alternet--2020-10-15--How political polling can go catastrophically wrong

The question looms in nearly every U.S. presidential election , even in this year 's race : Could the polls be wrong ?
If they are , they likely will err in unique fashion .
The history of election polling says as much .
That history tells of no greater polling surprise than what happened in 1948 , when President Harry Truman defied the polls , the pundits and the press to defeat Thomas E. Dewey , his heavily favored Republican foe .
Pollsters were certain Truman had no chance .
One of them , Elmo Roper , was so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced two months before the election he would release no further survey data unless a political miracle intervened .
Rival pollsters George Gallup and Archibald Crossley largely completed their poll-taking by mid-October – and missed a decisive shift in support to Truman in the campaign 's closing days .
As I point out in my latest book , “ Lost in a Gallup : Polling Failure in U.S. Presidential Elections , '' the misfire of 1948 was exceptional .
And that describes most polling failures in presidential elections : They tend to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When the polls go wrong , they almost always do so in some unanticipated way .
Errors spring from no single template .
This variety helps explain why polling failure is so unpredictable and so jarring .
The epic miscall of 1948 has never been duplicated in U.S. presidential elections – although the shock of Truman 's victory may have been rivaled by the profound surprise that accompanied Donald Trump 's win in 2016 .
Trump 's victory represented polling failure of another kind : Polls in 2016 were not so much in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Wisconsin , Pennsylvania and Michigan .
If Hillary Clinton had carried those states , as polls had indicated , she would have won the electoral votes to become president .
But errors in state-level polls upset national expectations , in part because those polls tended to include too few white voters without college degrees , a key Trump constituency in 2016 and this year .
Another type of polling failure is that of the venerable pollster who is singularly and astonishingly in error – as was the Literary Digest in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Digest was a weekly magazine whose massive mail-in polls had identified the winner in each of the three presidential elections since 1924 .
Some newspapers acclaimed the Digest 's mass-polling technique for its “ uncanny '' accuracy .
In 1936 , the Digest employed the same methodology that had served it so well .
After sending 10 million postcard ballots and tabulating the 2.3 million returned from around the country , the Digest reported that Republican Alf Landon was bound for a comfortable victory over President Franklin D. Roosevelt .
Landon ended up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – and lost the popular vote by 24 percentage points .
Roosevelt 's victory was one of the most lopsided in presidential election history .
That also was the year Gallup , Crossley and Elmo Roper initiated their election polls , which relied on smaller samples than the Digest .
With varying degrees of accuracy , all three newcomers in 1936 signaled Roosevelt 's victory .
The Digest 's debacle offers an enduring reminder that the roots of polling failure run deep .
The stunning miscall occurred at the dawn of modern survey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polling 's potential to mislead .
After all , if the great election oracle of its time could err so spectacularly , why would other polls be immune to failure ?
The answer : They were n't , and are n't , immune .
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

by W. Joseph Campbell, American University School of Communication
The question looms in nearly every U.S. presidential election, even in this year's race: Could the polls be wrong? If they are, they likely will err in unique fashion. The history of election polling says as much.
That history tells of no greater polling surprise than what happened in 1948, when President Harry Truman defied the polls, the pundits and the press to defeat Thomas E. Dewey, his heavily favored Republican foe.
Pollsters were certain Truman had no chance. One of them, Elmo Roper, was so confident of Dewey's victory that he announced two months before the election he would release no further survey data unless a political miracle intervened.
Rival pollsters George Gallup and Archibald Crossley largely completed their poll-taking by mid-October – and missed a decisive shift in support to Truman in the campaign's closing days.
As I point out in my latest book, “Lost in a Gallup: Polling Failure in U.S. Presidential Elections," the misfire of 1948 was exceptional. And that describes most polling failures in presidential elections: They tend to be exceptional, unlike previous polling errors.
No pattern
When the polls go wrong, they almost always do so in some unanticipated way. Errors spring from no single template.
This variety helps explain why polling failure is so unpredictable and so jarring. The epic miscall of 1948 has never been duplicated in U.S. presidential elections – although the shock of Truman's victory may have been rivaled by the profound surprise that accompanied Donald Trump's win in 2016.
Trump's victory represented polling failure of another kind: Polls in 2016 were not so much in error nationally as they were in states such as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan.
If Hillary Clinton had carried those states, as polls had indicated, she would have won the electoral votes to become president. But errors in state-level polls upset national expectations, in part because those polls tended to include too few white voters without college degrees, a key Trump constituency in 2016 and this year.
Recalling the 1936 debacle
Another type of polling failure is that of the venerable pollster who is singularly and astonishingly in error – as was the Literary Digest in its infamous mail-in survey of 1936.
The Digest was a weekly magazine whose massive mail-in polls had identified the winner in each of the three presidential elections since 1924. Some newspapers acclaimed the Digest's mass-polling technique for its “uncanny" accuracy.
In 1936, the Digest employed the same methodology that had served it so well. After sending 10 million postcard ballots and tabulating the 2.3 million returned from around the country, the Digest reported that Republican Alf Landon was bound for a comfortable victory over President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Landon ended up carrying two states – Maine and Vermont – and lost the popular vote by 24 percentage points. Roosevelt's victory was one of the most lopsided in presidential election history.
That also was the year Gallup, Crossley and Elmo Roper initiated their election polls, which relied on smaller samples than the Digest. With varying degrees of accuracy, all three newcomers in 1936 signaled Roosevelt's victory.
The Digest's debacle offers an enduring reminder that the roots of polling failure run deep. The stunning miscall occurred at the dawn of modern survey research and introduced a nagging sense about polling's potential to mislead.
After all, if the great election oracle of its time could err so spectacularly, why would other polls be immune to failure?
The answer: They weren't, and aren't, immune.
W. Joseph Campbell, Professor of Communication Studies, American University School of Communication
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-10-15--Sen. Warren slams Disney for 28,000 fired workers amid stock buyback spree

Sen. Elizabeth Warren tore into the CEO and chairman of the Walt Disney Company on Tuesday with a letter demanding they explain their decision to reward executives with huge payouts amid the coronavirus pandemic while laying off 28,000 employees .
`` In the years leading up to this crisis , your company prioritized the enrichment of executives and stockholders through hefty compensation packages , and billions of dollars ' worth of dividend payments and stock buybacks , all of which weakened Disney 's financial cushion and ability to retain and pay its front-line workers amid the pandemic , '' the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pdf ) to executive chairman Robert Iger and CEO Bob Chapek .
`` I would like to know whether Disney 's financial practices have impacted the company 's decision to lay off workers , '' she continued , `` and whether your company plans to extend healthcare or other critical benefits and protections to laid off employees . ''
The senator 's letter follows Disney 's announcement last month that the company was laying off the workers .
In a September 29 memo , head of parks Josh D'Amaro told employees that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisions '' and had `` modified ... operations to run as efficiently as possible '' to weather the budget shortfall as a result of the pandemic .
D'Amaro asserted that the layoffs were `` the only feasible option we have in light of the prolonged impact of Covid-19 on our business , including limited capacity due to physical distancing requirements and the continued uncertainty regarding the duration of the pandemic . ''
Warren , in her letter , took issue with D'Amaro for blaming California 's `` unwillingness to lift restrictions that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countered that the state-imposed measures `` were implemented to prevent the spread of Covid-19 and save lives . ''
What 's more , she wrote , `` nearly 6,400 of the employees you laid off are actually in Florida .
And just last week , another 8,857 part-time employees were laid off , also in Florida . ''
The senator took further issue with the memo for `` fail [ ing ] to acknowledge Disney 's short-sighted business decisions that reduced its capital , including spending billions of dollars to repurchase its own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its shareholders through billions of dollars in dividend payments , and showering its top company executives with over-the-top compensation packages and salaries—which reportedly were restored several weeks before the September layoff announcement . ''
While acknowledging that Iger and Chapek reduced their own salaries in April in light of the economic impact of the pandemic , the senator said the cuts represented a mere `` drop in the bucket '' and were short-lived .
Warren continued : Warren issued an October 27 deadline for answers to a number of questions about the company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would provide healthcare coverage and cover premiums for laid-off employees .
She also demanded to know the total value of stock buybacks made by Disney in each quarter over the past four years , the increase those buybacks had on stock value , and how they may have specifically benefited Disney 's top executives .
`` It appears that—prior to , and during the pandemic—Disney took good care of its top executives and shareholders , '' wrote Warren , `` and now is hanging its front-line workers out to dry . ''

Sen. Elizabeth Warren tore into the CEO and chairman of the Walt Disney Company on Tuesday with a letter demanding they explain their decision to reward executives with huge payouts amid the coronavirus pandemic while laying off 28,000 employees.
"In the years leading up to this crisis, your company prioritized the enrichment of executives and stockholders through hefty compensation packages, and billions of dollars' worth of dividend payments and stock buybacks, all of which weakened Disney's financial cushion and ability to retain and pay its front-line workers amid the pandemic," the Massachusetts Democrat wrote in her letter (pdf) to executive chairman Robert Iger and CEO Bob Chapek.
"I would like to know whether Disney's financial practices have impacted the company's decision to lay off workers," she continued, "and whether your company plans to extend healthcare or other critical benefits and protections to laid off employees."
The senator's letter follows Disney's announcement last month that the company was laying off the workers.
In a September 29 memo, head of parks Josh D'Amaro told employees that the company had to make "some difficult decisions" and had "modified... operations to run as efficiently as possible" to weather the budget shortfall as a result of the pandemic. D'Amaro asserted that the layoffs were "the only feasible option we have in light of the prolonged impact of Covid-19 on our business, including limited capacity due to physical distancing requirements and the continued uncertainty regarding the duration of the pandemic."
Warren, in her letter, took issue with D'Amaro for blaming California's "unwillingness to lift restrictions that would allow Disneyland to reopen." Warren countered that the state-imposed measures "were implemented to prevent the spread of Covid-19 and save lives." What's more, she wrote, "nearly 6,400 of the employees you laid off are actually in Florida. And just last week, another 8,857 part-time employees were laid off, also in Florida."
The senator took further issue with the memo for "fail[ing] to acknowledge Disney's short-sighted business decisions that reduced its capital, including spending billions of dollars to repurchase its own shares over the last decade, rewarding its shareholders through billions of dollars in dividend payments, and showering its top company executives with over-the-top compensation packages and salaries—which reportedly were restored several weeks before the September layoff announcement."
While acknowledging that Iger and Chapek reduced their own salaries in April in light of the economic impact of the pandemic, the senator said the cuts represented a mere "drop in the bucket" and were short-lived. Warren continued:
For example, Mr. Iger earned a total of $65.6 million in 2018 and $47 million in 2019 as a result of this compensation package; hence, his pandemic-inspired salary cut amounted to roughly 3.3% percent of his total compensation in 2019. Similarly, Mr. Chapek, who recently was promoted to CEO, was in line to earn up to $22.5 million in bonuses in addition to his base salary. Even worse, reports indicated that Disney was restoring the meager proposed cuts to executive pay in August 2020—just weeks before the announcement of the 28,000 worker layoffs.
Warren issued an October 27 deadline for answers to a number of questions about the company's recent moves, including whether it would provide healthcare coverage and cover premiums for laid-off employees.
She also demanded to know the total value of stock buybacks made by Disney in each quarter over the past four years, the increase those buybacks had on stock value, and how they may have specifically benefited Disney's top executives.
"It appears that—prior to, and during the pandemic—Disney took good care of its top executives and shareholders," wrote Warren, "and now is hanging its front-line workers out to dry."


alternet--2020-10-15--Rudy Giuliani's supposed Biden 'smoking gun' looks like an obvious Russian propaganda frame-up

On Wednesday morning , the New York Post broke the genuinely unbelievable story about a soggy laptop with a hard drive that contains emails suggesting that Joe Biden had a previously unreported meeting with a Ukrainian businessman … and video of Hunter Biden having a crack-laced party with a sex worker .
Because , sure , if you 're going to have illegal drugs while engaging in illegal sex , you have to be sure to film it , right after the email that 's a threat to your father .
This Donald Trump fantasy reel was then delivered to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definitely indictable ) hands of Trump attorney , Rudy Giuliani .
According to Giuliani , the source of this supposed mystery computer was a mystery customer who , extremely conveniently , left a Beau Biden Foundation sticker attached when dropping it off at a Delaware repair shop .
But the mystery customer never returned—or apparently gave his name .
So it was totally understandable that the repair shop guy busted out his best hacking tools and began reading those emails and watching those videos .
And absolutely understandable that his first action was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Seriously , the believability factor of this whole story is somewhere worse than a love child between Sasquatch and the Loch Ness Monster .
This is a story so ridiculous , Q would not want to be associated with it , which has n't stopped White House Press Sec .
Kayleigh McEnany from tweeting out parts of it as if it 's serious .
But now at least one aspect of the mystery is somewhat less mysterious , because the repair shop guy has been located .
And he 's a peach .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ start of the journey from wet laptop to Post story inexplicably promoted by reporters from The New York Times and Politico is a shop owner named John Paul Isaac from Wilmington , Delaware .
In a question and answer session lasting over an hour , Isaac gives often jaw-dropping and occasionally hilarious responses to questions about how exactly what Giuliani has been searching for happened to come into his hands , and how he then handed it over for appropriate scandal-level attention .
According to Isaac , he has a `` medical condition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually dropped off the laptop .
But that Biden Foundation sticker clued him in that this had to be the Macbook of Hunter Biden .
After all , it 's not like the Beau Biden Foundation has a dozen board members , several dozen employees and volunteers , has trained over 9,500 adults to assist in spotting and preventing child abuse , and worked with families in over 20 states .
Who but Hunter might have such a sticker ?
Isaac then called the FBI , who took the device , but then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on accessing hard drives .
Or he accessed the hard drive and then contacted the FBI .
Or both .
All of this is reported at various points in the conversation .
`` Muddled '' does n't begin to describe the explanation .
Isaac also provides the reason that he copied the drive for Giuliani .
That reason is : Seth Rich , as in the right-wing conspiracy theory that Seth Rich was murdered by the Democratic National Committee ( DNC ) because he knew the `` truth '' about DNC emails stolen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stone , WikiLeaks , and Donald Trump .
At various points , Isaac seems to believe the FBI killed Rich , and might kill him .
Which makes it difficult to understand why he would have called the FBI in the first place .
To make it extra confusing , Isaac at various points claims the FBI did n't know he made a copy—except they had to know he would make a copy .
`` They probably knew I had a copy because I was pretty vocal about not wanting to get murdered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ audio of the interview can be found with the Daily Beast article . )
The biggest problem with the claims in the emails is the same as that in every other Biden did something-something in Ukraine story .
That problem is simple : Prosecutor Viktor Shokin was not investigating the company where Hunter Biden was on the board .
How do we know that ?
Not only are there no records of such an investigation in Ukraine , Shokin himself has said as much .
In fact , it was Shokin 's refusal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to U.K. officials requesting that he be removed from office .
How does the Post story weasel-word their way around this problem ?
In the most weasel-y way imaginable .
According to the Post , Shokin had made `` specific plans '' to investigate Burisma .
So not only did Joe Biden apparently step in to stop the investigation , he stopped it when it was just an idea in Shokin 's head that had not been acted on .
Pretty darn clever , that Biden .
It might also be worth a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Post article .
The byline on the story is Emma-Jo Morris , who is listed on the masthead as Deputy Politics Editor at New York Post .
Since when ?
Since today , that 's when .
Morris has exactly three stories on her resume at the Post … all of them written on Wednesday .
All of them about Hunter Biden .
What did Morris do prior to her instant appointment as editor ?
She booked guests for Sean Hannity .
If all of this was n't shakier than watered down Jell-O @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how the contents of the hard drive seem to be perfectly in line with what Giuliani has been claiming all along .
Trump 's latest personal attorney has been beating the bushes , and paying off criminals , in Ukraine for over two years , looking for anyone willing to provide Biden dirt .
It was almost exactly one year ago that Giuliani associates Lev Parnas and Igor Furman were arrested while trying to leave the country .
Back in December , Parnas turned over documents to the House Intelligence Committee as charges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ falsifying records , and conspiracy against the United States were clearly expanding into `` a broader probe that is looking at numerous people in Giuliani 's orbit . ''
Just last month , FBI Director Christopher Wray and CIA officials made it clear that Giuliani 's orbit was a tight circle around Vladimir Putin .
That included identifying former Ukrainian legislator Andrii Derkach—Giuliani 's primary contact in Ukraine—as a Russian disinformation agent who was in direct contact with the Kremlin .
Derkach worked with Giuliani to spread disinformation about Biden `` inside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the media and contacts with figures close to the president . ''
Not only is Giuliani 's October surprise anything but believable , the odds that it 's not a direct ploy to slip disinformation sourced by Russia into the American media appear vanishingly small .
Because it 's not just Derkach who is a disinformation agent .
Twitter has now blocked access to the Post story .
Good for them .
At least someone is trying to stop the flow of Russian propaganda .

On Wednesday morning, the New York Post broke the genuinely unbelievable story about a soggy laptop with a hard drive that contains emails suggesting that Joe Biden had a previously unreported meeting with a Ukrainian businessman … and video of Hunter Biden having a crack-laced party with a sex worker. Because, sure, if you're going to have illegal drugs while engaging in illegal sex, you have to be sure to film it, right after the email that's a threat to your father.
This Donald Trump fantasy reel was then delivered to the Post through the unimpeachable (but definitely indictable) hands of Trump attorney, Rudy Giuliani. According to Giuliani, the source of this supposed mystery computer was a mystery customer who, extremely conveniently, left a Beau Biden Foundation sticker attached when dropping it off at a Delaware repair shop. But the mystery customer never returned—or apparently gave his name. So it was totally understandable that the repair shop guy busted out his best hacking tools and began reading those emails and watching those videos. And absolutely understandable that his first action was to make a copy for Giuliani.
Seriously, the believability factor of this whole story is somewhere worse than a love child between Sasquatch and the Loch Ness Monster. This is a story so ridiculous, Q would not want to be associated with it, which hasn't stopped White House Press Sec. Kayleigh McEnany from tweeting out parts of it as if it's serious. But now at least one aspect of the mystery is somewhat less mysterious, because the repair shop guy has been located. And he's a peach.
As Daily Beast reports, the apparent start of the journey from wet laptop to Post story inexplicably promoted by reporters from TheNew York Times and Politico is a shop owner named John Paul Isaac from Wilmington, Delaware. In a question and answer session lasting over an hour, Isaac gives often jaw-dropping and occasionally hilarious responses to questions about how exactly what Giuliani has been searching for happened to come into his hands, and how he then handed it over for appropriate scandal-level attention.
According to Isaac, he has a "medical condition" that prevented him from seeing who actually dropped off the laptop. But that Biden Foundation sticker clued him in that this had to be the Macbook of Hunter Biden. After all, it's not like the Beau Biden Foundation has a dozen board members, several dozen employees and volunteers, has trained over 9,500 adults to assist in spotting and preventing child abuse, and worked with families in over 20 states. Who but Hunter might have such a sticker?
Isaac then called the FBI, who took the device, but then called him back in for his expertise on accessing hard drives. Or he accessed the hard drive and then contacted the FBI. Or both. All of this is reported at various points in the conversation. "Muddled" doesn't begin to describe the explanation. Isaac also provides the reason that he copied the drive for Giuliani. That reason is: Seth Rich, as in the right-wing conspiracy theory that Seth Rich was murdered by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) because he knew the "truth" about DNC emails stolen by Russian sources and provided to Roger Stone, WikiLeaks, and Donald Trump.
At various points, Isaac seems to believe the FBI killed Rich, and might kill him. Which makes it difficult to understand why he would have called the FBI in the first place. To make it extra confusing, Isaac at various points claims the FBI didn't know he made a copy—except they had to know he would make a copy. "They probably knew I had a copy because I was pretty vocal about not wanting to get murdered," said Isaac. (Complete audio of the interview can be found with the Daily Beast article.)
The biggest problem with the claims in the emails is the same as that in every other Biden did something-something in Ukraine story. That problem is simple: Prosecutor Viktor Shokin was not investigating the company where Hunter Biden was on the board. How do we know that? Not only are there no records of such an investigation in Ukraine, Shokin himself has said as much. In fact, it was Shokin's refusal to open such an investigation that led to U.K. officials requesting that he be removed from office.
How does the Post story weasel-word their way around this problem? In the most weasel-y way imaginable. According to the Post, Shokin had made "specific plans" to investigate Burisma. So not only did Joe Biden apparently step in to stop the investigation, he stopped it when it was just an idea in Shokin's head that had not been acted on. Pretty darn clever, that Biden.
It might also be worth a quick look at the author of this Post article. The byline on the story is Emma-Jo Morris, who is listed on the masthead as Deputy Politics Editor at New York Post. Since when? Since today, that's when. Morris has exactly three stories on her resume at the Post … all of them written on Wednesday. All of them about Hunter Biden. What did Morris do prior to her instant appointment as editor? She booked guests for Sean Hannity.
If all of this wasn't shakier than watered down Jell-O, there's the little problem with how the contents of the hard drive seem to be perfectly in line with what Giuliani has been claiming all along. Trump's latest personal attorney has been beating the bushes, and paying off criminals, in Ukraine for over two years, looking for anyone willing to provide Biden dirt. It was almost exactly one year ago that Giuliani associates Lev Parnas and Igor Furman were arrested while trying to leave the country. Back in December, Parnas turned over documents to the House Intelligence Committee as charges of election law violations, perjury, falsifying records, and conspiracy against the United States were clearly expanding into "a broader probe that is looking at numerous people in Giuliani's orbit."
Just last month, FBI Director Christopher Wray and CIA officials made it clear that Giuliani's orbit was a tight circle around Vladimir Putin. That included identifying former Ukrainian legislator Andrii Derkach—Giuliani's primary contact in Ukraine—as a Russian disinformation agent who was in direct contact with the Kremlin. Derkach worked with Giuliani to spread disinformation about Biden "inside the United States through lobbyists, Congress, the media and contacts with figures close to the president."
Not only is Giuliani's October surprise anything but believable, the odds that it's not a direct ploy to slip disinformation sourced by Russia into the American media appear vanishingly small. Because it's not just Derkach who is a disinformation agent.
Twitter has now blocked access to the Post story. Good for them. At least someone is trying to stop the flow of Russian propaganda.


alternet--2020-10-15--Twitter locks Kayleigh McEnany Out of her account after spreading fake news

An official Trump campaign account shows a notice purportedly from the social media company addressed to McEnany that reads : @ @ @ @ @ locked . ''
`` We have determined that this account violated the Twitter rules , @ @ @ @ @ against distribution of hacked materials . ''
The policy is reportedly a longstanding one .
@ @ @ @ @ linking to a fake and quickly debunked New York Post story , one tied to @ @ @ @ @ Giuliani , that claims Hunter Biden used his relationship with his father , Vice President @ @ @ @ @ business gain .
The story has been dissected and is provably false , many reporters @ @ @ @ @ been working with a known Russian agent for at least months .
Here 's the @ @ @ @ @ highlighting the notice to McEnany : After being locked out of her personal account McEnany @ @ @ @ @ White House Press Secretary Twitter account to falsely claim `` censorship . ''

Twitter has locked White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany's personal Twitter account.
An official Trump campaign account shows a notice purportedly from the social media company addressed to McEnany that reads: "Your account has been locked."
"We have determined that this account violated the Twitter rules," it says, "against distribution of hacked materials."
The policy is reportedly a longstanding one.
McEnany had posted a tweet linking to a fake and quickly debunked New York Post story, one tied to Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, that claims Hunter Biden used his relationship with his father, Vice President Joe Biden, for personal business gain.
The story has been dissected and is provably false, many reporters have noted.
Giuliani has been working with a known Russian agent for at least months.
Here's the tweet from the Trump campaign highlighting the notice to McEnany:
After being locked out of her personal account McEnany then used her federal government White House Press Secretary Twitter account to falsely claim "censorship."


alternet--2020-10-16--GOP senator caught on tape in angry tirade against Trump's character, corruption and failure

Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska was recorded delivering an extensive tirade on his scathing view of President Donald Trump during a call with constituents , the Washington Examiner revealed Thursday in a new story .
Sasse was asked by a questioner why he disagrees with the president as much as he does .
At first , Sasse tried to emphasize the agreements he has with Trump on policy , citing the president 's judicial appointments , and arguing that the president has actually moved toward more traditionally Republican views since his election .
But then he began to explain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying the disagreements are about more than `` mere policy issues . ''
Sasse echoed many of the arguments Democrats have made about Trump 's unfitness and grotesque character over the years .
( Notably , Sasse did not vote to remove Trump during the impeachment proceedings in the Senate , as GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah did .
And while Sasse was once a vocal critic of the president , he quieted his opposition when he needed Trump 's support during his primary campaign . )
`` The way he kisses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way he ignores that the Uighurs are in literal concentration camps in Xinjiang .
Right now , he has n't lifted a finger on behalf of the Hong-Kongers , '' Sasse said .
`` The United States now regularly sells out our allies under his leadership , the way he treats women , spends like a drunken sailor .
The ways I criticize President Obama for that kind of spending ; I 've criticized President Trump for as well .
He mocks evangelicals behind closed doors .
His family has treated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's flirted with white supremacists . ''
He was also critical of the president 's response to the pandemic , though he prefaced his comments by saying the media takes the criticism too far .
`` First , he ignored COVID , '' Sasse explained .
`` And then he went into full economic shutdown mode .
He was the one who said 10 to 14 days of shutdown would fix this .
And that was always wrong .
I mean , and so I do n't think the way he 's lead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or right . ''
He also warned that Trump is likely turning off young voters from the Republican Party and conservatism .
`` If young people become permanent Democrats because they 've just been repulsed by the obsessive nature of our politics , or if women who were willing to still vote with the Republican Party in 2016 decide that they need to turn away from this party permanently in the future , '' he explained .
`` I 've spent lots of the of the last year on a campaign bus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they do n't really want more rage tweeting as a new form of entertainment . ''
A staffer for Sasse confirmed the authenticity of the recording to the Examiner , but expressed outrage that people are so focused on the presidential race : `` The fragile Senate seats that will determine whether Democrats nuke the Senate are the races Ben cares about , the races he 's working on , and the only races he 's talking about . ''

Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska was recorded delivering an extensive tirade on his scathing view of President Donald Trump during a call with constituents, the Washington Examiner revealed Thursday in a new story.
Sasse was asked by a questioner why he disagrees with the president as much as he does. At first, Sasse tried to emphasize the agreements he has with Trump on policy, citing the president's judicial appointments, and arguing that the president has actually moved toward more traditionally Republican views since his election.
But then he began to explain where he parts with the president, saying the disagreements are about more than "mere policy issues."
Sasse echoed many of the arguments Democrats have made about Trump's unfitness and grotesque character over the years. (Notably, Sasse did not vote to remove Trump during the impeachment proceedings in the Senate, as GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah did. And while Sasse was once a vocal critic of the president, he quieted his opposition when he needed Trump's support during his primary campaign.)
"The way he kisses dictators' butts. I mean, the way he ignores that the Uighurs are in literal concentration camps in Xinjiang. Right now, he hasn't lifted a finger on behalf of the Hong-Kongers," Sasse said. "The United States now regularly sells out our allies under his leadership, the way he treats women, spends like a drunken sailor. The ways I criticize President Obama for that kind of spending; I've criticized President Trump for as well. He mocks evangelicals behind closed doors. His family has treated the presidency like a business opportunity. He's flirted with white supremacists."
He was also critical of the president's response to the pandemic, though he prefaced his comments by saying the media takes the criticism too far.
"First, he ignored COVID," Sasse explained. "And then he went into full economic shutdown mode. He was the one who said 10 to 14 days of shutdown would fix this. And that was always wrong. I mean, and so I don't think the way he's lead through COVID has been reasonable or responsible, or right."
He also warned that Trump is likely turning off young voters from the Republican Party and conservatism.
"If young people become permanent Democrats because they've just been repulsed by the obsessive nature of our politics, or if women who were willing to still vote with the Republican Party in 2016 decide that they need to turn away from this party permanently in the future," he explained. "I've spent lots of the of the last year on a campaign bus, and when you listen to Nebraskans, they don't really want more rage tweeting as a new form of entertainment."
A staffer for Sasse confirmed the authenticity of the recording to the Examiner, but expressed outrage that people are so focused on the presidential race: "The fragile Senate seats that will determine whether Democrats nuke the Senate are the races Ben cares about, the races he's working on, and the only races he's talking about."
Watch the clip below:


alternet--2020-10-16--Experts: 'Rageful' Trump's 'inability to distinguish fact from fiction' make him 'unsuitable to be i

Experts: 'Rageful' Trump's 'inability to distinguish fact from fiction' make him 'unsuitable to be in command of the nuclear arsenal'

We continue the series , `` The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump Revisited : Mental Health Experts on the Devastating Mishandling of a Pandemic . ''
Whereas we could not have predicted a pandemic three-and-a-half years ago , the authors of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump : 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President anticipated how the president would respond , should there be a crisis .
We tried to warn the public of the very consequences that are unfolding today : abuse of power , incompetence , loss of lives and livelihoods of many Americans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself .
Drs .
Nanette Gartrell and Dee Mosbacher were among the first to open a national conversation about this problem , joining Dr. Judith Herman in writing a letter to then-President Barack Obama about the then-president-elect 's need for a thorough neuropsychiatric evaluation .
The actions they took to make the letter known are how the authors of The Dangerous Case came together , and how thousands of mental health professionals would follow from around the world .
Briefly , Dr. Gartrell is a psychiatrist , researcher , and writer who was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ School and the University of California , San Francisco .
Her half-century of groundbreaking scientific investigations have contributed greatly to our understanding of sexual minority parent families , and have brought her numerous awards , including a recent Alexandra Symonds Award for her outstanding contributions to the advancement of women .
Dr. Mosbacher is a psychiatrist and Academy Award–nominated documentary filmmaker who was formerly on the faculty of the University of California , San Francisco .
As a public-sector psychiatrist , she served as San Mateo County 's medical director for mental health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's Progress Foundation .
Her films are also contained within the Smithsonian National Museum of American History collection .
Together , they authored the essay , `` He 's Got the World in His Hands and His Finger on the Trigger '' for The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump , outlining how a medical advisory body for the 25th Amendment should form .
Lee : The 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution addresses presidential disability and succession , and your recommendations , almost four years ago , for a body to be set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now .
The president 's recent erratic behavior seems to have driven even Speaker Nancy Pelosi into introducing new legislation .
She stated that the legislation would create a `` Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of Office '' that includes outside experts tasked with evaluating his mental and physical health .
Would you remind us of the recommendations you yourselves gave ?
Gartrell : Under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution , Congress may constitute an independent , nonpartisan panel of mental health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capability to fulfill the responsibilities of the presidency .
We have recommended that the panel should consist of three neuropsychiatrists ( one clinical , one academic , and one military ) , one clinical psychologist , one neurologist , and two internists .
Our model states that the panel should be based on medical criteria , and appointed by an agency such as the nonpartisan , nongovernmental National Academy of Medicine nominating panelists , who may serve six-year terms .
Mosbacher : We stated that Congress should enact legislation to authorize this panel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evaluations of the president and vice president on an annual basis .
Also , the legislation should require the panel to evaluate all future presidential and vice-presidential candidates , and should be empowered to conduct emergency evaluations should there be an acute change in the mental or physical health of the president or vice president .
This is without doubt one of the greatest needs of our time .
Yet it appears that the proposed commission will not form before 2024 , and it may even die in the process if there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become law .
This seems a lesson not to wait until matters become very dire .
What are your thoughts now ?
Mosbacher : Speaker Pelosi stated that the legislation applies to future presidents , but Donald Trump 's behavior reminds us of the importance of the president 's mental fitness in a nuclear age .
We call on our elected officials to heed the warnings of thousands of mental health professionals who have requested an independent , impartial neuropsychiatric evaluation of Donald Trump .
The world as we know it could still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear tweet .
Gartrell : Throughout U.S. history , presidents have suffered from serious psychiatric or medical conditions , most of which were unknown to the public .
For example , Presidents Pierce and Lincoln had symptoms of depression .
Nixon and Johnson , paranoia .
Reagan , dementia .
And President Wilson experienced a massive stroke that resulted in severely impaired cognitive functioning .
Although military personnel who are responsible for relaying nuclear orders must undergo rigorous mental health and medical evaluations that assess psychological , financial , and medical fitness for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Commander in Chief .
With Dr. Herman , you—a team of three brave women—became the inspiration for our book , The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump , when you came forth with the first substantial public warning , which was pioneering for our profession .
Would you describe what you did to get there ?
Gartrell : Over the course of the U.S. 2016 presidential campaign , it became increasingly apparent that Donald Trump 's inability or unwillingness to distinguish fact from fiction , wanton disregard for the rule of law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own , rageful responses to criticism , lack of impulse control , and sweeping condemnations of entire populations rendered him temperamentally unsuitable to be in command of the nuclear arsenal .
When he became the president-elect , we , as psychiatrists , had grave concerns about his mental stability and fitness for office .
In November 2016 , we received a call from our psychiatrist friend and colleague Dr. Judith Herman , who shared our concerns about Mr. Trump 's grandiose , belligerent , and unpredictable behavior .
She proposed that we send @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our observations , and recommending an impartial psychiatric evaluation of the president-elect .
We agreed that such an assessment was warranted as a matter of national security .
Dr. Herman offered to draft the letter .
At the end of November , the letter was sent to President Obama , stating that Mr. Trump 's `` widely reported symptoms of mental instability—including grandiosity , impulsivity , hypersensitivity to slights or criticism , and an apparent inability to distinguish fantasy from reality—lead us to question his fitness for the immense responsibilities of the office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president-elect receive a `` full medical and neuropsychiatric evaluation by an impartial team of investigators . ''
We heard nothing from the White House .
Mosbacher : In December 2016 , a journalist contacted us , and we decided that we were willing to take the step of sharing our letter , in the interest of placing our recommendation in the public discourse .
This led to the letter being published in the Huffington Post and going viral .
We declined all requests for further comment , since most journalists wanted us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even though we had not personally evaluated him .
Instead , Gloria Steinem posted the article on her Facebook page , and contacted Dr. Herman to brainstorm about who in the government could implement our recommendation .
Robin Morgan suggested that we convey our letter to Gen. Joseph Dunford , chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , and reminded us of the series of events that transpired during the final days of the Nixon administration .
Because President Nixon was drinking heavily and threatening war , the secretary of defense , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to act on orders from the White House to deploy nuclear weapons unless authorized by Schlesinger or the secretary of state , Henry Kissinger .
In January 2017 , we sent our letter to Chairman Dunford , with the subject line : `` An urgent matter of national security . ''
A week later , Dr. Gartrell met a woman who worked in government intelligence .
Dr. Gartrell inquired if she would be willing to convey our recommendation to other professionals at the agency .
The woman agreed to distribute our letter among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Trump 's mental instability .
As Inauguration Day grew closer , Dr. Gartrell , Dr. Mosbacher , Dr. Herman , Gloria Steinem , and Robin Morgan decided to send our letter to members of Congress whom we know personally or to whom we had access .
We also agreed to publicize our recommendation whenever there was an opportunity .
Our message was that , all in all , Mr. Trump 's hostile , impulsive , provocative , suspicious , and erratic conduct poses a grave threat to our national security .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not be where we are today , the most dangerous point of this presidency .
It is frightening to observe his potential for apocalyptic self-destructiveness , as his fragile ego is injured , and he is filled with rage at the prospect of people falling away from him and his power diminishing .
Do you have any thoughts on how our profession can help the public meet this moment ?
Gartrell : One of the greatest travesties with regard to the mental health emergency that has descended upon our nation is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ professionals can alert to the need for all future presidential and vice-presidential candidates to have fitness-for-duty evaluations before they take office , just as military personnel do .
Mosbacher : When a historic movement of mental health professionals had garnered the attention of the public so as to become the number one topic of national conversation , the American Psychiatric Association extinguished the discussion rather than supported it .
When independent professionals and journalists are silenced , it is usually a first sign of tyranny .
We must still speak the truth to @ @ @ @

We continue the series, "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump Revisited: Mental Health Experts on the Devastating Mishandling of a Pandemic." Whereas we could not have predicted a pandemic three-and-a-half years ago, the authors of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President anticipated how the president would respond, should there be a crisis. We tried to warn the public of the very consequences that are unfolding today: abuse of power, incompetence, loss of lives and livelihoods of many Americans, and an existential threat to human civilization itself.
Drs. Nanette Gartrell and Dee Mosbacher were among the first to open a national conversation about this problem, joining Dr. Judith Herman in writing a letter to then-President Barack Obama about the then-president-elect's need for a thorough neuropsychiatric evaluation. The actions they took to make the letter known are how the authors of The Dangerous Case came together, and how thousands of mental health professionals would follow from around the world.
Briefly, Dr. Gartrell is a psychiatrist, researcher, and writer who was formerly on the faculties of Harvard Medical School and the University of California, San Francisco. Her half-century of groundbreaking scientific investigations have contributed greatly to our understanding of sexual minority parent families, and have brought her numerous awards, including a recent Alexandra Symonds Award for her outstanding contributions to the advancement of women.
Dr. Mosbacher is a psychiatrist and Academy Award–nominated documentary filmmaker who was formerly on the faculty of the University of California, San Francisco. As a public-sector psychiatrist, she served as San Mateo County's medical director for mental health and as senior psychiatrist at San Francisco's Progress Foundation. Her films are also contained within the Smithsonian National Museum of American History collection.
Together, they authored the essay, "He's Got the World in His Hands and His Finger on the Trigger" for The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, outlining how a medical advisory body for the 25th Amendment should form.
Lee: The 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution addresses presidential disability and succession, and your recommendations, almost four years ago, for a body to be set up in its context seem remarkably prescient now. The president's recent erratic behavior seems to have driven even Speaker Nancy Pelosi into introducing new legislation. She stated that the legislation would create a "Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of Office" that includes outside experts tasked with evaluating his mental and physical health. Would you remind us of the recommendations you yourselves gave?
Gartrell: Under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Congress may constitute an independent, nonpartisan panel of mental health and medical experts to evaluate Donald Trump's capability to fulfill the responsibilities of the presidency. We have recommended that the panel should consist of three neuropsychiatrists (one clinical, one academic, and one military), one clinical psychologist, one neurologist, and two internists. Our model states that the panel should be based on medical criteria, and appointed by an agency such as the nonpartisan, nongovernmental National Academy of Medicine nominating panelists, who may serve six-year terms.
Mosbacher: We stated that Congress should enact legislation to authorize this panel to perform comprehensive mental health and medical evaluations of the president and vice president on an annual basis. Also, the legislation should require the panel to evaluate all future presidential and vice-presidential candidates, and should be empowered to conduct emergency evaluations should there be an acute change in the mental or physical health of the president or vice president.
This is without doubt one of the greatest needs of our time. Yet it appears that the proposed commission will not form before 2024, and it may even die in the process if there is no presidential signature to allow it to become law. This seems a lesson not to wait until matters become very dire. What are your thoughts now?
Mosbacher: Speaker Pelosi stated that the legislation applies to future presidents, but Donald Trump's behavior reminds us of the importance of the president's mental fitness in a nuclear age. We call on our elected officials to heed the warnings of thousands of mental health professionals who have requested an independent, impartial neuropsychiatric evaluation of Donald Trump. The world as we know it could still cease to exist with a 3:00 a.m. nuclear tweet.
Gartrell: Throughout U.S. history, presidents have suffered from serious psychiatric or medical conditions, most of which were unknown to the public. For example, Presidents Pierce and Lincoln had symptoms of depression. Nixon and Johnson, paranoia. Reagan, dementia. And President Wilson experienced a massive stroke that resulted in severely impaired cognitive functioning. Although military personnel who are responsible for relaying nuclear orders must undergo rigorous mental health and medical evaluations that assess psychological, financial, and medical fitness for duty, there is no such requirement for the Commander in Chief.
With Dr. Herman, you—a team of three brave women—became the inspiration for our book, The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, when you came forth with the first substantial public warning, which was pioneering for our profession. Would you describe what you did to get there?
Gartrell: Over the course of the U.S. 2016 presidential campaign, it became increasingly apparent that Donald Trump's inability or unwillingness to distinguish fact from fiction, wanton disregard for the rule of law, intolerance of perspectives different from his own, rageful responses to criticism, lack of impulse control, and sweeping condemnations of entire populations rendered him temperamentally unsuitable to be in command of the nuclear arsenal. When he became the president-elect, we, as psychiatrists, had grave concerns about his mental stability and fitness for office. In November 2016, we received a call from our psychiatrist friend and colleague Dr. Judith Herman, who shared our concerns about Mr. Trump's grandiose, belligerent, and unpredictable behavior. She proposed that we send a private letter to President Obama outlining our observations, and recommending an impartial psychiatric evaluation of the president-elect.
We agreed that such an assessment was warranted as a matter of national security. Dr. Herman offered to draft the letter. At the end of November, the letter was sent to President Obama, stating that Mr. Trump's "widely reported symptoms of mental instability—including grandiosity, impulsivity, hypersensitivity to slights or criticism, and an apparent inability to distinguish fantasy from reality—lead us to question his fitness for the immense responsibilities of the office." We also strongly recommended that the president-elect receive a "full medical and neuropsychiatric evaluation by an impartial team of investigators." We heard nothing from the White House.
Mosbacher: In December 2016, a journalist contacted us, and we decided that we were willing to take the step of sharing our letter, in the interest of placing our recommendation in the public discourse. This led to the letter being published in the Huffington Post and going viral. We declined all requests for further comment, since most journalists wanted us to specify psychiatric diagnoses for the president-elect, even though we had not personally evaluated him. Instead, Gloria Steinem posted the article on her Facebook page, and contacted Dr. Herman to brainstorm about who in the government could implement our recommendation. Robin Morgan suggested that we convey our letter to Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and reminded us of the series of events that transpired during the final days of the Nixon administration. Because President Nixon was drinking heavily and threatening war, the secretary of defense, James Schlesinger, instructed the military not to act on orders from the White House to deploy nuclear weapons unless authorized by Schlesinger or the secretary of state, Henry Kissinger.
In January 2017, we sent our letter to Chairman Dunford, with the subject line: "An urgent matter of national security." A week later, Dr. Gartrell met a woman who worked in government intelligence. Dr. Gartrell inquired if she would be willing to convey our recommendation to other professionals at the agency. The woman agreed to distribute our letter among key individuals who shared our views about Mr. Trump's mental instability. As Inauguration Day grew closer, Dr. Gartrell, Dr. Mosbacher, Dr. Herman, Gloria Steinem, and Robin Morgan decided to send our letter to members of Congress whom we know personally or to whom we had access. We also agreed to publicize our recommendation whenever there was an opportunity. Our message was that, all in all, Mr. Trump's hostile, impulsive, provocative, suspicious, and erratic conduct poses a grave threat to our national security.
If they had listened to you, we may not be where we are today, the most dangerous point of this presidency. It is frightening to observe his potential for apocalyptic self-destructiveness, as his fragile ego is injured, and he is filled with rage at the prospect of people falling away from him and his power diminishing. Do you have any thoughts on how our profession can help the public meet this moment?
Gartrell: One of the greatest travesties with regard to the mental health emergency that has descended upon our nation is the stifling of expert voices. Mental health professionals can alert to the need for all future presidential and vice-presidential candidates to have fitness-for-duty evaluations before they take office, just as military personnel do.
Mosbacher: When a historic movement of mental health professionals had garnered the attention of the public so as to become the number one topic of national conversation, the American Psychiatric Association extinguished the discussion rather than supported it. When independent professionals and journalists are silenced, it is usually a first sign of tyranny. We must still speak the truth to protect people everywhere.
Read previous interviews with Dr. Robert Jay Lifton, Dr. Judith Herman, and Dr. James Gilligan.
Follow Dr. Lee at bandylee.com.