theguardian--2020-08-20--Pando, Miss Rona and Covid Toe: how the language of a disease develops – shaped by fear and prejudic

Pando, Miss Rona and Covid Toe: how the language of a disease develops – shaped by fear and prejudice

“ We now have a name for the disease.
” These were the words of the director of the World Health Organization ( WHO ) in a historic announcement on 11 February 2020 .
Back then , there had only been 393 cases of a mysterious new respiratory illness outside China , and in most places life continued as normal .
“ Covid-19 .
I ’ ll spell it : C-O-V-I-D hyphen one nine , ” he continued .
Little did we know that this oddly technical-sounding phrase would become not just a household name , but an era-defining one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coronavirus Study Group of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses , which researches the family of viruses that includes Sars , Mers and some strains of the common cold , rushed out a paper .
It redesignated the pathogen that had until then been called 2019-nCoV , the “ n ” standing for “ novel ” .
The new name was “ severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ” , or Sars-CoV-2 .
Fast forward to August 2020 , and both these terms , alongside coronavirus itself , have been used billions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the language gradually , as trends gather pace ( think “ selfie ” ) , or a new import becomes popular ( as with foods such as oranges and avocados ) .
But pandemics aren ’ t like that – they spread rapidly and assail us with scientific terms and slang as society struggles to adapt to each new , terrifying presence .
We have crunched Covid-19 to Covid ; the specific coronavirus Sars-CoV-2 is mostly now “ coronavirus ” , and has been joined by “ the pandemic ” ( for some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , “ ’ rona ” and even “ miss Rona ” .
There are terms to describe experiences linked to the virus : people suffer from “ happy hypoxia ” , “ Covid toe ” or become “ long-haulers ” .
Previously niche words and phrases have become wearily familiar as they are applied to the social effects of the crisis , from “ lockdown ” to “ furlough ” and “ shelter in place ” .
The world has been here before , of course – though not with today ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ circulates at dizzying speed .
Deadly disease outbreaks have beset humanity for centuries , each bringing with it a new vocabulary , and a new way of conceptualising the threat .
For Nancy Bristow , historian and author of American Pandemic : The Lost Worlds of the 1918 Influenza Epidemic , naming an illness can fulfil important social functions .
“ People are desperate for understanding in the midst of something that is incomprehensible .
And in the midst of that uncertainty , I think we look for things that we can know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can involve summarising the symptoms ( “ Russian sneeze ” was one name for the 1889-90 flu ) , downplaying the severity of the illness ( “ three day fever ” was used on US government information leaflets in 1918 ) or , most notoriously , linking it to particular countries or communities ( flu has come in Spanish , Asiatic and Russian instalments , and Aids was initially known as “ gay-related immune deficiency ” , or even “ gay cancer ” ) .
Donald Trump has attempted to stir up anti-Chinese @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failures by using the terms “ China virus ” and “ kung flu ” , but evidence for anti-Spanish feeling in 1918 is scant .
“ It ’ s relatively simple , ” Bristow says , about the most widely used name for the outbreak .
“ Spain was a neutral country during the first world war .
So they were very open about reporting on this scourge … whereas other nations hid the story initially.
” When the pandemic overwhelmed the US in the autumn of 1918 , there was no backlash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country was obsessively focused on Germany , its enemy in the first world war , with rumours that the illness was a plot somehow engineered by the kaiser .
Not only that , but martial metaphors abounded , too .
The flu was “ our foe ” , droplets from coughs and sneezes were compared to “ bullets sprayed from machine guns ” and doctors and nurses became “ soldiers in white ” .
Oddly enough , the word “ pandemic ” was used relatively rarely .
Historian Tom Ewing searched newspaper records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the word , many of them referring back to the 1889 outbreak .
Instead “ epidemic ” was the term of choice , with 45,461 instances .
Another common word for flu , “ grippe ” , now totally fallen out of use in English , was used 23,649 times .
Borrowed from the French , it derives from a Germanic word meaning “ to seize ” , with the sense changing to “ afflict ” , which is also where we get the word “ gripe ” .
“ Grippe ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that swept across Europe and the Americas in 1889 , commonly known as “ Russian flu ” , and the subject of Ewing ’ s current research .
“ Western newspapers record widespread cases of respiratory disease in St Petersburg .
They very quickly start calling it Russian influenza , or Russian grippe … and that name pretty much sticks around into the early 1890s ” .
Again , however , that geographical label didn ’ t seem to be especially pejorative .
Which is not to say that Russians were particularly enamoured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with them .
In earlier flu epidemics , the disease was described as the “ Russian illness ” in Germany and Italy , and “ Chinese catarrh ” in Russia .
Although it is true that a pandemic almost always arrives from another place , there seems to be a consistent desire to lay responsibility for it elsewhere – ideally far away from “ us ” .
One conclusion of this line of thinking is that the source of infection must be extraterrestrial .
An article in the Times from 1889 delves into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
“ First given … in Italy , in the course of outbreaks at Venice and Milan in 1741 , [ it ] was a manifest survival of the superstitions which , four centuries earlier , attributed the plague to the influence of three great planets , Saturn , Jupiter and Mars entering into conjunction with Aquarius ” .
While pandemics in 1889 and 1918 might not have led to the shunning of Russians or Spaniards , the early names given to a 20th-century plague made one community practically untouchable .
New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about a mysterious new disease in the early 1980s , when he was 18 .
“ I remember it incredibly vividly .
I was in the office of the ophthalmologist who prescribed my contact lenses .
And there was a copy of a magazine with a little entry on this new disease that was affecting homosexuals , ” he says .
The phrase that jumped out at him was “ gay-related immune deficiency ” or GRID , an early term for Aids .
“ I was stricken with complete terror .
And suddenly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ m probably going to die because of this .
I remember thinking : but how and why , and isn ’ t this hard enough already ?
” The term “ gay cancer ” was also used .
“ It felt as though it reinforced the idea , which was current in the culture at large , that being gay was somehow acting against the idea of the will of God or the rules of the society.
” The nomenclature suited what Solomon describes as an almost “ eugenic ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the idea “ that it was never going to affect anyone but gay people , and if we got rid of all the gay people in the society , that wouldn ’ t be such a bad thing ” .
Our choice of names for new diseases might seem trivial , but some descriptions can cause real harm , the WHO now agrees .
In 2009 , during the “ swine flu ” , the Egyptian authorities ordered the slaughter of 300,000 pigs , a hammer blow to the livelihoods of Christians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Already subject to discrimination , they saw the cull as an exercise in scapegoating .
At the time , WHO official Keiji Fukuda condemned the actions and said that , despite the label , “ We don ’ t see any evidence that anyone is getting infected from pigs ” .
In 2015 , he announced new guidance for naming diseases .
It stated that geographical locations , names of animal species and population-based references should all be avoided .
The message is lost on one particularly powerful individual .
Ewing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to link Covid-19 to China eclipses anything they have observed in either the 1889 or 1918 pandemics .
“ It serves him well politically , ” says Bristow .
“ And it cultivates the kind of anger that is very much a part of the movement that he ’ s tried to build in the country.
” If you have a name that identifies a country or a group of people , you have somewhere to place the blame , far from your own door .
“ And to me , that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing , here in 2020.
” David Shariatmadari is the author of Don ’ t Believe A Word : The Surprising Truth About Language

“We now have a name for the disease.” These were the words of the director of the World Health Organization (WHO) in a historic announcement on 11 February 2020. Back then, there had only been 393 cases of a mysterious new respiratory illness outside China, and in most places life continued as normal. “Covid-19. I’ll spell it: C-O-V-I-D hyphen one nine,” he continued. Little did we know that this oddly technical-sounding phrase would become not just a household name, but an era-defining one.
On the same day, the Coronavirus Study Group of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, which researches the family of viruses that includes Sars, Mers and some strains of the common cold, rushed out a paper. It redesignated the pathogen that had until then been called 2019-nCoV, the “n” standing for “novel”. The new name was “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2”, or Sars-CoV-2.
Fast forward to August 2020, and both these terms, alongside coronavirus itself, have been used billions of times. New words normally enter the language gradually, as trends gather pace (think “selfie”), or a new import becomes popular (as with foods such as oranges and avocados). But pandemics aren’t like that – they spread rapidly and assail us with scientific terms and slang as society struggles to adapt to each new, terrifying presence.
We have crunched Covid-19 to Covid; the specific coronavirus Sars-CoV-2 is mostly now “coronavirus”, and has been joined by “the pandemic” (for some in Australia, the “pando”), “’rona” and even “miss Rona”. There are terms to describe experiences linked to the virus: people suffer from “happy hypoxia”, “Covid toe” or become “long-haulers”. Previously niche words and phrases have become wearily familiar as they are applied to the social effects of the crisis, from “lockdown” to “furlough” and “shelter in place”.
The world has been here before, of course – though not with today’s level of connectivity, where information circulates at dizzying speed. Deadly disease outbreaks have beset humanity for centuries, each bringing with it a new vocabulary, and a new way of conceptualising the threat.
An American policeman wearing a “flu mask” after the first world war. Photograph: Topical Press Agency/Getty Images
For Nancy Bristow, historian and author of American Pandemic: The Lost Worlds of the 1918 Influenza Epidemic, naming an illness can fulfil important social functions. “People are desperate for understanding in the midst of something that is incomprehensible. And in the midst of that uncertainty, I think we look for things that we can know and that we can control.” This can involve summarising the symptoms (“Russian sneeze” was one name for the 1889-90 flu), downplaying the severity of the illness (“three day fever” was used on US government information leaflets in 1918) or, most notoriously, linking it to particular countries or communities (flu has come in Spanish, Asiatic and Russian instalments, and Aids was initially known as “gay-related immune deficiency”, or even “gay cancer”).
Donald Trump has attempted to stir up anti-Chinese sentiment and divert attention from his own failures by using the terms “China virus” and “kung flu”, but evidence for anti-Spanish feeling in 1918 is scant. “It’s relatively simple,” Bristow says, about the most widely used name for the outbreak. “Spain was a neutral country during the first world war. So they were very open about reporting on this scourge … whereas other nations hid the story initially.”
When the pandemic overwhelmed the US in the autumn of 1918, there was no backlash against people of Spanish descent. The country was obsessively focused on Germany, its enemy in the first world war, with rumours that the illness was a plot somehow engineered by the kaiser. Not only that, but martial metaphors abounded, too. The flu was “our foe”, droplets from coughs and sneezes were compared to “bullets sprayed from machine guns” and doctors and nurses became “soldiers in white”.
Oddly enough, the word “pandemic” was used relatively rarely. Historian Tom Ewing searched newspaper records for 1918-19 and found only 335 uses of the word, many of them referring back to the 1889 outbreak. Instead “epidemic” was the term of choice, with 45,461 instances. Another common word for flu, “grippe”, now totally fallen out of use in English, was used 23,649 times. Borrowed from the French, it derives from a Germanic word meaning “to seize”, with the sense changing to “afflict”, which is also where we get the word “gripe”.
“Grippe” was also used to describe the pandemic that swept across Europe and the Americas in 1889, commonly known as “Russian flu”, and the subject of Ewing’s current research. “Western newspapers record widespread cases of respiratory disease in St Petersburg. They very quickly start calling it Russian influenza, or Russian grippe … and that name pretty much sticks around into the early 1890s”. Again, however, that geographical label didn’t seem to be especially pejorative.
Which is not to say that Russians were particularly enamoured of the idea that it all started with them. In earlier flu epidemics, the disease was described as the “Russian illness” in Germany and Italy, and “Chinese catarrh” in Russia. Although it is true that a pandemic almost always arrives from another place, there seems to be a consistent desire to lay responsibility for it elsewhere – ideally far away from “us”.
A bus poster by Gran Fury for Art Against Aids/On The Road and Creative Time Inc, 1989. Photograph: Gran Fury, Courtesy of the New York Public Library Manuscripts and Archives Division
One conclusion of this line of thinking is that the source of infection must be extraterrestrial. An article in the Times from 1889 delves into the origin of the word “influenza”. “First given … in Italy, in the course of outbreaks at Venice and Milan in 1741, [it] was a manifest survival of the superstitions which, four centuries earlier, attributed the plague to the influence of three great planets, Saturn, Jupiter and Mars entering into conjunction with Aquarius”.
While pandemics in 1889 and 1918 might not have led to the shunning of Russians or Spaniards, the early names given to a 20th-century plague made one community practically untouchable. New York-based writer Andrew Solomon recalls first reading about a mysterious new disease in the early 1980s, when he was 18.
“I remember it incredibly vividly. I was in the office of the ophthalmologist who prescribed my contact lenses. And there was a copy of a magazine with a little entry on this new disease that was affecting homosexuals,” he says. The phrase that jumped out at him was “gay-related immune deficiency” or GRID, an early term for Aids. “I was stricken with complete terror. And suddenly I thought: Oh, I see, I’m probably going to die because of this. I remember thinking: but how and why, and isn’t this hard enough already?”
The term “gay cancer” was also used. “It felt as though it reinforced the idea, which was current in the culture at large, that being gay was somehow acting against the idea of the will of God or the rules of the society.”
The nomenclature suited what Solomon describes as an almost “eugenic” point of view in the Reagan administration, the idea “that it was never going to affect anyone but gay people, and if we got rid of all the gay people in the society, that wouldn’t be such a bad thing”.
Our choice of names for new diseases might seem trivial, but some descriptions can cause real harm, the WHO now agrees. In 2009, during the “swine flu”, the Egyptian authorities ordered the slaughter of 300,000 pigs, a hammer blow to the livelihoods of Christians, who owned most of the animals. Already subject to discrimination, they saw the cull as an exercise in scapegoating. At the time, WHO official Keiji Fukuda condemned the actions and said that, despite the label, “We don’t see any evidence that anyone is getting infected from pigs”. In 2015, he announced new guidance for naming diseases. It stated that geographical locations, names of animal species and population-based references should all be avoided.
The message is lost on one particularly powerful individual. Ewing and Bristow agree that Trump’s attempt to link Covid-19 to China eclipses anything they have observed in either the 1889 or 1918 pandemics. “It serves him well politically,” says Bristow. “And it cultivates the kind of anger that is very much a part of the movement that he’s tried to build in the country.” If you have a name that identifies a country or a group of people, you have somewhere to place the blame, far from your own door. “And to me, that’s clearly what the US president is doing, here in 2020.”
David Shariatmadari is the author of Don’t Believe A Word: From Myths to Misunderstandings – How Language Really Works


theguardian--2020-08-20--Trump's USPS attacks are already undermining confidence in vote by mail

Some election officials are receiving a flood of questions from voters suddenly concerned about whether or not their mail-in vote will count , an alarming signal of how Donald Trump ’ s efforts to hamstring the United States Postal Service ( USPS ) are already causing considerable confusion and undermining confidence in the 2020 election .
Trump admitted last week he opposed additional funding for the USPS because it would make it more difficult for the agency to support mail-in voting this fall .
There have been reports of significant mail delays across the country in recent weeks , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in part to operational changes imposed by Louis DeJoy , the postmaster general and a major Republican donor .
Facing tremendous scrutiny over the changes , DeJoy announced Tuesday he was suspending the changes until after the election “ to “ avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail ” .
Despite that pause , it does not appear that DeJoy will replace mail-sorting machines , mailboxes and other equipment reportedly removed from postal facilities .
But , regardless of DeJoy ’ s announcement , the damage to voters ’ confidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per cent of Americans believe the 2020 vote count will be accurate , a drop from the 59 % who believed so in 2016 , according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll .
Seventy-three per cent of Republicans believe that votes cast by mail will not be counted accurately , the poll found .
In Douglas county , Kansas – a Democratic stronghold home to the University of Kansas – hundreds of voters called the office of Jamie Shew , the county clerk , with concerns last week about whether their mail-in ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimately counted because of problems with the mail .
The calls were so frequent , Shew said , that the office receptionist was picking up new calls as soon as the person on the phone hung up .
Shew said his office had already received a record number of mail-in ballot requests for November ’ s election .
But last week voters who requested mail in ballots as far back as May and June began asking whether they could cancel their requests and vote in person and had other questions about the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followed through and cancelled their requests .
“ It ’ s frustrating .
We ’ ve been doing a lot of things to try and build trust , ” said Shew , whose office recently enacted a program allowing voters to track their ballots .
“ Election administrators like myself have worked for years to build up this system and then within a few weeks , the distrust of the system occurs because of , you know , politics.
” Shew said he was counting on a significant number of people to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of election workers necessary to hold in-person voting .
He ’ s been reassuring voters that the county ’ s absentee ballot program is secure and that their mail in vote will count .
He also ordered more secure drop boxes where voters can leave their ballots .
Many election officials like Shew are eyeing official dropboxes as an alternative to the post office for voters to return their mail-in ballots without relying on USPS .
But Trump opposes drop boxes too – his campaign is suing to block Pennsylvania from using them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Tarrant county , Texas , home of Fort Worth , with similar questions about mail-in voting .
One 83-year-old woman who hasn ’ t left her house in three months cancelled her request because she didn ’ t believe she could trust the post office , said Heider Garcia , the county ’ s election administrator .
Garcia said his office has been reminding eligible voters that they can submit their absentee ballot requests now and that Texas begins mailing voters ballots 45 days before election day .
He ’ s also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is allowing voters to personally return their ballots to election offices to the early voting clerk before election day ( it usually only allows this on election day ) .
In Polk county , Florida , where there was a primary on Tuesday , about 150 voters have called the election office with questions about their mail-in ballots over the last two weeks and around 24 cancelled requests , said Lori Edwards , the county supervisor of elections .
The voters are concerned about their ballots arriving in time and whether or not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person after requesting a mail ballot ( they can in Florida ) .
Officials have been looking up voters ’ ballots to see whether they arrived and telling them about drop box options .
And in Virginia , hundreds of voters called the state board of elections on Friday to inquire about how to void their absentee ballot request , according to the Washington Post .
( Voters in the state can bring their mail-in ballot to the polls to have it voided before they vote in person ) .
Even though experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reliable , fears have grown in recent weeks amid widespread reports of postal workers being told to leave the mail behind and sorting machines being moved from postal facilities .
Trump has railed against the practice , falsely saying it will lead to widespread fraud , even though there ’ s no evidence that ’ s true .
The Ohio attorney general , Republican Dave Yost , warned Trump that changes at USPS could greatly undermine confidence in the election .
“ Whatever reform is needed at the Postal Service , it can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faith in the 2020 election , ” Yost wrote in a letter to Trump this week .
“ Anything less than full confidence in the timely receipt of all timely mailed absentee ballots will rob the winners of an honest victory and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat .
Our country can not take any more of that.
” Shew , the county clerk in Kansas , said he worried about what would happen after the election if Americans did not believe the result was legitimate , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as [ Lyndon Johnson ] said , is the most fundamental part of our republic , ” he said .
“ If we continue to sow distrust in it , what happens when we no longer believe it is valid ?
”

Some election officials are receiving a flood of questions from voters suddenly concerned about whether or not their mail-in vote will count, an alarming signal of how Donald Trump’s efforts to hamstring the United States Postal Service (USPS) are already causing considerable confusion and undermining confidence in the 2020 election.
Trump admitted last week he opposed additional funding for the USPS because it would make it more difficult for the agency to support mail-in voting this fall. There have been reports of significant mail delays across the country in recent weeks, a problem postal workers and Democrats have attributed in part to operational changes imposed by Louis DeJoy, the postmaster general and a major Republican donor. Facing tremendous scrutiny over the changes, DeJoy announced on Tuesday he was suspending the changes until after the election “to “avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail”. Despite that pause, it does not appear that DeJoy will replace mail-sorting machines, mailboxes and other equipment reportedly removed from postal facilities.
But, regardless of DeJoy’s announcement, the damage to voters’ confidence may already have been done. Forty-five per cent of Americans believe the 2020 vote count will be accurate, a drop from the 59% who believed so in 2016, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll. Seventy-three per cent of Republicans believe that votes cast by mail will not be counted accurately, the poll found.
In Douglas county, Kansas – a Democratic stronghold home to the University of Kansas – hundreds of voters called the office of Jamie Shew, the county clerk, with concerns last week about whether their mail-in ballot will be delayed in the mail and ultimately counted because of problems with the mail. The calls were so frequent, Shew said, that the office receptionist was picking up new calls as soon as the person on the phone hung up.
Shew said his office had already received a record number of mail-in ballot requests for November’s election. But last week voters who requested mail-in ballots as far back as May and June began asking whether they could cancel their requests and vote in person and had other questions about the process. In total, about 20 voters followed through and cancelled their requests.
“It’s frustrating. We’ve been doing a lot of things to try and build trust,” said Shew, whose office recently enacted a program allowing voters to track their ballots. “Election administrators like myself have worked for years to build up this system and then within a few weeks, the distrust of the system occurs because of, you know, politics.”
Shew said he was counting on a significant number of people to vote by mail because he faces a shortage of election workers necessary to hold in-person voting. He has been reassuring voters that the county’s absentee ballot program is secure and that their mail in vote will count. He also ordered more secure drop boxes where voters can leave their ballots.
Many election officials like Shew are eyeing official dropboxes as an alternative to the post office for voters to return their mail-in ballots without relying on USPS. But Trump opposes drop boxes too – his campaign is suing to block Pennsylvania from using them.
Protesters hold placards during a press conference in front of the post office, in Pasadena, California. Photograph: Étienne Laurent/EPA
Voters have been calling election officials in Tarrant county, Texas, home of Fort Worth, with similar questions about mail-in voting. One 83-year-old woman who hasn’t left her house in three months cancelled her request because she didn’t believe she could trust the post office, said Heider Garcia, the county’s election administrator.
Garcia said his office has been reminding eligible voters that they can submit their absentee ballot requests now and that Texas begins mailing voters ballots 45 days before election day. He has also been emphasizing that this year the state is allowing voters to personally return their ballots to election offices to the early voting clerk before election day (it usually only allows this on election day).
In Polk county, Florida, where there was a primary on Tuesday, about 150 voters have called the election office with questions about their mail-in ballots over the last two weeks and about 24 cancelled requests, said Lori Edwards, the county supervisor of elections. The voters are concerned about their ballots arriving in time and whether or not they can still decide to vote in person after requesting a mail ballot (they can in Florida). Officials have been looking up voters’ ballots to see whether they arrived and telling them about drop box options.
And in Virginia, hundreds of voters called the state board of elections on Friday to inquire about how to void their absentee ballot request, according to the Washington Post. (Voters in the state can bring their mail-in ballot to the polls to have it voided before they vote in person.)
Even though experts consider mail-in voting to be secure and reliable, fears have grown in recent weeks amid widespread reports of postal workers being told to leave the mail behind and sorting machines being moved from postal facilities. Trump has railed against the practice, falsely saying it will lead to widespread fraud, even though there is no evidence that it is true.
The Ohio attorney general, Republican Dave Yost, warned Trump that changes at USPS could greatly undermine confidence in the election.
“Whatever reform is needed at the Postal Service, it cannot come at the expense of our faith in the 2020 election,” Yost wrote in a letter to Trump this week. “Anything less than full confidence in the timely receipt of all timely mailed absentee ballots will rob the winners of an honest victory and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. Our country cannot take any more of that.”
Shew, the county clerk in Kansas, said he worried about what would happen after the election if Americans did not believe the result was legitimate,
“The ability to choose your leaders, as [Lyndon Johnson] said, is the most fundamental part of our republic,” he said. “If we continue to sow distrust in it, what happens when we no longer believe it is valid?”


theguardian--2020-08-20--Does mail-in voting lead to fraud – and does it help Democrats? The facts

The 2020 presidential election is already unlike any other America has ever seen .
Election officials are scrambling to figure out how they can safely hold in-person voting in a pandemic , and a record number of Americans are expected to vote bymail , a process Donald Trump has falsely said will lead to fraud .
Because of the surge in mail-in voting , which can take days to count , Americans are unlikely to know the results on election night .
There is already concern Trump will use the period of uncertainty to claim he won before ballot totals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail really a threat to the election ?
We tried to answer some questions .
What is mail-in voting and why is it such a big deal this year ?
Mail-in voting describes the process voters can use to cast their ballots without having to appear in-person at a polling place .
Every state allows voters to cast a vote by mail in some form , though the rules around who is eligible to do so vary widely from state to state .
With the exception of a few states , voters are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then once election officials verify their eligibility , receive a ballot .
A handful of states – including Washington , Oregon and Colorado – automatically mail all eligible voters a ballot .
This practice is often called universal mail-in voting .
Around a quarter of all of the votes 2016 and 2018 were cast by mail , according to federal data .
But that number is expected to grow this year because of concerns about voting in person amid Covid-19 .
Michael McDonald , a professor at the University of Florida who closely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will account for around 50 % in November .
And during the primaries this year , election officials in many states already saw an unprecedented surge in the use of mail-in ballots .
In Georgia , for example , more than 1.1 million people voted by mail in the state ’ s June primary , more than four times the state ’ s previous record of 219,731 in 2018 .
That surge is prompting a host of concerns about whether states are adequately prepared to hold the November elections .
Many places are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail-in ballots and election offices – already on shoestring budgets and staffed by just a few employees – have struggled to keep up with the demand .
Congress has allocated just $ 400m of the $ 4bn the Brennan Center for Justice estimates states need to successfully run elections .
Is mail-in voting different from absentee voting ?
No , the two terms are often used interchangeably .
Traditionally , people who requested ballots were called “ absentee voters ” , because they were likely going to be absent from their polling place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Conference of State Legislatures ( NCSL ) .
There are instances of absentee voting for military members going back to the American revolution , but as mail-in voting has become more widespread among the general public over the last 30 years , the terminology has become more flexible and states refer to the practice as both absentee and mail-in voting .
Regardless of the term , the process is the same : a voter submits a request for a ballot and the election official sends them one once they verify they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House have repeatedly tried to make a false distinction between “ absentee ” and “ mail-in ” ballots .
Trump has argued that “ absentee ” ballots , which he uses , are acceptable because a voter needs an excuse ( such as illness or military duty ) to use them while “ mail-in ” ballots will lead to fraud and are problematic .
But 34 states do not require a voter to give an excuse if they want to vote by mail and incidents of fraud are still extremely rare .
Overall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million voters – are currently eligible to vote by mail without having to provide an excuse .
If more people are going to vote by mail because of the pandemic , why have there been reports of long lines during the primaries ?
One big lesson from the primaries this year has been that a lot of voters still are going to come out and vote in person .
That may be for a number of reasons – a voter may request a ballot that doesn ’ t arrive by election day or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballot in person .
Figuring out how to accommodate in-person voters has emerged as a major challenge for election administrators .
Poll workers tend to skew older and many have dropped out this year because over fears of contracting Covid-19 .
Facilities like schools and nursing homes that would ordinarily be polling sites may also be less willing to open to the public this year .
That has forced election officials to drastically scale back availability for in-person voting – in Milwaukee , for example , the city opened just five locations during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ usual 180 ( the city was able to open many more polling locations for its August primary ) .
Figuring out how states can provide adequate and safe in-person voting is one of the greatest challenges election administrators are facing this year .
Some places are getting creative ; some professional sports teams are offering arenas and stadiums as polling sites to leave more space for distancing .
Will mail-in voting hurt Trump ’ s chances of being re-elected ?
There ’ s no evidence that mail-in voting benefits either Democrats or Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that vote by mail does not benefit one party over the other .
In some places , Republicans have long used mail-in voting as part of their strategy to drive voter turnout .
“ It was a staple of our strategy , ” said Mac Stipanovich , a retired Florida Republican political operative , told the Guardian in April .
“ Republicans probably ought not to be complaining about it.
” Republicans in some key states , including Florida and Pennsylvania have encouraged their voters to cast mail-in ballots in recent months .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and encouraged people to vote by mail in Florida .
Trump ’ s opposition to vote by mail appears to be framed by a belief that increased voting will hurt Republicans .
Discussing a congressional proposal to make it easier to vote in March , Trump said “ They had things , levels of voting , that if you ’ d ever agreed to it , you ’ d never have a Republican elected in this country again.
” But does Trump have a point that mail-in voting could lead to more fraud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it does occur , it is isolated .
The same is true when it comes to voting by mail ; an analysis of voter fraud cases maintained by The Heritage Foundation , a conservative thinktank , found 143 cases of criminal convictions involving absentee ballots over the last 20 years .
That amounts to 0.00006 % of total votes cast .
A Washington Post analysis in states that conduct their elections entirely by mail found little evidence of fraud .
Election officials use several measures to prevent fraud .
Some states allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they can verify when it arrives at the board of elections .
Election officials also compare the signatures on an absentee ballot envelope to verify a voter ’ s identity .
Trump has repeatedly pointed to an election in Paterson , New Jersey , earlier this year where four people have been indicted on fraud charges to bolster his claims , but those are misleading ; he has claimed that 19 % of the ballots were rejected because of fraud , but ballots can be rejected if a voter makes even a minor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes in .
What are the mail-in voting rules states are fighting over ?
One of the biggest disputes over the last few months has been over how easy it should be to send someone a mail-in ballot .
California , Nevada , Vermont , New Jersey and the District of Columbia have all moved this year to automatically mail ballots to eligible voters .
Other states have opted to mail absentee ballot applications to all voters .
In some places , local election officials are choosing to mail absentee ballot applications to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opted not to .
The Trump campaign and Republican National Committee have staunchly opposed these efforts , falsely saying they will lead to widespread fraud .
The campaign has sued California and Nevada to block the mailing of ballots , as well as local clerks in Iowa to block them from sending absentee ballot applications .
Democrats and voting rights groups have also brought a slew of lawsuits challenging restrictions around absentee voting , including requirements that voters provide an excuse if they want to vote absentee or get their ballot signed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these laws overly burden voters in the middle of a pandemic .
How can I be sure my mail-in vote will count ?
Many states allow voters to track their absentee ballots , allowing voters to see when their ballots are received and counted .
Experts are pushing for more states to adopt tracking mechanisms before November to give voters more voters confidence about the status of their ballot .
There are also high-stakes legal battles over the processes states use to reject absentee ballots .
A mail-in ballot can be rejected if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trained in handwriting analysis – determine the signature on the ballot envelope doesn ’ t match the one on file or if the ballot arrives after election day , regardless of when the voter put it in the mail .
Research has shown that minorities , young and first-time voters are all more likely to have their mail-in ballots rejected .
Democrats have brought a number of legal challenges to require states to count ballots as long as they are postmarked by election day and arrive in the days after and to notify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a ballot .
Are we going to know who won the presidential election on election night ?
Barring a landslide election result , it is very unlikely that we are going to know who won the presidential election on 3 November .
There is probably going to be an influx of ballots that come in either on election day or in the days after , and it will likely take election officials at least a few days to continue to verify , open and count those ballots .
In some states , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials are barred from beginning to count ballots until election day , which could lead to further delays .
There ’ s nothing fishy about this – it takes time to count mail-in ballots and election officials want to be careful they get the results right .
But Trump has already laid the groundwork for contesting the results of the election , stoking fears about the integrity of mail-in ballots and suggesting the election could be stolen from him .
There is deep concern about what will happen during the period of uncertainty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If Trump voters overwhelmingly go to the polls in person , he may hold a lead on election night , only to see it disappear as mail-in votes are counted .
The Trump campaign and Republican national committee are reportedly preparing for a “ weeks-long ” legal fight after the election and readying efforts to get absentee ballots rejected if they lack postmarks .
What can I do to guarantee a free and fair election this year ?
First , you should make sure that your voter registration is up to date and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or need to register , you should take care of that now , just so you ’ re all set .
Then , you can help your family and friends do the same .
Next , check to see how and when you can request an absentee ballot in your state .
Many states already allow voters to request ballots for the November election ( yes , really ! )
and requesting your ballot early will ease some of the burden on election administrators as they try and process mail-in ballots in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are able to , sign up to be a poll worker .
Having a reserve of healthy people willing to work the polls will ensure that election officials can plan to preserve adequate in-person options for voters who want to cast their ballots in person .

The 2020 presidential election is already unlike any other America has ever seen.
So far, 61 million people have voted early – either to avoid long lines or Covid-19 exposure during an unprecedented year, according to US Elections Project data from University of Florida professor Michael McDonald. A week before election day, Americans have already surpassed 2016 early voting totals.
But perhaps even more striking than turnout along is that almost 87 million people requested mail-in ballots, and more than 21 million people have already returned them. This includes millions in key swing states, which the Guardian and ProPublica have been tracking.
These numbers come after Donald Trump and other Republicans spent the last months falsely claiming vote by mail will lead to fraud. Since then they have sought to curb mail-in ballot deadlines in battleground states like Pennsylvania and North Carolina, and limit the number of drop boxes for people to safely drop off their mail-in ballot amid postal service delays.
Because of the surge in mail-in voting, which can take days to count, Americans are unlikely to know the results of the election on 3 November. And there is already concern Trump will use the period of uncertainty to claim he won before ballot totals are final. But is voting by mail really a threat to the election? We tried to answer some questions.
What is mail-in voting and why is it such a big deal this year?
Mail-in voting describes the process voters can use to cast their ballots without having to appear in person at a polling place. Every state allows voters to cast a vote by mail in some form, though the rules around who is eligible to do so vary widely from state to state.
With the exception of a few states, voters are required to submit an application and then, once election officials verify their eligibility, receive a ballot. A handful of states – including Washington, Oregon and Colorado – automatically mail all eligible voters a ballot. This practice is often called universal mail-in voting.
About a quarter of all of the votes 2016 and 2018 were cast by mail, according to federal data. But that number is growing this year because of concerns about voting in person amid Covid-19. McDonald, the professor at the University of Florida who closely tracks voter turnout, estimates mail-in votes will account for about 50% this year. And during the primaries this year, election officials in many states saw an unprecedented surge in the use of mail-in ballots. In Georgia, for example, more than 1.1 million people voted by mail in the state’s June primary, more than four times the state’s previous record of 219,731 in 2018.
That surge is prompting a host of concerns about whether states can handle the election . Many places are not accustomed to seeing high volumes of mail-in ballots and election offices – already on shoestring budgets and staffed by just a few employees – have been struggling to keep up with the demand. Congress has allocated just $400m of the $4bn the Brennan Center for Justice estimates states need to successfully run elections.
05:32 Voter suppression: how Trump is undermining the US election – video explainer
Is mail-in voting different from absentee voting?
No, the two terms are often used interchangeably. Traditionally, people who requested ballots were called “absentee voters”, because they were likely to be absent from their polling place on election day, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).
There are instances of absentee voting for military members going back to the American revolution, but as mail-in voting has become more widespread among the general public over the last 30 years, the terminology has become more flexible and states refer to the practice as both absentee and mail-in voting. Regardless of the term, the process is the same: a voter submits a request for a ballot and the election official sends them one once they verify they are eligible.
Donald Trump and the White House have repeatedly tried to make a false distinction between “absentee” and “mail-in” ballots. Trump has argued that “absentee” ballots, which he uses, are acceptable because a voter needs an excuse (such as illness or military duty) to use them while “mail-in” ballots will lead to fraud and are problematic. But 34 states do not require a voter to give an excuse if they want to vote by mail and incidents of fraud are still extremely rare.
Overall, 76% of Americans – 158 million voters – are currently eligible to vote by mail without having to provide an excuse.
If more people are voting by mail why are there still long lines?
One big lesson from the primaries this year was that a lot of voters still are going to come out and vote in person. We’re seeing that during in-person early voting this year as well. That may be for a number of reasons – a voter may request a ballot that doesn’t arrive by election day or they might just prefer to cast a ballot in person. There’s also a swell of new voters casting ballots this year who didn’t vote in 2016.
Figuring out how to accommodate in-person voters has emerged as a major challenge for election administrators. Poll workers tend to skew older and many have dropped out this year because over fears of contracting Covid-19. Facilities like schools and nursing homes that would ordinarily be polling sites may also be less willing to open to the public this year. That has forced election officials to drastically scale back availability for in-person voting – in Milwaukee, for example, the city opened just five locations during the April primary, compared with the usual 180 (the city was able to open many more polling locations for its August primary).
Figuring out how states can provide adequate and safe in-person voting has been one of the greatest challenges election administrators are facing this year. Some places have gotten creative; some professional sports teams are offering arenas and stadiums as polling sites to leave more space for distancing.
Will mail-in voting hurt Trump’s chances of being re-elected?
There’s no evidence that mail-in voting benefits either Democrats or Republicans. One study by Stanford researchers found that vote by mail does not benefit one party over the other. So far, Democrats seem to have the edge when it comes to mail-in votes, in part because Trump warned his supporters not to use the system, but Republicans are not far behind.
In some places, Republicans have long used mail-in voting as part of their strategy to drive voter turnout. “It was a staple of our strategy,” said Mac Stipanovich, a retired Florida Republican political operative, told the Guardian in April. “Republicans probably ought not to be complaining about it.” Republicans in some key states, including Florida and Pennsylvania have encouraged their voters to cast mail-in ballots in recent months.
Trump’s opposition to vote by mail appears to be framed by a belief that increased voting will hurt Republicans. Discussing a congressional proposal to make it easier to vote in March, Trump said: “They had things, levels of voting, that if you’d ever agreed to it, you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.”
But does Trump have a point that mail-in voting could lead to more fraud?
Voter fraud is extremely rare and when it does occur, it is isolated. The same is true when it comes to voting by mail; an analysis of voter fraud cases maintained by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative thinktank, found 143 cases of criminal convictions involving absentee ballots over the last 20 years. That amounts to 0.00006% of total votes cast. A Washington Post analysis in states that conduct their elections entirely by mail found little evidence of fraud.
Election officials use several measures to prevent fraud. Some states allow voters to track their ballots, ensuring they can verify when it arrives at the board of elections. Election officials also compare the signatures on an absentee ballot envelope to verify a voter’s identity.
Trump has repeatedly pointed to an election in Paterson, New Jersey, earlier this year where four people have been indicted on fraud charges to bolster his claims, but those are misleading; he has claimed that 19% of the ballots were rejected because of fraud, but ballots can be rejected if a voter makes even a minor error in filling out the envelope it comes in.
What are the mail-in voting rules states are fighting over?
One of the biggest disputes over the last few months has been over how easy it should be to send someone a mail-in ballot. California, Nevada, Vermont, New Jersey and the District of Columbia have all moved this year to automatically mail ballots to eligible voters. Other states have opted to mail absentee ballot applications to all voters. In some places, local election officials chose to mail absentee ballot applications to voters, even if the state has opted not to. The Trump campaign and Republican National Committee staunchly opposed these efforts, falsely saying they will lead to widespread fraud.
Democrats and voting rights groups also brought a slew of lawsuits challenging restrictions around absentee voting, including requirements that voters provide an excuse if they want to vote absentee or get their ballot signed by a witness or notary. They argued these laws overly burden voters in the middle of a pandemic.
More recently there have been battles over mail-in ballot deadlines: some states have extended the date by which ballots can be counted, as long as they are postmarked by election day. But Republicans in states like North Carolina and Michigan have sought to block the extensions.
There have also been fights over the drop boxes for mail-in ballots, with states like Ohio and Texas limiting voters to one drop box a county. Civil rights groups have called these voter suppression tactics.
Finally, there have been court disputes about the technicalities that could lead to mail-in ballots being rejected. In Pennsylvania, for example, the state supreme court ruled last weekend that ballots cannot be rejected if a voter’s signature does not match a previous ballot signature. Similarly in North Carolina the board of elections circulated a memo instructing election officials not to reject ballots that didn’t have a witness signature after thousands of ballots had been flagged for rejection.
How can I be sure my mail-in vote will count?
Many states allow voters to track their absentee ballots, allowing voters to see when their ballots are received and counted.
There are also high-stakes legal battles over the processes states use to reject absentee ballots. A mail-in ballot can be rejected if election officials – who may not be trained in handwriting analysis – determine the signature on the ballot envelope doesn’t match the one on file or if the ballot arrives after election day, regardless of when the voter put it in the mail. Research has shown that minorities, young and first-time voters are all more likely to have their mail-in ballots rejected. Most recently, it was found that Black voters were more likely to have their ballots rejected in North Carolina than other groups.
Democrats have brought a number of legal challenges to require states to count ballots as long as they are postmarked by election day and arrive in the days after and to notify voters of any deficiencies before they reject a ballot. Some have been successful.
Are we going to know who won the presidential election on election night?
Barring a landslide election result, it is very unlikely that we are going to know who won the presidential election on 3 November. There is probably going to be an influx of ballots that come in either on election day or in the days after, and it will probably take election officials at least a few days to continue to verify, open and count those ballots. In some states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, election officials are barred from beginning to count ballots until election day, which could lead to further delays.
There’s nothing fishy about this – it takes time to count mail-in ballots and election officials want to be careful they get the results right. But Trump has already laid the groundwork for contesting the results of the election, stoking fears about the integrity of mail-in ballots and suggesting the election could be stolen from him.
There is deep concern about what will happen during the period of uncertainty while those ballots are being counted. If Trump voters overwhelmingly go to the polls in person, he may hold a lead on election night, only to see it disappear as mail-in votes are counted. The Trump campaign and Republican National Committee are reportedly preparing for a “weeks-long” legal fight after the election and readying efforts to get absentee ballots rejected if they lack postmarks.


theguardian--2020-08-20--'They're not alone': Biden aims to unite anti-Trump Republicans at DNC

Democrats are eagerly hoisting rebel Republican politicians opposed to Donald Trump into the national spotlight in an effort to attract dissatisfied conservatives over to their side .
As the Democratic national convention has unfolded , a wave of Republicans have been given plum speaking slots and high-profile platforms to show their support for former vice-president Joe Biden , the newly minted Democratic nominee for president of the United States .
On Monday , the former Ohio governor John Kasich , former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman , former Hewlett Packard CEO Meg Whitman and former New York congresswoman Susan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Tuesday , the convention schedule included an endorsement by the former Bush administration secretary of state Colin Powell and a video by Cindy McCain , the widow of the late Arizona senator John McCain .
The night also included a video from Chuck Hagel , who served as defense secretary under Barack Obama despite having been a Republican senator for Nebraska .
“ I think they ’ re just doing old-fashioned coalition building , ” said Stuart Stevens , a longtime Republican strategist who is helping lead the Lincoln Project , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senator Doug Jones , a moderate Democrat , said the outreach and support from Republicans during the convention is meant to “ to get folks comfortable with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris ” and show that “ that they are not going to lead this country in some socialist agenda ” .
The inclusion of many Republicans during the biggest Democratic summit every four years illustrates the effort the Biden campaign is putting in to woo disgruntled Republican voters over to Biden ’ s camp .
“ It ’ s important to let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the Louisiana congressman Cedric Richmond , a Biden campaign co-chairman , said .
“ It ’ s OK that there are Republican leaders that vote for Biden-Harris.
” Polls show Trump maintains a firm grip on most of his party .
But , Democrats argue , the rebel politicians could be a gateway to a slice of the American electorate that ’ s attainable and potentially crucial to Biden ousting Trump from the White House .
“ Nobody who thinks Donald Trump is doing a great job today is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic strategist Eric Goldman said .
“ What you ’ re going to get are people who maybe were Trump voters but people who voted for Barack Obama in the past.
” It ’ s not unheard of for one or two national figures of the opposing party to rally around a presidential nominee .
In 2004 , when he was a sitting senator from Georgia , Democrat Zell Miller gave a keynote speech at the Republican national convention .
Joe Lieberman , the former Connecticut senator who was the 2000 Democratic nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Republican senator John McCain ’ s presidential bid .
Biden has also long prided himself on being a politician with strong ties to both Democrats and Republicans , even in an era of intense partisanship .
The Biden campaign has embraced that record .
According to multiple Democrats , the campaign has been actively reaching out to Republicans for the convention .
That outreach comes as a number of anti-Trump Republican groups – the Lincoln Project , 43 Alumni for Biden , Republican Voters Against Trump – also actively campaign and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Hagel said he and the other Republicans featured at the convention are motivated by their revulsion for Trump ’ s actions as president .
“ What I suspect Christine Todd Whitman and John Kasich and other Republicans who are supporting Biden see … is , in our opinion , what Donald Trump has done to this country and will continue to do in this country – debase the presidency , in my opinion , in every way , ” Hagel said .
Hagel added : “ The Republican party has allowed him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enabled him .
They ’ ve been enablers .
And many Republicans I talk to in the Senate , in the House , know it .
But they ’ re also afraid.
” Even so the Republicans who have backed Biden are uniformly out of office .
None of the sitting Republican lawmakers who have fought with Trump have joined the ranks of anti-Trump Republicans .
“ They hold office now .
Christine Todd Whitman doesn ’ t .
I don ’ t .
John Kasich doesn ’ t .
We ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office so we don ’ t have anything to lose , ” Hagel said .
“ We don ’ t have anything to fear .
Incumbent office holders do .
If [ Maine senator ] Susan Collins or anybody would come out with the Democrats or appear at the Democratic national convention or say anything , they ’ re gone .
The Trump voters wouldn ’ t go with them .
They need the Trump vote in order to survive .
But they also need more than the Trump vote .
So they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spot.
” Jones added : “ I still think that the president holds a command over the Republican Party .
He has put fear into the hearts of folks .
They don ’ t want to be the subject of his tweets.
” Republican support for Biden is crucial .
Recent polling has majorities say their support for Biden is really more in opposition of Trump than in favor of the former vice-president .
And while polling shows Trump trailing Biden and underwater in job approval , the final months of the campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mudslinging contest than a battle of two competing optimistic visions .
“ You ’ re talking about getting those voters on the margin , ” Goldman said .
“ You ’ re talking about getting those voters who generally vote Republican but for whatever reason are turned off by the antics of the Trump administration .
And every validator , especially one who ’ s won statewide in a contested swing state as a Republican , is a pretty good surrogate for the message that you ’ re trying to communicate.
” Jones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s who still talks with the former vice-president , said he expects Biden and his campaign to try and compete in more conservative states because he sees a chance “ to narrow the gap , as I call it ” .

Democrats are eagerly hoisting rebel Republican politicians opposed to Donald Trump into the national spotlight in an effort to attract dissatisfied conservatives over to their side.
As the Democratic national convention has unfolded, a wave of Republicans have been given plum speaking slots and high-profile platforms to show their support for former vice-president Joe Biden, the newly minted Democratic nominee for president of the United States.
On Monday, the former Ohio governor John Kasich, former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman, former Hewlett Packard CEO Meg Whitman and former New York congresswoman Susan Molinari – all Republicans – spoke. On Tuesday, the convention schedule included an endorsement by the former Bush administration secretary of state Colin Powell and a video by Cindy McCain, the widow of the late Arizona senator John McCain. The night also included a video from Chuck Hagel, who served as defense secretary under Barack Obama despite having been a Republican senator for Nebraska.
“I think they’re just doing old-fashioned coalition building,” said Stuart Stevens, a longtime Republican strategist who is helping lead the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump organization run by Republicans.
Alabama senator Doug Jones, a moderate Democrat, said the outreach and support from Republicans during the convention is meant to “to get folks comfortable with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris” and show that “that they are not going to lead this country in some socialist agenda”.
The inclusion of many Republicans during the biggest Democratic summit every four years illustrates the effort the Biden campaign is putting in to woo disgruntled Republican voters over to Biden’s camp.
“It’s important to let them know they’re not alone,” the Louisiana congressman Cedric Richmond, a Biden campaign co-chairman, said. “It’s OK that there are Republican leaders that vote for Biden-Harris.”
Polls show Trump maintains a firm grip on most of his party. But, Democrats argue, the rebel politicians could be a gateway to a slice of the American electorate that’s attainable and potentially crucial to Biden ousting Trump from the White House.
Christine Todd Whitman, the Republican former governor of New Jersey, endorses Joe Biden at the Democratic convention via video. Photograph: Rex/Shutterstock
“Nobody who thinks Donald Trump is doing a great job today is going to vote for Joe Biden,” the Democratic strategist Eric Goldman said. “What you’re going to get are people who maybe were Trump voters but people who voted for Barack Obama in the past.”
It’s not unheard of for one or two national figures of the opposing party to rally around a presidential nominee. In 2004, when he was a sitting senator from Georgia, Democrat Zell Miller gave a keynote speech at the Republican national convention. Joe Lieberman, the former Connecticut senator who was the 2000 Democratic nominee for vice-president, was a vocal supporter of the Republican senator John McCain’s presidential bid.
Biden has also long prided himself on being a politician with strong ties to both Democrats and Republicans, even in an era of intense partisanship. The Biden campaign has embraced that record. According to multiple Democrats, the campaign has been actively reaching out to Republicans for the convention. That outreach comes as a number of anti-Trump Republican groups – the Lincoln Project, 43 Alumni for Biden, Republican Voters Against Trump – also actively campaign and fundraise to push Trump out of office.
Hagel said he and the other Republicans featured at the convention are motivated by their revulsion for Trump’s actions as president.
“What I suspect Christine Todd Whitman and John Kasich and other Republicans who are supporting Biden see … is, in our opinion, what Donald Trump has done to this country and will continue to do in this country – debase the presidency, in my opinion, in every way,” Hagel said.
Hagel added: “The Republican party has allowed him to do that. They’ve enabled him. They’ve been enablers. And many Republicans I talk to in the Senate, in the House, know it. But they’re also afraid.”
Even so the Republicans who have backed Biden are uniformly out of office. None of the sitting Republican lawmakers who have fought with Trump have joined the ranks of anti-Trump Republicans.
Joe Biden has long prided himself on his friendships across the aisle, including with the late Senator John McCain. Photograph: Matt Rourke/AP
“They hold office now. Christine Todd Whitman doesn’t. I don’t. John Kasich doesn’t. We’re has-beens. We’re out of office so we don’t have anything to lose,” Hagel said. “We don’t have anything to fear. Incumbent office holders do. If [Maine senator] Susan Collins or anybody would come out with the Democrats or appear at the Democratic national convention or say anything, they’re gone. The Trump voters wouldn’t go with them. They need the Trump vote in order to survive. But they also need more than the Trump vote. So they’re locked into a helluva tough spot.”
Jones added: “I still think that the president holds a command over the Republican Party. He has put fear into the hearts of folks. They don’t want to be the subject of his tweets.”
Republican support for Biden is crucial. Recent polling has majorities say their support for Biden is really more in opposition of Trump than in favor of the former vice-president. And while polling shows Trump trailing Biden and underwater in job approval, the final months of the campaign are more likely to be an all-out mudslinging contest than a battle of two competing optimistic visions.
“You’re talking about getting those voters on the margin,” Goldman said. “You’re talking about getting those voters who generally vote Republican but for whatever reason are turned off by the antics of the Trump administration. And every validator, especially one who’s won statewide in a contested swing state as a Republican, is a pretty good surrogate for the message that you’re trying to communicate.”
Jones, a longtime friend of Biden’s who still talks with the former vice-president, said he expects Biden and his campaign to try and compete in more conservative states because he sees a chance “to narrow the gap, as I call it”.


theguardian--2020-08-20--Politicians and doctors both make lethal mistakes – but doctors own up to theirs | Farrah Jarral

If you were unfortunate enough to fall into the river in late 18th-century London , you might have found yourself experiencing medical treatment that would raise eyebrows today .
Resuscitation kits , paid for by the Royal Humane Society , which was founded in 1774 as the Society for the Recovery of Persons Apparently Drowned , involved quite literally blowing tobacco smoke inside the rectums of drowning victims .
Beautiful examples of these devices this can still be found , in wooden cases complete with leather bellows and finely crafted ivory nozzles , including one in the Wellcome Collection on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I teach 21st-century medical students I ask them to have a look at this Georgian equivalent of a defibrillator while visualising the portraits of the dignified doctors that decorate the walls of the Royal College of Physicians .
I don ’ t need to tell you that the smoke-enema technique did not work , but it took years for these resuscitation kits to fall out of favour .
Showing these objects to medical students can be remarkably effective at deflating the hubris that still characterises our profession .
What is gold-standard medical practice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absurd the next .
Despite medicine ’ s chequered history when it comes to saving lives – the Royal College admits that some doctors of the past “ almost certainly killed as many patients as they cured ” – the profession has experienced a transformation in attitudes over the past few decades that other fields would do well to emulate .
Admitting error on an individual and institutional level is an essential and formally enshrined aspect of modern medicine in the UK .
Things aren ’ t perfect in British medicine .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the appalling treatment of whistleblowers in the NHS , but the profession is moving in the right direction , shaped by the expectation of transparency and accountability for all .
Today , particularly in our political sphere , these norms seem to be in need of renewed emphasis .
Medicine and aviation are among the most “ safety-critical ” industries .
In both professions , the most dangerous practitioners are those who do not admit their mistakes , or who are dishonest about the limits of their knowledge .
Practical measures such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ operating theatres alike , but less tangible aspects of organisational behaviour are no less important .
Addressing rigid social hierarchies that stop people from speaking up when things go wrong , or focusing on learning and not blame are equally crucial to avoiding harm .
It is easy to see how airline pilots and doctors can kill or maim people when they screw up , but politicians can cause the same harms too , and on a potentially vast scale .
We urgently need a political culture in which people admit mistakes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevent them from recurring .
Instead , the standard offerings from our politicians are a carousel of barefaced lies , pseudo apologies and relentless bluffing .
The coronavirus pandemic has brought the lethal consequences of politicians ’ poor behaviour into focus .
As the GP and former MP Sarah Wollaston recently tweeted , “ Doctors & nurses are expected to be open about mistakes & show they have learnt from them ” , yet the example set from ministers is “ never accept you have got it wrong , never apologise & just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boris Johnson ’ s government , as Wollaston noted , have “ cost lives ; England has the highest number of excess deaths in Europe ” .
The fact that political decisions can destroy millions of lives is not a new revelation .
Academic analysis of the consequences of austerity has shown serious adverse health outcomes in the UK , including increased rates of suicide and faltering life expectancy .
Medicine , like any field , is not immune from sleaze .
Not even a peer-reviewed randomised controlled trial published in a top @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bankroll much scientific research , and there is still no legal requirement for doctors to publicly declare their financial links with the pharmaceutical industry , for example .
However , in principle at least , the concepts of probity , evidence-based decision-making and candour around mistakes are central to ethical medical practice in the UK .
While doctors are rightly expected to be honest straight-talkers , politicians seem to be rewarded , or at least tolerated , for their glib performances , even when they are evidently riddled with lies .
But this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contemporary focus on consumer satisfaction means you can rate your clinician like you ’ d rate a pizzeria , and the basis for that score can be superficial or unsound .
And as most of us are aware , a doctor who is smooth-talking , acquiescent and gives the impression of being flawless is not necessarily a safe and competent pair of medical hands .
( Harold Shipman , Britain ’ s most prolific serial killer , was popular with his patients – but his case did catalyse significant reforms in the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it be that we fall for the appearance of infallibility ?
It would certainly seem so in our politicians .
Rightwing populists and “ strongmen ” have been winning votes around the world .
Donald Trump ’ s recent interview with Jonathan Swan of Axios demonstrated the exhausting volume of falsehoods he excretes – more than 17 over 35 minutes .
Yet his approval ratings remain stable .
It appears to be routine now for politicians to bludgeon us with reflex denial , defensiveness and insulting soundbites on a loop , even when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues .
They seem never to resign or apologise these days , however heinous or ridiculous their mistakes and lies .
The very concept of “ electability ” is tied to perceptions of success that are rooted in a deeply classist society which promotes intellectually mediocre , morally bankrupt posh boys to the highest offices in the country .
Part of their political performance is an astonishing resistance to self-reflection , or any awareness of the serious consequences their actions have for others .
Weaning ourselves off this tendency to accept form over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking , in the hope of a future where transparency , scrutiny and accountability are not just the concern of those who fly planes and treat patients , but also a priority for the leaders whose actions put all our lives at risk .

If you were unfortunate enough to fall into the river in late 18th-century London, you might have found yourself experiencing medical treatment that would raise eyebrows today. Resuscitation kits, paid for by the Royal Humane Society, which was founded in 1774 as the Society for the Recovery of Persons Apparently Drowned, involved quite literally blowing tobacco smoke inside the rectums of drowning victims. Beautiful examples of these devices this can still be found, in wooden cases complete with leather bellows and finely crafted ivory nozzles, including one in the Wellcome Collection on London’s Euston Road.
When I teach 21st-century medical students I ask them to have a look at this Georgian equivalent of a defibrillator while visualising the portraits of the dignified doctors that decorate the walls of the Royal College of Physicians. I don’t need to tell you that the smoke-enema technique did not work, but it took years for these resuscitation kits to fall out of favour. Showing these objects to medical students can be remarkably effective at deflating the hubris that still characterises our profession. What is gold-standard medical practice one day may become obsolete and even absurd the next.
Despite medicine’s chequered history when it comes to saving lives – the Royal College admits that some doctors of the past “almost certainly killed as many patients as they cured” – the profession has experienced a transformation in attitudes over the past few decades that other fields would do well to emulate. Admitting error on an individual and institutional level is an essential and formally enshrined aspect of modern medicine in the UK.
Things aren’t perfect in British medicine. We still see shocking cover-ups, scapegoating and the appalling treatment of whistleblowers in the NHS, but the profession is moving in the right direction, shaped by the expectation of transparency and accountability for all. Today, particularly in our political sphere, these norms seem to be in need of renewed emphasis.
Medicine and aviation are among the most “safety-critical” industries. In both professions, the most dangerous practitioners are those who do not admit their mistakes, or who are dishonest about the limits of their knowledge. Practical measures such as checklists can reduce errors in cockpits and operating theatres alike, but less tangible aspects of organisational behaviour are no less important. Addressing rigid social hierarchies that stop people from speaking up when things go wrong, or focusing on learning and not blame are equally crucial to avoiding harm.
It is easy to see how airline pilots and doctors can kill or maim people when they screw up, but politicians can cause the same harms too, and on a potentially vast scale. We urgently need a political culture in which people admit mistakes, apologise properly and investigate errors thoroughly to prevent them from recurring. Instead, the standard offerings from our politicians are a carousel of barefaced lies, pseudo apologies and relentless bluffing.
The coronavirus pandemic has brought the lethal consequences of politicians’ poor behaviour into focus. As the GP and former MP Sarah Wollaston recently tweeted, “Doctors & nurses are expected to be open about mistakes & show they have learnt from them”, yet the example set from ministers is “never accept you have got it wrong, never apologise & just blame others”. The errors of Boris Johnson’s government, as Wollaston noted, have “cost lives; England has the highest number of excess deaths in Europe”. The fact that political decisions can destroy millions of lives is not a new revelation. Academic analysis of the consequences of austerity has shown serious adverse health outcomes in the UK, including increased rates of suicide and faltering life expectancy.
Medicine, like any field, is not immune from sleaze. Not even a peer-reviewed randomised controlled trial published in a top journal is completely neutral. Drug companies bankroll much scientific research, and there is still no legal requirement for doctors to publicly declare their financial links with the pharmaceutical industry, for example. However, in principle at least, the concepts of probity, evidence-based decision-making and candour around mistakes are central to ethical medical practice in the UK.
While doctors are rightly expected to be honest straight-talkers, politicians seem to be rewarded, or at least tolerated, for their glib performances, even when they are evidently riddled with lies. But this apparent difference buckles under examination. The contemporary focus on consumer satisfaction means you can rate your clinician like you’d rate a pizzeria, and the basis for that score can be superficial or unsound. And as most of us are aware, a doctor who is smooth-talking, acquiescent and gives the impression of being flawless is not necessarily a safe and competent pair of medical hands. (Harold Shipman, Britain’s most prolific serial killer, was popular with his patients – but his case did catalyse significant reforms in the way that doctors are regulated.)
Could it be that we fall for the appearance of infallibility? It would certainly seem so in our politicians. Rightwing populists and “strongmen” have been winning votes around the world. Donald Trump’s recent interview with Jonathan Swan of Axios demonstrated the exhausting volume of falsehoods he excretes – more than 17 over 35 minutes. Yet his approval ratings remain stable. It appears to be routine now for politicians to bludgeon us with reflex denial, defensiveness and insulting soundbites on a loop, even when dealing with the most urgent and life-threatening issues. They seem never to resign or apologise these days, however heinous or ridiculous their mistakes and lies.
The very concept of “electability” is tied to perceptions of success that are rooted in a deeply classist society which promotes intellectually mediocre, morally bankrupt posh boys to the highest offices in the country. Part of their political performance is an astonishing resistance to self-reflection, or any awareness of the serious consequences their actions have for others. Weaning ourselves off this tendency to accept form over function in politics is a medicine worth taking, in the hope of a future where transparency, scrutiny and accountability are not just the concern of those who fly planes and treat patients, but also a priority for the leaders whose actions put all our lives at risk.


theguardian--2020-08-19--Security guard nominates Joe Biden for president: 'He really saw me'

What would you do if you were stuck in an elevator with the potential future president for five minutes ?
Security guard Jacquelyn Brittany , 31 , ( whose last name has been obscured at her request ) almost lost her chance to say something when she escorted Joe Biden up an elevator last year .
Brittany , who works as a security guard for the New York Times , remained silent for most of the journey , but when prompted by an aide she blurted out : “ I love you , I do .
You ’ re like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his way to a New York Times editorial board meeting trying to secure the paper ’ s endorsement .
The paper did not endorse him , but Brittany ’ s endorsement soon eclipsed that fact : the moment was captured on an episode of The Weekly and quickly went viral .
On Tuesday , Brittany got to endorse Biden again : she was the first person to nominate him for president during the Democratic national convention .
“ I take powerful people up on my elevator all the time , ” Brittany @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convention , which was held online this year due to the coronavirus pandemic .
“ When they get off , they go to their important meetings .
Me ?
I just head back to the lobby .
But in the short time I spent with Joe Biden , I could tell he really saw me , that he actually cared , that my life meant something to him , ” she continued .
Her nomination appeared to nod at some of the major issues this election : the concerns of middle- and working-class @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the coronavirus pandemic .
“ I knew even when he went into his important meeting , that he ’ d take my story in there with him .
That ’ s because Joe Biden has room in his heart for more than just himself , ” she said .
She finished by calling Biden her friend : “ We ’ ve been through a lot and have tough days ahead .
But nominating someone like that to be in the White House is a good place to start .
Thats why I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next president of the United States , ” she said .

What would you do if you were stuck in an elevator with the potential future president for five minutes?
Security guard Jacquelyn Brittany, 31, (whose last name has been obscured at her request) almost lost her chance to say something when she escorted Joe Biden up an elevator last year. Brittany, who works as a security guard for the New York Times, remained silent for most of the journey, but when prompted by an aide she blurted out: “I love you, I do. You’re like my favorite!”
Biden had been on his way to a New York Times editorial board meeting trying to secure the paper’s endorsement. The paper did not endorse him, but Brittany’s endorsement soon eclipsed that fact: the moment was captured on an episode of The Weekly and quickly went viral.
On Tuesday, Brittany got to endorse Biden again: she was the first person to nominate him for president during the Democratic national convention.
“I take powerful people up on my elevator all the time,” Brittany said in a prerecorded statement for the convention, which was held online this year due to the coronavirus pandemic.
“When they get off, they go to their important meetings. Me? I just head back to the lobby. But in the short time I spent with Joe Biden, I could tell he really saw me, that he actually cared, that my life meant something to him,” she continued.
Her nomination appeared to nod at some of the major issues this election: the concerns of middle- and working-class America, the Black Lives Matter movement and the coronavirus pandemic.
“I knew even when he went into his important meeting, that he’d take my story in there with him. That’s because Joe Biden has room in his heart for more than just himself,” she said.
She finished by calling Biden her friend: “We’ve been through a lot and have tough days ahead. But nominating someone like that to be in the White House is a good place to start. Thats why I nominate my friend Joe Biden as the next president of the United States,” she said.


theguardian--2020-08-20--Kamala Harris makes history, Barack Obama slams Trump: day three at the DNC – video highlights

Kamala Harris officially accepted her vice-presidential nomination on the third day of the Democratic national convention .
Her husband , @ @ @ @ @ on stage alongside Joe Biden and his wife , Jill .
Barack Obama , Hillary @ @ @ @ @ among the many figures who condemned Donald Trump 's presidency and pledged their support for @ @ @ @ @ makes history and Obama issues warning : key takeaways from the DNC 's third night @ @ @ @ @ at DNC after Barack Obama rallies voters against Trump – as it happened

Kamala Harris officially accepted her vice-presidential nomination on the third day of the Democratic national convention. Her husband, Douglas Emhoff, joined her on stage alongside Joe Biden and his wife, Jill. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Gabrielle Giffords were among the many figures who condemned Donald Trump's presidency and pledged their support for the Biden-Harris ticket


theguardian--2020-08-20--Billie Eilish at the DNC: 'Trump is destroying our country and everything we care about' – video

The 18-year old singer , who will be a first-time voter in 2020 , made an impassioned plea for people @ @ @ @ @ their ballot in November 's election .
Eilish also spoke out against the current president @ @ @ @ @ third night of the Democratic national convention , saying : 'You do n't need me @ @ @ @ @ a mess ... Donald Trump is destroying our country and everything we care about' • @ @ @ @ @ America must save itself from Trump

The 18-year old singer, who will be a first-time voter in 2020, made an impassioned plea for people to get out and cast their ballot in November's election.
Eilish also spoke out against the current president during her appeal on the third night of the Democratic national convention, saying: 'You don't need me to tell you things are a mess ... Donald Trump is destroying our country and everything we care about'


theguardian--2020-08-20--Shooting survivor Gabby Giffords delivers moving speech at DNC – video

Former US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords provided the most emotional moment of the third night of the Democratic national convention .
@ @ @ @ @ damage after she was shot at an event with constituents in 2011 , spoke during @ @ @ @ @ .
She said : 'Today , I struggle with speech but I have not lost @ @ @ @ @ all of us to speak out , even when you have to fight to find @ @ @ @ @ spokesperson for Giffords said she spent 'countless hours ' practising the speech , the longest @ @ @ @ @ shooting • Obama delivers searing attack on Trump and warns of grave threat to democracy

Former US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords provided the most emotional moment of the third night of the Democratic national convention.
Giffords, who sustained brain damage after she was shot at an event with constituents in 2011, spoke during a segment on gun control. She said: 'Today, I struggle with speech but I have not lost my voice. America needs all of us to speak out, even when you have to fight to find the words.'
A spokesperson for Giffords said she spent 'countless hours' practising the speech, the longest she has delivered since the shooting


theguardian--2020-08-20--Kamala Harris reflects on vice-presidential nomination at DNC – video

Kamala Harris made US history as she became the first black woman and first Asian American to join a major @ @ @ @ @ .
On the third night of the Democratic national convention , she urged voters to @ @ @ @ @ leadership of Donald Trump , calling him a president who 'turns our tragedies into political @ @ @ @ @ voters to prevent Trump from 'stealing way to victory '

Kamala Harris made US history as she became the first black woman and first Asian American to join a major party’s presidential ticket. On the third night of the Democratic national convention, she urged voters to reject the divisive and destructive leadership of Donald Trump, calling him a president who 'turns our tragedies into political weapons'


theguardian--2020-08-20--Barack Obama's fiery DNC speech in full – video

Barack Obama delivered a powerful message calling for voters to protect American democracy during the third night of the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ president argued that Donald Trump ’ s potential re-election posed an existential threat to the @ @ @ @ @ and institutions , and he implored voters to 'embrace your own responsibility as citizens' • @ @ @ @ @ issues warning : key takeaways from the DNC 's third night

Barack Obama delivered a powerful message calling for voters to protect American democracy during the third night of the Democratic national convention. The former president argued that Donald Trump’s potential re-election posed an existential threat to the country’s democratic values and institutions, and he implored voters to 'embrace your own responsibility as citizens'


theguardian--2020-08-20--Barack Obama condemns Trump in powerful Democratic convention speech – video

The former president spoke at the Democratic national convention and cast Donald Trump as someone who will 'tear our democracy @ @ @ @ @ it takes to win ' and urges Americans to get out and vote in November

The former president spoke at the Democratic national convention and cast Donald Trump as someone who will 'tear our democracy down if that's what it takes to win' and urges Americans to get out and vote in November


theguardian--2020-08-20--Democratic national convention day three: Barack Obama & Kamala Harris lead speeches – watch in full

Democrats stage the third night of their online convention after formally nominating Joe Biden as the presidential candidate for November @ @ @ @ @ main speakers on Wednesday include Barack Obama , Kamala Harris , Hillary Clinton and Nancy @

Democrats stage the third night of their online convention after formally nominating Joe Biden as the presidential candidate for November’s election. The main speakers on Wednesday include Barack Obama, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi