vox--2020-11-18--Why restaurants are open and schools are closed

Public health experts have been repeating this same refrain since the summer , when many states and cities reopened businesses like bars , restaurants , and gyms — all areas where the coronavirus is thought to spread readily — without a clear plan to reopen school buildings .
And the call has only gotten louder in recent weeks as cases skyrocket in a third viral wave and officials close schools while keeping indoor dining open .
For example , New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced on November 18 that school buildings would close in the city in response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduced-capacity indoor dining remain open , at least for now .
While there remains some debate , schools don ’ t appear to be major sources of viral spread in this pandemic .
Restaurants , bars , and gyms , however — places where adults congregate , often in close quarters and often without masks — do seem to contribute to outbreaks .
Indeed , many European countries that have locked down to mitigate their second waves have allowed schools to remain open while such businesses close .
“ It seems very clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our priority , ” Robin Lake , director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education , a research organization at the University of Washington , told Vox .
So why aren ’ t more places in the US closing the bars and keeping the schools open ?
There are a lot of reasons , from agreements with teachers ’ unions to pressure from restaurant and other lobbying groups to parents ’ understandable fears of exposing their children — and potentially themselves — to a deadly virus .
But one big reason for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lack of help from the federal government .
Money from the federal CARES Act kept many businesses afloat through shutdowns earlier this year , and expanded unemployment benefits and $ 1,200 stimulus checks kept many laid-off workers out of poverty .
But with no more help on the horizon for businesses or ordinary people , shutdowns at the state and local level could have a steep cost , many say , leaving some local leaders hesitant to try them .
“ I think we ’ re going to see a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re going to see a lot of people go out of business , ” Adam Ozimek , chief economist at the freelancing platform Upwork and the owner of two small businesses in Pennsylvania , told Vox .
Closing down schools , meanwhile , doesn ’ t have the same immediate economic impact , since teachers can still work and get paid while classes are remote .
But shuttering school buildings does affect students ’ learning , as well as parents ’ ability to work , which will hamper any economic recovery in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kids and families today .
In some ways , policymakers may be trading short-term economic damage for longer-term devastation , as an entire generation of working parents — the majority of them mothers — is forced to choose between getting a paycheck and caring for kids .
In general , the choice of restaurants over schools is yet another way the US government ’ s handling of the pandemic has caused needless pain , many say .
“ It ’ s not the Covid pandemic that has harmed so many businesses , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our mismanagement of the Covid pandemic.
” Many places are leaving businesses open while schools are closed While schools closed in all 50 states this spring as the first wave of the pandemic swept around the country , reopening in the fall has been a more uneven process : As of this summer , 49 percent of school districts planned for fully in-person classes , while 26 percent planned for a fully remote start and 12 percent planned on a hybrid model .
Since then , some districts , especially in urban areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to in-person instruction as this fall ’ s surge in virus cases arrived .
But the evidence so far suggests that schools themselves have not been a major driver of outbreaks .
In New York City , the largest district to try some in-person learning , the average test positivity rate in schools was just 0.17 percent as of last week , compared with close to 3 percent in the city as a whole .
In Florida , meanwhile , reopening schools in the fall did not appear to lead to a surge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argued that we don ’ t yet know enough about transmission within schools to say much about their safety , noting that little current research has focused specifically on Black and other students of color who come from communities that have been disproportionately affected by the virus .
Meanwhile , the risks to teachers — who , as adults , are more likely to become seriously ill from the virus — appear to be greater than the risks to students .
And reopening of schools has often been driven more by politics than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for schools around the country to reopen this summer in the face of rising caseloads , and without the financial assistance many said they needed to do so safely .
Thanks in part to his pressure , schools are more likely to be open in more conservative areas of the country , which have tended to have fewer restrictions overall even as cases rise .
But in general , public health experts have not ranked schools among the most dangerous venues for Covid-19 .
There ’ s a growing body of evidence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and gyms are significant contributors to community transmission .
A recent study using cellphone mobility data , for example , found that these venues were some of the biggest contributors to the spread of the virus in the spring , and that reducing capacity in them could be an effective way of reducing transmission in the future .
In one CDC study , people who tested positive for Covid-19 were twice as likely to have eaten in a restaurant recently as those who tested negative , as Benjamin P. Linas wrote for Vox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reimpose restrictions to combat the fall surge , restaurants and gyms remain open in some places where most schools are closed or on the verge of closing — like Boston and New York City — even though closing eateries might do far more to curb spread .
In other areas , such as San Francisco , indoor dining has closed only recently in response to new surges , while schools never opened in-person at all .
Meanwhile , areas such as New York and New Jersey have instituted smaller restrictions like curfews on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts are skeptical of their efficacy .
Overall , while leaders are moving to impose restrictions as cases rise , the country is taking a slow and piecemeal approach in which schools can sometimes feel like an afterthought .
And some of the reasons say a lot about the federal government ’ s failure to adequately respond to Covid-19 .
Decisions about schools are reflective of larger pressures on cities and states A lot of factors have gone into districts ’ decisions to close or open schools .
Teachers , for example , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their health , especially in places where school buildings are old and poorly ventilated .
When New York City reopened schools earlier this year , de Blasio announced that they would close if the citywide positivity rate hit 3 percent on a seven-day average , a threshold the teachers ’ union urged the city to stick to as cases rose .
Some parents pushed back against the plan , arguing that schools should not shutter since they have not been major drivers of spread .
“ It seems like schools are the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Daniela Jampel , a New York City parent who organized a petition to keep schools open , told Gothamist .
But other parents have concerns about keeping schools open .
Some have chosen not to send their children back in person — in New York , for example , only 26 percent of students have attended class in person this year .
And around the country , many Black and Latinx families , who often come from communities hard-hit by the virus , have been more wary than white parents about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In a poll conducted in the summer , about 67 percent of Black families said they supported keeping school remote , compared with just 32 percent of white families .
De Blasio announced on November 18 that schools in the city would close since the city ’ s positivity rate had hit the 3 percent threshold .
Meanwhile , indoor dining , gyms , and other businesses remain open , although New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo said that closure of dining rooms in the city could be coming soon .
Overall , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involve children — and even though kids seem less vulnerable to the virus than adults , parents and policymakers are often leery of putting them in harm ’ s way .
But there ’ s another big reason schools are closed while restaurants are open : money .
State and local authorities are in a tough position on ordering the closure of businesses like restaurants and bars .
“ It ’ s a really fragile time for small businesses , ” Ozimek said , with many still taking in reduced revenue or losing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you add a several-month lockdown onto it , or even a several-week lockdown — that ’ s just a recipe for businesses who have made it this far not being able to go any further.
” And business closures or contractions will likely lead to layoffs .
Some ( though by no means all ) of the millions of Americans laid off or furloughed in the spring have been rehired or gotten new jobs , Ozimek notes .
But if more businesses fail , fall closures could be even more devastating — we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ layoffs as the businesses go under and people don ’ t have a job to go back to.
” For example , in hard-hit El Paso , Texas , 300 businesses have already shuttered due to the pandemic , according to the Washington Post .
And 300 more , including restaurants , nail salons , and retail stores , don ’ t have enough cash on hand to survive for more than a month — and the city is already under a shutdown of nonessential businesses until December 1 .
Around the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we are going to see unemployment rates spike again , ” Lucy Dadayan , a senior research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute , told Vox .
Closing schools doesn ’ t have quite the same immediate economic effect , something local and state leaders are likely factoring into their decision-making — teachers can still work remotely and draw salaries , and public schools , at least , won ’ t shut down permanently due to virus-related closures .
Of course , closing schools still has economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ share of women dropped out of the workforce in September , with the demands of child care and homeschooling likely a major factor .
And then there ’ s the long-term impact of school closures on students .
Research conducted in the spring found significant learning losses , with Black and Latinx students and those from low-income neighborhoods disproportionately affected .
Meanwhile , uncontrolled surges of the virus will likely also lead to layoffs and business closures , even without shutdowns , as fewer people go out and spend money .
“ Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ functioning despite the surge in cases , we are not functioning at full capacity , ” Dadayan said .
“ The economy is not going to be back at the place where it was before the pandemic anytime soon.
” In a way , closing schools while leaving businesses open simply shifts the burden of the pandemic onto families with kids , where the impacts are no less severe , even if they ’ re less immediately visible .
“ Especially low-income families need their child to be in a supervised space so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even if they ’ re working from home , ” Lake said .
“ Academically and economically , it ’ s a little bit crazy to prioritize bars over schools.
” To close businesses without economic devastation , states and cities need federal help But when it comes to restrictions on businesses , authorities at the state and local level have been hamstrung , to some degree , by Washington ’ s inability to act .
“ The federal government did not give them the tools and help they need to shut down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harm to their economies , ” Ozimek said .
The biggest tool they need , many say , is stimulus money — funding , like that provided by the CARES Act , that could help keep businesses afloat and help ordinary people pay their bills if they ’ re not able to work .
As Vox ’ s German Lopez reports , experts agree that such stimulus is necessary to help people and the economy weather the kinds of lockdowns that seem increasingly necessary as cases surge and winter approaches .
Many European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this lesson and enacted furlough programs under which the government steps in to pay a portion of wages for companies affected by the pandemic .
These programs have , so far , helped Europe avoid the huge layoffs that the US has faced : While unemployment here went from 3.5 percent to 14.7 percent between February and April , Europe saw a smaller rise from 6.5 percent in February to 7.4 percent in August , according to the Washington Post .
But so far , there ’ s little sign of another stimulus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate opposing both enhanced unemployment and a second round of checks to American taxpayers , which House Democrats made part of their proposal .
President-elect Joe Biden has called for restart grants to help small businesses recover from the pandemic , as well as a government-funded workshare plan to help businesses bring back workers , but these , too , would likely need the support of Congress .
Democrats face a steep challenge in winning control of the Senate in Georgia ’ s runoff elections in January .
He has also selected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 response , including Céline Gounder , an infectious disease specialist who spoke to the New York Times this week of the importance of prioritizing schools over businesses like restaurants .
“ I would consider school an essential service , ” she told the Times .
“ Those other things are not essential services.
” Ultimately , the country will need a plan for supporting both students and workers — who often have kids at home themselves .
Unfortunately , such a plan doesn ’ t seem forthcoming under the current administration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fall and winter under Trump .
Without a change in direction , we may continue to see states and cities prioritize businesses over schools — because the federal government has left them with only bad choices .

Close the bars. Open the schools.
Public health experts have been repeating this same refrain since the summer, when many states and cities reopened businesses like bars, restaurants, and gyms — all areas where the coronavirus is thought to spread readily — without a clear plan to reopen school buildings. And the call has only gotten louder in recent weeks as cases skyrocket in a third viral wave and officials close schools while keeping indoor dining open.
For example, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced on November 18 that school buildings would close in the city in response to rising cases — but gyms and reduced-capacity indoor dining remain open, at least for now.
While there remains some debate, schools don’t appear to be major sources of viral spread in this pandemic. Restaurants, bars, and gyms, however — places where adults congregate, often in close quarters and often without masks — do seem to contribute to outbreaks. Indeed, many European countries that have locked down to mitigate their second waves have allowed schools to remain open while such businesses close. “It seems very clear to me that schools ought to be our priority,” Robin Lake, director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education, a research organization at the University of Washington, told Vox.
So why aren’t more places in the US closing the bars and keeping the schools open?
There are a lot of reasons, from agreements with teachers’ unions to pressure from restaurant and other lobbying groups to parents’ understandable fears of exposing their children — and potentially themselves — to a deadly virus. But one big reason for the seeming disconnect has gone somewhat overlooked: the lack of help from the federal government.
Money from the federal CARES Act kept many businesses afloat through shutdowns earlier this year, and expanded unemployment benefits and $1,200 stimulus checks kept many laid-off workers out of poverty. But with no more help on the horizon for businesses or ordinary people, shutdowns at the state and local level could have a steep cost, many say, leaving some local leaders hesitant to try them.
“I think we’re going to see a lot of layoffs again, and I think we’re going to see a lot of people go out of business,” Adam Ozimek, chief economist at the freelancing platform Upwork and the owner of two small businesses in Pennsylvania, told Vox.
Closing down schools, meanwhile, doesn’t have the same immediate economic impact, since teachers can still work and get paid while classes are remote. But shuttering school buildings does affect students’ learning, as well as parents’ ability to work, which will hamper any economic recovery in the future — as well as hurting kids and families today. In some ways, policymakers may be trading short-term economic damage for longer-term devastation, as an entire generation of working parents — the majority of them mothers — is forced to choose between getting a paycheck and caring for kids.
In general, the choice of restaurants over schools is yet another way the US government’s handling of the pandemic has caused needless pain, many say. “It’s not the Covid pandemic that has harmed so many businesses,” Ozimek said. “It’s our mismanagement of the Covid pandemic.”
Many places are leaving businesses open while schools are closed
While schools closed in all 50 states this spring as the first wave of the pandemic swept around the country, reopening in the fall has been a more uneven process: As of this summer, 49 percent of school districts planned for fully in-person classes, while 26 percent planned for a fully remote start and 12 percent planned on a hybrid model. Since then, some districts, especially in urban areas, have pushed back plans to return to in-person instruction as this fall’s surge in virus cases arrived.
But the evidence so far suggests that schools themselves have not been a major driver of outbreaks. In New York City, the largest district to try some in-person learning, the average test positivity rate in schools was just 0.17 percent as of last week, compared with close to 3 percent in the city as a whole. In Florida, meanwhile, reopening schools in the fall did not appear to lead to a surge in cases among children.
Some have argued that we don’t yet know enough about transmission within schools to say much about their safety, noting that little current research has focused specifically on Black and other students of color who come from communities that have been disproportionately affected by the virus.
Meanwhile, the risks to teachers — who, as adults, are more likely to become seriously ill from the virus — appear to be greater than the risks to students. And reopening of schools has often been driven more by politics than by science, with President Trump calling for schools around the country to reopen this summer in the face of rising caseloads, and without the financial assistance many said they needed to do so safely. Thanks in part to his pressure, schools are more likely to be open in more conservative areas of the country, which have tended to have fewer restrictions overall even as cases rise.
But in general, public health experts have not ranked schools among the most dangerous venues for Covid-19.
There’s a growing body of evidence, however, that restaurants, bars, and gyms are significant contributors to community transmission. A recent study using cellphone mobility data, for example, found that these venues were some of the biggest contributors to the spread of the virus in the spring, and that reducing capacity in them could be an effective way of reducing transmission in the future. In one CDC study, people who tested positive for Covid-19 were twice as likely to have eaten in a restaurant recently as those who tested negative, as Benjamin P. Linas wrote for Vox.
But even as states and cities reimpose restrictions to combat the fall surge, restaurants and gyms remain open in some places where most schools are closed or on the verge of closing — like Boston and New York City — even though closing eateries might do far more to curb spread. In other areas, such as San Francisco, indoor dining has closed only recently in response to new surges, while schools never opened in-person at all. Meanwhile, areas such as New York and New Jersey have instituted smaller restrictions like curfews on restaurants, even though some public health experts are skeptical of their efficacy.
Overall, while leaders are moving to impose restrictions as cases rise, the country is taking a slow and piecemeal approach in which schools can sometimes feel like an afterthought. And some of the reasons say a lot about the federal government’s failure to adequately respond to Covid-19.
Decisions about schools are reflective of larger pressures on cities and states
A lot of factors have gone into districts’ decisions to close or open schools. Teachers, for example, have been concerned about the risks to their health, especially in places where school buildings are old and poorly ventilated. When New York City reopened schools earlier this year, de Blasio announced that they would close if the citywide positivity rate hit 3 percent on a seven-day average, a threshold the teachers’ union urged the city to stick to as cases rose.
Some parents pushed back against the plan, arguing that schools should not shutter since they have not been major drivers of spread. “It seems like schools are the only thing being threatened with a shutdown,” said Daniela Jampel, a New York City parent who organized a petition to keep schools open, told Gothamist.
But other parents have concerns about keeping schools open. Some have chosen not to send their children back in person — in New York, for example, only 26 percent of students have attended class in person this year. And around the country, many Black and Latinx families, who often come from communities hard-hit by the virus, have been more wary than white parents about sending their kids back in person. In a poll conducted in the summer, about 67 percent of Black families said they supported keeping school remote, compared with just 32 percent of white families.
De Blasio announced on November 18 that schools in the city would close since the city’s positivity rate had hit the 3 percent threshold. Meanwhile, indoor dining, gyms, and other businesses remain open, although New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said that closure of dining rooms in the city could be coming soon.
Overall, decisions about school are fraught because they involve children — and even though kids seem less vulnerable to the virus than adults, parents and policymakers are often leery of putting them in harm’s way.
But there’s another big reason schools are closed while restaurants are open: money.
State and local authorities are in a tough position on ordering the closure of businesses like restaurants and bars. “It’s a really fragile time for small businesses,” Ozimek said, with many still taking in reduced revenue or losing money in the recession. “Then you add a several-month lockdown onto it, or even a several-week lockdown — that’s just a recipe for businesses who have made it this far not being able to go any further.”
And business closures or contractions will likely lead to layoffs. Some (though by no means all) of the millions of Americans laid off or furloughed in the spring have been rehired or gotten new jobs, Ozimek notes. But if more businesses fail, fall closures could be even more devastating — we could see “a lot of permanent layoffs as the businesses go under and people don’t have a job to go back to.”
For example, in hard-hit El Paso, Texas, 300 businesses have already shuttered due to the pandemic, according to the Washington Post. And 300 more, including restaurants, nail salons, and retail stores, don’t have enough cash on hand to survive for more than a month — and the city is already under a shutdown of nonessential businesses until December 1.
Around the country, “if we have more shutdowns, we are going to see unemployment rates spike again,” Lucy Dadayan, a senior research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, told Vox.
Closing schools doesn’t have quite the same immediate economic effect, something local and state leaders are likely factoring into their decision-making — teachers can still work remotely and draw salaries, and public schools, at least, won’t shut down permanently due to virus-related closures.
Of course, closing schools still has economic effects — for example, a disproportionate share of women dropped out of the workforce in September, with the demands of child care and homeschooling likely a major factor. And then there’s the long-term impact of school closures on students. Research conducted in the spring found significant learning losses, with Black and Latinx students and those from low-income neighborhoods disproportionately affected.
Meanwhile, uncontrolled surges of the virus will likely also lead to layoffs and business closures, even without shutdowns, as fewer people go out and spend money. “Even if some businesses are still open and functioning despite the surge in cases, we are not functioning at full capacity,” Dadayan said. “The economy is not going to be back at the place where it was before the pandemic anytime soon.”
In a way, closing schools while leaving businesses open simply shifts the burden of the pandemic onto families with kids, where the impacts are no less severe, even if they’re less immediately visible. “Especially low-income families need their child to be in a supervised space so they can go to work, or even if they’re working from home,” Lake said. “Academically and economically, it’s a little bit crazy to prioritize bars over schools.”
To close businesses without economic devastation, states and cities need federal help
But when it comes to restrictions on businesses, authorities at the state and local level have been hamstrung, to some degree, by Washington’s inability to act.
“The federal government did not give them the tools and help they need to shut down those businesses without doing serious, long-term harm to their economies,” Ozimek said.
The biggest tool they need, many say, is stimulus money — funding, like that provided by the CARES Act, that could help keep businesses afloat and help ordinary people pay their bills if they’re not able to work. As Vox’s German Lopez reports, experts agree that such stimulus is necessary to help people and the economy weather the kinds of lockdowns that seem increasingly necessary as cases surge and winter approaches.
Many European nations like Britain and France have heeded this lesson and enacted furlough programs under which the government steps in to pay a portion of wages for companies affected by the pandemic. These programs have, so far, helped Europe avoid the huge layoffs that the US has faced: While unemployment here went from 3.5 percent to 14.7 percent between February and April, Europe saw a smaller rise from 6.5 percent in February to 7.4 percent in August, according to the Washington Post.
But so far, there’s little sign of another stimulus on the horizon, with Republicans in the Senate opposing both enhanced unemployment and a second round of checks to American taxpayers, which House Democrats made part of their proposal. President-elect Joe Biden has called for restart grants to help small businesses recover from the pandemic, as well as a government-funded workshare plan to help businesses bring back workers, but these, too, would likely need the support of Congress. Democrats face a steep challenge in winning control of the Senate in Georgia’s runoff elections in January.
He has also selected a team of experts to manage the Covid-19 response, including Céline Gounder, an infectious disease specialist who spoke to the New York Times this week of the importance of prioritizing schools over businesses like restaurants. “I would consider school an essential service,” she told the Times. “Those other things are not essential services.”
Ultimately, the country will need a plan for supporting both students and workers — who often have kids at home themselves. Unfortunately, such a plan doesn’t seem forthcoming under the current administration, and the country has to get through a fall and winter under Trump. Without a change in direction, we may continue to see states and cities prioritize businesses over schools — because the federal government has left them with only bad choices.


vox--2020-11-18--Vox poll: 73 percent of Republican voters are questioning Biden’s victory

President Donald Trump ’ s unfounded allegations of voter fraud and unwillingness to concede the election are seriously affecting how some Republicans are interpreting the results .
According to a new survey from Vox and Data for Progress , 73 percent of likely Republican voters say that the allegations of voter fraud have made them question Joe Biden ’ s victory , a statement that 44 percent of all likely voters agreed with as well .
Similarly , 75 percent of likely Republican voters said they believed voter fraud took place during the election that benefitted Biden , something that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stated .
Trump ’ s refusal to concede the election has significant support from members of his party , too .
A majority of likely Republican voters — 65 percent — agreed with Trump ’ s decision not to concede despite the fact that media outlets have called the election for Biden .
And 69 percent of likely Republican voters felt that Trump doesn ’ t need to concede until the legal challenges he is levying about voter fraud have been resolved .
( Many such cases have already failed , but Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) This poll — which was fielded with 1,160 likely voters on November 16 — highlighted how much Trump ’ s actions have undercut the legitimacy of Biden ’ s election for many voters , a problem that could well undermine how they perceive his presidency once he takes office in January .
These findings are consistent with those of other recent surveys , including a Reuters/Ipsos poll this week that found that 68 percent of Republican voters think that the election was “ rigged ” and about half believe that Trump “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may ultimately give up his legal challenges , his questioning of the election results could have damaging effects that last long beyond those lawsuits .
Voters — including Republicans — think Trump should give up his dispute once states certify their results As Vox ’ s Andrew Prokop has written , upcoming state certifications of election results — when states make their counts official — will be a key step in electors being appointed to finalize the outcome of the presidential race .
For many likely Republican voters , the completion of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that Trump should concede .
Fifty-seven percent of likely Republican voters said they believed Trump had a right to continue contesting the election , but felt he should concede after the state certifications , as did 49 percent of voters overall .
Still , 34 percent of likely Republican voters and 23 percent of all likely voters said that Trump didn ’ t need to concede even after states certify their results .
Trump in fact doesn ’ t have to concede the election ( though his refusal to do so will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The election is over , voter tallies are near final , and the result won ’ t be overturned .
Biden has won , and that is true whether Trump ultimately decides to acknowledge it or not .
But this polling indicates that conceding is an important signal to one ’ s base about the legitimacy of the democratic process .
If Trump won ’ t accept the results , some of his followers may not either .
The poll found that people had different perceptions about what Trump ’ s lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters — 59 percent — were aware that Trump ’ s decision did not affect the election ’ s results , 29 percent believed that a lack of concession could enable him to remain in the presidency .
That split was also much closer among Republican voters — 41 percent agreed that Trump ’ s lack of concession has no impact on the results , and 44 percent believed that it could have an impact .
The divisions along party lines indicate that a solid proportion of Republican voters are still questioning Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open to Trump ’ s efforts to challenge it .
While these legal efforts haven ’ t really gone anywhere , the positions that Trump has taken — and the allegations of fraud that he ’ s presented without evidence — have clearly affected voters ’ perceptions .

President Donald Trump’s unfounded allegations of voter fraud and unwillingness to concede the election are seriously affecting how some Republicans are interpreting the results.
According to a new survey from Vox and Data for Progress, 73 percent of likely Republican voters say that the allegations of voter fraud have made them question Joe Biden’s victory, a statement that 44 percent of all likely voters agreed with as well. Similarly, 75 percent of likely Republican voters said they believed voter fraud took place during the election that benefitted Biden, something that 43 percent of likely voters overall also stated.
Trump’s refusal to concede the election has significant support from members of his party, too.
A majority of likely Republican voters — 65 percent — agreed with Trump’s decision not to concede despite the fact that media outlets have called the election for Biden. And 69 percent of likely Republican voters felt that Trump doesn’t need to concede until the legal challenges he is levying about voter fraud have been resolved. (Many such cases have already failed, but Trump has vowed to continue additional contests.)
This poll — which was fielded with 1,160 likely voters on November 16 — highlighted how much Trump’s actions have undercut the legitimacy of Biden’s election for many voters, a problem that could well undermine how they perceive his presidency once he takes office in January.
These findings are consistent with those of other recent surveys, including a Reuters/Ipsos poll this week that found that 68 percent of Republican voters think that the election was “rigged” and about half believe that Trump “rightfully won” it. Although Trump may ultimately give up his legal challenges, his questioning of the election results could have damaging effects that last long beyond those lawsuits.
Voters — including Republicans — think Trump should give up his dispute once states certify their results
As Vox’s Andrew Prokop has written, upcoming state certifications of election results — when states make their counts official — will be a key step in electors being appointed to finalize the outcome of the presidential race.
For many likely Republican voters, the completion of these state certifications mark the time when they think that Trump should concede. Fifty-seven percent of likely Republican voters said they believed Trump had a right to continue contesting the election, but felt he should concede after the state certifications, as did 49 percent of voters overall.
Still, 34 percent of likely Republican voters and 23 percent of all likely voters said that Trump didn’t need to concede even after states certify their results.
Trump in fact doesn’t have to concede the election (though his refusal to do so will likely hamper a smooth transition effort). The election is over, voter tallies are near final, and the result won’t be overturned. Biden has won, and that is true whether Trump ultimately decides to acknowledge it or not.
But this polling indicates that conceding is an important signal to one’s base about the legitimacy of the democratic process. If Trump won’t accept the results, some of his followers may not either.
The poll found that people had different perceptions about what Trump’s lack of concession means. While most likely voters — 59 percent — were aware that Trump’s decision did not affect the election’s results, 29 percent believed that a lack of concession could enable him to remain in the presidency. That split was also much closer among Republican voters — 41 percent agreed that Trump’s lack of concession has no impact on the results, and 44 percent believed that it could have an impact.
The divisions along party lines indicate that a solid proportion of Republican voters are still questioning Biden’s election, and are quite open to Trump’s efforts to challenge it. While these legal efforts haven’t really gone anywhere, the positions that Trump has taken — and the allegations of fraud that he’s presented without evidence — have clearly affected voters’ perceptions.


vox--2020-11-18--How bad is your state’s Covid-19 outbreak?

America ’ s national Covid-19 epidemic continues , with the US ’ s daily new cases still higher than most developed nations and the country recently surpassing 248,000 deaths due to the disease .
At the state level , things can look even worse than the national picture .
Public health experts look at a few markers to determine how bad things are in each state : the number of daily new cases ; the infection rate , which can show how likely the virus is to spread ; and the percentage of tests that come back positive , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sufficient testing .
A Vox analysis , updated weekly , indicates the vast majority of states report alarming trends across all three benchmarks for coronavirus outbreaks .
Most states still report a high — sometimes very high — number of daily new Covid-19 cases .
Most still have high infection rates .
And most have test positive rates that are too high , indicating they don ’ t have enough tests to track and contain the scope of their outbreaks .
Across these benchmarks , zero states fare well on all three metrics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under control right now .
In fact , no state meets even two of three benchmarks .
America ’ s outbreaks , reaching from California to Florida , are the result of the public and the country ’ s leaders never taking the virus seriously enough and , to the extent they did , letting their guard down prematurely .
States , with the support of President Donald Trump , moved to reopen — often before they saw sizable drops in daily new Covid-19 cases , and at times so quickly they didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each phase of their reopening was leading to too many more cases .
The public embraced the reopenings , going out and often not adhering to recommended precautions like physical distancing and wearing a mask .
Even as cases began to fall later in the summer , America ’ s overall caseload remained very high .
And yet many states moved to reopen once again , with much of the public embracing the looser restrictions and subsequently going out .
It ’ s this mix of government withdrawal and public complacency that experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to struggle with getting the coronavirus under control .
“ It ’ s a situation that didn ’ t have to be , ” Jaime Slaughter-Acey , an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota , told me .
“ For almost three months , you had opportunities to be proactive with respect to mitigating the Covid-19 pandemic and to help normalize culture to adopt practices that would stem the tide of transmissions as well as the development of Covid-19 complications .
… It was not prioritized over the economy.
” The effects are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infections , critical illnesses , new chronic conditions , and deaths , but in the long-term financial impact as the economy struggles , many people still refuse to go out , and businesses resist reopening during a pandemic .
“ Dead people don ’ t shop .
They don ’ t spend money .
They don ’ t invest in things , ” Jade Pagkas-Bather , an infectious diseases expert and doctor at the University of Chicago , told me .
“ When you fail to invest in the health of your population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The benchmarks tracked here by Vox don ’ t cover every important facet of the pandemic .
Hospital capacity was previously included among Vox ’ s metrics , but it ’ s been removed due to inconsistent data reporting .
The data for contact tracing , when “ disease detectives ” track down people who may have been infected and push them to quarantine , is also poor .
Some measures that are helpful for gauging if a state can safely start to reopen , like the total test count and whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks , are excluded to focus more on the status of each state ’ s current Covid-19 outbreak .
But together , these three benchmarks help give an idea of how each state is doing in its fight against Covid-19 .
Nationwide , it ’ s pretty grim .
1 ) All 50 states have too many daily new Covid-19 infections What ’ s the goal ?
Fewer than four daily new coronavirus cases per 100,000 people per day , based on data from the New York Times and the Census Bureau .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why is this important ?
The most straightforward way to measure whether any place is experiencing a big coronavirus outbreak is to look at the number of daily new Covid-19 cases .
There ’ s no widely accepted metric for how many cases , exactly , is too many .
But experts told me that aiming for below four daily new cases per 100,000 is generally a good idea — a level low enough that a state can say it ’ s starting to get significant control over the virus .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s only as good as a state ’ s testing .
Cases can only get picked up if states are actually testing people for the virus .
So if a state doesn ’ t have enough tests , it ’ s probably going to miss a lot of cases , and the reported cases won ’ t tell the full story .
That ’ s why it ’ s important not to use this benchmark by itself , but to use it alongside metrics like the test positive rate .
Along those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases may give a delayed snapshot of a Covid-19 outbreak .
If test results take a week to get reported to the state , then the count for daily new cases will really reflect the state of the outbreak for the previous week .
If testing is adequate in a state , though , the toll of daily new cases gives perhaps the best snapshot of how big a state ’ s Covid-19 outbreak is .
2 ) The coronavirus is spreading too quickly in most states What ’ s the goal ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , below 1 , based on data from Rt.live , a site created by two Instagram founders and a data analyst .
Which states meet the goal ?
Mississippi — one state .
Why is this important ?
The Rt measures how many people are infected by each person with Covid-19 .
If the Rt is 1 , then an infected person will , on average , spread the coronavirus to one other person .
If it ’ s 2 , then an infected person will spread it to two on average .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ an attempt , then , to gauge how quickly a virus is spreading .
One way to think about it : Unlike the count for daily new cases , this gives you a snapshot not of a state ’ s Covid-19 outbreak today , but of where the outbreak is heading in the near future .
The goal is to get the Rt below 1 .
If each infection doesn ’ t lead to another , that would over time lead to zero new Covid-19 cases .
The estimated Rt can be very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make it hard to know for certain in any state if it ’ s really above or below 1 .
Different modelers can also come up with different estimates .
That ’ s , unfortunately , just the reality of using limited data to come up with a rough estimate of a disease ’ s overall spread .
The Rt also reflects an average .
If 10 people are infected with Covid-19 , nine spread it to no one else , and one spreads it to 10 , that adds up to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that individuals , for whatever reason , can still cause superspreading events — which seem of particular concern with the coronavirus .
And the Rt is only as good as the data that goes into calculating it .
If a state ’ s data is poor quality or inconsistent , it might skew the picture .
That can help explain why some states with bad and continuing outbreaks , like Mississippi , seem to fare better on this benchmark than others .
Still , the Rt is one of the better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s spread across the whole population .
When paired with the other metrics on this list , it can give us a sense of each state ’ s outbreak now and in the future .
3 ) Most states ’ positive rates for tests are too high What ’ s the goal ?
Less than 5 percent of coronavirus tests coming back positive over the past week , based on data from the Covid Tracking Project .
Which states meet the goal ?
Hawaii , Maine , Massachusetts , New Hampshire , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states .
Washington , DC , did as well .
( Wyoming is excluded this week due to recent problems in its testing reports . )
Why is this important ?
To properly track and contain coronavirus outbreaks , states need to have enough testing .
There are all sorts of proposals for how much testing is needed in the US , up to the tens of millions .
But one way to see if a state is testing enough to match its outbreak is the rate of tests that come back positive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be testing lots and lots of people , many of whom don ’ t have the disease or don ’ t show severe symptoms .
High positive rates indicate that only people with obvious symptoms are getting tested , so there ’ s not quite enough testing to match the scope of an outbreak .
The goal for the positive rate is , in an ideal world , zero percent , since that would suggest that Covid-19 is vanquished entirely .
More realistically , in a world going through a pandemic , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But even if a state reaches 5 percent , experts argue it should continue trying to push that number further down — to match nations like Germany , New Zealand , and South Korea that have gotten their positive rates below 3 percent and even 1 percent — in order to truly get ahold of their outbreaks .
As long as a state is above 5 percent , chances are it ’ s still missing a significant number of Covid-19 cases .
And the higher that number is , the more cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So even if your state is reporting a low number of daily new cases , a high positive rate should be a cause for alarm — a sign that there ’ s an outbreak that ’ s only hidden due to a lack of testing .
And if your state is reporting a high number of daily new cases and a high positive rate , that ’ s all the more reason for concern , suggesting the epidemic is even worse than the total case count indicates .

America’s national Covid-19 epidemic continues, with the US’s daily new cases down from an early January peak but still higher than those of most developed nations — and the country recently surpassing 500,000 deaths due to the disease.
At the state level, things can look even worse than the national picture.
Public health experts look at a few markers to determine how bad things are in each state: the number of daily new cases; the infection rate, which can show how likely the virus is to spread; and the percentage of tests that come back positive, which should be low in a state with sufficient testing. Combined, these three benchmarks can tell you whether or not a state’s coronavirus outbreak is under control.
Vox’s analysis, updated weekly, shows the vast majority of states are reporting alarming trends for coronavirus cases based on these benchmarks. Only one state — Hawaii — fares well on all three metrics, suggesting the vast majority of states don’t have their outbreaks fully under control right now.
The US outbreaks are due to the failure of both the American public and the country’s leaders to take the virus seriously enough; to the extent they did, many let their guard down prematurely. With the support of former President Donald Trump, states moved to reopen — often before seeing sizable drops in daily new Covid-19 cases, and at times so quickly they weren’t able to tell whether each phase of their reopening plan was leading to too many new infections.
The public embraced the reopenings, resuming their usual day-to-day activities and often refusing to adhere to recommended precautions like physical distancing and mask-wearing.
Even as cases began to fall later in the summer, America’s overall caseload remained very high. Yet many states moved to reopen once more, with much of the public embracing the looser restrictions and subsequently going out.
It’s this mix of government withdrawal and public complacency that experts have cited in explaining why states continue to struggle with getting the coronavirus under control.
“It’s a situation that didn’t have to be,” Jaime Slaughter-Acey, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, previously told me, adding, “You had opportunities to be proactive with respect to mitigating the Covid-19 pandemic and to help normalize culture to adopt practices that would stem the tide of transmissions as well as the development of Covid-19 complications. … It was not prioritized over the economy.”
The effects are felt not just in terms of more infections, critical illnesses, new chronic conditions, and deaths, but in the long-term financial impact as the economy struggles, many people still refuse to go out, and businesses resist reopening during a pandemic.
“Dead people don’t shop. They don’t spend money. They don’t invest in things,” Jade Pagkas-Bather, an expert in infectious diseases and a doctor at the University of Chicago, previously told me. “When you fail to invest in the health of your population, then there are longitudinal downstream effects.”
With a Covid-19 vaccination campaign underway, a finish line to this crisis in finally visible. But until America reaches sufficient population protection — and, preferably, herd immunity — every day the coronavirus spreads means more illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths.
As the country works toward vaccinating everyone, the three benchmarks tracked by Vox give an idea of how each state is doing in its fight against Covid-19 in the meantime. Nationwide, it’s pretty grim.
1) Most states have too many daily new Covid-19 infections
What’s the goal? Fewer than four daily new coronavirus cases per 100,000 people per day, based on data from the Covid Tracking Project and the Census Bureau.
Which states meet the goal? Just one — Hawaii.
Why is this important? The most straightforward way to measure whether any place is experiencing a big coronavirus outbreak is to look at the number of daily new Covid-19 cases.
There’s no widely accepted metric for how many cases, exactly, is too many. But experts told me that aiming for below four daily new cases per 100,000 is generally a good idea — a level low enough that a state can say it’s starting to get significant control over the virus.
A big caveat to this metric: It’s only as good as a state’s testing. Cases can only get picked up if states are actually testing people for the virus. So if a state doesn’t have enough tests, it’s probably going to miss a lot of cases, and the reported cases won’t tell the full story. That’s why it’s important not to use this benchmark by itself, but to use it alongside metrics like the test positive rate.
The number of daily new cases may also give a delayed snapshot of a Covid-19 outbreak. If test results take a week to get reported to the state, the count for daily new cases will really reflect the state of the outbreak for the previous week.
If testing is adequate in a state, though, the toll of daily new cases is perhaps the best insight as to how big a state’s Covid-19 outbreak is.
2) The coronavirus is spreading too quickly in some states
What’s the goal? An effective reproduction number, or Rt, below 1, based on data from the Centre for Mathematical Modeling of Infectious Diseases.
Which states meet the goal? All but Alaska, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Wyoming — 45 states, as well as Washington, DC.
Why is this important? The Rt measures how many people are infected by each person with Covid-19. If the Rt is 1, then an infected person will, on average, spread the coronavirus to one other person. If it’s 2, then an infected person will spread it to two on average. And so on.
It’s an attempt, then, to gauge how quickly a virus is spreading. One way to think about it: Unlike the count for daily new cases, this gives you a snapshot not of a state’s Covid-19 outbreak today, but of where the outbreak is heading in the near future.
The goal is to get the Rt below 1. If each infection doesn’t lead to another, that would over time lead to zero new Covid-19 cases.
The estimated Rt can be very imprecise, with margins of error that make it hard to know for certain in any state if it’s really above or below 1. Different modelers can also come up with different estimates. That’s, unfortunately, just the reality of using limited data to come up with a rough estimate of a disease’s overall spread.
The Rt also reflects an average. If 10 people are infected with Covid-19, nine spread it to no one else, and one spreads it to 10, that adds up to an Rt of 1. But it masks the fact that individuals, for whatever reason, can still cause superspreading events — which seem of particular concern with the coronavirus.
And the Rt is only as good as the data that goes into calculating it. If a state’s data is poor quality or inconsistent, it might skew the picture. That can help explain why some states with bad and continuing outbreaks may fare better on this benchmark than others.
Still, the Rt is one of the better measures we have for tracking a pathogen’s spread across the whole population. When paired with the other metrics on this list, it can give us a sense of each state’s outbreak now and in the future.
3) Most states’ positive rates for tests are too high
What’s the goal? Less than 5 percent of coronavirus tests coming back positive over the previous week, based on data from the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center and the Covid Tracking Project.
Which states meet the goal? Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin — 24 states, as well as Washington, DC.
Why is this important? To properly track and contain coronavirus outbreaks, states need to have enough testing. There are all sorts of proposals for how much testing is needed in the US, up to the tens of millions.
But one way to see if a state is testing enough to match its outbreak is the rate of tests that come back positive. An area with adequate testing should be testing lots and lots of people, many of whom don’t have the disease or don’t show severe symptoms. High positive rates indicate that only people with obvious symptoms are getting tested, so there’s not quite enough testing to match the scope of an outbreak.
The goal for the positive rate is, in an ideal world, zero percent, since that would suggest that Covid-19 is vanquished entirely. More realistically, in a world going through a pandemic, the positive rate should be below 5 percent. But even if a state reaches 5 percent, experts argue it should continue trying to push that number further down — to match nations like Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea, which have gotten their positive rates below 3 percent or even 1 percent — in order to truly get ahold of their outbreaks.
As long as a state is above 5 percent, chances are it’s still missing a significant number of Covid-19 cases. And the higher that number is, the more cases that are very likely getting missed.
So even if your state is reporting a low number of daily new cases, a high positive rate should be a cause for alarm — a sign that there’s an outbreak that’s only hidden due to a lack of testing. And if your state is reporting a high number of daily new cases and a high positive rate, that’s all the more reason for concern, suggesting the epidemic is even worse than the total case count indicates.
Sign up for the Weeds newsletter. Every Friday, you’ll get an explainer of a big policy story from the week, a look at important research that recently came out, and answers to reader questions — to guide you through the first 100 days of President Joe Biden’s administration.


vox--2020-11-18--The disturbing GOP attempt to block certification of Biden’s Michigan win, explained

Republican officials in Wayne County , Michigan , made a stunning move to block the certification of their presidential election results Tuesday — but backed down a few hours later amid intense criticism .
Wayne County is the largest county in the state , it includes the city of Detroit ( where the vast majority of the population is Black ) , and it votes heavily for Democrats .
As with all Michigan counties , its election results go to a bipartisan board of canvassers for certification that has two Democrats and two Republicans .
Usually , this is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two Republicans initially said at a meeting that they wouldn ’ t certify the results , claiming various “ irregularities ” meant they weren ’ t sure they could trust the count .
The move was exactly what many following Trump ’ s efforts to dispute the election results have long feared .
Biden clearly won Michigan — he leads there by over 140,000 votes , a 2.6 percent margin .
But if Wayne County ’ s results were excluded from the count entirely , Trump would win .
Practically , the local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been the last word , as the state board of canvassers would have then gotten to weigh in — but that board , too , is made up of two Democrats and two Republicans .
President Trump welcomed this effort to overturn the will of Michigan ’ s voters .
“ Wow !
Michigan just refused to certify the election results !
Having courage is a beautiful thing .
The USA stands proud !
” he tweeted .
The chair of the Michigan Republican Party also praised the move and helped take credit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fell apart .
As the Wayne County board of canvassers meeting stretched onward , its Republican officials were bombarded with criticism , as news of their actions went viral nationwide .
And after a few hours of this , they backed down , agreeing to certify Wayne County ’ s results alongside a request that Michigan ’ s secretary of state audit results .
This drama may not have lasted long , but it was disturbing nonetheless .
Key Republicans basically made an attempt to steal the state of Michigan out of Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president and the Michigan Republican Party cheered them on .
The larger context for what happened in Michigan The context here is that Trump can ’ t sustain his effort to dispute the election indefinitely .
The deadlines in which states will certify their results — meaning , Biden wins in several key swing states — are fast approaching .
Those certification deadlines have been on Trump ’ s mind .
According to journalist Geraldo Rivera , Trump recently said he wants to see “ what states do ” in terms of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in extraordinarily close races where there ’ s solid evidence malfeasance occurred , certification should just be a formality — the person with the most votes wins .
However , Trump has been trying to weaponize this process by spreading baseless claims of election fraud , and urging either judges or partisan Republicans involved in the process to delay or block certification .
According to the Washington Post ’ s Robert Costa , the idea here is that if states are somehow prevented from certifying their votes and therefore electors for Biden , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives , and since Republicans will control more state delegations there , they could declare Trump the winner .
( This is a far-fetched scenario , but , per Costa , it ’ s what Trump is talking about at this point . )
Until Tuesday , the president had little success .
His various lawsuits trying to block certification have not yet convinced any judges to step in .
And even key Republican officials involved in the certification process , like Georgia Secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressure from Trump ’ s team .
In other important swing states , the key certifying officials are Democrats who of course wouldn ’ t go along with Trump ’ s games .
But in Michigan , the job of certification is given to a four-person State Board of Canvassers — a bipartisan body composed of two Democrats and two Republicans .
There are also four-member bipartisan boards of canvassers in each county in Michigan .
Historically , certification has not been a partisan matter , but theoretically these boards could deadlock along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two longtime Michigan Republicans warned in an op-ed that such partisan shenanigans were entirely plausible .
Republicans in Wayne County initially blocked the certification of results Michigan ’ s deadline to certify state results is this coming Monday , so the county boards of canvassers have been meeting to certify their respective county results .
The meeting for Wayne County took place Tuesday — and it was unexpectedly dramatic .
When the board of canvassers voted on whether to certify Wayne County ’ s results , the two Republican members , Monica Palmer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Republicans ’ stated reason was that there were discrepancies between precincts ’ counts of how many named people voted and the actual count of votes .
This is known as precincts being “ out of balance.
” But though many precincts were out of balance , the discrepancies were usually very small .
“ Most of the unbalanced Wayne County precincts reported to the board Tuesday were off by three or four votes , ” Zahra Ahmad and Lauren Gibbons of MLive report .
Small mistakes like that suggest clerical error @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and certainly they don ’ t add up to anything close to Biden ’ s 145,000 vote lead in the state .
Regardless , Palmer and Hartmann said , they couldn ’ t certify the results .
“ Based on what I saw and went through in poll books in this canvass , I believe that we do not have complete and accurate information in those poll books , ” Palmer said , according to the Detroit Free Press .
Their Democratic colleagues responded with fury , accusing them of playing political games @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the chair of Michigan ’ s Republican Party , praised this turn of events .
“ I am proud that , due to the efforts of the Michigan Republican Party , the Republican National Committee and the Trump Campaign , enough evidence of irregularities and potential voter fraud was uncovered resulting in the Wayne County Board of Canvassers refusing to certify their election results , ” Cox said in a statement .
It was lost on few that the two Republicans who voted against certification are white , and were alleging problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Indeed , Palmer even suggested that all of Wayne County ’ s results except for Detroit could be certified — even though the most out-of-balance precinct , with a 27-vote discrepancy , was in the mostly white city of Livonia .
“ Shame on you .
You are a disgrace , ” the president of Detroit ’ s NAACP chapter , Wendell Anthony , said over Zoom at the meeting .
Soon , the news went viral nationally .
Reporters discovered that Hartmann had posted racist memes mocking President Obama on his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeatedly posted on his public Facebook several times suggesting that the election wasn ’ t over yet and that there was “ more to come.
” He also posted links from right-wing conspiracy sites , and several months ago he retweeted President Trump saying that mail voting is “ RIPE for FRAUD ” and “ shouldn ’ t be allowed.
” Trump cheered this turn of events — just as Wayne County Republicans reversed course Biden ’ s statewide margin of victory over Trump is about 145,000 votes , but his margin of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So in the dubious scenario where Wayne County ’ s results were just thrown out entirely , Trump would lead the state .
But this was never going to be the last step in the certification process .
The call will ultimately be made by the four-person statewide Board of Canvassers , though there are similarly two Democrats and two Republicans on that board ( and one of those Republicans is married to a witness in one of Trump ’ s lawsuits alleging improprieties ) .
Still , the Trump campaign cheered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of votes in a county Biden won .
Jenna Ellis , a lawyer for the Trump campaign , bragged that the decision was a “ huge win ” for Trump and claimed that , if the state board also deadlocked , the GOP state legislature “ will select the electors.
” ( However , Michigan ’ s Republican state Senate majority leader said Tuesday that this is “ not going to happen.
” ) Then Trump himself weighed in , incorrectly claiming the state of Michigan , rather than just the Wayne County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results , and praising Republicans on the board for “ having courage.
” But around that time , Palmer and Hartmann decided to change course .
After facing hours of intense criticism , they agreed to a deal in which they ’ d vote to certify Wayne County ’ s results after all , alongside a recommendation that Michigan ’ s secretary of state conduct an audit .
So the certification process in Michigan is now back on track .
As of Wednesday , all counties have certified their vote totals .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to certify the overall results by this coming Monday .
The system only works if Republicans agree to let it work As Trump tries to contest an election Biden clearly won , many have expressed confidence that Trump will fail because American democratic institutions are too strong for him to subvert .
But while Trump ’ s effort indeed likely will fail , that may be mainly because Biden ’ s lead is just too big .
Trump would somehow have to flip three swing states Biden won into his column — a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s happened since the election is confidence-inspiring about how a closer race could have played out .
The reality is that the president and many of his supporters do not respect the outcomes in states where he lost and will try whatever they can to ignore the will of the voters in those states ( always citing supposed , unproven fraud as an excuse ) .
Overall , American democratic institutions will only continue to function if enough Republicans in key positions — state legislators , state officials , judges — agree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local officials have done so .
Raffensperger , Georgia ’ s secretary of state , has stood up to Trump ’ s pressure , strongly disputing his claims of fraud .
Arizona ’ s Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich has made similar comments .
GOP state legislature leaders in states Biden won have also been saying they won ’ t try to appoint Trump electors .
Judges so far have not given Trump ’ s frivolous lawsuits the time of day .
But high-profile Republicans and conservative media figures have indulged Trump in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Relatively few have spoken out against it .
And we saw the consequences of that in Wayne County Tuesday .
Can we really be surprised if local Republicans who like and trust the president start doing what he wants them to do — trying to help him maintain power ?

Republican officials in Wayne County, Michigan, made a stunning move to block the certification of their presidential election results Tuesday — but backed down a few hours later amid intense criticism.
Wayne County is the largest county in the state, it includes the city of Detroit (where the vast majority of the population is Black), and it votes heavily for Democrats. As with all Michigan counties, its election results go to a bipartisan board of canvassers for certification that has two Democrats and two Republicans.
Usually, this is a formality. But on Tuesday, the two Republicans initially said at a meeting that they wouldn’t certify the results, claiming various “irregularities” meant they weren’t sure they could trust the count.
The move was exactly what many following Trump’s efforts to dispute the election results have long feared. Biden clearly won Michigan — he leads there by over 140,000 votes, a 2.6 percent margin. But if Wayne County’s results were excluded from the count entirely, Trump would win. Practically, the local officials’ move wouldn’t have been the last word, as the state board of canvassers would have then gotten to weigh in — but that board, too, is made up of two Democrats and two Republicans.
President Trump welcomed this effort to overturn the will of Michigan’s voters. “Wow! Michigan just refused to certify the election results! Having courage is a beautiful thing. The USA stands proud!” he tweeted. The chair of the Michigan Republican Party also praised the move and helped take credit for it.
But quickly, it fell apart. As the Wayne County board of canvassers meeting stretched onward, its Republican officials were bombarded with criticism, as news of their actions went viral nationwide. And after a few hours of this, they backed down, agreeing to certify Wayne County’s results alongside a request that Michigan’s secretary of state audit results.
This drama may not have lasted long, but it was disturbing nonetheless. Key Republicans basically made an attempt to steal the state of Michigan out of Joe Biden’s hands — and both the president and the Michigan Republican Party cheered them on.
The larger context for what happened in Michigan
The context here is that Trump can’t sustain his effort to dispute the election indefinitely. The deadlines in which states will certify their results — meaning, Biden wins in several key swing states — are fast approaching. Those certification deadlines have been on Trump’s mind. According to journalist Geraldo Rivera, Trump recently said he wants to see “what states do” in terms of certifying their results before conceding.
Just had heartfelt phone call w friend @realDonaldTrump who said he's a "realist" who'll do the"right thing" But he wants to see "what states do in terms of certifiction (etc)" He sounded committed to fighting for every vote & if he loses, talking more about all he's accomplished — Geraldo Rivera (@GeraldoRivera) November 13, 2020
Except in extraordinarily close races where there’s solid evidence malfeasance occurred, certification should just be a formality — the person with the most votes wins. However, Trump has been trying to weaponize this process by spreading baseless claims of election fraud, and urging either judges or partisan Republicans involved in the process to delay or block certification.
According to the Washington Post’s Robert Costa, the idea here is that if states are somehow prevented from certifying their votes and therefore electors for Biden, he will lack 270 electoral votes, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, and since Republicans will control more state delegations there, they could declare Trump the winner. (This is a far-fetched scenario, but, per Costa, it’s what Trump is talking about at this point.)
Until Tuesday, the president had little success. His various lawsuits trying to block certification have not yet convinced any judges to step in. And even key Republican officials involved in the certification process, like Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, have resisted pressure from Trump’s team. In other important swing states, the key certifying officials are Democrats who of course wouldn’t go along with Trump’s games.
But in Michigan, the job of certification is given to a four-person State Board of Canvassers — a bipartisan body composed of two Democrats and two Republicans. There are also four-member bipartisan boards of canvassers in each county in Michigan. Historically, certification has not been a partisan matter, but theoretically these boards could deadlock along partisan lines. And last week, two longtime Michigan Republicans warned in an op-ed that such partisan shenanigans were entirely plausible.
Republicans in Wayne County initially blocked the certification of results
Michigan’s deadline to certify state results is this coming Monday, so the county boards of canvassers have been meeting to certify their respective county results. The meeting for Wayne County took place Tuesday — and it was unexpectedly dramatic. When the board of canvassers voted on whether to certify Wayne County’s results, the two Republican members, Monica Palmer and William Hartmann, voted not to.
The Republicans’ stated reason was that there were discrepancies between precincts’ counts of how many named people voted and the actual count of votes. This is known as precincts being “out of balance.”
But though many precincts were out of balance, the discrepancies were usually very small. “Most of the unbalanced Wayne County precincts reported to the board Tuesday were off by three or four votes,” Zahra Ahmad and Lauren Gibbons of MLive report. Small mistakes like that suggest clerical error rather than a massive fraud scheme — and certainly they don’t add up to anything close to Biden’s 145,000 vote lead in the state.
Regardless, Palmer and Hartmann said, they couldn’t certify the results. “Based on what I saw and went through in poll books in this canvass, I believe that we do not have complete and accurate information in those poll books,” Palmer said, according to the Detroit Free Press.
Their Democratic colleagues responded with fury, accusing them of playing political games. And very quickly, Laura Cox, the chair of Michigan’s Republican Party, praised this turn of events. “I am proud that, due to the efforts of the Michigan Republican Party, the Republican National Committee and the Trump Campaign, enough evidence of irregularities and potential voter fraud was uncovered resulting in the Wayne County Board of Canvassers refusing to certify their election results,” Cox said in a statement.
It was lost on few that the two Republicans who voted against certification are white, and were alleging problems in the mostly Black city of Detroit. Indeed, Palmer even suggested that all of Wayne County’s results except for Detroit could be certified — even though the most out-of-balance precinct, with a 27-vote discrepancy, was in the mostly white city of Livonia. “Shame on you. You are a disgrace,” the president of Detroit’s NAACP chapter, Wendell Anthony, said over Zoom at the meeting.
Soon, the news went viral nationally. Reporters discovered that Hartmann had posted racist memes mocking President Obama on his public Facebook page. He had also repeatedly posted on his public Facebook several times suggesting that the election wasn’t over yet and that there was “more to come.” He also posted links from right-wing conspiracy sites, and several months ago he retweeted President Trump saying that mail voting is “RIPE for FRAUD” and “shouldn’t be allowed.”
Trump cheered this turn of events — just as Wayne County Republicans reversed course
Biden’s statewide margin of victory over Trump is about 145,000 votes, but his margin of victory in Wayne County is 323,000 votes. So in the dubious scenario where Wayne County’s results were just thrown out entirely, Trump would lead the state.
But this was never going to be the last step in the certification process. The call will ultimately be made by the four-person statewide Board of Canvassers, though there are similarly two Democrats and two Republicans on that board (and one of those Republicans is married to a witness in one of Trump’s lawsuits alleging improprieties).
Still, the Trump campaign cheered the news that Republicans were blocking certification of votes in a county Biden won. Jenna Ellis, a lawyer for the Trump campaign, bragged that the decision was a “huge win” for Trump and claimed that, if the state board also deadlocked, the GOP state legislature “will select the electors.” (However, Michigan’s Republican state Senate majority leader said Tuesday that this is “not going to happen.”)
BREAKING: This evening, the county board of canvassers in Wayne County, MI refused to certify the election results. If the state board follows suit, the Republican state legislator will select the electors. Huge win for @realDonaldTrump — Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) November 17, 2020
Then Trump himself weighed in, incorrectly claiming the state of Michigan, rather than just the Wayne County board of canvassers, refused to certify results, and praising Republicans on the board for “having courage.”
Wow! Michigan just refused to certify the election results! Having courage is a beautiful thing. The USA stands proud! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 18, 2020
But around that time, Palmer and Hartmann decided to change course. After facing hours of intense criticism, they agreed to a deal in which they’d vote to certify Wayne County’s results after all, alongside a recommendation that Michigan’s secretary of state conduct an audit.
So the certification process in Michigan is now back on track. As of Wednesday, all counties have certified their vote totals. The statewide board of canvassers must decide whether to certify the overall results by this coming Monday.
The system only works if Republicans agree to let it work
As Trump tries to contest an election Biden clearly won, many have expressed confidence that Trump will fail because American democratic institutions are too strong for him to subvert.
But while Trump’s effort indeed likely will fail, that may be mainly because Biden’s lead is just too big. Trump would somehow have to flip three swing states Biden won into his column — a tall order.
Yet little of what’s happened since the election is confidence-inspiring about how a closer race could have played out.
The reality is that the president and many of his supporters do not respect the outcomes in states where he lost and will try whatever they can to ignore the will of the voters in those states (always citing supposed, unproven fraud as an excuse).
Overall, American democratic institutions will only continue to function if enough Republicans in key positions — state legislators, state officials, judges — agree to let them function.
And many local officials have done so. Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state, has stood up to Trump’s pressure, strongly disputing his claims of fraud. Arizona’s Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich has made similar comments. GOP state legislature leaders in states Biden won have also been saying they won’t try to appoint Trump electors. Judges so far have not given Trump’s frivolous lawsuits the time of day.
But high-profile Republicans and conservative media figures have indulged Trump in his efforts to dispute the outcome. Relatively few have spoken out against it. And we saw the consequences of that in Wayne County Tuesday. Can we really be surprised if local Republicans who like and trust the president start doing what he wants them to do — trying to help him maintain power?


vox--2020-11-18--A DHS agency said America’s elections were secure. So Trump fired its leader.

President Donald Trump fired Chris Krebs , who led the Homeland Security Department ’ s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency ( CISA ) , on Tuesday evening — days after the agency , which is in charge of protecting elections , called the 2020 presidential election “ the most secure in American history.
” Trump did so because the agency ’ s — and Krebs ’ s personal — defense of the integrity of the elections punctures Trump ’ s baseless claim that the election was stolen from him .
CISA ’ s statement rebutted many of the conspiracy theories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some sort of wrongdoing , and said , in part , “ While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections , we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections , and you should too.
” On Tuesday evening , Trump dismissed Krebs in a tweet , falsely calling the statement “ highly inaccurate ” and claiming that because of that , “ effective immediately , ” Krebs “ has been terminated ” as CISA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all that surprising ; Krebs had reportedly told people for some time that he expected to be fired after the election , in large part because his efforts to correct false claims about election vulnerabilities and mail-in voting had long put him on the wrong side of the White House .
Krebs , who ran the agency that Trump himself signed into existence in 2018 , had garnered substantial bipartisan support for his efforts to shore up and strengthen America ’ s election infrastructure and defend against foreign interference .
In 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room ” that election officials could contact to report suspicious activity in real time , and had CISA officials at the ready to deploy to polling places , if necessary , according to the Washington Post .
CISA streamlined coordination between states and the federal government on election security concerns , and beefed up its public communication before and after the election on potential threats , including setting up a “ rumor control ” webpage to debunk election disinformation .
Of course , countering election falsehoods is infinitely more difficult when the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that disinformation .
That presidential disinformation campaign — in particular , the lie that a voting system used by certain states changed Trump votes to ones for President-elect Joe Biden — culminated in a statement from CISA and election officials across the US who said in a bolded statement last week : “ There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes , changed votes , or was in any way compromised.
” Likely further drawing the president ’ s ire was that Krebs also tried to counter misinformation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a tweet on Tuesday , Krebs said , in response to allegations that voting machines and software were manipulated , that dozens of election experts had said that “ ‘ in every case of which we are aware , these claims either have been unsubstantiated or are technically incoherent.
’ ” After his dismissal , Krebs posted on his personal account : “ Honored to serve .
We did it right .
Defend Today , Secure Tomorrow.
” Krebs ’ s dismissal drew condemnation from lawmakers , mostly Democrats on Capitol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extraordinary public servant and exactly the person Americans want protecting the security of our elections , ” Sen. Mark Warner ( D-VA ) , vice chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence , said in a statement .
“ It speaks volumes that the president chose to fire him simply for telling the truth.
” “ Whenever folks in CT worried about the integrity of the 2020 election , I would tell them that somehow , someway , Trump had left in place , maybe by accident , actual non-partisan professionals in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking about Chris Krebs , ” Sen. Chris Murphy ( D-CT ) tweeted .
Republicans , who have been slow at best to refute Trump ’ s claims , and are often actively trying to help him , were a little more muted in their response .
One of the few to offer Krebs support was Sen. Ben Sasse ( R-NE ) , who said in a statement that “ Chris Krebs did a really good job — as state election officials all across the nation will tell you — and he obviously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2020 faced extraordinary challenges : the potential repeat of foreign meddling , and a pandemic that forced state and local election officials to implement public health precautions and expand options like mail and early voting .
But despite these challenges , the vote was , as one top official for the Election Assistance Commission put it , “ one of the smoothest and most well-run elections that we have ever seen.
” But Trump ’ s refusal to accept the outcome of the 2020 election diminishes these successes while undermining the integrity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy as a whole , which will be even harder to repair after Trump leaves office .

President Donald Trump fired Chris Krebs, who led the Homeland Security Department’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), on Tuesday evening — days after the agency, which is in charge of protecting elections, called the 2020 presidential election “the most secure in American history.”
Trump did so because the agency’s — and Krebs’s personal — defense of the integrity of the elections punctures Trump’s baseless claim that the election was stolen from him.
CISA’s statement rebutted many of the conspiracy theories Trump has used to claim there was some sort of wrongdoing, and said, in part, “While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too.”
On Tuesday evening, Trump dismissed Krebs in a tweet, falsely calling the statement “highly inaccurate” and claiming that because of that, “effective immediately,” Krebs “has been terminated” as CISA director.
...votes from Trump to Biden, late voting, and many more. Therefore, effective immediately, Chris Krebs has been terminated as Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 18, 2020
This news isn’t all that surprising; Krebs had reportedly told people for some time that he expected to be fired after the election, in large part because his efforts to correct false claims about election vulnerabilities and mail-in voting had long put him on the wrong side of the White House.
Krebs, who ran the agency that Trump himself signed into existence in 2018, had garnered substantial bipartisan support for his efforts to shore up and strengthen America’s election infrastructure and defend against foreign interference.
In 2020, CISA set up a 24/7 “war room” that election officials could contact to report suspicious activity in real time, and had CISA officials at the ready to deploy to polling places, if necessary, according to the Washington Post. CISA streamlined coordination between states and the federal government on election security concerns, and beefed up its public communication before and after the election on potential threats, including setting up a “rumor control” webpage to debunk election disinformation.
Of course, countering election falsehoods is infinitely more difficult when the president and his allies are the main purveyors of that disinformation. That presidential disinformation campaign — in particular, the lie that a voting system used by certain states changed Trump votes to ones for President-elect Joe Biden — culminated in a statement from CISA and election officials across the US who said in a bolded statement last week: “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”
Likely further drawing the president’s ire was that Krebs also tried to counter misinformation on social media from his official account. In a tweet on Tuesday, Krebs said, in response to allegations that voting machines and software were manipulated, that dozens of election experts had said that “‘in every case of which we are aware, these claims either have been unsubstantiated or are technically incoherent.’”
ICYMI: On allegations that election systems were manipulated, 59 election security experts all agree, "in every case of which we are aware, these claims either have been unsubstantiated or are technically incoherent." #Protect2020 https://t.co/Oj6NciYruD — Chris Krebs #Protect2020 (@CISAKrebs) November 17, 2020
After his dismissal, Krebs posted on his personal account: “Honored to serve. We did it right. Defend Today, Secure Tomorrow.”
Honored to serve. We did it right. Defend Today, Secure Tomrorow. #Protect2020 — Chris Krebs (@C_C_Krebs) November 18, 2020
Democratic lawmakers were quick to condemn Krebs’s dismissal
Krebs’s dismissal drew condemnation from lawmakers, mostly Democrats on Capitol Hill. “Chris Krebs is an extraordinary public servant and exactly the person Americans want protecting the security of our elections,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), vice chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in a statement. “It speaks volumes that the president chose to fire him simply for telling the truth.”
“Whenever folks in CT worried about the integrity of the 2020 election, I would tell them that somehow, someway, Trump had left in place, maybe by accident, actual non-partisan professionals in charge of election security. I was talking about Chris Krebs,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) tweeted.
Republicans, who have been slow at best to refute Trump’s claims, and are often actively trying to help him, were a little more muted in their response. One of the few to offer Krebs support was Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE), who said in a statement that “Chris Krebs did a really good job — as state election officials all across the nation will tell you — and he obviously should not be fired.”
Election officials in 2020 faced extraordinary challenges: the potential repeat of foreign meddling, and a pandemic that forced state and local election officials to implement public health precautions and expand options like mail and early voting. But despite these challenges, the vote was, as one top official for the Election Assistance Commission put it, “one of the smoothest and most well-run elections that we have ever seen.”
But Trump’s refusal to accept the outcome of the 2020 election diminishes these successes while undermining the integrity of November’s elections — and democracy as a whole, which will be even harder to repair after Trump leaves office.