Day: July 19, 2020
Vote him away!
Doubts about America’s November 3 election are multiplying: These are the most prominent concerns:
- Will people who oppose Trump be allowed to vote?
- Will the November 3 election be held?
- Will Trump recognize and observe the election results?
Voter suppression is definitely an issue. It has become integral to Republican campaign strategy. The phenomenon is not new. The Democrats used to do it, when their white supremacists controlled the South. Now it is vital to Republican prospects.
A glance at The Economist‘s forecasts is enough to illustrate the point. Trump is down to a 7% chance of winning the Electoral College, where he is far stronger than in the popular vote because the Electoral College favors smaller, more rural states. But Vice President Biden is now favored to win even Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona, all states Trump won last time around. Trump in current polling is looking strong in only a dozen states, all part of his base. A successful voter suppression campaign would render all these polls meaningless.
Voter suppression takes many forms: limiting polling places in Democratic strongholds, making mail-in voting more difficult, poll-watchers and election workers who intimidate, raising the cost of voting to those who have served jail time by making them pay court costs or fines, sending out misleading election information, and gerrymandering Congressional districts (though that has minimal effect on a presidential election). These are real and concerted efforts now in the Republican playbook. The Republican-controlled Supreme Court, in a series of rulings, has followed suit by choosing to limit voting rights.
2 and 3, never before big worries in my lifetime, are now emerging as concerns for some people. Neither is feasible, so long as constitutional procedures are observed.
President Trump cannot postpone the election–it is Congress that has that power, which has not been delegated to the President. The divided Congress is not going to change that. In any event, Trump leaves office, according to the Constitution, on January 20, so a postponement would not gain him much time.
Nor is 3 feasible, even though Trump is refusing to commit to accepting the election results. But once the states convey their Electoral College results to a joint session of Congress on December 14, whoever has the majority wins. If no one gets a majority, the House of Representatives chooses the President, in a “contingent” election based on a single vote for each state. It is the newly elected House, not the existing one, that gets to decide, but the new one is sure to be more Democratic than the current one.
There is of course the possibility of an extra-constitutional outcome: a coup. This cannot be ruled out. I find it hard to believe that the real purpose in deploying Federal law enforcement cadres to Portland, Oregon in the past week or so, over the objections of the governor, mayor, and many other officials, is to prevent graffiti on Federal property. The Administration is testing the limits: what can they get away with? This is classic Trump, who always pushes back on constraints to his behavior. He may be looking for excuses to deploy more forces before the election, generating enough violence to suppress voting, or he may be preparing for a post-election coup.
This sounds unlikely to me. We are a young country, but an old governing system. Elections have been held even when the country was at war, constitutional procedures have been followed, and presidents have gained and lost power in orderly fashion since 1789. President Trump no doubt dreads leaving office, but he can protect himself from prosecution by pardoning himself. I have no doubt that he will do it, as he has for his lying friends, war criminals, and other miscreants.
In any event, a coup won’t be necessary if Trump wins. So fans, the election will be held November 3 and Trump won’t have any choice constitutional choice but to accept the election results. But he will try to suppress the vote. Vote him away! is the right response.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, July 19
In a lengthy and curious article describing the changing administration response to the coronavirus, NYT point blame on two new figures, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Dr. Deborah Birx. On line, NYT has added a short summary article, 5 takeaways. The reports blame Meadows for daily small group meetings to plot strategy to turn the pandemic problems over to the states and thus away from the WH. Key date was April 10. The articles also depict Dr. Birx as the eternal optimist, repeatedly promising that the models forecast declining infections. She reportedly was given a West Wing office and was closer to the discussions and planning than any other medical person. The article has other nuggets, such as the claim that Jared Kushner told California Gov. Newsom he had to praise Trump if he wanted the medical equipment he was seeking.
– DHS was warned that agents sent to Portland lacked training in crowd control.
– WaPo says Russia is gaining in Syria.
– McClatchy says there is a serious whistleblower complaint against SecState Pompeo.
-WaPo has a review of the new book about Newt Gingrich.
– Two respected former members of Congress suggest ending gerrymandering by having the House reject credentials of members from gerrymandered states. Don’t go there!
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
