vox--2020-08-24--Why this former Republican says the party must be burned to the ground

Of all the “ Never Trumpers , ” Stuart Stevens might be the most interesting .
Stevens is one of the most successful GOP operatives in the last couple of decades .
He helped lead several presidential campaigns ( notably George W. Bush ’ s two campaigns and Mitt Romney ’ s failed bid in 2012 ) and multiple gubernatorial and congressional races .
He ’ s as seasoned as they come in Republican politics .
But Stevens stands out among Trump ’ s conservative critics because of his candor about the deeper rot at the core of the GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , called It Was All a Lie : How the Republican Party Became Donald Trump , he offers a grand mea culpa for his own role in paving the way for Trumpism .
“ It is a strange , melancholy feeling to turn sixty-five , and realize that what you have spent a good portion of your life working for and toward was not only meritless but also destructive , ” Stevens writes .
Stevens isn ’ t the only Republican who has criticized the GOP ’ s capitulation to Trump .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a group of former Republicans who are spending a ton of money pushing anti-Trump ads .
But he is somewhat unique for openly implicating himself and apologizing for his role in the party ’ s open embrace of nativism and bigotry .
I spoke to Stevens by phone about the story he wanted to tell in this book and why he insists that “ Donald Trump did not change the Republican Party as much as he gave the party permission to reveal its true self.
” Then we discuss which Republicans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him by pretending to care about conservative principles only to toss them out the window the second it was convenient to do so .
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows .
You call yourself a “ fool ” in the book for believing all those years that the GOP was based on a “ core set of values.
” What did you think the GOP was all about ?
And what is it actually about ?
Well , I would ’ ve said back in the Dark Ages , like four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party would agree on some core principles .
We could differ on issues here and there , but we all mostly believed in the importance of character , in personal responsibility , in free trade , in being tough on Russia , in fiscal sanity and legal immigration .
What gets me is not just that the party has drifted away from all of those things , because sometimes parties do that .
It ’ s that we ’ re actively against all these things now .
I don ’ t think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that in modern politics and I really don ’ t think we ’ ve seen anything like it in American politics .
Just a complete moral and policy collapse of a party .
Let me run something by you .
You say “ It was all a lie ” and that ’ s a great title , but I look at all this and I say that the lie was the strategy and therefore not really a betrayal in the way you imply .
Here ’ s what I mean : For several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to keep lower- and middle-class white voters drunk on grievances so that they don ’ t wake up one day and realize their pockets are being picked by plutocrats , and all that rhetoric about “ family values ” and “ personal responsibility ” and “ states rights ” was always a bait-and-switch designed to obscure the party ’ s real reasons for existing .
It certainly isn ’ t what I believe , and I think it ’ s complicated .
So you take the Bush era .
We thought that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay taxes .
So it was a goal that if you were a family of four and you made $ 40,000 a year , you wouldn ’ t pay federal income tax .
We thought that was the right way to go .
In retrospect , it probably wasn ’ t the right way to go .
It ’ s probably better if everybody pays lower taxes .
But I don ’ t think the people that I worked with — from Bill Weld to Tom Ridge to George Bush to Mitt Romney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spoke for those core values .
I think they believed it .
I don ’ t go through the book pointing fingers at this person or that person .
I didn ’ t want to write that book .
I think it ’ s more a collective failure , that if we really believed this stuff , the party would fight for it , but that simply didn ’ t happen .
So that ’ s the conclusion that I come to in the book .
You also come to the conclusion that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and this stuff goes all the way back to the “ Southern Strategy ” in the Nixon White House .
Race is the original sin of the Republican Party and , again , you can see how this stretches back to 1964 .
There was obviously a racist element to the party before .
I mean , now we view William Buckley as this lost erudite voice , but we forget that Buckley started out as a stone-cold racist defending segregation .
His second book was defending McCarthyism .
He later recanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was wrong .
But that element was always there .
I never thought the party was perfect .
I freely admit that I was a campaign guy .
I admit it , it ’ s just the truth .
I never worked in government .
I never really thought a lot about it .
I was always in the business of electing candidates and thought of my role like a defense lawyer .
In retrospect , I wish had thought about it more .
I guess my point is that there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — to say that the Republican Party lost its soul .
But I don ’ t think that ’ s true , or at least it hasn ’ t been true since Barry Goldwater .
It ’ s just the pursuit of power all the way down .
Hell , the line from Newt Gingrich to Donald Trump is pretty straight .
Well , I would look at Newt Gingrich as part of the dark side , but I don ’ t think that was true of George Bush .
I really don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felt very passionately about expanding the party .
He felt very passionately about the party appealing more to Hispanics .
He really cared about education .
If you go back and you read his acceptance speech in 2000 , it reads like a document from a lost civilization .
It really is about humility and service and helping others .
And I don ’ t think that was phony .
I think Bush is incapable of phoniness .
I think what you see is what you get with him .
And that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I think he believed he could take the party in that direction .
Look , I ’ ll be the first to say we weren ’ t perfect in Bush world .
I mean , we played too much to the dark side .
My biggest regret is signing the traditional marriage amendment in 2004 .
But that was a different era .
I mean , in 2008 , every presidential candidate , Democrat and Republican , was against same-sex marriage .
There ’ s another way to read the history of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your larger point about his disposition .
I want to push a little more on this idea that the hypocrisy of the Republican Party “ should have been obvious ” to people like you but wasn ’ t .
I don ’ t believe that you were too naive or that you couldn ’ t see the hollowness of those “ marketing slogans ” you were peddling .
Was it really just the intoxication of winning ?
I was always optimistic to a fault .
What I say is that I believed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and I wanted to believe this .
Now , how much of my believing it was because I wanted to believe it ?
I don ’ t know .
I look back at 2016 and see that a lot of people were wrong about Trump .
It ’ s very hard to find anybody who was more wrong than me .
I didn ’ t think he ’ d win the primary , I didn ’ t think he ’ d win the general .
And I realized in retrospect it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to believe that .
I didn ’ t want to believe this party that I ’ ve worked in would nominate this guy who ’ s talking about having sex with his daughter in public .
I didn ’ t think the party would do that .
I was an idiot , but I didn ’ t .
And Trump made all of this impossible to ignore .
So then there was the stage that a lot of people went through , and I went through for a while I guess , saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party .
But I don ’ t see how you can sustain that .
It ’ s like trying to pretend that the Confederacy wasn ’ t about slavery .
The party has abandoned any positive aspirations or values it might have had .
The thing about Trump is that he ’ s so easy to understand .
I mean , he ’ s a tiny tyrant and an emotional toddler .
But I ’ m dying to understand the political cowardice of Republicans who you say know better but can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do .
Are you sure that these people are actually morally conflicted about what they ’ re doing ?
I don ’ t think they ’ re morally conflicted .
They all believe that Donald Trump is uniquely unqualified to be president of the United States .
And they ’ ve come to grips with that .
So I don ’ t think that they see that as a moral test , because they don ’ t see any of this as a moral test .
To me , Trump is a mirror @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Mississippi and knew a lot of people that were really nice people .
They wouldn ’ t have used a racist slur any more than cut off their right hand .
But they were for segregation more than they were not .
They were segregationists , and Trump is very much like that .
You can ’ t negotiate with him or what he represents , in my opinion .
What struck me is that maybe we shouldn ’ t be surprised at this .
I mean , I think they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the norm , and we should be surprised and shocked by bravery .
I think the cowardice is contagious and courage is far less contagious .
And I think the hallmark of the Republican Party is cowardice .
No one can tell me that if these Republicans had been in power in 1775 , we wouldn ’ t still be celebrating the Queen ’ s birthday .
You can hear what they ’ d say : “ We ’ re going to fight the King ?
Are you out of your mind ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
We ’ re going to work this out.
” You say in the book that you were bamboozled by Republican politicians you worked with .
Give me some examples .
I want names , Stuart .
I don ’ t want to get into naming names , because I think there ’ s a genre of books settling scores .
And I think it invariably gets away from me taking responsibility for myself , because ultimately it ’ s up to me .
Explain someone like Lindsey Graham or Susan Collins to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel like calling these people cowards lets them off the hook because it implies that they don ’ t actually believe in the terrible things they ’ re supporting , that they ’ re somehow complicit by dint of their circumstances .
But I think the most charitable thing you can say about them is that they ’ re nihilists , and the least charitable thing you can say is that they ’ re far uglier than they ’ re pretending to be .
I think they ’ re just interested in power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ else .
Yeah , that ’ s the conclusion I come to .
That ’ s why I say the Republican Party really isn ’ t a political party .
It ’ s a cartel .
Why do cartels exist ?
Why does OPEC exist ?
To sell oil .
Nobody says , “ What is the moral purpose of OPEC ?
” What does the Republican Party exist for now at the federal level ?
To beat Democrats —that ’ s it .
There ’ s nothing else .
There is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Elizabeth Warren , she can at least articulate a theory of government .
You can hate it or you can love it , but you can argue with it and she ’ ll defend it .
Can anybody do that on the right with any credibility ?
I don ’ t think I ’ ve seen anything like it .
I compare it to the collapse of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union , where the gap between reality and what the party was saying was so massive that it collapsed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ collapse of the Republican Party .
Actually , I know we are .
You talk a lot about the redemptive power of leaders in the book , but here ’ s a deeper problem no one has a solution for .
The Republican Party is essentially the conservative media universe now .
You don ’ t have voters so much as customers , who ’ ve marinated for years in a carefully curated unreality where the only unifying principle is owning the libs , and no one can lead this party now without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hell do we do about that ?
I actually have a darker view of things .
The Republican Party created Fox News .
Fox News didn ’ t create the Republican Party .
Roger Ailes just realized this .
He didn ’ t make people like Italian food , he just opened up an Italian restaurant , and it became really popular .
And I think that ’ s more damning because it means Fox only exists because there ’ s a market for it .
So getting rid of it won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will emerge to take the place of Fox .
Can there be any accountability for the GOP after Trump ?
You say the party should be burned to the ground , but what does that even look like ?
Well , is it going to be 1964 ?
That ’ s definitely accountability .
Listen , this is why we ’ re called the Lincoln Project .
We have some skills , and we ’ re doing everything we can to try to beat Trump and Trumpism .
I mean , Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these people attack us .
It ’ s like , “ Are you kidding ?
We ’ re political consultants .
Attack us all you want.
” We ’ re not confusing this with any kind of personal nobility .
We ’ re just like carpenters and we can build these things .
So I don ’ t know what else to do .
I wake up every day trying to beat this guy .
You know how it will play out , Stuart .
If Trump gets destroyed in November , all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next day and pretend that none of this shit happened .
Oh , no question about it .
I think we ’ re in for a long period of Democratic government .
The country ’ s future will be decided inside the Democratic Party .
The Republican Party won ’ t have anything to do with it .
They can ’ t come up with an alternative .
They don ’ t want to come up with an alternative .
So the battle within the Democratic Party between the AOC or Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or whatever you want to call them , that ’ s the debate now .
I don ’ t see how the Republican Party comes back from this .
I think they ’ ll lose and lose big moving forward .
What Hemingway said about going bankrupt also applies to the death of political parties : It happens slowly and then all at once .
And as I keep saying , once you have a major political party that validates hate , it ’ s very hard to undo .
And that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

Of all the “Never Trumpers,” Stuart Stevens might be the most interesting.
Stevens is one of the most successful GOP operatives in the last couple of decades. He helped lead several presidential campaigns (notably George W. Bush’s two campaigns and Mitt Romney’s failed bid in 2012) and multiple gubernatorial and congressional races. He’s as seasoned as they come in Republican politics.
But Stevens stands out among Trump’s conservative critics because of his candor about the deeper rot at the core of the GOP. And in a new tell-all book, called It Was All a Lie: How the Republican Party Became Donald Trump, he offers a grand mea culpa for his own role in paving the way for Trumpism. “It is a strange, melancholy feeling to turn sixty-five, and realize that what you have spent a good portion of your life working for and toward was not only meritless but also destructive,” Stevens writes.
Stevens isn’t the only Republican who has criticized the GOP’s capitulation to Trump. He’s part of the Lincoln Project, a group of former Republicans who are spending a ton of money pushing anti-Trump ads. But he is somewhat unique for openly implicating himself and apologizing for his role in the party’s open embrace of nativism and bigotry.
I spoke to Stevens by phone about the story he wanted to tell in this book and why he insists that “Donald Trump did not change the Republican Party as much as he gave the party permission to reveal its true self.” Then we discuss which Republicans, in his words, “bamboozled” him by pretending to care about conservative principles only to toss them out the window the second it was convenient to do so.
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.
Sean Illing
You call yourself a “fool” in the book for believing all those years that the GOP was based on a “core set of values.” What did you think the GOP was all about? And what is it actually about?
Stuart Stevens
Well, I would’ve said back in the Dark Ages, like four years ago, that 90 percent of the party would agree on some core principles. We could differ on issues here and there, but we all mostly believed in the importance of character, in personal responsibility, in free trade, in being tough on Russia, in fiscal sanity and legal immigration.
What gets me is not just that the party has drifted away from all of those things, because sometimes parties do that. It’s that we’re actively against all these things now. I don’t think we’ve ever seen anything like that in modern politics and I really don’t think we’ve seen anything like it in American politics. Just a complete moral and policy collapse of a party.
Sean Illing
Let me run something by you. You say “It was all a lie” and that’s a great title, but I look at all this and I say that the lie was the strategy and therefore not really a betrayal in the way you imply.
Here’s what I mean: For several decades, the party has worked hard to keep lower- and middle-class white voters drunk on grievances so that they don’t wake up one day and realize their pockets are being picked by plutocrats, and all that rhetoric about “family values” and “personal responsibility” and “states rights” was always a bait-and-switch designed to obscure the party’s real reasons for existing.
Am I wrong?
Stuart Stevens
It certainly isn’t what I believe, and I think it’s complicated. So you take the Bush era. We thought that it was an admirable policy that fewer people pay taxes. So it was a goal that if you were a family of four and you made $40,000 a year, you wouldn’t pay federal income tax. We thought that was the right way to go. In retrospect, it probably wasn’t the right way to go. It’s probably better if everybody pays lower taxes. But I don’t think the people that I worked with — from Bill Weld to Tom Ridge to George Bush to Mitt Romney — thought they were lying when they spoke for those core values. I think they believed it.
I don’t go through the book pointing fingers at this person or that person. I didn’t want to write that book. I think it’s more a collective failure, that if we really believed this stuff, the party would fight for it, but that simply didn’t happen. So that’s the conclusion that I come to in the book.
Sean Illing
You also come to the conclusion that it was always about race.
Stuart Stevens
Yeah, and this stuff goes all the way back to the “Southern Strategy” in the Nixon White House. Race is the original sin of the Republican Party and, again, you can see how this stretches back to 1964. There was obviously a racist element to the party before. I mean, now we view William Buckley as this lost erudite voice, but we forget that Buckley started out as a stone-cold racist defending segregation. His second book was defending McCarthyism. He later recanted and wrote eloquent stuff about why he was wrong. But that element was always there.
I never thought the party was perfect. I freely admit that I was a campaign guy. I admit it, it’s just the truth. I never worked in government. I never really thought a lot about it. I was always in the business of electing candidates and thought of my role like a defense lawyer. In retrospect, I wish had thought about it more.
Sean Illing
I guess my point is that there’s a tendency — one you mostly avoid — to say that the Republican Party lost its soul. But I don’t think that’s true, or at least it hasn’t been true since Barry Goldwater. It’s just the pursuit of power all the way down. Hell, the line from Newt Gingrich to Donald Trump is pretty straight.
Stuart Stevens
Well, I would look at Newt Gingrich as part of the dark side, but I don’t think that was true of George Bush. I really don’t. I think that he felt very passionately about expanding the party. He felt very passionately about the party appealing more to Hispanics. He really cared about education.
If you go back and you read his acceptance speech in 2000, it reads like a document from a lost civilization. It really is about humility and service and helping others. And I don’t think that was phony. I think Bush is incapable of phoniness. I think what you see is what you get with him. And that’s I think what he believed, and I think he believed he could take the party in that direction.
Look, I’ll be the first to say we weren’t perfect in Bush world. I mean, we played too much to the dark side. My biggest regret is signing the traditional marriage amendment in 2004. But that was a different era. I mean, in 2008, every presidential candidate, Democrat and Republican, was against same-sex marriage.
Sean Illing
There’s another way to read the history of the Bush years, but I take your larger point about his disposition. I want to push a little more on this idea that the hypocrisy of the Republican Party “should have been obvious” to people like you but wasn’t. I don’t believe that you were too naive or that you couldn’t see the hollowness of those “marketing slogans” you were peddling.
Was it really just the intoxication of winning?
Stuart Stevens
I was always optimistic to a fault. What I say is that I believed the better angels of the party would win, and I wanted to believe this. Now, how much of my believing it was because I wanted to believe it? I don’t know. I look back at 2016 and see that a lot of people were wrong about Trump. It’s very hard to find anybody who was more wrong than me. I didn’t think he’d win the primary, I didn’t think he’d win the general. And I realized in retrospect it’s because I didn’t want to believe that. I didn’t want to believe this party that I’ve worked in would nominate this guy who’s talking about having sex with his daughter in public. I didn’t think the party would do that. I was an idiot, but I didn’t. And Trump made all of this impossible to ignore.
So then there was the stage that a lot of people went through, and I went through for a while I guess, saying this isn’t really the Republican Party. But I don’t see how you can sustain that. It’s like trying to pretend that the Confederacy wasn’t about slavery. The party has abandoned any positive aspirations or values it might have had.
Sean Illing
The thing about Trump is that he’s so easy to understand. I mean, he’s a tiny tyrant and an emotional toddler.
But I’m dying to understand the political cowardice of Republicans who you say know better but can’t do what they know they ought to do. Are you sure that these people are actually morally conflicted about what they’re doing?
Stuart Stevens
I don’t think they’re morally conflicted. They all believe that Donald Trump is uniquely unqualified to be president of the United States. And they’ve come to grips with that. So I don’t think that they see that as a moral test, because they don’t see any of this as a moral test.
To me, Trump is a mirror image of segregation. I grew up in Mississippi and knew a lot of people that were really nice people. They wouldn’t have used a racist slur any more than cut off their right hand. But they were for segregation more than they were not. They were segregationists, and Trump is very much like that. You can’t negotiate with him or what he represents, in my opinion. What struck me is that maybe we shouldn’t be surprised at this. I mean, I think they’re cowards, but maybe cowardice is the norm, and we should be surprised and shocked by bravery.
I think the cowardice is contagious and courage is far less contagious. And I think the hallmark of the Republican Party is cowardice. No one can tell me that if these Republicans had been in power in 1775, we wouldn’t still be celebrating the Queen’s birthday. You can hear what they’d say: “We’re going to fight the King? Are you out of your mind? The most powerful army in the world? We’re going to work this out.”
Sean Illing
You say in the book that you were bamboozled by Republican politicians you worked with. Give me some examples. I want names, Stuart.
Stuart Stevens
I don’t want to get into naming names, because I think there’s a genre of books settling scores. And I think it invariably gets away from me taking responsibility for myself, because ultimately it’s up to me.
Sean Illing
Explain someone like Lindsey Graham or Susan Collins to me. In some ways, I feel like calling these people cowards lets them off the hook because it implies that they don’t actually believe in the terrible things they’re supporting, that they’re somehow complicit by dint of their circumstances. But I think the most charitable thing you can say about them is that they’re nihilists, and the least charitable thing you can say is that they’re far uglier than they’re pretending to be.
Stuart Stevens
I think they’re just interested in power and don’t care about anything else.
Sean Illing
I mean, isn’t that ... nihilism?
Stuart Stevens
Yeah, that’s the conclusion I come to. That’s why I say the Republican Party really isn’t a political party. It’s a cartel. Why do cartels exist? Why does OPEC exist? To sell oil. Nobody says, “What is the moral purpose of OPEC?”
What does the Republican Party exist for now at the federal level? To beat Democrats —that’s it. There’s nothing else. There is no policy.
Say what you will about Elizabeth Warren, she can at least articulate a theory of government. You can hate it or you can love it, but you can argue with it and she’ll defend it. Can anybody do that on the right with any credibility?
I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it. I compare it to the collapse of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, where the gap between reality and what the party was saying was so massive that it collapsed. I think we’re watching the collapse of the Republican Party. Actually, I know we are.
“The Republican Party really isn’t a political party. It’s a cartel.”
Sean Illing
You talk a lot about the redemptive power of leaders in the book, but here’s a deeper problem no one has a solution for. The Republican Party is essentially the conservative media universe now. You don’t have voters so much as customers, who’ve marinated for years in a carefully curated unreality where the only unifying principle is owning the libs, and no one can lead this party now without bowing to this element.
What the hell do we do about that?
Stuart Stevens
I actually have a darker view of things.
Sean Illing
Really?
Stuart Stevens
The Republican Party created Fox News. Fox News didn’t create the Republican Party. Roger Ailes just realized this. He didn’t make people like Italian food, he just opened up an Italian restaurant, and it became really popular. And I think that’s more damning because it means Fox only exists because there’s a market for it. So getting rid of it won’t solve any problems. Something else will emerge to take the place of Fox.
Sean Illing
Can there be any accountability for the GOP after Trump? You say the party should be burned to the ground, but what does that even look like?
Stuart Stevens
Well, is it going to be 1964? That’s definitely accountability. Listen, this is why we’re called the Lincoln Project. We have some skills, and we’re doing everything we can to try to beat Trump and Trumpism. I mean, Trump’s out there attacking us, all these people attack us. It’s like, “Are you kidding? We’re political consultants. Attack us all you want.”
We’re not confusing this with any kind of personal nobility. We’re just like carpenters and we can build these things. So I don’t know what else to do. I wake up every day trying to beat this guy.
Sean Illing
You know how it will play out, Stuart. If Trump gets destroyed in November, all of these spineless Republicans will wake up the next day and pretend that none of this shit happened.
Stuart Stevens
Oh, no question about it. I think we’re in for a long period of Democratic government. The country’s future will be decided inside the Democratic Party. The Republican Party won’t have anything to do with it. They can’t come up with an alternative. They don’t want to come up with an alternative. So the battle within the Democratic Party between the AOC or Bernie Sanders wing and the Biden wing, or whatever you want to call them, that’s the debate now.
I don’t see how the Republican Party comes back from this. I think they’ll lose and lose big moving forward. What Hemingway said about going bankrupt also applies to the death of political parties: It happens slowly and then all at once. And as I keep saying, once you have a major political party that validates hate, it’s very hard to undo. And that’s what the Republican Party has done.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-24--College students are motivated to vote, but many don’t trust US elections

College students are highly motivated to vote , but they say they ’ re less confident in the legitimacy of the election — and many are likely to doubt the results .
That ’ s according to a new survey from the Knight Foundation , a nonprofit that funds research and projects to foster more engaged communities .
The survey was done through College Pulse , a research agency focused on college students .
And though the findings show Democratic nominee Joe Biden is clearly the preferred candidate among the those polled , respondents aren ’ t excited about him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they dislike President Donald Trump .
The survey , conducted from August 9 to 12 , polled 4,000 students enrolled in four-year universities .
The results paint a picture of an increasingly engaged electorate of young people who harbor mistrust of political parties and traditional election systems .
The findings reflect a widening gap — evidenced in the older voter base of both Biden and Trump — between young people and the legacy parties and electoral structures they feel aren ’ t working for them .
“ It really points to cracks in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty high level , ” said Evette Alexander , director of learning and impact at the Knight Foundation .
“ If we have significant parts of the population ... doubting our democratic process , it leads them away from participating , it leads them away from being engaged citizens , it leads them away from being informed , ” she added .
Around 37 percent of students surveyed leaned toward the Democratic Party , while 43 percent identified as independent ; only around 12 percent leaned toward the Republican Party .
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the college population based on the sample size .
Researchers weighted respondents for race and gender to ensure those categories were also representative .
Even before the coronavirus pandemic , a majority of Americans , 59 percent , didn ’ t feel confident in the honesty of the nation ’ s elections — in part thanks to the legacy of foreign interference in the 2016 election .
That ’ s more than most other major democracies and on par with Lithuania and Turkey .
That confidence has been further shaken by an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which will be charged with handling a higher-than-usual influx of mail-in ballots due to the pandemic , and concerns — largely ginned up by President Trump , without evidence — over the integrity of mail-in voting itself .
That ’ s reflected among young people : More than half of the students surveyed said they think the November election won ’ t be administered well , and only half said they believe the presidential race will be conducted in a fair and transparent way .
More than 80 percent said they believed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than voters do .
Nearly half of college students said problems at polling places , low voter turnout , evidence of foreign interference , and the winner of the election losing the popular vote would make them have “ major doubts ” about the fairness of the election .
Women were more likely than men to harbor those doubts .
College students ’ s views also reflect the partisan divide over mail-in voting seen at the national level : Only 17 percent of Democratic students said they would have major doubts about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were cast by mail , while 57 percent of Republican students did .
In total , 53 percent of students said they ’ d cast a ballot by mail — a surprising majority likely driven by the threat of coronavirus , Alexander said , given that young people usually don ’ t vote by mail .
College-aged voters favor Biden , but not because they like him Despite their mistrust of the country ’ s election systems , more than 70 percent of students said they are “ absolutely certain ” they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cuts across racial , political , and gender lines , indicating a widespread interest in heading to the polls .
Students cited Covid-19 and race relations as the most important issues facing the country today , reflecting ongoing fears about the coronavirus pandemic in the US and the increased scrutiny on racial equity and justice due to widespread Black Lives Matter protests in the wake of George Floyd ’ s death in Minneapolis in May .
Around 70 percent said they ’ d vote for Biden , compared with only 18 percent who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Trump .
But asked whether they have a favorable view of the former vice president , only around half agreed .
“ I think we can read between the lines there that for students , a vote for Biden is a vote against Trump , ” Alexander said .
That lack of enthusiasm extends to the parties as well : Only 26 percent of students had a positive view of the Republican Party , and only 51 percent had a positive view of the Democratic Party .
The findings on the presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a disillusionment with national politics from young people , Alexander said .
Instead , young people are turning to other forms of activism such as participating in protests , contacting elected officials , and discussing issues with friends and family .
Participation in local elections is “ extremely low ” among college students , the report found , but most still think local elections are one of the most effective ways to bring about change .
That paradox may have something to do with the way college students get their political news , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics rarely reach college-aged voters — who primarily get their news by scrolling through social media — let alone voters under 40 .
That ’ s an indicator that candidates and organizations that are social-media savvy should work to mobilize young people by reaching them where they already are .
“ Look , these students are interested in participating outside of national politics .
For some , national politics isn ’ t delivering on its promises , at least to them right now , ” Alexander said .
“ There ’ s an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for local issues to become more front and center , where people ’ s eyes and attention are .
”

College students are highly motivated to vote, but they say they’re less confident in the legitimacy of the election — and many are likely to doubt the results.
That’s according to a new survey from the Knight Foundation, a nonprofit that funds research and projects to foster more engaged communities. The survey was done through College Pulse, a research agency focused on college students.
And though the findings show Democratic nominee Joe Biden is clearly the preferred candidate among those polled, respondents aren’t excited about him — rather, they support him because they dislike President Donald Trump.
The survey, conducted from August 9 to 12, polled 4,000 students enrolled in four-year universities. The results paint a picture of an increasingly engaged electorate of young people who harbor mistrust of political parties and traditional election systems. The findings reflect a widening gap — evidenced in the older voter base of both Biden and Trump — between young people and the legacy parties and electoral structures they feel aren’t working for them.
“It really points to cracks in our democratic institutions and processes at a pretty high level,” said Evette Alexander, director of learning and impact at the Knight Foundation.
“If we have significant parts of the population ... doubting our democratic process, it leads them away from participating, it leads them away from being engaged citizens, it leads them away from being informed,” she added.
Around 37 percent of students surveyed leaned toward the Democratic Party, while 43 percent identified as independent; only around 12 percent leaned toward the Republican Party. That’s a breakdown Alexander said is representative of the college population based on the sample size. Researchers weighted respondents for race and gender to ensure those categories were also representative.
Even before the coronavirus pandemic, a majority of Americans, 59 percent, didn’t feel confident in the honesty of the nation’s elections — in part thanks to the legacy of foreign interference in the 2016 election. That’s more than most other major democracies and on par with Lithuania and Turkey.
That confidence has been further shaken by an ongoing fight over the US Postal Service, which will be charged with handling a higher-than-usual influx of mail-in ballots due to the pandemic, and concerns — largely ginned up by President Trump, without evidence — over the integrity of mail-in voting itself.
That’s reflected among young people: More than half of the students surveyed said they think the November election won’t be administered well, and only half said they believe the presidential race will be conducted in a fair and transparent way. More than 80 percent said they believed special-interest groups have more influence over elections than voters do.
Nearly half of college students said problems at polling places, low voter turnout, evidence of foreign interference, and the winner of the election losing the popular vote would make them have “major doubts” about the fairness of the election. Women were more likely than men to harbor those doubts.
College students’ views also reflect the partisan divide over mail-in voting seen at the national level: Only 17 percent of Democratic students said they would have major doubts about the fairness of the election if most votes were cast by mail, while 57 percent of Republican students did.
In total, 53 percent of students said they’d cast a ballot by mail — a surprising majority likely driven by the threat of coronavirus, Alexander said, given that young people usually don’t vote by mail.
College-aged voters favor Biden, but not because they like him
Despite their mistrust of the country’s election systems, more than 70 percent of students said they are “absolutely certain” they’ll vote in November. That largely cuts across racial, political, and gender lines, indicating a widespread interest in heading to the polls.
Students cited Covid-19 and race relations as the most important issues facing the country today, reflecting ongoing fears about the coronavirus pandemic in the US and the increased scrutiny on racial equity and justice due to widespread Black Lives Matter protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis in May.
Around 70 percent said they’d vote for Biden, compared with only 18 percent who said they’d cast a ballot for Trump. But asked whether they have a favorable view of the former vice president, only around half agreed.
“I think we can read between the lines there that for students, a vote for Biden is a vote against Trump,” Alexander said.
That lack of enthusiasm extends to the parties as well: Only 26 percent of students had a positive view of the Republican Party, and only 51 percent had a positive view of the Democratic Party. The findings on the presidential candidates and political parties are illustrative of a disillusionment with national politics from young people, Alexander said.
Instead, young people are turning to other forms of activism such as participating in protests, contacting elected officials, and discussing issues with friends and family. Participation in local elections is “extremely low” among college students, the report found, but most still think local elections are one of the most effective ways to bring about change.
That paradox may have something to do with the way college students get their political news, Alexander said. Information channels about local politics rarely reach college-aged voters — who primarily get their news by scrolling through social media — let alone voters under 40.
That’s an indicator that candidates and organizations that are social-media savvy should work to mobilize young people by reaching them where they already are.
“Look, these students are interested in participating outside of national politics. For some, national politics isn’t delivering on its promises, at least to them right now,” Alexander said. “There’s an opportunity — and perhaps a mandate — for local issues to become more front and center, where people’s eyes and attention are.”
New goal: 25,000
In the spring, we launched a program asking readers for financial contributions to help keep Vox free for everyone, and last week, we set a goal of reaching 20,000 contributors. Well, you helped us blow past that. Today, we are extending that goal to 25,000. Millions turn to Vox each month to understand an increasingly chaotic world — from what is happening with the USPS to the coronavirus crisis to what is, quite possibly, the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work — and helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-24--The RNC disarray is a microcosm of everything Trump did wrong with the coronavirus

The day it ’ s set to begin , there is still much we don ’ t know about what will be happening at the 2020 Republican National Convention .
But what we do indicates it ’ ll have a circus-like quality .
Confirmed speakers include Patricia and Mark McCloskey , the St. Louis couple best known for brandishing firearms at protesters earlier this year , and former Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann , who became a symbol of white grievance last year after he was filmed in a viral video of a confrontation with Native American demonstrators .
President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the White House , flouting ethical concerns and laws prohibiting the use of government property for political gain , with other events set to take place on government property located conveniently near the downtown DC hotel he still owns and profits from .
On Sunday , the RNC released a speaker list — with Trump scheduled to give an address every night .
“ President Trump accepting the GOP nomination from the White House would be completely unprecedented , ” Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington communications director Jordan Libowitz told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a political speech of this magnitude and visibility on the White House grounds creates the appearance that it ’ s a government-sanctioned event , something multiple laws were written to avoid.
” It wasn ’ t supposed to be this way .
Trump wanted to deliver his convention speech in front of a packed arena of his supporters and went to drastic lengths to make it happen .
But Covid-19 had other plans .
The backdrop to the disarray is the coronavirus pandemic , which caused convention logistics to change several times this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slap together an event at the last minute .
But instead of doing the work necessary to get the virus under control and make sizable indoor gatherings reasonably safe , Trump engaged in wishful thinking and refused to listen to officials , some from inside his own government , who pointed out the obvious : that an in-person convention held during a pandemic could become a superspreader event .
The chaos is a microcosm of Trump ’ s coronavirus response .
Short-term thinking repeatedly carried the day in a manner that scuttled the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Republican presidential nomination before a throng of supporters .
In the end , the Republican National Convention seems likely to serve as a symbol of everything Trump and his Republican enablers have done wrong .
In the middle of a pandemic , it was never a reasonable idea to have a large RNC extravaganza in North Carolina The 2020 Republican convention was originally supposed to be held in North Carolina , a swing state important to Trump ’ s reelection hopes .
But as coronavirus cases in the state started to tick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May , it quickly became clear that packing tens of thousands of people from all over the country into an arena in Charlotte would be ill-advised .
Trump didn ’ t want to hear it , however .
Instead of acknowledging reality , he tried to strong-arm the state ’ s Democratic governor , Roy Cooper , into allowing the RNC to go forward as though the pandemic didn ’ t exist .
“ Unfortunately , Democrat Governor , @ RoyCooper , is still in Shutdown mood & unable to guarantee that by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Arena , ” Trump tweeted on May 25 , before presenting Cooper with an ultimatum .
“ In other words , we would be spending millions of dollars building the Arena to a very high standard without even knowing if the Democrat Governor would allow the Republican Party to fully occupy the space , ” he wrote .
“ Plans are being made by many thousands of enthusiastic Republicans , and others , to head to beautiful North Carolina in August .
They must be immediately given an answer by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ space will be allowed to be fully occupied.
” Trump went as far as to publicly suggest that Cooper ’ s reluctance to allow the RNC to go forward as planned was part of a political conspiracy against him .
Similar cajoling took place in private .
The Washington Post reported that during an early June phone call , Trump told Cooper he didn ’ t “ want to be sitting in a place that ’ s 50 percent empty ” and therefore “ can ’ t do social distancing.
” “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump reportedly said on the call .
“ Otherwise , we ’ ll cancel the whole damn thing.
” Cooper responded publicly by politely pointing out the public health reality — that unless the convention agreed to dramatically scale down the proceedings , holding the event in Charlotte would be unsafe .
Cooper didn ’ t budge , and just over a week later , the RNC announced that most of the convention would be moved to Florida , a state run by Trump-loving Gov .
Ron DeSantis , who has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sake of perceived short-term economic gain .
But events over the next month would make clear that a Jacksonville convention too was a bad idea .
Trump ’ s Tulsa debacle was a case study in what not to do On June 20 , Trump tried to rejuvenate his flagging reelection campaign with a rally in Tulsa , Oklahoma , that was meant to symbolize how life in America was returning to normal .
But it turned out to be a disaster .
After weeks of massive Trump campaign hype , only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BOK Center , which holds about 19,000 .
Even worse , the Trump campaign ’ s decision to ignore warnings from public health experts likely fueled a spike in coronavirus cases in the area .
“ In the past few days , we ’ ve seen almost 500 new cases , and we had several large events just over two weeks ago , so I guess we just connect the dots , ” Tulsa City/County Health Department Director Dr. Bruce Dart said days after the rally , according to the Associated Press .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was photographed at the rally without a mask , contracted Covid-19 after the rally and died .
And instead of doing everything possible to keep people safe , Trump campaign workers were filmed removing thousands of “ Do Not Sit Here , Please !
” stickers meant to encourage rally-goers to social distance .
The Tulsa debacle illustrated all the risks involved in staging large in-person gatherings like the RNC during a pandemic .
Meanwhile , the coronavirus situation has continued to spiral out of control in Florida .
Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t bluster your way through a pandemic When Jacksonville was announced as the new site of the RNC in June , new daily coronavirus cases in the state had just started to spike toward about 2,000 .
By July 4 , that number had increased to over 11,000 .
On July 7 , Trump downplayed the worsening situation in Florida and expressed hope that the RNC show would go on , telling reporters cases were “ going to go down.
” But new cases did not start trending downward for weeks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ day in which there were more than 10,000 new cases in Florida and 173 deaths — Trump announced that the plug was being pulled on the Florida plan .
While the president told reporters that “ there ’ s nothing more important in our country than keeping our people safe , ” CNN reported that the Tulsa debacle played a role in his decision : Along similar lines , the New York Times reported on July 24 that “ Trump ’ s top political advisers had already become convinced that the convention stood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stories — like his recent , unsuccessful rally in Tulsa , Okla. — than a bounce in the polls.
” But by this time , there was only a month left before the RNC .
Trump ’ s announcement put the proceedings in a liminal state until officials finally came to terms with reality and started making belated plans for a virtual event .
The contrast with the DNC is instructive The RNC chaos stands in contrast with the more realistic approach taken by the Democratic National Committee , which announced in June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Committee would be almost entirely virtual .
The convention went off without any major hitches , with many positive reviews .
Whether the RNC will end up going similarly smoothly remains to be seen .
But one thing that can be said is that if Trump wanted to have an in-person convention this month , he needed to do the work back in February , March , and April .
Instead , he spent that time insisting the virus would go away on its own and passing the buck to governors who lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pandemic that has shuttered economies and spread like wildfire across state boundaries .
So now , instead of serving as a symbol of Trump ’ s successes , the RNC will serve as a symbol of everything he ’ s done wrong .
While other countries reopen schools and even sporting events with fans , the US continues to report 40,000 or more new coronavirus cases a day .
Trump has no plan to get the virus under control .
On the contrary , he continues to insist the virus will go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking point he used more than 170,000 deaths ago during the early days of the pandemic .
The pandemic has become the predominant issue in American life .
It also represents Trump ’ s failures .
And so instead of dealing with reality , Trump and RNC officials now seem intent on trying to turn the 2020 convention into another culture war spectacle .
In the spring , we launched a program asking readers for financial contributions to help keep Vox free for everyone , and last week , we set a goal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you helped us blow past that .
Today , we are extending that goal to 25,000 .
Millions turn to Vox each month to understand an increasingly chaotic world — from what is happening with the USPS to the coronavirus crisis to what is , quite possibly , the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes .
Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers , your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work — and helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world .
Contribute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

The day it’s set to begin, there is still much we don’t know about what will be happening at the 2020 Republican National Convention. But what we do indicates it’ll have a circus-like quality.
Confirmed speakers include Patricia and Mark McCloskey, the St. Louis couple best known for brandishing firearms at protesters earlier this year, and former Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann, who became a symbol of white grievance last year after he was filmed in a viral video of a confrontation with Native American demonstrators. President Trump will likely deliver his convention-closing speech from the White House, flouting ethical concerns and laws prohibiting the use of government property for political gain, with other events set to take place on government property located conveniently near the downtown DC hotel he still owns and profits from. On Sunday, the RNC released a speaker list — with Trump scheduled to appear every day.
Half of the convention’s key speakers are the president and his family members? pic.twitter.com/293IJbsk80 — Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) August 22, 2020
“President Trump accepting the GOP nomination from the White House would be completely unprecedented,” Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington communications director Jordan Libowitz told me in an email. “Giving a political speech of this magnitude and visibility on the White House grounds creates the appearance that it’s a government-sanctioned event, something multiple laws were written to avoid.”
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. Trump wanted to deliver his convention speech in front of a packed arena of his supporters and went to drastic lengths to make it happen. But Covid-19 had other plans.
The backdrop to the disarray is the coronavirus pandemic, which caused convention logistics to change several times this summer and forced officials to try to slap together an event at the last minute. But instead of doing the work necessary to get the virus under control and make sizable indoor gatherings reasonably safe, Trump engaged in wishful thinking and refused to listen to officials, some from inside his own government, who pointed out the obvious: that an in-person convention held during a pandemic could become a superspreader event.
The chaos is a microcosm of Trump’s coronavirus response. Short-term thinking repeatedly carried the day in a manner that scuttled the president’s hopes of triumphantly accepting the Republican presidential nomination before a throng of supporters.
The Republican National Convention starts Monday. There is STILL no information on the RNC site about what time it starts, who will be speaking ... or anything else. — Kaili Joy Gray (@KailiJoy) August 21, 2020
In the end, the Republican National Convention seems likely to serve as a symbol of everything Trump and his Republican enablers have done wrong.
In the middle of a pandemic, it was never a reasonable idea to have a large RNC extravaganza in North Carolina
The 2020 Republican convention was originally supposed to be held in North Carolina, a swing state important to Trump’s reelection hopes. But as coronavirus cases in the state started to tick up in March, April, and May, it quickly became clear that packing tens of thousands of people from all over the country into an arena in Charlotte would be ill-advised.
Trump didn’t want to hear it, however. Instead of acknowledging reality, he tried to strong-arm the state’s Democratic governor, Roy Cooper, into allowing the RNC to go forward as though the pandemic didn’t exist.
“Unfortunately, Democrat Governor, @RoyCooper, is still in Shutdown mood & unable to guarantee that by August we will be allowed full attendance in the Arena,” Trump tweeted on May 25, before presenting Cooper with an ultimatum.
“In other words, we would be spending millions of dollars building the Arena to a very high standard without even knowing if the Democrat Governor would allow the Republican Party to fully occupy the space,” he wrote. “Plans are being made by many thousands of enthusiastic Republicans, and others, to head to beautiful North Carolina in August. They must be immediately given an answer by the Governor as to whether or not the space will be allowed to be fully occupied.”
I love the Great State of North Carolina, so much so that I insisted on having the Republican National Convention in Charlotte at the end of August. Unfortunately, Democrat Governor, @RoyCooperNC is still in Shutdown mood & unable to guarantee that by August we will be allowed... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 25, 2020
Trump went as far as to publicly suggest that Cooper’s reluctance to allow the RNC to go forward as planned was part of a political conspiracy against him.
Trump accuses Gov. Roy Cooper (D) of acting "very suspiciously" by not committing to have the RNC in August in the teeth of a pandemic, while new coronavirus cases in his case are on the rise pic.twitter.com/MxGyh8FR4p — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 26, 2020
Similar cajoling took place in private. The Washington Post reported that during an early June phone call, Trump told Cooper he didn’t “want to be sitting in a place that’s 50 percent empty” and therefore “can’t do social distancing.”
“I believe other states will do it,” Trump reportedly said on the call. “Otherwise, we’ll cancel the whole damn thing.”
Cooper responded publicly by politely pointing out the public health reality — that unless the convention agreed to dramatically scale down the proceedings, holding the event in Charlotte would be unsafe.
We have been committed to a safe RNC convention in North Carolina and it’s unfortunate they never agreed to scale down and make changes to keep people safe. Protecting public health and safety during this pandemic is a priority. — Governor Roy Cooper (@NC_Governor) June 3, 2020
Cooper didn’t budge, and just over a week later, the RNC announced that most of the convention would be moved to Florida, a state run by Trump-loving Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has been similarly willing to ignore public health for the sake of perceived short-term economic gain.
But events over the next month would make clear that a Jacksonville convention too was a bad idea.
Trump’s Tulsa debacle was a case study in what not to do
On June 20, Trump tried to rejuvenate his flagging reelection campaign with a rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that was meant to symbolize how life in America was returning to normal. But it turned out to be a disaster.
After weeks of massive Trump campaign hype, only about 6,200 people showed up to the BOK Center, which holds about 19,000. Even worse, the Trump campaign’s decision to ignore warnings from public health experts likely fueled a spike in coronavirus cases in the area.
“In the past few days, we’ve seen almost 500 new cases, and we had several large events just over two weeks ago, so I guess we just connect the dots,” Tulsa City/County Health Department Director Dr. Bruce Dart said days after the rally, according to the Associated Press.
Herman Cain, a prominent Trump supporter who was photographed at the rally without a mask, contracted Covid-19 after the rally and died. And instead of doing everything possible to keep people safe, Trump campaign workers were filmed removing thousands of “Do Not Sit Here, Please!” stickers meant to encourage rally-goers to social distance.
The Tulsa debacle illustrated all the risks involved in staging large in-person gatherings like the RNC during a pandemic. Meanwhile, the coronavirus situation has continued to spiral out of control in Florida.
Trump’s ill-fated Jacksonville plan showed that you can’t bluster your way through a pandemic
When Jacksonville was announced as the new site of the RNC in June, new daily coronavirus cases in the state had just started to spike toward about 2,000. By July 4, that number had increased to over 11,000.
On July 7, Trump downplayed the worsening situation in Florida and expressed hope that the RNC show would go on, telling reporters cases were “going to go down.”
But new cases did not start trending downward for weeks. Finally, on July 23 — a day in which there were more than 10,000 new cases in Florida and 173 deaths — Trump announced that the plug was being pulled on the Florida plan.
While the president told reporters that “there’s nothing more important in our country than keeping our people safe,” CNN reported that the Tulsa debacle played a role in his decision:
Despite urges to ignore them, Trump was closely watching as several Republican lawmakers said they weren’t going to Jacksonville or were considering not going, a person familiar said. Trump was wary of having sparse attendance at the convention. Just a month ago, the Trump campaign was playing up expectations for a massive crowd at the President’s first rally since the pandemic began, but those crowds in Tulsa, Oklahoma, were much smaller than expected.
Along similar lines, the New York Times reported on July 24 that “Trump’s top political advisers had already become convinced that the convention stood a better chance of generating embarrassing news stories — like his recent, unsuccessful rally in Tulsa, Okla. — than a bounce in the polls.”
But by this time, there was only a month left before the RNC. Trump’s announcement put the proceedings in a liminal state until officials finally came to terms with reality and started making belated plans for a virtual event.
The contrast with the DNC is instructive
The RNC chaos stands in contrast with the more realistic approach taken by the Democratic National Committee, which announced in June that this year’s Democratic National Committee would be almost entirely virtual. The convention went off without any major hitches, with many positive reviews.
Whether the RNC will end up going similarly smoothly remains to be seen. But one thing that can be said is that if Trump wanted to have an in-person convention this month, he needed to do the work back in February, March, and April. Instead, he spent that time insisting the virus would go away on its own and passing the buck to governors who lack the resources and jurisdictional authority to handle a pandemic that has shuttered economies and spread like wildfire across state boundaries.
So now, instead of serving as a symbol of Trump’s successes, the RNC will serve as a symbol of everything he’s done wrong. While other countries reopen schools and even sporting events with fans, the US continues to report 40,000 or more new coronavirus cases a day.
Trump has no plan to get the virus under control. On the contrary, he continues to insist the virus will go away on its own — the same talking point he used more than 170,000 deaths ago during the early days of the pandemic.
Trump is still delusionally insisting that Covid will go away on its own pic.twitter.com/gzLRT1CVnK — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 5, 2020
The pandemic has become the predominant issue in American life. It also represents Trump’s failures. And so instead of dealing with reality, Trump and RNC officials now seem intent on trying to turn the 2020 convention into another culture war spectacle.
New goal: 25,000
In the spring, we launched a program asking readers for financial contributions to help keep Vox free for everyone, and last week, we set a goal of reaching 20,000 contributors. Well, you helped us blow past that. Today, we are extending that goal to 25,000. Millions turn to Vox each month to understand an increasingly chaotic world — from what is happening with the USPS to the coronavirus crisis to what is, quite possibly, the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work — and helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-24--Contracts, hacks, and Google: What to consider before you get a home security system

It has never been easier or cheaper to put some kind of security system in your home .
I know this from personal experience .
As one of the relatively small minority of Americans who has been the victim of a break-in — an experience I do not recommend and would prefer not to repeat — I decided to invest in home security by buying a small camera to monitor my apartment and send my phone alerts if it detected any motion or sound in it while I was enjoying a week-long vacation .
It was not a complete success @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , sending out multiple alerts per day — all false alarms — that I wasn ’ t always able to check due to spotty internet service .
By the end of the week , I was entirely ignoring the alerts .
My first attempt at DIY home security certainly could have gone better , but it wasn ’ t a total disaster , either .
If someone had broken into my apartment , I ’ m sure the camera would have picked them up — if nothing else , it was extremely sensitive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though my lack of internet access meant I couldn ’ t see the livestream of my apartment , the camera would at least get a recording of the burglar that could be used as evidence .
For less than $ 30 , I got some peace of mind that my apartment wasn ’ t being burglarized or burned down in my absence .
These days , home security runs the gamut from a humble , internet-connected camera and a phone app to a professionally installed and monitored set-up that locks down your entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come with trade-offs , and figuring out what ’ s best for your needs and your budget can be confusing .
You may also want to consider not just your home ’ s security but also your cybersecurity : Some systems have been prone to hacks , which is an especially scary prospect if the hackers are watching live footage of the inside of your home .
You ’ re putting a lot of data about your home in the hands of private companies , so it ’ s important that you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how safe they keep it .
If you ’ re thinking about getting your own security system , here ’ s what you need to know .
While there are many do-it-yourself options out there for home security , professionally installed and monitored systems remain the leader in the market .
These are the ones that come with the yard signs and window stickers and the classic keypad at the door where you type in various codes when you leave and enter your home .
For decades , these systems were the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot for them — the installation , equipment , and monthly monitoring fees add up fast .
“ For years , the security industry has been encumbered with this notion of , ‘ We just sell these ugly little white plastic boxes and sensors , they ’ re ugly , they ’ re not very sophisticated , ’ ” said Brad Russell , research director of connected home devices and security for Parks Associates .
The undeniable leader in this space is ADT , a company that long predates smart homes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The company started out as a telegraph delivery company — the “ T ” in ADT stands for “ telegraph ” — eventually branching out to fire and burglar alarms .
But it wasn ’ t until the 1980s that the technology was advanced ( and cheap ) enough for mainstream residential home use .
ADT ’ s competitors in this space include names like Vivint and Brinks Home Security .
They can be a good option if you ’ ve got the money but not the technical know-how : Professionals will recommend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home security expertise , install everything , get it connected to your phone lines and the rest of your smart devices if you ’ ve got them , and show you how to work everything .
Professionals will also monitor your home for alerts about things like potential break-ins , fires , and carbon monoxide leaks — and contact emergency services if needed — so you don ’ t need to be on call all the time .
The downside ?
They ’ re expensive .
Installation costs money , the gadgets cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money .
You may also have to sign a long-term contract that locks you into the service for several years .
Also , depending on where you live — for instance , in an apartment — it may not be an option for you at all .
Over the last decade , smart home technology has taken hold and cameras have gotten smaller , better , and cheaper .
These innovations have made DIY home security a viable option for a reasonably tech-savvy and wallet-conscious person who wants to keep an eye on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or violating their lease ) to do so .
You can buy as many or as few security gadgets as you want , including door and window sensors ; interior , exterior , and doorbell cameras ; alarms , smoke detectors , and keypads — the more you buy , obviously , the pricier your system becomes .
Or you can forgo the dedicated home security system completely and go with a couple of cameras and an app instead .
You set them up yourself , which means you ’ re also the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your needs are and where your devices should actually go to be the most effective .
You ’ ll also be the one who has to figure out how to set up the mobile app for alerts and integrate it into your smart home system if you have one .
All this requires a certain amount of technical know-how .
These systems are meant to be easy enough for anyone to set up , but that doesn ’ t mean everyone can .
Amazon ’ s Ring — which started life as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security system and social media app called Neighbors — may be the best-known in this space , given its association with Amazon .
Google has its Nest line , SimpliSafe is one of the pioneers in DIY home security , and there are a ton of cameras out there from several manufacturers at a variety of price points .
They have their own benefits , but they ’ ve also had their own controversies .
Ring , for example , has had issues with hackers and its close association with law enforcement ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you go the completely DIY route , your system will also be self-monitored , so you ’ ll be the one who gets any alerts .
And that means you have to be ready and able to get those alerts and act on them at all times .
You might also have to pay for extras like monthly cloud storage to keep camera recordings , get advanced features like AI , or to have a cellular backup option in case your internet goes out and renders the system useless .
But you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which many traditional and DIY companies now offer .
DIY systems may include professional monitoring for a monthly fee these days , for example , and those usually don ’ t require a long-term contract , making a more flexible and cheaper option for consumers .
Some DIY systems even offer professional installation — Ring now has an “ X Line ” offering , for instance , which removes the DIY element entirely .
ADT has dipped its toe into the DIY space a few times already , pairing up with Samsung @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with its own DIY line called Blue .
A few weeks ago , it made its biggest play yet with a major partnership with Google , which will invest $ 450 million and take a 6.6 percent stake in the home security company .
ADT will offer Google ’ s Nest family of smart home devices , as well as the artificial intelligence technology that powers them .
Meanwhile , Google ’ s Nest products will have access to the professional installation and monitoring services of ADT .
The deal represents a step @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DIY approach of Nest with the established record and professional monitoring services of ADT .
The deal shows that the leaders in the respective fields think they need each other to tap into a growing market that neither has been able to master : DIY smart home security .
Some things to keep in mind While the security of your home is top of mind here , don ’ t forget that cybersecurity is important , too .
You may not like the privacy or cybersecurity trade-offs you may have to make with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the information they collect is if they include cameras inside of your home .
Amazon ’ s Ring has had a few especially high-profile issues here .
Hackers found it relatively simple to break into Ring ’ s cameras , which initially didn ’ t have mandatory two-factor authentication ( the majority of people don ’ t use two-factor authentication when it ’ s offered , leaving them much more vulnerable to hacks in general ) .
There were several reports of hackers taking over customers ’ cameras , watching their activities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shout racial slurs at their kids .
This is not ideal .
Not to be left out , Nest has had some hacking issues of its own .
Ring also has controversial contracts with hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the country , giving the police access to customers ’ video doorbell footage ( if they consent to provide it ) to assist in their investigations .
Some might see this as a bonus , others might not .
Or you may not feel comfortable giving Google another source of data about you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opt out of having this data collected ) , though , I will note , just because you use a non-Google security system doesn ’ t mean Google isn ’ t getting data about you : These systems have apps , and those apps may well send information to Google if they use its SDKs .
Of course , this isn ’ t a security app problem ; it ’ s a mobile app industry problem .
And that ’ s not even getting into the lesser-known and even cheaper smart security cameras @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secure ; there are countless stories at this point of IoT devices that cut corners when it comes to cybersecurity .
You might be fine with that for a device that tells you how many eggs are in your refrigerator , but it ’ s a risk you may not want to take when it comes to the camera over your baby ’ s crib .
That ’ s not to say that every cheap , no-name camera has security flaws , but going with a more trusted brand might give you more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely be more expensive .
But don ’ t relax too much into your peace of mind because there ’ s no guarantee that a name brand or one that places greater importance on cybersecurity won ’ t get hacked .
As mentioned above , this has happened to Ring and Nest users , and even ADT has had issues , including recently revealing that one of its technicians added his email address to hundreds of customer accounts , giving him access to their cameras .
The company also settled a class action @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 16 million over allegations that its wireless sensors were easily susceptible to hacks because their signals weren ’ t encrypted .
If you ’ re really worried about hackers getting access to live footage of you in your living room , you can always just not use cameras at all and go with a system of motion detectors , door sensors , and smoke detectors .
The base kits for many of these systems actually don ’ t include cameras at all , so maybe the cheap and simple offering is the best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all this , you ’ re still interested in beefing up your home security , checking out review sites is always a good place to start .
Consumer Reports has a nice overview of what ’ s available , as well as reviews of several systems .
Wirecutter recommends professionally monitored systems but doesn ’ t seem to think much of companies that require long-term contracts and didn ’ t bother to review them at all .
Wirecutter also has a dedicated review for security cameras , as does CNET .
CNET also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ options , everything from smart light bulbs to my security system of choice , the lone sub- $ 30 camera .
Obviously , no system is perfect and some are going to be better for you than others depending on your specific needs .
The good news is that the DIY security industry has made creating your own home security system easier and cheaper than ever , and is more accessible to more people than ever before .
Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network .
All Open Sourced content is editorially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

It has never been easier or cheaper to put some kind of security system in your home. I know this from personal experience. As one of the relatively small minority of Americans who has been the victim of a break-in — an experience I do not recommend and would prefer not to repeat — I decided to invest in home security by buying a small camera to monitor my apartment and send my phone alerts if it detected any motion or sound in it while I was enjoying a week-long vacation.
It was not a complete success. The camera was way too sensitive, sending out multiple alerts per day — all false alarms — that I wasn’t always able to check due to spotty internet service. By the end of the week, I was entirely ignoring the alerts.
My first attempt at DIY home security certainly could have gone better, but it wasn’t a total disaster, either. If someone had broken into my apartment, I’m sure the camera would have picked them up — if nothing else, it was extremely sensitive to movement and sound. And even though my lack of internet access meant I couldn’t see the livestream of my apartment, the camera would at least get a recording of the burglar that could be used as evidence. For less than $30, I got some peace of mind that my apartment wasn’t being burglarized or burned down in my absence.
These days, home security runs the gamut from a humble, internet-connected camera and a phone app to a professionally installed and monitored set-up that locks down your entire house. But any of these systems come with trade-offs, and figuring out what’s best for your needs and your budget can be confusing. You may also want to consider not just your home’s security but also your cybersecurity: Some systems have been prone to hacks, which is an especially scary prospect if the hackers are watching live footage of the inside of your home. You’re putting a lot of data about your home in the hands of private companies, so it’s important that you can trust what they do with it and how safe they keep it.
If you’re thinking about getting your own security system, here’s what you need to know.
The classic keypad-at-the-door home security system
While there are many do-it-yourself options out there for home security, professionally installed and monitored systems remain the leader in the market. These are the ones that come with the yard signs and window stickers and the classic keypad at the door where you type in various codes when you leave and enter your home. For decades, these systems were the only game in town, and consumers paid a lot for them — the installation, equipment, and monthly monitoring fees add up fast.
“For years, the security industry has been encumbered with this notion of, ‘We just sell these ugly little white plastic boxes and sensors, they’re ugly, they’re not very sophisticated,’” said Brad Russell, research director of connected home devices and security for Parks Associates.
The undeniable leader in this space is ADT, a company that long predates smart homes, the internet, and even telephones. The company started out as a telegraph delivery company — the “T” in ADT stands for “telegraph” — eventually branching out to fire and burglar alarms. But it wasn’t until the 1980s that the technology was advanced (and cheap) enough for mainstream residential home use.
ADT’s competitors in this space include names like Vivint and Brinks Home Security. They can be a good option if you’ve got the money but not the technical know-how: Professionals will recommend the best package to you using their home security expertise, install everything, get it connected to your phone lines and the rest of your smart devices if you’ve got them, and show you how to work everything. Professionals will also monitor your home for alerts about things like potential break-ins, fires, and carbon monoxide leaks — and contact emergency services if needed — so you don’t need to be on call all the time.
The downside? They’re expensive. Installation costs money, the gadgets cost money, and the monthly monitoring costs money. You may also have to sign a long-term contract that locks you into the service for several years. Also, depending on where you live — for instance, in an apartment — it may not be an option for you at all.
The smart home approach
Over the last decade, smart home technology has taken hold and cameras have gotten smaller, better, and cheaper. These innovations have made DIY home security a viable option for a reasonably tech-savvy and wallet-conscious person who wants to keep an eye on their home without paying a premium (or violating their lease) to do so.
You can buy as many or as few security gadgets as you want, including door and window sensors; interior, exterior, and doorbell cameras; alarms, smoke detectors, and keypads — the more you buy, obviously, the pricier your system becomes. Or you can forgo the dedicated home security system completely and go with a couple of cameras and an app instead. You set them up yourself, which means you’re also the one who has to figure out what your needs are and where your devices should actually go to be the most effective. You’ll also be the one who has to figure out how to set up the mobile app for alerts and integrate it into your smart home system if you have one. All this requires a certain amount of technical know-how. These systems are meant to be easy enough for anyone to set up, but that doesn’t mean everyone can.
Amazon’s Ring — which started life as a video doorbell but now offers a whole-home security system and social media app called Neighbors — may be the best-known in this space, given its association with Amazon. Google has its Nest line, SimpliSafe is one of the pioneers in DIY home security, and there are a ton of cameras out there from several manufacturers at a variety of price points. They have their own benefits, but they’ve also had their own controversies. Ring, for example, has had issues with hackers and its close association with law enforcement (more on that below).
If you go the completely DIY route, your system will also be self-monitored, so you’ll be the one who gets any alerts. And that means you have to be ready and able to get those alerts and act on them at all times. You might also have to pay for extras like monthly cloud storage to keep camera recordings, get advanced features like AI, or to have a cellular backup option in case your internet goes out and renders the system useless.
But you can also get the best of both worlds, which many traditional and DIY companies now offer. DIY systems may include professional monitoring for a monthly fee these days, for example, and those usually don’t require a long-term contract, making a more flexible and cheaper option for consumers. Some DIY systems even offer professional installation — Ring now has an “X Line” offering, for instance, which removes the DIY element entirely.
ADT has dipped its toe into the DIY space a few times already, pairing up with Samsung SmartThings and, recently, coming out with its own DIY line called Blue. A few weeks ago, it made its biggest play yet with a major partnership with Google, which will invest $450 million and take a 6.6 percent stake in the home security company. ADT will offer Google’s Nest family of smart home devices, as well as the artificial intelligence technology that powers them. Meanwhile, Google’s Nest products will have access to the professional installation and monitoring services of ADT. The deal represents a step forward for both companies, marrying the DIY approach of Nest with the established record and professional monitoring services of ADT. The deal shows that the leaders in the respective fields think they need each other to tap into a growing market that neither has been able to master: DIY smart home security.
Some things to keep in mind
While the security of your home is top of mind here, don’t forget that cybersecurity is important, too.
You may not like the privacy or cybersecurity trade-offs you may have to make with DIY systems — especially considering how sensitive the information they collect is if they include cameras inside of your home. Amazon’s Ring has had a few especially high-profile issues here.
Hackers found it relatively simple to break into Ring’s cameras, which initially didn’t have mandatory two-factor authentication (the majority of people don’t use two-factor authentication when it’s offered, leaving them much more vulnerable to hacks in general). There were several reports of hackers taking over customers’ cameras, watching their activities, and using the two-way talk feature to shout racial slurs at their kids. This is not ideal. Not to be left out, Nest has had some hacking issues of its own.
Ring also has controversial contracts with hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the country, giving the police access to customers’ video doorbell footage (if they consent to provide it) to assist in their investigations. Some might see this as a bonus, others might not.
Or you may not feel comfortable giving Google another source of data about you (you can, as always, opt out of having this data collected), though, I will note, just because you use a non-Google security system doesn’t mean Google isn’t getting data about you: These systems have apps, and those apps may well send information to Google if they use its SDKs. Of course, this isn’t a security app problem; it’s a mobile app industry problem.
And that’s not even getting into the lesser-known and even cheaper smart security cameras out there that could be even less secure; there are countless stories at this point of IoT devices that cut corners when it comes to cybersecurity. You might be fine with that for a device that tells you how many eggs are in your refrigerator, but it’s a risk you may not want to take when it comes to the camera over your baby’s crib. That’s not to say that every cheap, no-name camera has security flaws, but going with a more trusted brand might give you more peace of mind. It will also likely be more expensive.
But don’t relax too much into your peace of mind because there’s no guarantee that a name brand or one that places greater importance on cybersecurity won’t get hacked. As mentioned above, this has happened to Ring and Nest users, and even ADT has had issues, including recently revealing that one of its technicians added his email address to hundreds of customer accounts, giving him access to their cameras. The company also settled a class action lawsuit a few years ago for $16 million over allegations that its wireless sensors were easily susceptible to hacks because their signals weren’t encrypted.
If you’re really worried about hackers getting access to live footage of you in your living room, you can always just not use cameras at all and go with a system of motion detectors, door sensors, and smoke detectors. The base kits for many of these systems actually don’t include cameras at all, so maybe the cheap and simple offering is the best one for you.
If, after all this, you’re still interested in beefing up your home security, checking out review sites is always a good place to start. Consumer Reports has a nice overview of what’s available, as well as reviews of several systems. Wirecutter recommends professionally monitored systems but doesn’t seem to think much of companies that require long-term contracts and didn’t bother to review them at all. Wirecutter also has a dedicated review for security cameras, as does CNET. CNET also has suggestions for the best cheap security options, everything from smart light bulbs to my security system of choice, the lone sub-$30 camera.
Obviously, no system is perfect and some are going to be better for you than others depending on your specific needs. The good news is that the DIY security industry has made creating your own home security system easier and cheaper than ever, and is more accessible to more people than ever before.
Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.