theguardian--2020-11-18--Coronavirus live news: Pfizer vaccine 'has 95% efficacy and passed safety checks'

France is preparing for a massive nationwide anti-Covid-19 vaccination programme as early as next year .
The government says it is “ in the starting blocks ” to begin distributing any tested and available vaccine from January 2021 and has budgeted €1.5bn to buy the first available on the market .
For the moment , no vaccine has been approved but several are said to be nearing the end of testing .
The French government says the vaccination campaign will be coordinated at European Union level and could begin in the most “ optimist ” scenario in the first quarter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re preparing a campaign to be ready the moment a vaccine is approved by the European and national health authorities , ” Gabriel Attal from the health ministry has said .
Jérôme Salomon , head of the French public health authority Santé Publique France , said the virus was making people psychologically as well as physically ill. “ The good news is the virus is slowing ... but this epidemic is making people stressed and anxious , ” Salomon said .
More than two weeks after a second national lockdown was introduced , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from depression between the end of September and the beginning of November had doubled and was affecting all the population but particularly those in a “ difficult financial situation , the vulnerable , the inactive and the young .
“ We can all feel stressed , anxious or depressed , ” he said advising people to keep a careful eye on family and friends for signs of depression .
He also advised those feeling stressed or anxious should avoid continuously following news reports and to limit their consumption of tobacco and alcohol .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 , Salomon announced at a press conference on Tuesday , making it the fourth worst for infections in the world behind the United States , India and Brazil .
He said there was an “ unprecedented ” number of hospital admissions of around 33,500 .
There were 437 hospital deaths in the previous 24 hours and 45,422 new confirmed contaminations , according to official figures .
France ’ s lockdown is set to end on 1 December , but the government has warned that the easing of restrictions will be progressive and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already stated that shops and businesses are likely to be allowed to open on 1 December but that bars and restaurants will remain closed until at least the start of the Christmas holidays and possibly later .
A special Defence Council meeting took place Wednesday morning to discuss what shops and business should be allowed to open and when .
Among the measures being considered are a return of the nightly curfew and whether to allow special authorisations for people to travel to see relatives at Christmas .
Emmanuel Macron is expected to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lifted in a nationwide address next week .
“ Restrictions will continue after the end of lockdown , ” Jean Castex said adding that lockdown easing would happen in stages .

Aamna Mohdin (now); Alexandra Topping, Martin Farrer and Ben Doherty (earlier)

18 Nov 2020 23.06 GMT The US has seen more than 250,000 deaths due to the coronavirus pandemic as a new swathe of data was released that pushed the stricken country over the grim landmark on Wednesday. Latest figures from Johns Hopkins University showed that the number of people killed by Covid-19 is now 250,029. The news comes amid record infections across the US with the Trump administration repeatedly failing to get a grip on the Covid-19 crisis. Most recently Trump has refused to concede he lost the presidential election to Joe Biden who this week said “more people may die” if he continues to hamper his transition. US passes 250,000 deaths from coronavirus Read more
18 Nov 2020 22.51 GMT A grim dispatch by Associated Press from a hospital in Tennessee where staff are struggling to cope: Overwhelmed hospitals are converting chapels, cafeterias, waiting rooms, hallways, even a parking garage into patient treatment areas. Staff members are desperately calling around to other medical centers in search of open beds. Fatigue and frustration are setting in among front-line workers. Conditions inside the nation’s hospitals are deteriorating by the day as the coronavirus rages across the U.S. at an unrelenting pace and the death toll closes in on a quarter-million. “We are depressed, disheartened and tired to the bone,” said Alison Johnson, director of critical care at Johnson City Medical Center in Tennessee, adding that she drives to and from work some days in tears. The number of people in the hospital with Covid-19 in the U.S. has doubled in the past month and set new records every day this week. As of Tuesday, nearly 77,000 were hospitalized with the virus.
Updated at 23.30 GMT
18 Nov 2020 22.07 GMT Uruguay is starting to see a worrying rise in cases, sparking concern among government officials that the country could reverse course after a long period of containing the pandemic. The South American nation has confirmed just 4,208 positive cases and 68 deaths since the pandemic began, with voluntary quarantines, widespread tracing programs and random testing helping keep infection rates far lower than its South American neighbors. However, cases have jumped in the last month, crossing 100 daily cases for the first time. Uruguayan President Luis Lacalle Pou has now opted for a government campaign to promote “responsible freedom,” with officials targeting young people ahead of the tourist season, calling on them to limit social gatherings and not share drinks. “The health authorities make a special request to the population to reduce the circles of social contact and meeting times, the permanent use of face masks, physical distancing, ventilation and hygiene,” Uruguay’s national emergency system said. Officials in the capital, Montevideo, where there are currently 449 active cases, are considering suspending celebrations for carnival, the country’s major festival set to begin in January. Health Ministry officials have asked laboratories to increase their analysis capacity for coronavirus testing, potentially doubling the current rate of about 4,000 test per day if cases continue to rise.
18 Nov 2020 21.55 GMT People arrive in their vehicles for a distribution of frozen turkeys and food boxes ahead of Thanksgiving to families affected by the Covid-19 pandemic in Los Angeles, California. The annual Operation Gobble Gobble event is organized by Supervisor Hilda Solis and 43 nonprofit organisations. Photograph: Frederic J Brown/AFP/Getty Images
18 Nov 2020 21.34 GMT Brazil records further 756 deaths Brazil recorded 34,091 further confirmed cases of coronavirus in the past 24 hours and 756 deaths, the country’s health ministry said. Brazil has registered more than 5.9 million cases of the virus since the pandemic began, while the official death toll has risen to 167,455, according to ministry data.
18 Nov 2020 21.25 GMT Canada is in talks with other governments about a plan to donate coronavirus vaccine shots to lower-income countries, sources told Reuters. Canada has made deals to buy more doses per capita than any other nation, according to researchers at the Duke Global Health Innovation Center in North Carolina. It is among a handful of wealthy nations that reserved billions of doses between them before late-stage trial data came in, ensuring they would get access even if only one or two vaccines worked. Canada could donate extra doses through the World Health Organization-backed COVAX facility, which would distribute them among recipient countries, said a Canadian government source. Separately, a COVAX source confirmed discussions were going on between Canada and other governments and organizations involved with COVAX, a facility created to ensure equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines. Sources declined to be identified as the discussions are confidential. Asked about the issue in a parliamentary committee meeting on Monday, Deputy Procurement Minister Bill Matthews said Canada “would have options” if all seven suppliers had their vaccines approved but that it was “too early” for a plan.
18 Nov 2020 21.01 GMT A summary of today's developments France has reported 28,383 new confirmed coronavirus cases, compared to 45,522 on Tuesday. The country has also reported a further 425 deaths compared to 428 yesterday.
has reported 28,383 new confirmed coronavirus cases, compared to 45,522 on Tuesday. The country has also reported a further 425 deaths compared to 428 yesterday. US coronavirus death toll nears 250,000. According to Johns Hopkins University, 248,707 Americans have now died of the virus, and the country is expected to soon surpass more than 250,000 deaths. President-elect Joe Biden will virtually speak with frontline health care workers today, as the US coronavirus death toll continues to climb.
coronavirus death toll nears 250,000. According to Johns Hopkins University, 248,707 Americans have now died of the virus, and the country is expected to soon surpass more than 250,000 deaths. President-elect Joe Biden will virtually speak with frontline health care workers today, as the US coronavirus death toll continues to climb. Italy registers 753 deaths and 34,282 new infections. The critical threshold of Covid patients taking up 30% of intensive care has been exceeded in 17 Italian regions, according to figures on Wednesday. The central region of Abruzzo is the latest to be upgraded to a red zone as the situation deteriorates there, while doctors in the southern region of Puglia have asked for the region to also be upgraded. While Italy has almost doubled the availability of intensive care beds to 9,931 and increased the number of ventilators, just 625 more anaesthetists and resuscitators have been hired since the beginning of the pandemic.
registers 753 deaths and 34,282 new infections. The critical threshold of Covid patients taking up 30% of intensive care has been exceeded in 17 Italian regions, according to figures on Wednesday. The central region of Abruzzo is the latest to be upgraded to a red zone as the situation deteriorates there, while doctors in the southern region of Puglia have asked for the region to also be upgraded. While Italy has almost doubled the availability of intensive care beds to 9,931 and increased the number of ventilators, just 625 more anaesthetists and resuscitators have been hired since the beginning of the pandemic. Scottish police submit assessment on Margaret Ferrier MP. Scottish police have handed the results of an initial investigation to prosecutors into whether MP Margaret Ferrier broke the law when she took a train from London to Glasgow after testing positive.
police submit assessment on Margaret Ferrier MP. Scottish police have handed the results of an initial investigation to prosecutors into whether MP Margaret Ferrier broke the law when she took a train from London to Glasgow after testing positive. Switzerland : intensive care beds at full capacity. In a press statement on Tuesday, the Swiss Society for Intensive Medicine said all of the 876 certified ICU beds in Switzerland were occupied, advising vulnerable people to write down in a will whether they would like to receive life support in the event of a severe illness.
: intensive care beds at full capacity. In a press statement on Tuesday, the Swiss Society for Intensive Medicine said all of the 876 certified ICU beds in Switzerland were occupied, advising vulnerable people to write down in a will whether they would like to receive life support in the event of a severe illness. Pfizer vaccine reports 95% efficacy. Pfizer had reported that its coronavirus vaccine has an efficacy of 95% effective and that it has passed its safety checks, according to further data from the firm.
18 Nov 2020 20.36 GMT Air France-KLM is among the airlines gearing up for the challenge of transporting millions of doses of temperature-sensitive Covid-19 vaccines in the midst of a travel slump. Breakthrough vaccines developed by Pfizer and Moderna have yet to win final approval, but the drugmakers, their logistics and cargo providers are not waiting for a green light to activate freight plans. “It’s going to be a major logistics challenge,” said Air France cargo chief Christophe Boucher, citing the “massive” volume of vaccines to be distributed globally.
“Another difficulty is the temperature control,” Boucher said in an interview at ParisCharles de Gaulle airport - where cargo specialists were preparing to load consignments of super-cooled rabies vaccines bound for Brazil. The Covid-19 airlift is being planned amid a partial shutdown of global air travel. Airlines have warned that travel curbs could hamper the effort, since around 45% of global cargo typically travels in passenger plane holds. Meanwhile, Pfizer Inc said it had offered to provide Brazil with millions of doses of the vaccine in the first half of 2021, amid evidence the coronavirus is spreading more rapidly in South America’s largest country.
18 Nov 2020 20.24 GMT A Kuwaiti health worker conducts PCR test at a COVID-19 drive-thru testing centre near Kuwait International Airport in Kuwait City. Kuwait has carried out over one million COVID-19 tests since the start of the pandemic. Photograph: Yasser Al-Zayyat/AFP/Getty Images
18 Nov 2020 20.13 GMT The WHO’s emergencies director has warned that vaccines would not arrive in time to defeat the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. Pfizer said a completed study of its experimental vaccine showed it was 95 per cent effective, while fellow US firm Moderna said this week that its own candidate was 94.5 percent effective. Russia claims its candidate is more than 90 percent effective. The WHO’s Michael Ryan said vaccines should not be seen as a “unicorn” magic solution - and countries battling a resurgence of the virus would once again have to “climb this mountain” without them. “I think it’s at least four to six months before we have significant levels of vaccination going on anywhere,” he said. 00:51 Covid vaccines should not be seen as 'unicorn' solution, says WHO chief – video Despite recent promising announcements from final-phase candidate vaccine trials, “We’re not there with vaccines yet,” said Ryan. “Many countries are going through this wave, and they’re going to go through this wave, and continue through this wave, without vaccines. “We need to understand and internalise that, and realise: we have got to climb this mountain this time, without vaccines.” The vaccines from Pfizer Inc and Moderna Inc could be ready for US authorisation and distribution within weeks, setting the stage for inoculation to begin as soon as this year, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar. “We now have two safe and highly effective vaccines that could be authorized by the Food and Drug Administration and ready to distribute within weeks,” Azar said.
Updated at 21.26 GMT


theguardian--2020-11-18--Ivanka Trump obsessed with status, says former friend in tell-all essay

Ivanka Trump shared her father ’ s craving for money and praise – and his apparent disdain for poor people – from a young age , according to a former schoolfriend who has written a tell-all essay .
Donald Trump ’ s daughter was obsessed with status and used to blame classmates for her infractions of school rules while projecting a refined persona , Lysandra Ohrstrom , who was a maid of honour at her wedding , claimed in Vanity Fair .
“ She had the Trump radar for status , money , and power , and her dad ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bus to save herself , ” alleged Ohrstrom , who described Ivanka , 39 , as her best friend growing up .
In the most scathing passage , Ohrstrom claimed that in their mid-20s she recommended to her friend the book Empire Falls , a Pulitzer prize-winning novel by Richard Russo about working-class characters in a small town in Maine .
“ ‘ Ly , why would you tell me to read a book about fucking poor people ?
’ I remember Ivanka saying , ” she wrote .
“ ‘ What part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this ?
’ ” Beneath her polish , the future president ’ s daughter occasionally betrayed “ rougher , more Trumpian edges ” , she wrote .
“ Ivanka would regularly relay stories of teachers or observers who had commented that she had the most innate talent they had ever seen for whatever new pursuit she was taking up.
” Ohrstrom , a journalist who used to report from Lebanon , said a necklace with her name in Arabic irked Ivanka .
“ One night in the middle of dinner , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ How does your Jewish boyfriend feel when you are having sex and that necklace hits him in the face ?
How can you wear that thing ?
It just screams ‘ terrorist ’ .
” Ohrstrom befriended Ivanka in seventh grade , when they were about 12 , at Chapin , an all-girls school on Manhattan ’ s Upper East Side with famous alumni including Jackie Kennedy Onassis .
They bonded during a school trip to Paris and Ohrstrom was a maid of honour at Ivanka ’ s 2009 wedding to Jared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she wrote .
Ohrstrom said she had written the article to show the true Ivanka , despite the risk of being branded a hypocritical , privileged elitist looking to capitalise on her first family connection .
“ Although friends and family have warned that this article won ’ t be received the way I want , I think it ’ s past time that one of the many critics from Ivanka ’ s childhood comes forward – if only to ensure that she really will never recover from the decision to tie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” When Ivanka joined Donald Trump ’ s White House team as an adviser in 2017 , Ohrstrom expected her to moderate the president ’ s most regressive , racist tendencies .
“ Not out of any moral commitment , but because caging young children and ripping up global climate agreements was not a good look in the halls of Davos , ” she wrote .
Ivanka had spent her career projecting a more polished and intellectual version of the Trump brand , blending millennial feminism with a “ mythical narrative ” of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she endorsed her father ’ s policies and judicial nominations , said Ohrstrom .
“ I ’ ve watched as Ivanka has laid waste to the image she worked so hard to build.
” It is unclear what Ivanka will do after Joe Biden moves into the White House in January .
She shut her eponymous clothing and shoe company in 2018 , reportedly over scrutiny and conflict-of-interest issues related to her work with her father ’ s administration .
There is speculation she may run for public office .
In a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ Trump-Republican ” and “ a pragmatist when it comes to everything ” .
She came out strongly against abortion , a position shared by the Republican party base .
“ I am pro-life , and unapologetically so , ” she said .
The article claims that Donald Trump paid close attention to the attractiveness of his daughter and her friends when they were teenagers .
“ He would barely acknowledge me except to ask if Ivanka was the prettiest or the most popular girl in our grade .
Before I learned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humor about themselves , I remember answering honestly that she was probably in the top five .
“ Who ’ s prettier than Ivanka ?
” I recall him asking once with genuine confusion , before correctly naming the two girls I ’ d had in mind.
” The future president never remembered Ohrstrom ’ s name but noticed when she gained or lost weight , she wrote .
Once , while dining at Mar-a-Lago , Ivanka scolded her brother Donald Jr for taking Ohrstrom ’ s grilled cheese sandwich .
Their father @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worry .
She doesn ’ t need it .
He ’ s doing her a favor .
”

Ivanka Trump shared her father’s craving for money and praise – and his apparent disdain for poor people – from a young age, according to a former schoolfriend who has written a tell-all essay.
Donald Trump’s daughter was obsessed with status and used to blame classmates for her infractions of school rules while projecting a refined persona, Lysandra Ohrstrom, who was a maid of honour at her wedding, claimed in Vanity Fair.
“She had the Trump radar for status, money, and power, and her dad’s instinct to throw others under the bus to save herself,” alleged Ohrstrom, who described Ivanka, 39, as her best friend growing up.
In the most scathing passage, Ohrstrom claimed that in their mid-20s she recommended to her friend the book Empire Falls, a Pulitzer prize-winning novel by Richard Russo about working-class characters in a small town in Maine.
“‘Ly, why would you tell me to read a book about fucking poor people?’ I remember Ivanka saying,” she wrote. “‘What part of you thinks I would be interested in this?’”
Beneath her polish, the future president’s daughter occasionally betrayed “rougher, more Trumpian edges”, she wrote. “Ivanka would regularly relay stories of teachers or observers who had commented that she had the most innate talent they had ever seen for whatever new pursuit she was taking up.”
Ohrstrom, a journalist who used to report from Lebanon, said a necklace with her name in Arabic irked Ivanka. “One night in the middle of dinner, she glanced at the necklace and said: ‘How does your Jewish boyfriend feel when you are having sex and that necklace hits him in the face? How can you wear that thing? It just screams ‘terrorist’.”
Ohrstrom befriended Ivanka in seventh grade, when they were about 12, at Chapin, an all-girls school on Manhattan’s Upper East Side with famous alumni including Jackie Kennedy Onassis. They bonded during a school trip to Paris and Ohrstrom was a maid of honour at Ivanka’s 2009 wedding to Jared Kushner, after which the friendship cooled, she wrote.
Quick Guide Books that exposed the inner workings of Donald Trump's White House Show Michael Wolff – Fire and Fury Wolff’s sensational White House exposé paints Donald Trump as a childlike nonentity. It alleges the self-styled "very stable genius” has been described as an idiot by Rupert Murdoch and a moron by Rex Tillerson. Wolff says the thing that interests the US president most is watching himself on television. “I consider it to be fiction,” said Trump of the book. Many others were not so sure. Read the review. Sean Spicer – The Briefing Sean Spicer's 182 days as press secretary yielded a book that tells of a White House where people would routinely bring in "burner phones" to avoid being caught leaking, He describes Trump as sometimes being his own worst enemy with his manic tweeting, and recalls his downfall essentially started on day one, when Spicer was responsible for attempts to spin the news on the president's dismal inauguration crowds. Perhaps, though, the highlight is when Spicer describes Trump as “a unicorn riding a unicorn over a rainbow'. Read the review. Omarosa Manigault Newman – Unhinged The most prominent African American in the Trump White House before she was abruptly dismissed, Newman spread her criticism liberally. Her description of the vice-president, Mike Pence, as the "Stepford veep" is one of the kinder sideswipes. Of the more jaw-dropping revelations, the suggestion Trump had initially asked to be sworn in over a copy of The Art of the Deal, instead of the Bible, is a hard image to shake. Read the review. Cliff Sims – Team of Vipers Cliff Sims' book suggested he had made enemies and alienated people throughout the administration. He was particularly scathing about Sarah Sanders, Trump’s former press secretary. Her “gymnastics with the truth", he said, "would tax even the nimblest of prevaricators, and Sanders was not that”. Read the review. Anonymous – A Warning From a senior official in the Trump administration – and so many have left and fallen out with the president – Trump is described as “like a 12-year-old in an air traffic control tower”. The unknown author adds: “It’s like showing up at the nursing home at daybreak to find your elderly uncle running pants-less across the courtyard and cursing loudly about the cafeteria food, as worried attendants tried to catch him” John Bolton - The Room Where It Happened John Bolton’s damning indictment of the Trump presidency soared up the chart despite withering reviews describing it as “bloated with self-importance”, after the Trump administration made a last-ditch attempt to prevent its publication. The book claimed that Trump pleaded with China to help win the 2020 election, he suggested he was open to serving more than two terms, offered favours to authoritarian leaders, praised Xi for China’s internment camps and thought Finland was part of Russia. Was this helpful? Thank you for your feedback.
Ohrstrom said she had written the article to show the true Ivanka, despite the risk of being branded a hypocritical, privileged elitist looking to capitalise on her first family connection.
“Although friends and family have warned that this article won’t be received the way I want, I think it’s past time that one of the many critics from Ivanka’s childhood comes forward – if only to ensure that she really will never recover from the decision to tie her fate to her father’s.”
When Ivanka joined Donald Trump’s White House team as an adviser in 2017, Ohrstrom expected her to moderate the president’s most regressive, racist tendencies. “Not out of any moral commitment, but because caging young children and ripping up global climate agreements was not a good look in the halls of Davos,” she wrote.
Ivanka had spent her career projecting a more polished and intellectual version of the Trump brand, blending millennial feminism with a “mythical narrative” of business acumen, but this dissolved when she endorsed her father’s policies and judicial nominations, said Ohrstrom. “I’ve watched as Ivanka has laid waste to the image she worked so hard to build.”
It is unclear what Ivanka will do after Joe Biden moves into the White House in January. She shut her eponymous clothing and shoe company in 2018, reportedly over scrutiny and conflict-of-interest issues related to her work with her father’s administration.
There is speculation she may run for public office. In a recent RealClearPolitics interview, she described herself as a “Trump-Republican” and “a pragmatist when it comes to everything”. She came out strongly against abortion, a position shared by the Republican party base. “I am pro-life, and unapologetically so,” she said.
The article claims that Donald Trump paid close attention to the attractiveness of his daughter and her friends when they were teenagers. “He would barely acknowledge me except to ask if Ivanka was the prettiest or the most popular girl in our grade. Before I learned that the Trumps have no sense of humor about themselves, I remember answering honestly that she was probably in the top five. “Who’s prettier than Ivanka?” I recall him asking once with genuine confusion, before correctly naming the two girls I’d had in mind.”
The future president never remembered Ohrstrom’s name but noticed when she gained or lost weight, she wrote. Once, while dining at Mar-a-Lago, Ivanka scolded her brother Donald Jr for taking Ohrstrom’s grilled cheese sandwich. Their father chimed in: “Don’t worry. She doesn’t need it. He’s doing her a favor.”


theguardian--2020-11-18--The dead voter conspiracy theory peddled by Trump voters, debunked

Late last week , Students for Trump founder Ryan Fournier declared on social media that he had unearthed definitive proof of widespread voter fraud in Detroit .
He pointed to an absentee ballot cast by “ 118-year-old William Bradley ” , a man who had supposedly died in 1984 .
“ They ’ re trying to steal the election , ” Fournier warned in a since-deleted Facebook post , though the election had already been called for Joe Biden by every major news network days before .
But the deceased Bradley hadn ’ t voted .
Within days , Bradley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bradley , but with a different middle name , told PolitiFact that he had cast the ballot .
That was confirmed by Michigan election officials , who said a clerk had entered the wrong Bradley as having voted .
Though the living Bradley had also received an absentee ballot for his father , he said he threw it away , “ because I didn ’ t want to get it confused with mine ” .
The false claim that the deceased Bradley had voted in the 3 November election is one of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off by Trump supporters across the country during recent weeks , and all have been debunked while failing to prove that widespread irregularities exist .
Instead , the theories often reveal Trump supporters ’ fundamental misunderstandings of the election system while creating a game of conspiracy theory whack-a-mole for election officials .
“ We are confident Michigan ’ s election was fair , secure and transparent , and the results are an accurate reflection of the will of the people , ” secretary of state spokesperson Tracy Wimmer told the Guardian .
Bradley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead Michigan voters who were found to be alive .
Trump supporters pointed to Napoleon Township ’ s Jane Aiken , who they claimed was born in 1900 , and cited an obituary as evidence that she was deceased .
But the township ’ s deputy police chief investigated and found the obituary to be for a different Jane Aiken .
Police told Bridge Magazine that the Aiken who cast the ballot is “ 94 years old , alive and well .
Quite well , actually.
” Meanwhile , CNN examined records for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead voters .
They found 37 were dead and had not voted .
Five are alive and had voted , and the remaining eight are also alive but didn ’ t vote .
The Michigan secretary of state cited several reasons for confusion .
Though election officials across the country purge dead people from voter rolls annually , some are missed and remain as registered voters .
Occasionally a worker will accidentally enter a vote by a living person as being cast by a dead person with a similar name .
The voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for each voter .
If a clerk doesn ’ t have it , then 1/1/1901 is used as a placeholder until the clerk can find the accurate birthday .
Rightwing conspiracy theorists pointed to multiple examples of residents with that birthday voting .
Among them was Donna Brydges , a 75-year-old Hamlin Township resident .
In a phone call with the Associated Press this week , she confirmed she ’ s alive and passed the phone to her husband so he could do the same .
He added : “ She ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cribbage.
” Michigan election officials , “ are not aware of a single confirmed case showing that a ballot was actually cast on behalf of a deceased individual , ” the secretary of state wrote on its website .
Similarly , in Pennsylvania , Trump supporters like Representative Matt Gaetz claimed 21,000 dead people in the state “ overwhelmingly swung for Biden ” .
In reality , the conservative Public Interest Legal Foundation had filed an 15 October federal lawsuit claiming 21,000 dead people were on the rolls , and asked a judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election .
A judge found that more than half of the voters had already been removed , questioned PILF ’ s intentions and methodology , and didn ’ t require the state to take action .
The dead voter theory is only one one of the several conspiracies Trump supporters have used to cast doubt on election results .
In Pennsylvania , a postal worker who claimed to have heard a supervisor directing staff to backdate late-arriving ballots recanted his allegation once he was visited by postal service investigators .
In Arizona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawsuit claiming that votes were tossed out because they had used Sharpie markers to fill out their ballot , but quickly dropped it .
Several viral videos also purported to reveal suspicious activity .
In Detroit , Trump supporters claimed a video showed someone bringing late-arriving mail in ballots into a vote-counting center .
In reality , it was a WXYZ Detroit cameraman wheeling his equipment in a wagon .
Meanwhile , a video that Eric Trump claimed showed 80 Trump ballots being set on fire was proven to be false – the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign also claimed that recent federal lawsuits would prove widespread voter fraud with hundreds of pages of testimony from poll watchers and ballot challengers in Michigan .
Almost all of them have failed in court so far .
Though Trump and his supporters have claimed thousands of dead people voted in Michigan , only one allegation was included in the lawsuits .
Warren , Michigan resident Anita Chase wrote in an affidavit that her deceased son , Mark D Chase , who had died in July 2016 , was marked in the secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as having voted in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections .
But the secretary of state said Anita Chase had identified one of two other Mark D Chases registered to vote in Michigan – a ballot had not been cast in her son ’ s name .
In their response to the affidavits , Detroit election officials lambasted the Trump campaign over such errors : “ Most of the objections raised in the submitted affidavits are grounded in an extraordinary failure to understand how elections function .
”

Late last week, Students for Trump founder Ryan Fournier declared on social media that he had unearthed definitive proof of widespread voter fraud in Detroit. He pointed to an absentee ballot cast by “118-year-old William Bradley”, a man who had supposedly died in 1984.
“They’re trying to steal the election,” Fournier warned in a since-deleted Facebook post, though the election had already been called for Joe Biden by every major news network days before.
But the deceased Bradley hadn’t voted. Within days, Bradley’s son, also named William Bradley, but with a different middle name, told PolitiFact that he had cast the ballot. That was confirmed by Michigan election officials, who said a clerk had entered the wrong Bradley as having voted. Though the living Bradley had also received an absentee ballot for his father, he said he threw it away, “because I didn’t want to get it confused with mine”.
The false claim that the deceased Bradley had voted in the 3 November election is one of a barrage of voter fraud conspiracy theories fired off by Trump supporters across the country during recent weeks, and all have been debunked while failing to prove that widespread irregularities exist.
Instead, the theories often reveal Trump supporters’ fundamental misunderstandings of the election system while creating a game of conspiracy theory whack-a-mole for election officials.
“We are confident Michigan’s election was fair, secure and transparent, and the results are an accurate reflection of the will of the people,” secretary of state spokesperson Tracy Wimmer told the Guardian.
Bradley was only one of dozens of allegedly dead Michigan voters who were found to be alive. Trump supporters pointed to Napoleon Township’s Jane Aiken, who they claimed was born in 1900, and cited an obituary as evidence that she was deceased. But the township’s deputy police chief investigated and found the obituary to be for a different Jane Aiken.
We are confident Michigan’s election was fair, secure and transparent, and the results are an accurate reflection of the will of the people secretary of state spokesperson
Police told Bridge Magazine that the Aiken who cast the ballot is “94 years old, alive and well. Quite well, actually.”
Meanwhile, CNN examined records for 50 Michiganders who Trump supporters claim are dead voters. They found 37 were dead and had not voted. Five are alive and had voted, and the remaining eight are also alive but didn’t vote.
The Michigan secretary of state cited several reasons for confusion. Though election officials across the country purge dead people from voter rolls annually, some are missed and remain as registered voters. Occasionally a worker will accidentally enter a vote by a living person as being cast by a dead person with a similar name.
The voting software in Michigan also requires a birthday for each voter. If a clerk doesn’t have it, then 1/1/1901 is used as a placeholder until the clerk can find the accurate birthday. Rightwing conspiracy theorists pointed to multiple examples of residents with that birthday voting.
Among them was Donna Brydges, a 75-year-old Hamlin Township resident. In a phone call with the Associated Press this week, she confirmed she’s alive and passed the phone to her husband so he could do the same. He added: “She’s actually beat me in a game of cribbage.”
Michigan election officials, “are not aware of a single confirmed case showing that a ballot was actually cast on behalf of a deceased individual,” the secretary of state wrote on its website.
Similarly, in Pennsylvania, Trump supporters like Representative Matt Gaetz claimed 21,000 dead people in the state “overwhelmingly swung for Biden”.
In reality, the conservative Public Interest Legal Foundation had filed an 15 October federal lawsuit claiming 21,000 dead people were on the rolls, and asked a judge to order them to be removed before the election. A judge found that more than half of the voters had already been removed, questioned PILF’s intentions and methodology, and didn’t require the state to take action.
The dead voter theory is only one one of the several conspiracies Trump supporters have used to cast doubt on election results.
In Pennsylvania, a postal worker who claimed to have heard a supervisor directing staff to backdate late-arriving ballots recanted his allegation once he was visited by postal service investigators. In Arizona and Michigan, Trump supporters filed a lawsuit claiming that votes were tossed out because they had used Sharpie markers to fill out their ballot, but quickly dropped it.
Several viral videos also purported to reveal suspicious activity. In Detroit, Trump supporters claimed a video showed someone bringing late-arriving mail in ballots into a vote-counting center. In reality, it was a WXYZ Detroit cameraman wheeling his equipment in a wagon. Meanwhile, a video that Eric Trump claimed showed 80 Trump ballots being set on fire was proven to be false – the ballots were sample ballots.
The Trump campaign also claimed that recent federal lawsuits would prove widespread voter fraud with hundreds of pages of testimony from poll watchers and ballot challengers in Michigan. Almost all of them have failed in court so far.
Though Trump and his supporters have claimed thousands of dead people voted in Michigan, only one allegation was included in the lawsuits. Warren, Michigan resident Anita Chase wrote in an affidavit that her deceased son, Mark D Chase, who had died in July 2016, was marked in the secretary of state’s online voter tool as having voted in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
But the secretary of state said Anita Chase had identified one of two other Mark D Chases registered to vote in Michigan – a ballot had not been cast in her son’s name. In their response to the affidavits, Detroit election officials lambasted the Trump campaign over such errors: “Most of the objections raised in the submitted affidavits are grounded in an extraordinary failure to understand how elections function.”


theguardian--2020-11-18--Can Trump actually stage a coup and stay in office for a second term?

Joe Biden won the presidential election , a fact that Donald Trump and other Republicans refuse to acknowledge .
There are worries the president and other Republicans will make every effort to stay in power .
“ There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration , ” Mike Pompeo , the secretary of state , said last week .
William Barr , the attorney general , has also authorized federal prosecutors to begin to investigate election irregularities , a move that prompted the head of the justice department ’ s election crimes unit to step down from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Tuesday , Trump fired Christopher Krebs , the director of the federal agency that vouched for the reliability of the 2020 election and had pushed back on the president ’ s baseless claims of voter fraud .
Yet , despite all of Trump ’ s machinations , it is extremely unlikely he can find a way to stay in power or stage a coup .
Here ’ s an explanation of why : Trump refuses to accept that Joe Biden won the presidential election .
Is there a constitutional path for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in office for another term ?
Not really .
The electoral college meets on 14 December to cast its vote for president and nearly every state uses the statewide popular vote to allocate its electors .
Biden is projected to win far more than the 270 electoral votes he needs to become president .
His victory doesn ’ t hinge on one state and he has probably insurmountable leads in Michigan , Nevada , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania and Arizona .
There is a long-shot legal theory , floated by Republicans before the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Michigan , Wisconsin and Pennsylvania could ignore the popular vote in their states and appoint their own electors .
Federal law allows legislatures to do this if states have “ failed to make a choice ” by the day the electoral college meets .
But there is no evidence of systemic fraud of wrongdoing in any state and Biden ’ s commanding margins in these places make it clear that the states have in fact made a choice .
“ If the country continues to follow the rule of law , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump to remain as president barring new evidence of some massive failure of the election system in multiple states , ” Richard Hasen , a law professor at the University of California , Irvine , who specializes in elections , wrote in an email .
“ It would be a naked , antidemocratic power grab to try to use state legislatures to get around the voters ’ choice and I don ’ t expect it to happen.
” For lawmakers in a single state to choose to override the clear will of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably cause a huge outcry .
For Trump to win the electoral college , several states would have to take this extraordinary step , a move that would cause extreme backlash and a real crisis of democracy throughout the country .
“ There ’ s a strange fascination with various imagined dark scenarios , perhaps involving renegade state legislatures , but this is more dystopian fiction than anything likely to happen , ” said Richard Pildes , a law professor at New York University .
“ The irony , or tragedy , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smooth election , with record turnout , under exceptionally difficult circumstances – and yet , a significant portion of the president ’ s supporters are now convinced that the process was flawed.
” Is there any indication Republicans in these important states are going to go along with this ?
Shortly after election day , Jake Corman , the top Republican in the Pennsylvania state senate , indicated his party would “ follow the law ” in Pennsylvania , which requires awarding electors to the winner of the popular vote .
In an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislature “ does not have and will not have a hand in choosing the state ’ s presidential electors or in deciding the outcome of the presidential election ” .
Last week , Republicans in the Pennsylvania legislature said they wanted to investigate allegations of voter fraud .
There ’ s no evidence of widespread malfeasance in the state , but the move is alarming because it could be the beginning of an effort to undermine the popular vote results in the state .
But in a major blow to the president ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s supreme court ruled that Philadelphia election officials did not improperly block Trump ’ s campaign from observing the counting of mail-in ballots .
The Republican-led legislature in Michigan is also investigating the election , as are Republicans in Wisconsin .
There ’ s no evidence of widespread wrongdoing in either place .
Is this related in any way to the lawsuits Trump is filing ?
Trump ’ s campaign has filed a slew of legally dubious suits since election day .
The purpose of these suits appears not to be to actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to create uncertainty and draw out the counting process .
Each state has its own deadlines for certifying election results that are then used to allocate its electoral college votes .
In at least two states , Pennsylvania and Michigan , Trump ’ s campaign is seeking to block officials from certifying results .
That certification timeline is important because federal law says that as long as election results are finalized by 8 December this year , the result is “ conclusive ” .
That provides a safeguard against Congress , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes , from second-guessing election results .
By dragging out the process , the Trump campaign may be seeking to blow past that deadline and create more wiggle room to second-guess the results .
Even if that is the Trump campaign ’ s hope , courts are unlikely to step in , Pildes said .
“ States are going to start certifying their vote totals beginning in less than 10 days , and there is no basis in the claims made thus far for the courts to stop that process , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fruition and Republican-led legislatures override the will of the people in several states .
Is there any safeguard to stop Trump ?
Yes .
Michigan , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania and Nevada all have Democratic governors who would refuse to approve a set of Trump electors with the popular vote clearly showing Biden winning their state .
Instead , they would submit the electors Biden is entitled to as the winner of the popular vote .
It would then fall to Congress , which is charged with counting the votes from the electoral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The law that outlines the process for how Congress should handle a dispute in electors from a state is extremely confusing , but experts believe the slate backed by a state ’ s governor is the legally sound one .
There is a rival theory that the president of the Senate , Mike Pence , could have control over the process .
A dispute over electors between the US House and Senate is a worst-case scenario and the US supreme court would probably be asked to step in .
Regardless of however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does set one final deadline .
Even if counting is ongoing , the president and vice-president ’ s terms both end at noon on 20 January .
At that point if there isn ’ t a final result in the race , the speaker of the House – probably Nancy Pelosi – would become the acting president .

Joe Biden won the presidential election, a fact that Donald Trump and other Republicans refuse to acknowledge.
There are worries the president and other Republicans will make every effort to stay in power. “There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, said. William Barr, the attorney general, has authorized federal prosecutors to begin to investigate election irregularities, a move that prompted the head of the justice department’s election crimes unit to step down from his position and move to another role. Trump also fired Christopher Krebs, the director of the federal agency that vouched for the reliability of the 2020 election and had pushed back on the president’s baseless claims of voter fraud.
Yet, despite all of Trump’s machinations, it is extremely unlikely he can find a way to stay in power or stage a coup. Here’s an explanation of why:
Trump refuses to accept that Joe Biden won the presidential election. Is there a constitutional path for him to stage a coup and stay in office for another term?
Not really. The electoral college meets on 14 December to cast its vote for president and nearly every state uses the statewide popular vote to allocate its electors. Biden is projected to win far more than the 270 electoral votes he needs to become president. His victory doesn’t hinge on one state and he has probably insurmountable leads in Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Arizona.
There is a long-shot legal theory, floated by Republicans before the election, that Republican-friendly legislatures in places such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania could ignore the popular vote in their states and appoint their own electors. Federal law allows legislatures to do this if states have “failed to make a choice” by the day the electoral college meets. But there is no evidence of systemic fraud or wrongdoing in any state and Biden’s commanding margins in these places make it clear that the states have in fact made a choice.
“If the country continues to follow the rule of law, I see no plausible constitutional path forward for Trump to remain as president barring new evidence of some massive failure of the election system in multiple states,” Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, who specializes in elections, wrote in an email. “It would be a naked, antidemocratic power grab to try to use state legislatures to get around the voters’ choice and I don’t expect it to happen.”
For lawmakers in a single state to choose to override the clear will of its voters this way would be extraordinary and probably cause a huge outcry. For Trump to win the electoral college, several states would have to take this extraordinary step, a move that would cause extreme backlash and a real crisis of democracy throughout the country.
“There’s a strange fascination with various imagined dark scenarios, perhaps involving renegade state legislatures, but this is more dystopian fiction than anything likely to happen,” said Richard Pildes, a law professor at New York University. “The irony, or tragedy, is that we managed to conduct an extremely smooth election, with record turnout, under exceptionally difficult circumstances – and yet, a significant portion of the president’s supporters are now convinced that the process was flawed.”
A live broadcast of Donald Trump speaking from the White House is shown on screens at an election night party in Las Vegas on 3 November. Photograph: John Locher/AP
Is there any indication Republicans in these important states are going to go along with this?
Shortly after election day, Jake Corman, the top Republican in the Pennsylvania state senate, indicated his party would “follow the law” in Pennsylvania, which requires awarding electors to the winner of the popular vote. In an October op-ed, Corman said the state legislature “does not have and will not have a hand in choosing the state’s presidential electors or in deciding the outcome of the presidential election”.
Republicans in the Pennsylvania legislature said they wanted to investigate allegations of voter fraud. There’s no evidence of widespread malfeasance in the state, but the move is alarming because it could be the beginning of an effort to undermine the popular vote results in the state. But in a major blow to the president’s legal efforts, the state’s supreme court ruled that Philadelphia election officials did not improperly block Trump’s campaign from observing the counting of mail-in ballots.
The Republican-led legislature in Michigan is also investigating the election, as are Republicans in Wisconsin. There’s no evidence of widespread wrongdoing in either place.
Is this related in any way to the lawsuits Trump is filing?
Trump’s campaign has filed a slew of legally dubious suits since election day. The purpose of these suits appears not to be to actually overturn the election results, but to try to create uncertainty and draw out the counting process.
Each state has its own deadlines for certifying election results that are then used to allocate its electoral college votes. In at least two states, Pennsylvania and Michigan, Trump’s campaign is seeking to block officials from certifying results.
That certification timeline is important because federal law says that as long as election results are finalized by 8 December this year, the result is “conclusive”. That provides a safeguard against Congress, which is responsible for counting the electoral college votes, from second-guessing election results. By dragging out the process, the Trump campaign may be seeking to blow past that deadline and create more wiggle room to second-guess the results.
Even if that is the Trump campaign’s hope, courts are unlikely to step in, Pildes said.
“States are going to start certifying their vote totals beginning in less than 10 days, and there is no basis in the claims made thus far for the courts to stop that process,” he said.
05:51 Can Joe Biden and Kamala Harris unite America after Trump? – video explainer
Say the worst-case scenario comes to fruition and Republican-led legislatures override the will of the people in several states. Is there any safeguard to stop Trump?
Yes. Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Nevada all have Democratic governors who would refuse to approve a set of Trump electors with the popular vote clearly showing Biden winning their state. Instead, they would submit the electors Biden is entitled to as the winner of the popular vote.
It would then fall to Congress, which is charged with counting the votes from the electoral college, to decide what to do. The law that outlines the process for how Congress should handle a dispute in electors from a state is extremely confusing, but experts believe the slate backed by a state’s governor is the legally sound one. There is a rival theory that the president of the Senate, Mike Pence, could have control over the process. A dispute over electors between the US House and Senate is a worst-case scenario and the US supreme court would probably be asked to step in.
Regardless of however long a dispute is, the constitution does set one final deadline. Even if counting is ongoing, the president and vice-president’s terms both end at noon on 20 January. At that point if there isn’t a final result in the race, the speaker of the House – probably Nancy Pelosi – would become the acting president.


theguardian--2020-11-18--Biden's cabinet could do a lot – if he resists the urge to fill it with 'consensus' picks | Max Mora

Biden's cabinet could do a lot – if he resists the urge to fill it with 'consensus' picks | Max Moran and Miranda Litwak

If this election was the beginning of the end of “ the Trump Show , ” the writers didn ’ t pick a very satisfying conclusion .
True , despite a deadly pandemic and organized Republican voter suppression , more people turned out than ever before to vote for Joe Biden .
But , unless Democrats are successful in Georgia , the Senate will likely still be controlled by Mitch McConnell – a man whose life ’ s work has been to stifle government action – come 2021 .
McConnell ’ s continued power seems to temper any hopes of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moment .
At least , that ’ s the narrative being pushed by the one group delighted by this outcome : big corporations and Wall Street , who were hoping for a divided government from day one of the 2020 campaign .
Bankers celebrated the electoral outcome , telling Vanity Fair : “ Wall Street will love it .
Are you kidding me ?
A growth agenda without overburdensome regulation or tax reform ?
C ’ mon .
Are you kidding me ?
[ T ] hey live for fucking gridlock.
” For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blessing .
A dysfunctional legislature will struggle to pass laws raising corporate taxes or cracking down on corporate malfeasance .
But just as importantly , by pushing the narrative that no progressives could ever get anything through a Republican-controlled Senate , corporate executives can position themselves as bipartisan “ consensus ” picks for powerful cabinet posts and regulatory jobs .
In fact , they ’ re already jockeying for them .
Before election results were clear , former Lehman Brothers executive and failed Republican presidential candidate John Kasich immediately chastised the left , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Kasich , who himself hasn ’ t won an election in six years and utterly failed to deliver Ohio to Biden , has been angling for a cabinet post for weeks .
In reality , corporate executives and lobbyists are only “ consensus ” cabinet picks among their fellow CEOs and corporate lawyers : by a staggering 2 to 1 margin , voters of all stripes – including Republicans – say that Biden should not hire big business executives to run his government .
If democracy means anything in this country – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turnout means the people still believe in democracy – Biden can not pick a corporate cabinet .
It ’ s perhaps the one issue on which Americans are united .
And so long as Biden resists the pressure to sell his executive branch out to the highest bidder , there ’ s still plenty he can do to improve average people ’ s lives without trying to appease McConnell .
Biden ’ s Plan B for filling out a cabinet involves the Vacancies Act , which lets the president temporarily make a senior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or bring a different Senate-confirmed individual ( like the many Democratic commissioners at independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission ) into the cabinet job temporarily .
He can also make appointments while the Senate is in recess , as presidents of both parties do all the time .
Biden could even force the Senate into recess by playing a bit of constitutional hardball – the kind of hardball McConnell plays constantly .
Likewise , corporate America might want you to think that a Republican Senate means that any hope of tackling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thus improving working conditions , cleaning air and drinking water , and granting Americans a life of economic dignity – is now gone .
These fatalists ask how exactly Biden is supposed to get these policies past McConnell , failing to mention that Biden doesn ’ t need to .
Biden ’ s treasury department can implement financial regulations to impede investments in the fossil fuel industry and reallocate funds to tackle Covid-19 and provide support to the most harmed Americans .
Biden ’ s justice department can prosecute Big Oil companies or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s labor department can enforce OSHA rules and crack down on wage theft like never before , making sure people ’ s hard-earned wages actually make it into their pockets .
His IRS can focus on ensuring the rich pay their fair share , instead of auditing poor Americans making mistakes on their taxes .
He can even , with one directive to his acting education secretary , cancel 95 % of student loan debt .
There are at least 277 actions broadly popular within both wings of the Democratic party which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his administration .
And he needn ’ t even walk near a McConnell-controlled Senate to do them .
Yet all of these actions depend on Biden appointing committed soldiers for the public good – not corporate allies .
A treasury secretary Gina Raimondo would prioritize slashing aid to struggling cities in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic , as she has in her home state .
If ex-Googlers like Roger Ferguson or Eric Schmidt pepper the executive branch , it will undercut the authority of the most important antitrust suit in a generation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will give the intellectual architect of California ’ s Prop 22 an insider ’ s angle to spread pain for gig-economy workers .
Stopping these people must be a priority for the Democratic base .
Activists can and should make clear to Biden that their repayment for hard work should be a highly-motivated and public interest-minded executive branch .
Executive actions represent the best hope for aggressively tackling our many interlinked crises – not to mention the best hope for Biden ’ s party to stand any chance in the 2022 and 2024 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to show for the trust the American people has placed in them .
Failure in the coming years could mean a second Trump term , or worse : a new far-right nationalist who is better organized and more serious than Trump .
Biden and the Democrats can only defeat such a threat by showing the American people that , yes , their government is still capable of improving their lives in tangible , substantive ways .
Executive authority provides Biden with no shortage of ways to do that – but only if he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corporate lobbyists are furiously pushing across Washington .
Such individuals can not populate a Biden cabinet .
• None Max Moran and Miranda Litwak are researchers at the Revolving Door Project

If this election was the beginning of the end of “the Trump Show,” the writers didn’t pick a very satisfying conclusion. True, despite a deadly pandemic and organized Republican voter suppression, more people turned out than ever before to vote for Joe Biden. But, unless Democrats are successful in Georgia, the Senate will likely still be controlled by Mitch McConnell – a man whose life’s work has been to stifle government action – come 2021. McConnell’s continued power seems to temper any hopes of the bold action we need in this moment.
At least, that’s the narrative being pushed by the one group delighted by this outcome: big corporations and Wall Street, who were hoping for a divided government from day one of the 2020 campaign. Bankers celebrated the electoral outcome, telling Vanity Fair: “Wall Street will love it. Are you kidding me? A growth agenda without overburdensome regulation or tax reform? C’mon. Are you kidding me? [T]hey live for fucking gridlock.”
For corporate America, divided government is a blessing. A dysfunctional legislature will struggle to pass laws raising corporate taxes or cracking down on corporate malfeasance. But just as importantly, by pushing the narrative that no progressives could ever get anything through a Republican-controlled Senate, corporate executives can position themselves as bipartisan “consensus” picks for powerful cabinet posts and regulatory jobs. In fact, they’re already jockeying for them. Before election results were clear, former Lehman Brothers executive and failed Republican presidential candidate John Kasich immediately chastised the left, claiming progressives nearly cost Biden the election. Kasich, who himself hasn’t won an election in six years and utterly failed to deliver Ohio to Biden, has been angling for a cabinet post for weeks.
In reality, corporate executives and lobbyists are only “consensus” cabinet picks among their fellow CEOs and corporate lawyers: by a staggering 2 to 1 margin, voters of all stripes – including Republicans – say that Biden should not hire big business executives to run his government. If democracy means anything in this country – and the 2020 election’s jaw-dropping turnout means the people still believe in democracy – Biden cannot pick a corporate cabinet. It’s perhaps the one issue on which Americans are united.
And so long as Biden resists the pressure to sell his executive branch out to the highest bidder, there’s still plenty he can do to improve average people’s lives without trying to appease McConnell.
Biden’s Plan B for filling out a cabinet involves the Vacancies Act, which lets the president temporarily make a senior staffer at a given agency the secretary, or bring a different Senate-confirmed individual (like the many Democratic commissioners at independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission) into the cabinet job temporarily. He can also make appointments while the Senate is in recess, as presidents of both parties do all the time. Biden could even force the Senate into recess by playing a bit of constitutional hardball – the kind of hardball McConnell plays constantly.
Likewise, corporate America might want you to think that a Republican Senate means that any hope of tackling big business’s abuses – and thus improving working conditions, cleaning air and drinking water, and granting Americans a life of economic dignity – is now gone. These fatalists ask how exactly Biden is supposed to get these policies past McConnell, failing to mention that Biden doesn’t need to.
Biden’s treasury department can implement financial regulations to impede investments in the fossil fuel industry and reallocate funds to tackle Covid-19 and provide support to the most harmed Americans. Biden’s justice department can prosecute Big Oil companies or seek breakups of corporate monopolies. Biden’s labor department can enforce OSHA rules and crack down on wage theft like never before, making sure people’s hard-earned wages actually make it into their pockets. His IRS can focus on ensuring the rich pay their fair share, instead of auditing poor Americans making mistakes on their taxes. He can even, with one directive to his acting education secretary, cancel 95% of student loan debt. There are at least 277 actions broadly popular within both wings of the Democratic party which Biden could take on day one of his administration. And he needn’t even walk near a McConnell-controlled Senate to do them.
Yet all of these actions depend on Biden appointing committed soldiers for the public good – not corporate allies. A treasury secretary Gina Raimondo would prioritize slashing aid to struggling cities in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, as she has in her home state. If ex-Googlers like Roger Ferguson or Eric Schmidt pepper the executive branch, it will undercut the authority of the most important antitrust suit in a generation. Appointing Seth Harris to labor secretary will give the intellectual architect of California’s Prop 22 an insider’s angle to spread pain for gig-economy workers.
Stopping these people must be a priority for the Democratic base. Activists can and should make clear to Biden that their repayment for hard work should be a highly-motivated and public interest-minded executive branch.
Executive actions represent the best hope for aggressively tackling our many interlinked crises – not to mention the best hope for Biden’s party to stand any chance in the 2022 and 2024 elections. The Democrats must have something to show for the trust the American people has placed in them. Failure in the coming years could mean a second Trump term, or worse: a new far-right nationalist who is better organized and more serious than Trump.
Biden and the Democrats can only defeat such a threat by showing the American people that, yes, their government is still capable of improving their lives in tangible, substantive ways. Executive authority provides Biden with no shortage of ways to do that – but only if he resists the false “bipartisanship” that corporate lobbyists are furiously pushing across Washington. Such individuals cannot populate a Biden cabinet.


theguardian--2020-11-18--Think Joe Biden's victory marks the end of rightwing populism? Think again | Benjamin Moffitt

It is tempting to conclude that Donald Trump ’ s defeat – which he still hasn ’ t accepted – is a sign that the “ populist wave ” that saw many rightwing populists triumph across the 2010s is finally receding .
With the populist commander-in-chief losing office , rightwing populists around the world must surely be feeling nervous , wondering if it is all over , and whether they might be next .
We ’ ve heard this one before .
In 2017 , when Emmanuel Macron defeated Marine Le Pen in France and Mark Rutte defeated Geert Wilders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few months , many a thinkpiece was written asking : are populism ’ s days numbered ?
I think we all know the answer to that , as do the likes of Narendra Modi in India , Viktor Orbán in Hungary and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil .
Make no mistake : Joe Biden ’ s win over Trump is a monumental and important victory , not only for the Democrats in the US , but for small-d democrats worldwide .
There was a collective sigh of relief in liberal democracies across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most prominent and famous case of rightwing populism would soon be packing his bags .
But to assume that Biden ’ s win sounds the death knell for populism , or that it provides a clear model for defeating populism that should be imitated in other countries , would be a mistake .
There are three key problems here .
The first is assuming that a single election in a single country acts as a bellwether for global trends – even if it is the most powerful and wealthy country in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about a process of “ diffusion ” in which political events in one country influence those in others , this is by no means a linear process .
While parties and movements across the globe that are opposed to rightwing populism and nativism will undoubtedly take heart from Biden ’ s victory and study what worked , there is no indication nor guarantee that the dominoes will fall for populists in other countries , many of whose success is far more entrenched and longstanding than Trump ’ s .
Beyond this , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that does not mean populism is : populist-right leaders and parties tend to have long institutional legacies , and we can expect the GOP to grapple with its post-Trump future – and the question of whether it wants to continue down the populist path he has set them on – for months and years to come .
The second problem is , strangely enough , overlooking what a singularly and uniquely bizarre , venal and odious character Trump is , even compared with the rogues ’ gallery that make up the global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political style that revolves around the appeal to “ the people ” versus “ the elite ” , the invocation of crisis , and the use of “ bad manners ” to demonstrate your closeness to the “ real people ” , Trump took this to an extreme .
His was a populism on steroids .
I have spent my professional life studying populism across the globe , so should be inured to these kinds of things , but constantly found myself shaking my head in disbelief at the depths Trump was willing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Philippines or perhaps Bolsonaro come close in terms of their ability to court outrage and offend : most rightwing populists at least know when to tone it down and when to play it up , a balance that Trump seemed unwilling or perhaps even unable to achieve .
In this regard , it is probably the case that this election should not be read as a vote for Biden , but as a strong vote against Trump .
This is what political scientists refer to as “ negative partisanship ” – the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties , not for them .
Trump is such a detestable figure that many people probably held their noses and voted for Biden as there was no other realistic choice if they wanted to save the republic .
Now that Biden will take office , those people will probably stop holding their noses .
This relates to the third , perhaps deepest problem : the kind of “ anti-populism ” put forward by Biden does not represent a lasting response to rightwing populism .
By anti-populism , I refer not to a clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but rather the phenomenon by which opponents of populism are drawn together in a temporary alliance to “ defeat ” populism .
Such anti-populism usually has a centrist and moderate flavour , offering a return to “ normal ” , a privileging of “ rationality ” , and the offer of the grownups being in charge once again : precisely what Biden was offering in comparison with the utter chaos of the Trump administration .
Let us be clear : anti-populism worked here .
Biden was able to pull together a loose coalition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defeating Trump – leftists , centrist Democrats , the so-called moderate Republicans of the “ Never Trumpers ” and Lincoln Project strand .
But what now ?
With Trump ( nearly ) out of the way , what on earth do these groups have to agree on ?
“ Decency ” ?
“ Normalcy ” ?
These are not the basis for a sustainable ideological project or the makings of newly forged political identity .
They have served their purpose as part of an electoral strategy , but there is little long-term to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political imagination and courage is needed to forge a way out of this .
As such , while the embrace of centrism may be enticing at present as Biden calls for unity , compromise and consensus , it is important to keep in mind that such a form of politics often ends up eventually feeding into the desire for populism .
Indeed , political theorists such as Chantal Mouffe have explicitly blamed such “ third wayism ” , which seeks to steer “ not right , nor left ” , for the rise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American people have every right to demand not “ normal ” , but serious systemic change in a fractured and deeply unequal nation .
It is not difficult to imagine how a failure to meet these challenges could create the conditions in which enough of the populace is discontented and alienated from political , economic and social life that they are willing to roll the dice on a right-populist once again .
So , let the anti-populists enjoy a much-deserved electoral victory .
The Trump era is over , and , in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deliver them from the misery that Trump had lorded over for the past four years .
But let ’ s not be naive : you don ’ t defeat populism in the long run simply by being anti-populist .
The longer struggle of what a Biden presidency will mean now begins .
• Benjamin Moffitt is a senior lecturer in politics at the Australian Catholic University , Melbourne .
His latest book is Populism

It is tempting to conclude that Donald Trump’s defeat – which he still hasn’t accepted – is a sign that the “populist wave” that saw many rightwing populists triumph across the 2010s is finally receding. With the populist commander-in-chief losing office, rightwing populists around the world must surely be feeling nervous, wondering if it is all over, and whether they might be next.
We’ve heard this one before. In 2017, when Emmanuel Macron defeated Marine Le Pen in France and Mark Rutte defeated Geert Wilders in the Netherlands within the space of a few months, many a thinkpiece was written asking: are populism’s days numbered? I think we all know the answer to that, as do the likes of Narendra Modi in India, Viktor Orbán in Hungary and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil.
Make no mistake: Joe Biden’s win over Trump is a monumental and important victory, not only for the Democrats in the US, but for small-d democrats worldwide. There was a collective sigh of relief in liberal democracies across the globe when the news came through that the most prominent and famous case of rightwing populism would soon be packing his bags. But to assume that Biden’s win sounds the death knell for populism, or that it provides a clear model for defeating populism that should be imitated in other countries, would be a mistake.
There are three key problems here. The first is assuming that a single election in a single country acts as a bellwether for global trends – even if it is the most powerful and wealthy country in the world. While political scientists often speak about a process of “diffusion” in which political events in one country influence those in others, this is by no means a linear process. While parties and movements across the globe that are opposed to rightwing populism and nativism will undoubtedly take heart from Biden’s victory and study what worked, there is no indication nor guarantee that the dominoes will fall for populists in other countries, many of whose success is far more entrenched and longstanding than Trump’s. Beyond this, while Trump may (eventually) be gone, that does not mean populism is: populist-right leaders and parties tend to have long institutional legacies, and we can expect the GOP to grapple with its post-Trump future – and the question of whether it wants to continue down the populist path he has set them on – for months and years to come.
The second problem is, strangely enough, overlooking what a singularly and uniquely bizarre, venal and odious character Trump is, even compared with the rogues’ gallery that make up the global populist right. While populism is a political style that revolves around the appeal to “the people” versus “the elite”, the invocation of crisis, and the use of “bad manners” to demonstrate your closeness to the “real people”, Trump took this to an extreme.
His was a populism on steroids. I have spent my professional life studying populism across the globe, so should be inured to these kinds of things, but constantly found myself shaking my head in disbelief at the depths Trump was willing to plumb. Only Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines or perhaps Bolsonaro come close in terms of their ability to court outrage and offend: most rightwing populists at least know when to tone it down and when to play it up, a balance that Trump seemed unwilling or perhaps even unable to achieve.
In this regard, it is probably the case that this election should not be read as a vote for Biden, but as a strong vote against Trump. This is what political scientists refer to as “negative partisanship” – the idea that you vote against candidates and parties, not for them. Trump is such a detestable figure that many people probably held their noses and voted for Biden as there was no other realistic choice if they wanted to save the republic. Now that Biden will take office, those people will probably stop holding their noses.
This relates to the third, perhaps deepest problem: the kind of “anti-populism” put forward by Biden does not represent a lasting response to rightwing populism. By anti-populism, I refer not to a clear ideological disposition or mode of governance, but rather the phenomenon by which opponents of populism are drawn together in a temporary alliance to “defeat” populism. Such anti-populism usually has a centrist and moderate flavour, offering a return to “normal”, a privileging of “rationality”, and the offer of the grownups being in charge once again: precisely what Biden was offering in comparison with the utter chaos of the Trump administration.
Let us be clear: anti-populism worked here. Biden was able to pull together a loose coalition of disparate groups in the name of defeating Trump – leftists, centrist Democrats, the so-called moderate Republicans of the “Never Trumpers” and Lincoln Project strand. But what now? With Trump (nearly) out of the way, what on earth do these groups have to agree on? “Decency”? “Normalcy”? These are not the basis for a sustainable ideological project or the makings of newly forged political identity. They have served their purpose as part of an electoral strategy, but there is little long-term to grasp on to here, and serious political imagination and courage is needed to forge a way out of this.
As such, while the embrace of centrism may be enticing at present as Biden calls for unity, compromise and consensus, it is important to keep in mind that such a form of politics often ends up eventually feeding into the desire for populism. Indeed, political theorists such as Chantal Mouffe have explicitly blamed such “third wayism”, which seeks to steer “not right, nor left”, for the rise of right populism in Europe. The American people have every right to demand not “normal”, but serious systemic change in a fractured and deeply unequal nation. It is not difficult to imagine how a failure to meet these challenges could create the conditions in which enough of the populace is discontented and alienated from political, economic and social life that they are willing to roll the dice on a right-populist once again.
So, let the anti-populists enjoy a much-deserved electoral victory. The Trump era is over, and, in the end, Biden was the person to deliver them from the misery that Trump had lorded over for the past four years. But let’s not be naive: you don’t defeat populism in the long run simply by being anti-populist. The longer struggle of what a Biden presidency will mean now begins.


theguardian--2020-11-18--End the odes to political 'civility'. Do you really think Republicans will reciprocate? | Jan-Werner

End the odes to political 'civility'. Do you really think Republicans will reciprocate? | Jan-Werner Mueller

For four years , Donald Trump and the Republican party have been riding roughshod over long-established norms of American democracy .
They have pushed to the legal limits of what they can do ( and sometimes beyond ) .
They have not so much ignored any opposition as declared it illegitimate .
In response , and in the face of intense national polarization , politicians and pundits have appealed to moderation , civility and the common good .
One of the biggest proponents of that attitude is President-elect Joe Biden , who , in his victory speech , said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as our enemy .
We are not enemies .
We are Americans.
” Now that Trump has lost , the political survivors of the Republican party may rush to join that chorus .
Biden , committed to re-establishing “ normalcy ” , will probably rejoice at the prospect of returning to the good old days of chummy bipartisanship .
Dianne Feinstein already gave a preview , when she thanked Lindsey Graham for his “ leadership ” in the plainly illegitimate Amy Coney Barrett confirmation process and literally embraced one of Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to four years , political moderation might be a particularly alluring siren call to a weak Democratic president who may not control the Senate or have a strong majority in the House of Representatives .
Here ’ s the problem , however : “ working across the aisle ” is not an ideal in itself .
If we expect politics to look like an impartial pursuit of the common good or think that there will be consensus if we all follow the rules , as the neoconservative writer Anne Applebaum has suggested , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over and over .
Rather , we must learn to distinguish between democratic and undemocratic forms of political conflict – and properly sanction those engaged in the latter .
Polarization is not a given .
Culture does not automatically determine politics ; we are not fated to debate all issues in terms of cliched contrasts between “ flyover country ” and “ liberal coasts ” .
Some social scientists like to reduce politics to psychology ; they claim that humans are hardwired for “ tribalism ” or , put less politely , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t true .
In fact , such accounts are curiously apolitical , as well as ahistorical .
They can not explain why , if tribalism is our universal fate , some democracies miraculously appear to escape it , and why some get by without endless culture wars , even if their internal differences are no smaller than in the US .
Polarization isn ’ t an objectively given reality ; it ’ s a rightwing political project and , not least , it ’ s big business – just look at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divisions and reduce all policy questions to questions of cultural belonging .
What makes them distinctive is not their criticism of elites , but the invidious suggestion that not every citizen is part of what such politicians often call “ the real people ” .
Trump told four congresswomen to go home to their shitholish countries ; his sycophant Jim Jordan tweeted that “ Americans love America .
They don ’ t want their neighborhoods turning into San Francisco.
” This strategy has worked well enough for a Republican party whose economic policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large majorities of Americans actually want .
For a counter-majoritarian party of plutocratic populism , riling people up with apocalyptic visions of “ real America ” being destroyed by black and brown people is not an add-on , but the core mechanism of an electoral outrage-and-grievances machine oiled with resources from the 0.01 % .
The noise of that machine effectively keeps people distracted from the plutocratic policies most Americans find unappealing .
Fierce partisanship is not in itself a symptom of politics gone wrong .
On the contrary : we would not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deep disagreements and divisions – which are inevitable , as long as we live in a free society .
The problem arises when disagreement translates into disrespect .
Disrespect doesn ’ t mean just being impolite ; it means denying the standing of particular citizens – and , as a logical next step , actively trying to disenfranchise people .
Republicans have been working towards a situation in which a combination of voter suppression and what the philosopher Kate Manne has called “ trickle-down aggression ” – acts of private political intimidation tacitly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power and relevance of many Americans in a way favorable to the interests of the Republican party .
None of this is to say that culture is off-limits for democratic conflict .
Of course , it ’ s not always clear how abortion , for instance , is really about “ culture ” .
But even deep moral disagreements can be accommodated in a democracy – provided that both winners and losers have another chance to fight the fight .
Contrary to Mitch McConnell ’ s gloating , losers don ’ t just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hold winners accountable and develop systematic policy alternatives .
Democracy always allows for second thoughts ; it ’ s only when the stakes become absolutely existential , or religious , that society gets locked in a scorched-earth , zero-sum battle .
What if rough play in politics – not pretty , but not illegitimate – becomes truly unfair play ?
Some theorists think the losing side should sacrifice for the sake of keeping the greater democratic whole together .
But democracy can not mean dividing politics between suckers and scoundrels , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Game theorists tell us that we can re-establish proper rule-following by answering every tat with a tit .
But responding to unfairness with unfairness might lead to a downward spiral of norms violations ; fighting fire with fire could burn down the house as a whole .
It is crucial to realize that not all norm violations in political conflict are the same .
Not every invention of an insulting nickname on Twitter must be answered with the same childishness ( of which even Trumpists must be tired by now ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters is not somehow keeping out partisans of the other side .
Mechanical tit-for-tat retaliation – even if sometimes emotionally satisfying – should be resisted in favor of could be called democracy-preserving or even democracy-enhancing reciprocity : measures the other side won ’ t like , but which can be justified with genuine democratic principles : such as giving statehood to DC and Puerto Rico , or abolishing the electoral college .
Of course , McConnell sees these proposals as merely a power grab ; yet a party that tries to construct new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counter-majoritarian institutions like the supreme court and relying on the votes of what Lindsey Graham once called “ angry white guys ” , would welcome the contest for new voters .
Fair partisan fights can restore democracy , not kitschy appeals to unity and bipartisanship .
• None Jan-Werner Mueller is a professor at Princeton and currently also a fellow at the Institute of Advanced Study in Berlin .
Democracy Rules is forthcoming from Farrar Straus & Giroux and Penguin

For four years, Donald Trump and the Republican party have been riding roughshod over long-established norms of American democracy. They have pushed to the legal limits of what they can do (and sometimes beyond). They have not so much ignored any opposition as declared it illegitimate. In response, and in the face of intense national polarization, politicians and pundits have appealed to moderation, civility and the common good. One of the biggest proponents of that attitude is President-elect Joe Biden, who, in his victory speech, said, “We must stop treating our opponents as our enemy. We are not enemies. We are Americans.” Now that Trump has lost, the political survivors of the Republican party may rush to join that chorus.
Biden, committed to re-establishing “normalcy”, will probably rejoice at the prospect of returning to the good old days of chummy bipartisanship. Dianne Feinstein already gave a preview, when she thanked Lindsey Graham for his “leadership” in the plainly illegitimate Amy Coney Barrett confirmation process and literally embraced one of Trump’s worst lackeys. In the coming two to four years, political moderation might be a particularly alluring siren call to a weak Democratic president who may not control the Senate or have a strong majority in the House of Representatives.
Here’s the problem, however: “working across the aisle” is not an ideal in itself. If we expect politics to look like an impartial pursuit of the common good or think that there will be consensus if we all follow the rules, as the neoconservative writer Anne Applebaum has suggested, then we are bound to be disappointed over and over. Rather, we must learn to distinguish between democratic and undemocratic forms of political conflict – and properly sanction those engaged in the latter.
Polarization is not a given. Culture does not automatically determine politics; we are not fated to debate all issues in terms of cliched contrasts between “flyover country” and “liberal coasts”. Some social scientists like to reduce politics to psychology; they claim that humans are hardwired for “tribalism” or, put less politely, for groups hating each other. That isn’t true. In fact, such accounts are curiously apolitical, as well as ahistorical. They cannot explain why, if tribalism is our universal fate, some democracies miraculously appear to escape it, and why some get by without endless culture wars, even if their internal differences are no smaller than in the US.
Polarization isn’t an objectively given reality; it’s a rightwing political project and, not least, it’s big business – just look at the talk radio millionaires. Rightwing populists deepen divisions and reduce all policy questions to questions of cultural belonging. What makes them distinctive is not their criticism of elites, but the invidious suggestion that not every citizen is part of what such politicians often call “the real people”. Trump told four congresswomen to go home to their shitholish countries; his sycophant Jim Jordan tweeted that “Americans love America. They don’t want their neighborhoods turning into San Francisco.”
This strategy has worked well enough for a Republican party whose economic policies are utterly out of line with what large majorities of Americans actually want. For a counter-majoritarian party of plutocratic populism, riling people up with apocalyptic visions of “real America” being destroyed by black and brown people is not an add-on, but the core mechanism of an electoral outrage-and-grievances machine oiled with resources from the 0.01%. The noise of that machine effectively keeps people distracted from the plutocratic policies most Americans find unappealing.
Fierce partisanship is not in itself a symptom of politics gone wrong. On the contrary: we would not need democracy if we did not have deep disagreements and divisions – which are inevitable, as long as we live in a free society. The problem arises when disagreement translates into disrespect. Disrespect doesn’t mean just being impolite; it means denying the standing of particular citizens – and, as a logical next step, actively trying to disenfranchise people. Republicans have been working towards a situation in which a combination of voter suppression and what the philosopher Kate Manne has called “trickle-down aggression” – acts of private political intimidation tacitly endorsed by Trump – shrinks the political power and relevance of many Americans in a way favorable to the interests of the Republican party.
None of this is to say that culture is off-limits for democratic conflict. Of course, it’s not always clear how abortion, for instance, is really about “culture”. But even deep moral disagreements can be accommodated in a democracy – provided that both winners and losers have another chance to fight the fight. Contrary to Mitch McConnell’s gloating, losers don’t just “go home”, but get to hold winners accountable and develop systematic policy alternatives. Democracy always allows for second thoughts; it’s only when the stakes become absolutely existential, or religious, that society gets locked in a scorched-earth, zero-sum battle.
What if rough play in politics – not pretty, but not illegitimate – becomes truly unfair play? Some theorists think the losing side should sacrifice for the sake of keeping the greater democratic whole together. But democracy cannot mean dividing politics between suckers and scoundrels, as the political scientist Andreas Schedler puts it. Game theorists tell us that we can re-establish proper rule-following by answering every tat with a tit. But responding to unfairness with unfairness might lead to a downward spiral of norms violations; fighting fire with fire could burn down the house as a whole.
It is crucial to realize that not all norm violations in political conflict are the same. Not every invention of an insulting nickname on Twitter must be answered with the same childishness (of which even Trumpists must be tired by now). The best answer to suppression of our voters is not somehow keeping out partisans of the other side. Mechanical tit-for-tat retaliation – even if sometimes emotionally satisfying – should be resisted in favor of could be called democracy-preserving or even democracy-enhancing reciprocity: measures the other side won’t like, but which can be justified with genuine democratic principles: such as giving statehood to DC and Puerto Rico, or abolishing the electoral college.
Of course, McConnell sees these proposals as merely a power grab; yet a party that tries to construct new majorities, as opposed to just capturing counter-majoritarian institutions like the supreme court and relying on the votes of what Lindsey Graham once called “angry white guys”, would welcome the contest for new voters. Fair partisan fights can restore democracy, not kitschy appeals to unity and bipartisanship.