thenation--2020-11-02--How 3 Democratic Women in Swing States Aim to Win This Week

North Carolina House candidate Aimy Steele is back on the doors .
” Knocking doors is my superpower !
” the Democrat from Caberras County , just outside of Charlotte , told me this summer .
At the time , though , Covid was keeping the longtime educator on the phone , not the doors .
Now , after the state ’ s coordinated campaign , which backs candidates from former vice president Joe Biden to down-ballot Democrats , moved cautiously back to the streets in recent weeks , her team has begun a new crusade of socially distant door @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There ’ s pure excitement to see us , ” Steele said .
“ One woman streamed me on Facebook Live when I came to her door !
” The Democrat , who lost by only 2,000 votes last time , had knocked on 300 doors as of last Wednesday , and was still counting .
Last summer , I focused on three women of color who ran for state legislative races in North Carolina , Texas , and Florida in 2018 .
All three lost , but by unexpectedly narrow margins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They were part of a wave of candidates , disproportionately women , who were trying to reverse a trend that began when Barack Obama was elected in 2008—and Republicans began their comeback by targeting state legislative races .
During Obama ’ s two terms , the GOP won 942 seats .
Thanks to new attention , grassroots enthusiasm , some smart funders , and many excellent women candidates and candidates of color , Democrats have clawed almost halfway back .
Meanwhile , North Carolina , Texas , and Florida have , rather surprisingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level , and these state legislative fights are also receiving national attention .
Democrats Are Winning Their Fight for the States A few days before the election , all three women are running effectively tied with their GOP opponents .
They ’ re trailing them in fundraising , but all are competitive , when two years ago , they were most definitely not .
This is getting interesting .
Politico has called North Carolina “ the epicenter of the epicenter ” of this terrifying and awesome 2020 election .
All the demographic changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ play here , in a state Barack Obama narrowly won in 2008 but Democrats lost in the next two presidential cycles .
The number of first-time voters and voters of color is on the rise , according to early-vote estimates .
But Republicans are voting early , too .
The Senate race between Thom Tillis , a Tea Party zealot elected in 2014 , and Democrat Cal Cunningham is a virtual tie , with Cunningham a nose ahead in most polls .
Former vice president Joe Biden has a narrow lead .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roy Cooper , up for reelection , is the most popular figure in the state , and other Democrats hope to grab his coattails .
Four African American women are running for statewide office here , and they ’ ve become a local “ Squad ” of their own .
Meanwhile the state House and Senate have come in for serious attention from regular Democratic organizations , like the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee and Emily ’ s List , but also the roster of what we used to call “ pop-up groups ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s election , but have since become serious players , so we need a new term—from millennial-focused Run for Something to Future Now , Sister District and Indivisible , Flippable , Forward Majority , and the National Democratic Redistricting Committee .
Democrats need six seats in the House , and five in the Senate , to make sure the party has a role in the crucial redistricting coming up in 2021 .
Just last week , The Cook Political Report shifted the North Carolina Senate from “ leans GOP ” to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Steele is running , will be harder , most people agree , but is doable .
As of last Wednesday , when Steele and I talked , roughly 50 percent of registered voters in her district had already turned out , she told me , either voting early or by mail .
That ’ s a huge advantage to her campaign .
“ We ’ re able to tell them if their absentee ballot was not received , or rejected , ” so voters can follow up , she notes .
Meanwhile , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who haven ’ t turned out yet , and get them to the polls .
“ And now we can knock on their doors , ” she says with elation .
The big early vote also lets Steele focus on the voters she told me in July she was going to turn out , against all odds—the so-called “ low propensity ” voters : younger voters and some voters of color , whom many campaigns neglect to focus on while motivating more regular voters , even if some of them have voted Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters , ” Steele tells me , looking at her lists .
She says she ’ s running her campaign as planned now .
“ Everybody ’ s gon na be shocked and awed on Election Day.
” In Dallas , Democrat Joanna Cattanach is also benefiting from a stunning level of early voting .
She ’ s also a beneficiary of what some of us call “ karma ” : The Texas GOP ’ s vicious gerrymandering over the last two decades couldn ’ t foresee the future .
They designed districts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state , to sequester voters of color and give wide berth to whites—only to see many such districts diversify , in terms of race , age , and gender , while that behemoth of suburban college-educated white people are , at least under Trump , becoming part of the Democratic base .
It couldn ’ t happen to a nicer bunch of racists .
Congrats , Tom DeLay !
Two years ago , educator and journalist Cattanach surprised Texas Democrats by coming within 220 votes of incumbent Representative Morgan Mayer .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not taking anything for granted , ” she told me by phone Thursday , noting that “ today we will surpass the 2018 turnout in the district.
” The next day , Texas passed the total statewide turnout from 2016 .
The very next day , Dave Wasserman of Redistrict tweeted : “ Morning update : Texas reporting 9,669,246 votes cast at the close of early voting .
That ’ s 57 % of registered voters and 700,020 more votes than were cast in Texas in *all of 2016 .
* ” Reached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an early polling place , Cattanach says she isn ’ t relaxing , because she ’ s seeing “ neck and neck partisanship in turnout , ” with Republicans energized this year too .
Endorsed by Planned Parenthood and Moms Demand Action , she runs on “ choice and commonsense gun laws , ” but in Texas that has made her the target of “ some gross ‘ pro-life ’ videos.
” Covid is still “ an overriding concern , ” she says—cases continue to rise , as does unemployment—and she believes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And like Aimy Steele , she finds the boon of early turnout lets her focus on folks in her district who are identified as likely or possible supporters , but who haven ’ t yet cast a ballot .
“ I ’ ve had to call some of them , a lot .
They ’ re excited to hear from me , but they may not feel like their vote counts.
” One voter , in fact , asked her why his vote mattered .
“ I was a little taken aback @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I lost this race by about 200 votes .
You matter to me.
’ ” He promised to vote .
“ And that ’ s why you call all these folks.
” Cattanach was pulling up to an early voting site , where , she told me , people could pose with photos of Ruth Bader Ginsberg while waiting to cast a ballot .
I could hear Michael Jackson ’ s “ Pretty Young Thing , ” pretty loud , in the background .
As candidates and voters have been allowed a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these closing days , you can feel the playful , optimistic energy of the “ Resistance ” rising , and just in time .
I let Cattanach get out of her car and meet her people .
I caught Florida Senate candidate Kathy Lewis in her car , too , as she was driving to a Biden rally in Tampa—her district includes some of that city , plus other parts of Hillsborough , Pasco , and Polk counties .
She didn ’ t get to see Biden , though other Democratic Senate candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s still rolling along .
The last time I talked to Lewis , she had been inexplicably ignored by the Florida Senate Democrats Victory Fund , despite running stronger than expected in 2018 , and looked left for dead , politically .
State Senate leaders are banking on picking up two seats , even though that would leave them in the minority—a victory by Lewis , widely considered the third-strongest challenger , would give Senate Democrats a tie .
She was even being chided by donors for criticizing the party over its neglect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s since gotten backing from Emily ’ s List and Moms Demand Action , Florida ’ s feminist Ruth ’ s List as well as eight incumbent Democratic senators ( but not Senate minority leader Gary Farmer ) .
Amazingly , she also won the endorsement of the Tampa Bay Times , a crushing disappointment to her GOP opponent , Danny Burgess , who ’ s still overwhelming her in fundraising .
“ Lewis would bring a rich life experience to the Upper Chamber and a history of perseverance , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ She emerged from an inner-city household in Baltimore to become a financial analyst in both the public and private sectors , and a civic leader in school and children ’ s groups .
She has a command of what ’ s happening on the ground and what should happen at the 30,000 foot level .
The Times editorial board recommends Kathy Lewis.
” It ’ s no wonder that , compared to when she ran in 2018 , “ I feel something very different ” Lewis tells me .
“ There is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day , at least , someone says to me , ‘ Are you Kathy Lewis ?
I voted for you !
’ ” An activist who came to politics trying to support a daughter with a disability , Lewis is seeing the toll Covid is taking on many Floridians—but especially the disabled .
Many group homes for people with disabilities are having trouble getting reimbursed during the pandemic , and families are afraid loved ones will be evicted .
“ The disability community is reeling , ” she says .
As in all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Lewis knows Medicaid expansion would make a huge difference—to her constituents , and to her politically .
All these women remember when Virginia came close—a seat away from taking the House in 2017 , Democrats nonetheless won Medicaid expansion .
It can happen in these states too ; Lewis hopes it will .
The GOP-leaning website Florida Politics reported last week that polling shows Lewis ’ s race is polling essentially tied .
Burgess has outraised her , but she ’ s nonetheless pulled in a surprising $ 118,000—surprising given the institutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It ’ s all good , ” the Baltimore native tells me .
“ I just do my job every day .
This kind of pressure isn ’ t pressure to me.
” All three women say it ’ s all about turnout .
Which at this point brings us to Tuesday .
All the so-called “ outside groups ” trying to support these insurgents , and learn from what they ’ re doing for next time , are cautiously optimistic .
Aimy Steele is not the only “ Resistance ” candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” even some of the best-funded and most sophisticated outside groups have been prioritizing that as a low-tech , high-impact way to fight the isolation that many people felt led to the Trump nightmare , especially in red and purple states .
There ’ s been concern that texting and phone banking , even done well , can ’ t quite measure up .
“ Right now it ’ s hard to know who ’ s done real ‘ relational organizing , ’ in a way that will match the impact of knocking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Future Now , which has put $ 2 million into Texas and has backed Cattanach , as well as Steele in North Carolina .
He looks forward to what we learn next week , and in the weeks to come .
Although there ’ s always concern that big early-vote numbers for Democrats will “ cannibalize ” Election Day turnout , which is where Republicans shine , most people believe this year ’ s early vote is additive .
Several people told me to expect higher turnout than the epochal year 2008 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media consultant Christine Bachman of Our States Matter says the early-vote bonanza is letting campaigns like Steele ’ s devote significant resources to courting the infrequent voters many Democrats traditionally write off—and in North Carolina , she has the blessing of state Democratic Party leaders to do so .
“ Thanks to NCDP ’ s vision , we ’ re able to invest in longer-term conversations and work to engage voters who stayed home in 2016 , particularly voters of color , ” Bachman says .
“ We ’ re able to tailor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of insurgent campaigns back for a while , since in-person canvassing has been a cornerstone of the Democratic state legislative renaissance since 2017 .
On the other hand , Bachman adds , the public health emphasis on voting early and voting by mail was an unexpected boon “ that has cleared the playing field of an unusually high number of early voters , which allows remaining paid media dollars to go even further.
” Democrats feel good about their chances of flipping chambers not just in these three states but also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Arizona to Michigan and Minnesota and lately , even Iowa .
There could well be some surprises given what is likely to be historic turnout in many states .
While most people ( with the exception of the president ) know it might take days to figure out the winner of the presidential election , it could take even longer to figure out some of the state races .
Narrow margins can require recounts , and the unprecedented use of mail-in ballots will almost certainly complicate things .
But after years of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , these are good problems to have .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
North Carolina House candidate Aimy Steele is back on the doors.
”Knocking doors is my superpower!” the Democrat from Caberras County, just outside of Charlotte, told me this summer. At the time, though, Covid was keeping the longtime educator on the phone, not the doors. Now, after the state’s coordinated campaign, which backs candidates from former vice president Joe Biden to down-ballot Democrats, moved cautiously back to the streets in recent weeks, her team has begun a new crusade of socially distant door knocking. And she is thrilled.
“There’s pure excitement to see us,” Steele said. “One woman streamed me on Facebook Live when I came to her door!” The Democrat, who lost by only 2,000 votes last time, had knocked on 300 doors as of last Wednesday, and was still counting.
Last summer, I focused on three women of color who ran for state legislative races in North Carolina, Texas, and Florida in 2018. All three lost, but by unexpectedly narrow margins, and all are running again. They were part of a wave of candidates, disproportionately women, who were trying to reverse a trend that began when Barack Obama was elected in 2008—and Republicans began their comeback by targeting state legislative races. During Obama’s two terms, the GOP won 942 seats. Thanks to new attention, grassroots enthusiasm, some smart funders, and many excellent women candidates and candidates of color, Democrats have clawed almost halfway back. Meanwhile, North Carolina, Texas, and Florida have, rather surprisingly, become hotly contested at the presidential level, and these state legislative fights are also receiving national attention. Related Article Democrats Are Winning Their Fight for the States Joan Walsh
A few days before the election, all three women are running effectively tied with their GOP opponents. They’re trailing them in fundraising, but all are competitive, when two years ago, they were most definitely not. This is getting interesting.
Politico has called North Carolina “the epicenter of the epicenter” of this terrifying and awesome 2020 election. All the demographic changes dooming Republicans and reviving Democrats are at play here, in a state Barack Obama narrowly won in 2008 but Democrats lost in the next two presidential cycles. The number of first-time voters and voters of color is on the rise, according to early-vote estimates. But Republicans are voting early, too. The Senate race between Thom Tillis, a Tea Party zealot elected in 2014, and Democrat Cal Cunningham is a virtual tie, with Cunningham a nose ahead in most polls. Former vice president Joe Biden has a narrow lead. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
But North Carolina’s low-key Democratic Governor Roy Cooper, up for reelection, is the most popular figure in the state, and other Democrats hope to grab his coattails. Four African American women are running for statewide office here, and they’ve become a local “Squad” of their own. Meanwhile the state House and Senate have come in for serious attention from regular Democratic organizations, like the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee and Emily’s List, but also the roster of what we used to call “pop-up groups”—they popped up in 2017, after Trump’s election, but have since become serious players, so we need a new term—from millennial-focused Run for Something to Future Now Fund, Sister District and Indivisible, Flippable, Forward Majority, and the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. Current Issue View our current issue
Democrats need six seats in the House, and five in the Senate, to make sure the party has a role in the crucial redistricting coming up in 2021. Just last week, The Cook Political Report shifted the North Carolina Senate from “leans GOP” to toss-up. Taking the House, where Steele is running, will be harder, most people agree, but is doable.
As of last Wednesday, when Steele and I talked, roughly 50 percent of registered voters in her district had already turned out, she told me, either voting early or by mail. That’s a huge advantage to her campaign. “We’re able to tell them if their absentee ballot was not received, or rejected,” so voters can follow up, she notes. Meanwhile, her campaign can focus on possible supporters who haven’t turned out yet, and get them to the polls. “And now we can knock on their doors,” she says with elation.
The big early vote also lets Steele focus on the voters she told me in July she was going to turn out, against all odds—the so-called “low propensity” voters: younger voters and some voters of color, whom many campaigns neglect to focus on while motivating more regular voters, even if some of them have voted Republican.
“We are winning with first-time voters,” Steele tells me, looking at her lists. She says she’s running her campaign as planned now. “Everybody’s gonna be shocked and awed on Election Day.”
In Dallas, Democrat Joanna Cattanach is also benefiting from a stunning level of early voting. She’s also a beneficiary of what some of us call “karma”: The Texas GOP’s vicious gerrymandering over the last two decades couldn’t foresee the future. They designed districts like hers, and others in the state, to sequester voters of color and give wide berth to whites—only to see many such districts diversify, in terms of race, age, and gender, while that behemoth of suburban college-educated white people are, at least under Trump, becoming part of the Democratic base. It couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of racists. Congrats, Tom DeLay!
Two years ago, educator and journalist Cattanach surprised Texas Democrats by coming within 220 votes of incumbent Representative Morgan Mayer. “We feel good, but we’re not taking anything for granted,” she told me by phone Thursday, noting that “today we will surpass the 2018 turnout in the district.” The next day, Texas passed the total statewide turnout from 2016. The very next day, Dave Wasserman of Redistrict tweeted: “Morning update: Texas reporting 9,669,246 votes cast at the close of early voting. That’s 57% of registered voters and 700,020 more votes than were cast in Texas in *all of 2016.*”
Reached by phone as she’s driving to an early polling place, Cattanach says she isn’t relaxing, because she’s seeing “neck and neck partisanship in turnout,” with Republicans energized this year too. Endorsed by Planned Parenthood and Moms Demand Action, she runs on “choice and commonsense gun laws,” but in Texas that has made her the target of “some gross ‘pro-life’ videos.” Covid is still “an overriding concern,” she says—cases continue to rise, as does unemployment—and she believes the district’s anxiety favors her. And like Aimy Steele, she finds the boon of early turnout lets her focus on folks in her district who are identified as likely or possible supporters, but who haven’t yet cast a ballot.
“I’ve had to call some of them, a lot. They’re excited to hear from me, but they may not feel like their vote counts.”
One voter, in fact, asked her why his vote mattered.
“I was a little taken aback. So I said, ‘Well, I lost this race by about 200 votes. You matter to me.’” He promised to vote. “And that’s why you call all these folks.”
Cattanach was pulling up to an early voting site, where, she told me, people could pose with photos of Ruth Bader Ginsberg while waiting to cast a ballot. I could hear Michael Jackson’s “Pretty Young Thing,” pretty loud, in the background. As candidates and voters have been allowed a little bit more socially distanced interaction in these closing days, you can feel the playful, optimistic energy of the “Resistance” rising, and just in time. I let Cattanach get out of her car and meet her people.
I caught Florida Senate candidate Kathy Lewis in her car, too, as she was driving to a Biden rally in Tampa—her district includes some of that city, plus other parts of Hillsborough, Pasco, and Polk counties. She didn’t get to see Biden, though other Democratic Senate candidates got speaking roles. But she’s still rolling along.
The last time I talked to Lewis, she had been inexplicably ignored by the Florida Senate Democrats Victory Fund, despite running stronger than expected in 2018, and looked left for dead, politically. State Senate leaders are banking on picking up two seats, even though that would leave them in the minority—a victory by Lewis, widely considered the third-strongest challenger, would give Senate Democrats a tie. She was even being chided by donors for criticizing the party over its neglect. That changed, quickly. She’s since gotten backing from Emily’s List and Moms Demand Action, Florida’s feminist Ruth’s List as well as eight incumbent Democratic senators (but not Senate minority leader Gary Farmer). Amazingly, she also won the endorsement of the Tampa Bay Times, a crushing disappointment to her GOP opponent, Danny Burgess, who’s still overwhelming her in fundraising.
“Lewis would bring a rich life experience to the Upper Chamber and a history of perseverance,” the Tampa Bay Times editorial board wrote. “She emerged from an inner-city household in Baltimore to become a financial analyst in both the public and private sectors, and a civic leader in school and children’s groups. She has a command of what’s happening on the ground and what should happen at the 30,000 foot level. The Times editorial board recommends Kathy Lewis.”
It’s no wonder that, compared to when she ran in 2018, “I feel something very different” Lewis tells me. “There is so much more positive energy. Every day, at least, someone says to me, ‘Are you Kathy Lewis? I voted for you!’”
An activist who came to politics trying to support a daughter with a disability, Lewis is seeing the toll Covid is taking on many Floridians—but especially the disabled. Many group homes for people with disabilities are having trouble getting reimbursed during the pandemic, and families are afraid loved ones will be evicted. “The disability community is reeling,” she says. As in all three of these houses on the verge, Lewis knows Medicaid expansion would make a huge difference—to her constituents, and to her politically. All these women remember when Virginia came close—a seat away from taking the House in 2017, Democrats nonetheless won Medicaid expansion. It can happen in these states too; Lewis hopes it will.
The GOP-leaning website Florida Politics reported last week that polling shows Lewis’s race is polling essentially tied. Burgess has outraised her, but she’s nonetheless pulled in a surprising $118,000—surprising given the institutional party’s lack of support. “It’s all good,” the Baltimore native tells me. “I just do my job every day. This kind of pressure isn’t pressure to me.”
All three women say it’s all about turnout. Which at this point brings us to Tuesday.
All the so-called “outside groups” trying to support these insurgents, and learn from what they’re doing for next time, are cautiously optimistic. Aimy Steele is not the only “Resistance” candidate to call door-knocking her “superpower;” even some of the best-funded and most sophisticated outside groups have been prioritizing that as a low-tech, high-impact way to fight the isolation that many people felt led to the Trump nightmare, especially in red and purple states. There’s been concern that texting and phone banking, even done well, can’t quite measure up. “Right now it’s hard to know who’s done real ‘relational organizing,’ in a way that will match the impact of knocking doors,” says Daniel Squadron of Future Now Fund, which has put $2 million into Texas and has backed Cattanach, as well as Steele in North Carolina. He looks forward to what we learn next week, and in the weeks to come.
Although there’s always concern that big early-vote numbers for Democrats will “cannibalize” Election Day turnout, which is where Republicans shine, most people believe this year’s early vote is additive. Several people told me to expect higher turnout than the epochal year 2008, when Obama was first elected. Digital media consultant Christine Bachman of Our States Matter says the early-vote bonanza is letting campaigns like Steele’s devote significant resources to courting the infrequent voters many Democrats traditionally write off—and in North Carolina, she has the blessing of state Democratic Party leaders to do so.
“Thanks to NCDP’s vision, we’re able to invest in longer-term conversations and work to engage voters who stayed home in 2016, particularly voters of color,” Bachman says. “We’re able to tailor and test messaging.” The pandemic set a lot of insurgent campaigns back for a while, since in-person canvassing has been a cornerstone of the Democratic state legislative renaissance since 2017. On the other hand, Bachman adds, the public health emphasis on voting early and voting by mail was an unexpected boon “that has cleared the playing field of an unusually high number of early voters, which allows remaining paid media dollars to go even further.”
Democrats feel good about their chances of flipping chambers not just in these three states but also in at least a half-dozen more, from Arizona to Michigan and Minnesota and lately, even Iowa. There could well be some surprises given what is likely to be historic turnout in many states. While most people (with the exception of the president) know it might take days to figure out the winner of the presidential election, it could take even longer to figure out some of the state races. Narrow margins can require recounts, and the unprecedented use of mail-in ballots will almost certainly complicate things. But after years of Democrats’ neglecting too many races like this, these are good problems to have.


thenation--2020-11-02--The Next Battle Is to Stop Trump From Sabotaging the Count

Lagging in the polls , Donald Trump has made it clear that he ’ s preparing to subvert a full counting of votes to stave off electoral defeat .
On Sunday Axios reported that “ President Trump has told confidants he ’ ll declare victory on Tuesday night if it looks like he ’ s ‘ ahead , ’ according to three sources familiar with his private comments .
That ’ s even if the Electoral College outcome still hinges on large numbers of uncounted votes in key states like Pennsylvania.… Trump ’ s team is preparing to claim baselessly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ changes the outcome in Pennsylvania from the picture on election night , then Democrats would have ‘ stolen ’ the election.
” The New York Times carried a brief report to the same effect : Trump ’ s own words support the contention that he ’ s going to try to muddy the water by claiming that the election night tally should be conclusive , despite the fact that elections in the United States often take much longer .
Even at the presidential level , there was no clear winner on the night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as 1960 , 1968 , 1976 , 2000 , 2004 , and 2016 .
Speaking to reporters on Sunday , Trump said , “ I think it ’ s terrible that we can ’ t know the results of an election the night of the election… .
We ’ re going to go in the night of , as soon as that election ’ s over , we ’ re going in with our lawyers.
” The Return of the Trump-Obama Feud Richard L. Hasen of Slate argues that there is little reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could change the outcome of the election .
He thinks both the mainstream media and the courts can be relied to push back against Trump ’ s bullying .
Hansen contends that Trump ’ s strategy is not going to work .
The networks and news organizations are prepared for this , and Americans have learned to discount anything the president says .
Most are inoculated against his lies about voting .
And assuming there are no major foul-ups in how the rest of Election Day voting goes , it is hard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ courts to order a halt to the counting of ballots that have arrived before Election Day ( even if there could still be litigation over late-arriving ballots ) .
So far , all of the Trump and Republican suits aimed at stopping the easing of voting rules during the pandemic on grounds of a risk of fraud have failed miserably , and any postelection attempt on these grounds should fail too .
Hasen ’ s arguments can ’ t be discounted out of hand—but they are not conclusive .
While the media has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there is still a powerful impulse towards faux-neutrality when covering partisan competition .
The mainstream media is still governed by the imperatives of pretending that both sides of a debate are equally valid .
Just on Sunday , the Times reported on Trump ’ s stoking of political violence with a headline that read : “ With the Election Looming , the Nation ’ s Divisions Play Out in the Streets : Disruptions in New Jersey , Texas , Georgia , North Carolina and elsewhere reflect a bitter , uncertain election.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Trump Backers Block Highways as Election Tensions Play Out in the Streets.
” The first headline shows that the initial impulse of the mainstream media in any partisan dispute will be to avoid casting blame on one party .
Which means Trump ’ s muddying of the water will have some impact .
Nor are the courts fully reliable as protectors of the votes—not with the history of the 2000 Bush v. Gore decision .
Three Republican lawyers who worked on that case , which ended with a partisan court stopping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court .
Never Trump conservative Bill Kristol thinks we should turn to Republican officials to help prevent a sabotage of vote counting .
On Sunday , Kristol tweeted , “ If Trump ‘ claims ’ victory , media should debunk .
But GOP elected officials , in relevant states and nationally , are key .
They all need to say right away , ‘ No .
Let the votes be counted.
’ And a George W. Bush statement saying no , let votes be counted , should be ready to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the point of absurdity .
The vast majority of elected Republican officials have gone along with Trump ’ s corruption until now .
Why would they take steps to prevent him from being reelected ?
For that matter , George W. Bush has to date not said a single public word holding Trump directly accountable for his actions .
There is no reason to think that he would do so now .
The existing political system , including the courts , can ’ t be trusted to do the right thing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainty , especially given historical experiences like the 2000 Supreme Court intervention .
Institutions like the courts are more likely to stop Trump if they are goaded into proper action by mass political mobilization .
Writing at the website Org Up , Jacob Swenson-Lengyel and Jonathan Matthew Smucker lay out the case for progressives to mobilize around a message that affirms the need for a complete vote count .
Such a message would also include the affirmation that protest is itself a necessary part of keeping institutions in check .
“ Our messaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of any and all contested election scenarios will hinge on mobilizing peaceful demonstrations at an unprecedented scale , ” they recommend .
“ In America , since our founding , the mandate to govern ultimately comes from ‘ We the People.
’ We can not rely on established systems and procedures to protect our democracy .
The people themselves must lead and demand accountability from those who claim to represent us.
” If Trump does follow through on his threats to sabotage the vote count , then America will face a protracted war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if not months .
In such a war , it ’ s essential to mobilize the population in order to make clear that Trump ’ s actions are illegitimate .
In the contested election of 2000 , organizers like Jesse Jackson , working with labor unions , were ready to take to the streets .
Al Gore infamously ordered them to stand down .
Neither the Democratic Party nor the broader anti-Trump movement can risk repeating that mistake .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Lagging in the polls, Donald Trump has made it clear that he’s preparing to subvert a full counting of votes to stave off electoral defeat. On Sunday Axios reported that “President Trump has told confidants he’ll declare victory on Tuesday night if it looks like he’s ‘ahead,’ according to three sources familiar with his private comments. That’s even if the Electoral College outcome still hinges on large numbers of uncounted votes in key states like Pennsylvania.… Trump’s team is preparing to claim baselessly that if [counting those votes] changes the outcome in Pennsylvania from the picture on election night, then Democrats would have ‘stolen’ the election.”
The New York Times carried a brief report to the same effect:
Trump sprinkles his rally speeches with unfounded attacks on the election process. Last week, he claimed with no real evidence that “everyday, there’s cheating with the ballots.” It’s part of his consistent questioning of the integrity of the election. Trump advisers said their best hope was if the president wins Ohio and Florida is too close to call early in the night, depriving Mr. Biden a swift victory and giving Mr. Trump the room to undermine the validity of uncounted mail-in ballots in the days after.
Trump’s own words support the contention that he’s going to try to muddy the water by claiming that the election night tally should be conclusive, despite the fact that elections in the United States often take much longer. Even at the presidential level, there was no clear winner on the night of the election in such recent elections as 1960, 1968, 1976, 2000, 2004, and 2016. Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Trump said, “I think it’s terrible that we can’t know the results of an election the night of the election…. We’re going to go in the night of, as soon as that election’s over, we’re going in with our lawyers.” More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
Richard L. Hasen of Slate argues that there is little reason to believe that Trump’s bluster could change the outcome of the election. He thinks both the mainstream media and the courts can be relied to push back against Trump’s bullying. Hansen contends that Trump’s strategy
Hasen’s arguments can’t be discounted out of hand—but they are not conclusive. While the media has learned to be more critical of Trump, there is still a powerful impulse towards faux-neutrality when covering partisan competition. The mainstream media is still governed by the imperatives of pretending that both sides of a debate are equally valid. Just on Sunday, the Times reported on Trump’s stoking of political violence with a headline that read: “With the Election Looming, the Nation’s Divisions Play Out in the Streets: Disruptions in New Jersey, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina and elsewhere reflect a bitter, uncertain election.” The headline was later changed to read: “Trump Backers Block Highways as Election Tensions Play Out in the Streets.” The first headline shows that the initial impulse of the mainstream media in any partisan dispute will be to avoid casting blame on one party. Which means Trump’s muddying of the water will have some impact. Current Issue View our current issue
Nor are the courts fully reliable as protectors of the votes—not with the history of the 2000 Bush v. Gore decision. Three Republican lawyers who worked on that case, which ended with a partisan court stopping the vote count, now sit on the Supreme Court.
Never Trump conservative Bill Kristol thinks we should turn to Republican officials to help prevent a sabotage of vote counting. On Sunday, Kristol tweeted, “If Trump ‘claims’ victory, media should debunk. But GOP elected officials, in relevant states and nationally, are key. They all need to say right away, ‘No. Let the votes be counted.’ And a George W. Bush statement saying no, let votes be counted, should be ready to go at once.”
This scenario is naive to the point of absurdity. The vast majority of elected Republican officials have gone along with Trump’s corruption until now. Why would they take steps to prevent him from being reelected? For that matter, George W. Bush has to date not said a single public word holding Trump directly accountable for his actions. There is no reason to think that he would do so now.
The existing political system, including the courts, can’t be trusted to do the right thing. It might, but there is no certainty, especially given historical experiences like the 2000 Supreme Court intervention.
Institutions like the courts are more likely to stop Trump if they are goaded into proper action by mass political mobilization. Writing at the website Org Up, Jacob Swenson-Lengyel and Jonathan Matthew Smucker lay out the case for progressives to mobilize around a message that affirms the need for a complete vote count. Such a message would also include the affirmation that protest is itself a necessary part of keeping institutions in check. “Our messaging must reinforce the idea that the outcome of any and all contested election scenarios will hinge on mobilizing peaceful demonstrations at an unprecedented scale,” they recommend. “In America, since our founding, the mandate to govern ultimately comes from ‘We the People.’ We cannot rely on established systems and procedures to protect our democracy. The people themselves must lead and demand accountability from those who claim to represent us.”
If Trump does follow through on his threats to sabotage the vote count, then America will face a protracted war of narratives that could last weeks, if not months. In such a war, it’s essential to mobilize the population in order to make clear that Trump’s actions are illegitimate. In the contested election of 2000, organizers like Jesse Jackson, working with labor unions, were ready to take to the streets. Al Gore infamously ordered them to stand down. Neither the Democratic Party nor the broader anti-Trump movement can risk repeating that mistake.


thenation--2020-11-02--The Democrat Who Could Prevent Democrats From Winning a Georgia Senate Seat

Democrats are surging in Georgia .
Joe Biden could be the first Democratic presidential contender to win the state ’ s electoral votes since Bill Clinton in 1992 , and a pair of Democratic US Senate candidates—one running in a regular election and one running in a complex special election—could win with him .
That delicious prospect is so enticing that Biden swept into the state Tuesday and appeared with the Senate candidates , Jon Ossoff and the Rev .
Raphael Warnock .
“ There aren ’ t a lot of pundits who would have guessed four years ago that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be campaigning in Georgia on the final week of the election , ” Biden told a cheering , horn-honking parking lot crowd in Atlanta .
“ Or that we ’ d have such competitive Senate races in Georgia .
But we do because something ’ s happening here in Georgia and across the nation.
” Doubling down on his “ we win Georgia , we win everything ” theme , the former vice president declared , “ I can ’ t tell you how important it is that we flip the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more consequential than Georgia.
” He ’ s right .
If Ossoff and Warnock prevail , Democrats ’ chances for taking the Senate away from Mitch McConnell and the Republicans increase exponentially .
With Georgia joining Arizona , Colorado , Maine , and North Carolina in turning out Republican senators—as polls now suggest is possible—Democrats could have the sort of clear control of the both the House and Senate that would allow Biden to govern decisively .
So Democrats really could win it all with Georgia .
But that state ’ s outlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who has allowed his ego to get in the way , could derail the prospect in the Warnock victory on November 3 .
Because there ’ s another Democrat , Matt Lieberman , running in the special election contest , which features candidates of all parties running on the same ballot .
Polls suggest Lieberman is running far behind .
Yet he has refused repeated pleas that he fold his doomed bid that could draw off just enough votes from Warnock to prevent an outright win by the pastor .
Georgia maintains a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South : runoff elections .
What this means is that if one candidate does not get 50 percent of the vote on November 3 , the top two finishers go on to face each other in one more election .
Traditionally , Republicans in Georgia have fared well in runoffs .
In 1992 , for instance , when Bill Clinton carried the state ’ s presidential voting , Democratic Senator Wyche Fowler finished first in his reelection bid .
But Fowler fell short of the 50 percent threshold and was forced into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the excitement and boosted turnout of the presidential race , Fowler was defeated .
So Democrats are keen on winning both of this year ’ s races on November 3 .
In the case of Ossoff , who has surged in the final days of his “ you ’ re a crook , senator ” challenge to Republican incumbent David Perdue , that ’ s looking increasingly possible—especially after a powerful October 28 debate performance in which Ossoff so outclassed Perdue that the Republican dropped out of a final debate that was scheduled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown the Democrat leading and moving closer and closer to that 50 percent threshold .
It had been assumed that Warnock , the senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta , would end up in a runoff with one of two prominent Republicans who are running in the crowded special election contest ( and thus splitting the Republican vote ) : appointed Senator Kelly Loeffler and Representative Doug Collins .
But some polls now show Warnock running almost as well as Ossoff .
A Public Policy Polling survey from late last week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ served as the Rev .
Martin Luther King Jr. ’ s spiritual home just shy of the 50 percent mark—at 46 percent , 19 points ahead of Loeffler .
All recent polls have Warnock well ahead of Loeffler and Collins .
However , several of them also show Lieberman , the son of former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman , continuing to pull as much as 9 percent of the vote while another Democrat , former federal prosecutor Ed Tarver , has been attracting 1 or 2 percent .
There are fears that because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he could pull enough votes to prevent Warnock from winning outright on November 3 , thus forcing him into a runoff with Loeffler or Collins .
Early in October , 10 progressive groups—Democracy for America ( DFA ) , Be a Hero Fund , Blue Future , Justice Democrats , Progress America , Progressive Change Campaign Committee ( PCCC ) , Progressive Democrats of America ( PDA ) , RootsAction.org , Social Security Works PAC , and the Working Families Party—begged Lieberman to quit the race .
“ We urge you , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right thing for our country , end your race for U.S. Senate , and ensure Democrats stand united behind Raphael Warnock in this unique election , ” wrote the groups in a letter released shortly after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg .
The letter to Lieberman explained the importance of winning an outright victory on November 3 , and concluded , “ Unfortunately , your continued presence in this race poses a very real and potentially disastrous threat to Democrats ’ chances of winning Georgia ’ s special election for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at around 11 percent in the polls at the time the letter was sent , has lost a lot of ground in recent weeks .
Yet he remains in the race .
And he remains the Democrat who could prevent Democrats from winning a Georgia Senate seat on November 3 .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Democrats are surging in Georgia. Joe Biden could be the first Democratic presidential contender to win the state’s electoral votes since Bill Clinton in 1992, and a pair of Democratic US Senate candidates—one running in a regular election and one running in a complex special election—could win with him. That delicious prospect is so enticing that Biden swept into the state Tuesday and appeared with the Senate candidates, Jon Ossoff and the Rev. Raphael Warnock.
“There aren’t a lot of pundits who would have guessed four years ago that the Democratic candidate for president in 2020 would be campaigning in Georgia on the final week of the election,” Biden told a cheering, horn-honking parking lot crowd in Atlanta. “Or that we’d have such competitive Senate races in Georgia. But we do because something’s happening here in Georgia and across the nation.”
Doubling down on his “we win Georgia, we win everything” theme, the former vice president declared, “I can’t tell you how important it is that we flip the U.S. Senate. There’s no state more consequential than Georgia.”
He’s right. If Ossoff and Warnock prevail, Democrats’ chances for taking the Senate away from Mitch McConnell and the Republicans increase exponentially. With Georgia joining Arizona, Colorado, Maine, and North Carolina in turning out Republican senators—as polls now suggest is possible—Democrats could have the sort of clear control of the both the House and Senate that would allow Biden to govern decisively. More From John Nichols A GOP Debate Without Trump Is the Definition of Pointlessness August 11, 2023 A Win for Abortion Rights, a Win for Democracy: Ohio Voters Reject Issue 1 August 9, 2023 The Biggest Threat to Donald Trump Could Be the Constitution Itself August 4, 2023
So Democrats really could win it all with Georgia. But that state’s outlier approach to elections, and another Democrat who has allowed his ego to get in the way, could derail the prospect in the Warnock victory on November 3. Because there’s another Democrat, Matt Lieberman, running in the special election contest, which features candidates of all parties running on the same ballot. Polls suggest Lieberman is running far behind. Yet he has refused repeated pleas that he fold his doomed bid that could draw off just enough votes from Warnock to prevent an outright win by the pastor.
Georgia maintains a remnant of the old politics of the South: runoff elections. What this means is that if one candidate does not get 50 percent of the vote on November 3, the top two finishers go on to face each other in one more election. Traditionally, Republicans in Georgia have fared well in runoffs. In 1992, for instance, when Bill Clinton carried the state’s presidential voting, Democratic Senator Wyche Fowler finished first in his reelection bid. But Fowler fell short of the 50 percent threshold and was forced into a runoff. Several weeks later, without the excitement and boosted turnout of the presidential race, Fowler was defeated. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
So Democrats are keen on winning both of this year’s races on November 3. In the case of Ossoff, who has surged in the final days of his “you’re a crook, senator” challenge to Republican incumbent David Perdue, that’s looking increasingly possible—especially after a powerful October 28 debate performance in which Ossoff so outclassed Perdue that the Republican dropped out of a final debate that was scheduled for Sunday. Several recent polls have shown the Democrat leading and moving closer and closer to that 50 percent threshold. Current Issue View our current issue
It had been assumed that Warnock, the senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, would end up in a runoff with one of two prominent Republicans who are running in the crowded special election contest (and thus splitting the Republican vote): appointed Senator Kelly Loeffler and Representative Doug Collins. But some polls now show Warnock running almost as well as Ossoff. A Public Policy Polling survey from late last week has the pastor of the church that served as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s spiritual home just shy of the 50 percent mark—at 46 percent, 19 points ahead of Loeffler. All recent polls have Warnock well ahead of Loeffler and Collins. However, several of them also show Lieberman, the son of former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, continuing to pull as much as 9 percent of the vote while another Democrat, former federal prosecutor Ed Tarver, has been attracting 1 or 2 percent.
There are fears that because of Lieberman’s name recognition, he could pull enough votes to prevent Warnock from winning outright on November 3, thus forcing him into a runoff with Loeffler or Collins.
Early in October, 10 progressive groups—Democracy for America (DFA), Be a Hero Fund, Blue Future, Justice Democrats, Progress America, Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), RootsAction.org, Social Security Works PAC, and the Working Families Party—begged Lieberman to quit the race.
“We urge you, with everything we have, to do the right thing for our country, end your race for U.S. Senate, and ensure Democrats stand united behind Raphael Warnock in this unique election,” wrote the groups in a letter released shortly after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. The letter to Lieberman explained the importance of winning an outright victory on November 3, and concluded, “Unfortunately, your continued presence in this race poses a very real and potentially disastrous threat to Democrats’ chances of winning Georgia’s special election for the U.S. Senate.”
Lieberman, who was at around 11 percent in the polls at the time the letter was sent, has lost a lot of ground in recent weeks. Yet he remains in the race. And he remains the Democrat who could prevent Democrats from winning a Georgia Senate seat on November 3.


thenation--2020-11-02--This Election, Black Women Are Leading the Way—Again

Black women are one of the most powerful voting blocs in the nation .
Although they occupy a marginalized position in American society—shouldering multiple and intersecting forms of oppression , including racism , sexism , and classism—Black women have always used whatever was at their disposal to shape American politics .
As the essential , if unsung , backbone of the Democratic Party , Black women have effectively harnessed the power of the vote to advance their political interest—while actively working to strengthen the party ’ s platform .
Now , with voter suppression tactics on the rise , Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the integrity of the electoral process .
The Democratic Party ’ s nomination of Kamala Harris for vice president has fueled many Black women ’ s passion for voting this year .
Far beyond symbolism , Harris ’ s platform aligns with the concerns of many Black women .
As a recent Essence poll of Black women voters reveals , most are concerned with addressing several interrelated societal issues : systemic racism , voter suppression , police violence , and poor access to health care .
Black women ’ s overwhelming support for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deeply connected to these critical issues .
No doubt these women will make their way to the ballot box this year , many inspired by Harris ’ s nomination , to ensure that their voices are heard .
While Harris ’ s nomination is historic and meaningful , Black women ’ s overwhelming interest and commitment to casting a ballot is not a new feature in American politics .
In 2008 and ’ 12 , Black women voted at the highest rate of any race and gender subgroup .
Their votes—96 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of President Barack Obama in 2012 .
Black women voters backed the then-incumbent in some key battleground states—Ohio , Pennsylvania , and Florida—that together gave him 67 electoral college votes .
While Black voters , in general , have had high turnouts in recent elections , Black women often lead at higher rates than Black men and other racial and ethnic groups in the country .
This was especially evident in 2016 , when the Black voter turnout rate declined for the first time in 20 years .
While fewer Black voters as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that year , Black women still made their mark , with an estimated 63.7 percent voting that year .
In comparison to other racial groups , Black women had one of that year ’ s largest voter turnout rates .
Long denied access to the vote , Black women in the United States need no convincing of the significance of electoral politics .
The general consensus today among Black women that voting is necessary—not optional—stems from a long history of exclusion .
Although some Black women were able to successfully cast a ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as California New York , and Illinois—most were shut out of the formal political process until the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act .
The passage in 1920 of the 19th Amendment , which granted voting rights to all women in theory but only white women in practice , had little effect on Black women ’ s lives .
Through an array of legal and extralegal strategies , white Americans worked to keep Black people from practicing the constitutional right to vote .
Black women passionately resisted these efforts .
During the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activist Fannie Lou Hamer led a nationwide movement to expand the voting rights of Black Americans .
It was a bold act of defiance—and a matter of life and death .
As Hamer explained in a 1964 interview with The Nation , “ We ’ re tired of all this beatin , ’ we ’ re tired of takin ’ this .
It ’ s been a hundred years and we ’ re still being beaten and shot at , crosses are still being burned , because we want to vote.
” Fully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Hamer refused to capitulate .
“ I ’ m goin ’ to stay in Mississippi , ” she added , “ and if they shoot me down , I ’ ll be buried here.
” She knew through firsthand experience the danger of voting in the Jim Crow South .
When she dared to try to register to vote for the first time in Indianola , Miss.
, in 1962 , she encountered intimidation from local police .
After Hamer returned home that evening , the owner of the plantation on which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He demanded that she withdraw her registration or leave .
Hamer chose the latter .
Emboldened by her commitment to exercise her rights as a citizen of the United States , she continued her attempts to register to vote and worked with the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee ( SNCC ) to encourage others to vote .
In 1964 , she helped establish the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party to challenge the segregated , all-white Mississippi delegation at the Democratic National Convention .
As a member of SNCC , Hamer traveled across the South to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awareness to the power of the vote .
It was her life ’ s mission—guided by the belief that voting provided an important vehicle to freedom for Black people .
Through voting , Hamer emphasized , Black people would be able to overturn decades of racist and exclusionary laws and practices .
And through voting , African Americans would have the power to appoint leaders who would act in their behalf .
“ The only way that we can change the system in the State of Mississippi , ” Hamer explained , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ registering to vote , but you got to stand up.
” “ Freedom is not something that ’ s put in your lap , ” she continued .
“ You will have to go to the courthouse and say ‘ I want to register .
This is a protest to show them that I am not satisfied.
’ ” More from The Nation To Stop Trump Stealing the Election , Democrats Must Do These 3 Things Black women in the United States today have not lost sight of this reality .
Like Hamer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , African American women are at the forefront of the movement to expand voting rights—and bring an end to voter suppression .
In 2018 , Stacey Abrams became the first African American woman to receive a major party nomination for governor in any state .
Following her unsuccessful bid for governor of Georgia—under a shroud of questionable practices on the part of her opponent , Republican Brian Kemp—Abrams has worked to raise national awareness on current methods of voter suppression .
Her organization , Fair Fight , now plays a central role in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in local , state , and national elections .
Similarly , activist LaTosha Brown has led a nationwide movement to bolster Black voting rights and challenge voter suppression tactics .
In 2016 , Brown cofounded the Black Voters Matter Fund , a civil engagement organization that played a significant role in the 2017 Alabama US Senate race .
Brown and her colleagues have worked to increase Black voter turnout in elections across the state—and across the nation , including deep-red states .
Working at the grassroots level , with a focus on community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ movement have already changed the landscape of American politics .
These efforts have been further amplified through the work of other like-minded Black women activists and leaders , including Aimee Allison , founder of She the People , a national network that aims to elevate the political voice and power of women of color .
From Stacey Abrams , LaTosha Brown , and Aimee Allison to countless others who are diligently working in their communities and on a national level , Black women refuse to sit on the sidelines as we approach one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation ’ s recent history .
As they have always done , Black women will boldly meet the challenge this November .
They will show up , in record numbers , to cast a ballot in the hope of ushering in a new era , without Trump at the helm .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Black women are one of the most powerful voting blocs in the nation. Although they occupy a marginalized position in American society—shouldering multiple and intersecting forms of oppression, including racism, sexism, and classism—Black women have always used whatever was at their disposal to shape American politics. As the essential, if unsung, backbone of the Democratic Party, Black women have effectively harnessed the power of the vote to advance their political interest—while actively working to strengthen the party’s platform. Now, with voter suppression tactics on the rise, Black women are leading the charge to preserve the integrity of the electoral process.
The Democratic Party’s nomination of Kamala Harris for vice president has fueled many Black women’s passion for voting this year. Far beyond symbolism, Harris’s platform aligns with the concerns of many Black women. As a recent Essence poll of Black women voters reveals, most are concerned with addressing several interrelated societal issues: systemic racism, voter suppression, police violence, and poor access to health care. Black women’s overwhelming support for the Biden-Harris ticket—an estimated 90 percent—is therefore deeply connected to these critical issues. No doubt these women will make their way to the ballot box this year, many inspired by Harris’s nomination, to ensure that their voices are heard.
While Harris’s nomination is historic and meaningful, Black women’s overwhelming interest and commitment to casting a ballot is not a new feature in American politics. In 2008 and ’12, Black women voted at the highest rate of any race and gender subgroup. Their votes—96 percent of them—played no small part in the reelection of President Barack Obama in 2012. Black women voters backed the then-incumbent in some key battleground states—Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida—that together gave him 67 electoral college votes. While Black voters, in general, have had high turnouts in recent elections, Black women often lead at higher rates than Black men and other racial and ethnic groups in the country. This was especially evident in 2016, when the Black voter turnout rate declined for the first time in 20 years. While fewer Black voters as a whole made it to the polls that year, Black women still made their mark, with an estimated 63.7 percent voting that year. In comparison to other racial groups, Black women had one of that year’s largest voter turnout rates. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
Long denied access to the vote, Black women in the United States need no convincing of the significance of electoral politics. The general consensus today among Black women that voting is necessary—not optional—stems from a long history of exclusion. Although some Black women were able to successfully cast a ballot during the early 20th century—in states such as California New York, and Illinois—most were shut out of the formal political process until the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The passage in 1920 of the 19th Amendment, which granted voting rights to all women in theory but only white women in practice, had little effect on Black women’s lives. Through an array of legal and extralegal strategies, white Americans worked to keep Black people from practicing the constitutional right to vote.
Black women passionately resisted these efforts. During the 1960s, for example, civil rights activist Fannie Lou Hamer led a nationwide movement to expand the voting rights of Black Americans. It was a bold act of defiance—and a matter of life and death. As Hamer explained in a 1964 interview with The Nation, “We’re tired of all this beatin,’ we’re tired of takin’ this. It’s been a hundred years and we’re still being beaten and shot at, crosses are still being burned, because we want to vote.” Fully aware of the consequences of her actions, Hamer refused to capitulate. “I’m goin’ to stay in Mississippi,” she added, “and if they shoot me down, I’ll be buried here.” Current Issue View our current issue
She knew through firsthand experience the danger of voting in the Jim Crow South. When she dared to try to register to vote for the first time in Indianola, Miss., in 1962, she encountered intimidation from local police. After Hamer returned home that evening, the owner of the plantation on which she worked gave her an ultimatum: He demanded that she withdraw her registration or leave. Hamer chose the latter. Emboldened by her commitment to exercise her rights as a citizen of the United States, she continued her attempts to register to vote and worked with the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) to encourage others to vote. In 1964, she helped establish the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party to challenge the segregated, all-white Mississippi delegation at the Democratic National Convention. As a member of SNCC, Hamer traveled across the South to lead voter registration workshops and raise greater awareness to the power of the vote.
It was her life’s mission—guided by the belief that voting provided an important vehicle to freedom for Black people. Through voting, Hamer emphasized, Black people would be able to overturn decades of racist and exclusionary laws and practices. And through voting, African Americans would have the power to appoint leaders who would act in their behalf. “The only way that we can change the system in the State of Mississippi,” Hamer explained, “is by going to the courthouse, registering to vote, but you got to stand up.”
“Freedom is not something that’s put in your lap,” she continued. “You will have to go to the courthouse and say ‘I want to register. This is a protest to show them that I am not satisfied.’” More from The Nation To Stop Trump Stealing the Election, Democrats Must Do These 3 Things Zack Malitz, Brandon Evans and Becky Bond
Black women in the United States today have not lost sight of this reality. Like Hamer and many others who came before them, African American women are at the forefront of the movement to expand voting rights—and bring an end to voter suppression. In 2018, Stacey Abrams became the first African American woman to receive a major party nomination for governor in any state. Following her unsuccessful bid for governor of Georgia—under a shroud of questionable practices on the part of her opponent, Republican Brian Kemp—Abrams has worked to raise national awareness on current methods of voter suppression. Her organization, Fair Fight, now plays a central role in educating voters and urging them to participate in local, state, and national elections.
Similarly, activist LaTosha Brown has led a nationwide movement to bolster Black voting rights and challenge voter suppression tactics. In 2016, Brown cofounded the Black Voters Matter Fund, a civil engagement organization that played a significant role in the 2017 Alabama US Senate race.
Brown and her colleagues have worked to increase Black voter turnout in elections across the state—and across the nation, including deep-red states. Working at the grassroots level, with a focus on community empowerment, Brown and others in the movement have already changed the landscape of American politics. These efforts have been further amplified through the work of other like-minded Black women activists and leaders, including Aimee Allison, founder of She the People, a national network that aims to elevate the political voice and power of women of color.
From Stacey Abrams, LaTosha Brown, and Aimee Allison to countless others who are diligently working in their communities and on a national level, Black women refuse to sit on the sidelines as we approach one of the most important elections in our nation’s recent history. As they have always done, Black women will boldly meet the challenge this November. They will show up, in record numbers, to cast a ballot in the hope of ushering in a new era, without Trump at the helm.


thenation--2020-11-02--Why a Biden Administration Needs to Spend Big

If Democrats take the White House and Senate , Joe Biden will be in a position to pass legislation that will shape the economy for decades to come .
But before the party gets into the policy weeds , there ’ s a major mental hurdle that needs to be cleared .
Biden and his administration will need to rapidly spend money and maintain deficits not seen or even debated in decades .
We are entering what I ’ m calling the Era of Large Numbers : massive spending , giant deficits , a high debt-to-GDP ratio .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and why we must defend it from opportunistic opposition .
To start , let ’ s look at what Biden has already planned to accomplish .
His Build Back Better agenda would commit $ 700 billion to research and development and investments to create millions of manufacturing jobs .
It also pledges $ 2 trillion to fight climate change and $ 775 billion for investing in the care economy , including resources for child care , universal pre-K , and home- and community-based care for those with long-term needs .
There are additional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for health care , a child allowance that would dramatically cut childhood poverty , and expanded access to college .
According to an estimate from the Penn Wharton Budget Model team , this essential spending would add up to more than $ 5 trillion over 10 years .
Some commentators will balk at the notion of funding anything new , but we need to understand that $ 5 trillion in additional spending should be the minimum proposal in any serious discussion .
The needs in this country are tremendous .
We face the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mass unemployment from our recession , a lack of investment in the country since the Republicans took control of the Senate , and larger crises in caregiving and climate .
The spending will need to be big enough to match the scale of the problems .
Luckily , such projects should also be big hits politically , as many of these would come online quickly .
In short order , they would show the public that Democrats are better at creating an economy that works for everyday people .
We need to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now move fast , especially compared with the first years of the Obama and Trump presidencies .
Barack Obama ’ s main early initiatives required creating marketplaces for health care and regulatory structures for the financial industry—acts that are time-intensive and less direct than simply spending cash resources .
Many of Biden ’ s planned actions , like a public option and expanding Medicare to those age 60 to 64 , would plug into existing regulatory infrastructure .
In the past , Democrats boxed themselves in by worrying about deficits and rising interest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economists now believe that because interest rates are lower than the growth rate of the economy , there is more space to tackle our problems through deficit spending .
Climate infrastructure , notably , is the kind of investment that should be debt-financed , as real interest rates are slightly negative in the long run .
The Stimulus Plan That We Need Now Republicans don ’ t mind debt when they are governing .
But under Trump they had no plan for what to do about health care , especially as they campaigned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their agenda was to worsen both .
The conservative dream of destroying social insurance ran into the reality that Americans use and will defend these programs .
What Biden wants to do , however , will be popular and address real needs .
He can drive economic change that neither Obama nor Trump could .
There are other reasons the spending can happen quickly .
Given Republican opposition to fighting the Great Recession , the realization that their supposed balanced budget credentials went out the door for corporate tax cuts , and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urge among Beltway Democrats for bipartisanship is weaker than in the past .
Democrats should target the Senate filibuster , which Mitch McConnell eroded for Supreme Court nominations and which never hampered Republican tax and spending cuts .
While some of Biden ’ s projects could be passed through reconciliation , the filibuster must be removed or altered to accomplish many of his administration ’ s progressive goals .
The moment is urgent , and if the Republicans have no interest in governing , that should not stop the Democrats .
The problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is our ability to spend .

This article appears in the November 30/December 7, 2020 issue.
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
If Democrats take the White House and Senate, Joe Biden will be in a position to pass legislation that will shape the economy for decades to come. But before the party gets into the policy weeds, there’s a major mental hurdle that needs to be cleared. Biden and his administration will need to rapidly spend money and maintain deficits not seen or even debated in decades. We are entering what I’m calling the Era of Large Numbers: massive spending, giant deficits, a high debt-to-GDP ratio. It is important to understand why this is necessary and why we must defend it from opportunistic opposition.
To start, let’s look at what Biden has already planned to accomplish. His Build Back Better agenda would commit $700 billion to research and development and investments to create millions of manufacturing jobs. It also pledges $2 trillion to fight climate change and $775 billion for investing in the care economy, including resources for child care, universal pre-K, and home- and community-based care for those with long-term needs. There are additional promises beyond that: a public option for health care, a child allowance that would dramatically cut childhood poverty, and expanded access to college. According to an estimate from the Penn Wharton Budget Model team, this essential spending would add up to more than $5 trillion over 10 years.
Some commentators will balk at the notion of funding anything new, but we need to understand that $5 trillion in additional spending should be the minimum proposal in any serious discussion. The needs in this country are tremendous. We face the health emergency of the coronavirus pandemic, mass unemployment from our recession, a lack of investment in the country since the Republicans took control of the Senate, and larger crises in caregiving and climate. The spending will need to be big enough to match the scale of the problems. Luckily, such projects should also be big hits politically, as many of these would come online quickly. In short order, they would show the public that Democrats are better at creating an economy that works for everyday people.
We need to be thinking large numbers because this money can now move fast, especially compared with the first years of the Obama and Trump presidencies. Barack Obama’s main early initiatives required creating marketplaces for health care and regulatory structures for the financial industry—acts that are time-intensive and less direct than simply spending cash resources. Many of Biden’s planned actions, like a public option and expanding Medicare to those age 60 to 64, would plug into existing regulatory infrastructure. In the past, Democrats boxed themselves in by worrying about deficits and rising interest rates that never materialized. But liberal economists now believe that because interest rates are lower than the growth rate of the economy, there is more space to tackle our problems through deficit spending. Climate infrastructure, notably, is the kind of investment that should be debt-financed, as real interest rates are slightly negative in the long run. More From Mike Konczal “Bidenomics” vs. “Reaganomics” July 21, 2023 The Revolutionary Potential of the Inflation Reduction Act April 28, 2023 The Tradeoffs in the Fight Against Inflation February 20, 2023
Republicans don’t mind debt when they are governing. But under Trump they had no plan for what to do about health care, especially as they campaigned on improving access and affordability even as their agenda was to worsen both. The conservative dream of destroying social insurance ran into the reality that Americans use and will defend these programs. What Biden wants to do, however, will be popular and address real needs. He can drive economic change that neither Obama nor Trump could.
There are other reasons the spending can happen quickly. Given Republican opposition to fighting the Great Recession, the realization that their supposed balanced budget credentials went out the door for corporate tax cuts, and their theft of Supreme Court seats, the urge among Beltway Democrats for bipartisanship is weaker than in the past. Democrats should target the Senate filibuster, which Mitch McConnell eroded for Supreme Court nominations and which never hampered Republican tax and spending cuts. While some of Biden’s projects could be passed through reconciliation, the filibuster must be removed or altered to accomplish many of his administration’s progressive goals. The moment is urgent, and if the Republicans have no interest in governing, that should not stop the Democrats. The problems we face are large. But so is our ability to spend.


thenation--2020-11-02--The Trauma of Trump’s Presidency Will Haunt Us

There was never a way to understand the forcible separation of migrant parents and their children as anything other than a program to intentionally inflict widespread punitive psychological harm .
Even as Trump administration officials publicly claimed ripping apart families was an unforeseen consequence of begrudging compliance with existing immigration law , they privately promoted the policy as one that would create mental anguish to deter migrant arrivals.1 In May 2018 , one month before falsely claiming the administration had “ never really intended to ” separate families , then–Attorney General Jeff Sessions reportedly gave border prosecutors their marching orders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take away children.
” Rod Rosenstein , the deputy AG at the time , ordered US attorneys who had declined to pursue cases involving toddlers to make “ no categorical exemption ” in prosecutions merely “ because of the age of a child , ” despite a secret 2017 pilot of the family separation policy in which prosecutors determined children younger than 12 would likely be unable to relocate their parents .
That trial run reportedly saw immigration authorities “ taking breastfeeding defendant moms away from their infants , ” according to one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials were warned that callously breaking up migrant families “ entails significant potential for traumatic psychological injury to the child , ” according to testimony from Public Health Service Commissioned Corps Cmdr .
Jonathan White .
The Trump team plowed ahead with the policy anyway , led by Stephen Miller—whose white supremacist ideology has defined this administration ’ s anti-immigration stance—without even bothering to develop a tracking system to reunite families .
( Federal lawyers recently admitted that more than 540 children remain in custody alone because the government doesn ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Miller made clear to us , ” one Department of Homeland Security official told The New Yorker , “ that if you start to treat children badly enough , you ’ ll be able to convince other parents to stop trying to come with theirs.
” 3 Trauma isn ’ t an unforeseen byproduct of Trumpism ; it is the intentional policy strategy of this administration and the hateful man who leads it .
The president consistently acts on this country ’ s ugliest and most dangerous impulses , leveraging psychological pain and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white supremacy and heteropatriarchy .
Family separation is one of the most extreme such examples , and there are many more .
The Muslim travel ban , devised by Miller and then–Trump strategist Steven Bannon and signed by Trump just seven days after taking office , was a precursor to child separation , serving essentially the same purpose : to emotionally devastate families torn apart by the law as it stemmed Muslim migration flows .
Trump ’ s Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids , both threatened and carried out , knowingly create a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unauthorized migrants.4 American History Is Getting Whitewashed , Again Trump Supports Housing Segregation—and So Do a Lot of White Liberals Meanwhile , this administration ’ s unstinting efforts to roll back LGBTQ rights , from pushing a rule that would allow shelters to deny space to unhoused transgender people to scrubbing all mention of LGBTQ rights from the White House website , have served to not only oppress and erase but also demoralize and mentally fatigue .
And Trump ’ s repeated calls to his self-dubbed “ army ” of racist supporters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go into the polls and watch very carefully ” for nonexistent fraudulent “ thieving and stealing and robbing , ” were an open incitement to violence as well as a mental poll tax levied against Black voters , in particular , to suppress their turnout .
Even Trump ’ s daily barrage of rage tweets , which frequently bundle violence and racism—such as when he threatened anti-racist protesters with the taunt that “ when the looting starts , the shooting starts ” —are a reflection of his addled psyche and his goal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans not directly targeted by these policies have also been justifiably shaken by Trump ’ s election and presidency .
The ascension to the Oval Office of a sexual predator who boasted about being able to “ do anything ” to women , including “ grab ‘ em by the pussy , ” retraumatized survivors forced to grapple with living in a country where many , including a plurality of white women , appear to be largely indifferent to sexual assault .
The sight of Trump mocking a disabled reporter to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a deeply emotionally unsettling reminder of who is unwelcome in Trump ’ s America .
It ’ s no wonder that on election night 2016 and in the following months , suicide and crisis hotlines reported a precipitous rise in calls from people who specifically reported distress over Trump ’ s win .
Likewise , mental health practitioners developed a whole series of unofficial diagnoses—Trump anxiety disorder , post-Trump stress disorder—to give name to the widespread negative mental health impacts they observed as a result of his election .
These were the psychological @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s celebration of casual abuse , its reflexive and rabid cruelty.6 Were they less invested in the politics of white racial resentment and revenge , Trump ’ s followers might take notice of how easily he also traumatizes them , with increasing frequency and intensity as we close in on the election .
He is fearmongering among his base and demonizing his perceived opponents—deeming Black Lives Matter “ a symbol of hate , ” calling for “ retribution ” against anti-racist activists who deface Confederate monuments , insisting the suburbs will fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discord and chaos , inflaming anxieties all around .
Trump ’ s use of trauma as his defining reelection tactic , after four years of sustained mental abuse , guarantees the psychological wounds of Trumpism will persist long after he exits office , and those scars will take doubly long to heal among those most directly targeted .
Even with a Biden win this November , we still face years of undoing the profound breaches of trust we ’ ve suffered.7

This article appears in the November 16/23, 2020 issue.
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
There was never a way to understand the forcible separation of migrant parents and their children as anything other than a program to intentionally inflict widespread punitive psychological harm. Even as Trump administration officials publicly claimed ripping apart families was an unforeseen consequence of begrudging compliance with existing immigration law, they privately promoted the policy as one that would create mental anguish to deter migrant arrivals.1
In May 2018, one month before falsely claiming the administration had “never really intended to” separate families, then–Attorney General Jeff Sessions reportedly gave border prosecutors their marching orders, declaring, “We need to take away children.” Rod Rosenstein, the deputy AG at the time, ordered US attorneys who had declined to pursue cases involving toddlers to make “no categorical exemption” in prosecutions merely “because of the age of a child,” despite a secret 2017 pilot of the family separation policy in which prosecutors determined children younger than 12 would likely be unable to relocate their parents. That trial run reportedly saw immigration authorities “taking breastfeeding defendant moms away from their infants,” according to one government prosecutor.2
At least three Trump administration officials were warned that callously breaking up migrant families “entails significant potential for traumatic psychological injury to the child,” according to testimony from Public Health Service Commissioned Corps Cmdr. Jonathan White. The Trump team plowed ahead with the policy anyway, led by Stephen Miller—whose white supremacist ideology has defined this administration’s anti-immigration stance—without even bothering to develop a tracking system to reunite families. (Federal lawyers recently admitted that more than 540 children remain in custody alone because the government doesn’t know where their parents are.) “Miller made clear to us,” one Department of Homeland Security official told The New Yorker, “that if you start to treat children badly enough, you’ll be able to convince other parents to stop trying to come with theirs.”3
Trauma isn’t an unforeseen byproduct of Trumpism; it is the intentional policy strategy of this administration and the hateful man who leads it. The president consistently acts on this country’s ugliest and most dangerous impulses, leveraging psychological pain and mental terror to push us further toward white supremacy and heteropatriarchy. Family separation is one of the most extreme such examples, and there are many more. The Muslim travel ban, devised by Miller and then–Trump strategist Steven Bannon and signed by Trump just seven days after taking office, was a precursor to child separation, serving essentially the same purpose: to emotionally devastate families torn apart by the law as it stemmed Muslim migration flows. Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, both threatened and carried out, knowingly create a toxic atmosphere of fear and anxiety for unauthorized migrants.4 Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann More From Kali Holloway Inside the Cynical Campaign to Claim That Affirmative Action Hurts Asian Americans August 9, 2023 It’s Not Just Corporate Pride Boycotts—Right-Wingers Are Escalating Their Anti-LGBTQ Campaign June 23, 2023 Affirmative Action Is in the Supreme Court’s Crosshairs June 22, 2023
Meanwhile, this administration’s unstinting efforts to roll back LGBTQ rights, from pushing a rule that would allow shelters to deny space to unhoused transgender people to scrubbing all mention of LGBTQ rights from the White House website, have served to not only oppress and erase but also demoralize and mentally fatigue. And Trump’s repeated calls to his self-dubbed “army” of racist supporters, whom he is now urging to “go into the polls and watch very carefully” for nonexistent fraudulent “thieving and stealing and robbing,” were an open incitement to violence as well as a mental poll tax levied against Black voters, in particular, to suppress their turnout. Even Trump’s daily barrage of rage tweets, which frequently bundle violence and racism—such as when he threatened anti-racist protesters with the taunt that “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”—are a reflection of his addled psyche and his goal of traumatizing perceived enemies and political opponents.5
Thousands of Americans not directly targeted by these policies have also been justifiably shaken by Trump’s election and presidency. The ascension to the Oval Office of a sexual predator who boasted about being able to “do anything” to women, including “grab ‘em by the pussy,” retraumatized survivors forced to grapple with living in a country where many, including a plurality of white women, appear to be largely indifferent to sexual assault. The sight of Trump mocking a disabled reporter to the approval of his rally attendees served as a deeply emotionally unsettling reminder of who is unwelcome in Trump’s America. It’s no wonder that on election night 2016 and in the following months, suicide and crisis hotlines reported a precipitous rise in calls from people who specifically reported distress over Trump’s win. Likewise, mental health practitioners developed a whole series of unofficial diagnoses—Trump anxiety disorder, post-Trump stress disorder—to give name to the widespread negative mental health impacts they observed as a result of his election. These were the psychological wages of merely bearing witness to Trumpism’s celebration of casual abuse, its reflexive and rabid cruelty.6
Were they less invested in the politics of white racial resentment and revenge, Trump’s followers might take notice of how easily he also traumatizes them, with increasing frequency and intensity as we close in on the election. He is fearmongering among his base and demonizing his perceived opponents—deeming Black Lives Matter “a symbol of hate,” calling for “retribution” against anti-racist activists who deface Confederate monuments, insisting the suburbs will fall to antifa throngs under Joe Biden—to sow discord and chaos, inflaming anxieties all around. Trump’s use of trauma as his defining reelection tactic, after four years of sustained mental abuse, guarantees the psychological wounds of Trumpism will persist long after he exits office, and those scars will take doubly long to heal among those most directly targeted. Even with a Biden win this November, we still face years of undoing the profound breaches of trust we’ve suffered.7