vox--2020-01-17--The controversy over New York’s bail reform law, explained

For years , criminal justice advocates have been fighting for an end to cash bail .
They say the practice creates two tiers of the justice system : In one , wealthy people can bond out of jail and work out their cases upon release ; in the other , poor people , often accused of low-level crimes , can ’ t afford bail and have their lives upended while awaiting trial .
At the start of the new year , New York joined states like California and New Jersey in taking steps to cease this practice .
Criminal courts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ setting cash bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies .
Ahead of the law ’ s passage , New York Governor Andrew Cuomo , who proposed his own version of the legislation , praised the move .
“ The blunt ugly reality is that too often , if you can make bail , you are set free , and if you are too poor to make bail , you are punished , ” he said .
But just days after the law took effect , New York media and politicians were in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York City and surrounding areas had seen a spate of anti-Semitic attacks , and critics of the bail law called for a hate crime exemption to it .
Outlets like the New York Post latched onto cases like that of Tiffany Harris , who was arrested three times for assaulting Orthodox Jewish women in Brooklyn in less than a week : “ Harris walked free under the state ’ s new soft-on-crime law , ” the Post wrote .
On January 10 , the New York Daily News ran a cover story of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with assault being released without bail .
Staten Island Assembly member Nicole Malliotakis told Tucker Carlson on Fox News that if the law doesn ’ t get modified , “ There ’ s going to be blood on Governor Cuomo ’ s hands.
” By January 8 , Governor Cuomo had gone on the record saying there were “ consequences we have to adjust for , ” and that he was open to modifying the law in the next session .
But much of the coverage has obscured or downplayed one crucial point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the idea of the “ potential dangerousness ” of someone accused of a crime — has not been a legal reason to set bail for a defendant in New York .
For nearly 50 years , judges have only been able to consider the defendant ’ s likelihood of coming to their court date when setting bail , and have been directed to use the “ least restrictive ” means to get them there .
However , just because “ potential dangerousness ” hasn ’ t been legally allowed doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ de facto use of bail by judges and prosecutors for decades .
This fear-based messaging has been a favorite tool of opponents of the law .
And it ’ s easy to see how it would catch on in the face of an uptick in hate crimes .
But New Yorkers aren ’ t the only ones concerned about a spike in crime as a result of changing the bail system .
Even though violent crime has dropped significantly around the country , some worry that more people charged with crimes “ out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangerous society .
In truth , most people in court each day are there for minor offenses .
Brooklyn Bail Fund , a nonprofit that has posted bail for more than 4,000 people who could not afford it , reported that those who were released were three times as likely as those who weren ’ t to have favorable outcomes to their cases .
That ’ s because , defense attorneys say , people who are stuck in jail are much more likely to plead guilty in order to get out , rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a country overwhelmed by mass incarceration , where about 67 percent of those in county jails are there pretrial , a system where the amount of money you have on hand dictates your freedom seems antiquated at best and unconstitutional at worst .
The New York bail reform law is expected to decrease the number of pretrial detainees by more than 40 percent , according to a report by the nonprofit Center for Court Innovation .
But standing in the way of a fairer system are misconceptions held by many Americans about what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The perception of bail reform versus the reality Back in the 1960s , New York was in the throes of a similar debate on bail reform .
The New York Times ran a series of editorials between 1963 and 1965 arguing the bail system was “ a machine to penalize the poor ” and advocating for it to be “ abolished or drastically modified.
” The idea of preventive detention , or detaining someone before their trial for public safety reasons , was hotly debated when the state was passing its first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That year , the New York State Legislature passed a law that excluded the “ dangerousness ” clause and limited a judge ’ s reasons in setting bail to ensuring that the defendant returns to court .
“ Although , legally , bail is not supposed to be used to determine dangerousness , we see that happen all the time , ” Khalil Cumberbatch , a formerly incarcerated person who now advocates for reform , told Vox .
“ Judges just don ’ t say the term ‘ dangerousness.
’ ” The idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is tied into the racial discrepancies of our justice system .
Two studies of state court data from 75 large jurisdictions in the 1990s found that bail was set at significantly higher rates for black and Latinx people .
In the latest bill , signed into law last year and enacted on January 1 , judges still can ’ t consider the potential dangerousness of a defendant .
While 90 percent of arrests statewide are now subject to release without bail , violent felonies , sex-related charges , and some domestic violence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ These reforms are a very incremental change — New York State did not get rid of cash bail .
It ’ s still applicable to almost all violent offenses , ” Cumberbatch said .
“ And for someone with means , almost nothing has changed.
” Across America , pretrial detention increased 433 percent from 1970 to 2015 , according to a 2019 Vera Institute of Justice report .
About two-thirds of people currently in jail have not been convicted of a crime .
A 2017 City University of New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were detained before their trials spent an average of 13-17 days behind bars .
But some stay much longer — like Kalief Browder , whose tragic story was an inspiration for the law .
Because he couldn ’ t make bail , Browder spent three years at Rikers Island without ever being convicted of a crime , two of those in solitary confinement .
Two years after he was released , he died by suicide .
People of color are disproportionately represented in New York ’ s prisons and jails : More than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ although black people represent just 16 percent of the state ’ s population .
And a 2019 analysis by antipoverty nonprofit FPWA found that “ as poverty rates increase , jail incarceration rates increase in New York City community districts.
” In a system where if you can afford to pay bail , you can walk free , even critics of the new law agree that those who are detained are overwhelmingly poor people .
John Flynn , the district attorney in Erie County , which includes Buffalo , said his office has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past year and a half in which prosecutors refrain from asking for bail in the majority of misdemeanor cases with a few exceptions , a policy that cut the number of people in jail pretrial by almost 50 percent , he says .
“ The main reason was the disproportionate economic realities — you have two people charged with the same offense , and one can afford to bond out and one can ’ t , and that ’ s just fundamentally unfair , ” Flynn said .
But Flynn , who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ district attorney associations , said the new law goes too far .
“ My attorneys are no longer able to argue , to point out to a judge , ‘ Hey Judge , there ’ s a good reason to why you should put bail , ’ ” Flynn said .
“ And the judges , who are elected by the people here in New York State , they now have no discretion at all.
” Flynn said the law should be amended to include a public safety component similar to the bail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which uses an algorithm to predict the likelihood of a defendant to commit further crimes .
“ Whether or not the person is a danger to himself or another person or society in general — I think a discussion needs to take place on that , ” Flynn said .
But proponents of the new law argue that it ’ s that judicial discretion that resulted in huge numbers of poor people being detained pretrial , and that same discretion also allows for racial bias .
The predictive algorithms , too , have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A 2016 ProPublica investigation found that the algorithm in Broward County , Florida , that was used to predict the likelihood of a defendant to commit future crimes “ was particularly likely to falsely flag black defendants as future criminals , wrongly labeling them this way at almost twice the rate as white defendants.
” Erin George , the civil rights campaigns director for Citizen Action of New York , said that these conversations about public safety are missing a critical segment of the public .
“ We have to stop talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of black and brown communities who are targeted by discriminatory pretrial laws and policing , and then forced into the most violent places in the United States , as if their safety doesn ’ t matter in this conversation , ” George said .
“ Our conversation has to include these people.
” The bail reform movement has produced positive results in nearby New Jersey What ’ s happening in New York is part of a larger wave of bail reform sweeping the country .
California became the first state to abolish cash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruled the practice unconstitutional .
But after a successful campaign by the bail bonds industry , the law is on hold until California voters take up the issue later this year .
Meanwhile , Harris County , home to Houston , has done away with cash bail for misdemeanors after a federal judge ruled the practice unconstitutional , and a similar lawsuit is pending for the felony courts there .
Other lawsuits have been filed in states and counties around the country .
New Jersey ’ s reforms , which happened in 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only has there been a 40 percent drop in the number of pretrial detainees , data also shows that since the new law went into effect there was no spike in crime , and people who were released were just about as likely to show up for their court dates .
This data is heartening for supporters of the New York law , who hope to see similar findings in their state .
But Senate Republicans plan to bring a bill to repeal the law in the current legislative session .
And with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , calling for some modification of the new law , it ’ s likely that potential changes to the bill will be heard in the Democrat-controlled House as well .
But some , like Dan Quart , a New York state assemblyman who is running for Manhattan district attorney next year , said the right move is to stay the course .
“ I ’ m hopeful that we would not consider rolling back reforms 12 , 15 , 20 days into those reforms , ” he said .
“ It was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Quart said .
“ It was not the ultimate solution , which is to eliminate cash bail completely .
”

For years, criminal justice advocates have been fighting for an end to cash bail. They say the practice creates two tiers of the justice system: In one, wealthy people can bond out of jail and work out their cases upon release; in the other, poor people, often accused of low-level crimes, can’t afford bail and have their lives upended while awaiting trial.
At the start of the new year, New York joined states like California and New Jersey in taking steps to cease this practice. Criminal courts in the state are now prohibited from setting cash bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies.
Ahead of the law’s passage, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who proposed his own version of the legislation, praised the move. “The blunt ugly reality is that too often, if you can make bail, you are set free, and if you are too poor to make bail, you are punished,” he said.
But just days after the law took effect, New York media and politicians were in a frenzy. Over the holidays, New York City and surrounding areas had seen a spate of anti-Semitic attacks, and critics of the bail law called for a hate crime exemption to it. Outlets like the New York Post latched onto cases like that of Tiffany Harris, who was arrested three times for assaulting Orthodox Jewish women in Brooklyn in less than a week: “Harris walked free under the state’s new soft-on-crime law,” the Post wrote. On January 10, the New York Daily News ran a cover story of a homeless man who had been charged with assault being released without bail. Staten Island Assembly member Nicole Malliotakis told Tucker Carlson on Fox News that if the law doesn’t get modified, “There’s going to be blood on Governor Cuomo’s hands.”
By January 8, Governor Cuomo had gone on the record saying there were “consequences we have to adjust for,” and that he was open to modifying the law in the next session.
But much of the coverage has obscured or downplayed one crucial point: that since 1971, public safety — the idea of the “potential dangerousness” of someone accused of a crime — has not been a legal reason to set bail for a defendant in New York. For nearly 50 years, judges have only been able to consider the defendant’s likelihood of coming to their court date when setting bail, and have been directed to use the “least restrictive” means to get them there. However, just because “potential dangerousness” hasn’t been legally allowed doesn’t mean it hasn’t been the de facto use of bail by judges and prosecutors for decades.
This fear-based messaging has been a favorite tool of opponents of the law. And it’s easy to see how it would catch on in the face of an uptick in hate crimes. But New Yorkers aren’t the only ones concerned about a spike in crime as a result of changing the bail system. Even though violent crime has dropped significantly around the country, some worry that more people charged with crimes “out on the streets” equals a more dangerous society.
In truth, most people in court each day are there for minor offenses. Brooklyn Bail Fund, a nonprofit that has posted bail for more than 4,000 people who could not afford it, reported that those who were released were three times as likely as those who weren’t to have favorable outcomes to their cases. That’s because, defense attorneys say, people who are stuck in jail are much more likely to plead guilty in order to get out, rather than to fight their cases.
In a country overwhelmed by mass incarceration, where about 67 percent of those in county jails are there pretrial, a system where the amount of money you have on hand dictates your freedom seems antiquated at best and unconstitutional at worst.
The New York bail reform law is expected to decrease the number of pretrial detainees by more than 40 percent, according to a report by the nonprofit Center for Court Innovation. But standing in the way of a fairer system are misconceptions held by many Americans about what it is their justice system actually does.
The perception of bail reform versus the reality
Back in the 1960s, New York was in the throes of a similar debate on bail reform. The New York Times ran a series of editorials between 1963 and 1965 arguing the bail system was “a machine to penalize the poor” and advocating for it to be “abolished or drastically modified.” The idea of preventive detention, or detaining someone before their trial for public safety reasons, was hotly debated when the state was passing its first crack at bail reform in 1970. That year, the New York State Legislature passed a law that excluded the “dangerousness” clause and limited a judge’s reasons in setting bail to ensuring that the defendant returns to court.
“Although, legally, bail is not supposed to be used to determine dangerousness, we see that happen all the time,” Khalil Cumberbatch, a formerly incarcerated person who now advocates for reform, told Vox. “Judges just don’t say the term ‘dangerousness.’”
The idea of “dangerousness,” advocates stress, is tied into the racial discrepancies of our justice system. Two studies of state court data from 75 large jurisdictions in the 1990s found that bail was set at significantly higher rates for black and Latinx people.
In the latest bill, signed into law last year and enacted on January 1, judges still can’t consider the potential dangerousness of a defendant. While 90 percent of arrests statewide are now subject to release without bail, violent felonies, sex-related charges, and some domestic violence charges are still subject to cash bail.
“These reforms are a very incremental change — New York State did not get rid of cash bail. It’s still applicable to almost all violent offenses,” Cumberbatch said. “And for someone with means, almost nothing has changed.”
Across America, pretrial detention increased 433 percent from 1970 to 2015, according to a 2019 Vera Institute of Justice report. About two-thirds of people currently in jail have not been convicted of a crime. A 2017 City University of New York report found New York City arrestees who were detained before their trials spent an average of 13-17 days behind bars. But some stay much longer — like Kalief Browder, whose tragic story was an inspiration for the law. Because he couldn’t make bail, Browder spent three years at Rikers Island without ever being convicted of a crime, two of those in solitary confinement. Two years after he was released, he died by suicide.
People of color are disproportionately represented in New York’s prisons and jails: More than half of those incarcerated are black, although black people represent just 16 percent of the state’s population. And a 2019 analysis by antipoverty nonprofit FPWA found that “as poverty rates increase, jail incarceration rates increase in New York City community districts.”
In a system where if you can afford to pay bail, you can walk free, even critics of the new law agree that those who are detained are overwhelmingly poor people.
John Flynn, the district attorney in Erie County, which includes Buffalo, said his office has been operating under a policy for the past year and a half in which prosecutors refrain from asking for bail in the majority of misdemeanor cases with a few exceptions, a policy that cut the number of people in jail pretrial by almost 50 percent, he says. “The main reason was the disproportionate economic realities — you have two people charged with the same offense, and one can afford to bond out and one can’t, and that’s just fundamentally unfair,” Flynn said.
But Flynn, who is vice president of the state and national district attorney associations, said the new law goes too far. “My attorneys are no longer able to argue, to point out to a judge, ‘Hey Judge, there’s a good reason to why you should put bail,’” Flynn said. “And the judges, who are elected by the people here in New York State, they now have no discretion at all.”
Flynn said the law should be amended to include a public safety component similar to the bail reform law passed by New Jersey, which uses an algorithm to predict the likelihood of a defendant to commit further crimes. “Whether or not the person is a danger to himself or another person or society in general — I think a discussion needs to take place on that,” Flynn said.
But proponents of the new law argue that it’s that judicial discretion that resulted in huge numbers of poor people being detained pretrial, and that same discretion also allows for racial bias. The predictive algorithms, too, have come under fire for furthering racial bias. A 2016 ProPublica investigation found that the algorithm in Broward County, Florida, that was used to predict the likelihood of a defendant to commit future crimes “was particularly likely to falsely flag black defendants as future criminals, wrongly labeling them this way at almost twice the rate as white defendants.”
Erin George, the civil rights campaigns director for Citizen Action of New York, said that these conversations about public safety are missing a critical segment of the public. “We have to stop talking about public safety as if the safety of black and brown communities who are targeted by discriminatory pretrial laws and policing, and then forced into the most violent places in the United States, as if their safety doesn’t matter in this conversation,” George said. “Our conversation has to include these people.”
The bail reform movement has produced positive results in nearby New Jersey
What’s happening in New York is part of a larger wave of bail reform sweeping the country. California became the first state to abolish cash bail in 2018 after an appellate court ruled the practice unconstitutional. But after a successful campaign by the bail bonds industry, the law is on hold until California voters take up the issue later this year. Meanwhile, Harris County, home to Houston, has done away with cash bail for misdemeanors after a federal judge ruled the practice unconstitutional, and a similar lawsuit is pending for the felony courts there. Other lawsuits have been filed in states and counties around the country.
New Jersey’s reforms, which happened in 2017, have seen promising results. Not only has there been a 40 percent drop in the number of pretrial detainees, data also shows that since the new law went into effect there was no spike in crime, and people who were released were just about as likely to show up for their court dates.
This data is heartening for supporters of the New York law, who hope to see similar findings in their state. But Senate Republicans plan to bring a bill to repeal the law in the current legislative session. And with even Democrats, especially in swing districts, calling for some modification of the new law, it’s likely that potential changes to the bill will be heard in the Democrat-controlled House as well.
But some, like Dan Quart, a New York state assemblyman who is running for Manhattan district attorney next year, said the right move is to stay the course. “I’m hopeful that we would not consider rolling back reforms 12, 15, 20 days into those reforms,” he said.
“It was a step in the right direction,” Quart said. “It was not the ultimate solution, which is to eliminate cash bail completely.”


vox--2020-01-17--Coping with war and crisis through memes

After the news broke the first week of January that President Trump had ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani , one of the most rapid reactions to emerge amid the surprise and confusion was the memes .
Jokes about the possible fallout of Soleimani ’ s death were instantly everywhere .
They especially proliferated on TikTok and Twitter , where hashtags like # WW3 drove major trends for several days .
A member of the subreddit r/ww3memes , created over two years ago , announced on January 3 , “ It ’ s time for this sub to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 43,000 subscribers .
You might think this type of reaction is juvenile or dismissive , but it ’ s really just human .
Memes frequently operate as exemplars of larger trends , as well as stand-ins for cultural anxieties and ways to express and alleviate fears or other emotions through humor .
The collectivism of memes , too , is a crucial part of their popularity , because their rapid and visible spread helps us all figure out how we ’ re feeling about some news trend or other issue .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if anything , about how teenage meme makers are perceiving the Iranian conflict and the larger , more abstract idea of a third World War ?
Surprisingly , many of them seem to demonstrate far less fear than you might expect .
In fact , the overall tone of the memes boiled down to a kind of cheerful ambivalence about the prospect of war .
There are definite gaps in the tone and subject of the memes from platform to platform .
And they may already be part of a larger tonal shift @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit more suited to an era of apocalypse : a determination to party through the hard times to come .
The vast majority of memes expressed anxiety over the draft After the news broke of Soleimani ’ s assassination on January 2 , memes about the turn of events exploded across Twitter , TikTok , and other social media platforms .
The memes proliferated ideas about the prospect of World War III ; about Iran and its culture ; and about the hilarity and absurdity of sending a modern generation of teens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Despite having some universal themes across platforms , most memes about the war looked and felt much , much different from platform to platform .
But the vast majority of them joked about people getting drafted to fight the war .
The American government eliminated the draft in 1973 , but that didn ’ t matter to the meme makers — which makes sense , because fears about the draft being reinstated have always circulated among teens and young adults .
In 2016 , a false claim that Trump wanted to bring back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a part of the larger cultural anxiety over his campaign .
As it often does , Black Twitter was the first community to drive this meme .
That also makes sense , given that a recurrent fear of the draft has been especially prevalent in black culture since the Vietnam War , when black men were disproportionately affected by the draft .
In other words , despite fears of a possible draft temporarily crashing the Selective Service website , the meme makers probably weren ’ t proliferating the idea that the draft still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a sense of anxiety about the country fighting another war .
That ironic sense of merriment was a crucial component in all the memes .
One thing that immediately struck me about the World War III memes on both Twitter and TikTok was how lighthearted their tone was despite the seriousness of the subject matter .
What was that about ?
Meanwhile , the other predominant emotion was ... glee ?
Again and again , the predominant theme associated with the World War III memes was the idea of Gen Z ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war of any kind .
This humorous anxiety took the form of jokes framing normal millennials and Gen Z-ers showing up to the war just to party , or approaching it like a typical game of Fortnite or Call of Duty : Do you have zero skills that can prepare you for battle ?
Are you learning Persian via Google ?
The memes tell you you ’ re not alone in being hilariously underprepared for a real global emergency .
There ’ s another recurring theme that accompanies all this comedic haplessness in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On TikTok especially , there ’ s a subset of memes that seem to relish the excitement and pure adrenaline of going to war .
It ’ s rare to see any TikToks of the meme that say something serious about the war — they do exist , but they ’ re far outnumbered by attempts to represent WWIII as a party .
As CNN ’ s Fernando Alfonso III pointed out , World War III memes have been a thing on the internet for a while , particularly as conflict escalated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And as the Atlantic ’ s Ian Bogost pointed out , the idea of World War III itself has been a looming specter since the Cold War , along with its threat of impending nuclear disaster .
The apocryphal nature of the next “ world war ” might help explain why so many of the memes are ambivalent about whether the war itself would be a good or bad thing for the country .
But there ’ s probably a simpler reason behind the ambivalence : When we make these jokes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about what they all mean .
The memes are helping to shape a narrative about the war — and it ’ s not always a great look “ They ’ re not very exciting to look at , to tell you frankly , ” Dr. Saleem Alhabash told me in a phone interview when I asked him if he ’ d seen the World War III memes .
Alhabash , a professor at Michigan State University ’ s media psychology department , studies social media and the way people use memes as intercultural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is about “ glorifying the war for sure , ” he told me , “ but also not realizing what war really is and what it means .
So dealing with it in a laissez-faire kind of way.
” Alhabash ’ s research shows that whenever social media users participate online , often people aren ’ t thinking too deeply about what to post or share .
“ None of us would see something online and look at it for five , 10 , or 20 or 30 minutes and discuss what the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he explained .
We ’ re also driven to make content based on what we think other people want to see on social media — which might explain why memes themselves get reified so easily : They show us what we think people want to see , so we make more of them .
Alhabash ’ s point , however , is that this can be a very knee-jerk experience , which doesn ’ t really lend itself to reflective war memes .
“ There ’ s also an issue of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I have to be part of the conversation , I have to remain relevant on social media and be part of the general discussion — at times without really understanding the issue in depth , ” he said .
To Alhabash , the non-linear nature of memes in spaces like TikTok has a huge role to play in shaping public discourse .
Think of TikTok as a place where memes aren ’ t so much purely copied — like a straightforward retweet — as they are shared with additional commentary .
Only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adding new personal imprints to the original footage , usually either new music to existing footage or new footage to existing music .
“ There ’ s a certain level of originality [ on TikTok ] and putting yourself within the narrative of that particular team , ” Alhabash said .
“ You become part of the narrative and it becomes part of you.
” So a meme that might start out calling attention to one idea in one way might wind up calling attention to a completely different idea in another way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been shared numerous times , it might have a completely different meaning in a completely different context .
Take this changing perspective on the dancer in the memes below .
In both memes , the main joke is about assimilation into the war .
But in the first meme , the meme ’ s point of view is from the dancer ; in the second , it ’ s from the “ kidnapped ” men around her .
These are significantly different ways of framing our relationship to Iran and its people , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ examples of how people are thinking about the war .
Because as the memes and their narratives travel and spread , they help shape the larger cultural narrative about Iran itself — just as all memes , from toxic to wholesome , help create cultural narratives .
“ Things just unfold and keep on unfolding .
And then [ the topic ] becomes so dynamic that there ’ s no way to pinpoint what is the cause of someone thinking in a particular way about the world in 2020 , ” Alhabash said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ re part of making that narrative and influencing how it evolves over time.
” The memes are really about coping with increasing disaster Despite Alhabash ’ s reservations about how effective the WWIII memes were at making salient political points , he pointed out that the anxiety the memes expressed is real .
“ These memes , the way that people are communicating , could be a reflection of the general feeling that people are having — this uncertainty about what is going to happen , and how severe this trend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humorous or [ dismissive ] of the seriousness , they can reflect [ public ] sentiment.
” The memes seem to follow a recent trend of viral internet humor as a coping mechanism — memes that are more overtly psychological than the usual wholesome meme , and more upfront about the touch of nihilism that drives them .
There are two obvious recent references for this self-aware state of mind .
The first is the “ are you in the right headspace ?
” meme , which spawned last month as a deeply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to ask their friends if they ’ re “ in the right headspace to receive information that can possibly hurt you.
” The resulting meme has been frequently used to ironically frame its subjects as overblown drama .
World War III ?
No exception : The second example is the “ do what you need to cope ” meme , which emerged near the end of 2019 and has been hugely popular into the beginning of 2020 .
The format usually involves a fictional character and starts with the banal “ canceling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then rapidly escalate through overdramatic plot points before coming to rest at “ do what you need to cope.
” There are WWIII variants of this meme as well , though they ’ re a bit bleaker than the norm .
The basic idea here , as Alhabash points out , is that the World War III meme itself isn ’ t just about war .
It ’ s about the larger cultural mood and the ways in which we receive , express , and amplify that mood .
Alhabash expressed doubts about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a subset of the meme makers and their audience , the war jokes are helping quell anxiety and keep things lighthearted .
In other words , the making of memes is a form of doing what you need to cope .
It ’ s worth noting , however , that some situations do seem to be utterly too dark to meme — there are virtually no memes about the Australian bushfires , for example — and that ironically might be cause for hope .
If the potential global conflict is something we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean that our prevailing emotion is still hope that it won ’ t happen .
Still , Alhabash cautioned that the memes are a kind of canary in the coal mine for a larger social media response to future emergent political situations .
“ In any kind of political tension , whether it is local , regional , national or global , social media is part of the warfare , ” he said .
“ And this is something to look for in any future crisis.
” In other words , keep your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just because they might help you figure out how you feel about an increasingly complicated world .

After the news broke the first week of January that President Trump had ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, one of the most rapid reactions to emerge amid the surprise and confusion was the memes.
Jokes about the possible fallout of Soleimani’s death were instantly everywhere. They especially proliferated on TikTok and Twitter, where hashtags like #WW3 drove major trends for several days. A member of the subreddit r/ww3memes, created over two years ago, announced on January 3, “It’s time for this sub to rise.” It’s currently got over 43,000 subscribers.
You might think this type of reaction is juvenile or dismissive, but it’s really just human. Memes frequently operate as exemplars of larger trends, as well as stand-ins for cultural anxieties and ways to express and alleviate fears or other emotions through humor. The collectivism of memes, too, is a crucial part of their popularity, because their rapid and visible spread helps us all figure out how we’re feeling about some news trend or other issue.
So what were the memes telling us, if anything, about how teenage meme makers are perceiving the Iranian conflict and the larger, more abstract idea of a third World War?
Surprisingly, many of them seem to demonstrate far less fear than you might expect. In fact, the overall tone of the memes boiled down to a kind of cheerful ambivalence about the prospect of war.
There are definite gaps in the tone and subject of the memes from platform to platform. And they may already be part of a larger tonal shift away from the wholesome meme toward something a bit more suited to an era of apocalypse: a determination to party through the hard times to come.
The vast majority of memes expressed anxiety over the draft
After the news broke of Soleimani’s assassination on January 2, memes about the turn of events exploded across Twitter, TikTok, and other social media platforms. The memes proliferated ideas about the prospect of World War III; about Iran and its culture; and about the hilarity and absurdity of sending a modern generation of teens and young adults off to war.
Despite having some universal themes across platforms, most memes about the war looked and felt much, much different from platform to platform. But the vast majority of them joked about people getting drafted to fight the war.
me when i get a draft for WWIII pic.twitter.com/KZuaXnRjAb — YLO GANG ___ BROWARD (@ylo_gang_) January 3, 2020
the US: we are considering adding women to the draft
me: call me old fashioned but yes, i was raised to serve my husband. cook for him. do the laundry. wake up at the crack of dawn to make him breakfast, prepare his clothes and clean the house. — queen quen (@quenblackwell) January 3, 2020
me disguising myself as a dog to avoid the draft for world war 3 pic.twitter.com/ydVfdhTPHc — jade loves george (@successfuliana) January 3, 2020
The American government eliminated the draft in 1973, but that didn’t matter to the meme makers — which makes sense, because fears about the draft being reinstated have always circulated among teens and young adults. In 2016, a false claim that Trump wanted to bring back the draft circulated around the internet as a part of the larger cultural anxiety over his campaign.
College students when they realize that signing up for fafsa also signed them up for the draft pic.twitter.com/17t9oSqyEw — Mike AM (@kofiiofk) January 3, 2020
As it often does, Black Twitter was the first community to drive this meme. That also makes sense, given that a recurrent fear of the draft has been especially prevalent in black culture since the Vietnam War, when black men were disproportionately affected by the draft.
me and my boys in prison after we all refused the draft for WWIII pic.twitter.com/urAAs1W6SN — . (@elijah_ayers) January 3, 2020
Me laughing at #WorldWarThree memes even though I'm eligible for the draft pic.twitter.com/TYpbtzCE56 — Kallix (@Kallix_) January 3, 2020
In other words, despite fears of a possible draft temporarily crashing the Selective Service website, the meme makers probably weren’t proliferating the idea that the draft still exists out of ignorance, but out of a sense of anxiety about the country fighting another war.
That ironic sense of merriment was a crucial component in all the memes. One thing that immediately struck me about the World War III memes on both Twitter and TikTok was how lighthearted their tone was despite the seriousness of the subject matter.
What was that about?
Meanwhile, the other predominant emotion was ... glee?
Again and again, the predominant theme associated with the World War III memes was the idea of Gen Z’s general unpreparedness to fight in a war of any kind.
This humorous anxiety took the form of jokes framing normal millennials and Gen Z-ers showing up to the war just to party, or approaching it like a typical game of Fortnite or Call of Duty:
How our snapchat maps gonna be looking like during #WWIII pic.twitter.com/phUDrsZhhC — cool ® (@6bigdaniel6) January 5, 2020
Do you have zero skills that can prepare you for battle? Are you learning Persian via Google? The memes tell you you’re not alone in being hilariously underprepared for a real global emergency.
Me dodging Iran’s bullets, after Trump drafts me to fight for World War 3 #WWIII pic.twitter.com/Apix8nImJJ — Demarkus ♂ (@yfn_demarkus) January 3, 2020
There’s another recurring theme that accompanies all this comedic haplessness in the face of an impending global crisis. On TikTok especially, there’s a subset of memes that seem to relish the excitement and pure adrenaline of going to war.
It’s rare to see any TikToks of the meme that say something serious about the war — they do exist, but they’re far outnumbered by attempts to represent WWIII as a party.
As CNN’s Fernando Alfonso III pointed out, World War III memes have been a thing on the internet for a while, particularly as conflict escalated between Trump and North Korea in 2017. And as the Atlantic’s Ian Bogost pointed out, the idea of World War III itself has been a looming specter since the Cold War, along with its threat of impending nuclear disaster.
The apocryphal nature of the next “world war” might help explain why so many of the memes are ambivalent about whether the war itself would be a good or bad thing for the country. But there’s probably a simpler reason behind the ambivalence: When we make these jokes, we’re not thinking too deeply about what they all mean.
The memes are helping to shape a narrative about the war — and it’s not always a great look
“They’re not very exciting to look at, to tell you frankly,” Dr. Saleem Alhabash told me in a phone interview when I asked him if he’d seen the World War III memes. Alhabash, a professor at Michigan State University’s media psychology department, studies social media and the way people use memes as intercultural communication. Part of the meme response is about “glorifying the war for sure,” he told me, “but also not realizing what war really is and what it means. So dealing with it in a laissez-faire kind of way.”
Alhabash’s research shows that whenever social media users participate online, often people aren’t thinking too deeply about what to post or share.
“None of us would see something online and look at it for five, 10, or 20 or 30 minutes and discuss what the ramifications are of posting this or not,” he explained.
We’re also driven to make content based on what we think other people want to see on social media — which might explain why memes themselves get reified so easily: They show us what we think people want to see, so we make more of them. Alhabash’s point, however, is that this can be a very knee-jerk experience, which doesn’t really lend itself to reflective war memes.
“There’s also an issue of jumping on the wagon — the feeling that I have to be part of the conversation, I have to remain relevant on social media and be part of the general discussion — at times without really understanding the issue in depth,” he said.
To Alhabash, the non-linear nature of memes in spaces like TikTok has a huge role to play in shaping public discourse. Think of TikTok as a place where memes aren’t so much purely copied — like a straightforward retweet — as they are shared with additional commentary. Only the share usually involves the next user adding new personal imprints to the original footage, usually either new music to existing footage or new footage to existing music.
“There’s a certain level of originality [on TikTok] and putting yourself within the narrative of that particular team,” Alhabash said. “You become part of the narrative and it becomes part of you.”
So a meme that might start out calling attention to one idea in one way might wind up calling attention to a completely different idea in another way. By the time a meme has been shared numerous times, it might have a completely different meaning in a completely different context.
Take this changing perspective on the dancer in the memes below. In both memes, the main joke is about assimilation into the war. But in the first meme, the meme’s point of view is from the dancer; in the second, it’s from the “kidnapped” men around her.
These are significantly different ways of framing our relationship to Iran and its people, but they’re both equally important examples of how people are thinking about the war. Because as the memes and their narratives travel and spread, they help shape the larger cultural narrative about Iran itself — just as all memes, from toxic to wholesome, help create cultural narratives.
“Things just unfold and keep on unfolding. And then [the topic] becomes so dynamic that there’s no way to pinpoint what is the cause of someone thinking in a particular way about the world in 2020,” Alhabash said. “Because, after all, they’re part of making that narrative and influencing how it evolves over time.”
The memes are really about coping with increasing disaster
Despite Alhabash’s reservations about how effective the WWIII memes were at making salient political points, he pointed out that the anxiety the memes expressed is real. “These memes, the way that people are communicating, could be a reflection of the general feeling that people are having — this uncertainty about what is going to happen, and how severe this trend is. So while they might appear humorous or [dismissive] of the seriousness, they can reflect [public] sentiment.”
The memes seem to follow a recent trend of viral internet humor as a coping mechanism — memes that are more overtly psychological than the usual wholesome meme, and more upfront about the touch of nihilism that drives them. There are two obvious recent references for this self-aware state of mind. The first is the “are you in the right headspace?” meme, which spawned last month as a deeply sarcastic response to a Twitter thread inviting people to ask their friends if they’re “in the right headspace to receive information that can possibly hurt you.” The resulting meme has been frequently used to ironically frame its subjects as overblown drama. World War III? No exception:
me: it's my birthday, oh boy! gonna get so many presents :3
The U.S., getting ready to draft my friend group: are you in the right headspace to receive information that could possibly hurt you? — storm (@st0rmcl0uds) January 4, 2020
The second example is the “do what you need to cope” meme, which emerged near the end of 2019 and has been hugely popular into the beginning of 2020. The format usually involves a fictional character and starts with the banal “canceling plans is okay” — only to then rapidly escalate through overdramatic plot points before coming to rest at “do what you need to cope.”
Canceling plans is ok. Being forced to participate in a fight to the death is ok. Having a fake relationship to trick the wealthy into loving you is ok. Becoming the face of the rebellion is ok. Do what you need to cope. — The Hunger Games (@TheHungerGames) January 7, 2020
There are WWIII variants of this meme as well, though they’re a bit bleaker than the norm.
Cancelling plans is ok. Realising the world is ending is ok. Longer zoomies with apocalypse looming on the horizon is ok. Acting like you’re an expert on Iran all of a sudden, semantic arguments about world wars being imperialistic constructs is ok. Do what you need to do to cope — Short Left Winger (@CivilSerpentt) January 3, 2020
The basic idea here, as Alhabash points out, is that the World War III meme itself isn’t just about war. It’s about the larger cultural mood and the ways in which we receive, express, and amplify that mood. Alhabash expressed doubts about how self-aware this process was. But for a subset of the meme makers and their audience, the war jokes are helping quell anxiety and keep things lighthearted.
In other words, the making of memes is a form of doing what you need to cope.
It’s worth noting, however, that some situations do seem to be utterly too dark to meme — there are virtually no memes about the Australian bushfires, for example — and that ironically might be cause for hope. If the potential global conflict is something we can joke about, then it might mean that our prevailing emotion is still hope that it won’t happen.
Still, Alhabash cautioned that the memes are a kind of canary in the coal mine for a larger social media response to future emergent political situations.
“In any kind of political tension, whether it is local, regional, national or global, social media is part of the warfare,” he said. “And this is something to look for in any future crisis.”
In other words, keep your eye on the memes — and not just because they might help you figure out how you feel about an increasingly complicated world.


vox--2020-01-17--The next Democratic debate will take place right before the New Hampshire primary

The next Democratic debate will take place after the first voters have already weighed in on the 2020 race .
Slated for February 7 in Manchester , New Hampshire , the debate is the first of a trio happening that month as individuals in all four early states head to the polls ( or caucuses ) .
Scheduled just days after Iowa ’ s caucuses and less than a week before New Hampshire ’ s February 11 primary , the debate , hosted by ABC , WMUR-TV , and Apple News , is poised to inform last-minute voter decisions both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As Vox ’ s Ella Nilsen reports , roughly two-thirds of voters in New Hampshire still haven ’ t made a final decision about their top candidate .
It ’ s possible candidates ’ last-ditch debate appearances — and arguments — could make the difference .
In the first debate after votes are cast in Iowa , candidates will for the first time in the 2020 primary race have two distinct pathways to making the stage .
The first option is to meet a delegate threshold : Any candidate who leaves Iowa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic National Convention will automatically have a spot on the stage .
The second pathway is identical to the standards put in place by the Democratic National Committee for the seventh debate in January : Candidates must achieve 225,00 unique donors and poll either at 5 percent or better in four qualifying national or early-state polls , or at 7 percent in two qualifying early-state polls .
The deadline to qualify for the eighth Democratic debate is midnight on February 6 , the day before the debate is scheduled to take place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place next month are slated for February 19 and 25 in Las Vegas and Charleston , South Carolina , respectively .
Currently , the set of candidates who have qualified to be on stage in the first of three February debates is the same as this month ’ s debate : Similarly , a slew of remaining candidates could get left out once again : The state of the race , briefly explained There ’ s a four-way race for first place in Iowa and New Hampshire : A recent poll from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren , Buttigieg , and Biden are all within striking distance of one another in Iowa .
Similarly , in New Hampshire , those same frontrunners are polling very closely with one another , with Sanders leading the RealClearPolitics average in both states .
...
But voters are still making up their minds : Even though we ’ re just weeks away from voters heading to the polls , the race is still very fluid as a majority of people continue to finalize their candidate of choice .
These last-minute debates could well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for voters who might be torn between a subset of the remaining candidates .
Three of the top five contenders are going to be rather busy for the next couple weeks : Impeachment continues to remain a wild card as the 2020 race continues , largely because a trial will keep three of the top five candidates off the campaign trail for part of the time .
Sens .
Sanders , Warren , and Klobuchar will need to stay in Washington while the trial is taking place in the coming weeks , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the downtime they might have .
As the trial rules dictate , however , the proceedings could take place six days a week , eating up valuable campaign opportunities .
The field keeps getting whiter : Sen. Cory Booker has dropped out of the 2020 race this week , and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro recently did as well , the latest candidates of color to leave a field once hailed as the most diverse ever .
Experts tell Vox that the dominance of the Iowa caucuses and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are more than 90 percent white — set the tone for evaluations of candidates ’ electability , and in doing so could wind up hurting candidates of color .

The next Democratic debate will take place after the first voters have already weighed in on the 2020 race. Slated for February 7 in Manchester, New Hampshire, the debate is the first of a trio happening that month as individuals in all four early states head to the polls (or caucuses). The debate’s start time will be 8 pm ET; it’s expected to run for about three hours.
Scheduled just days after Iowa’s caucuses and less than a week before New Hampshire’s February 11 primary, the debate, hosted by ABC, WMUR-TV, and Apple News, is poised to inform last-minute voter decisions both in the state and across the country. As Vox’s Ella Nilsen reports, roughly two-thirds of voters in New Hampshire still haven’t made a final decision about their top candidate. It’s possible candidates’ last-ditch debate appearances — and arguments — could make the difference.
In the first debate after votes are cast in Iowa, candidates will for the first time in the 2020 primary race have two distinct pathways to making the stage. The first option is to meet a delegate threshold: Any candidate who leaves Iowa with at least one pledged delegate to the Democratic National Convention will automatically have a spot on the stage.
The second pathway is identical to the standards put in place by the Democratic National Committee for the seventh debate in January: Candidates must achieve 225,000 unique donors and poll either at 5 percent or better in four qualifying national or early-state polls, or at 7 percent in two qualifying early-state polls.
The deadline to qualify for the eighth Democratic debate is midnight on February 6, the day before the debate is scheduled to take place.
The other debates set to take place next month are slated for February 19 and 25 in Las Vegas and Charleston, South Carolina, respectively.
Currently, the set of candidates who have qualified to be on stage in the first of three February debates is one larger than this month’s debate:
Similarly, a slew of remaining candidates could get left out once again:
The state of the race, briefly explained
There’s a four-way race for first place in Iowa and New Hampshire: A recent poll from the Des Moines Register found that Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, and Biden are all within striking distance of one another in Iowa. Similarly, in New Hampshire, those same frontrunners are polling very closely with one another, with Sanders leading the RealClearPolitics average in both states.
... But voters are still making up their minds: Even though we’re just weeks away from voters heading to the polls, the race is still very fluid as a majority of people continue to finalize their candidate of choice. These last-minute debates could well play a significant role in these decisions for voters who might be torn between a subset of the remaining candidates.
Three of the top five contenders are going to be rather busy for the next couple weeks: Impeachment continues to remain a wild card as the 2020 race continues, largely because a trial will keep three of the top five candidates off the campaign trail for part of the time. Sens. Sanders, Warren, and Klobuchar will need to stay in Washington while the trial is taking place in the coming weeks, though they’ll be able to campaign during the downtime they might have. As the trial rules dictate, however, the proceedings could take place six days a week, eating up valuable campaign opportunities.
The field keeps getting whiter: Sen. Cory Booker has dropped out of the 2020 race, and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro recently did as well, the latest candidates of color to leave a field once hailed as the most diverse ever. Experts tell Vox that the dominance of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary — both states that are more than 90 percent white — set the tone for evaluations of candidates’ electability, and in doing so could wind up hurting candidates of color.


vox--2020-01-17--Mike Bloomberg throws shade at Joe Biden as a looming “lame duck”

Mike Bloomberg seemingly suggested behind closed doors at an event with Silicon Valley elite on Thursday that former Vice President Joe Biden could be a “ lame duck ” president if elected , implying that the former New York mayor is the better moderate 77-year-old to support .
Toward the end of his 10-minute pitch to about 200 tech executives , investors , and socialites , Bloomberg , looking at notes , offered the contrast without naming Biden explicitly , according to video posted to social media and seen by Recode .
“ My message to you is if you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and strong enough to serve two terms and not give the gift of being a lame-duck president to the Republicans , ” Bloomberg said , before listing off a series of policy commitments , “ then welcome to Bloomberg 2020 and I ’ d love to have your support.
” Biden is the only candidate who has been the subject of credible reporting that he could pledge to serve a single term , an accusation the Biden campaign has forcefully denied .
Nevertheless , the speculation could prove fruitful fodder for Bloomberg , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the same elite support and moderate voters .
A campaign spokesperson noted that Bloomberg has pledged to support the Democratic nominee no matter what .
It is a sensitive point of attack for Biden .
Politico first reported in December that Biden ’ s campaign had considered publicly stating — or at least privately signaling — that he would only serve one term if elected , seen as a strategy to stave off nagging concerns about his age and whether he is as sharp as he used to be .
Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one-term pledge was ever under consideration But it has nevertheless continued to dog him , including being asked about it in an interview published Friday with the New York Times editorial board .
“ I never hinted that .
That is simply not true , ” he told the paper .
“ I don ’ t know where it came from , but it did not — it came from somebody who in fact , I guess , thinks that they know me and thinks that maybe , I don ’ t know.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ age : 77 .
Another candidate who has drawn concern about his health , age , and ability to do the job , Bernie Sanders , recently suffered a heart attack .
Elizabeth Warren is 70 , but there has not been serious reporting or speculation about Sanders or Warren making a similar one-term commitment .
Bloomberg ’ s line was interpreted as a comment about Biden , according to people in the room .
While Biden has not shown strength with Silicon Valley leaders , he does represent a clear threat to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg only entered the race at a time when Biden seemed to have a declining grip on moderate voters and Democratic elites .
But Biden has proved durable .
Bloomberg ’ s team has indicated to Democrats that he might reorient his campaign to a more general anti-Trump organization if Biden proves to be on the path to victory following Super Tuesday , when California votes , according to the New York Times .
And so it makes sense for Bloomberg to look for the opportunities to draw a contrast with Biden .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the comment at the conclusion of a “ private briefing ” for many leaders from the tech industry .
Attendees included people like San Francisco powerbroker Ron Conway , so-called “ Queen of the Internet ” Mary Meeker , and a host of other Bloomberg-curious Silicon Valley titans .
Bloomberg allies think his data-driven , subdued brand of politics will resonate among leaders in the tech community .
“ I think we need less talk and less partisanship .
In fact , I think we need less tweeting , ” he told the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make you this commitment right now : When I ’ m in the Oval Office , there will not be any tweeting.
” What Bloomberg is not seeking is campaign contributions from them — something that Biden , who has made multiple trips to Silicon Valley , very much is .
Bloomberg is self-financing his race and asked the donors there to consider giving to the Democratic National Committee and outside groups — while still pledging to support him in the primary .
“ I can imagine I ’ m the only politician @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a room with all of you and not asked for donations , ” he told the crowd .

Mike Bloomberg seemingly suggested behind closed doors at an event with Silicon Valley elite on Thursday that former Vice President Joe Biden could be a “lame duck” president if elected, implying that the former New York mayor is the better moderate 77-year-old to support.
Toward the end of his 10-minute pitch to about 200 tech executives, investors, and socialites, Bloomberg, looking at notes, offered the contrast without naming Biden explicitly, according to video posted to social media and seen by Recode.
“My message to you is if you want somebody who’s experienced, and strong enough to serve two terms and not give the gift of being a lame-duck president to the Republicans,” Bloomberg said, before listing off a series of policy commitments, “then welcome to Bloomberg 2020 and I’d love to have your support.”
Biden is the only candidate who has been the subject of credible reporting that he could pledge to serve a single term, an accusation the Biden campaign has forcefully denied.
Nevertheless, the speculation could prove fruitful fodder for Bloomberg, who is competing with Biden for some of the same elite support and moderate voters.
A campaign spokesperson noted that Bloomberg has pledged to support the Democratic nominee no matter what.
It is a sensitive point of attack for Biden. Politico first reported in December that Biden’s campaign had considered publicly stating — or at least privately signaling — that he would only serve one term if elected, seen as a strategy to stave off nagging concerns about his age and whether he is as sharp as he used to be. Biden’s team has strongly disputed that a one-term pledge was ever under consideration
But it has nevertheless continued to dog him, including being asked about it in an interview published Friday with the New York Times editorial board.
“I never hinted that. That is simply not true,” he told the paper. “I don’t know where it came from, but it did not — it came from somebody who in fact, I guess, thinks that they know me and thinks that maybe, I don’t know.”
Biden’s campaign declined to comment.
Bloomberg and Biden are the same age: 77. Another candidate who has drawn concern about his health, age, and ability to do the job, Bernie Sanders, recently suffered a heart attack. Elizabeth Warren is 70, but there has not been serious reporting or speculation about Sanders or Warren making a similar one-term commitment.
Bloomberg’s line was interpreted as a comment about Biden, according to people in the room.
While Biden has not shown strength with Silicon Valley leaders, he does represent a clear threat to Bloomberg’s path to victory. Bloomberg only entered the race at a time when Biden seemed to have a declining grip on moderate voters and Democratic elites. But Biden has proved durable.
Bloomberg’s team has indicated to Democrats that he might reorient his campaign to a more general anti-Trump organization if Biden proves to be on the path to victory following Super Tuesday, when California votes, according to the New York Times. And so it makes sense for Bloomberg to look for the opportunities to draw a contrast with Biden.
The former New York City mayor made the comment at the conclusion of a “private briefing” for many leaders from the tech industry. Attendees included people like San Francisco powerbroker Ron Conway, so-called “Queen of the Internet” Mary Meeker, and a host of other Bloomberg-curious Silicon Valley titans.
Bloomberg allies think his data-driven, subdued brand of politics will resonate among leaders in the tech community.
“I think we need less talk and less partisanship. In fact, I think we need less tweeting,” he told the crowd at one point. “I make you this commitment right now: When I’m in the Oval Office, there will not be any tweeting.”
What Bloomberg is not seeking is campaign contributions from them — something that Biden, who has made multiple trips to Silicon Valley, very much is. Bloomberg is self-financing his race and asked the donors there to consider giving to the Democratic National Committee and outside groups — while still pledging to support him in the primary.
“I can imagine I’m the only politician in history who’s been in a room with all of you and not asked for donations,” he told the crowd.


vox--2020-01-17--21 kids sued the government over climate change. A federal court dismissed the case.

A three-judge panel in the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to dismiss the Juliana v. US lawsuit on Friday , a seminal case involving 21 young people who sued the federal government for violating their right to a safe climate .
The decision is a blow to climate activists and shows the limits of the courts ’ willingness to assign legal responsibility to the government for the harms caused by greenhouse gases .
The judges all agreed that climate change is an urgent , threatening problem , but ruled that the plaintiffs , who were between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suit was filed , didn ’ t have standing to sue .
They also said that climate policies must come from the legislative branch .
“ The panel reluctantly concluded that the plaintiffs ’ case must be made to the political branches or to the electorate at large , ” according to the ruling .
Writing for the majority , Circuit Court Judge Andrew Hurwitz conceded that climate risks are growing and that young people stand to suffer the worst impacts of rising average temperatures , like increasingly destructive floods and fires .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ song warned that we were ‘ on the eve of destruction , ’ ” he wrote .
“ The plaintiffs in this case have presented compelling evidence that climate change has brought that eve nearer.
” Andrea Rodgers , a senior attorney at Our Children ’ s Trust , the nonprofit backing the youth who filed the lawsuit , described the decision in an email as “ unprecedented and contrary to American principles of justice.
” Her organization has vowed to appeal the ruling in the coming weeks .
As politicians have failed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have emerged as a prominent venue for advancing an agenda to limit emissions , and the Juliana case was one of a number of climate change lawsuits working their way through various US courts .
More than a dozen cities and counties have filed suit against companies like Exxon for the climate-related harms caused by their products .
But the Juliana case stood out among climate lawsuits because it challenged the federal government rather than fossil fuel companies .
Despite proposing a novel legal theory — that a safe climate is a civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it through policies like leasing public lands for coal mining — the suit managed to get surprisingly far .
It survived several motions to dismiss and intervention by the US Supreme Court .
But what the plaintiffs wanted — a government plan to phase out fossil fuels and pull greenhouse gases back out of the air — was not something the courts could provide .
“ Reluctantly , we conclude that such relief is beyond our constitutional power , ” Hurwitz wrote .
However , District Court Judge Josephine Staton thought otherwise and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It is as if an asteroid were barreling toward Earth and the government decided to shut down our only defenses , ” she wrote .
“ Seeking to quash this suit , the government bluntly insists that it has the absolute and unreviewable power to destroy the Nation.
” The Juliana case has been the highest-profile lawsuit filed by Our Children ’ s Trust , but the group has also filed similar climate change civil rights suits on behalf of young people in state courts .
While the 9th Circuit ruling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many are undeterred from using the courts to fight climate change and hold polluters accountable .
Recently , some law students have also begun to protest against the law firms representing fossil fuel companies in these climate suits , pressuring firms to drop them as clients and urging classmates not to work for them .
Climate litigation has also emerged as an issue in the 2020 campaign for president .
Many of the Democratic contenders have called for fossil fuel companies to be held liable for climate damages and for sowing disinformation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ far as to call for criminal prosecution of greenhouse gas emitters .
All the while , more suits and legal complaints are being filed .
On Thursday , a group of four indigenous tribes in Louisiana filed a human rights claim at the United Nations .
They argued that the US government , through its contributions to climate change and its failure to stop it , has violated the rights of these groups , who are seeing lands eroded by rising seas .
So climate change still has many more days in court @ @ @

A three-judge panel in the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to dismiss the Juliana v. US lawsuit on Friday, a seminal case involving 21 young people who sued the federal government for violating their right to a safe climate. The decision is a blow to climate activists and shows the limits of the courts’ willingness to assign legal responsibility to the government for the harms caused by greenhouse gases.
The judges all agreed that climate change is an urgent, threatening problem, but ruled that the plaintiffs, who were between the ages of 8 and 19 when the suit was filed, didn’t have standing to sue. They also said that climate policies must come from the legislative branch. “The panel reluctantly concluded that the plaintiffs’ case must be made to the political branches or to the electorate at large,” according to the ruling.
Writing for the majority, Circuit Court Judge Andrew Hurwitz conceded that climate risks are growing and that young people stand to suffer the worst impacts of rising average temperatures, like increasingly destructive floods and fires.
“In the mid-1960s, a popular song warned that we were ‘on the eve of destruction,’” he wrote. “The plaintiffs in this case have presented compelling evidence that climate change has brought that eve nearer.”
Andrea Rodgers, a senior attorney at Our Children’s Trust, the nonprofit backing the youth who filed the lawsuit, described the decision in an email as “unprecedented and contrary to American principles of justice.” Her organization has vowed to appeal the ruling in the coming weeks.
As politicians have failed to deliver adequate climate policies, courtrooms have emerged as a prominent venue for advancing an agenda to limit emissions, and the Juliana case was one of a number of climate change lawsuits working their way through various US courts. More than a dozen cities and counties have filed suit against companies like Exxon for the climate-related harms caused by their products. But the Juliana case stood out among climate lawsuits because it challenged the federal government rather than fossil fuel companies.
Despite proposing a novel legal theory — that a safe climate is a civil right and that the government has violated it through policies like leasing public lands for coal mining — the suit managed to get surprisingly far. It survived several motions to dismiss and intervention by the US Supreme Court.
But what the plaintiffs wanted — a government plan to phase out fossil fuels and pull greenhouse gases back out of the air — was not something the courts could provide. “Reluctantly, we conclude that such relief is beyond our constitutional power,” Hurwitz wrote.
However, District Court Judge Josephine Staton thought otherwise and did not mince words in her dissent. “It is as if an asteroid were barreling toward Earth and the government decided to shut down our only defenses,” she wrote. “Seeking to quash this suit, the government bluntly insists that it has the absolute and unreviewable power to destroy the Nation.”
The Juliana case has been the highest-profile lawsuit filed by Our Children’s Trust, but the group has also filed similar climate change civil rights suits on behalf of young people in state courts.
While the 9th Circuit ruling was a setback for climate activists, many are undeterred from using the courts to fight climate change and hold polluters accountable. Recently, some law students have also begun to protest against the law firms representing fossil fuel companies in these climate suits, pressuring firms to drop them as clients and urging classmates not to work for them.
Climate litigation has also emerged as an issue in the 2020 campaign for president. Many of the Democratic contenders have called for fossil fuel companies to be held liable for climate damages and for sowing disinformation. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has gone as far as to call for criminal prosecution of greenhouse gas emitters.
All the while, more suits and legal complaints are being filed. On Thursday, a group of four indigenous tribes in Louisiana filed a human rights claim at the United Nations. They argued that the US government, through its contributions to climate change and its failure to stop it, has violated the rights of these groups, who are seeing lands eroded by rising seas.
So climate change still has many more days in court to come.


vox--2020-01-17--GOP Sen. Martha McSally’s attack on a CNN reporter was an embrace of Trumpism

Sen. Martha McSally ’ s ( R-AZ ) remarkable attack on a CNN reporter in the halls of Congress on Thursday seemed to be an unusual outburst , but it now appears to be part of a calculated strategy to hang onto her Senate seat by hitching her wagon to the president .
On Thursday , the former member of Congress unloaded on CNN ’ s Manu Raju when he asked her an innocuous question about the Senate impeachment trial .
“ Senator McSally , should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial ?
” Raju @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one .
McSally has sent somewhat mixed messages about how seriously she ’ s taking the inquiry and was identified by my colleague Li Zhou as one of eight Republican senators to watch on impeachment .
But instead of answering , McSally made things personal .
“ Manu , you ’ re a liberal hack .
I ’ m not talking to you .
You ’ re a liberal hack , ” McSally replied , blowing past Raju and walking into a Capitol Hill meeting room .
Raju is widely respected by members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sides of the aisle , and some Republicans questioned the wisdom of going after him .
What ’ s more , McSally was once upon a time regarded as a relatively moderate Republican and has at least tacitly pushed back on Trump , so her decision to lambaste a reporter in a quintessentially Trumpian manner caught some off-guard .
But there was an upside .
McSally ’ s stunt received praise from the MAGA media , including Fox News staple Mark Levin ( “ Kudos to Martha McSally !
Love this !
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McSally “ slammed a CNN reporter to his face — and it was glorious.
” McSally , for her part , leaned into the incident by posting video of it on her Twitter page .
Within a couple hours of when it happened , the Trump campaign Twitter account rewarded her with a laudatory tweet ( “ THIS is how you handle FAKE NEWS @ CNN ” ) that also included a link to her fundraising page .
That tweet seemed to give the game away .
But if any doubt remained , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cheney of Politico reported that McSally registered the domain name “ LiberalHack.com ” shortly after the incident with Raju .
And the website was used to sell ( ugly ) t-shirts .
The irony of McSally going full MAGA is Trump may have contributed to her loss to Democrat Kyrsten Sinema in a race for a US Senate seat in Arizona in 2018 .
Strategists working on her behalf put together an exit memo that blamed her loss in part on Trump ’ s unpopularity in the state , and in particular on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even though Trump won the state by more than three points over Hillary Clinton .
“ A significant segment of the AZ GOP was hostile to the President , ” it says .
“ In internal polling during the primary , President Trump never broke 80 % favorability among Republican voters .
A certain segment of AZ Republicans was outright hostile to President Trump and was against the Kavanaugh appointment .
This segment of moderate Republicans , especially woman [ sic ] , proved very difficult to bring home to a Republican candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Justice Kavanaugh.
” In December 2018 , Republican Arizona Gov .
Doug Ducey appointed McSally to the Senate seat vacated by the late Sen. John McCain .
And despite what her strategists may have concluded , she ’ s apparently come around to the idea that her best chance at holding on to the seat is to embrace Trump , whose approval rating is slightly underwater in the state but holds his own in hypothetical matchups against the Democratic frontrunners .
McSally can use whatever help Trump can give her .
Though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary challenge , she ’ ll have her hands full in the general contest with Democratic candidate Mark Kelly , an astronaut and husband of former Rep. Gabby Giffords .
Polls conducted over the last few months have consistently shown Kelly holding a slight lead , and he has bested her so far in fundraising as well .
In a Republican party that has been purged of just about everyone who isn ’ t a Trump loyalist , McSally likely sees the writing on the wall : She can either embrace the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or keep her distance and have no shot at all .
Her antics on Thursday indicate she ’ s chosen the former .
Somewhat lost in the kerfuffle over McSally ’ s attack on Raju was the fact that she never answered his question about the impeachment trial for which she ’ ll be part of the jury : Does she think it should feature witness testimony or not ?
You ’ d think she ’ d have a position .
But during an appearance on Laura Ingraham ’ s Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McSally still couldn ’ t provide a straight answer .
“ What about Manu Raju ’ s question — do you want witnesses ?
” Ingraham asked her .
“ You ’ re not going to play the game with me .
You can call me a conservative hack , but do you want witnesses , yes or not ?
” Ingraham pressed .
“ Why aren ’ t you telling us ?
” “ I ’ m not going to tell everybody what all my votes are going to be , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of an easy question , don ’ t you think , senator ?
” Ingraham replied .
But McSally never answered .
Then again , for all intents and purposes , McSally answered the question in the hours leading up to that interview .
For better or worse , she ’ s once again rolling with Trump , and she ’ s hoping that the result this time will be different from 2018 ’ s .
The news moves fast .
To stay updated , follow Aaron Rupar on Twitter , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and politics coverage .

Sen. Martha McSally’s (R-AZ) remarkable attack on a CNN reporter in the halls of Congress on Thursday seemed to be an unusual outburst, but it now appears to be part of a calculated strategy to hang onto her Senate seat by hitching her wagon to the president.
On Thursday, the former member of Congress unloaded on CNN’s Manu Raju when he asked her an innocuous question about the Senate impeachment trial.
“Senator McSally, should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial?” Raju asked.
The question is an important one. McSally has sent somewhat mixed messages about how seriously she’s taking the inquiry and was identified by my colleague Li Zhou as one of eight Republican senators to watch on impeachment. But instead of answering, McSally made things personal.
“Manu, you’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you. You’re a liberal hack,” McSally replied, blowing past Raju and walking into a Capitol Hill meeting room.
Watch:
Q: Senator McSally, should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial?
McSally: You’re a liberal hack I’m not talking to you
Manu- You’re not going to comment about this?
McSally: You're a liberal hack. pic.twitter.com/IW5pCfZ6Oa — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 16, 2020
Raju is widely respected by members of Congress and their staffs on both sides of the aisle, and some Republicans questioned the wisdom of going after him. What’s more, McSally was once upon a time regarded as a relatively moderate Republican and has at least tacitly pushed back on Trump, so her decision to lambaste a reporter in a quintessentially Trumpian manner caught some off-guard.
But there was an upside. McSally’s stunt received praise from the MAGA media, including Fox News staple Mark Levin (“Kudos to Martha McSally! Love this!”) and Breitbart, who wrote that McSally “slammed a CNN reporter to his face — and it was glorious.”
McSally, for her part, leaned into the incident by posting video of it on her Twitter page. Within a couple hours of when it happened, the Trump campaign Twitter account rewarded her with a laudatory tweet (“THIS is how you handle FAKE NEWS @CNN”) that also included a link to her fundraising page.
THREE CHEERS for Senator @MarthaMcSally!!!
THIS is how you handle FAKE NEWS @CNN.
DONATE to Martha NOW ➡ https://t.co/6SuZq3HR7r pic.twitter.com/K9YAsxvYwb — Trump War Room --- Text FIGHT to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) January 16, 2020
That tweet seemed to give the game away. But if any doubt remained, it was resolved on Friday when Kyle Cheney of Politico reported that McSally registered the domain name “LiberalHack.com” shortly after the incident with Raju.
A little insight into how calculated this was.
McSally attacked Manu in the 10am hour. She had registered the domain name "https://t.co/YQW3ySFPna" by the 11am hour.
(16:24 UTC = 11:24 EST) pic.twitter.com/TkBHt8S2BZ — Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 17, 2020
And the website was used to sell (ugly) t-shirts.
The irony of McSally going full MAGA is Trump may have contributed to her loss to Democrat Kyrsten Sinema in a race for a US Senate seat in Arizona in 2018. Strategists working on her behalf put together an exit memo that blamed her loss in part on Trump’s unpopularity in the state, and in particular on his lack of appeal to women — even though Trump won the state by more than three points over Hillary Clinton.
“A significant segment of the AZ GOP was hostile to the President,” it says. “In internal polling during the primary, President Trump never broke 80% favorability among Republican voters. A certain segment of AZ Republicans was outright hostile to President Trump and was against the Kavanaugh appointment. This segment of moderate Republicans, especially woman [sic], proved very difficult to bring home to a Republican candidate that supported President Trump and the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh.”
In December 2018, Republican Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey appointed McSally to the Senate seat vacated by the late Sen. John McCain. And despite what her strategists may have concluded, she’s apparently come around to the idea that her best chance at holding on to the seat is to embrace Trump, whose approval rating is slightly underwater in the state but holds his own in hypothetical matchups against the Democratic frontrunners.
McSally can use whatever help Trump can give her. Though she isn’t facing a serious primary challenge, she’ll have her hands full in the general contest with Democratic candidate Mark Kelly, an astronaut and husband of former Rep. Gabby Giffords. Polls conducted over the last few months have consistently shown Kelly holding a slight lead, and he has bested her so far in fundraising as well.
In a Republican party that has been purged of just about everyone who isn’t a Trump loyalist, McSally likely sees the writing on the wall: She can either embrace the president and maintain hope of winning in November, or keep her distance and have no shot at all. Her antics on Thursday indicate she’s chosen the former.
McSally still isn’t answering the question
Somewhat lost in the kerfuffle over McSally’s attack on Raju was the fact that she never answered his question about the impeachment trial for which she’ll be part of the jury: Does she think it should feature witness testimony or not?
You’d think she’d have a position. But during an appearance on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show hours after the Raju incident, McSally still couldn’t provide a straight answer.
“What about Manu Raju’s question — do you want witnesses?” Ingraham asked her.
“I want a fair trial,” McSally replied, dodging.
“You’re not going to play the game with me. You can call me a conservative hack, but do you want witnesses, yes or not?” Ingraham pressed. “Why aren’t you telling us?”
“I’m not going to tell everybody what all my votes are going to be,” McSally replied.
“It’s kind of an easy question, don’t you think, senator?” Ingraham replied. But McSally never answered.
"It's kind of an easy question, don't you think Senator?" -- hours after she insulted @mkraju instead of answering his Q about if she wants witnesses at the impeachment trial, @SenMcSallyAZ somehow still didn't have an answer for that very basic query on Laura Ingraham's show pic.twitter.com/ufZvNzC0x3 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 17, 2020
Then again, for all intents and purposes, McSally answered the question in the hours leading up to that interview. For better or worse, she’s once again rolling with Trump, and she’s hoping that the result this time will be different from 2018’s.
The news moves fast. To stay updated, follow Aaron Rupar on Twitter, and read more of Vox’s policy and politics coverage.