Tag Archives: 2020 Election

A Few More Words on This Crisis

Posted on by

From E. J. Dionne, Jr. of The Washington Post:

At least the Confederate secessionists acknowledged that Abraham Lincoln won the 1860 election.

The 18 Republican state attorneys general and 126 Republican House members who asked the Supreme Court to throw out the results of the 2020 election may thus be more impudent than the Civil War seditionists in whose steps they followed.

Here is a translation of what they were telling a majority of the nation’s electorate and voters in states representing 62 of President-elect Joe Biden’s 306 electoral votes:

“We don’t like the president and vice president you chose so we simply won’t accept the result of a free election. We’ll deploy lies and phony statistics to justify imposing our will on the rest of the country. The heck with democracy. But we’ll continue to enjoy the Social Security checks, the farm subsidies and all the other money that states that voted for Biden send our way.”

Their lawsuit, flatly rejected by the court on Friday night, was originally brought by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (who happens to be under federal investigation for bribery and abuse of office and has been under indictment for felony securities fraud charges). It was joined by 17 of his Republican colleagues and backed by almost two-thirds of House Republicans. Its claims have been described as (you can look it up) clownish, comical, farcical, frivolous, ludicrous, insane and dumb. The court used none of those words, of course, but its terse dismissal said enough.

The lawsuit was all these things, but it was also profoundly dangerous, hypocritical and revealing. We should continue to take it very seriously as a sign that not only President Txxxx but also a majority of his party would rather tear our republic apart than accept electoral defeat. We went through this once before, and it led to a civil war.

Yes, that’s the moment we should be thinking about. . . .

No matter how they dress things up, the Nullification wing of the Republican Party is obsessed with the fact that Txxxx lost key states in part because a lot of Black voters in big cities rejected him. Paxton’s initial court filing mentioned Wayne County, home of Detroit, 11 times,; Milwaukee seven; and Philadelphia six. “In Wayne County, Mr. Biden’s margin (322,925 votes) significantly exceeds his statewide lead,” the brief declared, almost as if this in itself were evidence of a crime.

The lawsuit was plain about its partisan purposes, complaining of how elections were run in “areas administered by local government under Democrat control and with populations with higher ratios of Democrat voters than other areas of Defendant States.” (Paxton lacked the grace to refer to the Democratic Party by its proper name.)

Notice something else: Those who claim to believe in “states’ rights” and “local decision-making” once again showed that their rhetoric is a bunch of hooey. This was true of the Confederates, too. Not only was slavery, not states’ rights, the cause of the Civil War, but slavery’s advocates embraced the Dred Scott decision, which, as Lincoln had argued, laid out the path to nationalizing slavery. Power and results were all that mattered.

So it is with the GOP’s Minority Rule Caucus. They believe Republican jurisdictions should be free to suppress votes. But areas under “Democrat control” must be blocked from making voting a little bit easier. . . .

So, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, we should remain alarmed that so many Republican politicians blithely walked away from democracy and sought to undermine the very institutions they took an oath to defend.

Unquote.

Even though the Republicans won’t be able to undo the election, the majority of Americans are faced with a malignant minority that only pays lip service to the Constitution. It’s impossible to believe they will soon change their ways and behave responsibly again.

One Senator Sees the Extreme Danger

Posted on by

You could argue that the Southern states seceding from the union was the most serious attack on American democracy. But the slave states weren’t merely trying to change the way we govern ourselves. They were attacking the United States itself, trying to break it apart. Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut is correct when he says: “Right now, the most serious attempt to overthrow our democracy in the history of our of country is underway. Those who are pushing to make Dxxxx Txxxx President, no matter the outcome of the election, are engaged in a treachery against their nation.”

He spoke for 14 minutes on Friday and then later to Greg Sargent of The Washington Post.

Greg Sargent asks a good question:

How many other Democrats have you heard making this case in such stark terms?:

Yes, you regularly hear Democrats claiming that it’s time that Republicans accept that Txxxx lost. Or you hear them slamming Txxxx’s lawsuits as frivolous. Or you hear them suggesting that Republicans are spineless for not standing up to Txxxx, as if they harbor deeply held principles they’d adhere to if only Txxxx’s rage-tweets weren’t so frightening.

But you don’t often hear them saying what Murphy suggested here: that the Republican Party has morphed into a malignant and profoundly dangerous threat to the country and the long-term prospects for our democratic stability.

I followed up with Murphy to ask what prompted this speech.

“I have a very clear sense of the danger this all poses to the republic,” Murphy told me. “If this becomes at all normalized more broadly than it already is, they will steal an election two years from now or four years from now.”

“And then I’m not sure how we keep our democracy together,” Murphy continued.

. . . President-elect Joe Biden’s team — which has adopted the posture that much of what Republicans are doing is just a stunt — wants to reassure the country that the transition is proceeding smoothly, and might not want too much focus on this disruption. But that risks misleading the public about the tenuousness of the moment. . . .

. . . If large swaths of the Republican Party are morphing into a much more cancerous anti-democratic force, one that in some basic sense just isn’t functioning as an actor in a democracy, how should Democrats adapt, and communicate to the public about this? How can they compete in the information wars, given the massive media machine the GOP has at its disposal?

On another front, a much more robust agenda to broaden prosperity and combat inequality and flat wages might defuse some populist anger out there. But given that the prospects for a modest economic rescue package are dim — and given the likelihood of GOP Senate control — that seems like an uphill climb.

Murphy suggested that the starting point might be to “diagnose the problem,” which would require a real reorientation in posture.

“For much of the last four years, we thought the problem was that Republicans knew what the right thing was, but they just didn’t do it because Txxxx was so scary,” Murphy told me. “I think this moment is showing us that there are a whole lot of Republicans who believe this nonsense.”

“This isn’t just a party that’s trying to stay on the good side of an enemy of democracy,” Murphy continued. “This is a party that has a whole bunch of enemies of democracy inside its top ranks. That’s bone-chilling.”

Hatred and Delusion United

Posted on by

How strange it is to see this story displayed as if it’s just another bit of today’s news.

Untitled

It’s strange but not unexpected. Here are two meditations on current events from columnists for The Washington Post. First, Paul Waldman:

If you were dropped in from another country without knowing anything about the United States and surveyed our current political moment, what would you conclude about the Republican Party and the broader conservative movement it represents? As 2020 comes to an end, what is conservatism about?

After nearly four years of Dxxxx Txxxx’s presidency in which no misdeed was too vulgar or corrupt for conservatives to defend, now culminating in an outright war against democracy itself, you might be tempted to answer, “Nothing.” Though that’s not quite true, the real answer is not much more encouraging. . . .

The one thing that unites the right and drives the GOP is hatred of liberals. That hatred has consumed every policy goal, every ideological principle and even every ounce of commitment to country. . . .

When 18 Republican state attorneys general, more than half of House Republicans and multiple conservative organizations all demand that the results of a presidential election where no fraud was found be simply tossed aside so that Txxxx can be declared winner, something more profound has been revealed. . . .

Txxxx has often cited the extraordinary loyalty he has received from his party’s voters; it’s one of the few things he says that’s true. . . . When you ask the typical Txxxx supporter what they love about him, they don’t mention some substantive policy position; what they say is that he is a fighter. The petty squabbles, the insulting tweets, the deranged conspiracy theories — the things that the Never Txxxxers and most other Americans find off-putting are exactly what endears him to the Republican base.

Txxxx fights and fights, angrily, bitterly, endlessly driven forward by his hatred of the people his supporters hate. That’s what the base loves, and every other Republican knows it.

Everything about the election that just ended reinforced for conservatives that nothing is more important than hating liberals. The rhetoric of the 2020 campaign, starting with Txxxx but going all the way down the ballot, was that if Democrats were elected, then it would not be suboptimal or bad or even terrible, but the end of everything you care about. Towns and cities would burn, religion would be outlawed, America as we know it would cease to exist. These horrors were not presented as metaphors, but as the literal truth.

In the face of that potential apocalypse, who could possibly care about mundane policy goals? . . . They want to cut the capital gains tax, sure — but its importance pales next to the urgency of stopping the cataclysm that would engulf us all if Democrats were to hold power.
To be clear, there are still thoughtful conservatives out there trying to advance a coherent ideological project. But seldom have they mattered less to their movement and their party. . . .If it doesn’t Own the Libs, it doesn’t matter on the right. . . .

Second, ex-Republican Jennifer Rubin:

. . . With a new appreciation for the inexactitude of polling, it’s possible the portion of Americans who accept Biden’s victory is anywhere from 70 percent to only 50. Regardless, the answer to “How many Americans believe in a baseless conspiracy that the election was stolen?” is “Too many.”

The consequences are grave. It gives Republicans license to continue to break norms and even the law (e.g., threaten election officials). It promotes irrational, obstructionist politics and increases the divide between Americans. Biden voters, I would guess, have never been more contemptuous of Txxxx voters as they are now . . . [with good reason].

Conduct from Republican House and Senate members shows the pernicious effects of this cult of absurdity. Victimology and self-pity (We were denied a second Txxxx term!) mixed with arrogance (Only we know what really happened in those ballot-counting rooms!) do not make people amenable to compromise or empathy. Indeed, it turns seemingly capable and sane public figures into raving lunatics . . .

Expect a new norm to take root in the Republican Party that any lost election is a stolen election. Wholesale attempts to restrict voting (that make voter-ID laws look mild by comparison) and actual corruption of the election process may follow. . . .

And sadly, what we learned in the Txxxx era is that once you are ready to believe utter nonsense in one arena because Txxxx says so, you’re willing to believe — in fact, compelled to believe! — utter nonsense about a lot of things. Coronavirus is overblown. Masks are not needed.

“The Great Leader is never wrong” is the most fundamental principle of closed, authoritarian societies. When communism was crumbling in Poland, people began to put up signs that read “2 + 2 = 4,” a clever reminder that in a totalitarian state, reality is the province of the state and obedience to falsehoods is a requirement for survival.

The Republican Party, ironically the party that used to . . . scorn victim-mongering, now thrives as an institution in which people, as Txxxx said at a recent rally, think “we’re all victims” and accept Txxxx’s alternative reality. Maybe one day an American Lech Walesa will arrive in the Txxxx heartland and revive the spirit of democracy. Until then, the GOP remains the “2 + 2 = 5” party.

Unquote.

Does the hatred lead to the delusion or is it the other way around? I’d say they reinforce each other. On the other side, sure, we hate this president, but it’s not because we’re deluded about his actions. Besides, nobody hopes Democrats will raise the minimum wage or fix the climate in order to irritate Republicans. The two sides really are different, as the Texas lawsuit and its many supporters demonstrate.

Tyranny On The Docket

Posted on by

The Supreme Court should unanimously choose democracy over tyranny, possibly as soon as today. I use “should” in both of its senses: it is the right thing to do and they will do it. The only question is whether they dismiss Texas’s outrageous lawsuit with or without an explanation. Greg Sargent of The Washington Post argues that we need to consider what’s at stake: 

President Txxxx has once again demanded that the Supreme Court invalidate millions of votes in four states, nullifying the election and keeping him in power illegitimately.

Indeed, Txxxx was unintentionally explicit on this point: He predicted that Joe Biden’s presidency will be corrupt, and commanded the court to overturn the election results on that basis, in the process making this command with no legitimate legal or constitutional basis at all.

As early as Friday, the Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on this demand, which has taken the form of a lawsuit waged by the state of Texas, and backed by Txxxx and his propagandists, against four swing states that Biden won. The court will likely refuse to hear the case.

All of which is why the scorching reply brief that Pennsylvania has now filed is an extraordinarily important document. It frames the stakes with appropriate urgency, by essentially arguing that the Texas lawsuit and its supporters are, in effect, asking the court to arbitrarily and lawlessly impose the will of Txxxx supporters on that of the majority that rejected Txxxx — i.e., tyranny.

Even if the court does reject the lawsuit, it’s important for Americans to understand what Txxxx and his co-conspirators are attempting. Now that more than 100 House Republicans, more than 15 Republican state attorneys general and the two GOP senators running in the Georgia runoffs have endorsed this lawsuit, we should be clear on what large swaths of the GOP are really supporting.

The Texas lawsuit asks the court to invalidate the outcomes in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia on the grounds that the voting in them was administered illegally, a claim that largely revolves around the dramatic expansion of vote-by-mail in them. That could clear the way for GOP-controlled state legislatures in all four to appoint pro-Txxxx electors.

The Pennsylvania brief attacks the core of Texas’s case . . . . Pennsylvania points out that numerous courts have already shot down the same irregularities alleged by Texas, including the falsehoods that verification standards weren’t followed and that poll-watchers weren’t allowed to witness counting. . . .

It’s in debunking the merit of Texas’s other claim — of harm done to it — that the bigger point is made.

As the Pennsylvania brief notes, intrastate disputes that the Supreme Court has heard generally involve alleged damage done by one state to another state’s “core sovereign interests.” This might involve, say, a dispute over a boundary or a body of water.

In this case, though, Texas is instead claiming that its voters have been harmed by the supposedly illegitimate pro-Biden outcome in the four other states.

Which Texas voters were harmed by this? Why, those who voted for Txxxx, of course, or at least didn’t vote for Biden. . . .

[The Pennsylvania] brief notes, what Texas is really demanding is this:

Far from trying to vindicate its own sovereign or quasi-sovereign interests, Texas is ultimately seeking redress for the political preferences of those of its citizens who voted for President Txxxx.

It adds:

Let us be clear. Texas invites this Court to overthrow the votes of the American people and choose the next President of the United States. That Faustian invitation must be firmly rejected.

. . . Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, emails me this:

Texas is basically asking the Supreme Court to overturn the election for no other reason than because it has suspicions no one has been able to prove about mischief in other states. It’s not just a borderline frivolous legal suit; it’s an invitation to the Justices to simply substitute the preferences of a minority of voters for those of the clear majority.

We spend a great deal of time debating whether Republican elected officials endorsing this effort genuinely support its goals or instead are trying to realize other instrumental purposes, such as energizing the base or keeping Txxxx happy so he will endorse GOP candidates.

But even if those are also operative motivations, . . . would these elected Republicans be fine with this effort actually succeeding? There is just no evident reason to give them the benefit of the doubt . . . 

Ridiculous, But Still Seditious

Posted on by

The attorneys general of Texas and 17 other states run by Republicans are asking the Supreme Court to change the winner of the presidential election in four states Joe Biden won: Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. If the Supreme Court agreed, the Democratic electors in those four states wouldn’t get to vote for Biden. Instead, the Republican-led legislatures in George, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin would appoint electors who would then presumably vote for Biden’s opponent. Since those four states have 62 electoral votes between them, the Orange Menace would receive 294 electoral votes, enough for him to stay in office another four years. Voila!

The president and his cult have already lost more than 50 lawsuits before both Democratic and Republican judges aimed at changing the results of the election. But, according to the president, this latest lawsuit is “the big one”. It’s always been his hope that the Supreme Court, now overflowing with Republicans (three chosen by him), would come to his rescue if the election didn’t go his way.

In lawyer-speak, there is “no factual or legal basis” for the Supreme Court to intervene in the election. Giving Texas what it’s asking for would amount to a judicial coup d’Ă©tat. Pennsylvania’s response to the lawsuit says “the Court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated”. It’s not a close call.

In fact, it’s unlikely that the attorneys general of Texas and the other states think they can win. The president may be an ignoramus who lives in a world of his own imagination (he is), so he might think there’s hope. No doubt millions of his supporters believe the Supreme Court will step in and save their hero. But the attorneys general all made it through law school. They’re simply using the Supreme Court to publicly demonstrate they’ll do anything, no matter how preposterous, to back this president and Keep America Great Again.

As an indication of the seriousness of the Texas lawsuit, look at the statistical “evidence” the lawsuit presents (pages 6 and 7 here). They got one of the president’s supporters, who is roughly 80 years old and claims to have a Ph.D.in economics, to state that there was less than a 1 in 1 quadrillion chance (that’s less than 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000) that Biden won even one of the four states, given (1) how far ahead Txxxx was at 3 a.m. on the night of the election and (2) how much better Biden did than Hillary Clinton four years ago. These calculations were based on two absurd assumptions:

(1) Votes counted before 3 a.m. on the night of the election and those counted after 3 a.m. (including on subsequent days) were from identical samples of voters. But, as expected, Democrats tended to vote by mail, which meant their ballots were counted more slowly; and, of course, some jurisdictions count votes and report results more slowly than others. The assumption that “votes are evenly and randomly distributed among geographic regions, demographics, and voting method, so that any two large groups of voters should generate similar results [has been] described as “ludicrous” and “statistical incompetence” by several academics. Kenneth Mayer, professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin, said “This is going to be used in undergraduate statistics classes as a canonical example of how not to do statistics” [Wikipedia].

(2) Since they were both Democrats running for president, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton should have received roughly the same percentage of votes in the four states. Is it necessary to mention that Biden and Clinton were different candidates running in elections four years apart, and that Clinton ran against a political newcomer, while Biden ran against an incumbent with a disastrous four-year record? Or that the differences between Biden’s percentages and Clinton’s were relatively small — the only significant difference being that he won and she lost?

So, the Supreme Court will either refuse to consider Texas’s lawsuit or dismiss it. This doesn’t mean it’s unimportant. Millions of Republican voters, more than a few of whom are either violent or crazy, are counting on the Supreme Court. How will they react when they’re disappointed? (Gosh, I hope they refuse to vote in the Senate election in Georgia — that will show the politicians who’s boss!)

Secondly, hundreds of Republican politicians from around the country have signed on to this lawsuit, all repeating the same stupid arguments in favor of ignoring the votes of millions of their fellow citizens. As Paul Krugman wrote today:

The [Republican Party] has no commitment to democracy, and hasn’t for years. Given the chance to turn America into Hungary, the GOP wouldn’t hesitate for a second.

Some Republicans might hesitate, but it’s clear that one of our major political parties no longer plays by the rules. Their goal is power, and we have no idea how far they’ll go to get it or keep it. 

Note: Now that all the states have certified their election results, the Electoral College will meet on Monday and declare Joe Biden the winner. Thirty-seven days later, he’ll be sworn in. If you’d like to look at the legal documents filed for and against Texas’s suit, they’re available on the Supreme Court site.