thebulwark--2020-10-13--The Coronavirus Is Killing Democracy

The Coronavirus Is Killing Democracy

The COVID-19 pandemic has dealt a blow to American exceptionalism .
In all the worst ways—number of deaths , incoherence of government response , international irrelevance—the United States has exceeded both its allies and rivals .
In the degradation of the institutions of free society and good government , America has found itself succumbing to tragic international trends .
For the past 14 years , democracy around the world has been in decline , including in the United States , which has seen its score slip by more than 7 percent since 2013 .
A new report by Freedom House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the global trend .
Not letting a serious crisis go to waste , leaders on every continent are grasping their power more tightly .
Around the world , from Sri Lanka to Turkey and from Hungary to Bolivia , rulers have been taking advantage of the pandemic to erode political rights and postpone elections .
This is not only objectionable on its own merits .
According to the report , these measures are also diminishing confidence in governments , which makes containing the pandemic even more difficult .
Among the study ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they distrust what they are hearing about the pandemic from [ their country ’ s ] national government.
” Naturally , this lack of confidence is higher in less free countries , though a majority of Americans also distrust what the president says about a possible COVID-19 vaccine .
The spread of disinformation has not helped , either .
Deliberately misleading information sometimes originates in the confusion of social media crowds , but it also often comes from government officials .
A Polish respondent complained that Polish official are “ making unfounded statements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is similar to the trends in the United States , where politicians are misleading the public in response to pressure from their constituents to be misled .
Independent media are usually bulwarks against misinformation , but not always , and not where they don ’ t exist .
In countries rated by Freedom House as “ Not Free , ” independent media exist in the margins or not at all .
To make matters worse , in many countries , freedoms of the press and expression have been under assault in the name @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minister Viktor Orbán has criminalized reporting false news , which is defined by his own government .
In Kyrgyzstan , a respondent said that “ Medical workers who openly spoke out about the problems they encountered were forced to apologize and recant their claims on video.
” The Rwandan government has been cracking down on journalists who have been reporting on COVID-19 related issues .
But the press aren ’ t the only victims of political repression .
In several countries , elections have been postponed over and over again .
Democracy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back their operations due to lockdowns .
Some leaders have indefinitely suspended parliaments or used emergency measures to increase their influence over their legislatures .
And , naturally , minorities , likely to be poorer due to systemic injustices , have suffered the most due to lack of access to government assistance .
In Brazil and some other countries , national governments have deliberately designed relief measures to exclude minority parts of the population .
In this dark picture , there are shades of light .
Some of the Brazilian president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country ’ s independent judiciary .
A federal judge recently blocked an effort by Texas Governor Greg Abbott to limit ballot drop-off locations to one per county .
South Korea and New Zealand , benefiting from their consolidated democratic institutions and wealth , have been able to go ahead with their elections as scheduled .
Even though media have been under assault , support for them has risen around the world as people are seeking more information .
The report is careful to distinguish that even though “ democracy is suffering around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand for it has not been extinguished.
” To combat the erosion of liberty , Freedom House makes several recommendations , chief among the establishment an ambassador-at-large for promotion freedom of the press around the world .
The State Department already has ambassadors-at-large for counterterrorism , global women ’ s issues , AIDS , international religious freedom , global criminal justice , and human trafficking—press freedom seems almost overlooked .
Other proposals include the Protecting Human Rights During Pandemic Act , which would ensure pro-democracy organizations have access to necessary resources during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corporate Transparency Act ( respectively the Senate and House versions of the same bill ) which “ prohibit corrupt actors from hiding behind shell corporations.
” All three bills enjoy bipartisan support .
The portion of the report is dedicated to how the pandemic has hurt our own democracy in the United States cuts the deepest .
At the end of the day , it doesn ’ t matter how much of funding democracy organizations receive , as necessary as they are , or which persons and entities the U.S. government sanctions for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains the beacon of democracy and its guarantor .
Washington ’ s dysfunction over the past many years and the current and previous administrations ’ lack of dedication to and investment in protecting and promoting democracy around the world have contributed to the rapid decline of democracy .
The pandemic has just accelerated that trend .
This is not just bad news on moral grounds .
Democracies are natural allies of each other against autocracies that threaten them .
With the return of great power competition against China and Russia , the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next administration should take note .

The COVID-19 pandemic has dealt a blow to American exceptionalism. In all the worst ways—number of deaths, incoherence of government response, international irrelevance—the United States has exceeded both its allies and rivals. In the degradation of the institutions of free society and good government, America has found itself succumbing to tragic international trends. For the past 14 years, democracy around the world has been in decline, including in the United States, which has seen its score slip by more than 7 percent since 2013. A new report by Freedom House shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the global trend. Not letting a serious crisis go to waste, leaders on every continent are grasping their power more tightly.
Around the world, from Sri Lanka to Turkey and from Hungary to Bolivia, rulers have been taking advantage of the pandemic to erode political rights and postpone elections. This is not only objectionable on its own merits. According to the report, these measures are also diminishing confidence in governments, which makes containing the pandemic even more difficult. Among the study’s respondents, 62 percent said that “they distrust what they are hearing about the pandemic from [their country’s] national government.” Naturally, this lack of confidence is higher in less free countries, though a majority of Americans also distrust what the president says about a possible COVID-19 vaccine.
The spread of disinformation has not helped, either. Deliberately misleading information sometimes originates in the confusion of social media crowds, but it also often comes from government officials. A Polish respondent complained that Polish official are “making unfounded statements not based on actual data.” This is similar to the trends in the United States, where politicians are misleading the public in response to pressure from their constituents to be misled.
Independent media are usually bulwarks against misinformation, but not always, and not where they don’t exist. In countries rated by Freedom House as “Not Free,” independent media exist in the margins or not at all. To make matters worse, in many countries, freedoms of the press and expression have been under assault in the name of fighting the pandemic. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has criminalized reporting false news, which is defined by his own government. In Kyrgyzstan, a respondent said that “Medical workers who openly spoke out about the problems they encountered were forced to apologize and recant their claims on video.” The Rwandan government has been cracking down on journalists who have been reporting on COVID-19 related issues.
But the press aren’t the only victims of political repression. In several countries, elections have been postponed over and over again. Democracy and human rights professionals have had to scale back their operations due to lockdowns. Some leaders have indefinitely suspended parliaments or used emergency measures to increase their influence over their legislatures. And, naturally, minorities, likely to be poorer due to systemic injustices, have suffered the most due to lack of access to government assistance. In Brazil and some other countries, national governments have deliberately designed relief measures to exclude minority parts of the population.
In this dark picture, there are shades of light. Some of the Brazilian president’s policies have been struck down by the country’s independent judiciary. A federal judge recently blocked an effort by Texas Governor Greg Abbott to limit ballot drop-off locations to one per county. South Korea and New Zealand, benefiting from their consolidated democratic institutions and wealth, have been able to go ahead with their elections as scheduled. Even though media have been under assault, support for them has risen around the world as people are seeking more information. The report is careful to distinguish that even though “democracy is suffering around the world, but the public’s demand for it has not been extinguished.”
To combat the erosion of liberty, Freedom House makes several recommendations, chief among the establishment an ambassador-at-large for promotion freedom of the press around the world. The State Department already has ambassadors-at-large for counterterrorism, global women’s issues, AIDS, international religious freedom, global criminal justice, and human trafficking—press freedom seems almost overlooked.
Other proposals include the Protecting Human Rights During Pandemic Act, which would ensure pro-democracy organizations have access to necessary resources during the pandemic, and ILLICIT CASH Act or Corporate Transparency Act (respectively the Senate and House versions of the same bill) which “prohibit corrupt actors from hiding behind shell corporations.” All three bills enjoy bipartisan support.
The portion of the report is dedicated to how the pandemic has hurt our own democracy in the United States cuts the deepest. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter how much of funding democracy organizations receive, as necessary as they are, or which persons and entities the U.S. government sanctions for human rights abuses. The United States remains the beacon of democracy and its guarantor. Washington’s dysfunction over the past many years and the current and previous administrations’ lack of dedication to and investment in protecting and promoting democracy around the world have contributed to the rapid decline of democracy. The pandemic has just accelerated that trend.
This is not just bad news on moral grounds. Democracies are natural allies of each other against autocracies that threaten them. With the return of great power competition against China and Russia, the United States needs a freer world. The next administration should take note.


thebulwark--2020-10-13--The Trouble with Trump’s Gag Orders

The Trouble with Trump’s Gag Orders

The pull-out-all-the-stops efforts of medical professionals at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center to stave off serious COVID-related illness for President Trump seemed to have worked .
The White House physician has announced , albeit rather cryptically , that , barely 10 days after the president ’ s emergency hospitalization , he is no longer contagious and is ready to hit the campaign trail amid thousands of maskless followers .
But for the folks at Walter Reed , excellent care is not enough for Trump .
Many were reportedly asked to sign nondisclosure agreements ( NDAs ) last November , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons and on what appeared to be an emergency basis .
Well , like all things Trump , the relevant question is not whether the law allows him to gag military doctors and nurses , but whether there are consequences for his attempts to do so .
Without consequences , he can do as he pleases—as we ’ ve seen ad nauseam for four years and counting .
The bottom line is that government NDAs to protect classified information and private trade secrets are common and legitimate .
But NDAs aimed at muzzling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump are not legally authorized , and in fact probably violate both whistleblower laws and the First Amendment .
Still , even if the NDAs are not legally enforceable , the fear of retribution from Team Trump is enough to keep people quiet—which is why Congress must step up and pass a new law that bans this practice outright , with a private right of action to sue the government for money damages and injunctive relief if a future administration were to pick up the Trumpian baton in this regard .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transparency in government .
Congress has passed a number of statutes ensuring that government actions see the light of day , most prominently the Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA ) , which affords regular people—and the press—the ability to petition the federal government for disclosure of records .
( To the extent that private citizens like Rudy Giuliani do the work of the federal government by , say , acting as faux diplomats on personal missions for Trump , their records are not covered by the FOIA . )
The FOIA contains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government to keep certain information confidential , including information that ’ s properly classified in the interests of national security , commercial trade secrets , some private personnel records , and information that bears on the deliberative or policy-making processes of an agency .
It is in the public interest—for reasons of national security , competitiveness , individual privacy , and so on—to protect these kinds of information .
Courts addressing NDAs signed by former federal employees have confirmed this very concept .
In McGehee v. Casey , for example , the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Circuit held in 1983 that a CIA employee retains “ a strong First Amendment interest in ensuring that CIA censorship of his [ work ] results from a proper classification of the censored portions.
” But the court found that if an NDA “ does not extend to unclassified materials , ” the CIA could not censor such material “ contractually or otherwise.
” Consider President Trump ’ s NDAs , which reportedly include language barring White House employees from sharing any information they obtained in the building .
The agreement proffered to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as she described it in her White House memoir , would have banned her from discussing any derogatory information about the Trump family as well as that of Vice President Mike Pence .
In 2016 , Trump campaign employees signed NDAs with language so draconian that any disclosure of “ any information with respect to the personal life , political affairs , and/or business affairs of Mr. Trump or of any Family Member ” could trigger a $ 1.5 million claim—a sum that the campaign sought against a former campaign worker for allegedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as a matter of routine contract law , courts will refuse to enforce agreements that are so one-sided as to violate foundational notions of good public policy .
And NDAs are generally construed narrowly by courts even in purely private-sector settings—meaning that the employee ’ s ability to speak gets the benefit of the doubt .
But litigation is costly .
For federal employees , Congress has gone one step further to protect employees ’ right to speak .
The Whistleblower Protection Act ( WPA ) “ prohibits individuals in positions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ against a government employee in certain circumstances , particularly because of any disclosure of information by an employee .
.
.
which the employee .
.
.
reasonably believes evidences .
.
.
a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.
” So if a federal employee witnessing Trump being Trump has concerns about the health or safety of the public as a result , federal law protects that employee ’ s ability to safely make the threat known—regardless of Trump ’ s NDA .
But again , as Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and contractors in the private sector , the threat of legal action—even if frivolous—is often enough to motivate people to keep quiet , even if that means forgoing their First Amendment rights .
As of 2016 , Trump had been involved in a whopping 3,500 lawsuits .
After nearly four years in the White House , it ’ s even more abundantly clear that Trump and his cronies will stoop to inconceivable lows in order to vindicate him .
With 215,000 Americans dead from a virus that did not claim Donald Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Walter Reed have much larger personal and professional priorities than jousting with Trump in the courts over the terms of a piece of paper .
Under a Biden administration , a functioning Congress needs to amend the law to outright ban federal gag orders with zero public-policy justification .
In a democracy , the public has a right to know what its government is up to .

The pull-out-all-the-stops efforts of medical professionals at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center to stave off serious COVID-related illness for President Trump seemed to have worked. The White House physician has announced, albeit rather cryptically, that, barely 10 days after the president’s emergency hospitalization, he is no longer contagious and is ready to hit the campaign trail amid thousands of maskless followers. But for the folks at Walter Reed, excellent care is not enough for Trump. Many were reportedly asked to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) last November, when he was taken there for obscure reasons and on what appeared to be an emergency basis.
Is this legal?
Well, like all things Trump, the relevant question is not whether the law allows him to gag military doctors and nurses, but whether there are consequences for his attempts to do so. Without consequences, he can do as he pleases—as we’ve seen ad nauseam for four years and counting.
The bottom line is that government NDAs to protect classified information and private trade secrets are common and legitimate. But NDAs aimed at muzzling people from speaking about anything relating to Donald Trump are not legally authorized, and in fact probably violate both whistleblower laws and the First Amendment.
Still, even if the NDAs are not legally enforceable, the fear of retribution from Team Trump is enough to keep people quiet—which is why Congress must step up and pass a new law that bans this practice outright, with a private right of action to sue the government for money damages and injunctive relief if a future administration were to pick up the Trumpian baton in this regard.
The Constitution does not contain any language requiring transparency in government. Congress has passed a number of statutes ensuring that government actions see the light of day, most prominently the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which affords regular people—and the press—the ability to petition the federal government for disclosure of records. (To the extent that private citizens like Rudy Giuliani do the work of the federal government by, say, acting as faux diplomats on personal missions for Trump, their records are not covered by the FOIA.)
The FOIA contains a number of exemptions that allow the government to keep certain information confidential, including information that’s properly classified in the interests of national security, commercial trade secrets, some private personnel records, and information that bears on the deliberative or policy-making processes of an agency. It is in the public interest—for reasons of national security, competitiveness, individual privacy, and so on—to protect these kinds of information.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Courts addressing NDAs signed by former federal employees have confirmed this very concept. In McGehee v. Casey, for example, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held in 1983 that a CIA employee retains “a strong First Amendment interest in ensuring that CIA censorship of his [work] results from a proper classification of the censored portions.” But the court found that if an NDA “does not extend to unclassified materials,” the CIA could not censor such material “contractually or otherwise.”
Consider President Trump’s NDAs, which reportedly include language barring White House employees from sharing any information they obtained in the building. The agreement proffered to former Trump adviser Omarosa Manigault Newman, as she described it in her White House memoir, would have banned her from discussing any derogatory information about the Trump family as well as that of Vice President Mike Pence. In 2016, Trump campaign employees signed NDAs with language so draconian that any disclosure of “any information with respect to the personal life, political affairs, and/or business affairs of Mr. Trump or of any Family Member” could trigger a $1.5 million claim—a sum that the campaign sought against a former campaign worker for allegedly violating the NDA.
To be sure, as a matter of routine contract law, courts will refuse to enforce agreements that are so one-sided as to violate foundational notions of good public policy. And NDAs are generally construed narrowly by courts even in purely private-sector settings—meaning that the employee’s ability to speak gets the benefit of the doubt. But litigation is costly.
For federal employees, Congress has gone one step further to protect employees’ right to speak. The Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) “prohibits individuals in positions of authority from taking a ‘personnel action’ against a government employee in certain circumstances, particularly because of any disclosure of information by an employee . . . which the employee . . . reasonably believes evidences . . . a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.” So if a federal employee witnessing Trump being Trump has concerns about the health or safety of the public as a result, federal law protects that employee’s ability to safely make the threat known—regardless of Trump’s NDA.
But again, as Donald Trump knows from decades of bullying employees and contractors in the private sector, the threat of legal action—even if frivolous—is often enough to motivate people to keep quiet, even if that means forgoing their First Amendment rights. As of 2016, Trump had been involved in a whopping 3,500 lawsuits. After nearly four years in the White House, it’s even more abundantly clear that Trump and his cronies will stoop to inconceivable lows in order to vindicate him. With 215,000 Americans dead from a virus that did not claim Donald Trump’s life, the medical staffers at Walter Reed have much larger personal and professional priorities than jousting with Trump in the courts over the terms of a piece of paper.
Under a Biden administration, a functioning Congress needs to amend the law to outright ban federal gag orders with zero public-policy justification. In a democracy, the public has a right to know what its government is up to.


thebulwark--2020-10-13--Obama-Trump Voters Say the Darndest Things!

Back in the benighted 1990s , one of Chris Rock ’ s signature routines was a bit on why O.J .
Simpson might have killed his ex-wife : So , you got ta think about O.J.
’ s situation : $ 25,000 a month [ in alimony ] , another guy driving around in his car , f—ing his wife , in a house he ’ s still paying for .
Now , I ’ m not saying he shoulda killed her .
.
.
On Thursday night , I was reminded of that bit as I interviewed 13 Obama-to-Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Detroit and Saginaw .
Our timing was impeccable .
Federal authorities had announced a few hours earlier that they ’ d filed charges against six men for attempting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer .
What did her constituents think of this dramatic news ?
Here are a couple of responses : • “ She ’ s basically been running our state like a dictator .
She ’ s been breaking all the laws of our state constitution .
So , honestly , I ’ m not really surprised to hear that there was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hatched against her.
” • “ Most of the people here in Michigan are fed up with Whitmer .
It ’ s all about her .
It ’ s all about politics .
She doesn ’ t care about the businesses ; she doesn ’ t care about Michigan .
And I don ’ t want anybody to get kidnapped .
Don ’ t get me wrong .
But I think people are truly fed up , and we just .
.
.
don ’ t know where to turn.
” They weren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her .
.
.
but they understand !
There seems to be a lot of this kind of thinking going around .
In recent weeks , I ’ ve heard things from focus groups that I never imagined would bubble up in normal conversation .
On September 30 , several Obama-to-Trump voters in Ohio offered a litany of conspiracy theories tied to : the “ scam-demic ” —meaning the exaggerated severity of the pandemic ; Joe Biden ’ s apparent ability to read hidden messages during the debate using secret-agent style contact lenses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These are not topics I asked about .
The voters brought them up on their own .
Curious how far and wide the Qanon-related Hollywood conspiracy has spread , I specifically asked about it at my next focus group on October 8 .
Ten of the 13 Michigan respondents had not only heard about it , but said that they thought it was true .
When I asked why they believed the conspiracy theory was true , here is some of the evidence they offered : • “ Corey Feldman came out and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re hushing him.
” • “ I ’ ve watched a couple documentaries on it , one by Corey Feldman .
I mean .
.
.
it seems like it [ fits ] with the direction that the state ’ s going now that they ’ ve lowered the consensual age to 14 .
That ’ s crazy ; that ’ s crazy .
I don ’ t even understand how California can do that and still have any kind of morality.
” • “ Movie mogul people seem to be attracted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their range , but perfect for arm-candy and other things.
” • “ I worked with a lady for a year at Speedway here by my house , and back in the ’ 70s she was one of the girls , she was 15 , 16 , [ and ] would go to parties there [ in Hollywood ] , do coke , have sex , trying to get a career .
.
.
The house looks fine and everything [ from the outside ] ; they ’ d open the door , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scene .
Directors , all of them , would be involved.
” But Hollywood pedophilia wasn ’ t the only conspiracy on tap .
Another Michigander accused unspecified actors of supplying rioters with weapons : • “ We know that people have planted bricks in cities , you know , pallets of bricks in cities .
None of that has been , you know , really talked about in the media .
.
.
.
I ’ m not entirely sure if it ’ s right-wing groups or left-wing groups , or both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on that.
” And then there ’ s the subject of vaccines .
One respondent said something odd about vaccine development being purposefully slow .
I asked , “ Are you saying to me that scientists are deliberately slowing the process of getting vaccines to the public ?
” His reply : “ Yes .
I believe that 100 percent .
I believe that there ’ s a cure for cancer out there .
And the reason there ’ s not [ a cure right now ] is because , just think of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they would lose.
” Humans have a seemingly unlimited capacity to hear what they want to hear , and ignore what ’ s uncomfortable , even when true .
But most of the time , reality eventually finds a way to break through .
In the last chapter of his Memoirs , Ulysses S. Grant recounted how civilians in Georgia and the Carolinas—who throughout most of the Civil War had not felt the direct wrath of Union armies—were fed a steady diet of newspaper stories about fictitious Confederate successes .
These people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Sherman ’ s , the newspapers in his front were proclaiming daily that his army was nothing better than a mob of men who were frightened out of their wits and hastening , panic-stricken , to try to get under the cover of our navy for protection against the Southern people .
As the [ Union ] army was seen marching on triumphantly , however , the minds of the people became disabused and they saw the true state of affairs .
In turn they became disheartened , and would have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , that was before Facebook .

Back in the benighted 1990s, one of Chris Rock’s signature routines was a bit on why O.J. Simpson might have killed his ex-wife:
So, you gotta think about O.J.’s situation: $25,000 a month [in alimony], another guy driving around in his car, f—ing his wife, in a house he’s still paying for. Now, I’m not saying he shoulda killed her . . . [LONG PAUSE] . . . but I understand!
On Thursday night, I was reminded of that bit as I interviewed 13 Obama-to-Trump voters in two Michigan regions: suburban Detroit and Saginaw. Our timing was impeccable. Federal authorities had announced a few hours earlier that they’d filed charges against six men for attempting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer.
What did her constituents think of this dramatic news? Here are a couple of responses:
“She’s basically been running our state like a dictator. She’s been breaking all the laws of our state constitution. So, honestly, I’m not really surprised to hear that there was any kind of plot, or anything hatched against her.”
“Most of the people here in Michigan are fed up with Whitmer. It’s all about her. It’s all about politics. She doesn’t care about the businesses; she doesn’t care about Michigan. And I don’t want anybody to get kidnapped. Don’t get me wrong. But I think people are truly fed up, and we just . . . don’t know where to turn.”
They weren’t saying these guys shoulda kidnapped her . . . but they understand!
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
There seems to be a lot of this kind of thinking going around. In recent weeks, I’ve heard things from focus groups that I never imagined would bubble up in normal conversation.
On September 30, several Obama-to-Trump voters in Ohio offered a litany of conspiracy theories tied to: the “scam-demic”—meaning the exaggerated severity of the pandemic; Joe Biden’s apparent ability to read hidden messages during the debate using secret-agent style contact lenses; and widespread pedophilia in Hollywood. These are not topics I asked about. The voters brought them up on their own.
Curious how far and wide the Qanon-related Hollywood conspiracy has spread, I specifically asked about it at my next focus group on October 8. Ten of the 13 Michigan respondents had not only heard about it, but said that they thought it was true.
When I asked why they believed the conspiracy theory was true, here is some of the evidence they offered:
“Corey Feldman came out and tried talking about it, but they’re hushing him.”
“I’ve watched a couple documentaries on it, one by Corey Feldman. I mean . . . it seems like it [fits] with the direction that the state’s going now that they’ve lowered the consensual age to 14. That’s crazy; that’s crazy. I don’t even understand how California can do that and still have any kind of morality.”
“Movie mogul people seem to be attracted to younger girls that are just outside their range, but perfect for arm-candy and other things.”
“I worked with a lady for a year at Speedway here by my house, and back in the ’70s she was one of the girls, she was 15, 16, [and] would go to parties there [in Hollywood], do coke, have sex, trying to get a career . . . The house looks fine and everything [from the outside]; they’d open the door, and it was just a whole different scene. Directors, all of them, would be involved.”
But Hollywood pedophilia wasn’t the only conspiracy on tap. Another Michigander accused unspecified actors of supplying rioters with weapons:
“We know that people have planted bricks in cities, you know, pallets of bricks in cities. None of that has been, you know, really talked about in the media. . . . I’m not entirely sure if it’s right-wing groups or left-wing groups, or both. I’m not really clear on that.”
And then there’s the subject of vaccines. One respondent said something odd about vaccine development being purposefully slow. I asked, “Are you saying to me that scientists are deliberately slowing the process of getting vaccines to the public?”
His reply: “Yes. I believe that 100 percent. I believe that there’s a cure for cancer out there. And the reason there’s not [a cure right now] is because, just think of all the billions of dollars in funding that they would lose.”
Humans have a seemingly unlimited capacity to hear what they want to hear, and ignore what’s uncomfortable, even when true. But most of the time, reality eventually finds a way to break through.
In the last chapter of his Memoirs, Ulysses S. Grant recounted how civilians in Georgia and the Carolinas—who throughout most of the Civil War had not felt the direct wrath of Union armies—were fed a steady diet of newspaper stories about fictitious Confederate successes. These people believed them.
Grant recalled:
Even during this march of Sherman’s, the newspapers in his front were proclaiming daily that his army was nothing better than a mob of men who were frightened out of their wits and hastening, panic-stricken, to try to get under the cover of our navy for protection against the Southern people. As the [Union] army was seen marching on triumphantly, however, the minds of the people became disabused and they saw the true state of affairs. In turn they became disheartened, and would have been glad to submit without compromise.
But of course, that was before Facebook.


thebulwark--2020-10-13--These Seven Counties Are Trump’s Key to Reelection. They’re Going Badly for Him.

In March of 2019 I asked a simple question : President Donald Trump won the swing states of Pennsylvania , Michigan and Wisconsin by a combined 77,000 votes .
What counties in those states would have changed that if they had not swung his way ?
The standard was simple .
Find the counties that voted for Barack Obama in 2012 and flipped to Trump in 2016 .
Get the differences in those county votes between those two elections , and find a few that add up to the amount Trump won the state by .
Trump won by 10,704 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 22,748 in Wisconsin .
We pared it down to just seven counties total—three in Pennsylvania , one in Michigan , and three in Wisconsin .
Think about it this way : There are 3,142 counties in the United States .
President Trump could lose reelection if 3,135 counties voted as they did in 2016 , but 7 counties do not .
That was 18 months ago , before Joe Biden , before COVID , before George Floyd .
So here are how those seven counties are faring a few weeks a before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beat Clinton by 5,000 votes after Obama beat Romney by 6,000 .
Northampton is in the northeast part of the state , and has been transitioning from the manufacturing economy to transportation and service .
In Pennsylvania ’ s 7th Congressional District , which includes Northampton County , Biden is ahead of Trump 51 percent to 44 percent in one recent poll .
In that poll—which was taken before the the debate and Trump ’ s COVID infection—voters said the economy was the top issue , followed by the pandemic , health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got a lot of attention recently when it was discovered that a temporary election worker had mistakenly thrown out nine overseas mail-in ballots .
In 2016 , Trump beat Clinton by nearly 20 points .
Is he holding on to that margin ?
Benjamin Toll , a political scientist at Wilkes University , said recently that “ There ’ s not a lot of evidence that Donald Trump is losing popularity in Luzerne County .
He ’ s likely to still win here .
Whether it will translate to him winning Pennsylvania is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden is doing much better than Trump is among older voters and Erie County skews older .
About 19 percent of residents are over 65 ; the median age is two years above the national average .
In Pennsylvania , according to an AARP poll , Biden is winning with voters over 65 by 11 points .
In a June survey taken in Erie County , 54 percent of the respondents said Trump was “ ineffective ” in addressing the local “ economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
” In a state where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the voter flip in Macomb County was huge in 2016 .
There have been signs—namely , reduced ad spending—that the Trump campaign has all but given up on holding Michigan .
But on the other hand , they did send Donald Trump Jr. to Macomb County in mid-September to join up with Kid Rock for a concert/boat rally combo .
As Donald Jr. told the crowd “ Close by , liberal heads must be exploding.
” But what ’ s really exploding are the number of absentee ballot applications for this election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compared with 121,000 in 2016 ) .
Not good for Trump .
Along with Kenosha County to the south , Racine has been on the front lines of the law and order issues/protests .
Trump has scored poorly in a recent statewide poll in how he has handled the protests ( 37 percent approve , 54 percent disapprove ) , but it is difficult to figure out which side Racine County is on .
The key question is whether voters there are tired of Trump stoking the fires , or think he is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a political scientist who runs the Marquette Law School poll , thinks the protests issues are taking a back seat as we get closer to the election : “ His handling of COVID-19 does appear to be having a bigger effect on people ’ s vote than either the economy or his handling of the protests.
” Taiwanese flat screen TV and LCD panel manufacturer FoxConn was supposed to invest $ 10 billion in plants and research facilities here .
The project was touted bigly by Trump .
But little has actually come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is one—will likely be much smaller than it was sold as .
Add to that the economic uncertainty stemming from having four big state university campuses ( Eau Claire , Stout , River Falls , and La Crosse ) nearby , all of whom are having to adjust to the COVID-19 pandemic .
And then there ’ s the recent Wisconsin spike in COVID-19 cases , which is hitting the county hard as well .
COVID-19 has hit this county very hard , with hospitals filling up and Green Bay becoming one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the highest number of positive cases per 100,000 people .
University of Wisconsin economist Noah Williams says that the state ’ s economic recovery seems to have slowed , if not reversed , because of the outbreak .
“ Clearly it ’ s going to depend on how long it takes to get this spike under control and get things back to normal , ” Williams said .
“ But I think there ’ s already signs that it ’ s already slowing the recovery and delaying things and certainly has ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more.
” Also : former Packer ’ s head coach Mike Holmgren has endorsed Biden .
“ Small businesses in the community are paying dearly .
The latest poll has the Green Bay area voting for Biden by a +5 margin .
In sum : Of the critical seven counties , none of them look better for Trump than they were in 2016 .
And most of them look a good deal worse .

In March of 2019 I asked a simple question: President Donald Trump won the swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin by a combined 77,000 votes. What counties in those states would have changed that if they had not swung his way?
The standard was simple. Find the counties that voted for Barack Obama in 2012 and flipped to Trump in 2016. Get the differences in those county votes between those two elections, and find a few that add up to the amount Trump won the state by. Trump won by 10,704 votes in Michigan, 44,292 in Pennsylvania and 22,748 in Wisconsin.
We pared it down to just seven counties total—three in Pennsylvania, one in Michigan, and three in Wisconsin.
Think about it this way: There are 3,142 counties in the United States. President Trump could lose reelection if 3,135 counties voted as they did in 2016, but 7 counties do not.
***
That was 18 months ago, before Joe Biden, before COVID, before George Floyd.
So here are how those seven counties are faring a few weeks a before the election.
Northampton County, PA—Trump beat Clinton by 5,000 votes after Obama beat Romney by 6,000.
Northampton is in the northeast part of the state, and has been transitioning from the manufacturing economy to transportation and service. In Pennsylvania’s 7th Congressional District, which includes Northampton County, Biden is ahead of Trump 51 percent to 44 percent in one recent poll.
In that poll—which was taken before the the debate and Trump’s COVID infection—voters said the economy was the top issue, followed by the pandemic, health care, and law and order.
Luzerne County, PA—Trump beat Clinton by 26,000 votes; Obama beat Romney by 6,000.
Luzerne got a lot of attention recently when it was discovered that a temporary election worker had mistakenly thrown out nine overseas mail-in ballots.
In 2016, Trump beat Clinton by nearly 20 points. Is he holding on to that margin? Benjamin Toll, a political scientist at Wilkes University, said recently that “There’s not a lot of evidence that Donald Trump is losing popularity in Luzerne County. He’s likely to still win here. Whether it will translate to him winning Pennsylvania is a different story.”
Erie County, PA—Trump beat Clinton by 2,000 votes; Obama beat Romney by 20,000 votes.
One spot where Biden is doing much better than Trump is among older voters and Erie County skews older. About 19 percent of residents are over 65; the median age is two years above the national average.
In Pennsylvania, according to an AARP poll, Biden is winning with voters over 65 by 11 points. In a June survey taken in Erie County, 54 percent of the respondents said Trump was “ineffective” in addressing the local “economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Macomb County, MI—Trump beat Clinton by 48,000 votes; Obama beat Romney by 16,000 votes
In a state where Trump only won by about 11,000 votes, the voter flip in Macomb County was huge in 2016.
There have been signs—namely, reduced ad spending—that the Trump campaign has all but given up on holding Michigan. But on the other hand, they did send Donald Trump Jr. to Macomb County in mid-September to join up with Kid Rock for a concert/boat rally combo. As Donald Jr. told the crowd “Close by, liberal heads must be exploding.”
But what’s really exploding are the number of absentee ballot applications for this election in the county: 215,000 this year compared with 121,000 in 2016). Not good for Trump.
Racine County, WI—Trump beat Clinton by 4,000 votes; Romney beat Obama by 3,600 votes.
Along with Kenosha County to the south, Racine has been on the front lines of the law and order issues/protests. Trump has scored poorly in a recent statewide poll in how he has handled the protests (37 percent approve, 54 percent disapprove), but it is difficult to figure out which side Racine County is on. The key question is whether voters there are tired of Trump stoking the fires, or think he is acting appropriately.
And Charles Franklin, a political scientist who runs the Marquette Law School poll, thinks the protests issues are taking a back seat as we get closer to the election: “His handling of COVID-19 does appear to be having a bigger effect on people’s vote than either the economy or his handling of the protests.”
Chippewa County, WI—Trump beat Clinton by 6,000 votes; Romney beat Obama by 150 votes.
Taiwanese flat screen TV and LCD panel manufacturer FoxConn was supposed to invest $10 billion in plants and research facilities here. The project was touted bigly by Trump. But little has actually come to fruition and the endgame—if and when there is one—will likely be much smaller than it was sold as.
Add to that the economic uncertainty stemming from having four big state university campuses (Eau Claire, Stout, River Falls, and La Crosse) nearby, all of whom are having to adjust to the COVID-19 pandemic.
And then there’s the recent Wisconsin spike in COVID-19 cases, which is hitting the county hard as well.
Brown County, WI—Trump beat Clinton by 14,000 votes; Romney beat Obama by 2,300 votes.
COVID-19 has hit this county very hard, with hospitals filling up and Green Bay becoming one of the top 20 U.S. metro areas with the highest number of positive cases per 100,000 people.
University of Wisconsin economist Noah Williams says that the state’s economic recovery seems to have slowed, if not reversed, because of the outbreak. “Clearly it’s going to depend on how long it takes to get this spike under control and get things back to normal,” Williams said. “But I think there’s already signs that it’s already slowing the recovery and delaying things and certainly has ability or the capacity to do so even more.”
Also: former Packer’s head coach Mike Holmgren has endorsed Biden. “Small businesses in the community are paying dearly. The latest poll has the Green Bay area voting for Biden by a +5 margin.
In sum: Of the critical seven counties, none of them look better for Trump than they were in 2016. And most of them look a good deal worse.


thebulwark--2020-10-13--Academic Freedom Is a Key American Advantage over China

The debate over freedom of speech on campuses has been raging for many years , and there ’ s been plenty of discussion of why limitations on speech constitute a dangerous trend for students , universities , and society more generally .
Yet these debates too often overlook the real economic damage that can be done in the education market by de jure or de facto speech codes : They , like everything , have a cost .
And that cost could be the United States ’ s edge in its competition with China .
The U.S. has one comparative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country : intellectual freedom .
Despite being one of the most expensive countries in the world to study in , American universities continue to attract the best and brightest students from around the world , including from geopolitical rivals .
More than 350,000 Chinese students alone attend tertiary educational institutions in the U.S .
It has long been feared that China could one day overtake the United States in education and research .
China already has the advantage of cheap labor , and if it were also to gain an advantage in research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see how the U.S. could retain its spot as the world ’ s premier economic power .
Yet even as countries like China invest more in education and Chinese universities continue to rise in international university rankings , the outflow of Chinese students to the U.S. showed no signs of abating before the pandemic .
And while there may come a day when Chinese universities are as well-endowed as the likes of Harvard and Yale , that won ’ t mean that Chinese students won ’ t still prefer studying in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. can speak freely , read freely , write freely , and research freely .
They don ’ t have to worry about whether the conclusions of their research contradict the party line .
They can discuss contentious or sensitive topics without having to worry that a colleague might inform on them to the authorities .
They can write articles without checking the party manifesto—or , even worse , the unwritten rules enforced with extralegal punishments .
The attractiveness of intellectual freedom to intellectuals has redounded to the benefit of American colleges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up 12 percent of the total student body in 2015 , they accounted for 30 percent of revenue from tuition at public universities .
At private universities , international students often pay the sticker price of tuition , allowing for more generous financial aid for their American peers—hence why colleges and universities went to great lengths to try and protect these students from the effects of COVID-19 and the Trump administration ’ s threats to effectively cancel student visas .
Geopolitically , the brilliance of a comparative advantage in freedom is that authoritarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hardest time trying to replicate it .
Dictatorships are built on the silence ( or collaboration ) of smart people .
One of the very first human rights abuses of the Soviet Union was the deportation of free-thinking academics on the appropriately named Philosophers ’ Ships .
In “ The Power of the Powerless , ” Vaclav Havel famously identified the threat that even one free-thinking green grocer posed to a totalitarian regime .
Free-thinking intellectuals , like Havel himself , proved even more dangerous .
There are only two ways the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
One is if the likes of China were to become Western-style democracies .
To the misfortune of over a billion people , this is unlikely to happen in the near future .
The second possibility is if the U.S. were to choose voluntarily to abandon freedom of speech , forfeiting its own advantage .
This , unfortunately , is already happening on college campuses all over America .
Since private universities are not legally bound by the first amendment , they are free to restrict the speech of their students and employees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be hurting the university ’ s image .
All too often , it takes just a small mob of activist students demanding that the administration punish a wrongthinker .
Sometimes , a Change.org petition will do the trick .
There are a million arguments against safe spaces , no-platforming , and censorship .
But one that has not been made often enough is how these practices degrade the image of America ’ s universities , and indeed America itself .
There is a reason why state propaganda outlets in Russia gleefully cover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes the U.S. look just as bad and just as repressive as Russia .
The message they want to send to their own young people can be summed up as , “ You don ’ t like not being able to speak your mind ?
Well that ’ s certainly no reason to look to America ; they ’ re just as bad !
” If you ’ re a progressive , you may protest that the censoring that you support is different—you have a noble cause ; you just don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disapproval of other peoples ’ human rights .
You ’ re not trying to silence political opponents because you don ’ t like hearing them ; you ’ re just doing it to protect the vulnerable members of society .
You may even cite Karl Popper , who famously proposed that a tolerant society must be intolerant of intolerance .
The problem is that censorship is always backed up by such appeals to the common good and to the well-being of the weak .
( The word “ censor ” itself comes from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulation of the conduct and morals of Rome.
” ) If you ’ ve grown up in a totalitarian country , you ’ ve heard all of these excuses before .
Adding to the problem , many international students hold views—on matters of race , culture , sexuality , and gender—that differ from the American mainstream , and are often at extreme variance from the views most common on an average U.S. college campus .
But although their holding and expressing such views sometimes creates uncomfortable moments , those moments could , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be nowadays , create learning experiences for both the international students and their American peers .
The universities and the American economy aren ’ t the only beneficiaries of intellectual freedom in the academy .
In a real economic way , the students themselves stand to benefit as well .
One of the reasons a college education has economic value is that it increases labor productivity .
Students learned some useful things while in school , so they can produce more widgets per hour than you could before , and more widgets means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the value of a degree is signaling .
Anyone who ’ s ever been on either side of a job interview knows that it ’ s hard to tell just by appearance whether someone is a high-productivity or a low-productivity worker .
( For simplicity , we ’ ll assume these are the only types of workers . )
Obtaining education is one way to signal high-productivity to prospective employers , because earning a degree requires some of the same skills and work ethic that being a productive worker does : showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deadlines , managing time , processing and applying new skills and information , etc .
Maybe the degree is irrelevant to the job you apply for , maybe it doesn ’ t help you make widgets faster , but that ’ s not important—the value of the degree lies in the signal it provides .
Students might not learn more at an American university than they would a university in China or elsewhere , yet the degree is far more valuable simply because the only way to earn it is through performance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ In many countries it ’ s common either to buy degrees outright , or to slip a professor a brown envelope in exchange for a higher mark .
These lax norms of academic integrity are common in China , where even plagiarism is by and large not even considered an academic offense .
Thus , even if a Chinese university and an American university were to teach the exact same curriculum and confer the exact same increase in labor productivity to their respective students , the students from the American university would receive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since the signaling value of an American education is so much higher .
Unfortunately , the very same people who are throwing away America ’ s free speech advantage are also reducing the signaling value of a U.S. college degree .
The more factors that are introduced into the degree-granting equation that don ’ t have bearing on what kind of worker the student will be , the less stock potential employers can put in the signal the degree is supposed to send .
In the most extreme case , this becomes obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some students and not to others , they would be worthless .
Yet in the name of social justice , some in academia propose complicating the equation with variables related to race and ethnicity .
Beyond the decades-old practice of affirmative action in admissions , students at UCLA and the University of Washington demanded that black students receive special “ no-hard ” dispensation on exams .
Such a practice would likely hurt exactly those it claims to help .
If special leniency in grading is only awarded to minority students , and this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and degrees of minority students—those who , arguably , stand to benefit the most from higher education—will lose value .
This also affects the United States ’ s attractiveness as a destination for international students .
Many international students , are after all people of color , and the vast majority of them are looking to earn a degree—not be handed one as part of a misguided scheme to enhance racial equality .
What happens when education loses its signaling value ?
Employers will of course still look for clues that might reveal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applicants will seek other ways to signal that they are highly productive workers , such as extracurriculars ( many of which require access to capital beyond what the education itself requires ) or having a good network and/or an influential family .
This is seriously bad news for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds , regardless of race or ethnicity , since they tend to lack connections and may not have time or resources for the extracurriculars necessary to make it in a world where their degree is no longer a bright , clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course , non-economic criteria by which to judge the limits of intellectual freedom in academia .
But in as far as the American economy is driven by human capital and innovation , the potential costs of degrading the value of an American degree—both to the student and to society—are too great to overlook .
The U.S. is facing a daunting challenge over the next century , having to confront a geopolitical rival with more than four times its population .
If this is to be the new American century , the U.S. will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every corner of the world .
This , more than maybe anything else , needs to be the cornerstone of America ’ s higher education policy .

The debate over freedom of speech on campuses has been raging for many years, and there’s been plenty of discussion of why limitations on speech constitute a dangerous trend for students, universities, and society more generally. Yet these debates too often overlook the real economic damage that can be done in the education market by de jure or de facto speech codes: They, like everything, have a cost. And that cost could be the United States’s edge in its competition with China.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The U.S. has one comparative advantage over China and every other totalitarian country: intellectual freedom. Despite being one of the most expensive countries in the world to study in, American universities continue to attract the best and brightest students from around the world, including from geopolitical rivals. More than 350,000 Chinese students alone attend tertiary educational institutions in the U.S.
It has long been feared that China could one day overtake the United States in education and research. China already has the advantage of cheap labor, and if it were also to gain an advantage in research and development, it’s hard to see how the U.S. could retain its spot as the world’s premier economic power.
Yet even as countries like China invest more in education and Chinese universities continue to rise in international university rankings, the outflow of Chinese students to the U.S. showed no signs of abating before the pandemic. And while there may come a day when Chinese universities are as well-endowed as the likes of Harvard and Yale, that won’t mean that Chinese students won’t still prefer studying in the U.S.
Generally, students and researchers in the U.S. can speak freely, read freely, write freely, and research freely. They don’t have to worry about whether the conclusions of their research contradict the party line. They can discuss contentious or sensitive topics without having to worry that a colleague might inform on them to the authorities. They can write articles without checking the party manifesto—or, even worse, the unwritten rules enforced with extralegal punishments.
The attractiveness of intellectual freedom to intellectuals has redounded to the benefit of American colleges and universities. Thought international students made up 12 percent of the total student body in 2015, they accounted for 30 percent of revenue from tuition at public universities. At private universities, international students often pay the sticker price of tuition, allowing for more generous financial aid for their American peers—hence why colleges and universities went to great lengths to try and protect these students from the effects of COVID-19 and the Trump administration’s threats to effectively cancel student visas.
Geopolitically, the brilliance of a comparative advantage in freedom is that authoritarian countries like China and Russia would have the hardest time trying to replicate it. Dictatorships are built on the silence (or collaboration) of smart people. One of the very first human rights abuses of the Soviet Union was the deportation of free-thinking academics on the appropriately named Philosophers’ Ships. In “The Power of the Powerless,” Vaclav Havel famously identified the threat that even one free-thinking green grocer posed to a totalitarian regime. Free-thinking intellectuals, like Havel himself, proved even more dangerous.
There are only two ways the U.S. could ever lose this comparative advantage. One is if the likes of China were to become Western-style democracies. To the misfortune of over a billion people, this is unlikely to happen in the near future.
The second possibility is if the U.S. were to choose voluntarily to abandon freedom of speech, forfeiting its own advantage.
This, unfortunately, is already happening on college campuses all over America. Since private universities are not legally bound by the first amendment, they are free to restrict the speech of their students and employees, muzzling those whose opinions they deem to be hurting the university’s image. All too often, it takes just a small mob of activist students demanding that the administration punish a wrongthinker. Sometimes, a Change.org petition will do the trick.
There are a million arguments against safe spaces, no-platforming, and censorship. But one that has not been made often enough is how these practices degrade the image of America’s universities, and indeed America itself. There is a reason why state propaganda outlets in Russia gleefully cover stories of cancel culture in American universities—it makes the U.S. look just as bad and just as repressive as Russia. The message they want to send to their own young people can be summed up as, “You don’t like not being able to speak your mind? Well that’s certainly no reason to look to America; they’re just as bad!”
If you’re a progressive, you may protest that the censoring that you support is different—you have a noble cause; you just don’t want anyone to be able to voice disapproval of other peoples’ human rights. You’re not trying to silence political opponents because you don’t like hearing them; you’re just doing it to protect the vulnerable members of society. You may even cite Karl Popper, who famously proposed that a tolerant society must be intolerant of intolerance.
The problem is that censorship is always backed up by such appeals to the common good and to the well-being of the weak. (The word “censor” itself comes from the Roman office which “had the regulation of the conduct and morals of Rome.”) If you’ve grown up in a totalitarian country, you’ve heard all of these excuses before.
Adding to the problem, many international students hold views—on matters of race, culture, sexuality, and gender—that differ from the American mainstream, and are often at extreme variance from the views most common on an average U.S. college campus. But although their holding and expressing such views sometimes creates uncomfortable moments, those moments could, if handled more deftly than they tend to be nowadays, create learning experiences for both the international students and their American peers.
The universities and the American economy aren’t the only beneficiaries of intellectual freedom in the academy. In a real economic way, the students themselves stand to benefit as well.
One of the reasons a college education has economic value is that it increases labor productivity. Students learned some useful things while in school, so they can produce more widgets per hour than you could before, and more widgets means more money.
But another important component in the value of a degree is signaling. Anyone who’s ever been on either side of a job interview knows that it’s hard to tell just by appearance whether someone is a high-productivity or a low-productivity worker. (For simplicity, we’ll assume these are the only types of workers.)
Obtaining education is one way to signal high-productivity to prospective employers, because earning a degree requires some of the same skills and work ethic that being a productive worker does: showing up on time, keeping track of deadlines, managing time, processing and applying new skills and information, etc. Maybe the degree is irrelevant to the job you apply for, maybe it doesn’t help you make widgets faster, but that’s not important—the value of the degree lies in the signal it provides.
Students might not learn more at an American university than they would a university in China or elsewhere, yet the degree is far more valuable simply because the only way to earn it is through performance. This is not the case everywhere. In many countries it’s common either to buy degrees outright, or to slip a professor a brown envelope in exchange for a higher mark. These lax norms of academic integrity are common in China, where even plagiarism is by and large not even considered an academic offense.
Thus, even if a Chinese university and an American university were to teach the exact same curriculum and confer the exact same increase in labor productivity to their respective students, the students from the American university would receive a higher return on their education, since the signaling value of an American education is so much higher.
Unfortunately, the very same people who are throwing away America’s free speech advantage are also reducing the signaling value of a U.S. college degree. The more factors that are introduced into the degree-granting equation that don’t have bearing on what kind of worker the student will be, the less stock potential employers can put in the signal the degree is supposed to send. In the most extreme case, this becomes obvious: If degrees were granted randomly to some students and not to others, they would be worthless.
Yet in the name of social justice, some in academia propose complicating the equation with variables related to race and ethnicity. Beyond the decades-old practice of affirmative action in admissions, students at UCLA and the University of Washington demanded that black students receive special “no-hard” dispensation on exams. Such a practice would likely hurt exactly those it claims to help. If special leniency in grading is only awarded to minority students, and this is public information, only the grades and degrees of minority students—those who, arguably, stand to benefit the most from higher education—will lose value.
This also affects the United States’s attractiveness as a destination for international students. Many international students, are after all people of color, and the vast majority of them are looking to earn a degree—not be handed one as part of a misguided scheme to enhance racial equality.
What happens when education loses its signaling value? Employers will of course still look for clues that might reveal an applicant’s productivity, and applicants will seek other ways to signal that they are highly productive workers, such as extracurriculars (many of which require access to capital beyond what the education itself requires) or having a good network and/or an influential family. This is seriously bad news for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, regardless of race or ethnicity, since they tend to lack connections and may not have time or resources for the extracurriculars necessary to make it in a world where their degree is no longer a bright, clear enough signal.
There are, of course, non-economic criteria by which to judge the limits of intellectual freedom in academia. But in as far as the American economy is driven by human capital and innovation, the potential costs of degrading the value of an American degree—both to the student and to society—are too great to overlook.
The U.S. is facing a daunting challenge over the next century, having to confront a geopolitical rival with more than four times its population. If this is to be the new American century, the U.S. will need every genius it can get from every corner of the world. This, more than maybe anything else, needs to be the cornerstone of America’s higher education policy.


thebulwark--2020-10-14--Breaking News: Not Everything Is Terrible

We devote a lot of mental energy to things that are going wrong or could go wrong .
It ’ s human nature .
As the sociobiologists teach us , our ancestors were not the ones who heard a rustling in the grass and figured , “ Eh , it ’ s probably nothing.
” We are descended from the ones who said “ What the hell was that ?
Could be a cobra .
Better run the other way.
” Vigilance is our default mode .
But seven months after the start of this plague , we shouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went more right than we expected for two reasons : 1 ) gratitude is good for the spirit and the soul , and 2 ) we must guard against catastrophizing .
Thinking back to the origins of the pandemic in March , we were beset by fear .
Would the tanking stock market be the harbinger of another Great Depression ?
Between mid-February and mid-March , the Dow Jones Industrial average lost 35 percent of its value , wiping out years of investments .
Though we ’ d seen comparable drops in 2002 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Lehman Brothers ) only to see the market rebound , we worried that a pandemic of this scale could do far more permanent damage to the economy .
We expected mass unemployment and cratering businesses .
We worried that our savings could be decimated .
We feared that the virus would be impossible to vaccinate against .
I recall listening to a virologist who noted that medical science has been searching for vaccines for the common cold , SARS , and MERS ( all coronaviruses ) for years without result .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we believed it likely that the pandemic would increase deaths from other causes as people shunned hospitals and routine care .
We thought we needed thousands more ventilators than we could manufacture .
We were concerned that essential services like electricity generation , water purification , and trash collection might be affected , compounding the suffering and contributing even more to the spread of disease .
People hoarded canned goods , toilet paper , spaghetti , bottled water , and hand sanitizer .
( I hoarded coffee . )
In March , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact , any food would be available in a week ’ s time .
There was a run on guns .
This struck me , even at the time , as overwrought .
People feared that civil strife could be in the offing , and that they might have to defend their supplies of ramen noodles and peanut butter from marauding gangs .
We worried that the lockdowns would result in a spike in suicides and that school closings would rob children and teenagers of education and socialization .
And we fretted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approval rates due to the rally-round-the-flag effect .
Seven months on , some of those worries proved to be well-grounded , but many did not .
The stock market made up all of its losses by August .
There are explanations .
People aren ’ t spending money on other things right now , so they ’ re parking their funds in equities .
Okay .
But a few months ago we feared that we were at the early stages of a massive , worldwide depression that would feature huge firms declaring bankruptcy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Street as in 1929 .
That did not happen .
That ’ s not to say the economy is in good shape .
A number of marquee firms—J .
Crew , Neiman Marcus , Gold ’ s Gym , and Hertz among others—have filed for bankruptcy .
But they continue to operate , and may yet survive .
Other signs of economic distress include the 163,000 businesses that have closed , almost 98,000 of them permanently .
That represents real hardship for owners , employees , and customers .
But out of 32.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still a tiny fraction .
Unemployment remains high at nearly 8 percent , but it has declined considerably from above 14 percent in March .
Prospects for a vaccine look promising .
As the New York Times ’ s Donald MacNeil writes , “ Sometime in the next three months , health experts say , the F.D.A .
is likely to begin granting approval to vaccines now in the works.
” There will be setbacks—Johnson and Johnson halted one of its trials over the weekend due to the unexplained illness of one volunteer—but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or vaccines by the middle of 2021 remains good .
Even as the search for a vaccine stumbles momentarily in America , it continues around the world with unparalleled international cooperation .
Medical science , to say nothing of the pharmaceutical companies ( every populist ’ s bête noire ) , is rising to the occasion and on track to save millions of lives and livelihoods .
It turned out that ventilators were not as crucial in treating this virus as expected .
Fears about the pandemic increasing deaths from other causes appear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that in March and April , the US experienced 87,000 excess deaths—meaning deaths above what was experienced in those months during the preceding five years .
About a third were attributed to causes other than COVID-19 .
People feared entering hospitals and shunned even doctors ’ offices , which increased the death rate from heart disease and diabetes .
Thanks to the efforts of frontline workers ( who deserve more gratitude than they get ) , public services like transportation , electricity generation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , water purification , and emergency services continued pretty much without a hiccup .
The lights stayed on .
The heat and electricity continued to function .
Supermarkets remained open and remarkably well-stocked .
There were shortages here and there of various commodities—yeast !
Dijon mustard !
—but nothing that could be called hardship .
And the shortages were temporary .
Companies rapidly adjusted to consumer needs .
Stores offered curbside pick-up .
Hair salons ( after they were permitted to reopen—speaking of hardship ) adopted social distancing and masks .
The toilet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in my neighborhood shared ) .
Amazon continued to deliver just about anything you wanted in record time .
We did not experience a Lord-of-the-Flies-style social collapse requiring armed defense of our pantries .
What prolonged school closings will do to children is a great unknown , and there is reason to think that teachers unions have exerted too much power in this matter .
As for depression , suicide , and other psychological effects of the pandemic , the news is mixed .
Significant numbers of adults have reported increases in depression @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particularly those caring for an elderly relative and essential workers who can not work from home .
And many women have dropped out of the labor force due to the pressure of being forced to homeschool their kids .
Adolescents , on the other hand , are faring better .
According to a new report from the Institute for Family Studies , teen mental health has improved since the pandemic and associated lockdowns began .
Compared with 2018 , fewer adolescents described themselves as depressed , lonely , or unhappy during the COVID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In 2018 , only 55 percent said they regularly slept 7 or more hours per night .
In 2020 , it jumped to 84 percent .
Teens are spending more time talking with their parents and sharing a family dinner .
A solid 53 percent reported feeling stronger and more resilient as a result of the pandemic .
Teens whose families have experienced economic hardship didn ’ t fare as well .
Twenty-six percent of those who worried about their family ’ s economic situation were depressed , compared with 13 percent who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another IFS report found that the enforced togetherness of the pandemic has improved marriages , with 58 percent saying it has made them appreciate their spouse more .
As for the effect on Trump ’ s approval ratings , well , it turns out that when people are confined to their homes facing a serious threat to their health and well-being , they are inclined to pay close attention to press conferences hosted by the president of the United States .
And close attention is the one thing from which Donald Trump can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own eyes and heard with their own ears when he suggested injecting disinfectant into the human body .
Since the president has since insisted that he was being sarcastic , here ’ s what he said : As awful as it has been , this disease was not the apocalypse we feared .
Many aspects of our society proved more resilient than we expected .
With the exception of the fellow with the not-so-good “ you-know-what , ” there is reason to look forward with something we haven ’ t felt much lately—hope @

We devote a lot of mental energy to things that are going wrong or could go wrong. It’s human nature. As the sociobiologists teach us, our ancestors were not the ones who heard a rustling in the grass and figured, “Eh, it’s probably nothing.” We are descended from the ones who said “What the hell was that? Could be a cobra. Better run the other way.” Vigilance is our default mode.
But seven months after the start of this plague, we shouldn’t lose sight of the things that went more right than we expected for two reasons: 1) gratitude is good for the spirit and the soul, and 2) we must guard against catastrophizing.
Thinking back to the origins of the pandemic in March, we were beset by fear. Would the tanking stock market be the harbinger of another Great Depression? Between mid-February and mid-March, the Dow Jones Industrial average lost 35 percent of its value, wiping out years of investments. Though we’d seen comparable drops in 2002 (the dot-com bust) and 2007 (Lehman Brothers) only to see the market rebound, we worried that a pandemic of this scale could do far more permanent damage to the economy. We expected mass unemployment and cratering businesses. We worried that our savings could be decimated.
We feared that the virus would be impossible to vaccinate against. I recall listening to a virologist who noted that medical science has been searching for vaccines for the common cold, SARS, and MERS (all coronaviruses) for years without result.
In addition to worries about COVID-19 itself, we believed it likely that the pandemic would increase deaths from other causes as people shunned hospitals and routine care. We thought we needed thousands more ventilators than we could manufacture.
We were concerned that essential services like electricity generation, water purification, and trash collection might be affected, compounding the suffering and contributing even more to the spread of disease.
People hoarded canned goods, toilet paper, spaghetti, bottled water, and hand sanitizer. (I hoarded coffee.) In March, we wondered whether fresh food, or in fact, any food would be available in a week’s time.
There was a run on guns. This struck me, even at the time, as overwrought. People feared that civil strife could be in the offing, and that they might have to defend their supplies of ramen noodles and peanut butter from marauding gangs.
We worried that the lockdowns would result in a spike in suicides and that school closings would rob children and teenagers of education and socialization.
And we fretted that Donald Trump would see a rise in approval rates due to the rally-round-the-flag effect.
Seven months on, some of those worries proved to be well-grounded, but many did not.
The stock market made up all of its losses by August. There are explanations. People aren’t spending money on other things right now, so they’re parking their funds in equities. Okay. But a few months ago we feared that we were at the early stages of a massive, worldwide depression that would feature huge firms declaring bankruptcy and people jumping from windows on Wall Street as in 1929. That did not happen.
That’s not to say the economy is in good shape. A number of marquee firms—J. Crew, Neiman Marcus, Gold’s Gym, and Hertz among others—have filed for bankruptcy. But they continue to operate, and may yet survive. Other signs of economic distress include the 163,000 businesses that have closed, almost 98,000 of them permanently. That represents real hardship for owners, employees, and customers. But out of 32.5 million businesses nationwide, that’s still a tiny fraction. Unemployment remains high at nearly 8 percent, but it has declined considerably from above 14 percent in March.
Prospects for a vaccine look promising. As the New York Times’s Donald MacNeil writes, “Sometime in the next three months, health experts say, the F.D.A. is likely to begin granting approval to vaccines now in the works.” There will be setbacks—Johnson and Johnson halted one of its trials over the weekend due to the unexplained illness of one volunteer—but the outlook for a widely available vaccine or vaccines by the middle of 2021 remains good. Even as the search for a vaccine stumbles momentarily in America, it continues around the world with unparalleled international cooperation. Medical science, to say nothing of the pharmaceutical companies (every populist’s bête noire), is rising to the occasion and on track to save millions of lives and livelihoods.
It turned out that ventilators were not as crucial in treating this virus as expected.
Fears about the pandemic increasing deaths from other causes appear to have been correct. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that in March and April, the US experienced 87,000 excess deaths—meaning deaths above what was experienced in those months during the preceding five years. About a third were attributed to causes other than COVID-19. People feared entering hospitals and shunned even doctors’ offices, which increased the death rate from heart disease and diabetes.
Thanks to the efforts of frontline workers (who deserve more gratitude than they get), public services like transportation, electricity generation, food safety inspection, trash collection, water purification, and emergency services continued pretty much without a hiccup. The lights stayed on. The heat and electricity continued to function. Supermarkets remained open and remarkably well-stocked. There were shortages here and there of various commodities—yeast! Dijon mustard!—but nothing that could be called hardship. And the shortages were temporary. Companies rapidly adjusted to consumer needs. Stores offered curbside pick-up. Hair salons (after they were permitted to reopen—speaking of hardship) adopted social distancing and masks. The toilet paper emergency was short-lived (and people in my neighborhood shared). Amazon continued to deliver just about anything you wanted in record time. We did not experience a Lord-of-the-Flies-style social collapse requiring armed defense of our pantries.
What prolonged school closings will do to children is a great unknown, and there is reason to think that teachers unions have exerted too much power in this matter.
As for depression, suicide, and other psychological effects of the pandemic, the news is mixed. Significant numbers of adults have reported increases in depression, anxiety, and substance abuse, particularly those caring for an elderly relative and essential workers who cannot work from home. And many women have dropped out of the labor force due to the pressure of being forced to homeschool their kids. Adolescents, on the other hand, are faring better.
According to a new report from the Institute for Family Studies, teen mental health has improved since the pandemic and associated lockdowns began. Compared with 2018, fewer adolescents described themselves as depressed, lonely, or unhappy during the COVID crisis. They reported better sleep. In 2018, only 55 percent said they regularly slept 7 or more hours per night. In 2020, it jumped to 84 percent. Teens are spending more time talking with their parents and sharing a family dinner. A solid 53 percent reported feeling stronger and more resilient as a result of the pandemic. Teens whose families have experienced economic hardship didn’t fare as well. Twenty-six percent of those who worried about their family’s economic situation were depressed, compared with 13 percent who did not have that concern. Yet another IFS report found that the enforced togetherness of the pandemic has improved marriages, with 58 percent saying it has made them appreciate their spouse more.
As for the effect on Trump’s approval ratings, well, it turns out that when people are confined to their homes facing a serious threat to their health and well-being, they are inclined to pay close attention to press conferences hosted by the president of the United States. And close attention is the one thing from which Donald Trump cannot benefit. They saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears when he suggested injecting disinfectant into the human body. Since the president has since insisted that he was being sarcastic, here’s what he said:
And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning? So it’d be interesting to check that. I’m not a doctor. But I’m, like, a person that has a good you-know-what [pointing to his head].
As awful as it has been, this disease was not the apocalypse we feared. Many aspects of our society proved more resilient than we expected. With the exception of the fellow with the not-so-good “you-know-what,” there is reason to look forward with something we haven’t felt much lately—hope.


thebulwark--2020-10-14--What Do We Do About Voter Intimidation?

What Do We Do About Voter Intimidation?

Donald Trump ’ s diagnosis with COVID-19 shifted the race in several ways .
It refocused the election on the pandemic .
It raised questions about Trump ’ s honesty and competence .
And it sparked concerns about the president ’ s health .
But it also obscured something important .
As the recently thwarted plot to attack Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer shows , the risk of political violence is dangerously high .
But President Trump responded by denouncing Whitmer and publicly sympathizing with the attackers ’ grievances , which could encourage similar attempts .
And that was before Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watchers to be an “ Army for Trump.
” Whatever the president ’ s motivation , it ’ s playing with fire .
And stoking rather than tamping down the potential for violence fits with what Trump and his Republican collaborators had been doing before the president tested positive for coronavirus : laying out a three-pronged strategy to tilt the electoral playing field : voter suppression before the election , voter intimidation during , and voter disenfranchisement after .
In the debate—which was only last Tuesday—Joe Biden acted like a normal presidential candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the night was undermining the integrity of the election .
The president baselessly claimed that “ it ’ s a rigged election , ” citing things he made up about “ major states…run by Democrats.
” He repeatedly lied about mail-in ballots , spouting nonsense about multiple ballots being sent to the same voters , states “ losing 30 and 40 percent ” of them , some “ being sold , ” and others “ being dumped in rivers.
” Moderator Chris Wallace asked the candidates if they would call for calm and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declare victory until the election has been independently certified.
” Biden did .
Trump refused .
“ If it ’ s a fair election , I am 100 percent on board , ” the president said .
“ But if I see tens of thousands of ballots being manipulated .
I can ’ t go along with that.
” His reason ?
“ It means you have a fraudulent election .
You ’ re not equipped to , these people aren ’ t equipped to handle it , number one .
Number two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s been pushing this message on Twitter and in public appearances for months .
Most people reading this article know these accusations are false — just last week , FBI Director Christopher Wray told the Senate there ’ s no evidence of widespread voting fraud .
But that doesn ’ t mean Trump supporters do .
A mid-September Yahoo/YouGov poll asked “ Do you think this year ’ s presidential election will be free and fair ?
” Half of the respondents who said they intend to vote for Trump answered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ narrative is necessary because it rationalizes the rest of the three-pronged effort .
On voter suppression , it lets Republican-run states complement traditional techniques of purging voter rolls and reducing polling places in predominantly minority areas with 2020-specific variants , such as reducing locations where voters can drop off mail-in ballots .
For example , two days after the debate , Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced that , to “ help stop attempts at illegal voting , ” counties can not have more than one location to drop off completed ballots .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to close 11 drop-off sites , leaving just a single site for 4.7 million residents .
The next step is what happens on Election Day itself .
Wallace asked the candidates , “ Will you urge your supporters to stay calm during this extended period , not to engage in any civil unrest ?
” This was Trump ’ s response : “ I ’ m urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully because that ’ s what has to happen .
I am urging them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll watchers were blocked from observing early voting in Philadelphia — as the Philadelphia Inquirer reported , no actual polling places were open , and satellite election offices where voters can get mail-in ballots were following pandemic rules about limiting the number of people inside — ominously warning that “ bad things happen in Philadelphia.
” This doubled-down on something Trump had posted on Twitter before the debate : So what ’ s going to happen ?
The actions taken by Trump supporters could be mild , like the pro-Trump demonstrators who formed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this September and chanted slogans , forcing early voters to walk around them .
It could be disruptive , like the armed demonstrators opposed to coronavirus restrictions who shut down the Michigan statehouse in May after Trump encouraged people to “ LIBERATE MICHIGAN !
” It could be violent , like the Trump supporters who drove into Portland , shooting paintballs and pepper spray at Black Lives Matter protestors , or like the Proud Boys , a far right group that openly advocates and engages in violence who Trump told to “ stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s impossible to know the type and extent of voter intimidation in advance .
Hopefully , there won ’ t be much .
But with Trump and Trumpist media pushing the fictional narrative of fraud , and the president urging supporters to go to polling places to look for it , there ’ s enough of a risk that we should take the possibility seriously .
And then there is the post-election disenfranchisement .
The Trump campaign has already signaled that it intends to claim fraud in any state where mail-in votes make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyers to challenge every Biden vote they can .
At the Cleveland debate Trump said , “ we might not know [ the results ] for months.
” Which lays the predicate for a situation in which Trump uses the courts to keep results uncertain long enough to pass key post-election deadlines .
What can be done ?
Leaders , especially in law enforcement positions , can counter the president ’ s effort to stir up voter intimidation by making it clear they ’ ll prosecute election-related crimes , as Nevada Attorney General @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Police should prepare for the possibility of armed intimidation at polling places .
And concerned citizens should prepare for the unlikely , but not impossible , scenario in which some police are overwhelmed — or choose to look the other way — by being ready to calmly , peacefully escort any intimidated voters into polling places .
Georgetown Law ’ s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection recommends documenting what you see—if uniformed militia show up , photograph or take note of any insignias—and offers fact sheets on the relevant laws in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here .
Americans can vote for any candidate they want .
But they should be able to do so absent intimidation , and every vote should count .

Donald Trump’s diagnosis with COVID-19 shifted the race in several ways. It refocused the election on the pandemic. It raised questions about Trump’s honesty and competence. And it sparked concerns about the president’s health.
But it also obscured something important. As the recently thwarted plot to attack Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer shows, the risk of political violence is dangerously high. But President Trump responded by denouncing Whitmer and publicly sympathizing with the attackers’ grievances, which could encourage similar attempts.
And that was before Trump doubled down on his call for poll watchers to be an “Army for Trump.”
Volunteer to be a Trump Election Poll Watcher. Sign up today! #MakeAmericaGreatAgainhttps://t.co/3AnrRV7uSz — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 13, 2020
Whatever the president’s motivation, it’s playing with fire. And stoking rather than tamping down the potential for violence fits with what Trump and his Republican collaborators had been doing before the president tested positive for coronavirus: laying out a three-pronged strategy to tilt the electoral playing field: voter suppression before the election, voter intimidation during, and voter disenfranchisement after.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
In the debate—which was only last Tuesday—Joe Biden acted like a normal presidential candidate while Trump’s main message of the night was undermining the integrity of the election.
The president baselessly claimed that “it’s a rigged election,” citing things he made up about “major states…run by Democrats.” He repeatedly lied about mail-in ballots, spouting nonsense about multiple ballots being sent to the same voters, states “losing 30 and 40 percent” of them, some “being sold,” and others “being dumped in rivers.”
Moderator Chris Wallace asked the candidates if they would call for calm and “pledge tonight that you will not declare victory until the election has been independently certified.” Biden did. Trump refused.
“If it’s a fair election, I am 100 percent on board,” the president said. “But if I see tens of thousands of ballots being manipulated. I can’t go along with that.”
His reason? “It means you have a fraudulent election. You’re not equipped to, these people aren’t equipped to handle it, number one. Number two, they cheat. They cheat.”
Trump’s been pushing this message on Twitter and in public appearances for months. Most people reading this article know these accusations are false — just last week, FBI Director Christopher Wray told the Senate there’s no evidence of widespread voting fraud . But that doesn’t mean Trump supporters do. A mid-September Yahoo/YouGov poll asked “Do you think this year’s presidential election will be free and fair?” Half of the respondents who said they intend to vote for Trump answered “no.”
This fictional voter fraud narrative is necessary because it rationalizes the rest of the three-pronged effort. On voter suppression, it lets Republican-run states complement traditional techniques of purging voter rolls and reducing polling places in predominantly minority areas with 2020-specific variants, such as reducing locations where voters can drop off mail-in ballots.
For example, two days after the debate, Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced that, to “help stop attempts at illegal voting,” counties cannot have more than one location to drop off completed ballots. This forced Harris county, which includes Houston, to close 11 drop-off sites, leaving just a single site for 4.7 million residents.
The next step is what happens on Election Day itself.
Wallace asked the candidates, “Will you urge your supporters to stay calm during this extended period, not to engage in any civil unrest?” This was Trump’s response:
“I’m urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully because that’s what has to happen. I am urging them to do it.”
Then he falsely claimed poll watchers were blocked from observing early voting in Philadelphia — as the Philadelphia Inquirer reported, no actual polling places were open, and satellite election offices where voters can get mail-in ballots were following pandemic rules about limiting the number of people inside — ominously warning that “bad things happen in Philadelphia.”
This doubled-down on something Trump had posted on Twitter before the debate:
Wow. Won’t let Poll Watchers & Security into Philadelphia Voting Places. There is only one reason why. Corruption!!! Must have a fair Election. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 29, 2020
So what’s going to happen? The actions taken by Trump supporters could be mild, like the pro-Trump demonstrators who formed a line outside a Virginia polling place this September and chanted slogans, forcing early voters to walk around them.
It could be disruptive, like the armed demonstrators opposed to coronavirus restrictions who shut down the Michigan statehouse in May after Trump encouraged people to “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!”
It could be violent, like the Trump supporters who drove into Portland, shooting paintballs and pepper spray at Black Lives Matter protestors, or like the Proud Boys, a far right group that openly advocates and engages in violence who Trump told to “stand back and stand by.”
It’s impossible to know the type and extent of voter intimidation in advance. Hopefully, there won’t be much. But with Trump and Trumpist media pushing the fictional narrative of fraud, and the president urging supporters to go to polling places to look for it, there’s enough of a risk that we should take the possibility seriously.
And then there is the post-election disenfranchisement. The Trump campaign has already signaled that it intends to claim fraud in any state where mail-in votes make a difference and send an army of lawyers to challenge every Biden vote they can. At the Cleveland debate Trump said, “we might not know [the results] for months.” Which lays the predicate for a situation in which Trump uses the courts to keep results uncertain long enough to pass key post-election deadlines.
What can be done?
Leaders, especially in law enforcement positions, can counter the president’s effort to stir up voter intimidation by making it clear they’ll prosecute election-related crimes, as Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford did after the debate.
Police should prepare for the possibility of armed intimidation at polling places. And concerned citizens should prepare for the unlikely, but not impossible, scenario in which some police are overwhelmed — or choose to look the other way — by being ready to calmly, peacefully escort any intimidated voters into polling places.
Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection recommends documenting what you see—if uniformed militia show up, photograph or take note of any insignias—and offers fact sheets on the relevant laws in 50 states, which you can find here.
Americans can vote for any candidate they want. But they should be able to do so absent intimidation, and every vote should count.