alternet--2020-11-06--The election was a disaster for redistricting — ensuring extended GOP minority rule

Election night delivered nothing short of an unmitigated catastrophe for Democrats—and democracy—heading into the coming redistricting cycle .
Before the 2020 elections , Republicans would have been able to draw three to four times as many congressional districts as Democrats .
But instead of leveling the playing field , Tuesday saw the GOP 's edge expand to potentially four or five times as many districts as Democrats , as shown in the map at the top of this post ( see here for a larger version ) .
That disparity is similar to the lopsided aftermath of the 2010 elections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ redraw five times as many House districts as Democrats .
That allowed the GOP to craft a majority of all districts in the House while Democrats wound up responsible for just one-tenth .
That huge advantage helped Republicans win the House in 2012 despite the fact that Democratic candidates won more votes .
The same story played out in several legislatures in key swing states multiple times over the last decade .
A repeat of GOP minority rule is now a strong risk for 2022 and beyond , both in the House and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislative redistricting will also heavily favor Republicans , as shown on the map below .
Three states have legislative chambers with majorities in doubt as of Thursday morning : The Arizona Senate and House , Minnesota Senate , and Pennsylvania Senate and House .
The GOP currently leads for all three states .
Additionally , Democrats could gain a two-thirds supermajority in New York 's state Senate once mail ballots are counted after Nov. 6 .
We are tracking each key state and will update this post as races get called in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the future of redistricting is highly contingent upon the Supreme Court 's new far-right majority , which could both further undermine the Voting Rights Act and strip away checks on GOP state legislatures .
We also do n't know to what degree Trump has corrupted the accuracy of the census in a way that could disproportionately hurt Democrats .
We 'll delve into the results in all the important states , and their implications for the coming decade , just below .
We 'll also address the threat of the Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to follow .
You can also explore our guide to the rules that govern which party ( if any ) controls redistricting state by state .
Arizona has had an independent redistricting commission in place since 2000 , but there 's a significant risk that the Supreme Court will strike down all commissions that were passed by citizen-initiated ballot measures , especially with Amy Coney Barrett now on the court .
Republicans control the governorship , and while Democrats had high hopes of flipping the legislature , the GOP currently leads in key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would lead to a divided government in case the commission gets struck down , meaning that barring a bipartisan compromise , new maps would likely be drawn by the courts , which favor nonpartisan districts .
Republicans in the legislature have also repeatedly sought to undermine the commission , so ending the GOP 's control of state government would help insulate the panel from further attack .
Democrats failed to gain the two-thirds supermajorities that they would have needed under the state constitution to gain control over redistricting , leaving bipartisan control in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether they would have pursued the opportunity even had they reached that threshold .
Republicans remain in control in Florida after Democrats failed to flip either chamber .
Voters passed two ballot initiatives in 2010 to try to ban gerrymandering , but the state Supreme Court has taken a lurch far to the right after Republican Gov .
Ron DeSantis won in 2018 .
It 's therefore unlikely to enforce the amendments to curb GOP gerrymandering .
Republicans maintained full control over redistricting after Democrats failed to flip the gerrymandered state House or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is neck and neck .
Since the 1980s , a nonpartisan agency has proposed maps to the Iowa legislature , which has always adopted them .
However , since Democrats failed to flip the state House to break the GOP 's full control , next year will be the first time in several decades under this system that one party has unified control over state government .
That would allow the GOP to simply reject the agency 's proposals and implement their own gerrymanders , or even repeal the statute that created the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear of a public backlash , but as we 've seen in so many states , gerrymandering is the very thing that can protect incumbents from anger over gerrymandering .
Democrats needed to flip just a single state House seat or three state Senate seats to break the GOP 's veto-proof majorities , but they failed to do either .
Consequently , Republicans will be able to override Democratic Gov .
Laura Kelly 's vetoes , including of the very congressional gerrymander that the Republican Senate leader was recently caught on tape vowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michigan also has an independent redistricting commission , but while it 's new for the 2020 cycle , it too could get invalidated by the Supreme Court .
Even if it survives , though , litigation over the eventual maps the commission produces is likely , which is why it 's critical that Democrats gained a 4-3 majority on the state Supreme Court .
However , the court 's power to block gerrymandering is also threatened by the U.S. Supreme Court , just as the commission is , and even Democratic Gov .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well .
Michigan Democrats failed to retake the gerrymandered state House even though it 's very possible that , once again , their candidates will have won more votes .
If that comes to pass , it would mark the fourth of five elections over the last decade when the same thing has happened , offering the starkest example of how GOP gerrymandering has replaced democracy with entrenched minority rule .
It appears that Democrats have failed to gain full control in Minnesota , falling just short in the state Senate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced .
While the state currently has nonpartisan maps drawn by a court and is poised to again after 2020 , racial segregation in the Minneapolis area creates a `` geography penalty '' that harms Democrats , which means even ostensibly nonpartisan maps have the effect of functioning like GOP gerrymanders .
Case in point : Hillary Clinton and Democratic candidates won more votes statewide than Trump and Republicans in 2016 but failed to win a majority of seats in the state Senate .
That seems to have happened once more to Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an initiative in 2018 to reform the state 's existing bipartisan legislative redistricting commission by requiring new maps be drawn that explicitly take partisan fairness into account , which would negate the geographic penalty against Democrats caused by white-flight racial segregation .
However , Republicans successfully deceived voters into passing a disingenuous amendment this year that guts this reform by making the fairness requirement toothless .
Congressional redistricting , meanwhile , is still handled by the legislature and governor , both of which remained firmly in GOP hands .
• State Senate : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half of seats up ) Republicans control Nebraska 's unicameral and nominally nonpartisan legislature , but they just narrowly failed to gain the the two-thirds supermajority needed to overcome a filibuster of any new gerrymanders .
The GOP could also eliminate the filibuster with a simple majority , but it 's far from clear that enough Republican lawmakers are willing to make that move due to their internal divisions .
Therefore , if the status quo prevails and Democrats sustain a filibuster , new maps would be handled by the courts .
Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ full control over redistricting for the second decade in a row in New Hampshire .
It 's possible that Republicans will have once again won majorities despite Democrats winning more votes once outstanding mail votes are finalized .
Democratic Gov .
Phil Murphy and the heavily Democratic legislature do n't face the voters again until 2021 , after legislative redistricting is supposed to take place .
However , voters approved Question 3 , which Democrats hope will push back redistricting ( only for the legislature ) to the 2023 elections if the census @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Feb. 15 .
Delaying redistricting two more years would further disadvantage the state 's growing Asian and Latino populations , likely intended to be to the benefit of white Democratic incumbents in primaries .
No matter which year New Jersey conducts its redistricting , the process will see two bipartisan commissions ( one for Congress and one for the legislature ) appointed by a combination of legislative leaders and state party leaders calling the shots .
Democrats therefore wo n't have the chance to adopt extreme partisan maps , though either party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ districts enacted depending on what proposal each tiebreaker picks .
New York has a new bipartisan redistricting commission appointed by lawmakers , but Democrats could override the commission 's recommendations and pass maps to their own liking if they win a two-thirds supermajority .
It 's unclear whether the GOP 's gerrymander will further collapse and let Democrats hit that threshold in the state Senate once absentee ballots are counted .
( Democrats hold a more secure supermajority in the Democratically gerrymandered Assembly . )
However , many Democratic lawmakers in New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignore their party 's broader interests if it means getting a seat that insulates them from a potential primary challenge .
It 's therefore unclear whether Democrats would be able to pass aggressive partisan gerrymanders even if they were to win supermajorities .
North Carolina has seen the worst and most pervasive Republican gerrymandering of any state in modern history , and the battles over redistricting are set to continue after Republicans unexpectedly gained seats by ousting several Democratic legislators to maintain their majorities .
And even though Democratic Gov .
Roy Cooper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veto most key redistricting bills .
Making matters worse , Republicans ousted at least one Democratic incumbent on the state Supreme Court and lead in two uncalled races where absentee and provisional ballots will decide whether Democrats majority stays at 6-1 or narrows to 5-2 or even 4-3 .
The size of Democrats ' majority is important because it means the GOP could regain control of the court as soon as 2022 if they sweep every seat up this year .
That opportunity could be delayed until 2024 if Democrats hang on in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ curtailed the GOP 's gerrymanders last year , but while those rulings curbed the worst excesses of Republican gerrymandering , they did n't entirely eliminate the problem .
Furthermore , state-level judicial review is not guaranteed to succeed again given the increasingly radical stances taken by the U.S. Supreme Court .
Ohio 's legislature was hopelessly gerrymandered by Republicans this past decade , but while Democrat Jennifer Brunner flipped a seat on the state Supreme Court , fellow Democrat John O'Donnell failed to oust a second GOP incumbent , leaving the GOP with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority will likely mean the court wo n't enforce the protections added by the GOP in bad faith to Ohio 's constitution in 2018 in an ostensibly bipartisan compromise to reform congressional redistricting , leaving Republicans free to gerrymander while falsely claiming they curbed the legislature 's power to do so .
Over the last two years , Oregon Republicans repeatedly fled the state to deny Democrats the two-thirds legislative supermajority needed to conduct any business under Oregon 's unusual quorum rules , successfully defeating a Democratic bill to enact climate protections .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats from controlling congressional redistricting next year , since Democrats failed to gain a two-thirds supermajority in the state House .
If the GOP once more succeeds at quorum-busting , a court would likely draw the congressional map .
However , Democratic state Sen. Shemia Fagan flipped the open secretary of state 's office held by Republicans , meaning that if lawmakers do n't pass new legislative districts by July 1 , 2021 , the secretary of state takes over that process .
Had Fagan not prevailed , a GOP walkout would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of state .
• State Senate : Republican—uncalled but likely hold ( half of seats up ) While many mail ballots that lean heavily Democratic are yet to be counted , Democrats are unlikely to win either chamber even if they win more votes—which is precisely what happened in 2018 and 2012 .
Like North Carolina , Pennsylvania 's Supreme Court has a Democratic majority that , in 2018 , issued a ruling striking down the GOP 's congressional gerrymander .
However , even if Democratic Gov .
Tom Wolf once again blocks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the state Supreme Court may not get the opportunity to draw a fair map of its own , especially if the U.S. Supreme Court interferes .
However , because the state Supreme Court determines the majority tiebreaker on the bipartisan commission used for legislative redistricting , Democrats are poised to control that process after two decades of Republicans running the show .
A Republican effort to pass a constitutional amendment that would effectively gerrymander the court could be even more consequential , though .
The GOP passed their amendment earlier this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after 2020 before voters weigh in via a 2021 referendum .
A Democratic state House could stop that power grab dead in its tracks if absentee ballots help Democrats pull off an upset to win control this year .
The most important state for Republican congressional gerrymandering is Texas , and Democrats failed to make significant gains needed to flip the state House to break the GOP 's control , even though the GOP 's gerrymander showed major cracks in 2018 when Democrat Beto O'Rourke won a majority of seats despite losing 51-48 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failed to lay the groundwork for striking down gerrymanders later this decade after Republicans swept all four seats up this year to maintain their 9-0 state Supreme Court majority .
While Democrats could in theory gain control over the court as soon as 2024 ( at least three seats are up every two years depending on vacancies ) , Texas may simply not be blue enough for that to be realistic by then .
Democrats and their third-party Progressive allies lost their two-thirds supermajority in the state House needed to override Republican Gov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the legislature ( Vermont only has a single statewide congressional district ) .
Independents now hold the balance of power for veto overrides in the state House ( the GOP failed to break the Democratic-Progressive state Senate supermajority ) .
However , it 's far from a given that Democrats could have even overridden a veto anyway given the state 's penchant for rejecting the sharpest sort of partisan politics common just about everywhere else .
After 2010 , the Democratically dominated state government passed new maps with wide GOP support , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virginia voters have approved the creation of a bipartisan redistricting commission after the new Democratic majority in Virginia 's legislature agreed to hold a vote earlier this year on a GOP-backed reform to enact a bipartisan redistricting commission .
The amendment was a compromise that passed with widespread Democratic support in the state Senate but almost unanimous Democratic opposition in the state House .
While the measure is not without its own flaws , it should help ensure Virginia districts are by and large nonpartisan following the 2020 census if it passes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ their support and opposition for the ballot measure .
While its passage should help ensure fair maps for Virginia in isolation , particularly for legislative maps , it means Democrats lose a counterweight at the national level to GOP congressional gerrymandering elsewhere .
• State Senate : Republican hold , no supermajority ( half of seats up ) Democrats blocked Republicans from gaining the two-thirds supermajorities needed in the badly gerrymandered legislature to override Democratic Gov .
Tony Evers ' vetoes , meaning an Evers veto would send redistricting to court instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a more uncertain but plausible risk is that the partisan 4-3 conservative majority on Wisconsin 's Supreme Court will overturn a 1965 precedent and let Republicans pass a new gerrymander by stripping Evers of his veto power , potentially making the size of the GOP 's majorities irrelevant since they still will control both chambers .

Election night delivered nothing short of an unmitigated catastrophe for Democrats—and democracy—heading into the coming redistricting cycle. Before the 2020 elections, Republicans would have been able to draw three to four times as many congressional districts as Democrats. But instead of leveling the playing field, Tuesday saw the GOP's edge expand to potentially four or five times as many districts as Democrats, as shown in the map at the top of this post (see here for a larger version).
That disparity is similar to the lopsided aftermath of the 2010 elections, when Republicans won the power to redraw five times as many House districts as Democrats. That allowed the GOP to craft a majority of all districts in the House while Democrats wound up responsible for just one-tenth. That huge advantage helped Republicans win the House in 2012 despite the fact that Democratic candidates won more votes. The same story played out in several legislatures in key swing states multiple times over the last decade.
A repeat of GOP minority rule is now a strong risk for 2022 and beyond, both in the House and in the states, since control of legislative redistricting will also heavily favor Republicans, as shown on the map below.
Three states have legislative chambers with majorities in doubt as of Thursday morning: The Arizona Senate and House, Minnesota Senate, and Pennsylvania Senate and House. The GOP currently leads for all three states. Additionally, Democrats could gain a two-thirds supermajority in New York's state Senate once mail ballots are counted after Nov. 6. We are tracking each key state and will update this post as races get called in the coming days.
Beyond these four states, the future of redistricting is highly contingent upon the Supreme Court's new far-right majority, which could both further undermine the Voting Rights Act and strip away checks on GOP state legislatures. We also don't know to what degree Trump has corrupted the accuracy of the census in a way that could disproportionately hurt Democrats.
We'll delve into the results in all the important states, and their implications for the coming decade, just below. We'll also address the threat of the Supreme Court and a tainted census in an article to follow. You can also explore our guide to the rules that govern which party (if any) controls redistricting state by state.
ARIZONA
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican—uncalled
State House: Republican—uncalled
Arizona has had an independent redistricting commission in place since 2000, but there's a significant risk that the Supreme Court will strike down all commissions that were passed by citizen-initiated ballot measures, especially with Amy Coney Barrett now on the court. Republicans control the governorship, and while Democrats had high hopes of flipping the legislature, the GOP currently leads in key uncalled races as of Thursday.
That would lead to a divided government in case the commission gets struck down, meaning that barring a bipartisan compromise, new maps would likely be drawn by the courts, which favor nonpartisan districts. Republicans in the legislature have also repeatedly sought to undermine the commission, so ending the GOP's control of state government would help insulate the panel from further attack.
CONNECTICUT
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Democratic hold
State House: Democratic hold
Democrats failed to gain the two-thirds supermajorities that they would have needed under the state constitution to gain control over redistricting, leaving bipartisan control in place, though it's not clear whether they would have pursued the opportunity even had they reached that threshold.
FLORIDA
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold
State House: Republican hold
Republicans remain in control in Florida after Democrats failed to flip either chamber. Voters passed two ballot initiatives in 2010 to try to ban gerrymandering, but the state Supreme Court has taken a lurch far to the right after Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis won in 2018. It's therefore unlikely to enforce the amendments to curb GOP gerrymandering.
GEORGIA
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold
State House: Republican hold
Republicans maintained full control over redistricting after Democrats failed to flip the gerrymandered state House or Senate, even though the presidential race is neck and neck.
IOWA
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold (half of seats up)
State House: Republican hold
Since the 1980s, a nonpartisan agency has proposed maps to the Iowa legislature, which has always adopted them. However, since Democrats failed to flip the state House to break the GOP's full control, next year will be the first time in several decades under this system that one party has unified control over state government.
That would allow the GOP to simply reject the agency's proposals and implement their own gerrymanders, or even repeal the statute that created the agency. The only possible deterrent is fear of a public backlash, but as we've seen in so many states, gerrymandering is the very thing that can protect incumbents from anger over gerrymandering.
KANSAS
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican supermajority hold
State House: Republican supermajority hold
Democrats needed to flip just a single state House seat or three state Senate seats to break the GOP's veto-proof majorities, but they failed to do either. Consequently, Republicans will be able to override Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly's vetoes, including of the very congressional gerrymander that the Republican Senate leader was recently caught on tape vowing to fight for.
MICHIGAN
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican (up in 2022)
State House: Republican hold
Like Arizona, Michigan also has an independent redistricting commission, but while it's new for the 2020 cycle, it too could get invalidated by the Supreme Court. Even if it survives, though, litigation over the eventual maps the commission produces is likely, which is why it's critical that Democrats gained a 4-3 majority on the state Supreme Court. However, the court's power to block gerrymandering is also threatened by the U.S. Supreme Court, just as the commission is, and even Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's veto power could be as well.
Michigan Democrats failed to retake the gerrymandered state House even though it's very possible that, once again, their candidates will have won more votes. If that comes to pass, it would mark the fourth of five elections over the last decade when the same thing has happened, offering the starkest example of how GOP gerrymandering has replaced democracy with entrenched minority rule.
MINNESOTA
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold—uncalled
State House: Democratic hold
It appears that Democrats have failed to gain full control in Minnesota, falling just short in the state Senate, though final tallies have not yet been announced. While the state currently has nonpartisan maps drawn by a court and is poised to again after 2020, racial segregation in the Minneapolis area creates a "geography penalty" that harms Democrats, which means even ostensibly nonpartisan maps have the effect of functioning like GOP gerrymanders. Case in point: Hillary Clinton and Democratic candidates won more votes statewide than Trump and Republicans in 2016 but failed to win a majority of seats in the state Senate. That seems to have happened once more to Senate Democrats this year.
MISSOURI
Governor: Republican hold
State Senate: Republican supermajority hold (half of seats up)
State House: Republican supermajority hold
Missouri voters passed an initiative in 2018 to reform the state's existing bipartisan legislative redistricting commission by requiring new maps be drawn that explicitly take partisan fairness into account, which would negate the geographic penalty against Democrats caused by white-flight racial segregation. However, Republicans successfully deceived voters into passing a disingenuous amendment this year that guts this reform by making the fairness requirement toothless. Congressional redistricting, meanwhile, is still handled by the legislature and governor, both of which remained firmly in GOP hands.
NEBRASKA
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold, no supermajority gained (half of seats up)
Republicans control Nebraska's unicameral and nominally nonpartisan legislature, but they just narrowly failed to gain the the two-thirds supermajority needed to overcome a filibuster of any new gerrymanders. The GOP could also eliminate the filibuster with a simple majority, but it's far from clear that enough Republican lawmakers are willing to make that move due to their internal divisions. Therefore, if the status quo prevails and Democrats sustain a filibuster, new maps would be handled by the courts.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Governor: Republican hold
State Senate: Republican flip
State House: Republican flip
Republicans unexpectedly regained their gerrymandered majorities to obtain full control over redistricting for the second decade in a row in New Hampshire. It's possible that Republicans will have once again won majorities despite Democrats winning more votes once outstanding mail votes are finalized.
NEW JERSEY
Governor: Democratic (up in 2021)
State Senate: Democratic (up in 2021)
State House: Democratic (up in 2021)
Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy and the heavily Democratic legislature don't face the voters again until 2021, after legislative redistricting is supposed to take place. However, voters approved Question 3, which Democrats hope will push back redistricting (only for the legislature) to the 2023 elections if the census doesn't provide the data lawmakers need by Feb. 15. Delaying redistricting two more years would further disadvantage the state's growing Asian and Latino populations, likely intended to be to the benefit of white Democratic incumbents in primaries.
No matter which year New Jersey conducts its redistricting, the process will see two bipartisan commissions (one for Congress and one for the legislature) appointed by a combination of legislative leaders and state party leaders calling the shots. Democrats therefore won't have the chance to adopt extreme partisan maps, though either party has a chance at seeing somewhat favorable districts enacted depending on what proposal each tiebreaker picks.
NEW YORK
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Democratic—uncalled supermajority
State Assembly: Democratic supermajority hold
New York has a new bipartisan redistricting commission appointed by lawmakers, but Democrats could override the commission's recommendations and pass maps to their own liking if they win a two-thirds supermajority. It's unclear whether the GOP's gerrymander will further collapse and let Democrats hit that threshold in the state Senate once absentee ballots are counted. (Democrats hold a more secure supermajority in the Democratically gerrymandered Assembly.)
However, many Democratic lawmakers in New York have often been all too happy to ignore their party's broader interests if it means getting a seat that insulates them from a potential primary challenge. It's therefore unclear whether Democrats would be able to pass aggressive partisan gerrymanders even if they were to win supermajorities.
NORTH CAROLINA
Governor: Democratic hold
State Senate: Republican hold
State House: Republican hold
State Supreme Court: Democratic hold (three seats up)
North Carolina has seen the worst and most pervasive Republican gerrymandering of any state in modern history, and the battles over redistricting are set to continue after Republicans unexpectedly gained seats by ousting several Democratic legislators to maintain their majorities. And even though Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper won reelection, he is unable to veto most key redistricting bills.
Making matters worse, Republicans ousted at least one Democratic incumbent on the state Supreme Court and lead in two uncalled races where absentee and provisional ballots will decide whether Democrats majority stays at 6-1 or narrows to 5-2 or even 4-3. The size of Democrats' majority is important because it means the GOP could regain control of the court as soon as 2022 if they sweep every seat up this year. That opportunity could be delayed until 2024 if Democrats hang on in the two unsettled races.
State courts curtailed the GOP's gerrymanders last year, but while those rulings curbed the worst excesses of Republican gerrymandering, they didn't entirely eliminate the problem. Furthermore, state-level judicial review is not guaranteed to succeed again given the increasingly radical stances taken by the U.S. Supreme Court.
OHIO
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold (half of seats up)
State House: Republican hold
State Supreme Court: Republican hold (two seats up)
Ohio's legislature was hopelessly gerrymandered by Republicans this past decade, but while Democrat Jennifer Brunner flipped a seat on the state Supreme Court, fellow Democrat John O'Donnell failed to oust a second GOP incumbent, leaving the GOP with a narrower 4-3 majority. Such a majority will likely mean the court won't enforce the protections added by the GOP in bad faith to Ohio's constitution in 2018 in an ostensibly bipartisan compromise to reform congressional redistricting, leaving Republicans free to gerrymander while falsely claiming they curbed the legislature's power to do so.
OREGON
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Democratic hold—uncalled supermajority (half of seats up)
State House: Democratic hold but failure to gain two-thirds supermajority
Over the last two years, Oregon Republicans repeatedly fled the state to deny Democrats the two-thirds legislative supermajority needed to conduct any business under Oregon's unusual quorum rules, successfully defeating a Democratic bill to enact climate protections. They may try that move to stop Democrats from controlling congressional redistricting next year, since Democrats failed to gain a two-thirds supermajority in the state House. If the GOP once more succeeds at quorum-busting, a court would likely draw the congressional map.
However, Democratic state Sen. Shemia Fagan flipped the open secretary of state's office held by Republicans, meaning that if lawmakers don't pass new legislative districts by July 1, 2021, the secretary of state takes over that process. Had Fagan not prevailed, a GOP walkout would have handed legislative redistricting to a Republican secretary of state.
PENNSYLVANIA
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican—uncalled but likely hold (half of seats up)
State House: Republican—uncalled but likely hold
While many mail ballots that lean heavily Democratic are yet to be counted, Democrats are unlikely to win either chamber even if they win more votes—which is precisely what happened in 2018 and 2012. Like North Carolina, Pennsylvania's Supreme Court has a Democratic majority that, in 2018, issued a ruling striking down the GOP's congressional gerrymander. However, even if Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf once again blocks Republican legislators from passing an extreme gerrymander, the state Supreme Court may not get the opportunity to draw a fair map of its own, especially if the U.S. Supreme Court interferes.
However, because the state Supreme Court determines the majority tiebreaker on the bipartisan commission used for legislative redistricting, Democrats are poised to control that process after two decades of Republicans running the show. A Republican effort to pass a constitutional amendment that would effectively gerrymander the court could be even more consequential, though. The GOP passed their amendment earlier this year and would need to pass it again after 2020 before voters weigh in via a 2021 referendum. A Democratic state House could stop that power grab dead in its tracks if absentee ballots help Democrats pull off an upset to win control this year.
TEXAS
Governor: Republican (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold (half of seats up)
State House: Republican hold (four seats up)
The most important state for Republican congressional gerrymandering is Texas, and Democrats failed to make significant gains needed to flip the state House to break the GOP's control, even though the GOP's gerrymander showed major cracks in 2018 when Democrat Beto O'Rourke won a majority of seats despite losing 51-48 overall to Ted Cruz.
Democrats also failed to lay the groundwork for striking down gerrymanders later this decade after Republicans swept all four seats up this year to maintain their 9-0 state Supreme Court majority. While Democrats could in theory gain control over the court as soon as 2024 (at least three seats are up every two years depending on vacancies), Texas may simply not be blue enough for that to be realistic by then.
VERMONT
Governor: Republican hold
State Senate: Democratic supermajority hold
State House: Democratic supermajority lost
Democrats and their third-party Progressive allies lost their two-thirds supermajority in the state House needed to override Republican Gov. Phil Scott's vetoes and gerrymander the legislature (Vermont only has a single statewide congressional district). Independents now hold the balance of power for veto overrides in the state House (the GOP failed to break the Democratic-Progressive state Senate supermajority).
However, it's far from a given that Democrats could have even overridden a veto anyway given the state's penchant for rejecting the sharpest sort of partisan politics common just about everywhere else. After 2010, the Democratically dominated state government passed new maps with wide GOP support, so something similar could happen after 2020.
VIRGINIA
Governor: Democratic (up in 2021)
State Senate: Democratic (up in 2023)
State House: Democratic (up in 2021)
Virginia voters have approved the creation of a bipartisan redistricting commission after the new Democratic majority in Virginia's legislature agreed to hold a vote earlier this year on a GOP-backed reform to enact a bipartisan redistricting commission. The amendment was a compromise that passed with widespread Democratic support in the state Senate but almost unanimous Democratic opposition in the state House.
While the measure is not without its own flaws, it should help ensure Virginia districts are by and large nonpartisan following the 2020 census if it passes. Democrats, however, were divided in their support and opposition for the ballot measure. While its passage should help ensure fair maps for Virginia in isolation, particularly for legislative maps, it means Democrats lose a counterweight at the national level to GOP congressional gerrymandering elsewhere.
WISCONSIN
Governor: Democratic (up in 2022)
State Senate: Republican hold, no supermajority (half of seats up)
State House: Republican hold, no supermajority
Democrats blocked Republicans from gaining the two-thirds supermajorities needed in the badly gerrymandered legislature to override Democratic Gov. Tony Evers' vetoes, meaning an Evers veto would send redistricting to court instead of letting the GOP gerrymander.
However, a more uncertain but plausible risk is that the partisan 4-3 conservative majority on Wisconsin's Supreme Court will overturn a 1965 precedent and let Republicans pass a new gerrymander by stripping Evers of his veto power, potentially making the size of the GOP's majorities irrelevant since they still will control both chambers.


alternet--2020-11-06--The world is laughing: Trump's flailing is turning American democracy into 'a global joke'

Donald Trump has humiliated the United States on the global stage so often over the past four years , but his efforts to stop vote counting and undermine the results of the elections are something special .
And the world is taking notice .
According to one Japanese newspaper , `` responsibility for fanning the divide and amplifying the confusion lies with Mr .
Trump . ''
A `` relatively peaceful election exercise in the world 's oldest democracy '' was marred by the `` distinctly authoritarian turn '' of Trump claiming victory before enough votes had been counted , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prevent ballots from being counted would be `` unprecedented attempt at mass voter suppression . ''
Germany 's Der Spiegel wrote that Trump was like a `` late Roman emperor '' who has `` set a historic standard for voter contempt . ''
`` One can feel the anxiety for potential chaos seeing metal fences and security being hastily installed around the White House , '' an editorial from a Hong Kong newspaper controlled by the Chinese government said .
`` The American election has became a global joke . ''
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vladimir Putin would hold `` an international telephone conversation '' on Thursday , but no further details were offered .

Donald Trump has humiliated the United States on the global stage so often over the past four years, but his efforts to stop vote counting and undermine the results of the elections are something special. And the world is taking notice.
According to one Japanese newspaper, "responsibility for fanning the divide and amplifying the confusion lies with Mr. Trump." A "relatively peaceful election exercise in the world's oldest democracy" was marred by the "distinctly authoritarian turn" of Trump claiming victory before enough votes had been counted, The Hindu wrote, and his push to prevent ballots from being counted would be "unprecedented attempt at mass voter suppression."
Germany's Der Spiegel wrote that Trump was like a "late Roman emperor" who has "set a historic standard for voter contempt."
"One can feel the anxiety for potential chaos seeing metal fences and security being hastily installed around the White House," an editorial from a Hong Kong newspaper controlled by the Chinese government said. "The American election has became a global joke."
And in Russia, a spokesman said President Vladimir Putin would hold "an international telephone conversation" on Thursday, but no further details were offered.


alternet--2020-11-06--‘Let’s finally start thriving’: Missouri’s first Black congresswoman gives a speech for the ages

In August , progressive activist and nurse Cori Bush shocked the Democratic establishment when she unseated 20-year congressional veteran Rep. Lacy Clay for the Democratic nomination to Missouri 's 1st Congressional District .
Her victory against Clay all but ensured winning the seat on Tuesday , making Bush the first Black woman to represent Missouri in Congress .
It 's been a long time coming .
Bush had attempted to primary Clay in 2018 , receiving an endorsement from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez .
And while she lost that primary to Clay , it was clear the incumbent was not the formidable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be .
On Tuesday night , that dream came true for Bush and her supporters as she won decisively and gave a truly inspiring speech .
Bush went on to talk about representing the people in the America we all share , `` not Trump 's America '' or the America led by `` the small-mindedness of a powerful few , but the imagination of a mass movement that includes all of us . ''
She talked about how she will be carrying her constituents with her everywhere she goes and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave this very moving reminder of what leadership and representative democracy can promise to be .
Bush finished by raising her fist in the sky , along with the family and friends that stood on stage with her , and made the pledge to walk `` arm in arm , with our fists in the air , ready to serve each other until every single one of us is free . ''
Cori Bush delivers electrifying victory speech : 'This is our moment … I love you '

In August, progressive activist and nurse Cori Bush shocked the Democratic establishment when she unseated 20-year congressional veteran Rep. Lacy Clay for the Democratic nomination to Missouri's 1st Congressional District. Her victory against Clay all but ensured winning the seat on Tuesday, making Bush the first Black woman to represent Missouri in Congress. It's been a long time coming.
Bush had attempted to primary Clay in 2018, receiving an endorsement from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. And while she lost that primary to Clay, it was clear the incumbent was not the formidable legacy candidate that he had been perceived to be. On Tuesday night, that dream came true for Bush and her supporters as she won decisively and gave a truly inspiring speech.
CONGRESSWOMAN-ELECT CORI BUSH: So, I was running. I was that person running for my life, across a parking lot. Running from an abuser. I remember one day hearing bullets whiz past my head, and at that moment I wondered, How do I make it out of this life?
I was uninsured. I've been that uninsured person, hoping my healthcare provider wouldn't embarrass me by asking if I had insurance. I wondered, how will I bear this?
I was a single parent. I've been that single parent, struggling paycheck to paycheck. Sitting outside the payday loan office wondering, how much more will I have to sacrifice?
I was that COVID-19 patient. I've been that COVID-19 patient, gasping for breath, wondering how long will it be before I can breathe again?
I'm still that person. I'm proud to stand before you today knowing it was this person, with these experiences, that moved the voters of St. Louis to do something historic. St. Louis, my city. My home, my community. We have been surviving and grinding, and just scraping by for so long and now this is our moment to finally start living. Let's finally start living. Let's finally start growing. Let's finally start thriving.
So, as the first Black woman, and also the first nurse, and single mother to have the honor to represent Missouri in the United States Congress let me say this: To the Black women, the Black girls, the nurses, the essential workers, the single mothers—this is our moment.
BUSH: St. Louis, if you know nothing else, you remember this: Your congresswoman-elect, soon-to-be congresswoman loves you. Your congresswoman-elect, soon-to-be congresswoman loves you; and I need you to get that. Because if I love you, I care that you eat. If I love you, I care that you have shelter and adequate safe housing. If I love you, I care that you have clean water and clean air, and you have a livable wage. If I love you, I care that the police don't murder you. If I love you, I care that you make it home safely. If I love you, I care that you are able to have a dignity, and have a quality of life the same as the next person, the same as those that don't look like you. That didn't grow up the same way you did. Those that don't have the same socioeconomic status as you. I care.
Bush went on to talk about representing the people in the America we all share, "not Trump's America" or the America led by "the small-mindedness of a powerful few, but the imagination of a mass movement that includes all of us." She talked about how she will be carrying her constituents with her everywhere she goes and to every room she works in. She gave this very moving reminder of what leadership and representative democracy can promise to be.
Bush finished by raising her fist in the sky, along with the family and friends that stood on stage with her, and made the pledge to walk "arm in arm, with our fists in the air, ready to serve each other until every single one of us is free."


alternet--2020-11-06--India moves toward a de facto unitary state —  here's why that's dangerous for its future

This article was produced by Globetrotter .
Federalism is one of the basic features of the Indian Constitution .
In the Constituent Assembly , Indian economist professor K.T .
Shah wanted the terms `` federal '' and `` secular '' included in the Preamble itself , but Dr. Ambedkar rejected it on the grounds that the federal and secular character of the republic was understood and did not need specification .
The Indian Constitution , in its Seventh Schedule , spelled out the respective jurisdictions of the center and the states in two lists , and areas of common jurisdiction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Since then , the center has always tended to encroach on the domain of the states , but this tendency has now acquired a strength where the claim that the country is being pushed toward a de facto unitary state appears to be no exaggeration .
Having persuaded states to give up their constitutionally mandated taxing powers by substituting their main revenue source , the sales tax , with a goods and services tax ( GST ) —administered by a GST Council dominated by the center—with the promise that their revenue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ center has now coolly reneged on that promise .
States at present have no taxing powers ( except over just three commodities ) ; and the promised compensation from the center has not materialized .
But it is not just control over resources that has been centralized ; decision-making too is being centralized against the provisions of the Constitution .
Education , for instance , is in the Concurrent List ; but the center has recently come out with a new National Education Policy ( NEP ) , without any consultation with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fall in line and implement the NEP .
Agriculture belongs to the State List ; and yet the center has just rushed three bills through the parliament , with no consultation with state governments , making far-reaching changes in the country 's agricultural arrangements , which , apart from their impact upon the peasantry , would also mean significant revenue losses for states .
It is not just the states ' domains that are being encroached upon ; their very being can now be unilaterally altered by the center .
This became @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kashmir was carved into two separate Union Territories without the consent of the state legislature .
The state 's consent to this bifurcation was supposed to have been obtained through the consent of the center-appointed governor , since the state was placed under the governor 's rule at the time .
With this precedent being set , any state can cease to exist as a state and can be carved up into any number of fragments at any time—by placing it under governor 's rule and taking the consent of the governor who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legally equivalent to the consent of the state legislature .
When the very existence of a state becomes a matter of central discretion , a substantial step has been taken toward a unitary state .
Converting India into a de facto unitary state is the agenda of both the Hindutva forces and the corporate-financial oligarchy integrated with globalized finance capital ; it constitutes therefore a prominent element on the common agenda of the corporate-Hindutva alliance that is currently dominating Indian politics .
The federal nature of the Indian state follows from the dual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of belonging to a particular regional-linguistic group , that is , being an Odiya , or a Bengali , or a Malayali or a Gujarati , or a Tamil ; and a consciousness that is pan-Indian .
Both kinds of consciousness got strengthened during the anti-colonial struggle ; the post-colonial state accordingly sought to accommodate both , through a political arrangement that was federal in character .
Maintaining this federal character is essential for preserving the delicate balance between the two .
The arbitrary prioritization of one over the other disturbs this equilibrium @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unity .
Excessive centralization for instance , by riding roughshod over the regional-linguistic consciousness , tends to encourage its opposite , namely a tendency toward separatism and secession .
The Hindutva elements , however , do not understand this complex reality of India .
Since they had nothing to do with the anti-colonial struggle , and since for them India is not a nation-in-the-making but a land of the `` Hindus '' that has constituted a `` Hindu nation '' from time immemorial , they look down upon the regional-linguistic consciousness , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; they seek to impose from the center a uniformity , such as `` one language '' and `` one culture , '' on everyone .
They assume an immanent , essential , and ( philosophically ) `` idealist '' unity from which every deviation then becomes `` anti-national . ''
The negation of the federal character follows from this : federalism on this perception weakens the `` nation . ''
The Hindutva elements , in short , are for centralization not only for opportunistic reasons ( which of course exist and are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intrinsically and immanently anti-federal , and in favor of a unitary state ( as indeed all theocratic states tend to be ) .
Likewise , the corporate-financial oligarchy also favors centralization .
The monopoly of capital over which this oligarchy presides represents centralization in the sphere of the economy ; and for realizing its ambitions it requires the support of the state that must also be centralized .
A centralized state is the weapon that monopoly capital needs to further its ambitions .
There is , however , an important exception to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the central government in a federal polity is less benign toward a monopoly capital , including a metropolitan capital , than the government of some particular regions within the country .
In such a case , a monopoly or metropolitan capital ( I am using the two terms interchangeably because the contemporary world is not characterized by intense inter-imperialist rivalry ) would want a weakening of the center and a strengthening of the regions—it would , in short , want greater devolution of powers , resources and decision-making within the federal structure .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ encourage secessionism on the part of these regions , so that it can use the newly formed centralized states , through the breakup of the larger federal state , for its own purposes .
The breakup of Yugoslavia is the obvious example here .
The German capital encouraged the breakup of Yugoslavia because it had little hope of establishing its hegemony over the central government in a united Yugoslavia , since Serbia , with its history of anti-Nazi struggle and deep suspicions about the ambitions of the German capital , was a powerful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But of course , where the central government is itself amenable to furthering the interests of the corporate-financial oligarchy , as in India , this oligarchy favors a weakening of the federal structure , and a centralization of powers , resources and decision-making , so that its ambitions are furthered without its having to deal with a range of state-level governments : the latter could have ideas about entrusting projects to local producers , or to the public sector , or about compensation to peasants for lands being taken over from them , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The recently enacted agriculture bills , which open the way for corporate encroachment on peasant agriculture through contract farming and unregulated markets , would never have been permitted by several state legislatures ; they are being thrust down the throats of the states through central legislation whose very legality is suspect .
The fact that such legislation is imposed despite suspect legality is of course indicative of the degree to which the judiciary has lost its independence vis-à-vis the central government .
On the question of converting India into a de facto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a convergence of views between the Hindutva forces and the corporate-financial oligarchy ; the current Bharatiya Janata Party government at the center , which represents a corporate-Hindutva alliance , is engaged , not surprisingly , in carrying this project forward .
It is not only in center-state political and economic relations that this tendency is manifest .
Even in the spheres of culture and education , there is a strong parallel tendency .
The subtle attempt to impose Hindi language on non-Hindi speaking states in India under the NEP may have been thwarted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be revived again .
The curriculum in the NEP is supposed to be centrally prescribed with no consultations with states .
All these are pointers to the imposition of the `` one culture '' idea in the place of the diversity that defines India .
The country , however , will have to pay a heavy price for this thrusting of a uniformity that ignores and overrides completely the reality of regional-linguistic consciousness—for it will create its very opposite effect in ways that are dangerous for our future .
Prabhat Patnaik is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

By Prabhat Patnaik
This article was produced by Globetrotter.
Federalism is one of the basic features of the Indian Constitution. In the Constituent Assembly, Indian economist professor K.T. Shah wanted the terms "federal" and "secular" included in the Preamble itself, but Dr. Ambedkar rejected it on the grounds that the federal and secular character of the republic was understood and did not need specification. The Indian Constitution, in its Seventh Schedule, spelled out the respective jurisdictions of the center and the states in two lists, and areas of common jurisdiction in a third list (Concurrent List). Since then, the center has always tended to encroach on the domain of the states, but this tendency has now acquired a strength where the claim that the country is being pushed toward a de facto unitary state appears to be no exaggeration.
Having persuaded states to give up their constitutionally mandated taxing powers by substituting their main revenue source, the sales tax, with a goods and services tax (GST)—administered by a GST Council dominated by the center—with the promise that their revenue shortfall will be made good, the center has now coolly reneged on that promise. States at present have no taxing powers (except over just three commodities); and the promised compensation from the center has not materialized.
But it is not just control over resources that has been centralized; decision-making too is being centralized against the provisions of the Constitution. Education, for instance, is in the Concurrent List; but the center has recently come out with a new National Education Policy (NEP), without any consultation with the states. The states are simply expected to fall in line and implement the NEP. Agriculture belongs to the State List; and yet the center has just rushed three bills through the parliament, with no consultation with state governments, making far-reaching changes in the country's agricultural arrangements, which, apart from their impact upon the peasantry, would also mean significant revenue losses for states.
It is not just the states' domains that are being encroached upon; their very being can now be unilaterally altered by the center. This became clear when the state of Jammu and Kashmir was carved into two separate Union Territories without the consent of the state legislature. The state's consent to this bifurcation was supposed to have been obtained through the consent of the center-appointed governor, since the state was placed under the governor's rule at the time. With this precedent being set, any state can cease to exist as a state and can be carved up into any number of fragments at any time—by placing it under governor's rule and taking the consent of the governor who is handpicked by the center as being legally equivalent to the consent of the state legislature. When the very existence of a state becomes a matter of central discretion, a substantial step has been taken toward a unitary state.
Converting India into a de facto unitary state is the agenda of both the Hindutva forces and the corporate-financial oligarchy integrated with globalized finance capital; it constitutes therefore a prominent element on the common agenda of the corporate-Hindutva alliance that is currently dominating Indian politics.
The federal nature of the Indian state follows from the dual national consciousness that characterizes every Indian—the consciousness of belonging to a particular regional-linguistic group, that is, being an Odiya, or a Bengali, or a Malayali or a Gujarati, or a Tamil; and a consciousness that is pan-Indian. Both kinds of consciousness got strengthened during the anti-colonial struggle; the post-colonial state accordingly sought to accommodate both, through a political arrangement that was federal in character. Maintaining this federal character is essential for preserving the delicate balance between the two. The arbitrary prioritization of one over the other disturbs this equilibrium; and that disrupts the country's unity. Excessive centralization for instance, by riding roughshod over the regional-linguistic consciousness, tends to encourage its opposite, namely a tendency toward separatism and secession.
The Hindutva elements, however, do not understand this complex reality of India. Since they had nothing to do with the anti-colonial struggle, and since for them India is not a nation-in-the-making but a land of the "Hindus" that has constituted a "Hindu nation" from time immemorial, they look down upon the regional-linguistic consciousness, and the composite pan-Indian consciousness built upon it; they seek to impose from the center a uniformity, such as "one language" and "one culture," on everyone. They assume an immanent, essential, and (philosophically) "idealist" unity from which every deviation then becomes "anti-national." The negation of the federal character follows from this: federalism on this perception weakens the "nation."
The Hindutva elements, in short, are for centralization not only for opportunistic reasons (which of course exist and are significant); but they are also intrinsically and immanently anti-federal, and in favor of a unitary state (as indeed all theocratic states tend to be).
Likewise, the corporate-financial oligarchy also favors centralization. The monopoly of capital over which this oligarchy presides represents centralization in the sphere of the economy; and for realizing its ambitions it requires the support of the state that must also be centralized. A centralized state is the weapon that monopoly capital needs to further its ambitions.
There is, however, an important exception to this rule. There may be situations where the central government in a federal polity is less benign toward a monopoly capital, including a metropolitan capital, than the government of some particular regions within the country. In such a case, a monopoly or metropolitan capital (I am using the two terms interchangeably because the contemporary world is not characterized by intense inter-imperialist rivalry) would want a weakening of the center and a strengthening of the regions—it would, in short, want greater devolution of powers, resources and decision-making within the federal structure. Eventually, of course, it would encourage secessionism on the part of these regions, so that it can use the newly formed centralized states, through the breakup of the larger federal state, for its own purposes.
The breakup of Yugoslavia is the obvious example here. The German capital encouraged the breakup of Yugoslavia because it had little hope of establishing its hegemony over the central government in a united Yugoslavia, since Serbia, with its history of anti-Nazi struggle and deep suspicions about the ambitions of the German capital, was a powerful entity in any such united country.
But of course, where the central government is itself amenable to furthering the interests of the corporate-financial oligarchy, as in India, this oligarchy favors a weakening of the federal structure, and a centralization of powers, resources and decision-making, so that its ambitions are furthered without its having to deal with a range of state-level governments: the latter could have ideas about entrusting projects to local producers, or to the public sector, or about compensation to peasants for lands being taken over from them, that are inconvenient to the corporate-financial oligarchy. The recently enacted agriculture bills, which open the way for corporate encroachment on peasant agriculture through contract farming and unregulated markets, would never have been permitted by several state legislatures; they are being thrust down the throats of the states through central legislation whose very legality is suspect. The fact that such legislation is imposed despite suspect legality is of course indicative of the degree to which the judiciary has lost its independence vis-à-vis the central government.
On the question of converting India into a de facto unitary state, therefore, there is a convergence of views between the Hindutva forces and the corporate-financial oligarchy; the current Bharatiya Janata Party government at the center, which represents a corporate-Hindutva alliance, is engaged, not surprisingly, in carrying this project forward. It is not only in center-state political and economic relations that this tendency is manifest. Even in the spheres of culture and education, there is a strong parallel tendency. The subtle attempt to impose Hindi language on non-Hindi speaking states in India under the NEP may have been thwarted for the time being, but it will be revived again. The curriculum in the NEP is supposed to be centrally prescribed with no consultations with states. All these are pointers to the imposition of the "one culture" idea in the place of the diversity that defines India.
The country, however, will have to pay a heavy price for this thrusting of a uniformity that ignores and overrides completely the reality of regional-linguistic consciousness—for it will create its very opposite effect in ways that are dangerous for our future.
Prabhat Patnaik is an Indian political economist and political commentator.


alternet--2020-11-07--Has Donald Trump had his Joe McCarthy moment?

When CBS , NBC and ABC cut away from President Donald Trump 's news conference at the White House on the evening of Nov. 5 , they took pains to explain why they were shutting off the nation 's commander-in-chief .
It was a moment that for me , as a journalism historian , carried echoes of the 1954 takedown of another flamboyant populist demagogue , Sen. Joe McCarthy .
The key reason , the networks explained , was that Trump had made false claims about the integrity of Tuesday 's presidential election .
As ballot counting signaled the increasing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vice President Joe Biden , Trump accused the Democrats of trying to steal the election from him .
“ They 're trying to rig an election , and we ca n't let that happen , '' Trump said .
The networks ' anchors criticized the president for peddling false claims to support his vanishing hopes for retaining the presidency .
So did some of Trump 's staunchest allies .
Others have earlier drawn parallels between Trump and McCarthy , including journalist Peter Beinart , who wrote in The Atlantic that “ McCarthy built @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and a cult of personality – not tangible achievements or coherent ideas . ''
McCarthy rose to fame and popularity by exploiting Americans ' fear of communism .
He smeared his political opponents with accusations that they were communists .
As the news media later did with Trump , they helped create the spectacle of “ McCarthyism '' by providing McCarthy the means to make baseless charges against political opponents .
McCarthy exploited a key weakness in the model of so-called “ objective '' journalism : the practice of journalists to report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what they 're saying is factual .
McCarthy “ lied with such boldness that he distracted a nation and shot it full of distrust , '' one writer said .
In 1954 , the senator 's excesses were exposed .
The U.S. Army accused McCarthy of seeking preferential treatment for one of his aides .
During the televised Senate hearings , he charged that one of Army attorney Joseph Welch 's associates had ties to a communist organization .
The famous exchange between communist-hunting Sen. Joseph McCarthy and Army lawyer Joseph Welch .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Until this moment , Senator , I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness . ''
Welch went on to famously scold McCarthy : “ You have done enough .
Have you no sense of decency , sir , at long last ?
Have you left no sense of decency ? ''
It was that moment from 1954 that I thought of as the news broadcasts cut away from President Trump .
“ We have to interrupt here , because the president made a number of false statements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been fraudulent voting , '' said Lester Holt , the anchor of “ NBC Nightly News , '' as his broadcast cut away from the president 's speech .
He added , “ There has been no evidence of that . ''
David Muir , anchor of “ ABC World News Tonight , '' was even more direct : “ We 're not witnessing anyone stealing anything tonight . ''
CNN and Fox News continued to broadcast the news conference but later reported that Trump provided no evidence for his claims of vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defenders , including former New Jersey Gov .
Chris Christie and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum , criticized the president for his baseless charges .
[ Deep knowledge , daily .
Sign up for The Conversation 's newsletter . ]
After Welch 's rebuke of McCarthy 's baseless claims , millions of viewers watching the hearings finally had enough of the senator .
His immense national popularity disappeared .
He was censured by Senate colleagues , ostracized by the GOP and – finally – ignored by the press .
He died three years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man , at age 48 .
It is too soon , of course , to know whether Trump meets the same fate as McCarthy .
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

by Chris Lamb, IUPUI
When CBS, NBC and ABC cut away from President Donald Trump's news conference at the White House on the evening of Nov. 5, they took pains to explain why they were shutting off the nation's commander-in-chief.
It was a moment that for me, as a journalism historian, carried echoes of the 1954 takedown of another flamboyant populist demagogue, Sen. Joe McCarthy.
Making false accusations
The key reason, the networks explained, was that Trump had made false claims about the integrity of Tuesday's presidential election. As ballot counting signaled the increasing likelihood that he would lose to former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump accused the Democrats of trying to steal the election from him.
“They're trying to rig an election, and we can't let that happen," Trump said.
The networks' anchors criticized the president for peddling false claims to support his vanishing hopes for retaining the presidency. So did some of Trump's staunchest allies.
An echo from history
Others have earlier drawn parallels between Trump and McCarthy, including journalist Peter Beinart, who wrote in The Atlantic that “McCarthy built his political career on demagoguery, intimidation, and a cult of personality – not tangible achievements or coherent ideas."
McCarthy rose to fame and popularity by exploiting Americans' fear of communism. He smeared his political opponents with accusations that they were communists.
As the news media later did with Trump, they helped create the spectacle of “McCarthyism" by providing McCarthy the means to make baseless charges against political opponents.
McCarthy exploited a key weakness in the model of so-called “objective" journalism: the practice of journalists to report what politicians say, without questioning whether what they're saying is factual.
McCarthy “lied with such boldness that he distracted a nation and shot it full of distrust," one writer said.
In 1954, the senator's excesses were exposed. The U.S. Army accused McCarthy of seeking preferential treatment for one of his aides. During the televised Senate hearings, he charged that one of Army attorney Joseph Welch's associates had ties to a communist organization.
The famous exchange between communist-hunting Sen. Joseph McCarthy and Army lawyer Joseph Welch.
An emotional Welch then responded by saying, “Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness."
Welch went on to famously scold McCarthy: “You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
The media turns
It was that moment from 1954 that I thought of as the news broadcasts cut away from President Trump.
“We have to interrupt here, because the president made a number of false statements, including the notion that there has been fraudulent voting," said Lester Holt, the anchor of “NBC Nightly News," as his broadcast cut away from the president's speech. He added, “There has been no evidence of that."
David Muir, anchor of “ABC World News Tonight," was even more direct: “We're not witnessing anyone stealing anything tonight."
CNN and Fox News continued to broadcast the news conference but later reported that Trump provided no evidence for his claims of vote fraud.
Longtime allies shift
Some of Trump's loyal defenders, including former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, criticized the president for his baseless charges.
[Deep knowledge, daily.Sign up for The Conversation's newsletter.]
After Welch's rebuke of McCarthy's baseless claims, millions of viewers watching the hearings finally had enough of the senator. His immense national popularity disappeared. He was censured by Senate colleagues, ostracized by the GOP and – finally – ignored by the press. He died three years later, an alcoholic and a broken man, at age 48.
It is too soon, of course, to know whether Trump meets the same fate as McCarthy.
Chris Lamb, Professor of Journalism, IUPUI
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-11-07--Racist QAnon Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene launches a string of conspiracy tweets

Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene is the congressperson-elect of Georgia 's heavily Republican 14th District , and is clear proof that the Republican Party is broken beyond repair .
Greene is , in no uncertain terms , a virulent racist and dangerous , conspiracy-addled crackpot .
She 's one of several new Republicans to attach themselves to `` QAnon , '' a conspiracy theory modeled closely on anti-Semitic propaganda claims of a powerful worldwide collection of elites who are harvesting the blood of children because reasons , and that these elites consist of George Soros , all Democrats , and every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government and out of it .
But it 's not just that Greene is a QAnon promoter .
That bit is only part of an extensive list of conspiracy claims Greene has adopted .
Greene has made numerous racist videos and rants condemning Black and Hispanic Americans , Muslims , and Soros .
She speculated that the Charlottesville rally of white nationalists that resulted in violence and the death of one counterprotester was an `` inside job '' meant to discredit the right , speculated that the Las Vegas mass shooting was staged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new gun laws , and promoted `` Pizzagate '' claims of a Hillary Clinton-connected sex trafficking ring run from the basement of a pizza restaurant that has no basement .
She adopted Seth Rich conspiracy theories alleging the Obama administration was secretly behind his murder .
Greene also claimed that there was no `` evidence '' of a `` so-called plane '' crashing into the Pentagon during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks , and that President Barack Obama `` is a Muslim '' who `` opened up our borders to an invasion by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to act on her conspiratorial delusions .
She responded to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 's refusals to provide funding for Donald Trump 's demanded `` border wall '' by accusing Pelosi of `` crimes of treason '' that are `` punishable by death . ''
In February of 2019 she filmed herself inside the Capitol attempting to harass Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib , who she claimed were not legitimate congresspersons because they used the Quran to take their oaths of office rather than Bibles .
In September , Greene posted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assault rifle next to pictures of Reps. Rashida Tlaib , Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , and Ilhan Omar , declaring that `` Hate America leftists want to take this country down , '' and that `` Americans must take our country back . ''
It is an error to say that Marjorie Taylor Greene is a QAnon adherent .
Greene has been a conspiracy theorist on the level of Alex Jones about everything , QAnon-related or not , and has especially wallowed in racist , white nationalist , and militia claims from the far-far-right .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fascism .
Despite her anti-Semitic , anti-Muslim , and racist conspiracy-peddling , however , Greene has not only not faced few Republican Party denunciations but was quickly embraced by the party .
Donald Trump is especially enamored of her .
That is the state of Republicanism today .
Violence-peddling conspiratorial racists are not only the party 's target audience ; they are the party itself .
A generation of conspiracy peddling and win-at-all-cost propagandizing has resulted in the election of Republican lawmakers whose Republican foundations are the conspiracy theories past conservatives nurtured in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now Greene will be headed to Congress , though it remains to be seen whether she lasts a full term—or even a few months—before committing some breach requiring her expulsion .
With that in mind , we check in on conservatism 's `` future Republican star '' just after winning her election :

Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene is the congressperson-elect of Georgia's heavily Republican 14th District, and is clear proof that the Republican Party is broken beyond repair. Greene is, in no uncertain terms, a virulent racist and dangerous, conspiracy-addled crackpot. She's one of several new Republicans to attach themselves to "QAnon," a conspiracy theory modeled closely on anti-Semitic propaganda claims of a powerful worldwide collection of elites who are harvesting the blood of children because reasons, and that these elites consist of George Soros, all Democrats, and every last enemy of Donald Trump, in government and out of it.
But it's not just that Greene is a QAnon promoter. That bit is only part of an extensive list of conspiracy claims Greene has adopted. Greene has made numerous racist videos and rants condemning Black and Hispanic Americans, Muslims, and Soros. She speculated that the Charlottesville rally of white nationalists that resulted in violence and the death of one counterprotester was an "inside job" meant to discredit the right, speculated that the Las Vegas mass shooting was staged by the government in order to justify new gun laws, and promoted "Pizzagate" claims of a Hillary Clinton-connected sex trafficking ring run from the basement of a pizza restaurant that has no basement. She adopted Seth Rich conspiracy theories alleging the Obama administration was secretly behind his murder.
Greene also claimed that there was no "evidence" of a "so-called plane" crashing into the Pentagon during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and that President Barack Obama "is a Muslim" who "opened up our borders to an invasion by Muslims."
She is also willing to act on her conspiratorial delusions. She responded to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's refusals to provide funding for Donald Trump's demanded "border wall" by accusing Pelosi of "crimes of treason" that are "punishable by death." In February of 2019 she filmed herself inside the Capitol attempting to harass Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, who she claimed were not legitimate congresspersons because they used the Quran to take their oaths of office rather than Bibles.
In September, Greene posted to Facebook an image of herself holding an assault rifle next to pictures of Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ilhan Omar, declaring that "Hate America leftists want to take this country down," and that "Americans must take our country back."
It is an error to say that Marjorie Taylor Greene is a QAnon adherent. Greene has been a conspiracy theorist on the level of Alex Jones about everything, QAnon-related or not, and has especially wallowed in racist, white nationalist, and militia claims from the far-far-right. Greene is an advocate for propaganda and fascism.
Despite her anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, and racist conspiracy-peddling, however, Greene has not only not faced few Republican Party denunciations but was quickly embraced by the party. Donald Trump is especially enamored of her.
That is the state of Republicanism today. Violence-peddling conspiratorial racists are not only the party's target audience; they are the party itself. A generation of conspiracy peddling and win-at-all-cost propagandizing has resulted in the election of Republican lawmakers whose Republican foundations are the conspiracy theories past conservatives nurtured in their attempts to inflame the gullible.
Now Greene will be headed to Congress, though it remains to be seen whether she lasts a full term—or even a few months—before committing some breach requiring her expulsion. With that in mind, we check in on conservatism's "future Republican star" just after winning her election:
Mmm-hmm.


alternet--2020-11-07--How to read U.S. election maps as votes are being counted

As the world awaited a winner in the U.S. presidential election , people were glued to screens big and small for the latest results to be flashed on electoral maps .
But not all maps are created equal .
I tracked 10 election maps from Canadian and U.S. news outlets such as the CBC , Maclean 's , the Globe and Mail , Fox News and the New York Times .
While maps have long been used for political propaganda , even maps from sources without a partisan bent “ lie . ''
They are , at best , partial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choices about what to illustrate and how .
So what did this year 's election maps rightly or wrongly tell us ?
Since so many of us consume the news online , it was interactive maps embedded in websites that offered the most important windows onto the vote .
Professional mapmakers — cartographers — know these tools are both promising and limited .
Unlike print maps , web maps often allow their users to customize design .
For instance , web maps might allow “ re-symbolization '' to show the data in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let users drill deeper to get “ details on demand '' — to see county level rather than just national level results .
“ Affordances '' such as legends that appear when users hover over parts of the map also help put more information on the map and into readers ' hands .
Web maps can automatically reload with fresh data , but such updates may be misunderstood if care is n't taken to contextualize them .
With all this in mind , we should ask ourselves two questions when we look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the data ?
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented mail-in voting and delays in ballot counting .
We knew that many states would take days to fully report their results .
Cartographers use a variety of “ visual variables , '' such as texture and brightness , in order to represent this kind of information .
For instance , Fox News changed the brightness of its map 's reds and blues to illustrate the estimated number of votes counted , with darker colours representing areas that had reported more of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple approaches to characterize uncertainties in election results .
Some states appear textured , or hatched , because it was n't possible to say who had won yet .
The percentage of votes counted is indicated in text , as well as in a legend available when users hover over the map .
Map readers could click on the state to see which counties were still processing ballots , and the rest of the page provided even more detail .
The New York Times map of the U.S. election as of the morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uses texture — hatches — to illustrate where the vote is still undetermined .
But what does the map actually show ?
The most common American election maps overstate results from rural areas because these consist of large but relatively unpopulated counties and states .
The most infamous example is this map of the 2016 election that Trump supporters brought to his defence during his impeachment , and which the president reportedly framed for the Oval Office : It shows 2016 's results by shading counties according to the party that won them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Trump .
It 's a good indicator that his support in 2016 was widespread in a geographic sense , but it does not actually show that he was popular , because the map does not account for how few people voted in these counties .
It 's people who vote , not land .
Fox News view of 2020 election results by county as of the morning of Nov. 5 , 2020 .
In the 2020 election , the conservative Fox News was the only outlet I reviewed that allowed its readers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Less misleading approaches showed county-level results using circles coloured by the vote winner and sized according to the number of voters or margin of victory .
But a presidential election map depicting county-level results gives the wrong impression anyway , since this is not how U.S. elections are decided .
Trump was n't elected in 2016 because he won more ballots than Hillary Clinton , but because he earned more electoral college votes .
Read more : How is the American President elected ?
Each state has two electoral college votes , plus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total population .
What matters is who wins the most votes across the entirety of each state , not in individual counties ( though vote-rich counties can certainly sway a state 's final outcome ) .
A cartogram that appeared in The Globe and Mail of U.S. election results as of the morning of Nov. 5 , 2020 .
Many election web maps — such as the Globe and Mail 's and Maclean 's ( but not CBC 's ) — allowed readers to toggle between a more standard view of the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by their weight in the Electoral College .
These “ cartograms '' provide the most informative view of who is ahead in the election , even if they are not the most intuitive .
Interactive web maps offer readers a sense of commanding results in real time .
But they do n't always tell their readers much about the veracity of those results or how to understand them .
Web maps — whether of elections or pandemics — are not going away , so we would do well to better understand how to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Assistant Professor in Geography , Environment and Geomatics , University of Guelph This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

by Eric Nost, University of Guelph
As the world awaited a winner in the U.S. presidential election, people were glued to screens big and small for the latest results to be flashed on electoral maps. But not all maps are created equal.
I tracked 10 election maps from Canadian and U.S. news outlets such as the CBC, Maclean's, the Globe and Mail, Fox News and the New York Times. While maps have long been used for political propaganda, even maps from sources without a partisan bent “lie." They are, at best, partial representations of reality — statistical and design choices about what to illustrate and how.
So what did this year's election maps rightly or wrongly tell us?
Mapping on the web
Since so many of us consume the news online, it was interactive maps embedded in websites that offered the most important windows onto the vote. Professional mapmakers — cartographers — know these tools are both promising and limited.
Unlike print maps, web maps often allow their users to customize design. For instance, web maps might allow “re-symbolization" to show the data in a different way. Some interactive maps also let users drill deeper to get “details on demand" — to see county level rather than just national level results.
“Affordances" such as legends that appear when users hover over parts of the map also help put more information on the map and into readers' hands. Web maps can automatically reload with fresh data, but such updates may be misunderstood if care isn't taken to contextualize them.
With all this in mind, we should ask ourselves two questions when we look at any U.S. election map.
How complete is the data?
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented mail-in voting and delays in ballot counting. We knew that many states would take days to fully report their results.
Cartographers use a variety of “visual variables," such as texture and brightness, in order to represent this kind of information. For instance, Fox News changed the brightness of its map's reds and blues to illustrate the estimated number of votes counted, with darker colours representing areas that had reported more of their ballots.
The New York Times used multiple approaches to characterize uncertainties in election results. Some states appear textured, or hatched, because it wasn't possible to say who had won yet. The percentage of votes counted is indicated in text, as well as in a legend available when users hover over the map. Map readers could click on the state to see which counties were still processing ballots, and the rest of the page provided even more detail.
The New York Times map of the U.S. election as of the morning of Nov. 5, 2020. It uses texture — hatches — to illustrate where the vote is still undetermined.
(The New York Times)
But what does the map actually show?
The most common American election maps overstate results from rural areas because these consist of large but relatively unpopulated counties and states. The most infamous example is this map of the 2016 election that Trump supporters brought to his defence during his impeachment, and which the president reportedly framed for the Oval Office:
It shows 2016's results by shading counties according to the party that won them, illustrating that the vast majority voted for Trump. It's a good indicator that his support in 2016 was widespread in a geographic sense, but it does not actually show that he was popular, because the map does not account for how few people voted in these counties. It's people who vote, not land.
Fox News view of 2020 election results by county as of the morning of Nov. 5, 2020.
(Fox News)
In the 2020 election, the conservative Fox News was the only outlet I reviewed that allowed its readers to see results in this way. Less misleading approaches showed county-level results using circles coloured by the vote winner and sized according to the number of voters or margin of victory.
But a presidential election map depicting county-level results gives the wrong impression anyway, since this is not how U.S. elections are decided. Trump wasn't elected in 2016 because he won more ballots than Hillary Clinton, but because he earned more electoral college votes.
Read more: How is the American President elected?
Each state has two electoral college votes, plus more based on its share of the total population. What matters is who wins the most votes across the entirety of each state, not in individual counties (though vote-rich counties can certainly sway a state's final outcome).
A cartogram that appeared in The Globe and Mail of U.S. election results as of the morning of Nov. 5, 2020.
The Globe and Mail
Many election web maps — such as the Globe and Mail's and Maclean's (but not CBC's) — allowed readers to toggle between a more standard view of the U.S. and a view of the states sized by their weight in the Electoral College. These “cartograms" provide the most informative view of who is ahead in the election, even if they are not the most intuitive.
Interactive web maps offer readers a sense of commanding results in real time. But they don't always tell their readers much about the veracity of those results or how to understand them.
Web maps — whether of elections or pandemics — are not going away, so we would do well to better understand how to make and read them.
Eric Nost, Assistant Professor in Geography, Environment and Geomatics, University of Guelph
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-11-06--'They should be thanking us': Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and allies fire back at critics after tense r

'They should be thanking us': Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and allies fire back at critics after tense race

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did not directly address comments made in Thursday evening 's House Democratic caucus call on Friday , but in an extensive Twitter thread the congresswoman discussed multiple reasons for rejecting centrist Democrats ' claims that the embrace of progressive policies led to lackluster election results for the party .
Support for broadly popular policies like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All and relentless canvassing by progressives in the House—even when Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden 's campaign declined to campaign in key states—were among the factors which helped unapologetic progressives win elections this year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centrist candidates lost or came close to losing .
`` The whole 'progressivism is bad ' argument just does n't have any compelling evidence that I 've seen , '' tweeted Ocasio-Cortez .
The congresswoman made her points after political reporters shared details about a call held by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) and House Majority Whip James Clyburn ( D-S.C. ) in which several members expressed anger over public discussion of Medicare for All , far-reaching police reform , and policies the right has attacked as `` socialist . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ if `` we are going to run on Medicare for All , defund the police , socialized medicine , we 're not going to win . ''
In fact , Ocasio-Cortez pointed out , the 2020 election results show that the opposite is true in many cases .
Progressive victors in Tuesday 's elections include Ocasio-Cortez herself ; Reps. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) and Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) , who retained their House seats as well as helping secure Biden 's victories in their key states ; Rep.-elect Cori Bush ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bowman ( D-N.Y. ) , both of whom unseated powerful , longtime corporate-backed congressmen .
Democrats who lost include Reps. Donna Shalala ( D-Fla. ) , Collin Peterson ( D-Minn. ) , and Abby Finkenauer ( D-Iowa ) —all of whom oppose Medicare for All and reducing police funding .
Bush won her seat by a landslide after speaking publicly about `` defunding the police '' and redirecting funds to community policing as well as defunding the Pentagon .
Tlaib is a cosponsor of the BREATHE Act , which calls for , among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prisons , removal of police from schools , and investing in intervention programs which would ensure mental health professionals and other specialists instead of police officers to respond to many 911 calls .
While Rep. Abigail Spanberger ( D-Va. ) complained on the Democrats ' call that other candidates ' embrace of such policies nearly cost her her seat in Congress , which she retained after winning by a single point , the candidates who ran on those policies won by far greater margins .
Investing time and energy in `` deep canvassing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the issues that matter to them are among the ways candidates like Spanberger and others can secure more decisive victories , Ocasio-Cortez suggested .
`` When it comes to 'Defund ' and 'Socialism ' attacks , people need to realize these are racial resentment attacks , '' the congresswoman said .
`` You 're not gon na make that go away .
You can make it less effective . ''
`` Deep canvassing , '' in which candidates and campaigners have in-depth conversations with voters in order to learn about the issues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown to be 102 times more effective at garnering votes than typical short interactions during door-knocking operations .
Pandering to voters whose top concerns are `` law and order '' or avoiding a `` socialist '' takeover of the government through the expansion of Medicare to all Americans , Ocasio-Cortez tweeted , will only serve to alienate communities of color who responded positively to campaigning by progressives this year .
Other progressives on social media echoed Ocasio-Cortez 's objections to centrists ' hand-wringing and finger-pointing .
`` In the next few weeks , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to blame these same young voters , '' tweeted the grassroots climate action group Sunrise Movement .
`` They 'll blame our protests .
They 'll blame our demands .
They should be thanking us . ''

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did not directly address comments made in Thursday evening's House Democratic caucus call on Friday, but in an extensive Twitter thread the congresswoman discussed multiple reasons for rejecting centrist Democrats' claims that the embrace of progressive policies led to lackluster election results for the party.
Support for broadly popular policies like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All and relentless canvassing by progressives in the House—even when Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden's campaign declined to campaign in key states—were among the factors which helped unapologetic progressives win elections this year, the New York Democrat tweeted, while centrist candidates lost or came close to losing.
"The whole 'progressivism is bad' argument just doesn't have any compelling evidence that I've seen," tweeted Ocasio-Cortez.
The congresswoman made her points after political reporters shared details about a call held by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) in which several members expressed anger over public discussion of Medicare for All, far-reaching police reform, and policies the right has attacked as "socialist."
Clyburn warned that in congressional elections, if "we are going to run on Medicare for All, defund the police, socialized medicine, we're not going to win."
In fact, Ocasio-Cortez pointed out, the 2020 election results show that the opposite is true in many cases.
Progressive victors in Tuesday's elections include Ocasio-Cortez herself; Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who retained their House seats as well as helping secure Biden's victories in their key states; Rep.-elect Cori Bush (D-Mo.), and Rep.-elect Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), both of whom unseated powerful, longtime corporate-backed congressmen.
Democrats who lost include Reps. Donna Shalala (D-Fla.), Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), and Abby Finkenauer (D-Iowa)—all of whom oppose Medicare for All and reducing police funding.
Bush won her seat by a landslide after speaking publicly about "defunding the police" and redirecting funds to community policing as well as defunding the Pentagon. Tlaib is a cosponsor of the BREATHE Act, which calls for, among other things, the closure of federal prisons, removal of police from schools, and investing in intervention programs which would ensure mental health professionals and other specialists instead of police officers to respond to many 911 calls.
While Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) complained on the Democrats' call that other candidates' embrace of such policies nearly cost her her seat in Congress, which she retained after winning by a single point, the candidates who ran on those policies won by far greater margins.
Investing time and energy in "deep canvassing" in order to connect with voters about the issues that matter to them are among the ways candidates like Spanberger and others can secure more decisive victories, Ocasio-Cortez suggested.
"When it comes to 'Defund' and 'Socialism' attacks, people need to realize these are racial resentment attacks," the congresswoman said. "You're not gonna make that go away. You can make it less effective."
"Deep canvassing," in which candidates and campaigners have in-depth conversations with voters in order to learn about the issues that matter to them, has been shown to be 102 times more effective at garnering votes than typical short interactions during door-knocking operations.
Pandering to voters whose top concerns are "law and order" or avoiding a "socialist" takeover of the government through the expansion of Medicare to all Americans, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted, will only serve to alienate communities of color who responded positively to campaigning by progressives this year.
Other progressives on social media echoed Ocasio-Cortez's objections to centrists' hand-wringing and finger-pointing.
"In the next few weeks, every unpopular Democrat who lost will try to blame these same young voters," tweeted the grassroots climate action group Sunrise Movement. "They'll blame our protests. They'll blame our demands. They should be thanking us."