Month: January 2022

WTH???

Rep. Lauren Boebert left a group of Jewish visitors to the Capitol bewildered Thursday morning when she asked them if they were doing “reconnaissance” after seeing them at an elevator at the Capitol.

Members of the group, which was meeting with Rep. Tom Suozzi, were wearing yarmulkes, and the person coordinating the group is Orthodox, with a traditional beard.

One witness said the group, along with other members of Congress, was waiting for an elevator. When the doors opened, Boebert stepped out of the elevator and looked the group of visitors “from head to toe,” the witness said. Boebert then asked if they were there to conduct “reconnaissance.”

“When I heard that, I actually turned to the person standing next to me and asked, ‘Did you just hear that?’” a rabbi who was with the group told BuzzFeed News.

“You know, I’m not sure to be offended or not,” the rabbi said. “I was very confused.” The rabbi added that “people are very sensitive” now, especially after what happened in Texas this past weekend, when an armed man held four people hostage at a synagogue.

Boebert told BuzzFeed News that she was referencing the many comments that have been directed at her from Democrats about Capitol tours prior to the Jan. 6 attack, adding that some people present “got it.”

“I saw a large group and made a joke. Sadly when Democrats see the same they demonize my family for a year straight,” she said in a text.

“I’m too short to see anyone’s yarmulkes,” she added.

So she’s saying that she made an extremely obscure joke about people doing reconnaissance in the Capitol to a group of total strangers as if they should know what she was talking about?

Ok, if that’s what she says. But I would not be surprised if she thought she was looking at a group of Muslims and she was making one of those “Ilhan Omar with a backpack in the elevator” jokes she is so fond of. She is very, very stupid. Extremely stupid. I honestly doubt she knows what a yarmulke is.

Daddy’s going to be very angry if she cooperates. So she won’t. But she was no different than Sen Hannity or Kevin McCarthy or any number of other wingnuts who begged him to stop the insurrection and he refused:

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot on Thursday requested cooperation from Ivanka Trump, as it painted a dire picture of a frenzied and fruitless scramble inside the White House that day to get President Donald J. Trump to denounce and call off the mob that was laying siege to the Capitol.

In a letter to Ms. Trump, the former president’s eldest daughter who served as one of his senior advisers, the committee said it had obtained evidence that multiple White House officials — including Ms. Trump, at least twice — had implored Mr. Trump to call off the violence, only to be rebuffed. But aides at the time were also worried about Mr. Trump issuing anything other than a scripted statement during the mayhem.

“Apparently, certain White House staff believed that a live, unscripted press appearance by the president in the midst of the Capitol Hill violence could have made the situation worse,” wrote Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi and the panel’s chairman.

The summoning of Ms. Trump suggested that the committee was delving deeper into the question of what Mr. Trump was doing and saying as the attack unfolded, as it seeks to determine his intentions and state of mind during the assault. The letter also made clear that the panel has already uncovered substantial evidence about those critical hours inside the White House from key players who were present that day.

In the letter, Mr. Thompson wrote that investigators had received information from Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general who was Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser, about Mr. Trump’s refusal to condemn the violence, despite White House officials urging him to do so.

Mr. Kellogg testified that Mr. Trump had rejected entreaties by him as well as Mark Meadows, his chief of staff, and Kayleigh McEnany, the White House press secretary. Mr. Kellogg then appealed to Ms. Trump to intervene.

“She went back in, because Ivanka can be pretty tenacious,” Mr. Kellogg testified.

He also told investigators that he had recommended “very strongly” against the president speaking on live television, because his “press conferences tend to get out of control.”

The committee also revealed that Mr. Kellogg testified that he and Ms. Trump witnessed a telephone call in the Oval Office on the morning of Jan. 6 in which Mr. Trump pressured Mr. Pence to go along with a plan to throw out electoral votes for Joseph R. Biden Jr. when Congress met to make its official count of the results, thus invalidating the 2020 election and allowing Mr. Trump to stay in office.

Mr. Kellogg told the committee that the president had accused Mr. Pence of not being “tough enough” to overturn the election.

Ms. Trump then turned to Mr. Kellogg and said, “Mike Pence is a good man,” Mr. Kellogg testified.

Oh daddy is going to be extremely angry about that.

By the way, Ivanka’s tweet that day was a little bit less respectable than they indicate:

She deleted that when she realized she was aclling a violent mob of insurrectionists “patriots.”

The idea that daddy’s little girl had any real influence is ridiculous. Trump liked having her around because she is beautiful and he thinks that reflects on him (among other reasons…) I’m sure she could get her way in things that don’t matter much to him. But does he really respect her? I highly, highly doubt it.

Update:

“The committee has information suggesting that President Trump’s White House counsel may have concluded that the actions President Trump directed Vice President Pence to take would violate the Constitution or would be otherwise illegal,” Mr. Thompson wrote. “Did you discuss those issues with any member of the White House Counsel’s Office?”

The committee says they have a document that shows this. Oh my…

Well, well, well:

In some companies’ financial results in recent months, labor shortages have acted as a brake on earnings. Others in the same industry, not so much.

Consider FedEx and UPS. In the fiscal quarter ended in November, FedEx, which relies on armies of independent contractors, reported that labor shortages cost it $470 million.

UPS, with a unionized workforce and higher pay, has reaped an advantage from loyal, long-term employees on its payroll.

Its on-time delivery rates were higher than FedEx’s in the run-up to Christmas (97.1% vs. 91.2%, according to ShipMatrix). Its stock price is up 31% over the last year, versus 1.5% for FedEx.

The Voting Rights debacle aftermath from Dan Pfeiffer. He notes that there is much to say about what went wrong and makes a short but very salient point that this vote, taken at this moment of Democratic depression, was bad timing and poorly strategized. But instead he looks forward with suggestions about where to go now. I think they make sense:

I am tempted to write 5000 words about what went wrong — including my own mistakes and misperceptions. While that would be cathartic, it would not be constructive.

The Republicans are now closer to taking the majority in 2022 and the White House in 2024. Trumpism is on the rise and its namesake is waiting in the wings to reclaim the presidency. Therefore, I want to look forward and focus on where to channel our energy and anger.

Understanding the Limits of Political Leverage

Over the last year, every wing of the party tried to put tremendous public and private pressure on Manchin and Sinema. There were promised primary challenges, protests, and television ads. In the end, none of it mattered. Neither senator budged an inch. In fact, they are significantly more dug in against changing the filibuster than they were a year ago. There are lessons to be learned about the limits of political leverage. Manchin and Sinema both believe it to be in their political interests to be seen as opposing their own party. Manchin, who represents a state Trump won by 39 points last year, is undoubtedly correct about his political situation. Sinema is likely dead wrong about her politics, but no one is going to convince her otherwise, especially since she doesn’t have to face the voters until 2024.

But because they believe pissing off their party is good politics, all of the attention lavished on them had the opposite of the intended effect. Going forward, all of us are going to have to be more strategic about how we invest time and energy, and be realistic about politics. Changing a politician’s mind about what is in their own political interests is very difficult and in this case, impossible. Our focus going forward needs to be on changing the math in the Senate. It won’t be easy, but 52 Democratic Senators means we can stop caring about what Manchin and Sinema want regarding voting rights and other key issues.

Stop Talking About Manchin and Sinema

Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are a problem. They stand in the way of popular and important policy. They are a political anvil around our necks. But it’s time to stop talking and tweeting about them. I am sick of talking about them and I know you are sick of hearing about them. But this is about more than self-care. As Jonathan Weisman put it in the New York Times:

The remarkable vitriol being trained by Democratic activists on two members of their own party has largely given Republicans a pass for blocking the bill and standing by new state laws designed to limit access to the ballot box and empower partisan actors to administer elections and count votes.

All of the focus this week has been on the inability of Democrats to reform the filibuster as opposed to Republicans using the filibuster to block voting rights legislation. The story is our failure, not their obstruction, and that’s a big problem. To win in 2022, Democrats must reconstitute the anti-Trump majority who delivered the House, Senate, and White House. The best way to do that is to remind people the crisis that sparked them into action five years ago has not receded. It has grown. We have to make this election a choice between Democrats and MAGA Republicans. We can’t do that if we keep the spotlight on the incalcitrant Senate Democrats.

I would just pour a little cold water on that. Of course Democrats should elect more Democrats to have a larger majority., And it’s not impossible. The margin is very close which means the usual loss of people who came in on Biden’s coattails is not inevitable. (That’s partly what happened in 1996 and 2002.) But getting two more Democrats will not necessarily change the dynamic all that much. They will almost certainly be from swing states and those Senators are always a pain in the ass. Remember, Obama had 60 early in his tenure, 59 until 2010 and passing Obamacare was a nightmare of negotiations. Yes, he got it done, but it was by the skin of his teeth. This structural problem is huge — and has been ever since the parties polarized.

Back to Basics

Passing voting rights legislation was the single best way to prevent voter suppression and election subversion. Doing so would have exponentially complicated the Republican plan to implement minority rule. But since that legislation cannot pass the Senate, we have to find other ways to save democracy. We must win more elections and do it with one hand tied behind our backs. It won’t be easy but it isn’t impossible either. As a party, we need a specific focus on the offices and groups that provide the most leverage and the biggest bang for our buck.

As Amanda Litman, the co-founder of Run for Something, told Ezra Klein:

“While Congress can write, in some ways, rules or boundaries for how elections are administered, state legislatures are making decisions about who can and can’t vote. Counties and towns are making decisions about how much money they’re spending, what technology they’re using, the rules around which candidates can participate.”

To that end, Run for Something is recruiting and training candidates to run up and down the ballot with a specific focus on local election administrators. Supporting Run for Something may be the best investment you can make for the future of democracy. You can donate here:

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the importance of winning the 2022 governors’ races. In 2022, the governorships of the top six presidential battleground states (PA, NV, MI, WI, GA, AZ) are up and all six races are toss-ups. The Republicans will use those offices to make it harder to vote and less likely legal votes are counted. The links to donate to these races can be found in this post.

Secretaries of state are the next line of defense. Republicans understand this. Too many Democrats don’t. The Republican political group that funds secretary of state races raised $33 million last year. The Democratic Association of Secretaries of State raised a whopping $1 million in the first half of last year. You can help narrow that gap by donating here:

As always, sign up at Vote Save America to learn about ways you can make an impact in 2022 through the “No Off Years” program.

None of this is easy. None of us wanted to be in this position. But the only option is to dig in and go about the hard work of saving democracy.

He’s right, There is not choice. But it won’t be easy either way.

So what now? asks Dan Pfeiffer after Democrats’ failure in the Senate to advance voting rights. Stop talking about Sens. Manchin and Sinema and get to work:

Passing voting rights legislation was the single best way to prevent voter suppression and election subversion. Doing so would have exponentially complicated the Republican plan to implement minority rule. But since that legislation cannot pass the Senate, we have to find other ways to save democracy. We must win more elections and do it with one hand tied behind our backs. It won’t be easy but it isn’t impossible either. As a party, we need a specific focus on the offices and groups that provide the most leverage and the biggest bang for our buck.

Those are local, not federal. Activists love to hang their hats on flashy, heavily funded and advertised races, but that’s not where the real leverage is. If Democrats’ failure in the Senate yesterday did not bring that home, it’s hard to say what will.

Local, as Ezra Klein emphasized recently. Anyone old enough to remember the Vietnam War knows that holding the capitol and major cities is not much help when insurgents control the entire countryside. Democrats let that happen. Republicans know what they’re doing.

If you live in the bluest of blue states or counties, use the Google to find places and races that could use your support more than throwing another $100 at a doomed federal candidate’s tilt at a windmill. That cash could do more where a little means a lot more. If nothing else, make Republicans work harder and spend more in places where they are accustomed to Democrats giving them a bye. Make them sweat.

Pfeiffer has more:

• A few weeks ago, I wrote about the importance of winning the 2022 governors’ races. In 2022, the governorships of the top six presidential battleground states (PA, NV, MI, WI, GA, AZ) are up and all six races are toss-ups. The Republicans will use those offices to make it harder to vote and less likely legal votes are counted. The links to donate to these races can be found in this post.

• Secretaries of state are the next line of defense. Republicans understand this. Too many Democrats don’t. The Republican political group that funds secretary of state races raised $33 million last year. The Democratic Association of Secretaries of State raised a whopping $1 million in the first half of last year. You can help narrow that gap by donating here:

• As always, sign up at Vote Save America to learn about ways you can make an impact in 2022 through the “No Off Years” program.

It’s on you.

With no room for error — none — in the U.S. Senate and the filibuster an artifact of the Jim Crow era as stubborn as Sens. Manchin and Sinema, the Democrats’ majority there is more theoretical than practical. It has helped President Joe Biden “substantively, but not politically,” notes The Atlantic‘s Russell Berman. Meaning Democrats control the Senate but cannot pass much through it. It means Biden’s ambitious economic package goes nowhere. It means his effort to pass voting rights legislation died Wednesday. Not that Democrats had any other choice than to take the loss. Their base had to see them fail trying.

Biden and alllies in the Senate hold a weak hand.

The front page #OTD in 1964. The U.S. Senate breaks a 75-day filibuster against the Civil Rights Act, leading to the bill's passage. #nytimes pic.twitter.com/fJruSJBRQR

— New York Times OTD (@OnThisDayNYT) June 11, 2018

Biden might have had the nerve to stand for a nearly two-hour press conference Wednesday, but he lacks the verve to sell his accomplishments forcefully enough to make them stand out to a polling-obsessed press corps.

E.J. Dionne cites a short list:

With 6.2 million jobs created on his watch, the unemployment rate is at 3.9 percent, far lower than anyone anticipated when he took office. Gross domestic product is up and workers have more bargaining power than they’ve enjoyed in decades.

Nearly 210 million Americans are fully vaccinated, as Biden noted, through more than a half-billion shots. With very narrow congressional majorities, Biden secured his $1.9 trillion economic relief package and a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill.

It’s a good record. The problem is that much of this occurred in the first part of Biden’s opening year. His approval ratings then, a healthy 50 percent or better,, reflected this.

But a Covid-weary public is in “what have you done for me lately” mode. Hence, Biden’s polling numbers in the 40s. Free Covid tests and N95 masks are little relief either from pandemic deaths pushing 900,000 or from gas fill-ups topping $50.

Virus and inflation, virus and inflation need to be Biden’s focus, Dionne suggests. He needs to be caught fighting both. Weekly.

“Going forward,” Dionne writes, “he needs to settle on a strategy that reaches toward as much normality as is consistent with the virus threat, and he needs to put an end to confusing messaging from various parts of the government. Neither will be easy.”

That was clear from reporters’ questions and Biden’s answers at Wednesday’s press conference.

And on the biggest struggle of this generation, the battle for voting rights and democracy, Trumpified Republicans are plainly committed to giving the states they run free rein to suppress votes and subvert elections.

Democrats need to enact whatever they can of the Build Back Better legislation and then move on to passing pieces of what’s left individually, if only to force the question Biden asked of Republicans at his news conference: “What are they for?” And whatever happens the next few days on voting rights, they cannot walk away from the struggle — in Washington or in the states.

That repeated attack was perhaps Biden’s best messaging of the day.

“What are Republicans for? What are they for? Name me one thing they’re for?”

Not for helping meet people’s material needs. Not for taming the climate that has coasts flooding and tornadoes ripping up communities. Not for defending the Constitution they swore oaths to defend.

The one thing Trump-licking Republicans have demonstrated they are for is preserving their own power by any means necessary, including by jetisoning the very principles of government of the people, by the people, for the people upon which the nation is founded. Including by subverting elections and promoting hatred of Black and brown citizens.

Biden needs to stick with that message while doing a better job of conveying that he’s doing a better job. Democrats are for governing. Republicans are for themselves.

This has been a long time coming:

The New York State attorney general, Letitia James, accused Donald J. Trump’s family business late Tuesday of repeatedly misrepresenting the value of its assets to bolster its bottom line, saying in court papers that the company had engaged in “fraudulent or misleading” practices.

The filing came in response to Mr. Trump’s recent effort to block Ms. James from questioning him and two of his adult children under oath as part of a civil investigation of his business, the Trump Organization. Ms. James’s inquiry into Mr. Trump and the company is ongoing, and it is unclear whether her lawyers will ultimately file a lawsuit against them.

Still, the filing marked the first time that the attorney general’s office leveled such specific accusations against the former president’s company. Her broadside ratchets up the pressure on Mr. Trump as he seeks to shut down her investigation, which he has called a partisan witch hunt. Ms. James is a Democrat.

The filing outlined what Ms. James’s office termed misleading statements about the value of six Trump properties, as well as the “Trump brand.” The properties included golf clubs in Westchester County, N.Y., and Scotland, and flagship buildings such as Trump Tower and 40 Wall Street in Manhattan.

Ms. James’s filing argued that the company misstated the value of the properties to lenders, insurers and the Internal Revenue Service. Many of the statements, the filing argued, were “generally inflated as part of a pattern to suggest that Mr. Trump’s net worth was higher than it otherwise would have appeared.”

Lawyers for Mr. Trump and his company could not immediately be reached for comment.

Because Ms. James’s investigation is civil, she can sue Mr. Trump and his company but cannot file criminal charges. Her inquiry is running parallel to a criminal investigation led by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, which is examining some of the same conduct. Lawyers from Ms. James’s office are working on that separate investigation, which is continuing. Mr. Bragg, also a Democrat, inherited the inquiry from his predecessor after taking office on Jan. 1.

In early December, Ms. James issued a subpoena for Mr. Trump as well as for Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, seeking to question them as part of her civil inquiry. Ms. James already questioned another of Mr. Trump’s sons, Eric Trump, in October 2020.

After receiving the subpoenas, lawyers for Mr. Trump filed a federal lawsuit seeking to halt Ms. James’s civil investigation and to bar her office from participating in the district attorney’s criminal investigation. The lawsuit, which accused Ms. James of violating Mr. Trump’s constitutional rights, argued that her investigation was politically motivated and cited a long list of her public attacks on Mr. Trump.

This month, Mr. Trump’s lawyers also filed court papers in New York State seeking to block Ms. James’s subpoenas, prompting her filing on Tuesday.

Ms. James, who is running for re-election this year, argued in the court filing that while her office had compiled substantial evidence that Mr. Trump’s company had engaged in possible fraud, investigators needed to question Mr. Trump in order to determine who was responsible for “the numerous misstatements and omissions made by him or on his behalf” — and whether they were intentional.

Ms. James has been investigating Mr. Trump’s business practices since March 2019. In previous filings, she described the properties she was scrutinizing and said that her investigators were looking into whether Mr. Trump had inflated the value of various properties across the country in order to secure loans and obtain economic and tax benefits.

In Tuesday’s filing, she went further, giving specific examples in which she said the former president’s business had misrepresented the worth of some of its properties and showing how those misrepresentations had benefited the company, allowing it to receive favorable loans, insurance coverage and tax benefits.

The accusations center on Mr. Trump’s statements of financial condition, the annual record of his assets and liabilities that he gave to lenders and insurers. Ms. James’s office said that he “was personally involved in reviewing and approving the statements of financial condition before their issuance.”

Of course he lied about his assets. This is Donald Trump we’re talking about. The family has been exposed on this for many years. I wrote about it many times over the course of the Trump administration as did many others. His corruption is overwhelming and the fact that he’s gotten away with it all these years is stunning. Has he come to the end of the line?

I wrote this last year. I still don’t know if this is really going anywhere. But it needs to be:

There is some hope, however, that Trump will be held accountable and possibly even held criminally liable for his corruption. After the Supreme Court ruled this term that Trump could not withhold his tax returns from grand jury subpoena in a state criminal matter, the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which has jurisdiction over the Trump Organization, revealed that it has already obtained a whole boatload of documents from Deutsche Bank, which loaned the Trumps billions of dollars when no other bank would touch them. According to its filing with the court seeking Trump’s tax records, prosecutors are not simply looking at hush-money payments to porn stars, but at potentially major fraud charges.

We already knew from the New York Times’ 13,000-word examination about the massive criminal tax fraud scheme concocted by Fred Trump, Donald’s father. Considering the lengths to which he’s gone to hide his tax returns, it’s fair to suspect that Fred’s son has adopted similar practices. According to exposés by ProPublica and WNYC for their series “Trump, Inc.”, the Trump Organization may have misled banks, investors and buyers in many of their real estate licensing deals. There are many questions about money laundering and Trump’s odd special relationship with Deutsche Bank.

Much as I would love to see Trump held accountable for his crimes as president, it would be poetic justice to see his business exposed as a scam and see him prosecuted for ripping off taxpayers and clients. Apparently that won’t happen unless Manhattan DA Cy Vance Jr. can get his hands on those tax returns. Trump will fight that to the end, so there’s no telling whether anything will come of it. But at least someone, somewhere, is trying to bring him to justice. It’s hard to imagine how anyone can have faith in the system ever again if Donald Trump walks away scot-free after everything he’s done.

Biden gives a speech before taking questions at his news conference: "I often see empty shelves being shown on television. 89 percent are full. Which is only a few points below what it was before the pandemic."

Biden: "Look, I'm a capitalist. But capitalism without competition is not capitalism. It is exploitation."

Biden begins by taking a question from Zeke Miller framed around how bad things are right now.

"Why are you such an optimist?" Biden replies, sarcastically.

"Think about this. What are Republicans for? Name me one thing they're for." — Biden

In response to a question about if he needs to scale down his legislative ambitions, Biden points out that polling indicates the American people are largely behind his priorities

Biden calls malarkey on an ABC reporter

In response to a question about Covid and schools, Biden points out that the media obsesses over schools that are closed while overlooking that over 95 percent of them are still open

"My guess is he will move in" — Biden indicates he's expecting Putin's Russia to re-invade Ukraine

"It's clear to me that we're gonna have to probably break it up" — Biden on Build Back Better

Biden sounds surprised at himself as he says these words

"The fundamental question is, what's Mitch [McConnell] for? What's he for on immigration? What's he proposing? … what are they for? Everything is a choice" — Biden, who adds that Republicans are afraid of losing a primary if they behave in a constructive manner

👇

President Biden: “I did not anticipate that there would be such a stalwart effort to make sure that the most important thing was that President Biden didn’t get anything done.”

https://t.co/QtCUS0DQg5

Originally tweeted by Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) on January 19, 2022.

Kristin Welker asks Biden if VP Harris will be his running mate again in 2024

Kristen Welker asks Biden "What do you say to those who were offended by your [voting rights] speech?"

Biden on what he'll do differently in year two: "I'm going to get out of this place more often. I'm going to go out and talk to the public."

Biden calls on Peter Doocy. Doocy asks him why he's trying to pull the country so far to the left. Biden lets out a little chuckle.

Yikes. I'm not sure who this reporter is but Biden really wasn't having his question.

we just got our first Hunter Biden question

"I've had their back, and I've had their back my entire career. I've never not had their backs" — Biden responds to Kristen Welker's question suggesting he's failing Black voters (reposting this because of typo)

a Newsmax staffer asks Biden about his mental fitness.

Biden says Russia re-invading Ukraine would be "the most consequential thing that's happened in the world, in terms of war and peace, since World War 2"

"You said you were surprised by Republican obstruction of your agenda. But didn't the GOP take exactly the same tactic when you were VP to Barack Obama? So why did you think they would treat you any differently?" — good question here from @alexnazaryan

"I've never seen a time when the choice of what political coverage the voter looks to has as much impact on what they believe. They go to get reinforced in their views, whether it's MSNBC or Fox … everybody has put themselves in certain alleys" — Biden on political media

In response to a question from Steven Portnoy about why he isn't firing people, Biden says that to the extent public health messaging from his administration has been confusing, it's "because the scientists are learning more … this was a brand new virus."

Originally tweeted by Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) on January 19, 2022.

Dan Froomkin asks a question I think a lot of us would like the answer to: where are the feature articles about people who are freaked out by the encroaching fascism we all see coming?

I’m terrified.

And I know I’m not the only one.

I am terrified by the increasingly real possibility that this country — if Republicans take Congress in 2022 and Trump prevails in 2024 — could become a white Christian authoritarian state, where constitutional rights and protections get rolled back either by law, by fiat, or at the point of a neo-Brownshirt’s gun.

I am terrified about a scenario the likes of which I would never have even imagined before a few years ago. I thought this country’s constitutional system was unshakeable. Now it’s shaking and so am I. What would I do?

And of course I’m not alone. A Quinnipiac poll out this week found that a significant majority of Americans – by a 58 to 37 margin – believe “the nation’s democracy is in danger of collapse.” Some of that is right-wingers who think the 2020 election was stolen, but it’s 56 to 37 percent among Democrats, too.

Over half of Americans also consider it very likely (19 percent) or somewhat likely (34 percent) that there will be another attack in the United States like the one at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

And while people who follow me on Twitter are hardly a representative group, I was struck by how many people responded to this tweet by telling me that not only are they terrified, but that everybody they know is terrified, too.

Invisible

I don’t read about people who feel that way in the news, though.

A growing number of pundits are trying to sound the alarm, and some of them end up being quoted in news stories. But that’s not the same as a cultural trend piece that takes the temperature of a population.

It’s all highly reminiscent of what amounted to a near-boycott of Biden-supporter coverage before the 2020 election. New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie wrote in July 2019 that “anti-Trump voters are practically invisible in recent mainstream political coverage” – even though they represented the majority of Americans. It didn’t get any better in the ensuing 16 months.

It’s been true during every run-up to war in our history: the supposed “left” gets ignored. And it’s true again.

Where are the voices of the ordinary people who fear for democracy? Why has the majority been silenced?

We continue to get breathless reports from the Trump rallies.

What about talking to non-racist parents who worry their children will be taught propaganda at school? Or people in Black or brown communities who worry about barriers to voting, increased poverty and more militant policing? Or people in immigrant communities who don’t want to see their neighbors deported? Or trans people, who would have reason to be scared for their lives? Or government employees who would be asked to do things they consider abhorrent?

Or hang out at a Unitarian Church, or a reconstructionist synagogue, or a mosque, or a Common Cause meeting? Or, hell, just talk to people in a blue-state diner, if that’s easier? (Maybe make that a deli.)

It’s not only liberals who are terrified, either. It is, forgive me for saying so, pretty much anyone who occupies the reality-based sphere and is paying close attention.

That includes, for instance, the three dozen former Trump administration officials who, according to CNN, “held a conference call last Monday to discuss efforts to fend off his efforts to, in their view, erode the democratic process. Never-Trumpers were there already.

Our jaded, self-satisfied national political reporters could even benefit from talking to journalism colleagues in other departments. I have no doubt that a lot of reporters, editors, and publishers are worried about bogus prosecutions, harassment, and punishment of journalists perceived to be disloyal. Our entire industry should worry that even more extreme Trumpian bombast about fake news and the enemy of the people could well become rallying cries for armed militias.

What I asked on Twitter on Monday was this: Has anyone seen any good articles on people who are truly terrified that we may well be headed to white nationalist authoritarianism?

No one had a good example. There were several links to excellent articles about the threat to democracy written by experts. But none about ordinary people feeling scared.

The public needs to hear about ordinary Americans who are anxious and alarmed. And it would be good for top political reporters to be exposed to thoughts and emotions that don’t come from their colleagues’ elite, incestuous Twitter feeds and the occasional parachute into a red state.

Those reporters need to understand that a lot of ordinary Americans are scared. Some of us are even freaking out.

And that, in turn, might make their coverage about the growing threats to American democracy more urgent and a lot less emotionally removed.

There are at least as many of us out here as there were rabid MAGA followers in 2017 (and 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021) and nobody thinks it interesting or important to take our pulse and ask what we are thinking. I realize they think we are boring people who allegedly spend all day on our Peletons swilling caramel macchiatos and gobbling avocado toast, which isn’t true, but even if it was we are are Americans too. And we are freaked out.

Stunning stat: 48 Democrats who supported reforming filibuster to pass voting rights bills represent 34 MILLION more Americans than 52 senators (all Republicans + Sinema/Manchin) who opposed it

48 senators who voted to reform filibuster represent 182 million Americans, 55% of US

52 senators who upheld filibuster represent 148 million Americans, 45% of US

This is why US Senate so broken

Data via @atausanovitch

Originally tweeted by Ari Berman (@AriBerman) on January 20, 2022.