.
The comments follow Strzok's insistence in media interviews promoting his new book that the FBI's probe of the Trump campaign was legitimate and that the president was "compromised" by Russia.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
But Meadows said the documents don't back up Strzok, who was fired in 2018 after the disclosure of anti-Trump text messages.
Meadows said the president has "encouraged not only declassification, but full transparency" on the issue.
"I can tell you, it’s real easy for Peter Strzok to go on '60 Minutes' when he doesn’t have to raise his right hand and tell the truth. In all of this interview, I can tell you this. It’s not backed up by the facts. It’s not backed up by documents that I’ve seen. And ultimately, his house of cards will come falling down," Meadows said.


wnd--2020-09-09--Biden White House stenographer says Joe losing 'mental acuity'

The Joe Biden running for president is `` not the same Joe '' who was vice president only a few years ago .
That 's according to Mike McCormick , who worked as a White House stenographer for 15 years , including with Biden from 2011 to 2017 , reported the Washington Free Beacon .
`` It is a complete difference from what he was in 2017 , '' McCormick told the Beacon .
`` He 's lost a step and he does n't seem to have the same mental acuity as he did four years ago . ''
McCormick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy , he does n't have the pace of his speaking . ''
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move The Beacon noted Biden 's `` physical stamina and cognitive health have come under scrutiny during the 2020 election , due to a series of speaking appearances in which the 77-year-old has appeared to lose his train of thought , struggled to finish a sentence , or forgotten where he said . ''
McCormick said the Joe Biden he knew regularly went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 'd just make a big joke out of it , and go straight from the hip , '' McCormick said .
Now , he appears to be reading directly from scripts , including the instructions from his staff .
On one occasion he read `` END QUOTE '' and on another `` TOPLINE MESSAGE . ''
McCormick explained why Biden has such a dislike for Vladimir Putin .
In 2011 , Putin `` publicly humiliated '' Biden by cutting off his microphone during a press conference .
Last week , Rush Limbaugh discussed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was warning `` the Russians are seeking to sow discord in American politics by casting doubt over former Vice President Joe Biden 's mental fitness for office . ''
ABC 's Jonathan Karl said it was `` meant to be a warning , an intelligence bulletin from the Department of Homeland Security alerting local , state and federal law enforcement to a Russian scheme to damage Joe Biden 's presidential campaign . ''
Limbaugh said : `` Well , I got ta tell you , if that ’ s true , they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
We ’ ve had our doubts since Biden announced he was running in April of 2019 .
Besides , how did the Russians get Biden to cooperate ?
By pretending he can ’ t put two sentences together half the time .
`` Really ?
The Russians are behind this ?
It was just yesterday that we were told the Russians are already doing it again , folks , they ’ re already meddling in the 2020 election .
And that has an obvious question .
You mean we haven ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
We ’ ve known about it for four years ?
`` Look , I ’ m being facetious .
I ’ m playing devil ’ s advocate here .
These guys , these Democrats , the media , they have claimed the Russians meddled .
They stole the election .
Should have been Hillary .
You know the drill .
It ’ s been four years .
We haven ’ t fixed this ?
We haven ’ t identified what the Russians did , we haven ’ t shut those things down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roadblocks ?
We haven ’ t been able to stop the Russians ?
They just decide they want to meddle in the 2020 election and there ’ s nothing we can do , they ’ re gon na do it ?
Well , that ’ s what we ’ re being asked to believe . ''
The Federalist reported the document Karl quoted was titled `` Russia likely to denigrate health of U.S. candidates to influence 2020 election . ''
The report said Biden 's `` cognitive decline '' is `` very real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rare interview when the campaign allows … Biden to speak to friendly journalists . ''
One of his most recent blunders came in a televised address in Pittsburgh .
`` COVID has taken this year , just since the outbreak , has taken more than 100 year , look , here ’ s , the lives , it ’ s just , when you think about it .
More lives this year than any other year for the past 100 years , '' he said .
A recent survey found that four voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` diminished mental capacity '' that will allow him to be manipulated by the far left .
Forty-one percent said they strongly agree , and another 6 % said they somewhat agree .
Only 37 % said they strongly disagree .
Commissioned by Heritage Action For America , the survey asked voters whether or not they believe that `` Biden suffers from some level of diminished mental capacity and because of this they fear that if he is elected president his administration will be staffed with the very liberal socialists given to him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic National Committee . ''
The results were reported by Paul Bedard 's `` Washington Secrets '' column in the Washington Examiner .
Bedard noted Donald Trump Jr. has been raising the issue in his interviews and a new book , `` Liberal Privilege : Joe Biden and the Democrats ' Defense of the Indefensible . ''
Jackson said : `` The best way I can describe him every time I see him is that he ’ s just lost .
I won ’ t make any particular diagnosis about dementia .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that something is not right . ''
When Biden accepted his party 's nomination , his speech was praised widely by Democrats .
But CNN analyst Van Jones acknowledged in a panel covering the final night of the Democratic National Convention that they `` were prepared for it to be a terrible speech . ''
`` As long as he did n't embarrass himself , we were going to come out here and praise it ! ''

The Joe Biden running for president is "not the same Joe" who was vice president only a few years ago.
That's according to Mike McCormick, who worked as a White House stenographer for 15 years, including with Biden from 2011 to 2017, reported the Washington Free Beacon.
"It is a complete difference from what he was in 2017," McCormick told the Beacon. "He's lost a step and he doesn't seem to have the same mental acuity as he did four years ago."
McCormick said Biden "doesn't have the energy, he doesn't have the pace of his speaking."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"He's a different guy."
McCormick has a book out called "Joe Biden Unauthorized."
The Beacon noted Biden's "physical stamina and cognitive health have come under scrutiny during the 2020 election, due to a series of speaking appearances in which the 77-year-old has appeared to lose his train of thought, struggled to finish a sentence, or forgotten where he said."
McCormick said the Joe Biden he knew regularly went off script with reporters.
"He'd just make a big joke out of it, and go straight from the hip," McCormick said.
Now, he appears to be reading directly from scripts, including the instructions from his staff. On one occasion he read "END QUOTE" and on another "TOPLINE MESSAGE."
McCormick explained why Biden has such a dislike for Vladimir Putin.
In 2011, Putin "publicly humiliated" Biden by cutting off his microphone during a press conference.
Last week, Rush Limbaugh discussed an ABC News report that U.S. intelligence was warning "the Russians are seeking to sow discord in American politics by casting doubt over former Vice President Joe Biden's mental fitness for office."
ABC's Jonathan Karl said it was "meant to be a warning, an intelligence bulletin from the Department of Homeland Security alerting local, state and federal law enforcement to a Russian scheme to damage Joe Biden's presidential campaign."
Limbaugh said: "Well, I gotta tell you, if that’s true, they’ve been doing it for a long time. We’ve had our doubts since Biden announced he was running in April of 2019. Besides, how did the Russians get Biden to cooperate? By pretending he can’t put two sentences together half the time.
"Really? The Russians are behind this? It was just yesterday that we were told the Russians are already doing it again, folks, they’re already meddling in the 2020 election. And that has an obvious question. You mean we haven’t done anything to fix this problem? We’ve known about it for four years?
"Look, I’m being facetious. I’m playing devil’s advocate here. These guys, these Democrats, the media, they have claimed the Russians meddled. They stole the election. Should have been Hillary. You know the drill. It’s been four years. We haven’t fixed this? We haven’t identified what the Russians did, we haven’t shut those things down? We haven’t put up roadblocks? We haven’t been able to stop the Russians? They just decide they want to meddle in the 2020 election and there’s nothing we can do, they’re gonna do it? Well, that’s what we’re being asked to believe."
The Federalist reported the document Karl quoted was titled "Russia likely to denigrate health of U.S. candidates to influence 2020 election."
The report said Biden's "cognitive decline" is "very real and becomes much more apparent with every rare interview when the campaign allows … Biden to speak to friendly journalists."
One of his most recent blunders came in a televised address in Pittsburgh.
"COVID has taken this year, just since the outbreak, has taken more than 100 year, look, here’s, the lives, it’s just, when you think about it. More lives this year than any other year for the past 100 years," he said.
See Biden's comment:
A recent survey found that four voters in 10 believe Biden is suffering from "diminished mental capacity" that will allow him to be manipulated by the far left.
Forty-one percent said they strongly agree, and another 6% said they somewhat agree. Only 37% said they strongly disagree.
Commissioned by Heritage Action For America, the survey asked voters whether or not they believe that "Biden suffers from some level of diminished mental capacity and because of this they fear that if he is elected president his administration will be staffed with the very liberal socialists given to him by Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the Democratic National Committee."
The results were reported by Paul Bedard's "Washington Secrets" column in the Washington Examiner. Bedard noted Donald Trump Jr. has been raising the issue in his interviews and a new book, "Liberal Privilege: Joe Biden and the Democrats' Defense of the Indefensible."
Trump Jr. quotes Obama's White House doctor, Ronnie Jackson, a retired Navy officer, who has questioned Biden's mental capacity.
Jackson said: "The best way I can describe him every time I see him is that he’s just lost. I won’t make any particular diagnosis about dementia. ... But what I will say is that something is not right."
When Biden accepted his party's nomination, his speech was praised widely by Democrats.
But CNN analyst Van Jones acknowledged in a panel covering the final night of the Democratic National Convention that they "were prepared for it to be a terrible speech."
"As long as he didn't embarrass himself, we were going to come out here and praise it!"


wnd--2020-09-09--The Democrats side with the villain, again

On Aug. 23 , 29-year-old Jacob Blake , a black man , was shot seven times in the back by a white police officer .
The original video , which only included the last moments of the incident , gave no context for the incident .
But further video and police reports made clear what happened .
According to the police association , the police were called to the scene by a black woman who had dialed 911 to report that Blake was attempting to steal the keys to her car .
There was an open warrant on Blake for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victim is the woman who dialed 911 , and she apparently had a restraining order against Blake .
Back in May , she alleged that Blake entered a room where she was sleeping near one of her children , thrust his finger into her vagina , pulled it out , smelled it and said , `` Smells like you 've been with other men . ''
The alleged victim also said that Blake sexually assaults her approximately twice per year .
Upon arriving at the scene , the police attempted to effectuate an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got one of the officers in a headlock and resisted two separate uses of a stun gun .
He then disobeyed officer commands , walked around to the driver 's side of an SUV and reached inside .
A knife was found on the driver 's side floorboards .
This is the definition of a justified shoot , by all available evidence .
Yet Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris have chosen to side with an alleged rapist and against police officers attempting to do their job .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought that the officers in Blake 's shootings should be charged , adding , `` Let 's make sure justice is done . ''
Harris – whose judgment on these matters ought to be doubted , given her conviction that Michael Brown was murdered and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a probable rapist – agreed that the officer `` should be charged . ''
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move But Biden and Harris did n't stop there .
Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's family .
Biden got on the phone with Blake – who was handcuffed to his hospital bed , since he is currently under arrest – and quoted the book of Psalms , adding that `` nothing is going to defeat '' Blake .
Harris went further , telling Blake she was `` proud '' of him and saying that the Blake family is `` incredible '' – an amazing description of a family wherein the son is an alleged rapist and the father is an open anti-Semite , according to his public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times provided cover for this insulting insanity in a long puff piece about Blake , describing him as a hero who `` survived and has begun to tell his own story . ''
That piece left any description of his crimes to paragraph 17 and never mentioned that he resisted arrest and had a knife in the vehicle .
On a raw level , none of this makes sense .
Blake is , by all available evidence , a villain .
The police officer was , by all available evidence , acting within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the context of a broader Democratic narrative that police are systemically racist , and that all criminals of minority ethnicity are victims of that system , it all makes perfect sense .
If you think that American racism is responsible for a black man allegedly raping a black woman , this is a story in which there are only victims and there is no perpetrator but the system itself – in this case , a system represented by the white police officer .
If we wish to live together in a society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ By lionizing Jacob Blake while decrying the police who tried to arrest him , Democrats justify and incentivize criminality .
This must stop .
Individuals are responsible for their crimes ; police are necessary to stop those crimes .
Those who disagree can not be allowed to gain power .

On Aug. 23, 29-year-old Jacob Blake, a black man, was shot seven times in the back by a white police officer. The original video, which only included the last moments of the incident, gave no context for the incident. But further video and police reports made clear what happened.
According to the police association, the police were called to the scene by a black woman who had dialed 911 to report that Blake was attempting to steal the keys to her car. There was an open warrant on Blake for third-degree felony sexual assault; the alleged victim is the woman who dialed 911, and she apparently had a restraining order against Blake. Back in May, she alleged that Blake entered a room where she was sleeping near one of her children, thrust his finger into her vagina, pulled it out, smelled it and said, "Smells like you've been with other men." The alleged victim also said that Blake sexually assaults her approximately twice per year.
Upon arriving at the scene, the police attempted to effectuate an arrest. Blake resisted. He apparently got one of the officers in a headlock and resisted two separate uses of a stun gun. He then disobeyed officer commands, walked around to the driver's side of an SUV and reached inside. A knife was found on the driver's side floorboards.
This is the definition of a justified shoot, by all available evidence. Yet Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris have chosen to side with an alleged rapist and against police officers attempting to do their job.
On Sept. 2, Biden said he thought that the officers in Blake's shootings should be charged, adding, "Let's make sure justice is done." Harris – whose judgment on these matters ought to be doubted, given her conviction that Michael Brown was murdered and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a probable rapist – agreed that the officer "should be charged."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
But Biden and Harris didn't stop there. Biden traveled to Kenosha and met with Blake's family. Biden got on the phone with Blake – who was handcuffed to his hospital bed, since he is currently under arrest – and quoted the book of Psalms, adding that "nothing is going to defeat" Blake. Harris went further, telling Blake she was "proud" of him and saying that the Blake family is "incredible" – an amazing description of a family wherein the son is an alleged rapist and the father is an open anti-Semite, according to his public social media posts.
The New York Times provided cover for this insulting insanity in a long puff piece about Blake, describing him as a hero who "survived and has begun to tell his own story." That piece left any description of his crimes to paragraph 17 and never mentioned that he resisted arrest and had a knife in the vehicle.
On a raw level, none of this makes sense. Blake is, by all available evidence, a villain. The police officer was, by all available evidence, acting within the scope of his duty. But in the context of a broader Democratic narrative that police are systemically racist, and that all criminals of minority ethnicity are victims of that system, it all makes perfect sense. If you think that American racism is responsible for a black man allegedly raping a black woman, this is a story in which there are only victims and there is no perpetrator but the system itself – in this case, a system represented by the white police officer.
If we wish to live together in a society, this perspective cannot win. By lionizing Jacob Blake while decrying the police who tried to arrest him, Democrats justify and incentivize criminality. This must stop. Individuals are responsible for their crimes; police are necessary to stop those crimes. Those who disagree cannot be allowed to gain power.


wnd--2020-09-09--Trump's law-and-order message gaining traction in battleground suburbia

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
On the surface , President Trump ’ s doubling down on his law-and-order message appears to be working .
Polls in key battleground states have tightened since the Republican National Convention , which was heavy on a pro-police and anti-mayhem theme while showcasing a lineup of African Americans who wholeheartedly back the president and reject the racist label the left has tried to pin on him .
In the days following the convention , plenty of headlines have pushed the theory that swing voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after growing weary from watching wave after wave of violent racial clashes play out this summer .
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move The Trump campaign in recent days has repeatedly suggested that its efforts to paint Joe Biden as weak on crime and racial unrest is helping Trump win back suburban voters , especially women , who fueled the 2018 blue wave that swept Democrats back to power in the House of Representatives .
But is the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those sought-after suburban women voters , many of whom have soured on Trump in recent years ?
Or is the race simply tightening in battleground states because most presidential elections usually do in the final stretch ?
During the GOP convention , CNN ’ s Don Lemon appeared so rattled by signs that violent racial unrest in cities across the country are turning off voters that he demanded that Biden and Democrats take a stand against the looting , arson and violence or risk losing the election .
Lemon has since said he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sudden reversal over the last week to denounce the violence and looting , claiming that Biden ’ s remarks have Trump “ on his heels.
” The polls , however , tell a different , but not yet definitive , story .
Polling in the Trump era is rightfully suspect , but it ’ s still the main measuring stick to assess whether certain campaign strategies are working .
The RealClearPolitics polling averages show Biden ’ s lead narrowing to 5 % or below in all top swing states , including Arizona , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania and Wisconsin .
There are early signs that suburban voters are starting to swing toward Trump because of his strong stance against the riots , but there ’ s not enough evidence yet to say whether that trend will last to November .
Winning the suburbs remains a big hill for the president in some battlegrounds ; much will depend on his ability to connect to these suburban swing voters , and not just rev up his base on the issue of quelling violent unrest .
A Yahoo News/YouGov poll , conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Aug. 27-28 , found Biden leading Trump 47 % to 41 % overall , but Trump leading Biden 45 % to 43 % among all suburban voters surveyed .
Asked to describe the protests that have erupted across the country this summer , 37 % of those surveyed said they were “ mostly violent , ” compared to 28 % who said they were “ mostly peaceful , ” as many prominent Democrats tended to describe them before changing those characterizations the past week .
Suburban voters were slightly more critical , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ mostly violent ” and 30 % calling them “ mostly peaceful.
” In the same survey , suburban voters gave Trump a slight edge in their views of his ability to handle crime : 42 % said Trump would do better while 40 % said Biden would .
( That 2 % edge was flipped when considering all voters . )
The survey also showed that violent crime stemming from the rioting is of deep concern to all voters , with 48 % of all respondents called it “ a very big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who called it “ a small problem.
” That number is even higher among suburban voters , with 51 % regarding violent crime a “ very big problem.
” “ Every American , from the city to suburb , wants and deserves to feel safe in their communities , ” Courtney Parella , Trump ’ s deputy press secretary , told RealClearPolitics .
“ Unlike Joe Biden , who stayed silent for months as his supporters led violent riots and destroyed businesses across our great nation , President Trump took action without hesitation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our brave men and women in blue who put their lives on the line to keep us safe.
” With the race now in the home stretch , both Trump and Biden aren ’ t letting the coronavirus grind their campaigns to a halt .
Both candidates spent the week traveling to key battlegrounds to hone their pitches – moving to the turmoil rather than avoiding it .
In Kenosha , Wis. , the Milwaukee suburb that was the scene of the latest rioting and destruction over the police shooting of Jacob Blake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theme .
Talking to an all-white panel , he referred to the rioting as “ domestic terrorism ” in “ Democrat-run cities ” without stressing the need for unity and reconciliation that so many voters of every color would like to hear .
Instead , Trump blamed “ reckless far-left politicians ” for the ongoing violence and said , “ We must give far greater support to our law enforcement.
” Afterward , the Biden campaign blasted Trump for taking sides with police on the issue instead of trying to bring the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to meet the moment , refusing to utter the words that Wisconsinites and Americans across the country needed to hear today from the president : a condemnation of violence of all kinds , not matter who commits it , ” said Kate Bedingfield , Biden ’ s deputy campaign manager .
Biden ’ s messaging was far more nuanced , though his remarks were marred by some distracting gaffes .
At one point , he inexplicably stopped a train of thought by saying , “ They ’ ll shoot me , ” if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was an unfortunate reference amid a community still reeling from the police shooting of Blake the week before , which left him paralyzed .
After meeting with Blake ’ s family , Biden hosted a listening session with local leaders at a church , where he stressed his commitment to ending racial disparities , as well as the violence and disorder .
“ Win or lose , I ’ m going to go down fighting , ” he pledged .
“ I ’ m going to go down fighting for racial equality , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also warned against violent outpourings of anger , no matter “ how angry you are.
” Trump ’ s strong alignment with the police is his comfort zone , and the position has big base appeal .
But some Republican strategists argue he needs to move beyond it if he wants to win in November .
Even though the Yahoo News/YouGov survey shows that violent protests are now a top voter concern , other polling varies on where crime and unrest rank for voters .
A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far behind the economy and coronavirus as a top concern .
A recent Pew Research Center poll found that Republicans rank crime as the second-most important issue after the economy , but overall , likely voters rank violent crime fifth , well behind the coronavirus , the economy and health care .
Recent polling out of Wisconsin , North Carolina and Arizona suggests Trump still has a long way to go to win over suburban voters , especially suburban women , and some Republicans are worried that touting law and order alone without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from making the inroads he needs .
The demographics in the suburbs are changing , warns Matt Terrill , a GOP strategist and partner at Firehouse Strategies who served as chief of staff to Sen. Marco Rubio ’ s 2016 presidential campaign .
“ The candidate who talks about handling race relations , public safety and also unifying the country will be the candidate who wins this race , ” Terrill told RealClearPolitics .
“ .
.
.
It ’ s that balanced approach that at the end of the day is going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP convention planners credit for threading that difficult needle between race relations and law and order , but he said Trump , not just his surrogates , needs to show he ’ s capable of the same type of healing leadership .
Biden is ahead in three key states that Trump won in 2016 — Arizona , North Carolina and Wisconsin — mainly because suburban women have swung so strongly in favor of Biden , according to a new poll released by Fox News .
Suburban women in all three of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus , as well as policing and criminal justice issues .
Voters can start returning absentee ballots this week in North Carolina and in mid-September in Wisconsin , so it 's critical that each campaign ’ s message is resonating .
In Arizona , voters can start mailing in absentee ballots in early October .
The Fox News poll , conducted Aug. 29-Sept. 1 , found that in Arizona , Trump is down 9 points to Biden , 40 % to 49 % , with Biden is leading among suburban women voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters overall by 7 .
In North Carolina , voters are even more divided .
While whites back Trump by 23 points , blacks support Biden by 83 points .
Rural voters are supporting Trump by 14 points , while suburban voters are swinging to Biden by 19 .
Among suburban women , that number jumps to a 31-point lead for Biden .
In Wisconsin , women voters favor Biden by 17 points , while men are equally divided , favoring Trump by 1 point .
Suburban women in the Badger State back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all suburban voters , Biden maintains just an 8-point advantage .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Susan Crabtree
Real Clear Politics
On the surface, President Trump’s doubling down on his law-and-order message appears to be working. Polls in key battleground states have tightened since the Republican National Convention, which was heavy on a pro-police and anti-mayhem theme while showcasing a lineup of African Americans who wholeheartedly back the president and reject the racist label the left has tried to pin on him.
In the days following the convention, plenty of headlines have pushed the theory that swing voters are taking a second look at Trump after growing weary from watching wave after wave of violent racial clashes play out this summer.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The Trump campaign in recent days has repeatedly suggested that its efforts to paint Joe Biden as weak on crime and racial unrest is helping Trump win back suburban voters, especially women, who fueled the 2018 blue wave that swept Democrats back to power in the House of Representatives.
But is the president’s blunt law-and-order message really starting to attract those sought-after suburban women voters, many of whom have soured on Trump in recent years? Or is the race simply tightening in battleground states because most presidential elections usually do in the final stretch?
Biden’s Lead Narrows in Top Swing States
During the GOP convention, CNN’s Don Lemon appeared so rattled by signs that violent racial unrest in cities across the country are turning off voters that he demanded that Biden and Democrats take a stand against the looting, arson and violence or risk losing the election. Lemon has since said he’s satisfied with Biden’s sudden reversal over the last week to denounce the violence and looting, claiming that Biden’s remarks have Trump “on his heels.”
The polls, however, tell a different, but not yet definitive, story. Polling in the Trump era is rightfully suspect, but it’s still the main measuring stick to assess whether certain campaign strategies are working.
The RealClearPolitics polling averages show Biden’s lead narrowing to 5% or below in all top swing states, including Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
There are early signs that suburban voters are starting to swing toward Trump because of his strong stance against the riots, but there’s not enough evidence yet to say whether that trend will last to November. Winning the suburbs remains a big hill for the president in some battlegrounds; much will depend on his ability to connect to these suburban swing voters, and not just rev up his base on the issue of quelling violent unrest.
A Yahoo News/YouGov poll, conducted at the end of the GOP convention from Aug. 27-28, found Biden leading Trump 47% to 41% overall, but Trump leading Biden 45% to 43% among all suburban voters surveyed.
Asked to describe the protests that have erupted across the country this summer, 37% of those surveyed said they were “mostly violent,” compared to 28% who said they were “mostly peaceful,” as many prominent Democrats tended to describe them before changing those characterizations the past week.
Suburban voters were slightly more critical, with 41% saying protests have been “mostly violent” and 30% calling them “mostly peaceful.” In the same survey, suburban voters gave Trump a slight edge in their views of his ability to handle crime: 42% said Trump would do better while 40% said Biden would. (That 2% edge was flipped when considering all voters.)
The survey also showed that violent crime stemming from the rioting is of deep concern to all voters, with 48% of all respondents called it “a very big problem,” compared to 15% who called it “a small problem.” That number is even higher among suburban voters, with 51% regarding violent crime a “very big problem.”
“Every American, from the city to suburb, wants and deserves to feel safe in their communities,” Courtney Parella, Trump’s deputy press secretary, told RealClearPolitics. “Unlike Joe Biden, who stayed silent for months as his supporters led violent riots and destroyed businesses across our great nation, President Trump took action without hesitation to restore law and order and defend our brave men and women in blue who put their lives on the line to keep us safe.”
Candidates’ Differing Messages in Kenosha, Wis.
With the race now in the home stretch, both Trump and Biden aren’t letting the coronavirus grind their campaigns to a halt. Both candidates spent the week traveling to key battlegrounds to hone their pitches – moving to the turmoil rather than avoiding it.
In Kenosha, Wis., the Milwaukee suburb that was the scene of the latest rioting and destruction over the police shooting of Jacob Blake, Trump leaned heavily into the law-enforcement theme. Talking to an all-white panel, he referred to the rioting as “domestic terrorism” in “Democrat-run cities” without stressing the need for unity and reconciliation that so many voters of every color would like to hear.
Instead, Trump blamed “reckless far-left politicians” for the ongoing violence and said, “We must give far greater support to our law enforcement.” Afterward, the Biden campaign blasted Trump for taking sides with police on the issue instead of trying to bring the country together.
“Trump failed once again to meet the moment, refusing to utter the words that Wisconsinites and Americans across the country needed to hear today from the president: a condemnation of violence of all kinds, not matter who commits it,” said Kate Bedingfield, Biden’s deputy campaign manager.
Biden’s messaging was far more nuanced, though his remarks were marred by some distracting gaffes. At one point, he inexplicably stopped a train of thought by saying, “They’ll shoot me,” if he continued talking about it. It was an unfortunate reference amid a community still reeling from the police shooting of Blake the week before, which left him paralyzed.
After meeting with Blake’s family, Biden hosted a listening session with local leaders at a church, where he stressed his commitment to ending racial disparities, as well as the violence and disorder.
“Win or lose, I’m going to go down fighting,” he pledged. “I’m going to go down fighting for racial equality, equity across the board.” He then also warned against violent outpourings of anger, no matter “how angry you are.”
Trump’s strong alignment with the police is his comfort zone, and the position has big base appeal. But some Republican strategists argue he needs to move beyond it if he wants to win in November.
Even though the Yahoo News/YouGov survey shows that violent protests are now a top voter concern, other polling varies on where crime and unrest rank for voters.
Poll: Crime Is Not Voters’ Top Concern
A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey found that voters as a whole view crime far behind the economy and coronavirus as a top concern. A recent Pew Research Center poll found that Republicans rank crime as the second-most important issue after the economy, but overall, likely voters rank violent crime fifth, well behind the coronavirus, the economy and health care.
Recent polling out of Wisconsin, North Carolina and Arizona suggests Trump still has a long way to go to win over suburban voters, especially suburban women, and some Republicans are worried that touting law and order alone without a more unifying message could prevent Trump from making the inroads he needs.
The demographics in the suburbs are changing, warns Matt Terrill, a GOP strategist and partner at Firehouse Strategies who served as chief of staff to Sen. Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign.
“The candidate who talks about handling race relations, public safety and also unifying the country will be the candidate who wins this race,” Terrill told RealClearPolitics. “. . . It’s that balanced approach that at the end of the day is going to resonate with voters.”
Terrill gives the GOP convention planners credit for threading that difficult needle between race relations and law and order, but he said Trump, not just his surrogates, needs to show he’s capable of the same type of healing leadership.
Biden is ahead in three key states that Trump won in 2016 — Arizona, North Carolina and Wisconsin — mainly because suburban women have swung so strongly in favor of Biden, according to a new poll released by Fox News. Suburban women in all three of those states trust Biden over Trump to handle the coronavirus, as well as policing and criminal justice issues.
Voters can start returning absentee ballots this week in North Carolina and in mid-September in Wisconsin, so it's critical that each campaign’s message is resonating. In Arizona, voters can start mailing in absentee ballots in early October.
The Fox News poll, conducted Aug. 29-Sept. 1, found that in Arizona, Trump is down 9 points to Biden, 40% to 49%, with Biden is leading among suburban women voters by a whopping 15 points and suburban voters overall by 7.
In North Carolina, voters are even more divided. While whites back Trump by 23 points, blacks support Biden by 83 points. Rural voters are supporting Trump by 14 points, while suburban voters are swinging to Biden by 19. Among suburban women, that number jumps to a 31-point lead for Biden.
In Wisconsin, women voters favor Biden by 17 points, while men are equally divided, favoring Trump by 1 point. Suburban women in the Badger State back Biden by 14 points, but among all suburban voters, Biden maintains just an 8-point advantage.


wnd--2020-09-09--Biden walks back national mask mandate plan

( FOX NEWS ) -- Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden walked back his own call for a national mask mandate @ @ @ @ @ t issue any binding orders because he believes it would be unconstitutional .
The former @ @ @ @ @ AZFamily ’ s “ Politics Unplugged ” Sunday about his repeated pledges to use the @ @ @ @ @ force Americans to wear masks when he got candid about the efficacy of a mandate @ @ @ @ @ the governors who had appreciated President Trump ’ s more targeted coronavirus approach , which @ @ @ @ @ states , Biden said , “ Well , I hope you could trust the governors @

(FOX NEWS) -- Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden walked back his own call for a national mask mandate, saying he wouldn’t issue any binding orders because he believes it would be unconstitutional.
The former vice president was questioned by AZFamily’s “Politics Unplugged” Sunday about his repeated pledges to use the powers of the presidency to force Americans to wear masks when he got candid about the efficacy of a mandate.
Asked to respond to the governors who had appreciated President Trump’s more targeted coronavirus approach, which gave more authority to the states, Biden said, “Well, I hope you could trust the governors.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-09-09--Trump nominated for Nobel over Middle East peace deal

( FOX NEWS ) -- EXCLUSIVE : Just weeks after helping to broker peace between Israel and the United Arab @ @ @ @ @ President Trump has been nominated for the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize .
The nomination submitted @ @ @ @ @ member of the Norwegian Parliament , lauded Trump for his efforts toward resolving protracted conflicts @ @ @ @ @ merit , I think he has done more trying to create peace between nations than @ @ @ @ @ , ” Tybring-Gjedde , a four-term member of Parliament who also serves as chairman of @ @ @ @ @ NATO Parliamentary Assembly , told Fox News in an exclusive interview .

(FOX NEWS) -- EXCLUSIVE: Just weeks after helping to broker peace between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), President Trump has been nominated for the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize.
The nomination submitted by Christian Tybring-Gjedde, a member of the Norwegian Parliament, lauded Trump for his efforts toward resolving protracted conflicts worldwide.
“For his merit, I think he has done more trying to create peace between nations than most other Peace Prize nominees,” Tybring-Gjedde, a four-term member of Parliament who also serves as chairman of the Norwegian delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, told Fox News in an exclusive interview.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-09-10--Mall owners set to rescue JC Penney from bankruptcy in $800 million deal

( CNBC ) -- U.S. mall owners Simon Property Group and Brookfield Property Partners are close to finalizing an $ @ @ @ @ @ the embattled department store chain J.C. Penney from bankruptcy , avoiding a total liquidation and @ @ @ @ @ 650 stores , Joshua Sussberg of the law firm Kirkland & Ellis said Wednesday .
@ @ @ @ @ roughly $ 300 million in cash and assume $ 500 million in debt , Sussberg @ @ @ @ @ .
Wells Fargo has also agreed to give Penney $ 2 billion in revolving credit @ @ @ @ @ , leaving the retailer with $ 1 billion in cash , he said .
Penney @ @ @ @ @ the bankruptcy judge for this rescue deal early next month .

(CNBC) -- U.S. mall owners Simon Property Group and Brookfield Property Partners are close to finalizing an $800 million deal to rescue the embattled department store chain J.C. Penney from bankruptcy, avoiding a total liquidation and saving about 70,000 jobs and 650 stores, Joshua Sussberg of the law firm Kirkland & Ellis said Wednesday.
Simon and Brookfield will pay roughly $300 million in cash and assume $500 million in debt, Sussberg said during a court hearing.
Wells Fargo has also agreed to give Penney $2 billion in revolving credit once the transaction is completed, leaving the retailer with $1 billion in cash, he said. Penney plans to seek approval from the bankruptcy judge for this rescue deal early next month.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-09-10--Teacher shares clever mask-hack video to help make wearing them more comfortable

Disclosure : Some of the links below may contain affiliate links at no additional cost to you and may earn Liftable Media a commission on purchases .
By making purchases through these links , you ’ ll be helping to support The Western Journal .
One of the most annoying parts about wearing a mask , other than the facial swamp it creates and the sense of claustrophobia it can induce , is the plain difficulty of communicating .
`` Mmblgffhhhrr '' is n't the easiest answer , question or comment to understand , and people who have to communicate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the masks more than merely annoying : They impede work .
But one teacher has been championing a device that takes care of that issue .
A retired Marine staff sergeant and current teacher , Angie Madden knows how to get things done .
She posted a video on Facebook with her valuable PSA that has been shared over 300,000 times -- proving that her information has been well-received .
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move '' Teacher tip for all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Aug. 21 .
`` You have got to get one of these !
! ''
“ To all my teacher friends , look -- I ordered the coolest thing on Amazon .
... You stick it on your face , and you put your mask on ... and when you wear it , it keeps your mask off your face , '' she says in the video .
`` So you can hear me clearly , and I ’ m not breathing my mask in , and my mask doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wore it all day .
I didn ’ t have any issues .
...
It looks really weird , but it ’ s amazing.
” The plastic insert works to keep the fabric away from your lips , allowing you to talk and breathe much more clearly .
In an update on the device , Madden confirmed that it has continued to prove useful .
`` We started school 10 days ago and it has been such a relief to be able to talk and not suck in the mask , '' she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` One of the other reasons that I bought it is my husband works in a plant and it can get very noisy , so in order for him to talk to people he would pull his mask down . ''
`` I ’ m worried for him since he ’ s diabetic and is in a high-risk group . ''
Known as a `` mask bracket '' or `` mask frame , '' the item is now available in many places , including ( of course ) Amazon .
According to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is fine to wear -- as long as it does n't bump the mask out too far , causing gaps .
`` If the position of the mask around the nose , cheeks and chin is good , then a silicone mask insert should maintain the same level of effectiveness as wearing a mask without one , '' Dr. Nate Favini , medical lead of preventive care practice Forward , told `` Today . ''
What do you think -- is this something you could use ?
This article appeared originally on The @ @ @

Disclosure: Some of the links below may contain affiliate links at no additional cost to you and may earn Liftable Media a commission on purchases. By making purchases through these links, you’ll be helping to support The Western Journal.
One of the most annoying parts about wearing a mask, other than the facial swamp it creates and the sense of claustrophobia it can induce, is the plain difficulty of communicating.
"Mmblgffhhhrr" isn't the easiest answer, question or comment to understand, and people who have to communicate as part of their jobs have found the masks more than merely annoying: They impede work.
But one teacher has been championing a device that takes care of that issue. A retired Marine staff sergeant and current teacher, Angie Madden knows how to get things done.
She posted a video on Facebook with her valuable PSA that has been shared over 300,000 times -- proving that her information has been well-received.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"Teacher tip for all my teacher friends!" she shared on Aug. 21. "You have got to get one of these!!"
“To all my teacher friends, look -- I ordered the coolest thing on Amazon. ... You stick it on your face, and you put your mask on ... and when you wear it, it keeps your mask off your face," she says in the video.
"So you can hear me clearly, and I’m not breathing my mask in, and my mask doesn’t move off my face. ... I wore it all day. I didn’t have any issues. ... It looks really weird, but it’s amazing.”
The plastic insert works to keep the fabric away from your lips, allowing you to talk and breathe much more clearly.
In an update on the device, Madden confirmed that it has continued to prove useful.
"We started school 10 days ago and it has been such a relief to be able to talk and not suck in the mask," she told NBC's "Today" show.
"One of the other reasons that I bought it is my husband works in a plant and it can get very noisy, so in order for him to talk to people he would pull his mask down."
"I’m worried for him since he’s diabetic and is in a high-risk group."
Known as a "mask bracket" or "mask frame," the item is now available in many places, including (of course) Amazon.
According to at least one doctor, the device is fine to wear -- as long as it doesn't bump the mask out too far, causing gaps.
"If the position of the mask around the nose, cheeks and chin is good, then a silicone mask insert should maintain the same level of effectiveness as wearing a mask without one," Dr. Nate Favini, medical lead of preventive care practice Forward, told "Today."
What do you think -- is this something you could use?
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-09-10--Poll: Americans ignoring politics in COVID back-to-school decisions

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
Among the political classes in Washington and the nation ’ s state capitals , when and how to open public schools has become yet another contentious issue with partisan battle lines and dueling talking points .
This is not the case among the voters , however , according to the findings of an eye-opening survey by RealClear Opinion Research .
Registered voted are cautious , to be sure -- and a majority are leery of President Trump ’ s push to open schools -- @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not partisan .
TRENDING : Kaepernick nominated for NFL Hall of Fame , and a USA Today columnist supports the move “ The American people just want to get this right , ” said John Della Volpe , director of the RCP poll .
“ Nearly half of voters across the political spectrum defer to local health officials , and not Washington , to declare when it ’ s safe to resume in-person education.
” Led by powerful teachers ’ unions and reflexive opposition to Donald Trump , elected Democrats along with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the idea of opening schools as reckless and irresponsible .
Using the word “ science ” as a shillelagh , they insist that the coronavirus pandemic makes it far too dangerous to resume in-person learning .
The president , joined by most Republican governors , counters that keeping children from in-person learning is elitist , unnecessary , and even cruel .
They say it puts the kids most in need of education even further behind , and makes if difficult , if notimpossible , for their parents to work .
Trump has expressed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SCHOOLS !
” he has tweeted .
This difficult dilemma does not fit into a liberal vs. conservative paradigm , according to the poll ’ s findings .
It does show , however , that Americans put a premium on safety : Fewer than one in five believe that schools in the United States should reopen this month with in-person classes .
Perhaps the most striking result is that although there are sharp differences of opinion , they don ’ t break down along Republican Party and Democratic Party lines .
The biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at home and those who don ’ t .
The poll is the fifth in a RealClear Opinion Research series delving into the issues on voters ’ minds during the 2020 election season .
This survey , which entailed interviews with 2,020 registered voters , was conducted Aug. 19-21 as the United States entered its sixth month of the pandemic lockdown and COVID-19 fatalities in the United States surpassed 175,000 ( the death toll is now more than 190,000 ) .
The findings include the following : • While only 16 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. should reopen with in-person classes , a plurality ( 44 % ) believe they should be reopened on a case-by-case basis -- and only if local health officials declare it safe .
• Slightly more than one-third of registered voters ( 36 % ) say we should not reopen schools until a coronavirus vaccine is available , and that in the meantime all education should be done online .
• Democrats are only slightly more in favor of keeping all schools closed until vaccinations are developed ( 47 % ) compared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % ) .
• Republicans are not much different .
Nearly half ( 45 % ) prefer taking the advice of local officials on when to reopen .
This poll was also conducted as widespread social unrest roiled American cities , during a presidential election year as Donald Trump and Joe Biden fully joined the debate .
When it comes to schools , Trump does not appear to be winning the argument .
Shortly before the polling took place , Trump said schools in hot zones should delay reopening , but that others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relatively safe areas -- a designation he did not define -- still decline to physically reopen , the president floated the idea of steering $ 100 billion in federal education funds to parents for private schools , including those operated by religious institutions , or even home schooling .
For their part , defiant teachers ’ unions embraced a series of proposals on the other end of the spectrum .
The head of one national teachers union said that schools ’ physical reopenings should only take place where the daily community infection rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the transmission rate is less than 1 % -- a pipe dream currently -- threatening that if authorities decide otherwise they are likely to face protests , strikes , and lawsuits .
So where do voters come down ?
Well , by a margin of 53 % to 34 % , poll respondents offered the opinion that Trump ’ s stance is guided more by politics than “ the nation ’ s interest.
” By contrast , the poll numbers for union leaders ’ position was nearly inverted : 50 % say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest with only 32 % saying it was most primarily politics .
The Kids Are All Right – or Are They ?
That answers to that question – or , at least , adults ’ perceptions – depend on their proximity to K-12 students .
Parents of students in public schools have markedly lower concerns about the price their children will pay if schools are physically closed for an extended period of time this autumn than registered voters without school-age children .
Asked whether students ’ “ social and emotional health ” will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents answered affirmatively .
Among non-parents , it was much higher -- 64 % .
The same dynamic was true when asked whether their “ education this year ” will be negatively affected : 58 % of voters without children feared this outcome , while only 43 % of parents expressed that fear .
The same pattern was true regarding “ long-term education prospects.
” Only 39 % of parents expressed that worry , while 58 % of non-parents fear long-lasting damage to kids .
And so it went on every question : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family finances , kids ’ physical health .
In each case , non-parents had a more dire outlook than parents .
These finding surprised Della Volpe , who initially found them counterintuitive .
Isn ’ t the burden of home schooling and remote learning stressing out parents , who either have to work at home or scramble to find child care ?
Apparently not as much as had been assumed .
One possible answer to this enigma is unflattering to educators : Maybe the schools aren ’ t doing all that good a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that parents are witnessing first-hand just how resilient their kids are – and are enjoying spending more time with them .
Are You Ready for Some Football ?
Moving on to higher education , voters ’ attitudes are strikingly similar to their views of K-12 schools .
Only 15 % believe it ’ s best for the country to have colleges and universities reopen on time , with on-campus learning .
Nearly half ( 46 % ) say a case-by-case basis is best , with slightly more than one-third of registered voters saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a vaccine has been developed and made accessible .
Asked about collegiate athletics , a plurality of registered voters ( 44 % ) believe that the autumn NCAA Division I sports season should be canceled , with 35 % saying that each conference should make its own decision .
These views have potentially fateful financial implications for university administrators beyond the billions of dollars that would be lost by canceling the 2020 college football season .
A vast majority of registered American voters -- nearly four out of five -- stated that colleges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ classes online and can not not participate in traditional social and extracurricular campus activities should get a break on tuition and fees .
Only 15 % say they should remain the same .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Carl M. Cannon
Real Clear Politics
Among the political classes in Washington and the nation’s state capitals, when and how to open public schools has become yet another contentious issue with partisan battle lines and dueling talking points. This is not the case among the voters, however, according to the findings of an eye-opening survey by RealClear Opinion Research.
Registered voted are cautious, to be sure -- and a majority are leery of President Trump’s push to open schools -- but the fault lines are personal, not partisan.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
“The American people just want to get this right,” said John Della Volpe, director of the RCP poll. “Nearly half of voters across the political spectrum defer to local health officials, and not Washington, to declare when it’s safe to resume in-person education.”
Led by powerful teachers’ unions and reflexive opposition to Donald Trump, elected Democrats along with a few prominent Republican moderates, have denounced the idea of opening schools as reckless and irresponsible. Using the word “science” as a shillelagh, they insist that the coronavirus pandemic makes it far too dangerous to resume in-person learning.
The president, joined by most Republican governors, counters that keeping children from in-person learning is elitist, unnecessary, and even cruel. They say it puts the kids most in need of education even further behind, and makes if difficult, if notimpossible, for their parents to work. Trump has expressed this view unambiguously.
“OPEN THE SCHOOLS!” he has tweeted.
This difficult dilemma does not fit into a liberal vs. conservative paradigm, according to the poll’s findings. It does show, however, that Americans put a premium on safety: Fewer than one in five believe that schools in the United States should reopen this month with in-person classes.
Perhaps the most striking result is that although there are sharp differences of opinion, they don’t break down along Republican Party and Democratic Party lines. The biggest chasm is between those who have children at home and those who don’t.
The poll is the fifth in a RealClear Opinion Research series delving into the issues on voters’ minds during the 2020 election season. This survey, which entailed interviews with 2,020 registered voters, was conducted Aug. 19-21 as the United States entered its sixth month of the pandemic lockdown and COVID-19 fatalities in the United States surpassed 175,000 (the death toll is now more than 190,000).
The findings include the following:
While only 16% of respondents believe that public schools in the U.S. should reopen with in-person classes, a plurality (44%) believe they should be reopened on a case-by-case basis -- and only if local health officials declare it safe.
Slightly more than one-third of registered voters (36%) say we should not reopen schools until a coronavirus vaccine is available, and that in the meantime all education should be done online.
Democrats are only slightly more in favor of keeping all schools closed until
vaccinations are developed (47%) compared to reopening on a case-by-case basis (42%).
vaccinations are developed (47%) compared to reopening on a case-by-case basis (42%). Republicans are not much different. Nearly half (45%) prefer taking the advice of local officials on when to reopen.
This poll was also conducted as widespread social unrest roiled American cities, during a presidential election year as Donald Trump and Joe Biden fully joined the debate. When it comes to schools, Trump does not appear to be winning the argument.
Shortly before the polling took place, Trump said schools in hot zones should delay reopening, but that others should fully reopen. If schools in relatively safe areas -- a designation he did not define -- still decline to physically reopen, the president floated the idea of steering $100 billion in federal education funds to parents for private schools, including those operated by religious institutions, or even home
schooling.
For their part, defiant teachers’ unions embraced a series of proposals on the other end of the spectrum. The head of one national teachers union said that schools’ physical reopenings should only take place where the daily community infection rate among those tested is below 5% and the transmission rate is less than 1% -- a pipe dream currently -- threatening that if authorities decide otherwise they are likely to face protests, strikes, and lawsuits.
So where do voters come down? Well, by a margin of 53% to 34%, poll respondents offered the opinion that Trump’s stance is guided more by politics than “the nation’s interest.” By contrast, the poll numbers for union leaders’ position was nearly inverted: 50% say the teachers are motivated by the national interest with only 32% saying it was most primarily politics.
The Kids Are All Right – or Are They?
That answers to that question – or, at least, adults’ perceptions – depend on their proximity to K-12 students. Parents of students in public schools have markedly lower concerns about the price their children will pay if schools are physically closed for an extended period of time this autumn than registered voters without school-age children.
Asked whether students’ “social and emotional health” will be negatively affected, 46% of parents answered affirmatively. Among non-parents, it was much higher -- 64%.
The same dynamic was true when asked whether their “education this year” will be negatively affected: 58% of voters without children feared this outcome, while only 43% of parents expressed that fear. The same pattern was true regarding “long-term education prospects.” Only 39% of parents expressed that worry, while 58% of non-parents fear long-lasting damage to kids.
And so it went on every question: a family’s mental health, family finances, kids’ physical health. In each case, non-parents had a more dire outlook than parents.
These finding surprised Della Volpe, who initially found them counterintuitive. Isn’t the burden of home schooling and remote learning stressing out parents, who either have to work at home or scramble to find child care? Apparently not as much as had been assumed. One possible answer to this enigma is unflattering to educators: Maybe the schools aren’t doing all that good a job. A more likely explanation is that parents are witnessing first-hand just how resilient their kids are – and are enjoying spending more time with them.
Are You Ready for Some Football?
Moving on to higher education, voters’ attitudes are strikingly similar to their views of K-12 schools. Only 15% believe it’s best for the country to have colleges and universities reopen on time, with on-campus learning. Nearly half (46%) say a case-by-case basis is best, with slightly more than one-third of registered voters saying these institutions should not reopen fully until a vaccine has been developed and made accessible.
Asked about collegiate athletics, a plurality of registered voters (44%) believe that the autumn NCAA Division I sports season should be canceled, with 35% saying that each conference should make its own decision.
These views have potentially fateful financial implications for university administrators beyond the billions of dollars that would be lost by canceling the 2020 college football season. A vast majority of registered American voters -- nearly four out of five -- stated that colleges and universities where students are forced take classes online and cannot not participate in traditional social and extracurricular campus activities should get a break on tuition and fees. Only 15% say they should remain the same.