alternet--2020-10-23--How the coronavirus exposed the flaws of the childcare economy

The U.S. government 's Bureau of Labor Statistics finds that childcare workers in the nation have a median salary of just over $ 24,000 a year—below the poverty line for a family of four .
The segment of our nation 's workforce that attends to the basic needs of our children is shockingly underpaid , and now during the coronavirus pandemic , left even farther behind as childcare centers are forced to downsize or close .
At the same time , billionaires have minted money during our time of national crisis .
The fortunes of the wealthiest have increased by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , proving once more that the economy is rigged to benefit the already-rich .
It is no coincidence that an industry dominated by women , particularly women of color ( 40 percent of childcare workers are women of color—twice their population representation ) is in dire straits .
The vast majority of childcare workers do not have health insurance .
Many are self-employed and , even before the pandemic , operated on razor-thin margins to stay financially afloat .
While the cost of operating a childcare center is fixed , children age out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to the Wall Street Journal , `` The businesses have little in the way of collateral .
Banks are rarely interested in lending to them , beyond costly credit cards , making it difficult to ride out rough patches . ''
In other words , childcare is not a lucrative business in spite of its crucial nature , and while the cost of childcare for parents is often far too high , the cost of operating even a bare-bones childcare business is also too high .
Once the pandemic hit , many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required families to remain at home .
According to one survey conducted in April 2020 , `` 60 % of programs [ were ] fully closed and not providing care to any children '' at that time .
While some workplaces were able to transition to remote environments , by its nature , childcare work was not able to adapt to this `` new normal . ''
While many workers like grocery store employees , nurses , and delivery drivers were deemed `` essential '' to society and continued working , they needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American women providing childcare found themselves out of work , while women in other industries had no access to the care their children required .
Millions of parents , mostly mothers , have already left the workforce to care for their children during the pandemic .
The U.S. Census Bureau in August 2020 found that nearly 20 percent of `` working-age adults said the reason they were not working was because COVID-19 disrupted their childcare arrangements . ''
Additionally , `` women ages 25-44 [ were ] almost three times as likely as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ childcare demands . ''
Melissa Boteach of the National Women 's Law Center told Politico , `` the parents who are not going to be able to go back to work or who are going to have to give up their careers or jobs for less pay—because they ca n't find the child care to cover the hours that they need—are disproportionately going to be women and women of color . ''
In other words , women of color are disproportionately impacted on both ends of the childcare equation—both as providers and as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As I prepared for an interview with Wendoly Marte , director of economic justice at Community Change Action , about the crisis of childcare , I fielded texts from my seven-year-old son who could not find an extension cord for the tablet that he uses for school .
My child was in the room next to the home-studio that I work out of and knows never to disturb me during interviews .
But he was desperate to turn his device on so he would n't miss his next lesson .
I found myself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't have to work so I could be more present for my children during a time of deep uncertainty .
But I also remembered how much I loved my job and continued to speak with Marte , who explained that I was not alone .
`` I think a lot of parents have had to make really hard choices over the last few months as they tried to balance working from home and caring for their children , '' said Marte , who helps to organize childcare workers and amplify their voices in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I find myself constantly worrying about the state of my children 's mental health during the pandemic .
Isolated from their peers and forced to learn through screens and Zoom chats , they are coping as best as they can .
I am terrified of the long-term impacts on them and yet unable to leave a job on which my family depends to help pay the mortgage and purchase necessities , and at the same time resenting the fact that I have to even consider leaving a job that I love and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life in .
The pandemic has highlighted , in Marte 's words , the need for `` a system that is truly universal and equitable and that takes into account the perspective of parents , the children , and the childcare providers . ''
She articulated that `` we 're going to need a serious public investment in a bold solution that actually matches the scale of the crisis . ''
There was a crisis in childcare even before the pandemic .
More than a year ago , the Center for American Progress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost , limited availability , or inconvenient program hours , child care challenges are driving parents out of the workforce at an alarming rate , '' and that , `` in 2016 alone , an estimated 2 million parents made career sacrifices due to problems with child care . ''
Add to that a public health crisis that has no end in sight , and the U.S. 's childcare industry could collapse entirely under the weight of multiple pressures .
While the federal government made available small business loans through the Paycheck Protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy Center concluded that the program did not work for childcare businesses and only about half of applicants ever received the government-backed loans .
While the federal government 's `` Childcare and Development Fund '' provides some measure of support through block grants , according to Marte it is not nearly enough and `` the money ran out very quickly . ''
In late July , House Democrats passed the Childcare Is Essential Act , which Marte 's group has supported .
The bill creates a $ 50 billion fund to buttress the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) has made clear that he is far more interested in remaking the judicial system to benefit conservatives than ushering in financial aid bills for ordinary Americans .
President Donald Trump and his allies have expressed an eagerness to return to normal that is not couched in reality as a third wave of coronavirus infections threatens to derail the economy once more .
Without direct federal government intervention to save the childcare industry , the future is frighteningly precarious for women , and especially women of color .
Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a plan for what his campaign calls a `` caregiving economy , '' promising to `` [ e ] nsure access to high-quality , affordable child care and offer universal preschool to three-and four-year olds through greater investment , expanded tax credits , and sliding-scale subsidies . ''
The ambitious $ 775 billion plan is a start , and Biden will need to be held to his promises if he wins the White House .
When the coronavirus upended the economy , the crisis of childcare that had been brewing for years exploded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a society that leaves human needs to the whims of `` market forces . ''
There is no better symbol of a society 's future potential than the well-being of its children , and judging by that , we are in deep trouble .
Sonali Kolhatkar is the founder , host and executive producer of `` Rising Up With Sonali , '' a television and radio show that airs on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations .
This article was produced by Economy for All , a project of the Independent Media Institute @

The U.S. government's Bureau of Labor Statistics finds that childcare workers in the nation have a median salary of just over $24,000 a year—below the poverty line for a family of four. The segment of our nation's workforce that attends to the basic needs of our children is shockingly underpaid, and now during the coronavirus pandemic, left even farther behind as childcare centers are forced to downsize or close. At the same time, billionaires have minted money during our time of national crisis. The fortunes of the wealthiest have increased by a quarter over the past several months, proving once more that the economy is rigged to benefit the already-rich.
It is no coincidence that an industry dominated by women, particularly women of color (40 percent of childcare workers are women of color—twice their population representation) is in dire straits. The vast majority of childcare workers do not have health insurance. Many are self-employed and, even before the pandemic, operated on razor-thin margins to stay financially afloat. While the cost of operating a childcare center is fixed, children age out quickly, making revenues extremely unstable. According to the Wall Street Journal, "The businesses have little in the way of collateral. Banks are rarely interested in lending to them, beyond costly credit cards, making it difficult to ride out rough patches."
In other words, childcare is not a lucrative business in spite of its crucial nature, and while the cost of childcare for parents is often far too high, the cost of operating even a bare-bones childcare business is also too high.
Once the pandemic hit, many childcare providers simply lost clients as lockdowns required families to remain at home. According to one survey conducted in April 2020, "60% of programs [were] fully closed and not providing care to any children" at that time. While some workplaces were able to transition to remote environments, by its nature, childcare work was not able to adapt to this "new normal." While many workers like grocery store employees, nurses, and delivery drivers were deemed "essential" to society and continued working, they needed care for their out-of-school children. Suddenly American women providing childcare found themselves out of work, while women in other industries had no access to the care their children required.
Millions of parents, mostly mothers, have already left the workforce to care for their children during the pandemic. The U.S. Census Bureau in August 2020 found that nearly 20 percent of "working-age adults said the reason they were not working was because COVID-19 disrupted their childcare arrangements." Additionally, "women ages 25-44 [were] almost three times as likely as men to not be working due to childcare demands."
Melissa Boteach of the National Women's Law Center told Politico, "the parents who are not going to be able to go back to work or who are going to have to give up their careers or jobs for less pay—because they can't find the child care to cover the hours that they need—are disproportionately going to be women and women of color." In other words, women of color are disproportionately impacted on both ends of the childcare equation—both as providers and as customers who rely on these services.
As I prepared for an interview with Wendoly Marte, director of economic justice at Community Change Action, about the crisis of childcare, I fielded texts from my seven-year-old son who could not find an extension cord for the tablet that he uses for school. My child was in the room next to the home-studio that I work out of and knows never to disturb me during interviews. But he was desperate to turn his device on so he wouldn't miss his next lesson. I found myself for the umpteenth time wishing I didn't have to work so I could be more present for my children during a time of deep uncertainty. But I also remembered how much I loved my job and continued to speak with Marte, who explained that I was not alone. "I think a lot of parents have had to make really hard choices over the last few months as they tried to balance working from home and caring for their children," said Marte, who helps to organize childcare workers and amplify their voices in government.
Like millions of American women, I find myself constantly worrying about the state of my children's mental health during the pandemic. Isolated from their peers and forced to learn through screens and Zoom chats, they are coping as best as they can. I am terrified of the long-term impacts on them and yet unable to leave a job on which my family depends to help pay the mortgage and purchase necessities, and at the same time resenting the fact that I have to even consider leaving a job that I love and that I have invested years of my life in.
The pandemic has highlighted, in Marte's words, the need for "a system that is truly universal and equitable and that takes into account the perspective of parents, the children, and the childcare providers." She articulated that "we're going to need a serious public investment in a bold solution that actually matches the scale of the crisis."
There was a crisis in childcare even before the pandemic. More than a year ago, the Center for American Progress explained that "Whether due to high cost, limited availability, or inconvenient program hours, child care challenges are driving parents out of the workforce at an alarming rate," and that, "in 2016 alone, an estimated 2 million parents made career sacrifices due to problems with child care." Add to that a public health crisis that has no end in sight, and the U.S.'s childcare industry could collapse entirely under the weight of multiple pressures.
While the federal government made available small business loans through the Paycheck Protection Program earlier this year, the Bipartisan Policy Center concluded that the program did not work for childcare businesses and only about half of applicants ever received the government-backed loans. While the federal government's "Childcare and Development Fund" provides some measure of support through block grants, according to Marte it is not nearly enough and "the money ran out very quickly."
In late July, House Democrats passed the Childcare Is Essential Act, which Marte's group has supported. The bill creates a $50 billion fund to buttress the reeling industry. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has made clear that he is far more interested in remaking the judicial system to benefit conservatives than ushering in financial aid bills for ordinary Americans.
President Donald Trump and his allies have expressed an eagerness to return to normal that is not couched in reality as a third wave of coronavirus infections threatens to derail the economy once more. Without direct federal government intervention to save the childcare industry, the future is frighteningly precarious for women, and especially women of color.
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has shrewdly outlined a plan for what his campaign calls a "caregiving economy,"promising to "[e]nsure access to high-quality, affordable child care and offer universal preschool to three-and four-year olds through greater investment, expanded tax credits, and sliding-scale subsidies." The ambitious $775 billion plan is a start, and Biden will need to be held to his promises if he wins the White House.
When the coronavirus upended the economy, the crisis of childcare that had been brewing for years exploded and revealed the truly barbaric nature of a society that leaves human needs to the whims of "market forces." There is no better symbol of a society's future potential than the well-being of its children, and judging by that, we are in deep trouble.
Sonali Kolhatkar is the founder, host and executive producer of "Rising Up With Sonali," a television and radio show that airs on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations.
This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute.


alternet--2020-10-23--Alabama Lt. Gov. tests positive for COVID after condemning governor's mask mandate

Lt. Gov .
Will Ainsworth ( R ) pushed back against masks when Alabama Gov .
Kay Ivey ( R ) ordered statewide mask mandate amid the state 's coronavirus surge and its increase in COVID-related deaths .
Now , he has tested positive for coronavirus .
On Wednesday , Ainsworth released a statement confirming his positive COVID status .
He revealed that a fellow church member was found to have the virus , which led to the lieutenant governor to get tested .
Subsequently , the 39-year-old Republican tested positive for the virus .
`` After being notified this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school church group had acquired the coronavirus , I was tested out of an abundance of caution and received notice that the results proved positive , '' Ainsworth said .
Ainsworth 's positive COVID status comes just months after he criticized Ivey for the state 's mask mandate as he claimed mask-wearing `` infringes '' upon the rights of business owners and individuals .
At the time , Ainsworth took to Twitter to voice his concerns .
`` Wearing a face mask and maintaining social distancing are among the best ways to slow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeted .
`` However , it 's an overstep that infringes upon the property rights of business owners and the ability of individuals to make their own health decisions . ''
Despite Ainsworth 's stance on the state 's mask mandate , he claims that he always abided by coronavirus mitigation guidelines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) .
`` Because I follow social distancing rules and wear a mask both in church and in my daily interactions , the positive result shows that even those of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be at risk , '' Ainsworth also said in his latest statement .
Ainsworth 's positive COVID status comes as Alabama faces yet another gradual resurgence of coronavirus .
In the last two weeks , Alabama has reported more than 15,000 new COVID cases , according to the state 's health department .
As of Thursday , October 22 , there are more than 177,000 confirmed cases statewide .

Lt. Gov. Will Ainsworth (R) pushed back against masks when Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) ordered statewide mask mandate amid the state's coronavirus surge and its increase in COVID-related deaths. Now, he has tested positive for coronavirus.
On Wednesday, Ainsworth released a statement confirming his positive COVID status. He revealed that a fellow church member was found to have the virus, which led to the lieutenant governor to get tested. Subsequently, the 39-year-old Republican tested positive for the virus.
"After being notified this afternoon that a member of my Sunday school church group had acquired the coronavirus, I was tested out of an abundance of caution and received notice that the results proved positive," Ainsworth said.
Ainsworth's positive COVID status comes just months after he criticized Ivey for the state's mask mandate as he claimed mask-wearing "infringes" upon the rights of business owners and individuals. At the time, Ainsworth took to Twitter to voice his concerns.
"Wearing a face mask and maintaining social distancing are among the best ways to slow the spread of COVID-19," Ainsworth tweeted. "However, it's an overstep that infringes upon the property rights of business owners and the ability of individuals to make their own health decisions."
Despite Ainsworth's stance on the state's mask mandate, he claims that he always abided by coronavirus mitigation guidelines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
"Because I follow social distancing rules and wear a mask both in church and in my daily interactions, the positive result shows that even those of us who are the most cautious can be at risk," Ainsworth also said in his latest statement.
Ainsworth's positive COVID status comes as Alabama faces yet another gradual resurgence of coronavirus. In the last two weeks, Alabama has reported more than 15,000 new COVID cases, according to the state's health department. As of Thursday, October 22, there are more than 177,000 confirmed cases statewide.


alternet--2020-10-23--McConnell gets evasive when pressed on mysterious markings and bruises on his hands and face

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) avoided answering health-related questions after he appeared in public with what appeared to be significant bruises , discoloration , and markings on his hands and face .
On Tuesday , McConnell , 78 , came in contact with reporters after attending the Republican policy luncheon on Capitol Hill .
At the time , he was pressed by reporters on whether or not he had health issues .
To that question , he simply said , `` Of course not , '' according to CNN .
The top-ranking Republican was also asked if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That was another question he also dodged .
A CNN correspondent even went a step further and opted to ask McConnell a more direct question about the bruises and markings on his hands .
In response to that question , he only said , there were `` no concerns . ''
McConnell 's aide also declined to answer questions about the senator 's health .
The questions about McConnell 's health come as photos are also circulating from the luncheon on Capitol Hill .
The photos show what appears to be bruises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The bruises on his right hand are distinctively dark .
Twitter users have raised questions about McConnell 's health although he has remained particularly silent .
Despite the speculation , McConnell been conducting business as usual this week as he focuses on trying to push for the confirmation of President Donald Trump 's Supreme Court Justice nominee , Amy Coney Barrett .
No further details have been released regarding McConnell 's health .

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) avoided answering health-related questions after he appeared in public with what appeared to be significant bruises, discoloration, and markings on his hands and face.
On Tuesday, McConnell, 78, came in contact with reporters after attending the Republican policy luncheon on Capitol Hill. At the time, he was pressed by reporters on whether or not he had health issues. To that question, he simply said, "Of course not," according to CNN.
The top-ranking Republican was also asked if he was being treated by a doctor. That was another question he also dodged. A CNN correspondent even went a step further and opted to ask McConnell a more direct question about the bruises and markings on his hands. In response to that question, he only said, there were "no concerns." McConnell's aide also declined to answer questions about the senator's health.
The questions about McConnell's health come as photos are also circulating from the luncheon on Capitol Hill. The photos show what appears to be bruises on McConnell's face and hands. The bruises on his right hand are distinctively dark. Twitter users have raised questions about McConnell's health although he has remained particularly silent. Despite the speculation, McConnell been conducting business as usual this week as he focuses on trying to push for the confirmation of President Donald Trump's Supreme Court Justice nominee, Amy Coney Barrett. No further details have been released regarding McConnell's health.


alternet--2020-10-23--Republicans are setting up a trap for Democrats on COVID relief

The news that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell none-too-subtly expressed his opposition to passing any pre-election Covid economic relief dragged a simmering political question into the light : why exactly are Republican Senators being so stubborn about stopping something that would appear to help them politically -- certainly a lot more than it helps Democrats ?
There would seem to be a compelling case for them to have made a deal .
Further Covid relief is wildly popular , including among 55 percent of Republicans ( and it is pretty hard to find many issues these days that can garner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 88 percent of Democrats ) .
It is also highly salient to voters : two-thirds of voters in key battleground states want the Senate to prioritize Covid relief over confirming Amy Coney Barrett , and overall , the pandemic remains voters ' top concern .
Even more important for Senate Republicans ' calculus , GOP Senators like Susan Collins , Thom Tills , Cory Gardner , and Martha McSally , who are the most endangered , would benefit the most by delivering an economic boost in the runup to the election .
Among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the greatest electoral peril , most have come under direct fire on Covid relief , said they are in favor of further aid ( some are even running on their Covid relief credentials ) , and have positioned themselves as problem-solvers who are n't in lockstep with their party on the issue .
A successful Covid bill would solve some of these problems and fit powerfully into their narrative .
It would n't have to be a major watershed either : even a slight bump of 2-3 points might give Republicans a chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and hold on to their majority .
So what 's going on ?
The answer has changed over time .
The emerging thinking is that right now , McConnell sees the writing on the wall .
He may soon be a Minority Leader under a Democratic President .
So his best move has become to leave his option open to lay the entire economic mess created by the pandemic at Democrats ' collective feet , in order to jam up their agenda in a re-run of the 2009 stimulus playbook that was so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact , he 's probably decided in recent weeks that he 's actually got Democrats poised over a pretty good January trap door : instead of hitting the ground running by fixing the census , passing pro-democracy reforms , or doing a big climate bill , a new president and potentially a new Senate majority will have to expend precious political capital ( including possibly blowing up the filibuster ) and take responsibility for trillions in additional spending , with all of the inevitable problems and Republican donor outrage that goes with it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ granted anonymity due to the sensitive nature of this issue – stressed that things have changed a great deal during the five months that another round of federal economic support has been under discussion .
If there 's a major trap ahead now , it is not as if Democrats have blundered into it : there were solid reasons for each party to have followed the course they did .
In mid-March , as Covid lockdowns began , Democrats and Republicans were largely on the same page , and their political incentives for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same direction .
Right after the Senate passed the CARES Act 96-0 and with the US GDP in free fall , one veteran Democratic leadership staffer told me that it was inevitable that there would be multiple rounds of major , bipartisan Covid-related stimulus through the fall .
At the time , this sentiment was widespread and seemed totally warranted .
However , only weeks later , rapid re-opening especially in Republican-led states caused swift drops in weekly unemployment claims and a surge in the retail sector ( these kinds of positive economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the potential for a `` V-shaped '' recovery that would lead to a roaring third quarter economy and , despite all of Trump 's disastrous blunders , make his economic management appear strong ) .
By the summer , headlines began to focus on a `` mixed '' recovery , and as a result , both parties could look at the same data and reach different conclusions .
Democrats were eyeing weak durable goods and industrial production , a looming eviction crisis , and state and local government deficits with alarm , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rebounds and concluding that things were looking up .
This is at least part of the reason why after the House Democrats passed their $ 3 trillion HEROES Act in May , Senate Republicans waited until July and only then proposed their much slimmer $ 1 trillion HEALS Act .
They could have acted more aggressively , but did n't see a pressing need – indeed , they continued to believe that time and economic trends were on their side .
For their part , Senate Democrats could have gotten on board with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following some amendments , set a reasonable floor for negotiators to work with to achieve a bill by September .
But at the time , they still saw further relief as so obviously necessary – most of all for Donald Trump 's politics – that there was no reason to negotiate against themselves .
And of course , other factors were at work .
Some Republicans ( think Rand Paul , the lone Republican Senator to vote against his party 's Covid relief bill ) have genuine ideological opposition to further spending .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ their political positioning in a party facing an uncertain , potentially Trump-less future : traditionally , being against government spending is the safest political ground for ambitious Republicans to stand on .
On top of that , President Trump pulled his usual routine of giving no indication of what he wanted , leaving Mitch McConnell with a fractured caucus ( despite Democratic caricatures , McConnell does not pull all of the strings , but actually has to read and react to his team ) .
Not to mention that once the death of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a polarizing Supreme Court nomination fight , Senate Republicans and Trump operatives jumped at the chance to ignite their base and move the campaign focus onto relatively more favorable ground ( with just about anything being better for them than more focus on Covid ) .
Indeed , at this point , keeping the confirmation on track has become another reason to avoid diverting to Covid relief .
The bottom line is that Democrats may now be poised over a dangerous January trap , but it 's not as if they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clever .
Indeed , Democratic leaders may have been right all along that a Covid relief bill would be in Republicans ' best interest , but there were simply too many cross-currents that intervened along the way .
The next question will become if Democrats are facing a looming trap , can they evade it ?
If – absent a Trump victory – the incentives all line up for Senate Republicans to hold out until the new year and stick Democrats with the mess , there are still opportunities in the form of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` must-pass '' in a post-election lame duck session : the National Defense Authorization Act and a Continuing Resolution to fund the government past December 11 .
This means that there will be chances for Democrats to at least defray some of the costs of a January Covid bill by attaching them to government or defense funding and getting them done on Republicans ' watch .
They could , for example , accept Senate Republicans ' $ 500 billion Covid relief bill with additions in the House , attach them to one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and a potentially outgoing President Trump ) to shut down the Pentagon or most of the federal government to stop it .
Would this maneuver work , or at least improve the politics of a big January aid bill ?
It 's too soon to know .
The only thing that has been clear from the winding path of Covid relief is that Democrats will have to stay nimble – things can change fast .

The news that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell none-too-subtly expressed his opposition to passing any pre-election Covid economic relief dragged a simmering political question into the light: why exactly are Republican Senators being so stubborn about stopping something that would appear to help them politically--certainly a lot more than it helps Democrats?
There would seem to be a compelling case for them to have made a deal. Further Covid relief is wildly popular, including among 55 percent of Republicans (and it is pretty hard to find many issues these days that can garner that kind of Republican approval and get 88 percent of Democrats). It is also highly salient to voters: two-thirds of voters in key battleground states want the Senate to prioritize Covid relief over confirming Amy Coney Barrett, and overall, the pandemic remains voters' top concern.
Even more important for Senate Republicans' calculus, GOP Senators like Susan Collins, Thom Tills, Cory Gardner, and Martha McSally, who are the most endangered, would benefit the most by delivering an economic boost in the runup to the election. Among the nine or so Republican Senators in the greatest electoral peril, most have come under direct fire on Covid relief, said they are in favor of further aid (some are even running on their Covid relief credentials), and have positioned themselves as problem-solvers who aren't in lockstep with their party on the issue. A successful Covid bill would solve some of these problems and fit powerfully into their narrative. It wouldn't have to be a major watershed either: even a slight bump of 2-3 points might give Republicans a chance to eke out a handful of wins and hold on to their majority.
So what's going on? The answer has changed over time.
The emerging thinking is that right now, McConnell sees the writing on the wall. He may soon be a Minority Leader under a Democratic President. So his best move has become to leave his option open to lay the entire economic mess created by the pandemic at Democrats' collective feet, in order to jam up their agenda in a re-run of the 2009 stimulus playbook that was so politically successful for his party.
In fact, he's probably decided in recent weeks that he's actually got Democrats poised over a pretty good January trap door: instead of hitting the ground running by fixing the census, passing pro-democracy reforms, or doing a big climate bill, a new president and potentially a new Senate majority will have to expend precious political capital (including possibly blowing up the filibuster) and take responsibility for trillions in additional spending, with all of the inevitable problems and Republican donor outrage that goes with it.
But several Senate insiders – all granted anonymity due to the sensitive nature of this issue – stressed that things have changed a great deal during the five months that another round of federal economic support has been under discussion. If there's a major trap ahead now, it is not as if Democrats have blundered into it: there were solid reasons for each party to have followed the course they did.
In mid-March, as Covid lockdowns began, Democrats and Republicans were largely on the same page, and their political incentives for major economic intervention were going in the same direction. Right after the Senate passed the CARES Act 96-0 and with the US GDP in free fall, one veteran Democratic leadership staffer told me that it was inevitable that there would be multiple rounds of major, bipartisan Covid-related stimulus through the fall. At the time, this sentiment was widespread and seemed totally warranted.
However, only weeks later, rapid re-opening especially in Republican-led states caused swift drops in weekly unemployment claims and a surge in the retail sector (these kinds of positive economic indications even had Democrats temporarily fretting about the potential for a "V-shaped" recovery that would lead to a roaring third quarter economy and, despite all of Trump's disastrous blunders, make his economic management appear strong).
By the summer, headlines began to focus on a "mixed" recovery, and as a result, both parties could look at the same data and reach different conclusions. Democrats were eyeing weak durable goods and industrial production, a looming eviction crisis, and state and local government deficits with alarm, and Republicans were seeing unemployment and stock market rebounds and concluding that things were looking up.
This is at least part of the reason why after the House Democrats passed their $3 trillion HEROES Act in May, Senate Republicans waited until July and only then proposed their much slimmer $1 trillion HEALS Act. They could have acted more aggressively, but didn't see a pressing need – indeed, they continued to believe that time and economic trends were on their side. For their part, Senate Democrats could have gotten on board with the Senate Republican bill and, perhaps following some amendments, set a reasonable floor for negotiators to work with to achieve a bill by September. But at the time, they still saw further relief as so obviously necessary – most of all for Donald Trump's politics – that there was no reason to negotiate against themselves.
And of course, other factors were at work. Some Republicans (think Rand Paul, the lone Republican Senator to vote against his party's Covid relief bill) have genuine ideological opposition to further spending. Others with more philosophical flexibility were eyeing their political positioning in a party facing an uncertain, potentially Trump-less future: traditionally, being against government spending is the safest political ground for ambitious Republicans to stand on.
On top of that, President Trump pulled his usual routine of giving no indication of what he wanted, leaving Mitch McConnell with a fractured caucus (despite Democratic caricatures, McConnell does not pull all of the strings, but actually has to read and react to his team). Not to mention that once the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg opened up the prospect of a polarizing Supreme Court nomination fight, Senate Republicans and Trump operatives jumped at the chance to ignite their base and move the campaign focus onto relatively more favorable ground (with just about anything being better for them than more focus on Covid). Indeed, at this point, keeping the confirmation on track has become another reason to avoid diverting to Covid relief.
The bottom line is that Democrats may now be poised over a dangerous January trap, but it's not as if they were strategically slipshod or that Republicans were exceedingly clever. Indeed, Democratic leaders may have been right all along that a Covid relief bill would be in Republicans' best interest, but there were simply too many cross-currents that intervened along the way.
The next question will become if Democrats are facing a looming trap, can they evade it? If – absent a Trump victory – the incentives all line up for Senate Republicans to hold out until the new year and stick Democrats with the mess, there are still opportunities in the form of two pieces of legislation considered to be "must-pass" in a post-election lame duck session: the National Defense Authorization Act and a Continuing Resolution to fund the government past December 11. This means that there will be chances for Democrats to at least defray some of the costs of a January Covid bill by attaching them to government or defense funding and getting them done on Republicans' watch. They could, for example, accept Senate Republicans' $500 billion Covid relief bill with additions in the House, attach them to one of these legislative vehicles, and dare them (and a potentially outgoing President Trump) to shut down the Pentagon or most of the federal government to stop it.
Would this maneuver work, or at least improve the politics of a big January aid bill? It's too soon to know. The only thing that has been clear from the winding path of Covid relief is that Democrats will have to stay nimble – things can change fast.


alternet--2020-10-23--How Fox News has been encouraging America’s extremists hoping for a second civil war

Although Fox News has always had a right-wing slant , there have been divisions between its far-right opinion hosts ( Tucker Carlson , Sean Hannity , Laura Ingraham ) and the more reasonable hard news division ( Chris Wallace , Andrew Napolitano ) .
But viewers who tune into Fox hoping for National Review-type conservatism are likely to encounter kooky World Net Daily-type conservatism instead , and journalist Alex Wagner — this week in an article for The Atlantic — warns that parts of Fox News have been encouraging the paranoia of America 's extremists during the Trump era .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ xenophobia and division has always been popular and highly lucrative , '' Wagner explains .
`` But now , with the advent of COVID-19 , the channel has become a marketplace for something considerably more poisonous : increasingly dystopian coverage of the country that provides fodder for radicals . ''
Two of the radicals that Wagner was referring to were Chris Hill and Corey Wells , both members of the well-armed Security Force Three Percent — a far-right militia in Georgia .
Hill believes that `` coronavirus is a scam , '' and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his civil liberties .
Wells told The Atlantic , `` This country right now is a tinder box .
This whole country is like California — just waiting on a spark to land in it .
And when it does , it 's gon na be bad .
The original Civil War has nothing on what 's coming . ''
Wells , Wagner stresses , only trusts far-right media figures like Carlson and Hannity — and Fox News , she warns , is keeping the far right fired up with its coverage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' opinion hosts have often downplayed the dangers of COVID-19 and claimed that social distancing restrictions are anti-freedom — a message that , Wagner observes , militia members like Hill and Wells have been buying into .
`` In previous years , Fox could claim credit for Republican intransigence on immigration reform and the party 's willful denial of climate change , '' Wagner explains .
`` Today , Fox plays a significant role in stoking fear that it may be time for a second American civil war . ''
President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been encouraging fringe groups — for example , his refusal to criticize QAnon , which believes that the federal government has been infiltrated by an international cabal of child sex traffickers , Satanists and cannibals and that Democrats play a key role in that cabal .
Wagner explains , `` The concentric circles of paranoia that once separated the most radical theorists from the most mainstream conservatives have , with the assistance of Fox , grown dramatically smaller — indeed , under President Trump , they might even overlap… .
Fox has undeniably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public through its constant drumbeat of stories promoting fear and mistrust , eroding confidence in institutions and our democracy . ''

Although Fox News has always had a right-wing slant, there have been divisions between its far-right opinion hosts (Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham) and the more reasonable hard news division (Chris Wallace, Andrew Napolitano). But viewers who tune into Fox hoping for National Review-type conservatism are likely to encounter kooky World Net Daily-type conservatism instead, and journalist Alex Wagner — this week in an article for The Atlantic — warns that parts of Fox News have been encouraging the paranoia of America's extremists during the Trump era.
"Fox News' unique blend of xenophobia and division has always been popular and highly lucrative," Wagner explains. "But now, with the advent of COVID-19, the channel has become a marketplace for something considerably more poisonous: increasingly dystopian coverage of the country that provides fodder for radicals."
Two of the radicals that Wagner was referring to were Chris Hill and Corey Wells, both members of the well-armed Security Force Three Percent — a far-right militia in Georgia. Hill believes that "coronavirus is a scam," and he views social distancing measures an assault on his civil liberties. Wells told The Atlantic, "This country right now is a tinder box. This whole country is like California — just waiting on a spark to land in it. And when it does, it's gonna be bad. The original Civil War has nothing on what's coming."
Wells, Wagner stresses, only trusts far-right media figures like Carlson and Hannity — and Fox News, she warns, is keeping the far right fired up with its coverage of the coronavirus pandemic. Fox News' opinion hosts have often downplayed the dangers of COVID-19 and claimed that social distancing restrictions are anti-freedom — a message that, Wagner observes, militia members like Hill and Wells have been buying into.
"In previous years, Fox could claim credit for Republican intransigence on immigration reform and the party's willful denial of climate change," Wagner explains. "Today, Fox plays a significant role in stoking fear that it may be time for a second American civil war."
President Donald Trump, according to Wagner, has also been encouraging fringe groups — for example, his refusal to criticize QAnon, which believes that the federal government has been infiltrated by an international cabal of child sex traffickers, Satanists and cannibals and that Democrats play a key role in that cabal.
Wagner explains, "The concentric circles of paranoia that once separated the most radical theorists from the most mainstream conservatives have, with the assistance of Fox, grown dramatically smaller — indeed, under President Trump, they might even overlap…. Fox has undeniably poisoned a broad section of the American public through its constant drumbeat of stories promoting fear and mistrust, eroding confidence in institutions and our democracy."


alternet--2020-10-23--Trump walked into a trap on Obamacare — and the Lincoln Project pounced

The Lincoln Project quickly fired back at President Donald Trump when he revealed his true intentions regarding the Affordable Care Act , known commonly as Obamacare .
During the president 's debate against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden , he admitted that the goal is to `` terminate '' Obamacare .
As Trump offered multiple baseless excuses to justify his administration 's reason for wanting to terminate healthcare for more than 20 million Americans , he walked into another debacle .
When asked how he would replace Obamacare , the president failed to provide any serious answer to that question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deliver a `` beautiful healthcare plan . ''
But once again , Trump offered no substance to detail what that means .
His remarks influenced The Lincoln Project 's response .
The anti-Trump Republican group took to Twitter with highlights of the president 's so-called healthcare plan .
With a video compilation of the president 's previous remarks about healthcare , The Lincoln Project shed light on what Trump really meant during the debate .
Since January 2017 , Trump has volleyed on healthcare often spewing lies about forthcoming release dates for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump has claimed his full healthcare plan would be released in `` two weeks , '' `` one month , '' `` soon , '' and so on , the truth is that it has been three and a half years and Trump still has not released a plan .
The president 's failed war on healthcare also sheds light on how reckless his decision would be to terminate healthcare for millions of Americans .
The Lincoln Project 's clip made that very clear .
The group 's latest video is one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highlight the inconsistencies in Trump 's promise to voters and his ability to execute .
Over the last two weeks , The Lincoln Project 's support on Twitter has surpassed that of the Republican National Committee which suggests there are many Republicans that may be jumping ship as Election Day approaches .

The Lincoln Project quickly fired back at President Donald Trump when he revealed his true intentions regarding the Affordable Care Act, known commonly as Obamacare.
During the president's debate against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, he admitted that the goal is to "terminate" Obamacare. As Trump offered multiple baseless excuses to justify his administration's reason for wanting to terminate healthcare for more than 20 million Americans, he walked into another debacle. When asked how he would replace Obamacare, the president failed to provide any serious answer to that question.
Instead, he pivoted and promised to deliver a "beautiful healthcare plan." But once again, Trump offered no substance to detail what that means. His remarks influenced The Lincoln Project's response.
The anti-Trump Republican group took to Twitter with highlights of the president's so-called healthcare plan. With a video compilation of the president's previous remarks about healthcare, The Lincoln Project shed light on what Trump really meant during the debate.
The tweet read, "JUST LEAKED: President Trump's healthcare plan."
Since January 2017, Trump has volleyed on healthcare often spewing lies about forthcoming release dates for his plan. On multiple occasions, Trump has claimed his full healthcare plan would be released in "two weeks," "one month," "soon," and so on, the truth is that it has been three and a half years and Trump still has not released a plan. The president's failed war on healthcare also sheds light on how reckless his decision would be to terminate healthcare for millions of Americans. The Lincoln Project's clip made that very clear.
The group's latest video is one of several clips that have been released to highlight the inconsistencies in Trump's promise to voters and his ability to execute. Over the last two weeks, The Lincoln Project's support on Twitter has surpassed that of the Republican National Committee which suggests there are many Republicans that may be jumping ship as Election Day approaches.


alternet--2020-10-23--Here's what an expert in nonverbal communication saw in the Trump-Biden debate

President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden met on Oct. 22 for the final debate in the 2020 election and , like the first debate , it was unusual .
COVID-19 forced social distancing and largely took the studio audience , with their laughter , cheering and booing out of the equation .
What 's more , with norm-breaking interruptions and stealing of speaking time an inherent part of Donald Trump 's debate strategy , the contentious crosstalk between the two candidates and the moderator made long sections of the candidates ' first debate nearly impossible to hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the microphone cut off effectively muted this aggression .
But is what they say as important as we think ?
Although news coverage generally focuses on what the candidates say , as a political psychologist who studies nonverbal behavior , I focus less on the rehearsed answers and more on the space between talking points .
These moments , when candidates nonverbally – and largely involuntarily – respond to their opposition can be enormously revealing .
In other words , how people listen and react may speak louder than what they say .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the emotionally expressive politician he has been throughout his career .
Even when directly dealing with attacks from Trump , whether aimed at his family or his record , Biden often smiled , laughed and shook his head while closing his eyes .
That made him appear bemused , if not jovial .
Research suggests that people in informal discussions often change topics within 30 seconds of laughter occurring .
This , in turn may be why people – especially politicians - “ laugh off '' insults .
Laughter when under attack likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be playful and that he is subtly taking control of the conversation .
Trump presented a much less aggressive and more thoughtful face to the American public during this second debate , especially when compared to the first one .
Instead of directly attacking Biden when his assertions were questioned , Trump responded with what may best be termed a controlled-posed smile , in which his lower lip is pressed up while his lip corners were pulled up in a smile .
This type of smile is often used to mask negative emotions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not felt .
Perhaps Trump 's signature facial display is his protruding funneled lips .
This lip funneler – as it is referred to by facial display researchers – can often be seen while Trump is listening and preparing to interrupt or respond to Biden .
The research that exists about this behavior in humans suggests it is a primal display often occurring during intense emotional situations and is associated with anger and threats while engaging in dominance-seeking behavior .
Much can be learned about each candidate with the noise turned down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distinct nonverbal behavior styles .
This is especially the case when focusing on how the candidates respond to their opposition 's assertions and attacks .
Public figures can often control how they act .
However , they often do not have as much control over how they react in the heat of the moment .
[ Expertise in your inbox .
Sign up for The Conversation 's newsletter and get expert takes on today 's news , every day . ]
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license @ @ @ @ @ @

by Patrick Stewart, University of Arkansas
President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden met on Oct. 22 for the final debate in the 2020 election and, like the first debate, it was unusual.
COVID-19 forced social distancing and largely took the studio audience, with their laughter, cheering and booing out of the equation.
What's more, with norm-breaking interruptions and stealing of speaking time an inherent part of Donald Trump's debate strategy, the contentious crosstalk between the two candidates and the moderator made long sections of the candidates' first debate nearly impossible to hear or follow. The threat of having the microphone cut off effectively muted this aggression.
But is what they say as important as we think?
Although news coverage generally focuses on what the candidates say, as a political psychologist who studies nonverbal behavior, I focus less on the rehearsed answers and more on the space between talking points. These moments, when candidates nonverbally – and largely involuntarily – respond to their opposition can be enormously revealing.
In other words, how people listen and react may speak louder than what they say.
Biden
During this debate Joe Biden reacted as the emotionally expressive politician he has been throughout his career.
Even when directly dealing with attacks from Trump, whether aimed at his family or his record, Biden often smiled, laughed and shook his head while closing his eyes. That made him appear bemused, if not jovial.
Research suggests that people in informal discussions often change topics within 30 seconds of laughter occurring. This, in turn may be why people – especially politicians - “laugh off" insults.
Laughter when under attack likely signals that Biden feels positive enough to be playful and that he is subtly taking control of the conversation.
Trump
Trump presented a much less aggressive and more thoughtful face to the American public during this second debate, especially when compared to the first one.
Instead of directly attacking Biden when his assertions were questioned, Trump responded with what may best be termed a controlled-posed smile, in which his lower lip is pressed up while his lip corners were pulled up in a smile. This type of smile is often used to mask negative emotions or to signal positive emotions when they are not felt.
Perhaps Trump's signature facial display is his protruding funneled lips. This lip funneler – as it is referred to by facial display researchers – can often be seen while Trump is listening and preparing to interrupt or respond to Biden. The research that exists about this behavior in humans suggests it is a primal display often occurring during intense emotional situations and is associated with anger and threats while engaging in dominance-seeking behavior.
Much can be learned about each candidate with the noise turned down and the attention placed squarely on their distinct nonverbal behavior styles.
This is especially the case when focusing on how the candidates respond to their opposition's assertions and attacks. Public figures can often control how they act. However, they often do not have as much control over how they react in the heat of the moment.
[Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation's newsletter and get expert takes on today's news, every day.]
Patrick Stewart, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Arkansas
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-10-23--Georgia will be a real nail-biter this year — and that includes 2 Senate races

In recent decades , Georgia was predictably Republican outside of Atlanta .
But in 2020 , Georgia is , like Texas , a light red state — and if former Vice President Joe Biden wins Georgia on November 3 , it might be time to start thinking of it as a swing state .
Journalists Margaret Talev and Alexi McCammond , in an October 23 article for Axios , stress that Georgia will be full of nail-biters this year — from the presidential race to U.S. Senate races .
`` It has n't backed a Democrat for president since 1992 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` but Georgia 's changing demographics may prove pivotal this year — not only to Trump v. Biden , but also , to whether Democrats take control of the Senate . ''
There were some warning signs for Republicans when , in 2016 , Trump defeated Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton by only 5 % in the Peach State .
Compared to the double-digit wins Republicans had enjoyed in Georgia in previous presidential elections , the 2016 results indicated that they were losing ground there .
Then , in 2018 , Democratic gubernatorial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brian Kemp , now Georgia 's governor .
And now , polls are showing a tight 2020 presidential race in Georgia , with Biden slightly ahead in some polls and Trump slightly ahead in others .
A recent New York Times/Siena College survey showed Biden and Trump tied at 45 % .
Compare that to 2004 , when President George W. Bush defeated Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry by 16 % in Georgia .
In addition to the presidential race , reporters will be paying close attention to Georgia because of two U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but both of Georgia 's Senate seats are on the ballot this year because of the special election to fill Johnny Isakson 's seat , '' Talev and McCammond note .
`` Polling shows they 're crowded or close races with no clear winner .
Georgia law sends general-election races to a January 5 runoff if no one hits 50 % + — and right now , no candidate is reaching 50 % in the polling .
So , if control of the Senate is n't clear by then , we 'll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
On Election Night , the states that could determine whether or not Republicans will maintain their Senate majority include Arizona , Iowa , Maine , Colorado and North Carolina .
Incumbent GOP senators are considered vulnerable in all of those states .
But as Talev and McCammond point out , it 's important to keep an eye on Georgia 's two U.S. Senate races as well .
In Georgia , the Axios reporters observe , `` GOP incumbent Sen. David Perdue was tied with Democrat Jon Ossoff at 43 % in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York Times/Siena College poll out this week .
Libertarian Shane Hazel had 4 % , potentially drawing enough support to block either major-party candidate from crossing 50 % ... .
The intraparty battle for the other seat , between Sen. Kelly Loeffler — who 's filled the seat since January after Isakson retired early for health reasons — and Rep. Doug Collins , has split the GOP side of the vote , with Loeffler holding an edge .
That 's allowed Democrat Raphael Warnock to slide into the lead , though no one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It 's important to understand the difference between deep red states and light red states when it comes to U.S. politics .
The states where polls are showing Trump ahead of Biden by 15 % or 20 % are deep red states , while the states where Republicans still have an advantage but not a double-digit advantage are light red states — Georgia and Texas , for example ( Biden is competitive in Texas as well ) .
And Talev and McCammond note that demographics are making Georgia more Democrat-friendly .
`` Nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and White people 's share of the population has fallen significantly in the past two decades , '' the reporters observe .
`` With the pandemic and push toward early voting , white early voting has increased 64 % in Georgia compared to the same point in 2016 , according to TargetSmart .
But early ballots cast by Black voters has increased 88 % . ''

In recent decades, Georgia was predictably Republican outside of Atlanta. But in 2020, Georgia is, like Texas, a light red state — and if former Vice President Joe Biden wins Georgia on November 3, it might be time to start thinking of it as a swing state. Journalists Margaret Talev and Alexi McCammond, in an October 23 article for Axios, stress that Georgia will be full of nail-biters this year — from the presidential race to U.S. Senate races.
"It hasn't backed a Democrat for president since 1992," Talev and McCammond explain, "but Georgia's changing demographics may prove pivotal this year — not only to Trump v. Biden, but also, to whether Democrats take control of the Senate."
There were some warning signs for Republicans when, in 2016, Trump defeated Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton by only 5% in the Peach State. Compared to the double-digit wins Republicans had enjoyed in Georgia in previous presidential elections, the 2016 results indicated that they were losing ground there. Then, in 2018, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams narrowly lost to Republican Brian Kemp, now Georgia's governor. And now, polls are showing a tight 2020 presidential race in Georgia, with Biden slightly ahead in some polls and Trump slightly ahead in others.
A recent New York Times/Siena College survey showed Biden and Trump tied at 45%. Compare that to 2004, when President George W. Bush defeated Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry by 16% in Georgia.
In addition to the presidential race, reporters will be paying close attention to Georgia because of two U.S. Senate races.
"Not just one, but both of Georgia's Senate seats are on the ballot this year because of the special election to fill Johnny Isakson's seat," Talev and McCammond note. "Polling shows they're crowded or close races with no clear winner. Georgia law sends general-election races to a January 5 runoff if no one hits 50%+ — and right now, no candidate is reaching 50% in the polling. So, if control of the Senate isn't clear by then, we'll have to wait for the Georgia runoffs."
On Election Night, the states that could determine whether or not Republicans will maintain their Senate majority include Arizona, Iowa, Maine, Colorado and North Carolina. Incumbent GOP senators are considered vulnerable in all of those states. But as Talev and McCammond point out, it's important to keep an eye on Georgia's two U.S. Senate races as well.
In Georgia, the Axios reporters observe, "GOP incumbent Sen. David Perdue was tied with Democrat Jon Ossoff at 43% in the latest public polling, a New York Times/Siena College poll out this week. Libertarian Shane Hazel had 4%, potentially drawing enough support to block either major-party candidate from crossing 50%.... The intraparty battle for the other seat, between Sen. Kelly Loeffler — who's filled the seat since January after Isakson retired early for health reasons — and Rep. Doug Collins, has split the GOP side of the vote, with Loeffler holding an edge. That's allowed Democrat Raphael Warnock to slide into the lead, though no one's close to 50%."
It's important to understand the difference between deep red states and light red states when it comes to U.S. politics. The states where polls are showing Trump ahead of Biden by 15% or 20% are deep red states, while the states where Republicans still have an advantage but not a double-digit advantage are light red states — Georgia and Texas, for example (Biden is competitive in Texas as well). And Talev and McCammond note that demographics are making Georgia more Democrat-friendly.
"Nearly a third of Georgians are Black, and White people's share of the population has fallen significantly in the past two decades," the reporters observe. "With the pandemic and push toward early voting, white early voting has increased 64% in Georgia compared to the same point in 2016, according to TargetSmart. But early ballots cast by Black voters has increased 88%."


alternet--2020-10-23--Trump believes the GOP will take the House — here's why that's ridiculous

On multiple occasions , President Donald Trump has admitted that he believes Republican lawmakers will take back the House of Representatives with the upcoming election , but experts and analysts are pushing back against the president and explaining why they are not confident that will happen .
Contrary to what Trump believes , multiple political analysts are predicting that not only will Democrats maintain control of the lower chamber of Congress but they may also gain more seats , according to a prediction by the Cook Political Report .
In fact , on Wednesday , Dave Wasserman released a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` overall , we 're revising our outlook in the House from a Democratic net gain of five to ten seats to a gain of between five and 15 seats . ''
The latest arguments come less than a day after Trump touched on the subject during the final presidential debate in Nashville , Tenn .
Despite the poll projections that suggest he may not even win a second term in the White House , Trump believes he will and the Republicans will maintain control of the Senate and take control of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) as he insisted she would be the reason Republican lawmakers win back the House .
`` I think we 're going to win the House , '' Trump said on Thursday night .
`` That 's one of the reasons I think we 're going to take over the House because of her . ''
However , there are multiple key aspects that Trump is not taking into consideration .
Since 2018 when the Democrats regained control of the House , they have had 232 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Republican Party would need to gain a total of 18 seats to flip the lower chamber .
On the other side of the spectrum , USA Today notes that it appears Democrats have a better chance of flipping the Senate compared to Republicans ' chance of winning the House as they only need to flip four seats .

On multiple occasions, President Donald Trump has admitted that he believes Republican lawmakers will take back the House of Representatives with the upcoming election, but experts and analysts are pushing back against the president and explaining why they are not confident that will happen.
Contrary to what Trump believes, multiple political analysts are predicting that not only will Democrats maintain control of the lower chamber of Congress but they may also gain more seats, according to a prediction by the Cook Political Report.
In fact, on Wednesday, Dave Wasserman released a statement for the non-partisan political report saying, "overall, we're revising our outlook in the House from a Democratic net gain of five to ten seats to a gain of between five and 15 seats."
The latest arguments come less than a day after Trump touched on the subject during the final presidential debate in Nashville, Tenn. Despite the poll projections that suggest he may not even win a second term in the White House, Trump believes he will and the Republicans will maintain control of the Senate and take control of the House.
The president also took aim at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as he insisted she would be the reason Republican lawmakers win back the House.
"I think we're going to win the House," Trump said on Thursday night. "That's one of the reasons I think we're going to take over the House because of her."
However, there are multiple key aspects that Trump is not taking into consideration. Since 2018 when the Democrats regained control of the House, they have had 232 representatives compared to Republicans' 197. The Republican Party would need to gain a total of 18 seats to flip the lower chamber. On the other side of the spectrum, USA Today notes that it appears Democrats have a better chance of flipping the Senate compared to Republicans' chance of winning the House as they only need to flip four seats.


alternet--2020-10-23--Blue wave or not, expect to see a lot of Mitch McConnell in 2021

With the 2020 election less than two weeks away , many pundits are stressing that despite what the polls are showing , President Donald Trump might win a narrow Electoral College victory if he is able to outperform former Vice President Joe Biden in enough swing states .
But Fox News ' ultra-conservative Rupert Murdoch is predicting that Biden will win by a landslide .
It remains to be seen what will happen on Tuesday , November 3 , but even if 2020 sees a major blue wave — even if Biden defeats Trump and Democrats achieve a majority in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House of Representatives — one Republican name that will likely be heard a lot in 2021 is Mitch McConnell .
In fact , a blue tsunami could make the Senate majority leader the most prominent Republican in the United States .
Democrats have a chance of winning back the Senate this year , and the incumbent GOP senators who are considered vulnerable include Arizona 's Martha McSally , Iowa 's Joni Ernst , Maine 's Susan Collins , Colorado 's Cory Gardner and North Carolina 's Thom Tillis .
If all of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a Senate majority in 2021 — even if Sen. Doug Jones , easily 2020 's most vulnerable Democratic senator , loses to Republican Tommy Tuberville in Alabama 's U.S. Senate race .
But one incumbent Republican senator who does n't appear to be in danger of being voted out of office is McConnell , who is up for reelection this year .
Polls released during the second half of October have found the Senate majority leader ahead of his centrist Democratic challenger , Amy McGrath , by 9 % ( Mason-Dixon ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The 78-year-old Senate majority leader , who was first elected to the Senate in 1984 , has become an incredibly polarizing figure — and he would probably lose badly to McGrath if he were running against her in a blue state or even a swing state .
But McConnell is seeking reelection in deep red Kentucky .
While Democrats view McConnell as a mean-spirited hyper-partisan , the far-right Republican base view him as a fighter .
Assuming that McConnell is reelected , he is likely to remain the top Republican in the Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to obtain a Senate minority .
The Democratic National Committee , knowing how hyper-partisan McConnell is , has been warning that Biden would n't be able to get very much done as president if Republicans hold the Senate on November 3 — and Democratic strategists have emphasized that flipping the White House and the Senate are both high priorities for their party .
If Democrats flip the Senate , Republicans would likely want to have McConnell as Senate minority leader .
And in a scenario in which Democrats controlled both the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for the GOP , become the face of the opposition and the most important Republican in Washington , D.C. McConnell 's most appalling behavior is the thing that endears him to the far-right Republican base — including his refusal to even consider Judge Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court after President Barack Obama nominated him to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016 .
McConnell argued that according to the `` McConnell Rule , '' it was unfair for Obama to nominate Garland during an election year .
But now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bader Ginsburg , McConnell is hypocritically trying to push Trump 's nominee , Judge Amy Coney Barrett , though the Senate is quickly as possible .
The `` McConnell Rule '' clearly does n't apply in 2020 .
McConnell 's insistence that Barrett needs to be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court before Election Day is blatant hypocrisy in light of his reaction to Garland 's nomination in 2016 , and Democrats are rightly calling foul .
But to the far-right Republican base , the fact that McConnell plays hardball is a plus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's impeachment trial , McConnell was among Trump 's most aggressive defenders .
Trump 's actions were egregious : the president , according to House Democrats , encouraged a foreign leader , Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky , to provide opposition research against Joe Biden and his son , Hunter Biden — and made dirt on the Bidens a condition of military aid to Ukraine .
Regardless , McConnell was n't about to turn against a Republican president who supported much of his agenda .
His only loyalty was to the Republican Party , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fights dirty , and that is the thing that the modern-day GOP loves about him .
If Biden defeats Trump and Democrats flip the Senate while maintaining their House majority , Republicans will be dispirited but will view McConnell as the one doing the most to fight for them .
And if Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court , McConnell would take some of the credit for that .
Whether November 3 , 2020 brings a major blue wave or Republicans defy the polls , Washington , D.C. will likely be seeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

With the 2020 election less than two weeks away, many pundits are stressing that despite what the polls are showing, President Donald Trump might win a narrow Electoral College victory if he is able to outperform former Vice President Joe Biden in enough swing states. But Fox News' ultra-conservative Rupert Murdoch is predicting that Biden will win by a landslide. It remains to be seen what will happen on Tuesday, November 3, but even if 2020 sees a major blue wave — even if Biden defeats Trump and Democrats achieve a majority in the U.S. Senate while holding the U.S. House of Representatives — one Republican name that will likely be heard a lot in 2021 is Mitch McConnell.
In fact, a blue tsunami could make the Senate majority leader the most prominent Republican in the United States.
Democrats have a chance of winning back the Senate this year, and the incumbent GOP senators who are considered vulnerable include Arizona's Martha McSally, Iowa's Joni Ernst, Maine's Susan Collins, Colorado's Cory Gardner and North Carolina's Thom Tillis. If all of them lose to Democratic opponents, Democrats will have a Senate majority in 2021 — even if Sen. Doug Jones, easily 2020's most vulnerable Democratic senator, loses to Republican Tommy Tuberville in Alabama's U.S. Senate race. But one incumbent Republican senator who doesn't appear to be in danger of being voted out of office is McConnell, who is up for reelection this year. Polls released during the second half of October have found the Senate majority leader ahead of his centrist Democratic challenger, Amy McGrath, by 9% (Mason-Dixon) or 10% (Cygnal).
The 78-year-old Senate majority leader, who was first elected to the Senate in 1984, has become an incredibly polarizing figure — and he would probably lose badly to McGrath if he were running against her in a blue state or even a swing state. But McConnell is seeking reelection in deep red Kentucky. While Democrats view McConnell as a mean-spirited hyper-partisan, the far-right Republican base view him as a fighter.
Assuming that McConnell is reelected, he is likely to remain the top Republican in the Senate regardless of whether or not Democrats are able to obtain a Senate minority. The Democratic National Committee, knowing how hyper-partisan McConnell is, has been warning that Biden wouldn't be able to get very much done as president if Republicans hold the Senate on November 3 — and Democratic strategists have emphasized that flipping the White House and the Senate are both high priorities for their party. If Democrats flip the Senate, Republicans would likely want to have McConnell as Senate minority leader. And in a scenario in which Democrats controlled both the White House and the Senate, McConnell would, for the GOP, become the face of the opposition and the most important Republican in Washington, D.C.
McConnell's most appalling behavior is the thing that endears him to the far-right Republican base — including his refusal to even consider Judge Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court after President Barack Obama nominated him to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016. McConnell argued that according to the "McConnell Rule," it was unfair for Obama to nominate Garland during an election year. But now, following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, McConnell is hypocritically trying to push Trump's nominee, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, though the Senate is quickly as possible. The "McConnell Rule" clearly doesn't apply in 2020.
McConnell's insistence that Barrett needs to be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court before Election Day is blatant hypocrisy in light of his reaction to Garland's nomination in 2016, and Democrats are rightly calling foul. But to the far-right Republican base, the fact that McConnell plays hardball is a plus rather than a minus.
During Trump's impeachment trial, McConnell was among Trump's most aggressive defenders. Trump's actions were egregious: the president, according to House Democrats, encouraged a foreign leader, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, to provide opposition research against Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden — and made dirt on the Bidens a condition of military aid to Ukraine. Regardless, McConnell wasn't about to turn against a Republican president who supported much of his agenda. His only loyalty was to the Republican Party, not the rule of law.
McConnell fights dirty, and that is the thing that the modern-day GOP loves about him. If Biden defeats Trump and Democrats flip the Senate while maintaining their House majority, Republicans will be dispirited but will view McConnell as the one doing the most to fight for them. And if Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court, McConnell would take some of the credit for that.
Whether November 3, 2020 brings a major blue wave or Republicans defy the polls, Washington, D.C. will likely be seeing a lot of Mitch McConnell in 2021.


alternet--2020-10-23--Trump's slight cash flow increase still does not measure up to Biden's staggering cash lead

The much-needed uptick in campaign donations President Donald Trump received in early October still was not enough to measure up to Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden 's cash lead .
New filings reportedly show that Trump raked in millions amid his battle with COVID-19 at the beginning of the month , according to The Washington Post .
While the funds were likely welcomed by his campaign , it still does not add up to the massive donation surge Biden has received .
With just two weeks until the election , the filings also show that `` Trump had $ 43.6 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Oct. 15 — the biggest cash lead Biden had gained so far in the campaign , according to the filings , '' per the publication .
Despite the glaring difference in the financial fortune of both campaigns , the Trump campaign has shrugged off its cash deficit .
The latest reports come amid growing speculation about the Trump campaign 's financial status .
It has been reported that the president 's re-election campaign has blown through more than a $ 1 billion-dollar cash advantage since 2017 .
So , what happened to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Associated Press , Trump 's campaign has `` set a lot of it on fire . ''
Mike Murphy , a veteran Republican consultant and known Trump critic , weighed in with his take on the campaign 's major cash dump as he criticized their spending as `` unnecessary overhead '' due to his campaign staff spending on their own `` lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-famous . ''
`` They spent their money on unnecessary overhead , lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-famous activity by the campaign staff and vanity ads , '' Murphy said .
`` You could literally have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money , and they would n't have burned through it as stupidly . ''
It has also been reported that the Trump campaign has opted for more rallies because the president is no longer in a financial position to spend sizable amounts of money on advertising .
However , Trump has dismissed the speculation as he has insisted his campaign is doing fine , financially .

The much-needed uptick in campaign donations President Donald Trump received in early October still was not enough to measure up to Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's cash lead.
New filings reportedly show that Trump raked in millions amid his battle with COVID-19 at the beginning of the month, according to The Washington Post. While the funds were likely welcomed by his campaign, it still does not add up to the massive donation surge Biden has received.
With just two weeks until the election, the filings also show that "Trump had $43.6 million and Biden had $162 million by Oct. 15 — the biggest cash lead Biden had gained so far in the campaign, according to the filings," per the publication.
Despite the glaring difference in the financial fortune of both campaigns, the Trump campaign has shrugged off its cash deficit.
The latest reports come amid growing speculation about the Trump campaign's financial status. It has been reported that the president's re-election campaign has blown through more than a $1 billion-dollar cash advantage since 2017. So, what happened to all of the money? According to The Associated Press, Trump's campaign has "set a lot of it on fire."
Mike Murphy, a veteran Republican consultant and known Trump critic, weighed in with his take on the campaign's major cash dump as he criticized their spending as "unnecessary overhead" due to his campaign staff spending on their own "lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-famous."
"They spent their money on unnecessary overhead, lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-famous activity by the campaign staff and vanity ads," Murphy said. "You could literally have 10 monkeys with flamethrowers go after the money, and they wouldn't have burned through it as stupidly."
It has also been reported that the Trump campaign has opted for more rallies because the president is no longer in a financial position to spend sizable amounts of money on advertising. However, Trump has dismissed the speculation as he has insisted his campaign is doing fine, financially.


alternet--2020-10-23--Right-wing House candidate got caught with an explicitly racist website

Liberals and progressives often attack far-right MAGA and Trumpian Republicans for `` racist dog whistles . ''
But sometimes , racism from the far right is n't subliminal , but rather , overt and in-your-face — for example , the congressional campaign of 25-year-old North Carolina Republican Madison Cawthorn saying , in essence , that Cawthorn 's 62-year-old Democratic opponent , Moe Davis , is a self-hating White male for being too pro-Black .
Tim Miller , a Never Trump conservative and ex-communications director for former Florida Gov .
Jeb Bush , slams Cawthorn 's campaign in an October 22 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Cawthorn 's campaign , on the anti-Davis website MoeTaxes.com , `` takes aim at Davis over his purported association with a local journalist , Tom Fiedler .
It says that Fiedler 'quit his academia job in Boston to work for non-white males , like ( Sen. ) Cory Booker , who aims to ruin white males . '
'' Miller writes , `` Putting the atrocious syntax aside : quitting one 's job to work for someone who is n't White is a problem now ?
Booker 's blackness is the issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's white grievance party , apparently so . ''
The Bulwark points out that after Miller 's article was initially published , the overtly racist rhetoric at MoeTaxes.com was changed .
The `` non-white males '' and `` ruin white males '' references were replaced with claims that Davis supports `` left-wing identity politics . ''
Miller , in his article , explains that `` Trump has made a feature of his stump speech a line about how Joe Biden plans to send Cory Booker , of all people , into the suburbs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are a total mystery .
Wink .
But Cawthorn is happy to say the loud part even louder : Cory Booker , you should n't work for him because he 's 'non-white ' and 'ruining white males . '
Horrific . ''
In North Carolina 's 11th Congressional District , Cawthorn is running for the U.S. House of Representatives seat that was vacated by former Rep. Mark Meadows when he left Congress to become White House chief of staff in the Trump Administration .
Miller stresses that Cawthorn has been `` claiming to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' adding that `` like the rest of the young Generation Trump , Cawthorn has learned that Republican voters are less interested in the regulatory regime than in uncut white identity politics .
In addition to targeting Davis for associating with someone who worked for a Black man , the microsite , ( MoeTaxes.com ) also smeared him as a 'terrorist defender ' who commits 'perversion . '
But , like the rest of Generation Trump , Cawthorn is also learning that while it 's easy to dominate a Republican primary with this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harder . ''
Miller notes that an internal Democratic poll found Davis leading Cawthorn by 3 % .
And considering that the district in question was conservative enough to send far-right Tea Party favorite Meadows to Congress , that is saying a lot .
Slamming Cawthorn 's campaign with biting sarcasm , Miller writes , `` If Cawthorn goes down in defeat , at least we know he wo n't go work for anyone who is Black , since his closing message against Moe Davis is Make America 1950 Again . ''

Liberals and progressives often attack far-right MAGA and Trumpian Republicans for "racist dog whistles." But sometimes, racism from the far right isn't subliminal, but rather, overt and in-your-face — for example, the congressional campaign of 25-year-old North Carolina Republican Madison Cawthorn saying, in essence, that Cawthorn's 62-year-old Democratic opponent, Moe Davis, is a self-hating White male for being too pro-Black.
Tim Miller, a Never Trump conservative and ex-communications director for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, slams Cawthorn's campaign in an October 22 article for The Bulwark. Miller notes that Cawthorn's campaign, on the anti-Davis website MoeTaxes.com, "takes aim at Davis over his purported association with a local journalist, Tom Fiedler. It says that Fiedler 'quit his academia job in Boston to work for non-white males, like (Sen.) Cory Booker, who aims to ruin white males.'"
Miller writes, "Putting the atrocious syntax aside: quitting one's job to work for someone who isn't White is a problem now? Booker's blackness is the issue that offends you? In Donald Trump's white grievance party, apparently so."
The Bulwark points out that after Miller's article was initially published, the overtly racist rhetoric at MoeTaxes.com was changed. The "non-white males" and "ruin white males" references were replaced with claims that Davis supports "left-wing identity politics."
Miller, in his article, explains that "Trump has made a feature of his stump speech a line about how Joe Biden plans to send Cory Booker, of all people, into the suburbs to somehow ruin everything for reasons that are a total mystery. Wink. But Cawthorn is happy to say the loud part even louder: Cory Booker, you shouldn't work for him because he's 'non-white' and 'ruining white males.' Horrific."
In North Carolina's 11th Congressional District, Cawthorn is running for the U.S. House of Representatives seat that was vacated by former Rep. Mark Meadows when he left Congress to become White House chief of staff in the Trump Administration.
Miller stresses that Cawthorn has been "claiming to represent a new generation of Republicans," adding that "like the rest of the young Generation Trump, Cawthorn has learned that Republican voters are less interested in the regulatory regime than in uncut white identity politics. In addition to targeting Davis for associating with someone who worked for a Black man, the microsite, (MoeTaxes.com) also smeared him as a 'terrorist defender' who commits 'perversion.' But, like the rest of Generation Trump, Cawthorn is also learning that while it's easy to dominate a Republican primary with this stuff, winning a general election is harder."
Miller notes that an internal Democratic poll found Davis leading Cawthorn by 3%. And considering that the district in question was conservative enough to send far-right Tea Party favorite Meadows to Congress, that is saying a lot.
Slamming Cawthorn's campaign with biting sarcasm, Miller writes, "If Cawthorn goes down in defeat, at least we know he won't go work for anyone who is Black, since his closing message against Moe Davis is Make America 1950 Again."


alternet--2020-10-23--Our long national nightmare may soon be over: Critics and voters dump on Trump after final 2020 deba

Our long national nightmare may soon be over: Critics and voters dump on Trump after final 2020 debate

President Donald Trump is known for his sideshow antics and projectionism tactics that he typically uses to avoid being held accountable for his unfavorable actions and irrational decisions but now it looks like the jig may be up .
Trump 's tactics may have worked against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016 , but things were a bit different during the president 's final debate with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden .
During the debate , Trump worked overtime to make Biden out to be unfit for the presidency .
At multiple points during the debate , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's son , Hunter Biden .
However , the seemingly farfetched allegations did not garner the reaction or deliver the type of blow Trump may have hoped for .
The president also accused Biden of receiving $ 3.5 million from China .
However , Trump may not have counted on Biden flipping the script .
Each time , Trump attacked , Biden had a strong argument to counter the president 's remarks .
Even Trump 's theatrics failed to take the audience 's attention off of his inadequacy and lack of substance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the debate concluded , the vast majority of viewers believe Biden won the debate which further proves that the president 's argumentative tactics were not as effective as he may have expected .
The publication reports that 53 % of the debate viewers believe Biden won the debate and managed to maintain his ground .
Here is the breakdown of CNN 's poll results : Thursday 's debate watchers preferred Trump over Biden on the economy ( 56 % say they think Trump would better handle it vs. 44 % who say Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between the two on foreign policy ( 50 % prefer Biden , 48 % Trump ) .
Biden held a wide edge as more trusted to handle the coronavirus ( 57 % Biden to 41 % Trump ) , climate change ( 67 % Biden to 29 % Trump ) and racial inequality in the US ( 62 % Biden to 35 % Trump ) .
As a result of the president 's arguments and theatrics amid his war on mail-in voting , more than 45 million voters have already taken the initiative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great impact on the outcome of the election .
Although Trump believes his actions may help his presidential campaign , there is a possibility that it could backfire on him .

President Donald Trump is known for his sideshow antics and projectionism tactics that he typically uses to avoid being held accountable for his unfavorable actions and irrational decisions but now it looks like the jig may be up.
Trump's tactics may have worked against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016, but things were a bit different during the president's final debate with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
During the debate, Trump worked overtime to make Biden out to be unfit for the presidency. At multiple points during the debate, Trump took jabs at the former vice president's son, Hunter Biden. However, the seemingly farfetched allegations did not garner the reaction or deliver the type of blow Trump may have hoped for.
The president also accused Biden of receiving $3.5 million from China. However, Trump may not have counted on Biden flipping the script. Each time, Trump attacked, Biden had a strong argument to counter the president's remarks. Even Trump's theatrics failed to take the audience's attention off of his inadequacy and lack of substance.
According to the CNN poll taken after the debate concluded, the vast majority of viewers believe Biden won the debate which further proves that the president's argumentative tactics were not as effective as he may have expected. The publication reports that 53% of the debate viewers believe Biden won the debate and managed to maintain his ground.
Here is the breakdown of CNN's poll results:
Thursday's debate watchers preferred Trump over Biden on the economy (56% say they think Trump would better handle it vs. 44% who say Biden would), and divided about evenly between the two on foreign policy (50% prefer Biden, 48% Trump). Biden held a wide edge as more trusted to handle the coronavirus (57% Biden to 41% Trump), climate change (67% Biden to 29% Trump) and racial inequality in the US (62% Biden to 35% Trump).
As a result of the president's arguments and theatrics amid his war on mail-in voting, more than 45 million voters have already taken the initiative to vote early which may also have a great impact on the outcome of the election. Although Trump believes his actions may help his presidential campaign, there is a possibility that it could backfire on him.