thenation--2020-07-06--Why JPMorgan Chase Should Give $1 Billion to Black Neighborhoods in Chicago

In June , an investigation by two Chicago newsrooms , City Bureau and WBEZ , analyzed more than 168,000 bank loans between 2012 and 2018 .
The team found that for every $ 1 banks loaned in Chicago ’ s white neighborhoods , they invested just 12 cents in the city ’ s Black neighborhoods .
These findings reflect a grim truth that many researchers on urban affairs have long observed : Housing discrimination may be illegal , but residential segregation and de facto redlining have remained the norm .
The bank with the worst record in Chicago is also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chase .
For every dollar it loaned in white neighborhoods between 2012 and 2018 , the bank invested only 2.4 cents in the city ’ s Black communities .
In response to these findings , Chicago residents have shut down bank branches across the city , and have called on the company to pay reparations .
Ja ’ Mal Green , a community activist and 2018 mayoral candidate , has been mobilizing community members and reaching hundreds of thousands through videos of protests and actions .
His demands for change dovetail with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their history of racist lending and profiteering from slavery ( JPMorgan ’ s predecessor , Citizens Bank of Louisiana , secured its early mortgages through the purchase of thousands of slaves ) .
The rate of Black homeownership has barely budged since the Fair Housing Act prohibited racial discrimination in 1968 , and today the average Black family has a net worth about one-10th that of the average white family , a gap larger than it was at the start of this century .
I spoke to Green about community organizing , why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibilities for radical social change in this moment .
aniel ernandez : You ’ ve called on Chase to give Chicago ’ s Black neighborhoods $ 1 billion in grants and $ 10 billion in loans , which will be used for home buyer assistance , small-business start-ups , and , eventually , the creation of a Black-owned bank .
How did you settle on these demands ?
a ’ al reen : We started by looking at the numbers—and what the numbers could have been .
What WBEZ showed was that if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rest of the market was lending , which was like 8 percent , then our communities would have gotten $ 89 million each year since 2012 .
And if Chase was doing in our neighborhoods what they had been doing in a white neighborhood like Lincoln Park , then we would have gotten hundreds of millions of dollars every year since 2012 .
We looked at those numbers and where they could have been , and tried to pick a number that would help us create generational wealth , jump-start the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create businesses and ownership .
DF : When you were running for mayor back in 2018 , you talked a lot about growing up in Englewood and the impact that poverty and systemic racism have had on your life and your community .
How do these actions against Chase fit into a larger movement for accountability in communities that have been historically underserved ?
JG : This fits into a larger movement of wanting economic progression , instead of what we ’ ve been getting , which is economic oppression .
And of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been going on with our government dollars .
It comes [ down ] to really investing in our urban communities .
They ’ ve been left behind for so many years .
There ’ s still a War on Drugs , but there ’ s not a war on poverty .
When you have poverty , it spills over into a whole bunch of other problems .
But the criminal justice system is the only thing they push us towards .
‘ We Can ’ t Be Duped by Petty Reforms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Black Panther ‘ Starve the Beast ’ : A Q & A With Alex S. Vitale on Defunding the Police Finding Humor When ‘ Shit Is So Terrible ’ : A Conversation With Samantha Irby Many of us were brought over to America because of capitalism .
They brought us over here to create the wealth they now have .
Just like how JPMorgan used slaves as collateral .
[ Our bodies ] were used to create everything in America , but we never reaped the benefits .
And so after 1865 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physical chains , they created all of these systems that we could not see , but would ultimately keep us at the bottom .
They put all of these systems in place to make sure that folks of color in America would never be able to get far enough ahead to be able to make it in their communities .
DF : WBEZ recently reported that both the state treasurer of Chicago and of Illinois plan to work with banking leaders on how to root out systemic racism in the industry and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state .
What are you hoping will come out of this ?
JG : I think we ’ re in a unique time , where folks all over the country are waking up and paying attention .
We ’ ve got the city treasurer , the state treasurer , and the Cook County treasurer all involved and trying to help us root out racism in the banking industry .
Those leaders must bring [ JPMorgan ] Chase to the table , and say , “ We will divest from you if you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you do not pay these communities that you ’ ve hurt.
” They have that power because they ’ ve been funneling money to those banks for so many years .
And when you can give $ 1.7 million in home loans to Englewood , but give $ 980 million to Lincoln Park over the same time span , you are showing that you really don ’ t care .
It ’ s not fair , especially because you have these branches in the same communities that you refuse to invest in , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DF : In Chicago , you have elected officials talking about wanting to end systemic racism without necessarily paying reparations .
Why is paying reparations important , and why is a pledge to end systemic racism not enough ?
JG : When you ’ re talking about these goals , people have to understand that you can not erase the damage that you ’ ve already done .
You can ’ t wake up one day and say , “ I ’ m going to be better , ” and not be held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commit a crime , and the next day say , “ I ’ m not going to commit any more crimes , I ’ m turning myself over to Jesus.
” They ’ re still going to hold me accountable for yesterday ’ s crime .
These banking institutions have deprived these folks of creating generational wealth and owning their homes , even when they ’ ve had the credit score , even when they ’ ve had the down payment .
You don ’ t just say tomorrow , “ I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s what Chase committed to on their call [ earlier today ] , but that ’ s not good enough .
It ’ s not enough to say that you ’ ll do better now .
We have to hold them accountable to pay reparations .
It ’ s the only way to go .
DF : In many ways , what you ’ re calling on the community to take up—to not put their money in banks that refuse to invest in them and their community—is an action with deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immediately for me was MLK , right before he was killed , telling folks in Memphis to take money out of the big downtown banks and to put it in a local one run by Jesse Turner .
He called it a “ bank in.
” Because many of these demands are decades old , I ’ m curious how you ’ ve thought about—and been inspired by—past movements ?
JG : From the start we ’ ve tried to educate Black people about the power of their dollar .
And what I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know where your dollar is going , because you could be funding your own oppression .
Whether it ’ s a business that disrespects people that look like you , or a bank that won ’ t invest in you , if you put your dollar there—if you give them your dollar—you ’ re funding your own oppression .
If you understand the power of your dollar , you have control , and you can turn that control into power for your community .
Past movement leaders like MLK have preached this , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the power of our dollar and knowing where it goes , too .
DF : What ’ s the mood of the protests been like ?
What have you heard from community members ?
JG : We ’ ve shut down eight or nine banks so far .
We don ’ t get much opposition from people because folks in these communities understand what Chase does .
It ’ s more of a “ Finally !
” moment .
Folks are getting educated , they ’ re taking their money out .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and stockholders are looking at the articles and selling their stock .
And now Chase wants to come to the table before things get even worse .
DF : Have there been any moments from the protests that stick out to you ?
JG : Lincoln Park .
We shut down a location there , and what stuck out was the change in the environment .
When you go outside of that Chase , you have a community without crime .
You didn ’ t have folks standing on the corner selling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ folks begging for money .
You have a community where a lot of folks are thriving , and a lot of those folks are upper middle class , where they have homes and are embedded in their community .
What I told folks on Facebook Live is that this can be our reality .
We can have a community without violence , we can have a community where we are living lives , where we have great careers , where we can open up businesses , where we can walk our dog and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what could happen .
I wanted to give hope to all these communities—and all the folks living in these communities—where there are boarded-up businesses , boarded-up homes , violence , police brutality , just all these problems going on , and nobody is doing anything about it .
We want to give people the feel of where we could be if we start holding these institutions accountable [ and get them ] to invest in our communities .

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?
In June, an investigation by two Chicago newsrooms, City Bureau and WBEZ, analyzed more than 168,000 bank loans between 2012 and 2018. The team found that for every $1 banks loaned in Chicago’s white neighborhoods, they invested just 12 cents in the city’s Black neighborhoods. These findings reflect a grim truth that many researchers on urban affairs have long observed: Housing discrimination may be illegal, but residential segregation and de facto redlining have remained the norm.
The bank with the worst record in Chicago is also the nation’s largest, JPMorgan Chase. For every dollar it loaned in white neighborhoods between 2012 and 2018, the bank invested only 2.4 cents in the city’s Black communities. In response to these findings, Chicago residents have shut down bank branches across the city, and have called on the company to pay reparations.
Ja’Mal Green, a community activist and 2018 mayoral candidate, has been mobilizing community members and reaching hundreds of thousands through videos of protests and actions. His demands for change dovetail with a larger movement to hold banks accountable for their history of racist lending and profiteering from slavery (JPMorgan’s predecessor, Citizens Bank of Louisiana, secured its early mortgages through the purchase of thousands of slaves).
The rate of Black homeownership has barely budged since the Fair Housing Act prohibited racial discrimination in 1968, and today the average Black family has a net worth about one-10th that of the average white family, a gap larger than it was at the start of this century.
I spoke to Green about community organizing, why banks should pay reparations, and the possibilities for radical social change in this moment.
—Daniel Fernandez
D aniel F ernandez: You’ve called on Chase to give Chicago’s Black neighborhoods $1 billion in grants and $10 billion in loans, which will be used for home buyer assistance, small-business start-ups, and, eventually, the creation of a Black-owned bank. How did you settle on these demands? Current Issue View our current issue
J a’ M al G reen: We started by looking at the numbers—and what the numbers could have been. What WBEZ showed was that if Chase had been lending just at what the rest of the market was lending, which was like 8 percent, then our communities would have gotten $89 million each year since 2012. And if Chase was doing in our neighborhoods what they had been doing in a white neighborhood like Lincoln Park, then we would have gotten hundreds of millions of dollars every year since 2012. 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
We looked at those numbers and where they could have been, and tried to pick a number that would help us create generational wealth, jump-start the economy, lower the crime rate, and create businesses and ownership.
DF: When you were running for mayor back in 2018, you talked a lot about growing up in Englewood and the impact that poverty and systemic racism have had on your life and your community. How do these actions against Chase fit into a larger movement for accountability in communities that have been historically underserved?
JG: This fits into a larger movement of wanting economic progression, instead of what we’ve been getting, which is economic oppression. And of course the banks are intertwined with what’s been going on with our government dollars. It comes [down] to really investing in our urban communities. They’ve been left behind for so many years. There’s still a War on Drugs, but there’s not a war on poverty. When you have poverty, it spills over into a whole bunch of other problems. But the criminal justice system is the only thing they push us towards. The Q&A ‘We Can’t Be Duped by Petty Reforms’: A Q&A With a Black Panther Jules Boykoff ‘Starve the Beast’: A Q&A With Alex S. Vitale on Defunding the Police Zachary Siegel Finding Humor When ‘Shit Is So Terrible’: A Conversation With Samantha Irby Rima Parikh
Many of us were brought over to America because of capitalism. They brought us over here to create the wealth they now have. Just like how JPMorgan used slaves as collateral. [Our bodies] were used to create everything in America, but we never reaped the benefits. And so after 1865, when we were freed from the physical chains, they created all of these systems that we could not see, but would ultimately keep us at the bottom. They put all of these systems in place to make sure that folks of color in America would never be able to get far enough ahead to be able to make it in their communities.
DF: WBEZ recently reported that both the state treasurer of Chicago and of Illinois plan to work with banking leaders on how to root out systemic racism in the industry and to direct more money to Black communities across the state. What are you hoping will come out of this?
JG: I think we’re in a unique time, where folks all over the country are waking up and paying attention. We’ve got the city treasurer, the state treasurer, and the Cook County treasurer all involved and trying to help us root out racism in the banking industry. Those leaders must bring [JPMorgan] Chase to the table, and say, “We will divest from you if you do not change your policies, if you do not pay these communities that you’ve hurt.” They have that power because they’ve been funneling money to those banks for so many years. And when you can give $1.7 million in home loans to Englewood, but give $980 million to Lincoln Park over the same time span, you are showing that you really don’t care. It’s not fair, especially because you have these branches in the same communities that you refuse to invest in, where folks are keeping their money.
DF: In Chicago, you have elected officials talking about wanting to end systemic racism without necessarily paying reparations. Why is paying reparations important, and why is a pledge to end systemic racism not enough?
JG: When you’re talking about these goals, people have to understand that you cannot erase the damage that you’ve already done. You can’t wake up one day and say, “I’m going to be better,” and not be held accountable. I can’t just commit a crime, and the next day say, “I’m not going to commit any more crimes, I’m turning myself over to Jesus.” They’re still going to hold me accountable for yesterday’s crime.
These banking institutions have deprived these folks of creating generational wealth and owning their homes, even when they’ve had the credit score, even when they’ve had the down payment. You don’t just say tomorrow, “I’m going to change my policies.” That’s what Chase committed to on their call [earlier today], but that’s not good enough. It’s not enough to say that you’ll do better now. We have to hold them accountable to pay reparations. It’s the only way to go.
DF: In many ways, what you’re calling on the community to take up—to not put their money in banks that refuse to invest in them and their community—is an action with deep historical roots. What came to mind immediately for me was MLK, right before he was killed, telling folks in Memphis to take money out of the big downtown banks and to put it in a local one run by Jesse Turner. He called it a “bank in.” Because many of these demands are decades old, I’m curious how you’ve thought about—and been inspired by—past movements?
JG: From the start we’ve tried to educate Black people about the power of their dollar. And what I preach today is that you should always know where your dollar is going, because you could be funding your own oppression. Whether it’s a business that disrespects people that look like you, or a bank that won’t invest in you, if you put your dollar there—if you give them your dollar—you’re funding your own oppression.
If you understand the power of your dollar, you have control, and you can turn that control into power for your community. Past movement leaders like MLK have preached this, and I want to educate us on the power of our dollar and knowing where it goes, too.
DF: What’s the mood of the protests been like? What have you heard from community members?
JG: We’ve shut down eight or nine banks so far. We don’t get much opposition from people because folks in these communities understand what Chase does. It’s more of a “Finally!” moment. Folks are getting educated, they’re taking their money out. You’re seeing folks move their money, and stockholders are looking at the articles and selling their stock. And now Chase wants to come to the table before things get even worse.
DF: Have there been any moments from the protests that stick out to you?
JG: Lincoln Park. We shut down a location there, and what stuck out was the change in the environment. When you go outside of that Chase, you have a community without crime. You didn’t have folks standing on the corner selling drugs, you didn’t have folks begging for money. You have a community where a lot of folks are thriving, and a lot of those folks are upper middle class, where they have homes and are embedded in their community.
What I told folks on Facebook Live is that this can be our reality. We can have a community without violence, we can have a community where we are living lives, where we have great careers, where we can open up businesses, where we can walk our dog and have a good time without worrying about what could happen. I wanted to give hope to all these communities—and all the folks living in these communities—where there are boarded-up businesses, boarded-up homes, violence, police brutality, just all these problems going on, and nobody is doing anything about it. We want to give people the feel of where we could be if we start holding these institutions accountable [and get them] to invest in our communities.


thenation--2020-07-06--Topple the Electoral College

Topple the Electoral College

Donald Trump has convinced himself that defending statues of those who fought to preserve human bondage will get him reelected .
In a carefully choreographed appearance at Mount Rushmore on the eve of the Fourth of July , the president , who has been complaining for weeks about efforts by anti-racist campaigners to remove statues of Confederate generals and agents of colonialism , fretted , “ Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history , defame our heroes , erase our values , and indoctrinate our children.
” As usual , the most historically ignorant president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even the Trump-friendly Wall Street Journal acknowledges this reality , with a headline reading , “ Trump Jumps on Preserving Monuments as Winning Campaign Issue : The president ’ s aides see his defense of statues and monuments as a unifying issue beyond his political base.
” Championing the memory of slavery ’ s defenders will not win Trump the election in a year when even conservative politicians in Mississippi have accepted that the time has come to strip the Confederate battle emblem off their state flag .
But there is one shameful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump in office : the Electoral College , an antidemocratic relic of unconscionable compromises made at America ’ s founding that should never have been allowed to linger into the 21st century .
This “ college ” has never operated as the quality-assurance mechanism Alexander Hamilton imagined would prevent those with “ talents for low intrigue , and the little arts of popularity ” from claiming the presidency .
Superior contenders have often been rejected by partisan electors .
And , with some frequency , the inferior presidents produced by the Electoral College @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why Are Federal Jurists Cheering on Voter Suppression in Wisconsin ?
If this foul remnant of 18th century oligarchy—and the fears of Southern politicians that free and fair elections might one day undermine the power of slave states—isn ’ t abolished or , at the very least , constrained , there is every reason to believe the Electoral College will continue upending popular democracy .
That ’ s what Trump is counting on in 2020 .
No serious poll since February has given the president a lead in the race with presumptive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average of national polls gives Biden a 49.6 to 40.9 advantage .
Several recent polls show the Democrat opening up a double-digit lead .
Yet Trump could still lose and “ win ” —as he did four years ago , when 54 percent of Americans cast ballots for someone other than the Republican nominee , and when Democrat Hillary Clinton piled up a 2.9 million-vote advantage over her rival .
Trump ’ s campaign is again targeting battleground states where he narrowly won in 2016 ( such as Wisconsin ) as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Minnesota ) with an eye toward repeating the scenario that gave their man the presidency .
The US Supreme Court just gave them what could be seen as a bit of a boost by approving crackdowns on electors who go rogue .
With a 9-0 decision , the court upheld so-called “ faithless elector ” statutes that are used to bind members of the Electoral College to vote for the popular-vote winner in their states .
The challenge to those laws had come from Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig and others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution prevents electors from voting their consciences—as many have throughout history and as a handful did in 2016 .
With their embrace of the “ faithless elector ” statutes , the justices have undercut prospects that at least a small number of electors might revolt against a circumstance where Trump could lose the national popular vote by a dramatic margin and still be positioned for an Electoral College “ win.
” Conservative members of the court highlighted their concern that an effort to secure the presidency for the winner of the national popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the words of Justice Samuel Alito , lead to “ a long period of uncertainty about who the next president was going to be.
” Justice Brett Kavanaugh signaled that he was applying “ the chaos principle of judging , which suggests that if it ’ s a close call…we shouldn ’ t facilitate or create chaos.
” But the truth is that there is nothing more chaotic and antidemocratic than a system that allows the loser of the popular vote to become president—as has happened twice in the past 20 years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ flawed calculus , a candidate who is beaten convincingly in the national popular vote can still prevail with narrow wins in a handful of competitive states .
In 2016 in Michigan , for example , Trump led Clinton by less than 11,000 votes out of 4.8 million cast , and yet he received all 16 of the state ’ s electoral votes .
And here ’ s the truly frustrating reality : Different states have different systems for casting , counting , and recounting votes .
Without an absolute guarantee of voting rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cast and counted according to a single national standard , the electoral pathologies of individual states will continue to warp the Electoral College in ways that define the race for the presidency .
Even if the United States had a consistent voting standard across all 50 states , however , that wouldn ’ t make the Electoral College a fair reflection of America .
Defenders of the institution claim that it assures representation for smaller states .
But in 2016 , five of the 10 smallest states in the union ( Vermont , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Maine , as well as the District of Columbia ) delivered more ballots for Clinton than for Trump .
The real issue arises from the fact that the current system overrepresents small states in a way that can help popular-vote losers become Electoral College winners .
Every state , no matter its population , gets at least three Electoral College votes .
In 2016 , that meant that an elector from Wyoming spoke for roughly 58,000 Trump voters , while an elector from California spoke for roughly 160,000 Clinton voters .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the imbalance could be even greater in 2020 .
And 2024 .
And 2028—unless Americans get serious about reform .
Ideally , the Constitution would be amended to eliminate the Electoral College .
But amendments are a heavy lift .
Fortunately , there ’ s another route to reform : the bipartisan National Popular Vote initiative .
Promoted by the group FairVote , it commits the states to respect the will of the people as part of a multistate compact , under which states pledge to assign their electoral votes to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The compact takes effect only when states with a majority of the nation ’ s electoral votes—270 or more—have signed on .
So far , 16 jurisdictions with 196 electoral votes have agreed to the compact .
Pro-compact bills have been submitted in additional states across the country , with both Democratic and Republican support ; they should gain traction as the bitter experience of 2016 reminds Americans that something must be done to address the structural absurdity of elections that allow losers to become presidents .

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?
Donald Trump has convinced himself that defending statues of those who fought to preserve human bondage will get him reelected. In a carefully choreographed appearance at Mount Rushmore on the eve of the Fourth of July, the president, who has been complaining for weeks about efforts by anti-racist campaigners to remove statues of Confederate generals and agents of colonialism, fretted, “Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children.”
As usual, the most historically ignorant president in American history is being cynical. Even the Trump-friendly Wall Street Journal acknowledges this reality, with a headline reading, “Trump Jumps on Preserving Monuments as Winning Campaign Issue: The president’s aides see his defense of statues and monuments as a unifying issue beyond his political base.”
Championing the memory of slavery’s defenders will not win Trump the election in a year when even conservative politicians in Mississippi have accepted that the time has come to strip the Confederate battle emblem off their state flag.
But there is one shameful remnant from the past that could keep Trump in office: the Electoral College, an antidemocratic relic of unconscionable compromises made at America’s founding that should never have been allowed to linger into the 21st century. This “college” has never operated as the quality-assurance mechanism Alexander Hamilton imagined would prevent those with “talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity” from claiming the presidency. Superior contenders have often been rejected by partisan electors. And, with some frequency, the inferior presidents produced by the Electoral College have taken office without a popular mandate. 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
If this foul remnant of 18th century oligarchy—and the fears of Southern politicians that free and fair elections might one day undermine the power of slave states—isn’t abolished or, at the very least, constrained, there is every reason to believe the Electoral College will continue upending popular democracy.
That’s what Trump is counting on in 2020.
No serious poll since February has given the president a lead in the race with presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden, and the average of national polls gives Biden a 49.6 to 40.9 advantage. Several recent polls show the Democrat opening up a double-digit lead.
Yet Trump could still lose and “win”—as he did four years ago, when 54 percent of Americans cast ballots for someone other than the Republican nominee, and when Democrat Hillary Clinton piled up a 2.9 million-vote advantage over her rival. Trump’s campaign is again targeting battleground states where he narrowly won in 2016 (such as Wisconsin) as well as those where he narrowly lost (such as Minnesota) with an eye toward repeating the scenario that gave their man the presidency. 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Current Issue View our current issue
The US Supreme Court just gave them what could be seen as a bit of a boost by approving crackdowns on electors who go rogue.
With a 9-0 decision, the court upheld so-called “faithless elector” statutes that are used to bind members of the Electoral College to vote for the popular-vote winner in their states. The challenge to those laws had come from Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig and others who argued that nothing in the US Constitution prevents electors from voting their consciences—as many have throughout history and as a handful did in 2016. With their embrace of the “faithless elector” statutes, the justices have undercut prospects that at least a small number of electors might revolt against a circumstance where Trump could lose the national popular vote by a dramatic margin and still be positioned for an Electoral College “win.”
Conservative members of the court highlighted their concern that an effort to secure the presidency for the winner of the national popular vote—or for a compromise choice—might, in the words of Justice Samuel Alito, lead to “a long period of uncertainty about who the next president was going to be.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh signaled that he was applying “the chaos principle of judging, which suggests that if it’s a close call…we shouldn’t facilitate or create chaos.”
But the truth is that there is nothing more chaotic and antidemocratic than a system that allows the loser of the popular vote to become president—as has happened twice in the past 20 years.
Under the Electoral College’s fundamentally flawed calculus, a candidate who is beaten convincingly in the national popular vote can still prevail with narrow wins in a handful of competitive states. In 2016 in Michigan, for example, Trump led Clinton by less than 11,000 votes out of 4.8 million cast, and yet he received all 16 of the state’s electoral votes. And here’s the truly frustrating reality: Different states have different systems for casting, counting, and recounting votes. Without an absolute guarantee of voting rights nationwide and an assurance that votes are cast and counted according to a single national standard, the electoral pathologies of individual states will continue to warp the Electoral College in ways that define the race for the presidency. Trump and the Electoral College The Loser President John Nichols
Even if the United States had a consistent voting standard across all 50 states, however, that wouldn’t make the Electoral College a fair reflection of America. Defenders of the institution claim that it assures representation for smaller states. But in 2016, five of the 10 smallest states in the union (Vermont, Delaware, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Maine, as well as the District of Columbia) delivered more ballots for Clinton than for Trump. The real issue arises from the fact that the current system overrepresents small states in a way that can help popular-vote losers become Electoral College winners. Every state, no matter its population, gets at least three Electoral College votes. In 2016, that meant that an elector from Wyoming spoke for roughly 58,000 Trump voters, while an elector from California spoke for roughly 160,000 Clinton voters.
As America becomes more coastal and cosmopolitan, the imbalance could be even greater in 2020. And 2024. And 2028—unless Americans get serious about reform.
Ideally, the Constitution would be amended to eliminate the Electoral College. But amendments are a heavy lift.
Fortunately, there’s another route to reform: the bipartisan National Popular Vote initiative. Promoted by the group FairVote, it commits the states to respect the will of the people as part of a multistate compact, under which states pledge to assign their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote nationwide. The compact takes effect only when states with a majority of the nation’s electoral votes—270 or more—have signed on. So far, 16 jurisdictions with 196 electoral votes have agreed to the compact. Pro-compact bills have been submitted in additional states across the country, with both Democratic and Republican support; they should gain traction as the bitter experience of 2016 reminds Americans that something must be done to address the structural absurdity of elections that allow losers to become presidents.


thenation--2020-07-06--Is Dan Snyder Really Changing the Washington Team’s Name?

We are so close .
After decades of demonstrations , meetings , and boycotts , the Washington football team has finally entered internal discussions about changing its dictionary-defined slur of a name .
For the past 25 years , team owner Dan Snyder has refused to listen to the National Congress of the American Indian , the Idle No More movement , and the host of Native American activists who have pleaded with him to do the right thing .
He has ignored the American Psychiatric Association , which concluded that these brands harm children .
But this time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s being forced to listen to his sponsors .
Shareholders and investment firms involved with Pepsi , FedEx , and Nike have penned a letter to the gigantic sponsors asking they end their partnerships with Washington unless the team name is changed .
AdWeek reports three separate letters were sent , signed by 87 firms and shareholders .
This is significant because the 87 signees in question are reportedly worth $ 620 billion combined .
That ’ s a lot of money talking to three of the biggest sponsors in sports .
Nike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has even removed the team ’ s apparel from its website .
Of course , these corporations didn ’ t just wake up one day and notice that the multibillion-dollar brand they were promoting is a racial slur against those that this nation dispossessed to create our outpost of settler colonialism .
It has taken a national uprising against racism and white supremacy , which followed the police murder of George Floyd , to make this change ever so close to being a reality .
Corporate sponsors are desperate to stay relevant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left-wing , less white , and far less accepting of the status quo .
Jacqueline Keeler , who founded the organization Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry , says that the recent uprisings have been a game changer : “ Without BLM ’ s activism and basically changing the playing field , change would not have happened .
We owe this to the struggle of the black community .
We always do .
They are our leaders in this country for social justice .
Always have been .
Every success we ’ ve had has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ True as this may be , people like Jacqueline Keeler , Amanda Blackhorse , Ray Halbritter , Suzan Shown Harjo , and many others are responsible for putting the team name up for public debate and scrutiny .
They have always linked the struggle against mascot names to the harsh realities of Indian Country as well as to the broader issues of systemic racism and settler colonialism .
The DC area is only .6 percent Native American , according to the most recent Census .
That near-absence of Native voices was a precondition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racist brand .
Only because the team ’ s original owner was a white supremacist named George Preston Marshall , who kept the team all-white longer than any other NFL franchise , was the team saddled with a brand so obscene .
It was these activists who over decades dragged that history out into the open so it could connect with the kind of powerful moment and movement that we are living through today .
Athletes Are Taking Their Solidarity to the Streets Bubba Wallace , NASCAR ’ s Only Black Driver , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggle is not over .
I won ’ t believe that the team has actually changed its name until the players take the field with a new moniker and logo .
Snyder is such an erratic and impulsive personality that he could change his mind tomorrow and insist upon keeping the name that he clings to as desperately as Trump clings to Confederate statues .
The pressure must stay on him : financial pressure , media pressure , and the pressure of Native American activists .
Dan Snyder is on a precipice , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history where he has always found a cozy home .
He still needs to be pushed .

We are so close. After decades of demonstrations, meetings, and boycotts, the Washington football team has finally entered internal discussions about changing its dictionary-defined slur of a name. For the past 25 years, team owner Dan Snyder has refused to listen to the National Congress of the American Indian, the Idle No More movement, and the host of Native American activists who have pleaded with him to do the right thing. He has ignored the American Psychiatric Association, which concluded that these brands harm children. But this time, it’s different: He’s being forced to listen to his sponsors.
As The Big Lead reported,
Shareholders and investment firms involved with Pepsi, FedEx, and Nike have penned a letter to the gigantic sponsors asking they end their partnerships with Washington unless the team name is changed. AdWeek reports three separate letters were sent, signed by 87 firms and shareholders. This is significant because the 87 signees in question are reportedly worth $620 billion combined. That’s a lot of money talking to three of the biggest sponsors in sports.
Nike, the official outfitter of the NFL, has even removed the team’s apparel from its website.
Of course, these corporations didn’t just wake up one day and notice that the multibillion-dollar brand they were promoting is a racial slur against those that this nation dispossessed to create our outpost of settler colonialism. It has taken a national uprising against racism and white supremacy, which followed the police murder of George Floyd, to make this change ever so close to being a reality. Corporate sponsors are desperate to stay relevant to a younger generation that is more left-wing, less white, and far less accepting of the status quo.
Jacqueline Keeler, who founded the organization Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry, says that the recent uprisings have been a game changer: “Without BLM’s activism and basically changing the playing field, change would not have happened. We owe this to the struggle of the black community. We always do. They are our leaders in this country for social justice. Always have been. Every success we’ve had has been made possible by their courage.”
True as this may be, people like Jacqueline Keeler, Amanda Blackhorse, Ray Halbritter, Suzan Shown Harjo, and many others are responsible for putting the team name up for public debate and scrutiny. They have always linked the struggle against mascot names to the harsh realities of Indian Country as well as to the broader issues of systemic racism and settler colonialism.
The DC area is only .6 percent Native American, according to the most recent Census. That near-absence of Native voices was a precondition for the team to have such a racist brand. Only because the team’s original owner was a white supremacist named George Preston Marshall, who kept the team all-white longer than any other NFL franchise, was the team saddled with a brand so obscene. It was these activists who over decades dragged that history out into the open so it could connect with the kind of powerful moment and movement that we are living through today. More From Dave Zirin “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash August 15, 2023 Why the Right Wanted the USWNT to Lose August 10, 2023 Carli Lloyd’s Attacks on the USWNT Are Personal—and Political August 1, 2023
But this struggle is not over. I won’t believe that the team has actually changed its name until the players take the field with a new moniker and logo. Snyder is such an erratic and impulsive personality that he could change his mind tomorrow and insist upon keeping the name that he clings to as desperately as Trump clings to Confederate statues. The pressure must stay on him: financial pressure, media pressure, and the pressure of Native American activists. Dan Snyder is on a precipice, facing away from the wrong side of history where he has always found a cozy home. He still needs to be pushed.


thenation--2020-07-06--Conversations With ‘The Nation’: Chase Iron Eyes, Takota Iron Eyes, and Madonna Thunder Hawk

Chase Iron Eyes , Takota Iron Eyes , and Madonna Thunder Hawk join Nation contributing writer Zoë Carpenter in conversation @ @ @ @ @ July 8 , to talk about the toll the coronavirus pandemic is taking on Native @ @ @ @ @ Dakota Access Pipeline , and the protests at Mt .
Rushmore .
Register now to @ @ @ @ @ check out the schedule of upcoming Nation virtual events .
Our virtual series , “ @ @ @ @ @ ” helps to support rigorous progressive journalism at a critical moment in our history .
@ @ @ @ @ Berkeley professor Robert Reich , labor activist Ai-jen Poo , environmental activist and author Bill @ @ @ @ @ of Maryland and Pramila Jayapal of Washington state , and NARAL president ’ s Ilyse @ @ @ @ @ Sign up for Nation e-mails to receive new speaker announcements and invitations to future events @

Chase Iron Eyes, Takota Iron Eyes, and Madonna Thunder Hawk join Nation contributing writer Zoë Carpenter in conversation at noon on Wednesday, July 8, to talk about the toll the coronavirus pandemic is taking on Native America, shutting down the Dakota Access Pipeline, and the protests at Mt. Rushmore. Register now to join us for $10—and check out the schedule of upcoming Nation virtual events.
Our virtual series, “Conversations With The Nation,” helps to support rigorous progressive journalism at a critical moment in our history. Former labor secretary and UC Berkeley professor Robert Reich, labor activist Ai-jen Poo, environmental activist and author Bill McKibben, Representatives Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Pramila Jayapal of Washington state, and NARAL president’s Ilyse Hogue have joined us. Sign up for Nation e-mails to receive new speaker announcements and invitations to future events.


thenation--2020-07-06--A Shattered Nation Isn’t Buying Trump’s Angry Nationalism

Donald Trump is a merchant of anger , a grievance-monger who bonds with his political base over shared resentments .
This makes it difficult for him to handle celebratory holidays like Independence Day , which are normally meant to be joyous and unifying events .
In the hands of other politicians , Independence Day can be an occasion for somber reflection or for uplifting messages about national achievements .
But for Trump , the joy taken in reflecting on America ’ s success has an emotional potency only if it helps him do what he truly loves : attack his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aggressive leads to a shrill and bitter nationalism : a furious boasting that offers no satisfaction and leaves a bad taste in the mouth .
This was on full display when Trump spoke at Mount Rushmore on Friday night .
Half the speech was spent upholding national heroes like George Washington , Thomas Jefferson , Abraham Lincoln , and Theodore Roosevelt .
But the far more energized half was devoted to lashing out at the contemporary left , who were charged with actively working to undermine America ’ s cultural achievement .
Stephen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known for his hostility to immigration , was reportedly the main writer of the speech .
It certainly featured Miller ’ s signature touches of bombast and belligerence , most famously displayed in Trump ’ s inaugural address decrying the era of “ American carnage.
” Calling attention to the faces on Rushmore , Trump said , “ Before these figures were immortalized in stone , they were American giants in full flesh and blood , gallant men whose intrepid deeds unleashed the greatest leap of human advancement the world has ever known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and , most importantly , the youth of our nation , the true stories of these great , great men.
” Trump added , “ We declare that the United States of America is the most just and exceptional nation ever to exist on Earth.
” Trump Is Trying to Remake the Military in His Own Ugly Image Trump warned that the achievements of these “ American giants ” were now under threat .
“ In our schools , our newsrooms , even our corporate boardrooms , there is a new far-left fascism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president claimed .
“ Make no mistake : this left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution .
In so doing , they would destroy the very civilization that rescued billions from poverty , disease , violence , and hunger , and that lifted humanity to new heights of achievement , discovery , and progress.
” Trump returned to this theme in his Fourth of July message on the White House lawn , saying , “ We are now in the process of defeating the radical left , the Marxists , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looters , and people who in many instances have absolutely no clue what they are doing.
” These two speeches underscore that Trump intends to run on culture war for the election .
In this , he is hardly an innovator .
Trump ’ s language is more divisive than most politicians , lacking any magnanimous gestures hinting at broader shared values .
Still , his basic message repeats a formula that Republican presidential candidates have used since at least Richard Nixon : The GOP represents the real America of patriots prepared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while the Democrats are the party of those too soft and cosmopolitan to defend the heartland .
This was the strategy behind Nixon ’ s appeal to the “ silent majority ” who believe in law and order , Reagan ’ s call to “ make America great again ” ( which Trump merely parroted ) , and George H.W .
Bush ’ s making hay out of flag-burning .
Trump is using a pitch that may not have won every election but has worked more often than not over the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to discount the genuine appeal this message has for Trump ’ s solid base of roughly 40 percent of the electorate .
With the right set of circumstances dragging down Biden and a favorable Electoral College map , Trump could well use culture war to make this a competitive race—and perhaps even win with a minority of the vote as he did in 2016 .
But there ’ s good reason to think that culture war won ’ t have the same magic as before .
Joe Biden is a difficult figure to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tear down George Washington statues .
Biden , for good or ill , is very securely nestled in the political center .
Demonizing Biden won ’ t get the base riled up as they were against Hillary Clinton , who had a similar political profile to Biden but also embodied female ambition , which unsettled many gender traditionalists .
Biden simply isn ’ t a scary figure in the same way .
The bigger problem , though , is that Trump is trying to sell the idea of American exceptionalism just when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any time since Watergate and the loss of the Vietnam War .
It ’ s becoming increasingly clear that America ’ s handling of Covid-19 , which continues to surge , is far worse than that of any other rich country .
This reality is undermining the myth of American exceptionalism far more quickly than any critique by radical historians pointing out the flaws of the founding fathers .
The recent cases of police violence have further shaken any simple conviction of national virtue .
The Black Lives Matter protests in the wake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the largest mass movement in American history .
It ’ s estimated that between 15 million and 26 million Americans participated in the protests ( which were also echoed throughout the world ) .
Never in history have more Americans been willing to take to the streets to challenge the racial status quo .
Neither the rising pandemic death toll nor the size of protests indicates a country that is ready to bask in its glory .
Recent polls reflect this loss of faith .
According to a Yahoo News/You Gov poll , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 52 percent ) believe America was a shining city on a hill when Reagan gave his final speech as president , most Americans ( 62 percent ) say the country is no longer a beacon and a model for the rest of the nations of the world.
” Interestingly , this diminished belief in America as a role model cuts across party lines .
Among Democrats , 42 percent said America was a “ shining city on a hill ” in 1989 , but only 11 percent say that is true in 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American had been a “ shining city on a hill ” in 1989 , but only 30 percent believe that to be true in 2020 .
This poll points to perhaps the greatest problem Trump faces in his reelection bid .
In 2016 , Trump ran as the truth-teller who would speak about problems mainstream politicians ignored .
Hillary Clinton enabled Trump to play that role by making herself the defender of the status quo , saying on occasion , “ America is already great.
” This allowed Trump to draw on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t have much faith in Trump ’ s agenda—or any particular affection for his public persona .
America ’ s problems have only gotten worse since 2016 .
This time , it ’ s Trump who is the incumbent , while the stance he ’ s taking in the culture wars makes him a defender of the status quo .
But there ’ s no mileage in being the status quo candidate when a majority of the public thinks the nation is deep trouble .

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?
Donald Trump is a merchant of anger, a grievance-monger who bonds with his political base over shared resentments. This makes it difficult for him to handle celebratory holidays like Independence Day, which are normally meant to be joyous and unifying events. In the hands of other politicians, Independence Day can be an occasion for somber reflection or for uplifting messages about national achievements. But for Trump, the joy taken in reflecting on America’s success has an emotional potency only if it helps him do what he truly loves: attack his enemies.
The need to always be aggressive leads to a shrill and bitter nationalism: a furious boasting that offers no satisfaction and leaves a bad taste in the mouth. This was on full display when Trump spoke at Mount Rushmore on Friday night. Half the speech was spent upholding national heroes like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt. But the far more energized half was devoted to lashing out at the contemporary left, who were charged with actively working to undermine America’s cultural achievement.
Stephen Miller, the hard-right White House adviser known for his hostility to immigration, was reportedly the main writer of the speech. It certainly featured Miller’s signature touches of bombast and belligerence, most famously displayed in Trump’s inaugural address decrying the era of “American carnage.”
Calling attention to the faces on Rushmore, Trump said, “Before these figures were immortalized in stone, they were American giants in full flesh and blood, gallant men whose intrepid deeds unleashed the greatest leap of human advancement the world has ever known. Tonight, I will tell you and, most importantly, the youth of our nation, the true stories of these great, great men.” Trump added, “We declare that the United States of America is the most just and exceptional nation ever to exist on Earth.” 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
Trump warned that the achievements of these “American giants” were now under threat. “In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance,” the president claimed. “Make no mistake: this left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution. In so doing, they would destroy the very civilization that rescued billions from poverty, disease, violence, and hunger, and that lifted humanity to new heights of achievement, discovery, and progress.”
Trump returned to this theme in his Fourth of July message on the White House lawn, saying, “We are now in the process of defeating the radical left, the Marxists, the anarchists, the agitators, the looters, and people who in many instances have absolutely no clue what they are doing.” 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
These two speeches underscore that Trump intends to run on culture war for the election. In this, he is hardly an innovator. Trump’s language is more divisive than most politicians, lacking any magnanimous gestures hinting at broader shared values. Still, his basic message repeats a formula that Republican presidential candidates have used since at least Richard Nixon: The GOP represents the real America of patriots prepared to face down enemies at home and abroad, while the Democrats are the party of those too soft and cosmopolitan to defend the heartland. Current Issue View our current issue
This was the strategy behind Nixon’s appeal to the “silent majority” who believe in law and order, Reagan’s call to “make America great again” (which Trump merely parroted), and George H.W. Bush’s making hay out of flag-burning.
Trump is using a pitch that may not have won every election but has worked more often than not over the past 50 years. It would be wrong to discount the genuine appeal this message has for Trump’s solid base of roughly 40 percent of the electorate. With the right set of circumstances dragging down Biden and a favorable Electoral College map, Trump could well use culture war to make this a competitive race—and perhaps even win with a minority of the vote as he did in 2016.
But there’s good reason to think that culture war won’t have the same magic as before. Joe Biden is a difficult figure to caricature as a radical leftist eager to tear down George Washington statues. Biden, for good or ill, is very securely nestled in the political center. Demonizing Biden won’t get the base riled up as they were against Hillary Clinton, who had a similar political profile to Biden but also embodied female ambition, which unsettled many gender traditionalists. Biden simply isn’t a scary figure in the same way.
The bigger problem, though, is that Trump is trying to sell the idea of American exceptionalism just when the nation is experiencing more self-doubt than at any time since Watergate and the loss of the Vietnam War. It’s becoming increasingly clear that America’s handling of Covid-19, which continues to surge, is far worse than that of any other rich country. This reality is undermining the myth of American exceptionalism far more quickly than any critique by radical historians pointing out the flaws of the founding fathers.
The recent cases of police violence have further shaken any simple conviction of national virtue. The Black Lives Matter protests in the wake of the George Floyd killing may be the largest mass movement in American history. It’s estimated that between 15 million and 26 million Americans participated in the protests (which were also echoed throughout the world). Never in history have more Americans been willing to take to the streets to challenge the racial status quo.
Neither the rising pandemic death toll nor the size of protests indicates a country that is ready to bask in its glory. Recent polls reflect this loss of faith. According to a Yahoo News/You Gov poll, “while about half of Americans (52 percent) believe America was a shining city on a hill when Reagan gave his final speech as president, most Americans (62 percent) say the country is no longer a beacon and a model for the rest of the nations of the world.”
Interestingly, this diminished belief in America as a role model cuts across party lines. Among Democrats, 42 percent said America was a “shining city on a hill” in 1989, but only 11 percent say that is true in 2020. Among Republicans, 77 percent said American had been a “shining city on a hill” in 1989, but only 30 percent believe that to be true in 2020.
This poll points to perhaps the greatest problem Trump faces in his reelection bid. In 2016, Trump ran as the truth-teller who would speak about problems mainstream politicians ignored. Hillary Clinton enabled Trump to play that role by making herself the defender of the status quo, saying on occasion, “America is already great.”
This allowed Trump to draw on the inchoate anger shared by many Americans who didn’t have much faith in Trump’s agenda—or any particular affection for his public persona.
America’s problems have only gotten worse since 2016. This time, it’s Trump who is the incumbent, while the stance he’s taking in the culture wars makes him a defender of the status quo. But there’s no mileage in being the status quo candidate when a majority of the public thinks the nation is deep trouble.


thenation--2020-07-06--Can This Montana Governor Deliver the Senate to the Democrats?

On June 24 , Governor Steve Bullock stood at a podium in the east wing of the Montana State Capitol preparing for his weekly press conference on the pandemic .
With its red carpet and oak walls , the room is a favorite spot to celebrate bill signings and entertain political delegations .
On this hot summer day , however , the crowd was thin and the mood sober .
A few masked reporters stood at a distance behind their television cameras , and a handful of staffers swiped at their phones at the back of the long room .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of cases per capita in the United States , ” the governor began , “ we do have to recognize that there are increased cases.
” For an hour , he and several health officials documented their efforts to contain a resurgent coronavirus , which have included aggressive contact tracing and community testing events in rural towns and on the state ’ s seven Native American reservations .
Then , as the press conference streamed live , Bullock took questions from reporters , which focused on the possibility of new restrictions in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier than most states .
The governor ’ s replies betrayed a reluctance to regulate people ’ s private lives in a conservative state with a large percentage of independent and libertarian voters .
He urged people to avoid gyms and bars , but refused to re-close them .
He emphasized the importance of masks , but rejected a suggestion to make them mandatory .
He pressed his online audience to govern themselves .
“ I ’ m asking Montanans to use their common sense , ” he said .
“ The actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what ’ s going to impact Covid-19.
” This balanced approach has worked well for Bullock , a moderate Democrat who served one term as attorney general before winning two consecutive terms as governor in a state that Trump won by 20 points .
Now , however , Bullock ’ s knack for navigating Montana politics has national implications .
On March 9 , Bullock announced a run for the Senate .
Over the next 22 days , he raked in more than $ 3 million to challenge Republican Steve Daines , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 5 , a Montana State University poll showed him up by seven points .
National forecasters now rank the race among the most competitive in the nation , and Democrats need to flip at least four seats to take the Senate for the first time since 2008 .
Montana , a homogeneous rural state with three electoral votes , has rarely been a bellwether for national politics .
But in this unusual year , where Montana leads the nation may follow .
“ In Montana , it is more important than in other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us , as a ‘ real Montanan , ’ and Bullock projects that , ” said Robert Saldin , a political science professor at the University of Montana .
“ Bullock is really the one Democrat in Montana who could give Daines a run for his money.
” This political viability stems partly from Bullock ’ s careful selection of issues during his 12 years in public office .
In 2008 , Montana voters elected the Columbia Law School graduate as their attorney general , and he rewarded them by working with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stream access that he had written while working as an assistant attorney general in the late 1990s .
The law allowed anglers to access any river or stream regardless of streambed ownership .
The law is frequently touted by his supporters as a victory for local fisherman over out-of-state landowners .
Four years later , during his first run for governor , he made national headlines arguing that Montana ’ s century-old limits on corporate campaign donations should be exempted from the Supreme Court ’ s Citizens United ruling .
He lost the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a champion for local elections threatened by private corruption and federal ineptitude .
As governor , he would continue to situate himself in this manner , as a defender of local values against outside interests , even when it put him at odds with his own party .
In 2014 , he worked with ranchers to implement voluntary conservation efforts to prevent the listing of sage grouse as an endangered species .
He framed it as a win for state management over federal intervention .
In 2016 , he railed against President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leasing of new coal mines on federal land and withheld support for Obama ’ s Clean Power Plan .
That November , he was the only Democratic governor to be reelected in a state that Trump carried .
The singularity of this victory landed Bullock on national short lists for a 2020 presidential run , an option he pursued for seven months last year .
He built that campaign on a promise to win over Trump voters in swing states and deliver campaign finance reform once in the White House .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the time he entered the race in May , and he never gained traction in early primary states .
He ended his campaign in December , two months before the Iowa caucus .
‘ It ’ s Time to Get Pissed Off ’ : In Montana , a Labor Standoff Has National Implications Bullock ’ s failure to convince voters nationally , however , was tempered by legislative success back home , where he had plenty of political capital to spend on issues important to the Democrats and crossover voters who had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and infrastructure .
Bullock delivered on both by working with Democrats and a “ Solutions Caucus ” of Republicans who together formed a moderate majority in both chambers .
That coalition expanded Medicaid for two years in 2017 and renewed the measure in 2019 , extending coverage to one in 10 Montanans through 2025 .
Last year , they also passed an infrastructure bill to fund sewer , water , and building projects across the state .
Bullock ’ s Senate campaign is already working to leverage these bipartisan wins for the next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to move to the center .
“ He ’ s done all this while balancing a budget and creating the first-ever rainy day fund , ” said Olivia Bercow , communications director for the campaign , referring to a $ 117 million fund created by the state legislature and approved by Bullock in 2017 .
“ Look , it ’ s surely rainy now , so that fiscal responsibility has been very needed at this point in time.
” Bullock ’ s ability to keep Montanans fiscally strong and physically healthy seems to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daines .
But Daines ’ s political experience and formidable business background make any advantage uncertain .
A 57-year-old corporate manager , Daines worked for more than two decades for Proctor & Gamble and RightNow Technologies—a company founded by Montana congressman and gubernatorial candidate Greg Gianforte—before entering politics .
He easily won a race for Montana ’ s lone House seat in 2012 and launched a Senate campaign the following year after Democratic Senator Max Baucus announced his resignation .
Bullock appointed his lieutenant governor , John Walsh , to finish Baucus ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the race following a plagiarism scandal .
Daines easily defeated Amanda Curtis , a Democratic state senator from Butte , who replaced Walsh on the ticket .
“ I think he comes off as an affable , decent guy .
He doesn ’ t have a hard edge in his public persona , ” said Saldin , whose book Never Trump : The Revolt of the Conservative Elites was published earlier this year .
“ His other advantage is that he ’ s a Republican in Montana .
I tend to think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but there is a narrow path for Democrats.
” A comparison of the last two campaigns for each candidate underlines this analysis .
Daines drubbed his opponents by 11 points in 2012 and 18 points in 2014 .
Bullock eked out victories by one point in 2012 and four points in 2016 .
The question now is whether Daines can block the narrow path available to Bullock before November .
His campaign is confident it can do that by using the governor ’ s brief presidential run against him .
“ Bullock put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and during his failed presidential run that ’ s going to be tough to get out of , ” said Julia Doyle , communications director for Daines ’ s campaign .
“ [ H ] e took a sharp turn left on issues that matter most for Montanans such as embracing a ban on semiautomatic weapons and support for background checks , opposing Keystone XL , and calling for impeaching and removing President Trump from office.
” Of these issues , Bullock ’ s positions on gun safety issues and impeachment may prove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state that Guns & Ammo magazine ranks the ninth most gun friendly .
Still , Bullock carries a higher favorability rating than Daines , and some people believe that Daines ’ s unflagging support for the embattled president could turn out to be more of a liability than an asset .
Last year , Daines was one of a handful of Republicans who supported the president ’ s declaration that four congresswomen should “ go back ” to “ the crime infested places from which they came.
” Daines posted on Facebook and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tired of listening to anti-American , anti-Semite , radical Democrats trash our country and our ideals .
We ’ re the greatest country in the world .
I stand with @ realdonaldtrump.
” The statement drew immediate criticism from the Montana Association of Rabbis and from the editorial boards of newspapers in several of the Montana ’ s largest cities .
Daines has also defended Trump ’ s trade policies , despite their negative impact on Montana grain farmers .
“ I don ’ t think voters have a clear understanding of who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said David Parker , the political science professor who oversaw the Montana State University poll published in May .
“ Elections with presidential incumbents end up being referendums on the president , and Steve Daines may have aligned himself too closely to Trump.
” On June 18 , The Cook Political Report moved Montana ’ s Senate Race from “ lean republican ” to a “ toss-up , ” placing the race among the five most competitive in the country alongside Arizona , Colorado , Maine , and North Carolina , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Of our five Toss Ups , if I had to rank them , I think Montana is still the most difficult , ” said Jessica Taylor , the senate and governors editor for the Report , but “ Montana has clearly become one of the better options ” for Democrats to pick up a seat .
And if national forecasters believe Daines is vulnerable in a place like Montana , then “ it ’ s possible that Republicans in many other places might be vulnerable too , in places we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Parker .
“ Maybe Lindsay Graham in South Carolina and John Cornyn in Texas.
” The bottom line is that if Bullock can pull off an upset in Montana , then Democrats will likely have many reasons to celebrate all across the country , including a Biden victory and majorities in both chambers .
Bullock has probably spent ample time pondering these possibilities , but he had other things on his mind when I caught up with him in late June .
After the press conference concluded , we visited for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a broad corridor in the capitol building , and he seemed reluctant to comment on the campaign .
“ We can ’ t let the political food fights of the day get in the way of what , hopefully , is that shared aspiration for our kids and our grandkids to have greater opportunities than [ we ] ’ ve ever had , ” he explained .
He paused for several seconds , searching for a way to illustrate his point .
Then he told me about a run he took early that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way to express concern about Covid-19 .
“ I can ’ t get away from being governor , and I think that ’ s important because then politics doesn ’ t become some kind of abstract game.
” “ You know politics impacts people directly , because the people that you ’ re serving will tell you when you ’ re doing something right and tell you when you ’ re doing something wrong.
” In November , Montana voters will do just that , and control of the Senate will likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

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?
On June 24, Governor Steve Bullock stood at a podium in the east wing of the Montana State Capitol preparing for his weekly press conference on the pandemic. With its red carpet and oak walls, the room is a favorite spot to celebrate bill signings and entertain political delegations. On this hot summer day, however, the crowd was thin and the mood sober. A few masked reporters stood at a distance behind their television cameras, and a handful of staffers swiped at their phones at the back of the long room.
“While we still have the lowest number of cases per capita in the United States,” the governor began, “we do have to recognize that there are increased cases.”
For an hour, he and several health officials documented their efforts to contain a resurgent coronavirus, which have included aggressive contact tracing and community testing events in rural towns and on the state’s seven Native American reservations. Then, as the press conference streamed live, Bullock took questions from reporters, which focused on the possibility of new restrictions in a state that shut down and reopened earlier than most states.
The governor’s replies betrayed a reluctance to regulate people’s private lives in a conservative state with a large percentage of independent and libertarian voters. He urged people to avoid gyms and bars, but refused to re-close them. He emphasized the importance of masks, but rejected a suggestion to make them mandatory. He pressed his online audience to govern themselves. “I’m asking Montanans to use their common sense,” he said. “The actions that each of us take individually are what’s going to impact Covid-19.”
This balanced approach has worked well for Bullock, a moderate Democrat who served one term as attorney general before winning two consecutive terms as governor in a state that Trump won by 20 points. Now, however, Bullock’s knack for navigating Montana politics has national implications.
On March 9, Bullock announced a run for the Senate. Over the next 22 days, he raked in more than $3 million to challenge Republican Steve Daines, a first-term incumbent. Then, on May 5, a Montana State University poll showed him up by seven points. National forecasters now rank the race among the most competitive in the nation, and Democrats need to flip at least four seats to take the Senate for the first time since 2008. Montana, a homogeneous rural state with three electoral votes, has rarely been a bellwether for national politics. But in this unusual year, where Montana leads the nation may follow.
“In Montana, it is more important than in other states to come off as one of us, as a ‘real Montanan,’ and Bullock projects that,” said Robert Saldin, a political science professor at the University of Montana. “Bullock is really the one Democrat in Montana who could give Daines a run for his money.” Current Issue View our current issue
This political viability stems partly from Bullock’s careful selection of issues during his 12 years in public office. In 2008, Montana voters elected the Columbia Law School graduate as their attorney general, and he rewarded them by working with the legislature to codify a legal opinion on stream access that he had written while working as an assistant attorney general in the late 1990s. The law allowed anglers to access any river or stream regardless of streambed ownership. The law is frequently touted by his supporters as a victory for local fisherman over out-of-state landowners. 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life 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 A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Four years later, during his first run for governor, he made national headlines arguing that Montana’s century-old limits on corporate campaign donations should be exempted from the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling. He lost the case, but the public viewed him as a champion for local elections threatened by private corruption and federal ineptitude. As governor, he would continue to situate himself in this manner, as a defender of local values against outside interests, even when it put him at odds with his own party.
In 2014, he worked with ranchers to implement voluntary conservation efforts to prevent the listing of sage grouse as an endangered species. He framed it as a win for state management over federal intervention. In 2016, he railed against President Barack Obama’s decision to halt leasing of new coal mines on federal land and withheld support for Obama’s Clean Power Plan. That November, he was the only Democratic governor to be reelected in a state that Trump carried.
The singularity of this victory landed Bullock on national short lists for a 2020 presidential run, an option he pursued for seven months last year. He built that campaign on a promise to win over Trump voters in swing states and deliver campaign finance reform once in the White House. But the moderate lane was already clogged with candidates by the time he entered the race in May, and he never gained traction in early primary states. He ended his campaign in December, two months before the Iowa caucus. Related Article ‘It’s Time to Get Pissed Off’: In Montana, a Labor Standoff Has National Implications Gabriel Furshong
Bullock’s failure to convince voters nationally, however, was tempered by legislative success back home, where he had plenty of political capital to spend on issues important to the Democrats and crossover voters who had given him a second term—namely health care and infrastructure. Bullock delivered on both by working with Democrats and a “Solutions Caucus” of Republicans who together formed a moderate majority in both chambers. That coalition expanded Medicaid for two years in 2017 and renewed the measure in 2019, extending coverage to one in 10 Montanans through 2025. Last year, they also passed an infrastructure bill to fund sewer, water, and building projects across the state.
Bullock’s Senate campaign is already working to leverage these bipartisan wins for the next race, which will require both candidates to move to the center. “He’s done all this while balancing a budget and creating the first-ever rainy day fund,” said Olivia Bercow, communications director for the campaign, referring to a $117 million fund created by the state legislature and approved by Bullock in 2017. “Look, it’s surely rainy now, so that fiscal responsibility has been very needed at this point in time.”
Bullock’s ability to keep Montanans fiscally strong and physically healthy seems to have given him an early advantage over Daines. But Daines’s political experience and formidable business background make any advantage uncertain.
A 57-year-old corporate manager, Daines worked for more than two decades for Proctor & Gamble and RightNow Technologies—a company founded by Montana congressman and gubernatorial candidate Greg Gianforte—before entering politics. He easily won a race for Montana’s lone House seat in 2012 and launched a Senate campaign the following year after Democratic Senator Max Baucus announced his resignation. Bullock appointed his lieutenant governor, John Walsh, to finish Baucus’s term, but Walsh dropped out of the race following a plagiarism scandal. Daines easily defeated Amanda Curtis, a Democratic state senator from Butte, who replaced Walsh on the ticket.
“I think he comes off as an affable, decent guy. He doesn’t have a hard edge in his public persona,” said Saldin, whose book Never Trump: The Revolt of the Conservative Elites was published earlier this year. “His other advantage is that he’s a Republican in Montana. I tend to think Montana is more red than purple, but there is a narrow path for Democrats.”
A comparison of the last two campaigns for each candidate underlines this analysis. Daines drubbed his opponents by 11 points in 2012 and 18 points in 2014. Bullock eked out victories by one point in 2012 and four points in 2016. The question now is whether Daines can block the narrow path available to Bullock before November. His campaign is confident it can do that by using the governor’s brief presidential run against him.
“Bullock put himself in a corner in the lead-up and during his failed presidential run that’s going to be tough to get out of,” said Julia Doyle, communications director for Daines’s campaign. “[H]e took a sharp turn left on issues that matter most for Montanans such as embracing a ban on semiautomatic weapons and support for background checks, opposing Keystone XL, and calling for impeaching and removing President Trump from office.”
Of these issues, Bullock’s positions on gun safety issues and impeachment may prove most troublesome for him in a Trump state that Guns & Ammo magazine ranks the ninth most gun friendly. Still, Bullock carries a higher favorability rating than Daines, and some people believe that Daines’s unflagging support for the embattled president could turn out to be more of a liability than an asset.
Last year, Daines was one of a handful of Republicans who supported the president’s declaration that four congresswomen should “go back” to “the crime infested places from which they came.” Daines posted on Facebook and Twitter that “Montanans are sick and tired of listening to anti-American, anti-Semite, radical Democrats trash our country and our ideals. We’re the greatest country in the world. I stand with @realdonaldtrump.” The statement drew immediate criticism from the Montana Association of Rabbis and from the editorial boards of newspapers in several of the Montana’s largest cities. Daines has also defended Trump’s trade policies, despite their negative impact on Montana grain farmers.
“I don’t think voters have a clear understanding of who Daines is distinctive from the Trump brand,” said David Parker, the political science professor who oversaw the Montana State University poll published in May. “Elections with presidential incumbents end up being referendums on the president, and Steve Daines may have aligned himself too closely to Trump.”
On June 18, The Cook Political Report moved Montana’s Senate Race from “lean republican” to a “toss-up,” placing the race among the five most competitive in the country alongside Arizona, Colorado, Maine, and North Carolina, where GOP incumbents are also endangered.
“Of our five Toss Ups, if I had to rank them, I think Montana is still the most difficult,” said Jessica Taylor, the senate and governors editor for the Report, but “Montana has clearly become one of the better options” for Democrats to pick up a seat.
And if national forecasters believe Daines is vulnerable in a place like Montana, then “it’s possible that Republicans in many other places might be vulnerable too, in places we’re not even thinking about yet,” according to Parker. “Maybe Lindsay Graham in South Carolina and John Cornyn in Texas.”
The bottom line is that if Bullock can pull off an upset in Montana, then Democrats will likely have many reasons to celebrate all across the country, including a Biden victory and majorities in both chambers. Bullock has probably spent ample time pondering these possibilities, but he had other things on his mind when I caught up with him in late June. After the press conference concluded, we visited for a few minutes from opposite sides of a broad corridor in the capitol building, and he seemed reluctant to comment on the campaign.
“We can’t let the political food fights of the day get in the way of what, hopefully, is that shared aspiration for our kids and our grandkids to have greater opportunities than [we]’ve ever had,” he explained. He paused for several seconds, searching for a way to illustrate his point.
Then he told me about a run he took early that morning and how someone stopped him along the way to express concern about Covid-19. “I can’t get away from being governor, and I think that’s important because then politics doesn’t become some kind of abstract game.”
“You know politics impacts people directly, because the people that you’re serving will tell you when you’re doing something right and tell you when you’re doing something wrong.”
In November, Montana voters will do just that, and control of the Senate will likely depend on what they have to say.