alternet--2020-10-19--Legal marijuana is on the ballot in Big Sky Country

Come November 3 , Big Sky Country could be among the latest places to free the weed .
As is the case in Arizona , New Jersey , and South Dakota , marijuana legalization is on the ballot in Montana in 2020 .
In Montana , though , people will be voting on not one but two complementary initiatives .
While I-190 would legalize marijuana , CI-118 would amend the state constitution to allow for the age of majority—set at 18—to be raised for purchasing , consuming , or possessing marijuana as it is for alcohol .
I-190 would legalize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marijuana by adults 21 and over and allow for the home cultivation of up to four plants and four seedlings .
It would also designate the state department of revenue to regulate marijuana commerce , from cultivation to retail sales .
The initiative sets a retail tax of 20 percent on marijuana and marijuana-infused products for non-medical use .
And that 's become a selling point for legalization : It can help fund state spending with the budget stressed by the coronavirus pandemic .
A September report from the University of Montana Bureau @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax revenues from legal marijuana sales would generate between $ 43 million and $ 52 million a year in the first four years after legalization .
`` Following in the footsteps of eleven other states , Montana voters have the opportunity to legalize recreational marijuana for people over the age of 21 by passing both CI-118 and I-190 , '' said an op-ed by the Public Lands Coalition , which wants to see revenues from marijuana support projects like Habitat Montana , which works to `` increase access to landlocked public lands .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Montana effort to legalize marijuana differs from other states , though .
Roughly 50 percent of the revenue generated from recreational marijuana sales would support state public lands by funding efforts like Habitat Montana .
These funds are critical in order to maintain abundant wildlife populations and ensure our outdoor economy continues to thrive . ''
`` Our research has always shown that a majority of Montanans support legalization , and now voters will have the opportunity to enact that policy , which will create jobs and generate new revenue for our state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spokesperson for New Approach Montana , which is organizing the campaign for the initiatives .
`` It also means that law enforcement will stop wasting time and resources arresting adults for personal marijuana possession , and instead focus on real crime . ''
There is no recent polling to back up Petersen 's claims , but a pair of older polls suggest he could be onto something .
A February University of Montana Big Sky poll had recreational marijuana legalization winning 54 percent against 37 percent who were not in favor of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 Big Sky poll that had support at 51 percent .
That 's not an especially comfortable lead for a ballot initiative , since organized opposition later in the campaign can eat away at support .
And in September , organized opposition emerged in the form of Wrong for Montana .
Led by Billings businessman Stephen Zabawa , a persistent foe of marijuana reforms , the group is also supported by the Montana Family Foundation and the Montana Contractors Association .
Zabawa said he had launched a billboard and digital media campaign against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our message will be well-received , it 'll be shared , and it 'll be taken from family to family , '' he said .
`` I believe that , at the end of the day , the legalization issue will go away in the state of Montana . ''
Wrong for Montana has reported about $ 78,000 in donations and has already spent $ 61,000 , leaving a paltry $ 17,000 to campaign with .
New Approach Montana , on the other hand , has raised nearly $ 7 million in total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cash to play with .
It has spent $ 2.3 million of this money on a late campaign TV ad blitz for October and November .
The campaign 's coffers were filled largely by the national New Approach PAC , which supports various drug reform efforts around the country and has kicked in nearly $ 2 million , and the North Fund , which has donated $ 4.7 million .
A somewhat mysterious entity whose funders remain unknown , the North Fund has also donated big bucks to a campaign for D.C. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Missouri .
All that money and all those TV ads should help New Approach Montana get over the finish line come November 3 .
But it will be nail-biting time until all the votes are counted .

Come November 3, Big Sky Country could be among the latest places to free the weed. As is the case in Arizona, New Jersey, and South Dakota, marijuana legalization is on the ballot in Montana in 2020.
In Montana, though, people will be voting on not one but two complementary initiatives. While I-190 would legalize marijuana, CI-118 would amend the state constitution to allow for the age of majority—set at 18—to be raised for purchasing, consuming, or possessing marijuana as it is for alcohol.
I-190 would legalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults 21 and over and allow for the home cultivation of up to four plants and four seedlings. It would also designate the state department of revenue to regulate marijuana commerce, from cultivation to retail sales. The initiative sets a retail tax of 20 percent on marijuana and marijuana-infused products for non-medical use.
And that's become a selling point for legalization: It can help fund state spending with the budget stressed by the coronavirus pandemic. A September report from the University of Montana Bureau of Business and Economic Research found that tax revenues from legal marijuana sales would generate between $43 million and $52 million a year in the first four years after legalization.
"Following in the footsteps of eleven other states, Montana voters have the opportunity to legalize recreational marijuana for people over the age of 21 by passing both CI-118 and I-190," said an op-ed by the Public Lands Coalition, which wants to see revenues from marijuana support projects like Habitat Montana, which works to "increase access to landlocked public lands." The op-ed continued: "The Montana effort to legalize marijuana differs from other states, though. Roughly 50 percent of the revenue generated from recreational marijuana sales would support state public lands by funding efforts like Habitat Montana. These funds are critical in order to maintain abundant wildlife populations and ensure our outdoor economy continues to thrive."
"Our research has always shown that a majority of Montanans support legalization, and now voters will have the opportunity to enact that policy, which will create jobs and generate new revenue for our state," said Pepper Petersen, a spokesperson for New Approach Montana, which is organizing the campaign for the initiatives. "It also means that law enforcement will stop wasting time and resources arresting adults for personal marijuana possession, and instead focus on real crime."
There is no recent polling to back up Petersen's claims, but a pair of older polls suggest he could be onto something. A February University of Montana Big Sky poll had recreational marijuana legalization winning 54 percent against 37 percent who were not in favor of this. That was up from a March 2019 Big Sky poll that had support at 51 percent.
That's not an especially comfortable lead for a ballot initiative, since organized opposition later in the campaign can eat away at support. And in September, organized opposition emerged in the form of Wrong for Montana. Led by Billings businessman Stephen Zabawa, a persistent foe of marijuana reforms, the group is also supported by the Montana Family Foundation and the Montana Contractors Association.
Zabawa said he had launched a billboard and digital media campaign against the two marijuana legalization measures. "Our message will be well-received, it'll be shared, and it'll be taken from family to family," he said. "I believe that, at the end of the day, the legalization issue will go away in the state of Montana."
Wrong for Montana has reported about $78,000 in donations and has already spent $61,000, leaving a paltry $17,000 to campaign with. New Approach Montana, on the other hand, has raised nearly $7 million in total and still has around $1.6 million in cash to play with. It has spent $2.3 million of this money on a late campaign TV ad blitz for October and November.
The campaign's coffers were filled largely by the national New Approach PAC, which supports various drug reform efforts around the country and has kicked in nearly $2 million, and the North Fund, which has donated $4.7 million. A somewhat mysterious entity whose funders remain unknown, the North Fund has also donated big bucks to a campaign for D.C. statehood and an effort to expand Medicaid in Missouri.
All that money and all those TV ads should help New Approach Montana get over the finish line come November 3. But it will be nail-biting time until all the votes are counted.


alternet--2020-10-19--Here's the simple truth about the fake Hunter Biden scandal Team Trump wishes was a 'smoking gun'

Donald Trump is trying hard to recreate the perfect storm that landed him in the White House in 2016 despite being the most unpopular candidate in the modern polling era .
That year , the Clinton campaign 's hacked emails were dribbled out over the final six weeks of the race .
There was n't much to them , but internal campaign communications tend to be frank and are easily mined for scandalettes .
Having established the storyline that Clinton was as corrupt as Trump , they provided a steady stream of stories with `` emails reveal '' in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's narrative .
We can expect a similar stream of stories of ostensible `` smoking guns '' stemming from Hunter Biden 's emails ( whether hacked or fabricated ) to come our way in the final weeks of this race .
And some people who want to see themselves as fair will inadvertently amplify the right 's preferred narratives by assuming that there must be something there .
So it 's very important to keep in mind that the `` scandal '' is supposed to be that then-Vice President Joe Biden pushed for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Viktor Shokin , to stave off an investigation into Burisma Holdings -- the Ukrainian gas company whose Board Hunter sat on -- in order to protect his son .
It is supposed to be a story about conflict of interest -- of the elder Biden using the office of the Vice Presidency to help his son .
There is not a shred of truth to those claims .
The effort to get Shokin fired `` was prompted by a push for anti-corruption reforms developed at the State Department and coordinated with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' The Washington Post reported .
And according to CNN , a bipartisan `` letter from 2016 shows that Republican senators pushed for reforms to Ukraine 's prosecutor general 's office and judiciary , echoing calls then-Vice President Joe Biden made at the time . ''
Shokin was corrupt , and that was a problem .
Vitaliy Kasko , a former deputy of Shokin 's who resigned over his boss 's habit of stymieing corruption probes , told Bloomberg that Shokin was not investigating Burisma during the period in question .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. to close cases against '' the firm or its owner .
`` It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015 , '' Kasko said .
And Daria Kaleniuk , a prominent Ukrainian anti-corruption crusader , told The Washington Post that `` Shokin was fired not because he wanted to do that investigation , but quite to the contrary , because he failed that investigation . ''
Without some impropriety on Joe Biden 's part , Hunter Biden 's business ventures are n't a story .
He is n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if not most children of the powerful , the younger Biden leveraged both his family name and the connections he 'd made at Yale to land various business deal and secure a cushy , high-paying position on a corporate board .
Both Hunter and Joe Biden have acknowledged that associating himself with a shady Ukrainian gas company -- as opposed to , say , a reputable American or Western European firm -- was an error of judgment , but it was neither illegal nor unethical .
This is n't a meritocracy , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power are reproduced from one generation to the next .
It 's distasteful and unfair , but that 's a class issue , not a scandal .
Hunter is n't running for office and his judgment , or lack thereof , is n't a matter of public concern .
Joe Biden spent years in the Senate , and year after year he ranked among the least wealthy members of that body .
We know how he came into his wealth -- mostly through a multi-million dollar book advance and speaking gigs after leaving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's cup of tea , but there 's no evidence that he 's corrupt .

Donald Trump is trying hard to recreate the perfect storm that landed him in the White House in 2016 despite being the most unpopular candidate in the modern polling era. That year, the Clinton campaign's hacked emails were dribbled out over the final six weeks of the race. There wasn't much to them, but internal campaign communications tend to be frank and are easily mined for scandalettes. Having established the storyline that Clinton was as corrupt as Trump, they provided a steady stream of stories with "emails reveal" in the headlines which served to reinforce the right's narrative.
We can expect a similar stream of stories of ostensible "smoking guns" stemming from Hunter Biden's emails (whether hacked or fabricated) to come our way in the final weeks of this race. And some people who want to see themselves as fair will inadvertently amplify the right's preferred narratives by assuming that there must be something there.
So it's very important to keep in mind that the "scandal" is supposed to be that then-Vice President Joe Biden pushed for the removal of Ukraine's top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, to stave off an investigation into Burisma Holdings--the Ukrainian gas company whose Board Hunter sat on--in order to protect his son. It is supposed to be a story about conflict of interest--of the elder Biden using the office of the Vice Presidency to help his son.
There is not a shred of truth to those claims. The effort to get Shokin fired "was prompted by a push for anti-corruption reforms developed at the State Department and coordinated with the European Union and the International Monetary Fund," The Washington Post reported. And according to CNN, a bipartisan "letter from 2016 shows that Republican senators pushed for reforms to Ukraine's prosecutor general's office and judiciary, echoing calls then-Vice President Joe Biden made at the time."
Shokin was corrupt, and that was a problem. Vitaliy Kasko, a former deputy of Shokin's who resigned over his boss's habit of stymieing corruption probes, told Bloombergthat Shokin was not investigating Burisma during the period in question. "There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against" the firm or its owner. "It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015," Kasko said. And Daria Kaleniuk, a prominent Ukrainian anti-corruption crusader, told The Washington Post that "Shokin was fired not because he wanted to do that investigation, but quite to the contrary, because he failed that investigation."
Without some impropriety on Joe Biden's part, Hunter Biden's business ventures aren't a story. He isn't running for office. Like many, if not most children of the powerful, the younger Biden leveraged both his family name and the connections he'd made at Yale to land various business deal and secure a cushy, high-paying position on a corporate board. Both Hunter and Joe Biden have acknowledged that associating himself with a shady Ukrainian gas company--as opposed to, say, a reputable American or Western European firm--was an error of judgment, but it was neither illegal nor unethical. This isn't a meritocracy, and this is one way that wealth and power are reproduced from one generation to the next. It's distasteful and unfair, but that's a class issue, not a scandal. Hunter isn't running for office and his judgment, or lack thereof, isn't a matter of public concern.
Joe Biden spent years in the Senate, and year after year he ranked among the least wealthy members of that body. We know how he came into his wealth--mostly through a multi-million dollar book advance and speaking gigs after leaving office. Biden may not be everyone's cup of tea, but there's no evidence that he's corrupt.


alternet--2020-10-19--Trump could sink vulnerable Senate Republicans even in states he manages to win

Donald Trump 's parting gift to vulnerable Senate Republicans is that he appears to be a drag on them with both his most loyal supporters and the swing voters they need to win their reelection bids .
In several of the most crucial Senate races , Trump is running ahead of his Senate GOP counterparts .
In some cases , Trump might even win the state while the corresponding Senate Republican loses their race .
In others , they both appear poised to lose the state but the Senate Republican could suffer a bigger defeat .
What this suggests is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enthusiasts is n't making the 1-to-1 transfer to his Senate colleagues—meaning their blind loyalty to Trump has n't paid the dividends they anticipated .
At the same time , Senate Republicans ' studied obsequiousness to Trump has hobbled their chances of winning enough moderate and independent voters to be assured they can prevail in their reelection bids .
In North Carolina , for instance , Trump and GOP Sen. Thom Tillis are both losing to their Democratic rivals according to polling composites , but Tillis is running behind Trump .
According to Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has 45 % support to Tillis ' 41 % .
In Georgia , the Post has Trump running slightly ahead of Joe Biden , 48 % to 46 % , but Sen. David Perdue only garners 46 % support .
It 's worth noting the some aggregates show Biden just slightly ahead or virtually tied .
But more crucially to Sen. Perdue , if he ca n't clear the 50 % threshold in the state , he 'll be forced into a two-way runoff with Democrat Jon Ossoff .
South Carolina 's Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lindsey Graham is still favored to win reelection , though Democrat Jamie Harrison has made a real race of it .
But in last week 's New York Times/Siena poll , for instance , Trump enjoyed a `` very favorable '' rating among 79 % of GOP voters while only 54 % said the same of Graham .
The survey also showed Trump up by 8 points , while Graham was winning by 6 points .
In Iowa , polls show a dead heat between Trump and Biden in the presidential race but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against her Democratic challenger Theresa Greenfield .
The Post aggregates have Trump winning 46 % of voters to Ernst 's 44 % of voters .
It 's kind of beautiful , when you think about it .
After Senate Republicans built Trump into a monster by underwriting every abhorrent thing he 's done and then acquitting him of all wrongdoing to boot , they 're getting punished for selling out America on both sides of the electoral equation .

Donald Trump's parting gift to vulnerable Senate Republicans is that he appears to be a drag on them with both his most loyal supporters and the swing voters they need to win their reelection bids.
In several of the most crucial Senate races, Trump is running ahead of his Senate GOP counterparts. In some cases, Trump might even win the state while the corresponding Senate Republican loses their race. In others, they both appear poised to lose the state but the Senate Republican could suffer a bigger defeat.
What this suggests is that Trump's wild support among MAGA enthusiasts isn't making the 1-to-1 transfer to his Senate colleagues—meaning their blind loyalty to Trump hasn't paid the dividends they anticipated. At the same time, Senate Republicans' studied obsequiousness to Trump has hobbled their chances of winning enough moderate and independent voters to be assured they can prevail in their reelection bids.
In North Carolina, for instance, Trump and GOP Sen. Thom Tillis are both losing to their Democratic rivals according to polling composites, but Tillis is running behind Trump. According to Washington Post aggregates of the races, Trump has 45% support to Tillis' 41%.
In Georgia, the Post has Trump running slightly ahead of Joe Biden, 48% to 46%, but Sen. David Perdue only garners 46% support. It's worth noting the some aggregates show Biden just slightly ahead or virtually tied. But more crucially to Sen. Perdue, if he can't clear the 50% threshold in the state, he'll be forced into a two-way runoff with Democrat Jon Ossoff.
South Carolina's Senate race is wild and GOP incumbent Senator Lindsey Graham is still favored to win reelection, though Democrat Jamie Harrison has made a real race of it. But in last week's New York Times/Siena poll, for instance, Trump enjoyed a "very favorable" rating among 79% of GOP voters while only 54% said the same of Graham. The survey also showed Trump up by 8 points, while Graham was winning by 6 points.
In Iowa, polls show a dead heat between Trump and Biden in the presidential race but incumbent Senator Joni Ernst is fairing worse against her Democratic challenger Theresa Greenfield. The Post aggregates have Trump winning 46% of voters to Ernst's 44% of voters.
It's kind of beautiful, when you think about it. After Senate Republicans built Trump into a monster by underwriting every abhorrent thing he's done and then acquitting him of all wrongdoing to boot, they're getting punished for selling out America on both sides of the electoral equation.


alternet--2020-10-19--Even Fox News refused to publish Giuliani’s 'sketchy' Hunter Biden email story

Months ago President Donald Trump 's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani approached Fox News with the story published last week by the New York Post .
The infamously anti-Biden , pro-Trump conservative media outlet refused to publish it .
Giuliani , according to a Mediaite exclusive , ended up going to the less-reputable Post ( both are owned by Rupert Murdoch ) because , as he said , he wanted a publisher to not vet the information he gave them .
And even now , Fox News is n't pushing the apparently fraudulent story , which alleges that Giuliani got hold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden 's son Hunter dropped off at a Delaware repair shop , did not leave his name , and never returned to retrieve .
In fact , two sources tell Mediaite that `` the lack of authentication of Hunter Biden 's alleged laptop , combined with established concerns about Giuliani as a reliable source and his desire for unvetted publication , led the network 's news division to pass . ''
Fox News ' top anchors are running away from the story .
`` Let 's say , just not sugarcoat it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bret Baier said .
Calling the story `` suspicious , Chris Wallace said , `` I can understand the concern about this story .
It is completely unverified and frankly , Rudy Giuliani is not the most reliable source anymore .
I hate to say that , but it 's just true . ''

Months ago President Donald Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani approached Fox News with the story published last week by the New York Post. The infamously anti-Biden, pro-Trump conservative media outlet refused to publish it.
Giuliani, according to a Mediaite exclusive, ended up going to the less-reputable Post (both are owned by Rupert Murdoch) because, as he said, he wanted a publisher to not vet the information he gave them.
And even now, Fox News isn't pushing the apparently fraudulent story, which alleges that Giuliani got hold of a laptop former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter dropped off at a Delaware repair shop, did not leave his name, and never returned to retrieve.
In fact, two sources tell Mediaite that "the lack of authentication of Hunter Biden's alleged laptop, combined with established concerns about Giuliani as a reliable source and his desire for unvetted publication, led the network's news division to pass."
Fox News' top anchors are running away from the story.
"Let's say, just not sugarcoat it. The whole thing is sketchy," Bret Baier said.
Calling the story "suspicious, Chris Wallace said, "I can understand the concern about this story. It is completely unverified and frankly, Rudy Giuliani is not the most reliable source anymore. I hate to say that, but it's just true."


alternet--2020-10-19--Misogyny helped Trump in 2016 — and he wants to repeat by attacking Gretchen Whitmer. So far it's no

Misogyny helped Trump in 2016 — and he wants to repeat by attacking Gretchen Whitmer. So far it's not working

Donald Trump is getting hammered , badly , by female voters in the national polls .
In the lastest NPR/PBS poll , Democratic nominee Joe Biden is leading Trump among women by 25 points .
The Washington Post/ABC News poll shows a similar spread , with Biden beating Trump by 23 points with women .
Even the Fox News polling data puts Biden ahead of Trump by 19 points among female voters .
Trump is doing much better with male voters , but considering that women tend to vote at higher rates than men , Trump simply ca n't count @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another Electoral College victory .
Facing a very high chance that female voters will send him packing next month send Trump packing in November — FiveThirtyEight 's odds of a Biden victory , as of Monday morning are at 88 % — how did the pussy-grabbing president react ?
By laughingl encouraging a crowd in Michigan , at another of his largely mask-free rallies , to chant , `` Lock her up ! ''
`` Lock her up ?
Lock them all up ! ''
Trump responded in glee .
That chant was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aimed at Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on the fallacious grounds that she had supposedly committed some crime for which she was escaping justice .
( As usual , this was pure projection from Trump , who knew at the time he was a tax fraud and serial sexual assailant , whereas decades of effort to turn up some kind of malfeasance to pin on Clinton have resulted in bupkis . )
This time , even that thin pretense was dropped , as the chant was aimed at Michigan 's Democratic governor , Gretchen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even falsely or facetiously , of committing any crimes .
Whitmer 's only `` crime '' is being a woman — and a conventionally attractive woman , at that — who Trump ca n't control .
Trump has spent months publicly lashing out at Whitmer , who , like most Democratic governors , rejected Trump 's demands that she ignore public health recommendations to slow the coronavirus spread .
Instead , Whitmer instituted restrictions that have likely saved tens of thousands of lives .
Trump and his loyal followers have n't let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over what he clearly sees an unforgivable act of female defiance .
`` Lock her up ! ''
was always a misogynist battle cry , a prescription offered by Trump and his followers for any and all women who commit the `` crime '' of thinking themselves equal to men .
Aimed at Whitmer , the charade that this was ever about anything but misogyny has been dropped .
The sadism of all this is particularly gruesome , in light of the recent arrest of a group of would-be domestic terrorists who were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ murderer .
The all-male would-be kidnappers fantasized about holding a `` trial '' for Whitmer on made-up charges before killing her , showcasing the extremely toxic , anxiety-ridden masculinity that Trump is calling forth from his most avid supporters .
It is traditional in more Politico-style publications , to attribute Trump 's behavior in cases like this to some kind of `` strategy , '' perhaps complete with quotes from Republican consultants eager to spin this to make their candidate look savvy .
Hell , maybe Trump really does think this sort of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as disobedient will drive up his margins among resentful white men , and drag more of them to the polls .
But it 's more likely that this is just Trump and his voters , throwing a massive temper tantrum , exposing the immaturity and insecurity that has always underpinned right-wing notions of masculinity .
After all , Trump — who always had poor impulse control — has been even less in charge of his motormouth lately , complaining even more than usual during his speeches about how he does n't want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially women , for rejecting him .
It 's rational to be concerned this might work , of course .
While racism was a leading factor in driving voters to Trump in 2016 , sexism was right up there with it .
Research shows that harboring beliefs characterized as `` hostile sexism '' — which is to say anger at women for speaking up or wanting equality — was as strong a predictor of a Trump vote as harboring racist beliefs .
Those same voters are out there , chanting `` lock her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may have changed is that there 's a strong feminist response to this misogyny this time around .
In 2016 , American women who did n't like this kind of sexism were cowed by sneering accusations of being `` vagina voters , '' sometimes even from the left .
There was a general fear of being seen as hysterical for raising the alarm about sexism , especially when it seemed almost certain that Clinton would win the election .
Clinton 's defeat came as an emotional shock to the system , not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for men who feel repulsed by the levels of sexism that clearly still exist in our society .
While it feels roughly one billion years ago in Trump years , it was less than four years ago that millions of people ( most but by no means all of them women ) hit the streets for the Women 's March , likely the biggest single-day protest in American history .
That anger and momentum fed into the 2018 midterms , where a record number of voters turned out and Democrats swept to victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ female voters , 59 % of whom voted for the Democrats , whereas just 54 % of women voted for Clinton in 2016 .
Even among white women , a slight majority of whom supported Trump in 2016 , shifted left , even as 60 % of white men stuck with Republicans .
`` Barring a giant polling error , the 2020 election will witness the largest gender gap in partisan preference since women gained the franchise , '' Eric Levitz writes in New York .
`` In 2016 , the gender gap @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if current polls hold steady , it will be 28 . ''
It 's telling that Trump and his followers respond to this not by considering what it would take to attract more female voters — dialing down the misogyny a bit , perhaps ?
— but instead by chanting `` Lock her up '' at yet another female politician .
Fear of women 's autonomy , along with racism , has been one of the twin carburetors driving Trumpism .
The irony is that Trump and his largely male supporters , by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly what they fear to happen : Women turning away from them in increasing numbers .
Plenty of women did n't want to believe that patriarchy is still a problem , but it 's hard to deny that when men are literally demanding women be locked up .
Two weeks remain until the election , of course , and it 's conceivable that some of the women who currently tell pollsters that they 're voting against men 's wishes will chicken out by Election Day .
But right now , there 's a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump and his fans chant `` Lock her up '' and realizing that they have to fight for their freedom .

Donald Trump is getting hammered, badly, by female voters in the national polls. In the lastest NPR/PBS poll, Democratic nominee Joe Biden is leading Trump among women by 25 points. The Washington Post/ABC News poll shows a similar spread, with Biden beating Trump by 23 points with women. Even the Fox News polling data puts Biden ahead of Trump by 19 points among female voters. Trump is doing much better with male voters, but considering that women tend to vote at higher rates than men, Trump simply can't count on male support to push him to another Electoral College victory.
Facing a very high chance that female voters will send him packing next month send Trump packing in November — FiveThirtyEight's odds of a Biden victory, as of Monday morning are at 88% — how did the pussy-grabbing president react? By laughingl encouraging a crowd in Michigan, at another of his largely mask-free rallies, to chant, "Lock her up!"
"Lock her up? Lock them all up!" Trump responded in glee.
That chant was a Trump-rally greatest hit in 2016, aimed at Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on the fallacious grounds that she had supposedly committed some crime for which she was escaping justice. (As usual, this was pure projection from Trump, who knew at the time he was a tax fraud and serial sexual assailant, whereas decades of effort to turn up some kind of malfeasance to pin on Clinton have resulted in bupkis.) This time, even that thin pretense was dropped, as the chant was aimed at Michigan's Democratic governor, Gretchen Whitmer, who hasn't been accused, even falsely or facetiously, of committing any crimes.
Whitmer's only "crime" is being a woman — and a conventionally attractive woman, at that — who Trump can't control. Trump has spent months publicly lashing out at Whitmer, who, like most Democratic governors, rejected Trump's demands that she ignore public health recommendations to slow the coronavirus spread. Instead, Whitmer instituted restrictions that have likely saved tens of thousands of lives. Trump and his loyal followers haven't let go of this, and keep obsessing over what he clearly sees an unforgivable act of female defiance.
"Lock her up!" was always a misogynist battle cry, a prescription offered by Trump and his followers for any and all women who commit the "crime" of thinking themselves equal to men. Aimed at Whitmer, the charade that this was ever about anything but misogyny has been dropped.
The sadism of all this is particularly gruesome, in light of the recent arrest of a group of would-be domestic terrorists who were plotting to kidnap Whitmer, and perhaps murderer. The all-male would-be kidnappers fantasized about holding a "trial" for Whitmer on made-up charges before killing her, showcasing the extremely toxic, anxiety-ridden masculinity that Trump is calling forth from his most avid supporters.
It is traditional in more Politico-style publications, to attribute Trump's behavior in cases like this to some kind of "strategy," perhaps complete with quotes from Republican consultants eager to spin this to make their candidate look savvy. Hell, maybe Trump really does think this sort of grotesque malice toward women he's marked as disobedient will drive up his margins among resentful white men, and drag more of them to the polls.
But it's more likely that this is just Trump and his voters, throwing a massive temper tantrum, exposing the immaturity and insecurity that has always underpinned right-wing notions of masculinity. After all, Trump — who always had poor impulse control — has been even less in charge of his motormouth lately, complaining even more than usual during his speeches about how he doesn't want to lose and lashing out at voters, especially women, for rejecting him.
It's rational to be concerned this might work, of course. While racism was a leading factor in driving voters to Trump in 2016, sexism was right up there with it. Research shows that harboring beliefs characterized as "hostile sexism" — which is to say anger at women for speaking up or wanting equality — was as strong a predictor of a Trump vote as harboring racist beliefs. Those same voters are out there, chanting "lock her up" at rallies.
But what may have changed is that there's a strong feminist response to this misogyny this time around. In 2016, American women who didn't like this kind of sexism were cowed by sneering accusations of being "vagina voters," sometimes even from the left. There was a general fear of being seen as hysterical for raising the alarm about sexism, especially when it seemed almost certain that Clinton would win the election.
Clinton's defeat came as an emotional shock to the system, not just for many American women, but also for men who feel repulsed by the levels of sexism that clearly still exist in our society.
While it feels roughly one billion years ago in Trump years, it was less than four years ago that millions of people (most but by no means all of them women) hit the streets for the Women's March, likely the biggest single-day protest in American history. That anger and momentum fed into the 2018 midterms, where a record number of voters turned out and Democrats swept to victory in the House on the backs of female voters, 59% of whom voted for the Democrats, whereas just 54% of women voted for Clinton in 2016. Even among white women, a slight majority of whom supported Trump in 2016, shifted left, even as 60% of white men stuck with Republicans.
"Barring a giant polling error, the 2020 election will witness the largest gender gap in partisan preference since women gained the franchise," Eric Levitz writes in New York. "In 2016, the gender gap in voting preference was 20 points; if current polls hold steady, it will be 28."
It's telling that Trump and his followers respond to this not by considering what it would take to attract more female voters — dialing down the misogyny a bit, perhaps? — but instead by chanting "Lock her up" at yet another female politician. Fear of women's autonomy, along with racism, has been one of the twin carburetors driving Trumpism.
The irony is that Trump and his largely male supporters, by expressing such overt hatred, have caused exactly what they fear to happen: Women turning away from them in increasing numbers. Plenty of women didn't want to believe that patriarchy is still a problem, but it's hard to deny that when men are literally demanding women be locked up. Two weeks remain until the election, of course, and it's conceivable that some of the women who currently tell pollsters that they're voting against men's wishes will chicken out by Election Day. But right now, there's a good chance that women are hearing Donald Trump and his fans chant "Lock her up" and realizing that they have to fight for their freedom.


alternet--2020-10-19--Robert Reich on the public, personal and total hypocrisy of the GOP

Trump and many Republicans insist that the decisions whether to wear a mask , go to a bar or gym , or work or attend school during a pandemic should be personal .
Government should play no role .
Yet they also insist that what a woman does with her own body or whether same-sex couples can marry should be decided by government .
It 's a tortured , topsy-turvy view of what 's public and what 's private .
Yet it 's remarkably prevalent as the pandemic resurges and as the Senate considers Trump 's pick for the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has wisely declared he would do `` whatever it takes '' to stop the pandemic , including mandating masks and locking down the entire economy if scientists recommend it .
`` I would shut it down ; I would listen to the scientists , '' he said .
And Biden wants to protect both abortion and same-sex marriage from government intrusion .
In 2012 he memorably declared his support of the latter before even Barack Obama did so .
Trump 's opposite approaches , discouraging masks and other Covid restrictions while seeking government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes , have become the de facto centerpieces of his campaign .
At his `` town hall '' on Thursday night , Trump falsely claimed that most people who wear masks contract the virus .
He also criticized governors for ordering lockdowns , adding that Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer `` wants to be a dictator . ''
( He was speaking just one week after state and federal authorities announced they had thwarted an alleged plot to kidnap and possibly kill Whitmer . )
Attorney General William Barr – once again contesting Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called state lockdown orders the `` greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history '' since slavery .
Yet at the very same time Trump and his fellow-travelers defend peoples ' freedom to infect others or become infected with Covid-19 , they 're inviting government to intrude into the most intimate aspects of personal life .
Trump has promised that the Supreme Court 's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision , establishing a federal right to abortion , will be reversed `` because I am putting pro-life justices on the court . ''
Much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court hinges on her putative willingness to repeal Roe .
While an appeals court judge , Barrett ruled in favor of a law requiring doctors to inform the parents of any minor seeking an abortion , without exceptions , and also joined a dissenting opinion suggesting that an Indiana state law requiring burial or cremation of fetal remains was constitutional .
A Justice Barrett might also provide the deciding vote for reversing Obergefell v. Hodges , the 2015 Supreme Court decision protecting same-sex marriage .
Only three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain on the Court .
Barrett says her views are rooted in the `` text '' of the Constitution .
That 's a worrisome omen given that earlier this month Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito opined that the right to same-sex marriage `` is found nowhere in the text '' of the Constitution .
What 's public , what 's private , and where should government intervene ?
The question suffuses the impending election and much else in modern American life .
It is nonsensical to argue , as do Trump and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandate masks or close businesses during a pandemic but can prevent women from having abortions and same-sex couples from marrying .
The underlying issue is the common good , what we owe each other as members of the same society .
During wartime , we expect government to intrude on our daily lives for the common good : drafting us into armies , converting our workplaces and businesses , demanding we sacrifice normal pleasures and conveniences .
During a pandemic as grave as this one we should expect no less intrusion , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the risk of contracting the virus .
But we have no right to impose on each other our moral or religious views about when life begins or the nature and meaning of marriage .
The common good requires instead that we honor such profoundly personal decisions .
Public or private ?
We owe it to each other to understand the distinction .

Trump and many Republicans insist that the decisions whether to wear a mask, go to a bar or gym, or work or attend school during a pandemic should be personal. Government should play no role.
Yet they also insist that what a woman does with her own body or whether same-sex couples can marry should be decided by government.
It's a tortured, topsy-turvy view of what's public and what's private. Yet it's remarkably prevalent as the pandemic resurges and as the Senate considers Trump's pick for the Supreme Court.
By contrast, Joe Biden has wisely declared he would do "whatever it takes" to stop the pandemic, including mandating masks and locking down the entire economy if scientists recommend it. "I would shut it down; I would listen to the scientists," he said.
And Biden wants to protect both abortion and same-sex marriage from government intrusion. In 2012 he memorably declared his support of the latter before even Barack Obama did so.
Trump's opposite approaches, discouraging masks and other Covid restrictions while seeking government intrusion into the most intimate decisions anyone makes, have become the de facto centerpieces of his campaign.
At his "town hall" on Thursday night, Trump falsely claimed that most people who wear masks contract the virus.
He also criticized governors for ordering lockdowns, adding that Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer "wants to be a dictator." (He was speaking just one week after state and federal authorities announced they had thwarted an alleged plot to kidnap and possibly kill Whitmer.)
Attorney General William Barr – once again contesting Trump for the most wacky analogy – has called state lockdown orders the "greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history" since slavery.
Yet at the very same time Trump and his fellow-travelers defend peoples' freedom to infect others or become infected with Covid-19, they're inviting government to intrude into the most intimate aspects of personal life.
Trump has promised that the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, establishing a federal right to abortion, will be reversed "because I am putting pro-life justices on the court."
Much of controversy over Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court hinges on her putative willingness to repeal Roe.
While an appeals court judge, Barrett ruled in favor of a law requiring doctors to inform the parents of any minor seeking an abortion, without exceptions, and also joined a dissenting opinion suggesting that an Indiana state law requiring burial or cremation of fetal remains was constitutional.
A Justice Barrett might also provide the deciding vote for reversing Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 Supreme Court decision protecting same-sex marriage. Only three members of the majority in that case remain on the Court.
Barrett says her views are rooted in the "text" of the Constitution. That's a worrisome omen given that earlier this month Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito opined that the right to same-sex marriage "is found nowhere in the text" of the Constitution.
What's public, what's private, and where should government intervene? The question suffuses the impending election and much else in modern American life.
It is nonsensical to argue, as do Trump and his allies, that government cannot mandate masks or close businesses during a pandemic but can prevent women from having abortions and same-sex couples from marrying.
The underlying issue is the common good, what we owe each other as members of the same society. During wartime, we expect government to intrude on our daily lives for the common good: drafting us into armies, converting our workplaces and businesses, demanding we sacrifice normal pleasures and conveniences. During a pandemic as grave as this one we should expect no less intrusion, in order that we not expose each other to the risk of contracting the virus.
But we have no right to impose on each other our moral or religious views about when life begins or the nature and meaning of marriage. The common good requires instead that we honor such profoundly personal decisions.
Public or private? We owe it to each other to understand the distinction.


alternet--2020-10-19--US won’t be withdrawing from Afghanistan this year despite Trump's tweets: national security adviser

On October 7 , President Donald Trump discussed the presence of U.S. troops in Afghanistan on Twitter and posted , `` We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas . ''
But National Security Adviser Robert C. O'Brien , on Friday , said that it is unrealistic to expect the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan that soon .
The 54-year-old O'Brien , according to the Associated Press , said , `` I think what the president was doing is , he was expressing the same desire I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Whenever we 're at war , whether it was the Revolutionary War , the Civil War , World War I or World War II , all presidents ... .
want the troops home by Christmas . ''
On Friday , AP journalists Deb Riechmann and Lolita C. Baldor report that O'Brien `` appeared to take a shot at Gen. Mark Milley , chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff .
Milley , in recent days , said that the U.S. is executing a plan to reduce the number of troops to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has had a military presence in Afghanistan for many years .
During the 1980s — following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the anti-Soviet Mujahideen .
And after the al-Qaeda terrorist attacks of September 11 , 2001 , the U.S. went to war in both Iraq and Afghanistan .
O'Brien , discussing a possible reduction of U.S. troops in in Afghanistan , said , `` We 're on a path right now that looks like about 4,500 this fall and a smaller number in January and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , look , we 'd love to get people out earlier… .
In the early part of next year , we 're going to be down to 2,500 troops . ''
Riechmann and Baldor note that Trump 's October 7 tweet `` alarmed Pentagon and State Department officials who fear that putting a definitive date on troop withdrawal could undercut negotiations to finalize ongoing peace negotiations between the Taliban and representatives of Afghan society , including the current Afghan government .
They also worry that a hasty withdrawal could force the U.S. to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they continue to stress that the Taliban have still not met requirements to reduce violence against the Afghans , a key element of the U.S. withdrawal plan . ''
The AP reporters explain that `` exit from Afghanistan after 19 years was laid out in a February agreement Washington reached with the Taliban .
That agreement said U.S. troops would be out of Afghanistan in 18 months , provided the Taliban honored a commitment to fight terrorist groups , with most attention seemingly focused on the Islamic State group 's affiliate in the @ @ @

On October 7, President Donald Trump discussed the presence of U.S. troops in Afghanistan on Twitter and posted, "We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas." But National Security Adviser Robert C. O'Brien, on Friday, said that it is unrealistic to expect the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan that soon.
The 54-year-old O'Brien, according to the Associated Press, said, "I think what the president was doing is, he was expressing the same desire I think every president since the Revolutionary War has said. Whenever we're at war, whether it was the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I or World War II, all presidents.... want the troops home by Christmas."
On Friday, AP journalists Deb Riechmann and Lolita C. Baldor report that O'Brien "appeared to take a shot at Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Milley, in recent days, said that the U.S. is executing a plan to reduce the number of troops to 4,500 in November."
The U.S. has had a military presence in Afghanistan for many years. During the 1980s — following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the anti-Soviet Mujahideen. And after the al-Qaeda terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the U.S. went to war in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
O'Brien, discussing a possible reduction of U.S. troops in in Afghanistan, said, "We're on a path right now that looks like about 4,500 this fall and a smaller number in January and February, but if the conditions permitted, look, we'd love to get people out earlier…. In the early part of next year, we're going to be down to 2,500 troops."
Riechmann and Baldor note that Trump's October 7 tweet "alarmed Pentagon and State Department officials who fear that putting a definitive date on troop withdrawal could undercut negotiations to finalize ongoing peace negotiations between the Taliban and representatives of Afghan society, including the current Afghan government. They also worry that a hasty withdrawal could force the U.S. to leave behind sensitive military equipment — and they continue to stress that the Taliban have still not met requirements to reduce violence against the Afghans, a key element of the U.S. withdrawal plan."
The AP reporters explain that "exit from Afghanistan after 19 years was laid out in a February agreement Washington reached with the Taliban. That agreement said U.S. troops would be out of Afghanistan in 18 months, provided the Taliban honored a commitment to fight terrorist groups, with most attention seemingly focused on the Islamic State group's affiliate in the country."


alternet--2020-10-19--Trump 'equates wearing a mask with weakness': Fauci 'absolutely not' surprised president got COVID

Dr. Anthony Fauci said in an interview on Sunday that he was `` absolutely not '' surprised that President Donald Trump tested positive for the coronavirus after holding a `` superspreader event '' at the White House .
Fauci , the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , pushed back on the administration 's coronavirus spin in an interview with `` 60 Minutes . ''
He told CBS News medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook that he was `` absolutely not '' surprised that Trump tested positive after Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett 's announcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which also featured indoor festivities .
`` I was worried that he was going to get sick when I saw him in a completely precarious situation of crowded , no separation between people , and almost nobody wearing a mask , '' Fauci said .
`` When I saw that on TV , I said , 'Oh my goodness .
Nothing good can come outta that , that 's got ta be a problem . '
And then sure enough , it turned out to be a superspreader event . ''
`` You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mask with weakness , '' Fauci said , suggesting the president was trying to make a `` statement of strength , like , we 're strong , we do n't need a mask , that kind of thing . ''
`` Do you have a feeling that there is sometimes an all-out war against science ? ''
LaPook asked .
`` Oh yeah .
I mean , particularly over the last few years .
There 's an anti-authority feeling in the world , '' Fauci replied .
`` And science has an air @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who want to push back on authority tend to , as a sidebar , push back on science . ''
Fauci now has to be accompanied by federal agents on his routine walks after receiving threats against him and his family .
`` That 's sad .
The very fact that a public health message to save lives triggers such venom and animosity to me that it results in real and credible threats to my life and my safety , '' he said .
`` But it bothers me less than the hassling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Fauci also said he was `` really ticked off '' when the Trump campaign used his comments out of context in an advertisement .
`` I do not and nor will I ever , publicly endorse any political candidate , '' he said .
`` And here I am , they 're sticking me right in the middle of a campaign ad .
Which I thought was outrageous . ''
But even as the campaign uses him to score political points , the White House has blocked many of his media appearances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlling when you can speak with the media ? ''
LaPook asked .
`` You know , I think you 'd have to be honest and say yes , '' Fauci said .
`` I certainly have not been allowed to go on many , many , many shows that have asked for me . ''
Fauci added that that White House restrictions on his media appearances have n't been `` consistent . ''
While Fauci was highly visible at the White House coronavirus task force briefings early in the pandemic , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that of the task force .
Fauci said last week that the task force meetings have been reduced from every day to just one day a week even as the US continues to see increases in new cases .
Instead , Trump has been more interested in discrediting the scientific consensus around masks and social distancing .
He recently added controversial Dr. Scott Atlas , a neuroradiologist with no background in infectious diseases who has pushed a deadly and `` unethical '' herd immunity strategy , to the task force .
Fauci told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things that are `` out of context or actually incorrect '' and was an `` outlier '' among the infectious disease experts on the panel .
CDC Director Robert Redfield was reportedly heard saying that `` everything '' Atlas says `` is false . ''
Atlas posted a Twitter thread misrepresenting the science around masks over the weekend , writing , `` Masks work ?
NO . ''
Twitter removed the tweet .
A spokesperson for the social network said that the tweet violated its policy on content that `` could lead to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assertions that have been confirmed to be false or misleading by subject-matter experts , such as public health authorities . ''

Dr. Anthony Fauci said in an interview on Sunday that he was "absolutely not" surprised that President Donald Trump tested positive for the coronavirus after holding a "superspreader event" at the White House.
Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, pushed back on the administration's coronavirus spin in an interview with "60 Minutes." He told CBS News medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook that he was "absolutely not" surprised that Trump tested positive after Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett's announcement last month in the Rose Garden, which also featured indoor festivities.
"I was worried that he was going to get sick when I saw him in a completely precarious situation of crowded, no separation between people, and almost nobody wearing a mask," Fauci said. "When I saw that on TV, I said, 'Oh my goodness. Nothing good can come outta that, that's gotta be a problem.' And then sure enough, it turned out to be a superspreader event."
Fauci said Trump's resistance to masks doesn't make sense.
"You know, he sometimes equates wearing a mask with weakness," Fauci said, suggesting the president was trying to make a " statement of strength, like, we're strong, we don't need a mask, that kind of thing."
"Do you have a feeling that there is sometimes an all-out war against science?" LaPook asked.
"Oh yeah. I mean, particularly over the last few years. There's an anti-authority feeling in the world," Fauci replied. "And science has an air of authority to it. So people who want to push back on authority tend to, as a sidebar, push back on science."
Fauci now has to be accompanied by federal agents on his routine walks after receiving threats against him and his family.
"That's sad. The very fact that a public health message to save lives triggers such venom and animosity to me that it results in real and credible threats to my life and my safety," he said. "But it bothers me less than the hassling of my wife and my children."
Fauci also said he was "really ticked off" when the Trump campaign used his comments out of context in an advertisement.
"I do not and nor will I ever, publicly endorse any political candidate," he said. "And here I am, they're sticking me right in the middle of a campaign ad. Which I thought was outrageous."
But even as the campaign uses him to score political points, the White House has blocked many of his media appearances.
"Has the White House been controlling when you can speak with the media?" LaPook asked.
"You know, I think you'd have to be honest and say yes," Fauci said. "I certainly have not been allowed to go on many, many, many shows that have asked for me."
Fauci added that that White House restrictions on his media appearances haven't been "consistent."
While Fauci was highly visible at the White House coronavirus task force briefings early in the pandemic, the administration has shrunk both his role and that of the task force. Fauci said last week that the task force meetings have been reduced from every day to just one day a week even as the US continues to see increases in new cases.
Instead, Trump has been more interested in discrediting the scientific consensus around masks and social distancing. He recently added controversial Dr. Scott Atlas, a neuroradiologist with no background in infectious diseases who has pushed a deadly and "unethical" herd immunity strategy, to the task force.
Fauci told CNN last month that Atlas often says things that are "out of context or actually incorrect" and was an "outlier" among the infectious disease experts on the panel.
CDC Director Robert Redfield was reportedly heard saying that "everything" Atlas says "is false."
Atlas posted a Twitter thread misrepresenting the science around masks over the weekend, writing, "Masks work? NO."
Twitter removed the tweet. A spokesperson for the social network said that the tweet violated its policy on content that "could lead to harm," and "statements or assertions that have been confirmed to be false or misleading by subject-matter experts, such as public health authorities."


alternet--2020-10-19--Struggling Wisconsin voters are unimpressed with Trump bragging about the economy

In 2016 , President Donald Trump became the first Republican presidential candidate to carry Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan in 1984 .
But four years later , many polls are showing Trump struggling in the midwestern Rust Belt state .
Between the coronavirus pandemic , unemployment and the state of Wisconsin 's economy — journalist Dominic Rushe emphasizes in an article for The Guardian — Trump is facing an uphill climb in Wisconsin this time .
`` Trump beat Clinton in Wisconsin by just 0.77 % in 2016 , '' Rushe explains .
`` The polls currently have Biden ahead by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but in a year that feels like no other , anything can happen between now and 3 November .
In this volatile environment , progressives have been making gains with voters , reflecting on the fragility of the economy Trump had hoped would re-elect him . ''
For many years , Wisconsin had a reputation for being a deep blue state .
Former Massachusetts Gov .
Michael Dukakis , a Democrat , lost the popular vote by 8 % to Republican Vice President George H.W .
Bush in 1988 's presidential election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Republicans gained a lot of ground in Wisconsin during the Barack Obama years , and Trump 's narrow victory in Wisconsin in 2016 was a very unpleasant surprise for Democrats .
`` The Republicans have been remarkably successful in their economic messaging , not least in Wisconsin , '' Rushe notes .
`` Since Ronald Reagan , the Republican Party has promulgated the idea that there is a simple formula for economic success : lower taxes , less regulation and smaller government .
That message , repeated over and over for 40 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bastion of progressive politics to a union-bashing laboratory for right-wing economic experiments led by Scott Walker , the former governor , and Paul Ryan , the former House speaker , and backed by the Koch Brothers . ''
But now , Rush explains , many Wisconsin residents are struggling badly .
`` Until February , Trump could have confidently boasted that he had made good on his promises , '' Rush writes .
`` Unemployment had fallen to record lows in the state , manufacturing was coming back — albeit at the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama .
The headline figures looked good .
Then came the coronavirus — a disease that is now ravaging the state and has , in its wake , exposed the fault lines beneath those headline figures . ''
Dana Bye , campaign director for the group The Hub Project , emphasizes that Wisconsin residents who are hurting economically are unimpressed when Trump brags about the stock market .
Bye told The Guardian , `` Nationally and in Wisconsin , people look at the stock market and the jobs figures and think that 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal experiences are not reflected in those macro figures… .
The pandemic has crystalized the idea that there is one economy for the rich and another for working folk . ''

In 2016, President Donald Trump became the first Republican presidential candidate to carry Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan in 1984. But four years later, many polls are showing Trump struggling in the midwestern Rust Belt state. Between the coronavirus pandemic, unemployment and the state of Wisconsin's economy — journalist Dominic Rushe emphasizes in an article for The Guardian — Trump is facing an uphill climb in Wisconsin this time.
"Trump beat Clinton in Wisconsin by just 0.77% in 2016," Rushe explains. "The polls currently have Biden ahead by a clear 6.5% in the state, but in a year that feels like no other, anything can happen between now and 3 November. In this volatile environment, progressives have been making gains with voters, reflecting on the fragility of the economy Trump had hoped would re-elect him."
For many years, Wisconsin had a reputation for being a deep blue state. Former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, a Democrat, lost the popular vote by 8% to Republican Vice President George H.W. Bush in 1988's presidential election, but he carried Wisconsin. However, Republicans gained a lot of ground in Wisconsin during the Barack Obama years, and Trump's narrow victory in Wisconsin in 2016 was a very unpleasant surprise for Democrats.
"The Republicans have been remarkably successful in their economic messaging, not least in Wisconsin," Rushe notes. "Since Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party has promulgated the idea that there is a simple formula for economic success: lower taxes, less regulation and smaller government. That message, repeated over and over for 40 years, helped Wisconsin shift from a bastion of progressive politics to a union-bashing laboratory for right-wing economic experiments led by Scott Walker, the former governor, and Paul Ryan, the former House speaker, and backed by the Koch Brothers."
But now, Rush explains, many Wisconsin residents are struggling badly.
"Until February, Trump could have confidently boasted that he had made good on his promises," Rush writes. "Unemployment had fallen to record lows in the state, manufacturing was coming back — albeit at the same, snail-paced crawl that it had under Obama. The headline figures looked good. Then came the coronavirus — a disease that is now ravaging the state and has, in its wake, exposed the fault lines beneath those headline figures."
Dana Bye, campaign director for the group The Hub Project, emphasizes that Wisconsin residents who are hurting economically are unimpressed when Trump brags about the stock market.
Bye told The Guardian, "Nationally and in Wisconsin, people look at the stock market and the jobs figures and think that's the economy. But often, their personal experiences are not reflected in those macro figures…. The pandemic has crystalized the idea that there is one economy for the rich and another for working folk."


alternet--2020-10-19--In campaign call, Trump attacks Dr. Fauci and ‘these idiots’ who keep talking about COVID-19

President Donald Trump on Monday once again lashed out at America 's top infectious disease expert .
During a call with campaign staff , the president bitterly complained that there has been so much attention paid to the COVID-19 pandemic , which so far has killed 220,000 Americans in eight months while simultaneously upending the American economy and putting millions out of work .
`` People are tired of COVID , '' the president ranted during the call , according to the New York Times ' Maggie Haberman .
`` People are tired of hearing Fauci and all these idiots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong… Fauci 's a nice guy , he 's been here for 500 years . ''
The president also called Fauci `` a disaster '' and lamented that he would receive lots of negative press for firing him .
`` If I listened to [ Fauci ] , we 'd have 500,000 deaths , '' the president fumed .
Trump for the last month has been trying to claim that America is `` rounding the corner '' on COVID-19 , even though infections from the disease have been surging and are now averaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If I listened to [ Fauci ] , we 'd have 500,000 deaths , '' the president fumed .
Trump for the last month has been trying to claim that America is `` rounding the corner '' on COVID-19 , even though infections from the disease have been surging and are now averaging more than 50,000 a day .

President Donald Trump on Monday once again lashed out at America's top infectious disease expert.
During a call with campaign staff, the president bitterly complained that there has been so much attention paid to the COVID-19 pandemic, which so far has killed 220,000 Americans in eight months while simultaneously upending the American economy and putting millions out of work.
"People are tired of COVID," the president ranted during the call, according to the New York Times' Maggie Haberman. "People are tired of hearing Fauci and all these idiots, all these idiots who got it wrong… Fauci's a nice guy, he's been here for 500 years."
The president also called Fauci "a disaster" and lamented that he would receive lots of negative press for firing him.
"If I listened to [Fauci], we'd have 500,000 deaths," the president fumed.
Trump for the last month has been trying to claim that America is "rounding the corner" on COVID-19, even though infections from the disease have been surging and are now averaging more than 50,000 a day.
"If I listened to [Fauci], we'd have 500,000 deaths," the president fumed.
Trump for the last month has been trying to claim that America is "rounding the corner" on COVID-19, even though infections from the disease have been surging and are now averaging more than 50,000 a day.


alternet--2020-10-19--Pennsylvania’s rejection of 372,000 ballot applications bewilders voters and strains election staff

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom .
Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox .
Pennsylvania , one of the most hotly contested battlegrounds in the presidential election , has rejected 372,000 requests for mail-in ballots , straining election offices and bewildering voters .
More than 90 % of those applications , or about 336,000 , were denied as duplicates , primarily because people who had requested mail-in ballots for the state 's June 2 primary did not realize that they had checked a box to be sent ballots for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have also been baffled by unclear or inaccurate information on the state 's ballot-tracking website , and by a wave of mail ballot applications from political parties and get-out-the-vote groups .
County offices across the state have been forced to hire temporary staff and work seven days a week to cope with the confusion .
“ The volume of calls we have been getting has been overwhelming , '' said Marybeth Kuznik , elections director in Armstrong County , northeast of Pittsburgh .
It 's been preventing her office from working on anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like a denial of service attack at times because it seemed that sometimes all I could get done was answer the phone ! ''
Though it may deter some people from voting , the mass rejection of ballot applications is unlikely to have a big effect on turnout .
Voters who submitted duplicate applications should eventually receive a ballot .
Those who do n't can still vote at the polls on Election Day .
Overall , one out of every five requests for a mail-in ballot are being rejected in Pennsylvania .
An @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spurned requests , some submitting them multiple times .
Although the state 's email rejecting the requests describes them as duplicates , it does n't explain why , prompting some people to reapply .
ProPublica and The Philadelphia Inquirer identified hundreds of voters who submitted three or more duplicate applications ; one voter appears to have submitted 11 duplicates .
The administrative nightmare highlights the difficulty of ramping up vote-by-mail on the fly without enough voter education .
Last year , Pennsylvania passed a law that removed the state 's tight restrictions on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to receive a ballot without giving a reason such as travel or ill health .
In 2018 , only 4 % of votes in Pennsylvania were cast by mail .
In the June primary , with the pandemic discouraging many people from voting in person , that percentage rose to just over half .
“ States that have large numbers of successful mail voters , pre-pandemic , have educated their voters about this process over decades , and Pennsylvania is trying to do this in a matter of months , '' said David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center for Election Innovation & Research in Washington .
Nongovernmental groups have inundated Pennsylvania voters with mail-in ballot applications , making it easy to request ballots — and contributing to the flood of duplicates .
Voters often believe these unsolicited and sometimes inaccurate applications come directly from elections offices .
Some voters are filling them out even if they 've previously submitted a ballot application .
These groups have created “ confusion for voters and the likelihood that voters will not realize their application has been processed and they do n't need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania Department of State , which oversees elections .
It added that “ some voters may have forgotten that they opted to be put on the annual mail ballot list when they applied for a ballot for the June primary . ''
Counties big and small across Pennsylvania have been deluged with duplicate requests .
Officials in Allegheny County , which includes Pittsburgh , have rejected more than 49,000 duplicate ballot requests from the June primary to October 14 .
Armstrong has rejected 25 % of its 5,400 applications as duplicates .
Chester @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has processed 113,000 applications , and about one in five have been duplicates .
Neighboring Montgomery County has rejected 32,000 of its 174,000 applications , or 18 % , as duplicates .
Philadelphia has denied nearly 49,000 duplicate applications .
Workers must handle every application individually .
“ We basically have to treat them all the same , '' said Bill Turner , acting elections director for Chester County .
“ We 're taking a tremendous amount of staff time and effort only to find out it 's a duplicate . ''
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Craig Sewall , 33 , a registered Democrat and a Ph.D. student in social work at the University of Pittsburgh , got an email from the state this summer inviting him to apply for a mail-in ballot for the general election .
He had voted by mail in the primary and was “ very motivated to vote '' in the presidential election , he said .
So he followed the email 's prompts and applied for a ballot online .
A few weeks after requesting a ballot , Sewall received an email from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declined because of the following reason : DECL - DUPLICATE APPLICATION , '' the email read .
It advised him to call the Allegheny County Board of Elections if he had any questions .
But when he called , he said , the office was too busy to answer his questions .
“ I 've been fairly persistent and I 'm pretty disillusioned , '' he said .
The mix-up led Sewall and his wife , who followed the same steps but received a ballot , to reconsider voting by mail .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might just end up surrendering our ballot and voting in person just to make sure , '' he said .
Amie Downs , an Allegheny County spokesperson , acknowledged that the problem has strained staff .
“ We continue to try to speak with everyone , '' she said .
“ Even with the addition of extra telephone lines , a queue and the assistance of our call center , callers are still having difficulty getting through . ''
In retrospect , Sewall said , he thinks he checked the box on his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one for the general election .
Doing so would have placed him on a “ permanent list '' that voters can opt into as part of the new law .
When applying for mail ballots , voters can check a box to vote by mail in every election that year , as well as to automatically receive an application form annually .
“ Because becoming a permanent mail-in voter is new , this is the first time that they would automatically receive a ballot without having to apply for it , '' said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania 's Blair County , where more than one in four applications is a duplicate .
“ They 're unsure , so they 're sending in another application . ''
Frustrated voters like Sewall are contacting election offices by the thousands .
Montgomery County last week received 5,000 calls a day — more than 911 receives during a hurricane , according to Lee Soltysiak , the county 's chief operating officer and clerk of its elections board .
Philadelphia has had so many calls it started outsourcing them to the city 's 311 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last week , Allegheny County has seen more than 7,000 calls a day .
“ The phones do n't stop ringing , '' said Tim Benyo , chief clerk for Lehigh County elections .
“ They ring through the night and on weekends . ''
At one point this summer , Allegheny officials were processing mail-in ballot applications 24 hours a day , with a peak of 125 workers .
On some recent days , 40-50 % of ballot applications in the county are duplicates .
The county has experienced other snafus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced that , because of a printing error , it had sent incorrect ballots to 28,879 voters .
Adding to the confusion , voters and election officials say that the state 's online application and ballot-tracking system sometimes has inaccurate or outdated information , because it relies on counties ' goodwill to keep it current .
“ The state website ballot tracker , polling place locator , and find your voter registration tools are not working correctly all of the time , leaving voters to call to verify information that they should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Downs , of Allegheny County .
The Department of State said that “ depending on when and how the counties update the ballot and mailing information '' in the state systems , “ the mail-in ballot tracker on votesPA.com may not reflect precise information . ''
The department added that it is working with counties to ensure that voters get the correct information : “ As more ballots are mailed in the coming days and weeks , the tracker will more accurately reflect each county 's activity and the status of individual voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks by President Donald Trump that mail voting is susceptible to widespread fraud have soured many Republican voters on using the method and created a large partisan divide .
Of Pennsylvania 's approved ballot applications as of Wednesday , more than 948,000 have come from Democrats , 343,000 from Republicans , and 241,000 from independent and third-party voters .
Pennsylvania last year began allowing voters to apply online for mail-in ballots , but the state system does n't notify voters that they are submitting a duplicate .
The online form links to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ status , but it does n't link to the tool where they can check their vote-by-mail status .
That ballot-tracker tool is itself confusing .
Voters whose applications have not yet been approved do not show up in the system — instead , the site says “ record not found . ''
Voters who have been approved to receive a mail-in ballot have their status listed as “ pending , '' without further explanation .
“ There 's nothing on the website that tells a voter that 'pending ' means you 've been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent out yet , '' said Christine Reuther , a council member in Delaware County in suburban Philadelphia .
“ I mean , I would n't know that 's what pending means . ''
Another consistent problem : the terse rejection email sent to voters .
The email , like the website , should be clearer , county officials said .
“ They could explain what that means .
A duplicate : you have applied before , we already have an application on file for you .
Sit back , relax , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail , '' Soltysiak said .
A longtime voter in his 60s in the Pittsburgh area , who asked to remain anonymous to protect his privacy , was rejected three times because of duplicate applications .
He kept applying , he said , because he never heard back from his local election office .
He called the office “ a zillion times , but no one ever answered , '' he said .
This summer , he received a mailer from an official-sounding voting organization that listed a “ Jr . ''
after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Jr. suffix , and he worried that using that ballot application would disqualify his vote .
“ I have no interest in having more than one ballot , '' he said .
The voter was able to get an explanation about his mail-in ballot applications only after a local election official fixed a problem with his voter registration — his first such problem in nearly 30 years of voting in Allegheny County .
“ I have never seen such a mess with the county government in my life , '' he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail was too much trouble .
“ I gave up and I 'm voting in person , '' the voter said .
“ I figured the hell with it , I 'm done . ''

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
Pennsylvania, one of the most hotly contested battlegrounds in the presidential election, has rejected 372,000 requests for mail-in ballots, straining election offices and bewildering voters.
More than 90% of those applications, or about 336,000, were denied as duplicates, primarily because people who had requested mail-in ballots for the state's June 2 primary did not realize that they had checked a box to be sent ballots for the general election, too. Voters have also been baffled by unclear or inaccurate information on the state's ballot-tracking website, and by a wave of mail ballot applications from political parties and get-out-the-vote groups. County offices across the state have been forced to hire temporary staff and work seven days a week to cope with the confusion.
“The volume of calls we have been getting has been overwhelming," said Marybeth Kuznik, elections director in Armstrong County, northeast of Pittsburgh. It's been preventing her office from working on anything else: “It has been almost like a denial of service attack at times because it seemed that sometimes all I could get done was answer the phone!"
Though it may deter some people from voting, the mass rejection of ballot applications is unlikely to have a big effect on turnout. Voters who submitted duplicate applications should eventually receive a ballot. Those who don't can still vote at the polls on Election Day.
Overall, one out of every five requests for a mail-in ballot are being rejected in Pennsylvania. An estimated 208,000 Pennsylvania voters sent in the spurned requests, some submitting them multiple times. Although the state's email rejecting the requests describes them as duplicates, it doesn't explain why, prompting some people to reapply. ProPublica and The Philadelphia Inquirer identified hundreds of voters who submitted three or more duplicate applications; one voter appears to have submitted 11 duplicates.
The administrative nightmare highlights the difficulty of ramping up vote-by-mail on the fly without enough voter education. Last year, Pennsylvania passed a law that removed the state's tight restrictions on mail ballots and enabled any registered voter to receive a ballot without giving a reason such as travel or ill health. In 2018, only 4% of votes in Pennsylvania were cast by mail. In the June primary, with the pandemic discouraging many people from voting in person, that percentage rose to just over half.
“States that have large numbers of successful mail voters, pre-pandemic, have educated their voters about this process over decades, and Pennsylvania is trying to do this in a matter of months," said David Becker, founder and executive director of Center for Election Innovation & Research in Washington.
Nongovernmental groups have inundated Pennsylvania voters with mail-in ballot applications, making it easy to request ballots — and contributing to the flood of duplicates. Voters often believe these unsolicited and sometimes inaccurate applications come directly from elections offices. Some voters are filling them out even if they've previously submitted a ballot application.
These groups have created “confusion for voters and the likelihood that voters will not realize their application has been processed and they don't need to submit another one," said the Pennsylvania Department of State, which oversees elections. It added that “some voters may have forgotten that they opted to be put on the annual mail ballot list when they applied for a ballot for the June primary."
Counties big and small across Pennsylvania have been deluged with duplicate requests. Officials in Allegheny County, which includes Pittsburgh, have rejected more than 49,000 duplicate ballot requests from the June primary to October 14. Armstrong has rejected 25% of its 5,400 applications as duplicates. Chester County, in the Philadelphia suburbs, has processed 113,000 applications, and about one in five have been duplicates. Neighboring Montgomery County has rejected 32,000 of its 174,000 applications, or 18%, as duplicates. Philadelphia has denied nearly 49,000 duplicate applications.
Workers must handle every application individually. “We basically have to treat them all the same," said Bill Turner, acting elections director for Chester County. “We're taking a tremendous amount of staff time and effort only to find out it's a duplicate."
The rejections engender mistrust in already-anxious voters. Craig Sewall, 33, a registered Democrat and a Ph.D. student in social work at the University of Pittsburgh, got an email from the state this summer inviting him to apply for a mail-in ballot for the general election. He had voted by mail in the primary and was “very motivated to vote" in the presidential election, he said. So he followed the email's prompts and applied for a ballot online.
A few weeks after requesting a ballot, Sewall received an email from the state. “Your application was declined because of the following reason: DECL - DUPLICATE APPLICATION," the email read. It advised him to call the Allegheny County Board of Elections if he had any questions. But when he called, he said, the office was too busy to answer his questions. “I've been fairly persistent and I'm pretty disillusioned," he said.
The mix-up led Sewall and his wife, who followed the same steps but received a ballot, to reconsider voting by mail. “We're still not sure, we might just end up surrendering our ballot and voting in person just to make sure," he said.
Amie Downs, an Allegheny County spokesperson, acknowledged that the problem has strained staff. “We continue to try to speak with everyone," she said. “Even with the addition of extra telephone lines, a queue and the assistance of our call center, callers are still having difficulty getting through."
In retrospect, Sewall said, he thinks he checked the box on his application for the primary ballot to receive one for the general election. Doing so would have placed him on a “permanent list" that voters can opt into as part of the new law. When applying for mail ballots, voters can check a box to vote by mail in every election that year, as well as to automatically receive an application form annually.
“Because becoming a permanent mail-in voter is new, this is the first time that they would automatically receive a ballot without having to apply for it," said Sarah Seymour, elections director in central Pennsylvania's Blair County, where more than one in four applications is a duplicate. “They're unsure, so they're sending in another application."
Frustrated voters like Sewall are contacting election offices by the thousands. Montgomery County last week received 5,000 calls a day — more than 911 receives during a hurricane, according to Lee Soltysiak, the county's chief operating officer and clerk of its elections board. Philadelphia has had so many calls it started outsourcing them to the city's 311 call center. On several days in the last week, Allegheny County has seen more than 7,000 calls a day.
“The phones don't stop ringing," said Tim Benyo, chief clerk for Lehigh County elections. “They ring through the night and on weekends."
At one point this summer, Allegheny officials were processing mail-in ballot applications 24 hours a day, with a peak of 125 workers. On some recent days, 40-50% of ballot applications in the county are duplicates. The county has experienced other snafus as well. On Wednesday, it announced that, because of a printing error, it had sent incorrect ballots to 28,879 voters.
Adding to the confusion, voters and election officials say that the state's online application and ballot-tracking system sometimes has inaccurate or outdated information, because it relies on counties' goodwill to keep it current. “The state website ballot tracker, polling place locator, and find your voter registration tools are not working correctly all of the time, leaving voters to call to verify information that they should be able to find online," said Downs, of Allegheny County.
The Department of State said that “depending on when and how the counties update the ballot and mailing information" in the state systems, “the mail-in ballot tracker on votesPA.com may not reflect precise information." The department added that it is working with counties to ensure that voters get the correct information: “As more ballots are mailed in the coming days and weeks, the tracker will more accurately reflect each county's activity and the status of individual voters' ballots."
Months of baseless attacks by President Donald Trump that mail voting is susceptible to widespread fraud have soured many Republican voters on using the method and created a large partisan divide. Of Pennsylvania's approved ballot applications as of Wednesday, more than 948,000 have come from Democrats, 343,000 from Republicans, and 241,000 from independent and third-party voters.
Pennsylvania last year began allowing voters to apply online for mail-in ballots, but the state system doesn't notify voters that they are submitting a duplicate. The online form links to a tool where voters can check their registration status, but it doesn't link to the tool where they can check their vote-by-mail status.
That ballot-tracker tool is itself confusing. Voters whose applications have not yet been approved do not show up in the system — instead, the site says “record not found." Voters who have been approved to receive a mail-in ballot have their status listed as “pending," without further explanation.
“There's nothing on the website that tells a voter that 'pending' means you've been approved but your ballot hasn't been sent out yet," said Christine Reuther, a council member in Delaware County in suburban Philadelphia. “I mean, I wouldn't know that's what pending means."
Another consistent problem: the terse rejection email sent to voters. The email, like the website, should be clearer, county officials said.
“They could explain what that means. A duplicate: you have applied before, we already have an application on file for you. Sit back, relax, it's going to be coming in the mail," Soltysiak said.
A longtime voter in his 60s in the Pittsburgh area, who asked to remain anonymous to protect his privacy, was rejected three times because of duplicate applications. He kept applying, he said, because he never heard back from his local election office. He called the office “a zillion times, but no one ever answered," he said.
This summer, he received a mailer from an official-sounding voting organization that listed a “Jr." after his name. He has never used a Jr. suffix, and he worried that using that ballot application would disqualify his vote. “I have no interest in having more than one ballot," he said.
The voter was able to get an explanation about his mail-in ballot applications only after a local election official fixed a problem with his voter registration — his first such problem in nearly 30 years of voting in Allegheny County. “I have never seen such a mess with the county government in my life," he said.
By that time, voting by mail was too much trouble. “I gave up and I'm voting in person," the voter said. “I figured the hell with it, I'm done."


alternet--2020-10-19--Judge strikes down Trump effort to slash food stamps for 700,000 Americans: Victory for 'basic human

Judge strikes down Trump effort to slash food stamps for 700,000 Americans: Victory for 'basic human decency'

A federal judge in Washington , D.C. late Sunday struck down the Trump administration 's proposed changes to the SNAP benefits program , potentially saving hundreds of thousands of people from losing badly-needed federal food assistance .
U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell issued a scathing ruling , denouncing President Donald Trump and U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue , who she said have been `` icily silent about how many [ adults ] would have been denied SNAP benefits had the changes sought ... been in effect while the pandemic rapidly spread across the country . ''
New York Attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than a dozen state attorneys general who joined the District of Columbia in suing the administration over the changes , called Howell 's ruling `` a major victory for common sense and basic human decency in our nation . ''
The USDA proposed the changes months before the coronavirus pandemic began .
They were initially set to go into effect in April , but Howell issued an injunction in March , as the president declared a state of emergency , ordering the administration to delay the changes .
Perdue later appealed Howell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rules to go into effect despite a pandemic that has left millions unemployed .
Under existing SNAP benefits rules , states are able to waive work requirements for SNAP benefits for areas with unemployment rates as low as 2.5 % .
Perdue and Trump moved to tighten the criteria for waiving the requirements by raising the minimum rate to 6 % .
The change could have left nearly 700,000 people without the benefit , the Washington Post reported Sunday .
Tamar Haspel , a Post food policy columnist , tweeted that the proposal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensure it could go into effect during the public health and economic crisis , was in the running for Trump 's `` Vilest Policy Ever . ''
The pandemic , Howell said in her ruling , exposed how unworkable the administration 's proposed changes were , with the number of Americans relying on SNAP benefits growing by 17 % , or six million enrollees , and unemployment rates quadrupling .
Perdue and Trump displayed an `` utter failure to address the issue '' of how millions would be affected by new work requirements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rendering their changes `` arbitrary and capricious . ''
With the ruling handed down two weeks before Nov. 3 , the last day Americans can vote in the presidential election , journalist Matt Taibbi wrote that it may serve as a reminder of the president 's priorities .
`` Trump : yes to Space Force , no to Food Stamps , '' Taibbi tweeted .

A federal judge in Washington, D.C. late Sunday struck down the Trump administration's proposed changes to the SNAP benefits program, potentially saving hundreds of thousands of people from losing badly-needed federal food assistance.
U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell issued a scathing ruling, denouncing President Donald Trump and U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, who she said have been "icily silent about how many [adults] would have been denied SNAP benefits had the changes sought ... been in effect while the pandemic rapidly spread across the country."
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who was among more than a dozen state attorneys general who joined the District of Columbia in suing the administration over the changes, called Howell's ruling "a major victory for common sense and basic human decency in our nation."
The USDA proposed the changes months before the coronavirus pandemic began. They were initially set to go into effect in April, but Howell issued an injunction in March, as the president declared a state of emergency, ordering the administration to delay the changes. Perdue later appealed Howell's order, potentially allowing the new rules to go into effect despite a pandemic that has left millions unemployed.
Under existing SNAP benefits rules, states are able to waive work requirements for SNAP benefits for areas with unemployment rates as low as 2.5%. Perdue and Trump moved to tighten the criteria for waiving the requirements by raising the minimum rate to 6%.
The change could have left nearly 700,000 people without the benefit, the Washington Post reported Sunday.
Tamar Haspel, a Post food policy columnist, tweeted that the proposal, and the administration's attempt to ensure it could go into effect during the public health and economic crisis, was in the running for Trump's "Vilest Policy Ever."
The pandemic, Howell said in her ruling, exposed how unworkable the administration's proposed changes were, with the number of Americans relying on SNAP benefits growing by 17%, or six million enrollees, and unemployment rates quadrupling.
Perdue and Trump displayed an "utter failure to address the issue" of how millions would be affected by new work requirements during the crisis, Howell said, rendering their changes "arbitrary and capricious."
With the ruling handed down two weeks before Nov. 3, the last day Americans can vote in the presidential election, journalist Matt Taibbi wrote that it may serve as a reminder of the president's priorities.
"Trump: yes to Space Force, no to Food Stamps," Taibbi tweeted.