Connect with us

An Election Day Plea

Published

on

It’s the day of the election. You’re probably tired of reading yet another post about why it’s so important that every one of us eligible voters vote in this election. Several excellent bloggers have already told you why on this site, and I risk repeating some of their points.

But on the off chance that you think it doesn’t matter, or that it’s in the bag (don’t you dare!), or that one more vote will never make a difference, or whatever reason you’ve come up with to write it off, please take one more minute to reflect, and rethink.

If you care about women, either because you are one, came out of one, or love one, consider the loss of autonomy—literally, the loss of rights. Because reproductive rights are fundamental rights. Maybe you’re not in the childbearing demographic, maybe you’re queer and rarely or never need birth control, maybe you’re set for life and feel it doesn’t concern you. Think about other people, and stick up for them. Especially if you’re queer because damn it, other people have stuck up for you, including a helluva lot of women. It’s time to pay up. Some of us know well the term “fragile and reversible”. That’s what hard-fought rights are, and that is what’s on the line today.

If you still don’t get just how badly reproductive rights have been under attack, just look at one basic statistic, the image above.

 

Election after election, we wonder how it can get any worse, and then it does. No matter what you thought of 2000 or 2004 or 2008, this is not politics as usual. You’ve seen the gif going around about remembering to set your clocks back Sunday, but on Tuesday “be careful that you don’t set the country back 50 years”? Don’t laugh. The movement in the Republican Party that believes people have their places is strong; and for women, that place is to serve the natural superiority of men. We like to think we’re way past that. We’re not. There is no other reason for so many GOP politicians to claim so earnestly that they they’ve struggled with it, but when the sperm meets the egg, the resulting multiplications immediately take precedence over the body housing that communion. Regardless of how they got there. Bodily autonomy simply doesn’t matter, no matter what those politicians say.

Don’t look for lies, because these people believe what they’re saying. For the most part, they do not believe they’re disrespecting women’s autonomy. They believe they’re respecting women’s dependence. The double standard (“but what if it was you?”) is unfathomable, and therefore inconsequential. It’s un-American to deprive citizens of their individual autonomy, but they don’t see it that way because, well, liberalism offers them that pesky public/private sphere loophole. We have yet to accept fully that what happens in the home is political, too. So we keep fighting these battles that waste our energy and resources, but to give up is to lose basic rights, or to lose the ground we’ve fought so hard to gain. I imagine this is an unthinkable prospect to anyone who cares about women’s rights and LGBT rights.

The autonomy they want to deprive women of bleeds through to gay rights, make no mistake. The conservatives gunning for power want to be able to tell people how to live their lives, including what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Trying to deprive women of the right to abort, or of the right to the contraception of her choice is directly related to queer rights that allow sexually similar bodies to commingle. They’re the same people who want to repeal gay rights, bring back Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, and cut funding for HIV programs. Justice Scalia doesn’t believe the Constitution covers abortion or private sexual acts between consenting adults of the same sex (to be clear, that liberalism loophole is all about heteronormativity). They’re not too crazy about the Civil Rights Act, either. Want to deprive African Americans of the right to sit at the counter of your diner? Rand Paul thinks maybe, yeah, since you know, it’s your diner. They want to legislate morality, and the morality they want to legislate just so happens to be theirs. Yes, laws are linked to morality, but they are not one and the same. And laws are supposed to protect those who are not like the majority.

So who needs protecting: the business owner, or the African American coming for a cup of coffee? Maybe we’re not in immediate danger of the Rand Pauls rolling back civil rights to that degree, though I sure don’t want to find out. But the woman who absolutely will not, no matter the obstacles and risks, carry to term the fetus that she never intended on having? The man whose partner died and whose family is challenging the custody of his children? The woman who cannot be at the hospital bedside of her partner because she’s not “family”? These events continue to happen today, and if the GOP gets in the White House, you can look forward to more of it. SCOTUS is on the table. Romney has made it clear, in words and actions, how he feels about gay parents. They’re not legit. And he’s made it clear that despite his own wife’s illnesses, he doesn’t think gay people should have the same rights his marriage afforded him. The man has no empathy because he doesn’t think gay people are covered under the “all men are created equal” concept the country was founded on. I don’t care what he has said in the past. He’s made his position on these particular subjects clear enough in this campaign.

This is where, though I’m not normally into shaming, I have to say that both Log Cabin Republicans and GOPRoud need therapy for the degree of self-loathing they’re exhibiting. If they’re so into protecting their pocketbooks, they’d be smarter about which candidate provides the best chance for a recovering economy. But even if they honestly believe the Romney/Ryan economic plan, such as it is, would benefit everyone, it doesn’t matter when you’re rights are taken away from you or your loved ones. We’ve been aware of this at least since Vito Russo chastised gay Republicans decades ago. If you’re still in doubt, read this excellent post by Kergan Edwards-Stout on why he got to the point of defriending those voting against his rights.

You want the truth? Don’t look to Romney, because his track record of lies is never-ending. Don’t look to the GOP, because they can’t handle the truth. They are still pushing the tired, debunked trickle-down theory that Reaganites used to justify tax breaks, and when non-partisan research comes out proving that they only help line the pockets of the already-rich, they suppress it. It’s a travesty and we should be outraged. But then again, so is their flouting of conflicts of interest when it comes to who owns voting machines in swing states. It won’t be the first time they’ve boasted that they will “deliver” the state to their candidate through such means. Why are we standing for this? Why are we standing for a candidate who lies about sending jobs overseas and who, in the midst of those lies, benefits so hugely from corporate welfare and from the same bailout he criticizes? If you’re still unconvinced, perhaps Reagan budget director David Stockman’s assessment of Romney’s job eliminations will help.

Let’s face it, both parties can play dirty. It’s politics, after all. Best not to ask how laws and sausages are made. I lived in Chicago for several years, and I’ve seen polling locations switched on Election Day when the incumbent suspected he’d lose, among other voter suppression maneuvers. It’s not a myth that when a ward didn’t deliver an election, some streets didn’t get potholes fixed or snow plowed. Those were just the realities of living in a machine-run city, and they’re not even particularly egregious examples of shady Chicago politics.

But what we’ve seen in the last four years is not politics as usual. For me, the most obvious evidence is the abuse of the filibuster. Complain all you want that Harry Reid is ineffective. The fact is, the Senate Republicans have engaged in a conspiracy to grind its business to a halt. Legislation that should require passage by a simple majority now requires a super majority—every single one, or it will be filibustered. They have effectively held the Senate hostage in opposition to how the founders had intended the houses of Congress to work, and that is quite clear. It is unprecedented in the history of the United States, and it is the overriding reason that the art of bipartisan politicking has gone out the window. It is not because of the Democrats. It is because of the Republicans, and it’s your country and your rights that are stake. They are not interested in protecting the rights of the minority. They have ostracized the moderates in their own party, to the point that group think is a requirement. Their behavior implies that they’re not big believers in democracy.

The second most obvious way politics has overtly changed for the worst is the acceleration of voter suppression strategies in swing states, from voter roll “purges” and lying (or not) about requiring voter IDs (which hits Democrats particularly hard) to shortening voting days and hours. If you’re curious about these developments, tune into The Rachel Maddow Show. She’s been covering this story for months. It is so blatantly undemocratic that it’s hard to believe these people consider themselves proud Americans. (I know. It’s not, really, but it should be.)

Obama is by no means perfect, but considering the brick wall he has been up against, he has been remarkably effective. I do not agree with all of his policies, and have to laugh at those who insist he’s a Socialist. But I didn’t expect miracles, because it quickly became clear what he was up against in the last presidential election. He has shown real spine in the face of a party full of racists who are not content until his every move is thwarted, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for that. The GOP is wholly uninterested in cooperation, and has stated as such. One cannot judge the effectiveness of the administration without taking into account the GOP’s radical use of the filibuster. I believe that if Obama manages to win re-election (despite voter suppression), and if we can fix the broken filibuster, he might accomplish great things for the American people in the next four years. For me, it’s that, or it’s turning the clock back to the 1950s. If that prospect doesn’t scare the hell out of you, you’re not paying attention. The choice has never been clearer.

So if you’re reading this on November 6th and haven’t voted yet, what are you waiting for?

Joanne Kalogeras grew up outside of Chicago. She studied political philosophy at the University of Chicago before engaging in various and sundry other occupations, including a long stint in software development. San Francisco is her home, but she is currently residing in London where she is finishing her doctoral thesis on cosmopolitan theory at the London School of Economics’ Gender Institute.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Election Denialism Embraced by ‘Large Proportion’ of Trump’s Followers: Report

Published

on

Since at least 2012 Donald Trump has been engaging in election denialism. Now, a tenet of the Republican Party, the refusal to accept official election results they don’t like is ingrained in a large number of his followers.

“I think that the powers that be on the Democratic side have figured out a way to circumvent democracy,” Darlene Anastas, 69, of Middleborough, Massachusetts, told NBC News. The network “spoke to more than 50 Trump supporters, most of whom said they don’t believe Biden can win legitimately in November.”

Poll after poll,” NBC also reported, “has found that a large proportion of the Republican electorate believes the only reasons Joe Biden is president are voter fraud and Democratic dirty tricks, buying into former President Donald Trump’s baseless claims about the 2020 election.”

NBC spoke with 72-year old George Crosby, from Fitzwilliam, New Hampshire, who said, Democrats “cheat like crazy” (video below).

READ MORE: ‘No Place for Antisemitism’: Biden Denounces Violent Campus Protests, Hate Speech and Racism

“I think they cheated before, and I think they’re going to try to do it again, because they’re a bunch of communists,” Fitzwilliam added.

38-year old James Russon of Eagle Mountain, Utah told NBC, “There’s no way Biden could legally … win without unfair means.”

“He added that the only way Biden could prevail would be through ‘cheating’ or ‘a lot of deceased people voting.'”

62-year old Randall Minicola of Las Vegas said it would be “impossible” for Biden to win. “I don’t think he’s got a following. I mean, you look who’s behind him — the only thing he’s got is ghosts behind him. That’s what I believe. Where’s the supporters then? Are they in the basement with him? I don’t think so.”

NBC News did not report on where these particular GOP voters got their information or how they came to believe these claims, but it did note the “possibility of another election in which large numbers of Republicans refuse to accept a Biden victory has also been stoked by influential conservatives.”

READ MORE: Trump Would Not Oppose State Pregnancy Surveillance or Abortion Prosecution

Trump’s election denialism is so strong that in 2020 CNN published “A list of the times Trump has said he won’t accept the election results or leave office if he loses.”

Election denialism continues to be spread throughout the right.

“A senile man is not going to get elected in the most powerful country in the world unless there’s fraud,” former Fox News host Tucker Carlson said in March, NBC noted. Carlson, a purveyor of conspiracy theories, has spoken very positively about Russia and its authoritarian president, Vladimir Putin, and against Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Numerous studies and fact checks have found mail-in voting to be safe and secure, with little opportunity for fraud, yet just last week Carlson, like Trump, was claiming massive election fraud. Undermining Americans’ faith in democracy was a main goal of Russian President Putin’s 2016 attack on the U.S. elections, according to a 2017 report issued by a group of U.S. Intelligence agencies.

But just last week Carlson claimed, “About one in five mail-in ballots in the last election was fraudulent, handing Biden the presidency. We know this because the people who committed the fraud have admitted it in a new poll.”

A portion of NBC’s report from Thursday also appears in this January 2024 NBC News video.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: DeSantis Declares NYC ‘Reeks’ of Pot Amid Florida’s Battle for Legalization and 2024 Voters

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Won’t Commit to Accepting Election Results if He Doesn’t Win State He Falsely Claims He Won

Published

on

Falsely claiming he won the state of Wisconsin in the 2020 presidential election Donald Trump is now refusing to commit to accepting the 2024 results for the Badger State this November.

In an interview with Wisconsin’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Trump appeared to dance around the issue, declaring he would only accept the official results “if everything’s honest.”

“If everything’s honest, I’d gladly accept the results,” Trump told the paper’s Alison Dirr and Molly Beck in an interview Wednesday. “If it’s not, you have to fight for the right of the country.”

“But if everything’s honest, which we anticipate it will be — a lot of changes have been made over the last few years — but if everything’s honest, I will absolutely accept the results,” he said.

The Journal Sentinel reports Trump “offered similar conditions when asked the same question by news outlets in 2016 and 2020.”

READ MORE: ‘No Place for Antisemitism’: Biden Denounces Violent Campus Protests, Hate Speech and Racism

“I’d be doing a disservice to the country if I said otherwise,” he said.

In that interview Trump once again falsely claimed he won Wisconsin in 2020, a state President Joe Biden actually won by more than 20,000 votes.

“If you go back and look at all of the things that had been found out, it showed that I won the election in Wisconsin,” Trump told the newspaper. “It also showed I won the election in other locations.”

Trump’s “Big Lie,” that the 2020 election was “rigged” against him, along with his support for the January 6, 2021 insurrection, have been central to his 2024 campaign.

“Trump’s refusal to accept the results of the last presidential election in Wisconsin and his new comments placing conditions on when he would accept the results of the next election come as Republicans are seeking to persuade GOP voters to restore their trust in the state’s system of elections and embrace absentee voting,” the Journal Sentinel reported. “There’s no evidence to support that Wisconsin’s election was tainted by cheating or fraud in 2020. The results have been confirmed by recounts in Dane and Milwaukee counties that Trump paid for, court rulings, a nonpartisan state audit and a study by the conservative legal firm Wisconsin Institute of Law & Liberty, among other analyses.”

READ MORE: Noem Insists 14 Month Old Dog She Shot Was ‘Not a Puppy’ Sparking New Backlash

In October of 2016, weeks before Election Day, during the final presidential debate, Trump was asked if he would make the commitment “that you will absolutely accept the results of this election?”

“I will look at it at the time,” Trump replied. “I’m not looking at anything now, I’ll look at it at the time.”

He then went on to sow doubt about the credibility of the election.

Trump’s refusal to accept election results stretches back more than a decade, even before he ran for president.

After he refused to accept his loss in 2020, ABC News reported “Trump has longstanding history of calling elections ‘rigged’ if he doesn’t like the results.”

“On election night in 2012, when President Barack Obama was reelected, Trump said that the election was a ‘total sham’ and a ‘travesty,’ while also making the claim that the United States is ‘not a democracy’ after Obama secured his victory.

“We can’t let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!” Trump wrote on Twitter

One month later, in December of 2012, Trump tweeted, “The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.” Ironically, four years later he became president after losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton, but winning the Electoral College.

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Antisemitism Is Wrong, But’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Pilloried for Promoting Antisemitic Claim

Continue Reading

News

‘No Place for Antisemitism’: Biden Denounces Violent Campus Protests, Hate Speech and Racism

Published

on

President Joe Biden made rare, unscheduled remarks from the White House Thursday morning, denouncing the recent violent protests on college campuses, and telling Americans there is “no place” for antisemitism anywhere across the nation. He also denounced “hate speech” and “racism,” while declaring his support for the right to peacefully protest.

“There should be no place on any campus, no place in America for antisemitism or threats of violence against Jewish students,” President Biden declared. “There is no place for hate speech, or violence of any kind, whether it’s antisemitism, Islamophobia, or discrimination against Arab Americans or Palestinian Americans. It’s simply wrong. There’s no place for racism in America. It’s all wrong. It’s un-American.”

“Violent protest is not protected,” Biden said strongly. “Peaceful protest is.”

Stressing “the right to free speech,” and the people’s right “to peacefully assemble and make their voices heard,” President Biden also declared the importance of “the rule of law.”

READ MORE: Noem Insists 14 Month Old Dog She Shot Was ‘Not a Puppy’ Sparking New Backlash

“We are not an authoritarian nation where we silence people or squash dissent,” the President also said, praising the ideal of peaceful protests, which he said are in the “best tradition of how Americans respond to consequential issues.”

“But,” he added, “neither are we a lawless country. We are a civil society and order must prevail.”

America is a “big, diverse, free thinking and freedom-loving nation,” Biden said, denouncing those “who rush in to score political points.”

“This isn’t a moment for politics, it’s a moment for clarity.”

“It’s against the law when violence occurs. Destroying property is not a peaceful protest. It’s against the law. Vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and graduations. None of this is a peaceful protest,” he warned. “Threatening people, intimidating people. instilling fear in people is not peaceful protest. It’s against the law. Dissent is essential to democracy but dissent must never lead to disorder or to denying the rights of others so students can finish a semester and their college education.”

READ MORE: ‘Antisemitism Is Wrong, But’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Pilloried for Promoting Antisemitic Claim

“Look. It’s basically a matter of fairness. It’s a matter of what’s right. There’s the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos. People have the right to get an education, the right to get a degree, the right to walk across the campus safely without fear of being attacked.”

“I understand people have strong feelings and deep convictions in America. We respect the right and protect the right for them to express that. But it doesn’t mean anything goes. It needs to be done without violence. Without destruction, without hate, and within the law. And I’ll make no mistake. As President, I will always defend free speech. And I will always be just as strong standing up for the rule of law. That’s my responsibility to you the American people. My obligation to the Constitution.”

The President also responded to reporters’ questions, including saying he saw no need to call up the National Guard.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.