thenation--2020-06-12--The Wilder the Conspiracy, the More Trump Likes It

Every few days , the media looks aghast at something Donald Trump has said or done , and concludes that he “ has hit a new low.
” If one were to graph Trump ’ s behavior , the result would be clear : The longer he has exercised power , the more irresponsibly he has used it .
The Signal : This week , as the pandemic continued its devastating course and the country remained convulsed with protests , the most powerful man on Earth turned his attention to smearing Martin Gugino , the 75-year-old who was seriously injured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In true Joe McCarthy form , Trump accused the Catholic Worker peace activist of being an antifa agent provocateur .
He alleged that Gugino was illicitly monitoring police communications , and that when police pushed Gugino to the ground—where he smashed his head against the pavement—Gugino was acting , worsening his own fall just to discredit Buffalo ’ s finest .
Trump had no evidence to back up these claims .
He simply took , verbatim , the conspiracy nonsense floated by a Trump-propaganda outlet named One America News , then used his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elderly man lying seriously ill in a Buffalo hospital .
This comes just weeks after Trump went on a tear of similarly unsubstantiated smears against Joe Scarborough , accusing the TV personality—his longtime nemesis—of having murdered a young woman who was working for him in 2001 .
Trump Wants to ‘ Dominate ’ but Can ’ t Take the Backlash Apparently , none of this is enough to convince most GOP senators of Trump ’ s fundamental indecency .
While Mitt Romney , Lisa Murkowski , and a handful of others did express @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , most GOP senators simply pretended they didn ’ t know what all the fuss was about .
So let me explain what it ’ s about : Trump is using his bully pulpit to character-assassinate private citizens .
He is spewing forth one lie after another on Twitter , then his White House team is doubling down and amplifying his falsehoods .
At a moment as perilous as any in America ’ s post–Civil War history , Trump ’ s disdain—both for the truth and for a politics of reconciliation that could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remaining trust there is in the country ’ s governing institutions .
That ’ s not simply Trumpian Noise ; it ’ s a fiercely dangerous development .
When Trump speaks , millions of his followers listen .
When Trump blithely declares a private citizen to be the enemy , with no real evidence to back up his claims , he puts that person ’ s safety at risk .
When he elevates conspiracy theories over facts , he profoundly vandalizes the political culture and the notion of a rational , rules-based social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the larger process by which Trump attacks reality whenever that reality stands in the way of his power and his political prospects .
Witness the Orwellian cease-and-desist letter that his campaign sent to CNN this week , demanding that the network apologize to him for daring to release polling data indicating that he is trailing Joe Biden .
Or witness the fact that the administration has stopped holding Covid-19 briefings with doctors Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx , despite the 2 million cases now confirmed in the United States , the national death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sharply rising infection rate in many states .
In fact , Trump ’ s minions have nearly stopped talking about the pandemic in public .
They seem to hope that if they don ’ t draw attention to the ongoing mayhem Covid-19 is causing , the country will go back to business as usual and drive down unemployment numbers in the months leading up to the election .
Meanwhile , although Trump may not be talking about the pandemic anymore , his agencies continue to use fear of the disease as an excuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ICE detention centers—even while pushing back on court orders to release detainees and decrease crowding that could cause Covid-19 to spread .
This week , reports emerged of ICE agents repeatedly spraying a powerful disinfectant called HDQ Neutral inside several privately run detention facilities around the United States .
The advocacy organization United We Dream says that detainees in facilities in California , Florida , and Texas had all reported similar stories .
While the spray is ostensibly meant to control the spread of Covid-19 , the manufacturer ’ s instructions for its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people wearing gloves and goggles—that if it gets into eyes , they should be thoroughly rinsed ; if it touches skin , it should be washed off with soap ; and that anyone who inhales it should be removed immediately into fresh air .
Instead , immigrants report being kept inside during its alleged use , resulting in a range of serious health symptoms from exposure to the gas , including nosebleeds , headaches , blisters , and fainting .
Despite the many allegations of HDQ Neutral being used in ways that compromised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a blanket denial of any wrongdoing earlier this month , simply stating that it was “ committed to maintaining the highest facility standards of cleanliness and sanitation.
” Or witness Trump ’ s ongoing assault on vote-by-mail systems .
Trump keeps screaming that expanding this program will undermine the integrity of the ballot , despite the lack of evidence supporting this .
Yet there has been a deafening silence from the White House regarding the all-too-real fiasco of Georgia ’ s primary vote on Tuesday , when hastily purchased voting machines didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stations in Atlanta—especially in poor , largely African American neighborhoods—were shuttered ; and people had to wait in line for many , many hours simply to cast their ballots .
The assault on truth and decency is so all-encompassing these days , it ’ s tempting to simply tune out .
Don ’ t .
We resist totalitarianism not by unplugging but by engaging .
We defeat the politics of the Big Lie not by ignoring it but by challenging each and every falsehood that the purveyors of that Big Lie spew .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by calling out every shameful , ugly misuse of power and the manipulation of information .
Keep well , keep safe , and keep up the righteous outrage at the nonsense and the sadism that pass for public policy in these debased , Trumpian times .

Every few days, the media looks aghast at something Donald Trump has said or done, and concludes that he “has hit a new low.” If one were to graph Trump’s behavior, the result would be clear: The longer he has exercised power, the more irresponsibly he has used it.
The Signal: This week, as the pandemic continued its devastating course and the country remained convulsed with protests, the most powerful man on Earth turned his attention to smearing Martin Gugino, the 75-year-old who was seriously injured by police in Buffalo, N.Y. In true Joe McCarthy form, Trump accused the Catholic Worker peace activist of being an antifa agent provocateur. He alleged that Gugino was illicitly monitoring police communications, and that when police pushed Gugino to the ground—where he smashed his head against the pavement—Gugino was acting, worsening his own fall just to discredit Buffalo’s finest.
Trump had no evidence to back up these claims. He simply took, verbatim, the conspiracy nonsense floated by a Trump-propaganda outlet named One America News, then used his immense social media reach to defame an elderly man lying seriously ill in a Buffalo hospital.
This comes just weeks after Trump went on a tear of similarly unsubstantiated smears against Joe Scarborough, accusing the TV personality—his longtime nemesis—of having murdered a young woman who was working for him in 2001. Related Article Trump Wants to ‘Dominate’ but Can’t Take the Backlash Sasha Abramsky
Apparently, none of this is enough to convince most GOP senators of Trump’s fundamental indecency. While Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, and a handful of others did express discomfort at Trump’s denigrating Gugino, most GOP senators simply pretended they didn’t know what all the fuss was about.
So let me explain what it’s about: Trump is using his bully pulpit to character-assassinate private citizens. He is spewing forth one lie after another on Twitter, then his White House team is doubling down and amplifying his falsehoods. At a moment as perilous as any in America’s post–Civil War history, Trump’s disdain—both for the truth and for a politics of reconciliation that could lower the tension—threatens to obliterate what little remaining trust there is in the country’s governing institutions.
That’s not simply Trumpian Noise; it’s a fiercely dangerous development. When Trump speaks, millions of his followers listen. When Trump blithely declares a private citizen to be the enemy, with no real evidence to back up his claims, he puts that person’s safety at risk. When he elevates conspiracy theories over facts, he profoundly vandalizes the political culture and the notion of a rational, rules-based social order. 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
This is all part of the larger process by which Trump attacks reality whenever that reality stands in the way of his power and his political prospects.
Witness the Orwellian cease-and-desist letter that his campaign sent to CNN this week, demanding that the network apologize to him for daring to release polling data indicating that he is trailing Joe Biden.
Or witness the fact that the administration has stopped holding Covid-19 briefings with doctors Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, despite the 2 million cases now confirmed in the United States, the national death toll of over 112,000, and the sharply rising infection rate in many states. In fact, Trump’s minions have nearly stopped talking about the pandemic in public. They seem to hope that if they don’t draw attention to the ongoing mayhem Covid-19 is causing, the country will go back to business as usual and drive down unemployment numbers in the months leading up to the election.
Meanwhile, although Trump may not be talking about the pandemic anymore, his agencies continue to use fear of the disease as an excuse to brutalize the immigrants being held in ICE detention centers—even while pushing back on court orders to release detainees and decrease crowding that could cause Covid-19 to spread.
This week, reports emerged of ICE agents repeatedly spraying a powerful disinfectant called HDQ Neutral inside several privately run detention facilities around the United States. The advocacy organization United We Dream says that detainees in facilities in California, Florida, and Texas had all reported similar stories. While the spray is ostensibly meant to control the spread of Covid-19, the manufacturer’s instructions for its use say it should be used by people wearing gloves and goggles—that if it gets into eyes, they should be thoroughly rinsed; if it touches skin, it should be washed off with soap; and that anyone who inhales it should be removed immediately into fresh air. Instead, immigrants report being kept inside during its alleged use, resulting in a range of serious health symptoms from exposure to the gas, including nosebleeds, headaches, blisters, and fainting.
Despite the many allegations of HDQ Neutral being used in ways that compromised the health of detainees, ICE issued a blanket denial of any wrongdoing earlier this month, simply stating that it was “committed to maintaining the highest facility standards of cleanliness and sanitation.”
Or witness Trump’s ongoing assault on vote-by-mail systems. Trump keeps screaming that expanding this program will undermine the integrity of the ballot, despite the lack of evidence supporting this. Yet there has been a deafening silence from the White House regarding the all-too-real fiasco of Georgia’s primary vote on Tuesday, when hastily purchased voting machines didn’t work; dozens of Atlanta polling stations in Atlanta—especially in poor, largely African American neighborhoods—were shuttered; and people had to wait in line for many, many hours simply to cast their ballots.
The assault on truth and decency is so all-encompassing these days, it’s tempting to simply tune out. Don’t. We resist totalitarianism not by unplugging but by engaging. We defeat the politics of the Big Lie not by ignoring it but by challenging each and every falsehood that the purveyors of that Big Lie spew. We win not by turning off but by calling out every shameful, ugly misuse of power and the manipulation of information.
Keep well, keep safe, and keep up the righteous outrage at the nonsense and the sadism that pass for public policy in these debased, Trumpian times.


thenation--2020-06-12--A Full-Blown Cold War With China Could Be Disastrous

America ’ s pundits and politicians have largely concluded that a new Cold War with China—a period of intense hostility and competition falling just short of armed combat—has started .
“ Rift Threatens U.S .
Cold War Against China , ” as a New York Times print headline put it on May 15 , citing recent clashes over trade , technology , and responsibility for the spread of Covid-19 .
Beijing ’ s decision to subject Hong Kong to tough new security laws has only further heightened such tensions .
President Trump promptly threatened to eliminate that city-state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while imposing new sanctions on Chinese leaders .
Meanwhile , Democrats and Republicans in Congress are working together to devise tough anti-Chinese sanctions of their own .
For anyone who can remember the original Cold War , the latest developments may seem eerily familiar .
They bring to mind what occurred soon after America ’ s World War II collaboration with the Soviets collapsed in acrimony as the Russians became ever more heavy-handed in their treatment of Eastern Europe .
In those days , distrust only grew , while Washington decided to launch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the USSR .
We seem to be approaching such a situation today .
Though China and the United States continue to maintain trade , scientific , and educational ties , the leaders of both countries are threatening to sever those links and undertake a wide range of hostile moves .
Admittedly , some of the steps being discussed in Washington to punish China for its perceived bad behavior will have little immediate impact on the lives of Americans .
A lot of the threats , in fact , may turn out to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Consider , for instance , the proposal floated by the top-ranking majority and minority members of the Senate Armed Services Committee , Oklahoma Republican Jim Inhofe and Rhode Island Democrat Jack Reed , to fund a multibillion-dollar “ Pacific Deterrence Initiative ” intended to bolster American forces in Asia .
That effort , they avowed , will “ send a strong signal to the Chinese Communist Party that the American people are committed to defending US interests in the Indo-Pacific.
” Well , that was easy !
All we , the taxpaying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do in this opening salvo of a new Cold War is salute Congress as it funnels yet more billions of dollars to the usual defense contractors and thereby “ send a signal ” to Beijing that we will “ defend US interests ” somewhere far across the globe .
( Now , there ’ s a moment to wave your American flag ! )
But don ’ t count on such a moment lasting long , not if a new Cold War starts in earnest .
A quick look back at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll all pay a price of some sort for intensifying hostility toward China ( even if a hot war isn ’ t the result ) .
Perhaps , then , it ’ s none too soon to consider how such a world would impact you and me .
For most Americans , the first consequence of an intensifying Cold War could be a weaker than expected recovery from the Covid-19 economic meltdown .
Anything that stands in the way of a swift rebound—and a new Cold War with China falls into that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the original Cold War , when Washington and Moscow maintained few economic ties , the US and Chinese economies remain intertwined , contributing to the net wealth of both countries and benefiting this country ’ s export-oriented industries like agriculture and civilian aircraft production .
Admittedly , such ties have also harmed blue-collar workers who have watched their jobs migrate across the Pacific and tech companies that have seen their intellectual property purloined by Chinese upstarts .
Donald Trump stoked resentments over just such issues to get himself elected in 2016 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to disentangle the two economies , claiming we would be better off on our own .
( America first ! )
As part of this drive , he ’ s already imposed stiff tariffs on Chinese imports and blocked Chinese firms from gaining access to American technology .
Feel free to argue about whether China has abused international trade rules , as Trump and his allies have charged , and whether imposing tariffs ( paid for by American importers and consumers , not Chinese suppliers ) is the best way to address that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key thing to note , however , is that economic growth in both places had slowed in the wake of Trump ’ s trade war even before Covid-19 hit .
As 2019 drew to a close , in fact , the prospect of yet higher tariffs and intensified economic warfare was already dragging down the whole global economy .
And while some experts believe that a relaxation of tariffs and other steps to improve US-China trade would stimulate the economy in tough times , Trump and his China hawks , led by Secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade adviser Peter Navarro , appear to view this moment as the perfect opportunity to double down on anti-Chinese measures .
The president has already hinted that he ’ s prepared to order yet more tariffs on Chinese products and take other steps to hasten the “ decoupling ” of the two economies .
“ There are many things we could do , ” he told Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business in mid-May .
“ We could cut off the whole relationship.
” Cut off the whole relationship ?
Some policy-makers claim that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home as American firms shifted manufacturing back to the United States and its close allies .
This argument , however , ignores two key factors when it comes to Americans desperate for work now : First , many of the tasks currently performed by Chinese workers will be shifted to plants in Mexico , Thailand , Vietnam , and other low-cost manufacturing hubs ; and second , any relocation of entire production lines to this country will take years to accomplish and , in the end , undoubtedly wind up employing more robots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an intensifying Cold War is guaranteed to scuttle any chances of a rapid recovery from the Coronavirus Depression , dampening employment prospects for millions of Americans .
And here ’ s another thing a new Cold War guarantees : a significant increase in military spending at a time of ballooning national debt and a desperate need for investment in domestic economic recovery .
By the end of June , unless Congress votes additional assistance , much of the $ 2.2 trillion in emergency pandemic relief voted by Congress will have been used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and many small-business owners in dire straits .
Democrats in the House of Representatives did unveil a plan for an additional $ 3 trillion in emergency funding , including aid for struggling states and cities and another round of direct payments to citizens .
White House officials and many Republicans insist , however , that any further giveaways to ordinary Americans will raise the federal debt to unsustainable levels ( a problem that never worries them when it comes to tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy ) .
So passing anything like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and July may leave millions of Americans unable to pay rent as well as other essential expenses .
When it comes to increased military spending , however , Republicans have no such qualms .
Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas , for example , has introduced a $ 43 billion Forging Operational Resistance to Chinese Expansion ( FORCE ) Act .
( Nifty title , huh ? )
Its goal , he claims , would be to “ help thwart the Chinese Communist Party ’ s main geopolitical aim [ of ] pushing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pacific [ and ] achieving cross-strait unification with Taiwan via military force.
” It includes , among other things , $ 3.9 billion for another Virginia-class submarine ( that ’ s in addition to the $ 4.7 billion requested for such a sub in the Pentagon ’ s proposed 2021 budget ) and $ 3 billion for more of one of the most expensive weapons systems in history , the F-35 jet fighter ( and that ’ s in addition to the $ 4.6 billion requested for 48 of them in that same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to demonstrate their own anti-Chinese credentials , passage of the FORCE Act , or the somewhat more modest Pacific Deterrence Initiative introduced by Senators Reed and Inhofe , appears to be a sure thing .
In fact , the need for yet more military funds may prove to be the Republican rationale for rejecting calls for additional pandemic relief .
But won ’ t higher military spending act as an economic stimulus , just as it did during World War II when it helped lift the United States out of the Great Depression @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act or a variant of it will pump additional money into the economy .
But today ’ s military-industrial complex bears little relation to the one of 80 years ago when millions of workers were mobilized to churn out thousands of tanks and planes monthly in an all-out drive to defeat Nazi Germany .
Nowadays , military hardware has become so complex that most of any dollar spent on a new plane , tank , or ship goes into specialized materials and computer systems , not armies of laborers .
So the billions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ additional F-35s are likely to generate only a few thousand extra jobs , while spending the same amounts on health care or elementary school education would generate many times that number .
And then there ’ s the issue that should be on the minds of every young man and woman in America ( along with their parents , grandparents , and loved ones ) : the draft .
In contrast to the original Cold War , young men in this country are no longer obliged to serve in the US military , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) may choose to do so , whether for patriotic reasons , economic need , or both .
Even though the United States has been continuously involved in “ forever wars ” since the 9/11 attacks , the armed services have been able to use a variety of economic and educational incentives to keep the ranks filled ( and avoid the public outcry over those wars that would surely have accompanied a draft ) .
This was possible in part because the numbers of soldiers engaged in combat at any given moment was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Korean or Vietnam War eras and because vast numbers of troops were no longer on tap to “ contain ” the Soviet Union in Europe .
A full-scale Cold War with China could , however , prove another matter entirely , even if Pentagon manpower requirements were somewhat diminished by US troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and Iraq .
Large force deployments will undoubtedly be needed to engage in a modern version of the “ containment ” of China , not to speak of deterring the further adventurism of Vladimir Putin ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with an all-volunteer military ?
Not if tensions rise with Beijing .
Count on it : At some point , the question of conscription is bound to come up .
So far , the Department of Defense has not opted for reinstating the draft—a move that would require congressional approval and undoubtedly ignite intense political debate of the sort top officials would prefer to avoid right now .
Still , the leadership ’ s overarching guidance , the National Defense Strategy of 2018 , made it quite clear that the United States must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with its “ great power competitors ” and that such an epic struggle could well require the full mobilization of America ’ s war-making capabilities .
“ Long-term strategic competition [ with China and Russia ] , ” it claimed , “ requires the seamless integration of multiple elements of national power.
” Conscription was not specifically mentioned , but given the new focus on a rising China and a reckless Russia , it will be on the table sooner or later .
Another feature of the original Cold War that you should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environment of repression , intolerance , and discrimination .
In this case , it would be against Chinese Americans , Chinese students and researchers currently in this country , and non-Chinese viewed as in any way beholden to that power .
Sadly enough , signs of this have already emerged .
Officials from the FBI and the National Security Council have , for instance , been dispatched to leading Ivy League universities to warn administrators against admitting or retaining Chinese students who may be collecting scientific and technical information to share with government-sponsored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 Chinese professors with ties to such institutions have had their visas denied , despite a history of collaboration with American academics .
In a more dramatic move , the chair of Harvard University ’ s chemistry department , Charles Lieber , was arrested in January for failing to report income he had received from a Chinese university .
Many American academics have criticized such actions as an assault on academic freedom .
Increasingly , however , US officials insist that they represent a necessary component of the new Cold War .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adversary in this struggle is the Chinese government or people associated with it ( however tangentially ) , many Chinese Americans are increasingly experiencing suspicion and hostility just for being Chinese .
“ Chinese Americans feel targeted , and that ’ s really hurtful , ” said Charlie Woo , a prominent Chinese American businessman .
The experience of the first Cold War suggests that this sort of intolerance and repression will only increase with potentially chilling effects on intellectual freedom and the already deeply unsettled racial situation in this country .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ becoming hot ones .
Looking back , it ’ s easy enough to remember those years of the US-USSR standoff as a relatively war-free era , since the two superpowers were fearful that a direct conflict of any sort between them might spark an all-out thermonuclear conflagration , leaving a planet in ruins .
In reality , though , both sides engaged in a grim assortment of bloody “ proxy wars ” —regional conflicts in Korea , Vietnam , and Afghanistan , among other places , involving troops from one superpower and local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ addition , the United States and the Soviet Union nearly found themselves in direct conflict on several occasions .
The most notable , of course , was the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 , when Moscow installed nuclear-armed ballistic missiles in Cuba and the United States nearly went to war—which would probably have turned into a nuclear conflict—to remove them .
Only a last-ditch negotiating effort by President John F. Kennedy and his Russian counterpart , Nikita Khrushchev , averted such an outcome .
It ’ s easy enough to imagine that both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Cuban missile crisis could emerge from a growing confrontation with China .
An incident on the Korean Peninsula , no matter how it was sparked , could quickly turn into just such a proxy war .
The greatest danger , however , would be US and Chinese forces facing off directly , perhaps due to a naval clash in the East or South China Sea .
At present , American and Chinese warships encounter each other on a regular basis in those waters , often coming within shooting ( or even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insists that it ’ s conducting permissible “ freedom of navigation operations ” ( FRONOPS ) in international waters .
The Chinese—claiming ownership of , and often building up , the many small atolls and islets that dot those seas—accuse the American ships of infringing on their national maritime territory .
On occasion , Chinese gunboats have sailed dangerously close to them , forcing them to shift course to avoid a collision .
As such incidents multiply and tensions increase , the risk of a serious face-off involving loss of life on one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , possibly providing the spark for a full-scale military confrontation .
And there can be no question of one thing : An intensifying Cold War with China will only increase the odds of such a thing happening .
No one can say at what point you or any of us will begin to feel the direct effects of this new Cold War , only that , as tensions and hostile acts heighten , the consequences will prove harsh indeed .
So cheer now , if you approve of measures already taken to isolate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before you embrace a full-blown Cold War with China and all that it will entail .

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article originally appeared at TomDispatch.com. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.
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?
America’s pundits and politicians have largely concluded that a new Cold War with China—a period of intense hostility and competition falling just short of armed combat—has started. “Rift Threatens U.S. Cold War Against China,” as a New York Times print headline put it on May 15, citing recent clashes over trade, technology, and responsibility for the spread of Covid-19. Beijing’s decision to subject Hong Kong to tough new security laws has only further heightened such tensions. President Trump promptly threatened to eliminate that city-state’s special economic relationship with this country, while imposing new sanctions on Chinese leaders. Meanwhile, Democrats and Republicans in Congress are working together to devise tough anti-Chinese sanctions of their own.
For anyone who can remember the original Cold War, the latest developments may seem eerily familiar. They bring to mind what occurred soon after America’s World War II collaboration with the Soviets collapsed in acrimony as the Russians became ever more heavy-handed in their treatment of Eastern Europe. In those days, distrust only grew, while Washington decided to launch a global drive to contain and defeat the USSR. We seem to be approaching such a situation today. Though China and the United States continue to maintain trade, scientific, and educational ties, the leaders of both countries are threatening to sever those links and undertake a wide range of hostile moves.
Admittedly, some of the steps being discussed in Washington to punish China for its perceived bad behavior will have little immediate impact on the lives of Americans. A lot of the threats, in fact, may turn out to be little more than good old-fashioned chest thumping. Consider, for instance, the proposal floated by the top-ranking majority and minority members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Oklahoma Republican Jim Inhofe and Rhode Island Democrat Jack Reed, to fund a multibillion-dollar “Pacific Deterrence Initiative” intended to bolster American forces in Asia. That effort, they avowed, will “send a strong signal to the Chinese Communist Party that the American people are committed to defending US interests in the Indo-Pacific.”
Well, that was easy! All we, the taxpaying citizens of the United States, need to do in this opening salvo of a new Cold War is salute Congress as it funnels yet more billions of dollars to the usual defense contractors and thereby “send a signal” to Beijing that we will “defend US interests” somewhere far across the globe. (Now, there’s a moment to wave your American flag!)
But don’t count on such a moment lasting long, not if a new Cold War starts in earnest. A quick look back at the original one should remind us that we’ll all pay a price of some sort for intensifying hostility toward China (even if a hot war isn’t the result). Perhaps, then, it’s none too soon to consider how such a world would impact you and me.
A Feeble Economic Recovery
For most Americans, the first consequence of an intensifying Cold War could be a weaker than expected recovery from the Covid-19 economic meltdown. Anything that stands in the way of a swift rebound—and a new Cold War with China falls into that very category—would be bad news. 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
Unlike in the original Cold War, when Washington and Moscow maintained few economic ties, the US and Chinese economies remain intertwined, contributing to the net wealth of both countries and benefiting this country’s export-oriented industries like agriculture and civilian aircraft production. Admittedly, such ties have also harmed blue-collar workers who have watched their jobs migrate across the Pacific and tech companies that have seen their intellectual property purloined by Chinese upstarts. Donald Trump stoked resentments over just such issues to get himself elected in 2016. Since then, he’s sought to disentangle the two economies, claiming we would be better off on our own. (America first!) As part of this drive, he’s already imposed stiff tariffs on Chinese imports and blocked Chinese firms from gaining access to American technology. Current Issue View our current issue
Feel free to argue about whether China has abused international trade rules, as Trump and his allies have charged, and whether imposing tariffs (paid for by American importers and consumers, not Chinese suppliers) is the best way to address that country’s economic rise. The key thing to note, however, is that economic growth in both places had slowed in the wake of Trump’s trade war even before Covid-19 hit. As 2019 drew to a close, in fact, the prospect of yet higher tariffs and intensified economic warfare was already dragging down the whole global economy.
And while some experts believe that a relaxation of tariffs and other steps to improve US-China trade would stimulate the economy in tough times, Trump and his China hawks, led by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, appear to view this moment as the perfect opportunity to double down on anti-Chinese measures. The president has already hinted that he’s prepared to order yet more tariffs on Chinese products and take other steps to hasten the “decoupling” of the two economies. “There are many things we could do,” he told Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business in mid-May. “We could cut off the whole relationship.”
Cut off the whole relationship? Some policy-makers claim that such a decoupling would stimulate growth at home as American firms shifted manufacturing back to the United States and its close allies. This argument, however, ignores two key factors when it comes to Americans desperate for work now: First, many of the tasks currently performed by Chinese workers will be shifted to plants in Mexico, Thailand, Vietnam, and other low-cost manufacturing hubs; and second, any relocation of entire production lines to this country will take years to accomplish and, in the end, undoubtedly wind up employing more robots than workers. Bottom line: Economically, an intensifying Cold War is guaranteed to scuttle any chances of a rapid recovery from the Coronavirus Depression, dampening employment prospects for millions of Americans.
Military Spending, Not Recovery Stimulus
And here’s another thing a new Cold War guarantees: a significant increase in military spending at a time of ballooning national debt and a desperate need for investment in domestic economic recovery.
By the end of June, unless Congress votes additional assistance, much of the $2.2 trillion in emergency pandemic relief voted by Congress will have been used up, leaving millions of jobless Americans and many small-business owners in dire straits. Democrats in the House of Representatives did unveil a plan for an additional $3 trillion in emergency funding, including aid for struggling states and cities and another round of direct payments to citizens. White House officials and many Republicans insist, however, that any further giveaways to ordinary Americans will raise the federal debt to unsustainable levels (a problem that never worries them when it comes to tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy). So passing anything like that stimulus package appears ever less conceivable, and July may leave millions of Americans unable to pay rent as well as other essential expenses.
When it comes to increased military spending, however, Republicans have no such qualms. Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, for example, has introduced a $43 billion Forging Operational Resistance to Chinese Expansion (FORCE) Act. (Nifty title, huh?) Its goal, he claims, would be to “help thwart the Chinese Communist Party’s main geopolitical aim [of] pushing the United States out of the Western Pacific [and] achieving cross-strait unification with Taiwan via military force.” It includes, among other things, $3.9 billion for another Virginia-class submarine (that’s in addition to the $4.7 billion requested for such a sub in the Pentagon’s proposed 2021 budget) and $3 billion for more of one of the most expensive weapons systems in history, the F-35 jet fighter (and that’s in addition to the $4.6 billion requested for 48 of them in that same budget).
With the Democrats desperate to demonstrate their own anti-Chinese credentials, passage of the FORCE Act, or the somewhat more modest Pacific Deterrence Initiative introduced by Senators Reed and Inhofe, appears to be a sure thing. In fact, the need for yet more military funds may prove to be the Republican rationale for rejecting calls for additional pandemic relief.
But won’t higher military spending act as an economic stimulus, just as it did during World War II when it helped lift the United States out of the Great Depression?
Indeed, passage of the FORCE Act or a variant of it will pump additional money into the economy. But today’s military-industrial complex bears little relation to the one of 80 years ago when millions of workers were mobilized to churn out thousands of tanks and planes monthly in an all-out drive to defeat Nazi Germany. Nowadays, military hardware has become so complex that most of any dollar spent on a new plane, tank, or ship goes into specialized materials and computer systems, not armies of laborers. So the billions of dollars for one new submarine and additional F-35s are likely to generate only a few thousand extra jobs, while spending the same amounts on health care or elementary school education would generate many times that number.
Conscription
And then there’s the issue that should be on the minds of every young man and woman in America (along with their parents, grandparents, and loved ones): the draft.
In contrast to the original Cold War, young men in this country are no longer obliged to serve in the US military, though they (and their female counterparts) may choose to do so, whether for patriotic reasons, economic need, or both. Even though the United States has been continuously involved in “forever wars” since the 9/11 attacks, the armed services have been able to use a variety of economic and educational incentives to keep the ranks filled (and avoid the public outcry over those wars that would surely have accompanied a draft). This was possible in part because the numbers of soldiers engaged in combat at any given moment was not huge in comparison to, say, the Korean or Vietnam War eras and because vast numbers of troops were no longer on tap to “contain” the Soviet Union in Europe.
A full-scale Cold War with China could, however, prove another matter entirely, even if Pentagon manpower requirements were somewhat diminished by US troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and Iraq. Large force deployments will undoubtedly be needed to engage in a modern version of the “containment” of China, not to speak of deterring the further adventurism of Vladimir Putin’s Russia. Can this be done with an all-volunteer military? Not if tensions rise with Beijing.
Count on it: At some point, the question of conscription is bound to come up. So far, the Department of Defense has not opted for reinstating the draft—a move that would require congressional approval and undoubtedly ignite intense political debate of the sort top officials would prefer to avoid right now. Still, the leadership’s overarching guidance, the National Defense Strategy of 2018, made it quite clear that the United States must expect to face years of intense rivalry with its “great power competitors” and that such an epic struggle could well require the full mobilization of America’s war-making capabilities. “Long-term strategic competition [with China and Russia],” it claimed, “requires the seamless integration of multiple elements of national power.” Conscription was not specifically mentioned, but given the new focus on a rising China and a reckless Russia, it will be on the table sooner or later.
Repression and Discrimination
Another feature of the original Cold War that you should expect in a new one is an environment of repression, intolerance, and discrimination. In this case, it would be against Chinese Americans, Chinese students and researchers currently in this country, and non-Chinese viewed as in any way beholden to that power. Sadly enough, signs of this have already emerged. Officials from the FBI and the National Security Council have, for instance, been dispatched to leading Ivy League universities to warn administrators against admitting or retaining Chinese students who may be collecting scientific and technical information to share with government-sponsored institutions at home. Concurrently, some 30 Chinese professors with ties to such institutions have had their visas denied, despite a history of collaboration with American academics. In a more dramatic move, the chair of Harvard University’s chemistry department, Charles Lieber, was arrested in January for failing to report income he had received from a Chinese university.
Many American academics have criticized such actions as an assault on academic freedom. Increasingly, however, US officials insist that they represent a necessary component of the new Cold War. And while those officials also insist that our adversary in this struggle is the Chinese government or people associated with it (however tangentially), many Chinese Americans are increasingly experiencing suspicion and hostility just for being Chinese. “Chinese Americans feel targeted, and that’s really hurtful,” said Charlie Woo, a prominent Chinese American businessman.
The experience of the first Cold War suggests that this sort of intolerance and repression will only increase with potentially chilling effects on intellectual freedom and the already deeply unsettled racial situation in this country.
Hot War
And never forget that cold wars always risk becoming hot ones. Looking back, it’s easy enough to remember those years of the US-USSR standoff as a relatively war-free era, since the two superpowers were fearful that a direct conflict of any sort between them might spark an all-out thermonuclear conflagration, leaving a planet in ruins. In reality, though, both sides engaged in a grim assortment of bloody “proxy wars”—regional conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan, among other places, involving troops from one superpower and local allies armed by the other. In addition, the United States and the Soviet Union nearly found themselves in direct conflict on several occasions. The most notable, of course, was the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, when Moscow installed nuclear-armed ballistic missiles in Cuba and the United States nearly went to war—which would probably have turned into a nuclear conflict—to remove them. Only a last-ditch negotiating effort by President John F. Kennedy and his Russian counterpart, Nikita Khrushchev, averted such an outcome.
It’s easy enough to imagine that both contemporary versions of such proxy conflicts and of the Cuban missile crisis could emerge from a growing confrontation with China. An incident on the Korean Peninsula, no matter how it was sparked, could quickly turn into just such a proxy war. The greatest danger, however, would be US and Chinese forces facing off directly, perhaps due to a naval clash in the East or South China Sea.
At present, American and Chinese warships encounter each other on a regular basis in those waters, often coming within shooting (or even ramming) range. The US Navy insists that it’s conducting permissible “freedom of navigation operations” (FRONOPS) in international waters. The Chinese—claiming ownership of, and often building up, the many small atolls and islets that dot those seas—accuse the American ships of infringing on their national maritime territory. On occasion, Chinese gunboats have sailed dangerously close to them, forcing them to shift course to avoid a collision. As such incidents multiply and tensions increase, the risk of a serious face-off involving loss of life on one or both sides is bound to grow, possibly providing the spark for a full-scale military confrontation. And there can be no question of one thing: An intensifying Cold War with China will only increase the odds of such a thing happening.
No one can say at what point you or any of us will begin to feel the direct effects of this new Cold War, only that, as tensions and hostile acts heighten, the consequences will prove harsh indeed. So cheer now, if you approve of measures already taken to isolate and punish Beijing, but think carefully before you embrace a full-blown Cold War with China and all that it will entail.


thenation--2020-06-12--Charles Booker Is Changing the Thinking About Who Beats Mitch

The largest newspaper in Kentucky endorsed the insurgent Senate candidacy of Charles Booker this week , with a stark call for a politics that might actually matter .
“ This is a historic time in our state and nation .
A time when young and old , black , white and brown are calling for change—not just incremental change , but sweeping reform that will usher in true equality and justice for all , ” the editorial board of the Louisville Courier-Journal announced on Wednesday .
“ To get there , we need political leaders with insight and vision , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and are willing to put forth bold ideas and fight for everyday people .
Voters in Kentucky and around the country deserve the chance to consider candidates who have strident beliefs and the courage to go beyond scripted , milquetoast politics.
” Booker , a 35-year-old African American legislator from Louisville who champions an economic , social , and racial justice agenda , has rejected scripted , milquetoast politics from the start of his uphill bid for the Democratic nomination to take on the most powerful man in American politics , Senate majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teargassed during Black Lives Matter demonstrations in his hometown , where Breonna Taylor , a 26-year-old African American health care worker , was shot and killed by Louisville Metro Police Department officers on March 13 .
He has traveled to Eastern Kentucky ’ s Harlan County to stand with coal miners who blocked a railroad line to demand unpaid wages and protest layoffs .
He has argued that fundamental changes , including single-payer Medicare for All health care reform and a Green New Deal , are needed to address the needs of urban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the June 23 Kentucky primary approaches , his progressive campaign has a growing number of Kentuckians thinking that the # BookerBeatsMitch hashtag might actually be right .
In addition to the Courier-Journal endorsement , the legislator just secured the backing of the state ’ s second-largest daily paper , the Lexington Herald-Leader , which wrote , “ We understand that Booker is the underdog in this race ; he has a steep climb to earn votes outside of his native Louisville , where he is well-known .
But we believe this is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Charles Booker is the only one generating real excitement among young people and old .
We believe he would move the state in the direction that Kentucky needs to go in the future so it can , at long last , move forward.
” Newspaper endorsements rarely carry as much weight with voters as newspaper editors might imagine .
But these endorsements surprised a good many Kentucky political observers , and they have stirred talk about how Booker—who referred to the Courier-Journal declaration as a “ humbling and absolutely critical endorsement ” —might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kentucky .
And perhaps nationally .
Georgia Shows How Serious the Threat of Voter Suppression Will Be This November Jamaal Bowman Wants to Spend Less on the Pentagon and More on the Bronx Shouldn ’ t Congressional Approval Be Required to Deploy Troops at Home Too ?
The papers , and 16 Democratic legislators from across Kentucky , including House Democratic leader Joni Jenkins , have chosen Booker over Amy McGrath , a retired Marine fighter pilot and defeated 2018 congressional candidate , whom the Herald-Leader describes as “ the nationally anointed front-runner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might even rival McConnell ’ s usual corporate haul.
” Senate minority leader Charles Schumer recruited McGrath to run for the Senate , and she ’ s secured plenty of financial backing from D.C. insiders .
Yet she hasn ’ t exactly lit fires in Kentucky with an unfocused and often disappointing campaign that began last year with her saying she would probably have voted to put Brett Kavanaugh on the US Supreme Court .
That statement drew such intense blowback that she quickly announced that “ upon further reflection and further understanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have rejected Donald Trump ’ s scandal-plagued nominee .
While Amy McGrath has broad support , as evidenced by her successful fundraising , she has not shown the progressive ideas and bold leadership necessary to move our state forward .
She has been overly moderate , measured and cautious throughout this campaign , focusing more on her military service ( which we applaud and sincerely respect ) or her motherhood than offering a sweeping vision for the commonwealth—especially in these turbulent times , Unfortunately , her message to voters has been unimaginative and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what ’ s wrong with Mitch McConnell instead of explaining why my vision for our commonwealth and our country is a better fit for Kentucky voters.
” We also believe the national Democratic Party was too quick to offer its full support and fundraising apparatus to a candidate who has never held public office and stumbled out of the gate when announcing her candidacy .
McGrath ’ s self-described “ common sense Kentucky Democrat ” tagline—a campaign strategy to attract potential supporters of President Donald Trump who are looking for an alternative to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the campaign .
Democratic Candidates Should Be Campaigning to End Toxic Policing Political fortunes are shaped by many factors , including money , name recognition , and endorsements .
There ’ s no question that Amy McGrath has been the front-runner , thanks to the big-name and big-money support she got from Democrats in Washington .
She fit the template for the sort of candidate D.C. insiders—and , surely , a good many Kentuckians—thought in the early stages of the 2020 election cycle was best positioned to take on McConnell .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in recent months , as Kentucky and the rest of the country has been rocked by the coronavirus pandemic , mass unemployment , and , now , mass protests over police brutality .
That ’ s created a new dynamic—and a different momentum .
As the primary approaches , McGrath ’ s insider campaign has “ fallen flat , ” while Booker ’ s insurgent campaign has taken off .
There are no guarantees , especially in a year like this one .
But sometimes , the right candidate is in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different politics becomes possible .
The Courier-Journal recognized this prospect in its endorsement of Booker : Echoing the “ not me , us ” message of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders—who has endorsed his campaign—Booker says , “ The movement is very real .
Kentuckians are taking our power back , and we will not be stopped.
” If Booker ’ s right , Mitch McConnell could be in for a rough fall .

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?
The largest newspaper in Kentucky endorsed the insurgent Senate candidacy of Charles Booker this week, with a stark call for a politics that might actually matter. “This is a historic time in our state and nation. A time when young and old, black, white and brown are calling for change—not just incremental change, but sweeping reform that will usher in true equality and justice for all,” the editorial board of the Louisville Courier-Journal announced on Wednesday. “To get there, we need political leaders with insight and vision, who understand the challenges of our times and are willing to put forth bold ideas and fight for everyday people. Voters in Kentucky and around the country deserve the chance to consider candidates who have strident beliefs and the courage to go beyond scripted, milquetoast politics.”
Booker, a 35-year-old African American legislator from Louisville who champions an economic, social, and racial justice agenda, has rejected scripted, milquetoast politics from the start of his uphill bid for the Democratic nomination to take on the most powerful man in American politics, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell. He has been teargassed during Black Lives Matter demonstrations in his hometown, where Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old African American health care worker, was shot and killed by Louisville Metro Police Department officers on March 13. He has traveled to Eastern Kentucky’s Harlan County to stand with coal miners who blocked a railroad line to demand unpaid wages and protest layoffs. He has argued that fundamental changes, including single-payer Medicare for All health care reform and a Green New Deal, are needed to address the needs of urban and rural Kentuckians.
Now, as the June 23 Kentucky primary approaches, his progressive campaign has a growing number of Kentuckians thinking that the #BookerBeatsMitch hashtag might actually be right. In addition to the Courier-Journal endorsement, the legislator just secured the backing of the state’s second-largest daily paper, the Lexington Herald-Leader, which wrote, “We understand that Booker is the underdog in this race; he has a steep climb to earn votes outside of his native Louisville, where he is well-known. But we believe this is a time for passion, not pragmatism. Charles Booker is the only one generating real excitement among young people and old. We believe he would move the state in the direction that Kentucky needs to go in the future so it can, at long last, move forward.”
Newspaper endorsements rarely carry as much weight with voters as newspaper editors might imagine. But these endorsements surprised a good many Kentucky political observers, and they have stirred talk about how Booker—who referred to the Courier-Journal declaration as a “humbling and absolutely critical endorsement”—might just be reworking the 2020 calculus in Kentucky. And perhaps nationally. 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 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
The papers, and 16 Democratic legislators from across Kentucky, including House Democratic leader Joni Jenkins, have chosen Booker over Amy McGrath, a retired Marine fighter pilot and defeated 2018 congressional candidate, whom the Herald-Leader describes as “the nationally anointed front-runner with a war chest of donations that might even rival McConnell’s usual corporate haul.” Senate minority leader Charles Schumer recruited McGrath to run for the Senate, and she’s secured plenty of financial backing from D.C. insiders. Yet she hasn’t exactly lit fires in Kentucky with an unfocused and often disappointing campaign that began last year with her saying she would probably have voted to put Brett Kavanaugh on the US Supreme Court. That statement drew such intense blowback that she quickly announced that “upon further reflection and further understanding of his record,” she would have rejected Donald Trump’s scandal-plagued nominee.
The Courier-Journal observed:
While Amy McGrath has broad support, as evidenced by her successful fundraising, she has not shown the progressive ideas and bold leadership necessary to move our state forward. She has been overly moderate, measured and cautious throughout this campaign, focusing more on her military service (which we applaud and sincerely respect) or her motherhood than offering a sweeping vision for the commonwealth—especially in these turbulent times, Unfortunately, her message to voters has been unimaginative and uninspiring: “Let me tell you what’s wrong with Mitch McConnell instead of explaining why my vision for our commonwealth and our country is a better fit for Kentucky voters.” We also believe the national Democratic Party was too quick to offer its full support and fundraising apparatus to a candidate who has never held public office and stumbled out of the gate when announcing her candidacy. McGrath’s self-described “common sense Kentucky Democrat” tagline—a campaign strategy to attract potential supporters of President Donald Trump who are looking for an alternative to McConnell—has fallen flat in these final weeks of the campaign. Booker on Policing Democratic Candidates Should Be Campaigning to End Toxic Policing John Nichols
Political fortunes are shaped by many factors, including money, name recognition, and endorsements. There’s no question that Amy McGrath has been the front-runner, thanks to the big-name and big-money support she got from Democrats in Washington. She fit the template for the sort of candidate D.C. insiders—and, surely, a good many Kentuckians—thought in the early stages of the 2020 election cycle was best positioned to take on McConnell.
But this election cycle has changed, radically, in recent months, as Kentucky and the rest of the country has been rocked by the coronavirus pandemic, mass unemployment, and, now, mass protests over police brutality. That’s created a new dynamic—and a different momentum. As the primary approaches, McGrath’s insider campaign has “fallen flat,” while Booker’s insurgent campaign has taken off.
There are no guarantees, especially in a year like this one. But sometimes, the right candidate is in the right place at the right time—and a different politics becomes possible. The Courier-Journal recognized this prospect in its endorsement of Booker:
His life experience is unlike that of other Kentucky candidates. The 35-year-old grew up in poverty in Louisville’s West End, living in one of Kentucky’s poorest ZIP codes. He knows what it means to go hungry, to be homeless, to struggle. Ending poverty is at the core of his mission. He’s passionate about it because he’s lived the struggle. In Kentucky, where 17 percent of people live in poverty—one of the highest rates in the nation—Booker’s message resonates.
Echoing the “not me, us” message of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders—who has endorsed his campaign—Booker says, “The movement is very real. Kentuckians are taking our power back, and we will not be stopped.”
If Booker’s right, Mitch McConnell could be in for a rough fall.


thenation--2020-06-12--With Covid-19, We Need to Rethink the Youth Vote

Despite being the largest , most diverse generation in history and a projected 37 percent of the 2020 electorate , young people could have disproportionately low voter turnout in the coming election .
This isn ’ t a new problem—young people historically vote less than other age groups—but given our current crisis , the risk is even greater and the stakes higher .
For students across the country , Covid-19 has thrown the fall semester into question—and with it the traditional get-out-the-vote organizing that happens on campus .
High school and college campuses are central hubs for voting activity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boxes , and key locations for voter registration and mobilization efforts .
Studies repeatedly show that on-campus and in-the-classroom voting efforts remain the most consistent way to increase youth engagement and turnout .
And young people have also shown a preference for registering to vote at community and school events .
Even if students return to campus in the fall , large community events , where student organizers typically set up their voter registration booths , are unlikely to exist .
If schools do away with an in-person semester altogether , getting students @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t be an easy process .
Recent research by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement ( CIRCLE ) shows that 10 percent of young people have used online voter registration in the states that allow it .
Similarly , e-mail has been found to be effective only when it includes a direct link to register completely online .
In a study published by the American Political Science Association , voter registration rates increased by 1.2 percent among students who had never registered before when linked to a system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This story was produced for Student Nation , a section devoted to highlighting campus activism and student movements from students in their own words .
For more Student Nation , check out our archive .
Are you a student with a campus activism story ?
Send questions and pitches to Samantha Schuyler at samantha @ thenation.com .
The Student Nation program is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation .
Although today ’ s youth are digital natives , social media and text outreach also is a mixed bag .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of young people have used text reminders to vote .
Social media has been seen to marginally increase youth voter turnout , but only if it is personalized .
For example , when Facebook showed users photos of specific friends who had voted in the lead-up to the 2010 election , it increased turnout by 0.4 percent .
Similarly , youth voter turnout increased less than 1 percent among those who had received text messages in an experiment conducted by NextGen with young Democratic-leaning voters in Arizona , Illinois , and Virginia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make an impact , the results are still minimal , averaging around one percentage point or less .
And without personalization , they are not typically significantly measurable tools to increase youth voter turnout .
Without community hubs on campus , our digital youth outreach needs to be peer-to-peer—that is , voter outreach needs to be based on a community model for it to have an impact .
With more states adopting new policies in the wake of the pandemic , vote-by-mail is more likely to be a primary method of voting in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inequities up to the surface : According to a recent study by CIRCLE , youth of color without college experience are the most likely to vote in person on Election Day but the least likely to vote by mail .
One-fifth of the young people who voted by mail in 2016 did so because their ballot was delivered automatically to their address .
But with the uncertainty of Covid-19 , many young people have switched locations and do not have the security of knowing where their home will be in November .
Not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made aware that their ballot was automatically sent to their now-defunct address—literacy on the vote-by-mail process among young people remains alarmingly low .
We need comprehensive national education efforts on the vote-by-mail process for voting in the fall to be equitable and inclusive of young people from all backgrounds .
There are some reasons to be cautiously optimistic for fall youth voter turnout .
The 2018 midterms had the highest youth voter turnout in the past 25 years , with 31 percent of youth ages 18-to-29 casting a ballot .
However , further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it did so fairly equally among all age categories , leaving the age turnout gap largely unchanged .
Covid-19 impacts us all , but the impact on Generation Z is particularly jarring .
Gen Z is expected to be the hardest hit by the financial fallout caused by the pandemic , with Covid-19 impacting young people ’ s careers and life paths now and in the long term .
Additionally , as the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor by the police ignited a national conversation about the generations of systemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have suggested voting as a mechanism to bring institutional change .
Yet the obstacles are sometimes enormous .
In the United States , one in 13 black Americans has lost their right to vote because of felony disenfranchisement laws .
Structural blockages such as the purging of voter rolls , ID requirements , partisan gerrymandering , and intergenerational lack of exposure to voting and civic institutions further suppress these voters .
Addressing these preexisting hurdles for young people of color on top of the challenges Covid-19 brings to the surface is vital in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and accessible as some may assume .
Public officials , educators , community members , friends , and family should all take this opportunity to make politics personal and utilize peer-to-peer incentives to increase youth voter registration and turnout .
We must call on our communities to launch comprehensive education efforts to teach young people about voting by mail and other voting methods and push for states to make voting easier for young people .
States should adopt more flexible deadlines , and we must push for automatic voter registration and automatic absentee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on us taking new , bold action to allow for young people ’ s electoral participation .

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?
Despite being the largest, most diverse generation in history and a projected 37 percent of the 2020 electorate, young people could have disproportionately low voter turnout in the coming election.
This isn’t a new problem—young people historically vote less than other age groups—but given our current crisis, the risk is even greater and the stakes higher.
For students across the country, Covid-19 has thrown the fall semester into question—and with it the traditional get-out-the-vote organizing that happens on campus. High school and college campuses are central hubs for voting activity, serving as polling places, ballot drop boxes, and key locations for voter registration and mobilization efforts. Studies repeatedly show that on-campus and in-the-classroom voting efforts remain the most consistent way to increase youth engagement and turnout. And young people have also shown a preference for registering to vote at community and school events.
Even if students return to campus in the fall, large community events, where student organizers typically set up their voter registration booths, are unlikely to exist. If schools do away with an in-person semester altogether, getting students to register to vote online won’t be an easy process. Recent research by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (CIRCLE) shows that 10 percent of young people have used online voter registration in the states that allow it. Similarly, e-mail has been found to be effective only when it includes a direct link to register completely online. In a study published by the American Political Science Association, voter registration rates increased by 1.2 percent among students who had never registered before when linked to a system that allowed them to register entirely digitally. This story was produced for Student Nation, a section devoted to highlighting campus activism and student movements from students in their own words. For more Student Nation, check out our archive. Are you a student with a campus activism story? Send questions and pitches to Samantha Schuyler at [email protected]. The Student Nation program is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation.
Although today’s youth are digital natives, social media and text outreach also is a mixed bag. A 2018 study found that only 5 percent of young people have used text reminders to vote. Social media has been seen to marginally increase youth voter turnout, but only if it is personalized. For example, when Facebook showed users photos of specific friends who had voted in the lead-up to the 2010 election, it increased turnout by 0.4 percent. Similarly, youth voter turnout increased less than 1 percent among those who had received text messages in an experiment conducted by NextGen with young Democratic-leaning voters in Arizona, Illinois, and Virginia. 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
While social media and texting can make an impact, the results are still minimal, averaging around one percentage point or less. And without personalization, they are not typically significantly measurable tools to increase youth voter turnout. Without community hubs on campus, our digital youth outreach needs to be peer-to-peer—that is, voter outreach needs to be based on a community model for it to have an impact.
With more states adopting new policies in the wake of the pandemic, vote-by-mail is more likely to be a primary method of voting in the fall. Yet vote-by-mail brings further inequities up to the surface: According to a recent study by CIRCLE, youth of color without college experience are the most likely to vote in person on Election Day but the least likely to vote by mail. Current Issue View our current issue
One-fifth of the young people who voted by mail in 2016 did so because their ballot was delivered automatically to their address. But with the uncertainty of Covid-19, many young people have switched locations and do not have the security of knowing where their home will be in November. Not only that, they aren’t made aware that their ballot was automatically sent to their now-defunct address—literacy on the vote-by-mail process among young people remains alarmingly low. We need comprehensive national education efforts on the vote-by-mail process for voting in the fall to be equitable and inclusive of young people from all backgrounds.
There are some reasons to be cautiously optimistic for fall youth voter turnout. The 2018 midterms had the highest youth voter turnout in the past 25 years, with 31 percent of youth ages 18-to-29 casting a ballot. However, further analysis showed that although turnout did increase, it did so fairly equally among all age categories, leaving the age turnout gap largely unchanged.
Covid-19 impacts us all, but the impact on Generation Z is particularly jarring. Gen Z is expected to be the hardest hit by the financial fallout caused by the pandemic, with Covid-19 impacting young people’s careers and life paths now and in the long term.
Additionally, as the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor by the police ignited a national conversation about the generations of systemic racism prevalent in our country, many have suggested voting as a mechanism to bring institutional change. Yet the obstacles are sometimes enormous. In the United States, one in 13 black Americans has lost their right to vote because of felony disenfranchisement laws. Structural blockages such as the purging of voter rolls, ID requirements, partisan gerrymandering, and intergenerational lack of exposure to voting and civic institutions further suppress these voters. Addressing these preexisting hurdles for young people of color on top of the challenges Covid-19 brings to the surface is vital in understanding why voting is not as simple and accessible as some may assume.
Public officials, educators, community members, friends, and family should all take this opportunity to make politics personal and utilize peer-to-peer incentives to increase youth voter registration and turnout. We must call on our communities to launch comprehensive education efforts to teach young people about voting by mail and other voting methods and push for states to make voting easier for young people. States should adopt more flexible deadlines, and we must push for automatic voter registration and automatic absentee ballots nationally.
Our future now depends on us taking new, bold action to allow for young people’s electoral participation.