Archives for category: Elections
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Why I Voted For Zohran Mamdani

By dianeravitch
November 5, 2025 //
35

I decided after Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary that I would vote for him. I was concerned about his lack of managerial experience, but impressed by his energy, his enthusiasm, his ever-present smile, and his willingness to try bold policies on behalf of working-class and low-income New Yorkers. I was repulsed by the billionaire-funded hate campaign against him as a Muslim.

But at some point before the general election, I wavered. I read article after article about his hard-and-fast views on Israel, the BDS movement, and other third-rail topics. I am not a Zionist but I believe that Israel should not have to justify its right to exist. And I condemn the rightwing cabal in Israel that has supported the genocidal war in Gaza, as well as settler terrorism against Palestinians who live on the West Bank.

I decided not to vote, which I have never done. Voting is a precious right, which I have always exercised.

Then I read this article in the New York Times, in which David Leonhardt interviewed Senator Bernie Sanders, and it resolved all my doubt and hesitation. After reading this, I went to my polling place and very happily voted for Zohran Mamdani.

Of course, I was thrilled to see a Democratic sweep in Virginia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania (where the state GOP proposed to remove three Democratic judges from the state’s Supreme Court), and California, where Prop. 50 passed easily, allowing a redistricting intended to produce an additional 5 Democratic seats in Congress. Prop 50 was a response to the Texas GOP’s redistricting that will eliminate 5 Democratic seats. Joke of the day: California Republicans are suing to block the Prop 50 gerrymandering because it favors one race over another. I didn’t hear similar concerns about gerrymanders by Republicans in Texas, Missouri, and other states that are creating new Republican seats, eliminating Black representation.

The article linked above is a gift article, so you can read it in full without a subscription.

Here is a sample:

David Leonhardt: Senator Bernie Sanders started talking about income inequality nearly 40 years ago.

Archived clip of Bernie Sanders in 1988:In our nation today, we have extreme disparity between the rich and the poor, that elections are bought and sold by people who have huge sums of money.

He railed against oligarchs before Elon Musk made his first million.

Archived clip of Sanders in 1991: To a very great extent, the United States of America today is increasingly becoming an oligarchy.

Sanders started out as a political oddity. But his focus on inequality has made him one of the most influential politicians in America. I wanted to know where he thinks we’re headed next. So I asked him to join me for “America’s Next Story,” a Times Opinion series about the ideas that once held our country together, and those that might do so again.

Senator Bernie Sanders, thank you for being here.

Bernie Sanders: My pleasure….

Leonhardt: OK, let’s get into it. I want to go back to the pre-Trump era and think about the fact that a lot of Democrats during that time — I’m thinking about the Clintons and Obama — felt more positively toward the market economy than you did.

They were positive toward trade. They didn’t worry that much about corporate power. They didn’t pay that much attention to labor unions. And if I’m being totally honest, a lot of people outside of the Democratic Party, like New York Times columnists, had many of those same attitudes.

Sanders: Yes, I recall that. Vaguely, yes. Some of them actually weren’t supportive of my candidacy for president.

Leonhardt: That is fair. I assume you would agree that the consensus has shifted in your direction over the last decade or so?

Sanders: I think that’s fair to say.

Leonhardt: And I’m curious: Why do you think those other Democrats and progressives missed what you saw?

Sanders: In the 1970s — the early ’70s — some of the leaders in the Democratic Party had this brilliant idea. They said: Hey, Republicans are getting all of this money from the wealthy and the corporations. Why don’t we hitch a ride, as well? And they started doing that. Throughout the history of this country — certainly the modern history of this country, from F.D.R. to Truman to Kennedy, even — the Democratic Party was the party of the working class. Period. That’s all your working class. Most people were Democrats.

But from the ’70s on, for a variety of reasons — like the attraction of big money — the party began to pay more attention to the needs of the corporate world and the wealthy rather than working-class people. And I think, in my view, that has been a total disaster, not only politically, but for our country as a whole.

Leonhardt: I agree, certainly, that corporate money played a role within the party. But I also think a lot of people genuinely believed things like trade would help workers. When I think about —

Sanders: Hmm, no.

Leonhardt: You think it’s all about money?

Sanders: No. What I think is, if you talked to working-class people during that period, as I did, if you talked to the union movement during that period, as I did, you said: Guys, do you think it’s a great idea that we have a free-trade agreement with China? No worker in America thought that was a good idea. The corporate world thought it was a good idea. The Washington Post thought it was a great idea. I don’t know what The New York Times thought.

But every one of us who talked to unions, who talked to workers, understood that the result of that would be the collapse of manufacturing in America and the loss of millions of good-paying jobs. Because corporations understood: If I could pay people 30 cents an hour in China, why the hell am I going to pay a worker in America a living wage? We understood that.

Leonhardt: I think that’s fair. I guess I’m interested in why you think that members of the Democratic Party — not workers, but members — and other progressives ignored workers back then but have come more closely to listen to workers. I mean, if you look at the Biden administration’s policy, if you look at the way Senator Schumer talks about his own views shifting, I do think there’s been this meaningful shift in the Democratic Party toward your views. Not all the way.

Sanders: Well, what we will have to see is to what degree people are just seeing where the wind is blowing as to whether or not they mean it.

In my view, working-class Americans did not vote for Donald Trump because they wanted to see the top 1 percent get a trillion dollars in tax breaks. They did not want to see 15 million people, including many of them, being thrown off the health care they had or their health care premiums double, etc. They voted for Trump because he said: I am going to do something. The system is broken. I’m going to do something.

What did the Democrats say? Well, in 13 years, if you’re making $40,000, $48,000, we may be able to help your kid get to college. But if you’re making a penny more, we can’t quite do that. The system is OK — we’re going to nibble around the edges. Trump smashed the system. Of course, everything he’s doing is disastrous. Democrats? Eh, system is OK — let’s nibble around the edges.

Democrats lost the election. All right? They abdicated. They came up with no alternative. Because you know what? They, even today, don’t acknowledge the economic crises facing the working class of this country. Now you tell me, how many Democrats are going around saying: You know what? We have a health care system that is broken, completely. We are the only major country on Earth not to guarantee health care to all people I’ve introduced Medicare for All. You know how many Democrats in the Senate I have on board?

Leonhardt: How many?

Sanders: Fifteen — out of a caucus of 47.

Leonhardt: And you think Medicare for All is both good policy and good politics?

Sanders: Of course, it’s good policy! Health care is a human right! I feel very strongly about that. And I think the function of our health care system should not make the drug companies and the insurance companies phenomenally rich. We guarantee health care to all people — that’s what most Americans think. Where’s the leader?

I think that at a time when we have more income and wealth inequality, you know what the American people think? Maybe we really levy some heavy duty taxes on the billionaire class. I believe that. I think most Americans, including a number of Republicans, believe that. Hmm, not quite so sure where the Democrats are. I believe that you don’t keep funding a war criminal like Netanyahu to starve the children of Gaza. That’s what I believe. It’s what most Americans believe. An overwhelming majority in the Democratic world believes it. Hmm, Democratic leadership, maybe not quite so much.

The point is that, right now, 60 percent of our people have been paycheck to paycheck. I don’t know that the Democratic leadership understands that there are good, decent people out there working as hard as they can, having a hard time paying their rent. Because the cost of housing is off the charts, health care is off the charts, child care is off the charts. The campaign finance system is completely broken. When Musk can spend $270 million to elect Trump, you’ve got a broken system. Our job is to create an economy and a political system that works for working people, not just billionaires.

PLEASE OPEN THE LINK AND READ THE REST OF THIS AMAZING INTERVIEW.

Categories Democrats, Disruption, Elections, Inequality, Injustice, Republicans

Jamelle Bouie: The Constitution Prohibits a Third Term for Presidents

By dianeravitch
November 4, 2025 //
11

Jamelle Bouie is a columnist for The New York Times. He is my favorite. He has a broad and deep knowledge of politics and history. He writes about what he’s reading and what he’s cooking.

In this column, he explains that the Constitution prohibits any President from serving a third term. Since Trump loves to scoff at the Constitution, he’s been dropping hints that he will run again or maybe be president for life.

The polls are not encouraging. He currently is at 42% approval, and 52% disapproval. Polls can change, of course. But Trump is as impulsive, arrogant, and vengeful as ever.

Jamelle Bouie reminds us that it was Republicans who insisted on a two-term limit for the Presdency:

It does not come as a great surprise to see that less than a year into his second term in office, President Trump is already thinking about a third.

“I would love to do it,” he told reporters on Air Force One this week.

He has, in fact, been thinking about a third term for years.

“We’re going to win four more years in the White House,” he said in 2020. “And then after that, we’ll negotiate, right? Because we’re probably — based on the way we were treated — we are probably entitled to another four after that.”

And earlier this year, he told NBC News that he wasn’t “joking” about serving a third term. “There are methods which you could do it,” he said.

The obvious response to Trump’s musings is that the Constitution limits each president to two full terms. “No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice, and no person who has held the office of president, or acted as president, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected president shall be elected to the office of the president more than once,” reads the 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951.

But allies of the president insist that there is a plan — a loophole — that might allow Trump to circumvent the Constitution and serve another four years or more.

“Trump is going to be president in ’28, and people just ought to get accommodated with that,” said Steve Bannon last week. “At the appropriate time, we’ll lay out what the plan is.”

This sounds plausible, but it is wrong. First, it treats the Constitution as a language game whose meaning depends less on the text, structure, history and purpose of the document and more on whether you can use the fundamental indeterminacy of language to brute-force your preferred outcome.

But that is not how you should read the Constitution, which isn’t a rigid set of instructions to be gamed by clever lawyers, but a political document meant to structure the rules of self-government in the United States. The 22nd Amendment was written to change one of those rules and limit the president’s term of office, regardless of the circumstances. Any apparent “loophole” is a mirage produced by a basic misunderstanding of what it is that the Constitution set out to accomplish. A quick look at the history and debate behind the amendment makes this clear.

Two terms in office had been the norm for American presidents since George Washington declined to stand for a third in 1796, instead handing the reins to his vice president, John Adams. In 1940, Franklin Roosevelt became the first president to run for and win a third term of office. He continued the streak in 1944, winning another term but dying in office just a few months after he delivered his fourth Inaugural Address.

In the following midterm elections, Republicans won a House and a Senate majority for the first time since the early 1930s. And at the top of the agenda for the 80th Congress was a constitutional amendment to make the two-term tradition a formal rule of American politics. Although this was a clear response to Roosevelt, congressional arguments in favor of the two-term limit emphasized the vast scope of presidential power and the threat it might pose to American democracy if left in the hands of one man over an extended period of time.

“If long tenure of office of the president was a threat to our republican form of government as stated by President Jefferson nearly 140 years ago, with his limited powers, small disbursements, small Army and Navy and a small number of appointees, how much greater must that threat be to our republican form of government and to the liberties of the American people today?” asked Representative John Marshall Robsion of Kentucky during floor debates over the amendment in 1947.

“I favor this proposed amendment,” said Representative John Jennings Jr. of Tennessee. “Only by its adoption can the people be assured that we shall never have a dictator in this land. Without such a limit on the number of terms a man may serve in the presidency, the time may come when a man of vaulting ambition becomes president.” Backed by a “subservient Congress,” continued Jennings, such a man “could well name to the Supreme Court of the United States men of his political faith and economic thinking” who could “sweep aside and overthrow the safeguards of the Constitution” and “overrule the settled states of law that have been declared and recognized for a hundred years.”

“Almost all of the rest of the world has slipped away from the foundations of freedom and skidded dangerously close to the shoals of executive domination, one-man rule, dictatorship and ruthless tyranny,” declared Representative Karl Earl Mundt of South Dakota. “Let us consolidate our gains in self-government by passing this resolution to prevent any president hereafter — Republican or Democratic — from perpetuating himself in office.”

The overriding concern among congressional supporters of the 22nd Amendment was to limit the president’s overall tenure of office. They did not parse the difference between service and election; they did not intend to create some special scenario by which, if a president followed the right steps, he could circumvent the restriction. They meant, simply, to restrict the president to two full terms for fear of what might be if presidential power fell into the wrong hands.

“To grant extended power to any one man would be a definite step in the direction of autocracy, regardless of the name given the office, whether it be president, king, dictator, emperor or whatever title the office may carry,” Senator Chapman Revercomb of West Virginia said during his chamber’s debate over the proposed amendment. “It would be a definite step toward the destruction of real freedom of the people.”

Categories Elections, Evil, Extremism, Fascism, History, Trump

Ian Bassin: Why You Must Not Despair, Even in the Darkest of Times

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2025 //
5

Don’t lose hope! Don’t give up, no matter how bad it looks today.

That’s the advice of Ian Bassin, the co-founder and executive director of Protect Democracy. In this essay, he explains that the enemies of democracy cultivate despair. They flood the zone with cruel policies. They want us to believe that resistance is futile.

It is not. Don’t help them achieve their goals!

He writes:

Let’s not mince words. It’s a dark time.

If you’re reading this, you feel it. You see federal troops on American streets as a political tool. You see a multi-front assault on our elections. You see the machinery of government — from a supercharged ICE to a weaponized Department of Justice — being wielded against those the regime dislikes. You see courts wavering, Congress cowering, and other institutions choosing accommodation over confrontation. The danger is real, and the exhaustion is profound.

But it’s not just the individual threats that weigh on us. It’s the sheer volume. The autocrat’s playbook isn’t just about single acts of repression; it’s about creating a dozen crises at once. This is not incompetence; it is a strategy. As strategists from Sun Tzu onward have counseled, stretch an opponent’s defenses, exhaust them, and strike where they are then unprepared. By flooding the zone with outrages, they keep us perpetually reactive, divided, and off-balance. Our attention is their battleground, and they are winning by forcing us to fight on a thousand fronts at once.

The goal of this chaos is twofold. First, to spread us thinly so our responses are less effective. Second, to exhaust us and make the defense of democracy feel so futile that its defenders simply give up. Despair is a political weapon.

I’m not writing to tell you that you’re wrong to feel this way. I’m writing to tell you that this feeling is a designed part of the assault we’re facing. And I’m writing to tell you that we are not the first to stand in this spot, staring into what looks like an abyss. In the history of those who came before us, we can find a map not for a specific strategy but for a resilient mindset.

The long defeat as enduring hope

The phrase “the long defeat” comes from J.R.R. Tolkien, who has Galadriel speak of “fighting the long defeat” in The Lord of the Rings. That evil may never be fully vanquished and therefore that even victories against it are temporary. For Tolkien, a devout Catholic, it carried a tragic but defiant realism: History is a process of entropy, yet the fight for beauty, justice, and truth is still worth waging.

Over time, the idea that even in a period of decline doing the right thing remains a strategic and moral imperative has migrated from literature into political and theological commentary. Dissidents under Soviet rule, activists resisting authoritarianism, and modern democratic leaders have invoked versions of this concept to capture the paradox of resistance.

Victory may lie invisibly over some horizon, or may never be final. Setbacks are inevitable, and yet the very act of persevering is itself a form of hope.

To “fight the long defeat” is not to surrender to futility but to locate dignity and meaning in the struggle itself — and to recognize that what feels like defeat in one moment may seed the victories of another. Indeed history is replete with examples.

Lessons from a Polish winter

Consider Poland in the winter of 1981. The vibrant Solidarity movement was met with martial law. (If you don’t know the history of Solidarity, we’re planning to write about it later this week — stay tuned.) Its leaders were jailed; its organization shattered.

The pro-democracy cause appeared utterly defeated by the full weight of a Soviet-backed state.

What did they do when open confrontation became impossible? They didn’t stop. They began a patient, underground campaign — sustained organizing, covert communications, and cultural work that kept civic life alive. They understood that when you cannot win on the state’s terms, you must refuse to let the state define the terms of reality. They focused on keeping the idea of a free Poland alive. Through underground publishing and clandestine lectures — continuing traditions like the “Flying University” — they maintained a shared understanding of truth in the face of a regime dedicated to lies.

For roughly eight years they persisted. They were not just an opposition; they were the custodians of a democratic ideal. When a crack in the regime appeared in 1989 — with the Round Table Talks and semi-free elections — they were ready because they had never surrendered the moral and intellectual foundations of a free society.

Their lesson for us is this: When the machinery of the state is captured, the most critical ground to defend is our shared commitment to truth and democratic values. Doing so is necessary to be ready to seize the opening when it inevitably comes.

Clarity in our own history

We can find a similar lesson in our own history. Think of the lawyers and activists of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and ’60s. They faced a legal and political system built to exclude them. The courts, the police, and the law itself were instruments of a brutal racial hierarchy.

Every institution that was supposed to deliver justice was instead architected to deny it.
Their response was not to meet every injustice with a scattered, reactive defense

It was to maintain an unwavering focus on the core principle at stake: the moral and constitutional bankruptcy of segregation. They possessed profound strategic patience, persistence, and powerful moral clarity. Their fight reminds us that in an environment of institutional failure and constant attack, the most potent weapon is a disciplined focus on the fundamental principles being violated.

But history also shows that change can come with surprising speed. Consider the movement for marriage equality in the immediate aftermath of the 2004 election. Voters approved bans in 11 states that year, amending constitutions to prohibit same-sex marriage, and President George W. Bush — who supported a federal marriage amendment — was reelected. The political consensus was so strong that even in 2008, the Democratic nominee for president recanted his previous support for marriage equality. Yet within just a few years, everything shifted: in 2011 the Obama administration stopped defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court; in 2012 the president endorsed marriage equality; and public opinion moved rapidly until marriage equality was recognized in the Constitution. While we know that victory is now facing its own backlash, that moment is a powerful reminder that political winds can shift with breathtaking speed.

A moment of seeming hopelessness can be the prelude to a breakthrough.

A mindset for a hard moment

The history of these movements does not offer us an easy comfort or a simple to-do list. It offers us a way to think, a framework for how to situate ourselves and endure.

  1. Find the signal in the noise — We must resist the autocrat’s strategy of distraction. We cannot respond en masse to every fire. Instead, we must anchor our work in the foundational principles at stake: the rule of law, the integrity of elections, and the ultimate sovereignty of a free people. By focusing on the core pillars of democracy, we refuse to have our attention fragmented and our energy dissipated.
  2. Cultivate strategic readiness — This isn’t just about passively enduring a long winter. It is about actively preparing for a change in the weather and doing what we can to bring it about. We cannot ultimately control when the political winds will shift or when an unexpected event will create an opportunity. But we can control our readiness. The work of a hard moment is to get the sails ready. It is the time to lay the legal groundwork, build the coalitions, refine the strategies, and organize the resources. Our task is to be so prepared that when a crack of daylight appears, we are ready to sail through it with maximum force and not be caught scrambling.
  3. Uphold a common truth — In an era of rampant disinformation, the simple act of insisting on objective reality is a profound form of resistance. The authoritarian project depends on breaking our collective understanding of facts. By committing ourselves to defending the institutions and norms that discern truth — in journalism, in science, in law — we are defending the very possibility of a self-governing society.
  4. Bolster each other — In moments that feel like we’re spiraling backwards, when the forces of unfreedom are on the march, a common tendency is for the forces of freedom to fall into infighting. Rather than gaining strength from each other, our fears and anxieties and anger lead us to turn on each other. But in that reaction are the seeds of ultimate defeat; whereas movements that come together in times of adversity water the seeds of renewal.

There is no question we are being tested — as a country, as a movement, and as individuals.
But we are not the first to have faced such tests and we will not be the last. Many who preceded us faced tests like this and even harder ones, and we have their example to remind us that whatever happens, no matter how dark the night, the world keeps turning and eventually comes the dawn.

Personally, I’m more optimistic than Tolkien. I don’t think human history bends towards decay. I’m partial to Martin Luther King’s vision that it bends towards justice. But what’s powerful about the idea of the long defeat is that it is agnostic about one’s optimism or pessimism — it simply reminds us that the task of being human (or elf) is to do right and to do good and to embrace beauty where we can find it.

And if I can play my small role in lifting you up in this difficult moment, it’s to remind us all to remember that. And to act on it.

Categories Democracy, Elections, Evil, Extremism, Hope, Resistance

Mike DeGuire: The Big Money Behind the Denver School Board Election

By dianeravitch
October 10, 2025 //
5

Veteran educator Mike DeGuire scoured through the public list of campaign contributions to the Denver school board elections.

The pro-charter funders are made up of billionaires, charter school operators, and big-money privatizers.

Among the donors to school board elections are billionaire Philip Anschutz, the richest man in Colorado; he was also a funder of the anti-public school documentary titled “Waiting for Superman,” which claimed falsely that charter schools are the answer to all the problems of public schools.

Other billionaire donors include Netflix founder Reed Hastings and John Arnold, a former trader at Enron.

Then there’s an alphabet series of organizations, some of which use fancy names–the equivalent of Parents for Public Schools– to hide the fact that they are pro-charter.

It’s hard for the average voter to make sense of the election with so many groups endorsing certain candidates.

Tto cut through the hype and propaganda of the charter lobby requires a wise ally.

Mike DeGuire has the experience and wisdom to sort out the charter groups from the true friends of students, teachers and public schools.

And he does it in this article.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Colorado, Denver, Education Industry, Elections, Ethics, Privatization

Josh Cowen Is Running for Congress as a Champion for Public Schools!

By dianeravitch
September 26, 2025 //
0

You may have read about Josh Cowen . He’s a professor of Education Policy at Michigan State University. For twenty years, he worked on voucher research, hoping to find definitive evidence that vouchers helped the neediest kids–or didn’t.

About two years ago, he concluded that the answer was clear: vouchers do not help the neediest kids. Most are claimed by kids who never attended public schools. In other words, they are subsidies for families who already pay for private schools. When low-income kids use vouchers, the academic results are abysmal. He concluded that the best way to improve the schooling of American students is to invest in public schools.

Josh did his best to stop the billionaire-funded voucher drive. He published a book about the evidence, called The Privateers. He wrote articles in newspapers across the nation. He testified before legislative committees.

He concluded that the most important thing he could do is to run for Congress. He’s doing that and needs our help. I’ve contributed twice. Please give whatever you can.

Public schools need a champion in Congress.

Josh writes:

Hey everyone. You may have heard that I’m running for Congress in my home district in Michigan. It’s one of the most important seats to flip next year for Democrats to retake the US House. I’m hoping you’d consider chipping in today to help us meet a big deadline by 9/30.

I’m probably the most prominent congressional candidate in the country running in part on the idea that we need to stand up for and renew our public schools.

I took on Betsy DeVos and the Koch operation all over the country, trying to stop school voucher schemes. I’m a union member and work closely with labor—check out my book excerpt about vouchers in AFT’s New Educator right now!—and I was just given NEA’s highest honor, the Friend of Education award. Diane herself won a few years back—I’m truly honored. 

But the DeVoses and a MAGA Texas billionaire are going to spend big here to hold Congress and defund schools. Former MI GOP Governor Rick Snyder is planning to raise $30 million to make 2026 the “education election” for Republicans in Michigan. This is the same guy at the helm when kids were poisoned in Flint. And the same guy responsible for the disastrous EAA charter school fiasco. 

My GOP opponent is the Koch’s bagman in Michigan. This is a guy who eked out a win in our district just last year when Elissa Slotkin had to give up her seat to run for Senate. So it’s a very winnable race. But we need help. 

Last month just for starters: 14 statewide and local school and community leaders in Michigan endorsed us. Last week, UNITE HERE!, the big hospitality workers union, endorsed our campaign. And just this week, Dr. Jill Underly, the statewide elected chief of Wisconsin public schools, announced her support. You may remember that Dr. Underly beat back Elon Musk’s plan to buy the off-year elections just this spring in her state. She showed how a strong, positive message of standing up for public schools and standing up to billionaires can win a swing state election.

We can do that too. So I’m asking for your help to close this month strong.

Thanks for your support!

Josh Cowen

Categories Charter Schools, Courage, Democracy, Education Reform, Elections, Funding, Michigan, Privatization, Resistance, Supporting public schools, Vouchers

Glenn Kessler: Trump Is the Master of Bullshit

By dianeravitch
September 11, 2025 //
9

I seldom recommend a blog that requires payment. Here is an exception: Glenn Kessler. He served for many years as the Fact Checker for The Washington Post. He is remarkably good as a fact checker. After many years, he left The Post and started his own blog, as so many other journalists have done. He is a member of the International Society of Factcheckers. He relies on facts, not opinion. Consider subscribing. He has my stamp of approval.

Kessler recently started a series about Trump’s long history of bullshitting. As he explains here, there is a difference between lying and bullshit.

Kessler writes:

This is the first in a series of Substack essays looking at Trump’s bullshit. Future installments will be available to paid subscribers.

Twenty years ago this month, the late Princeton philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt published his seminal work On Bullshit, which argued that bullshit was worse than lying. His point was that a liar knows the truth and deliberately tries to hide or distort it, while a bullshitter doesn’t care about the truth at all — they care only about the impression they make.

When Donald Trump emerged on the political stage in 2015, Frankfurt wrote in Time magazine that Trump was the epitome of the bullshit artist he had identified a decade earlier.

“Trump freely offers extravagant claims about his own talents and accomplishments,” Frankfurt said. “He maintains, for example, that he has the greatest memory in the world. This is farcically unalloyed bullshit.”

When I managed The Fact Checker for The Washington Post, readers constantly asked: Why rely only on Pinocchio ratings? Why don’t you call Trump a liar?

I thought “liar” was a conversation stopper — it would be my judgment that he lied. With Trump, it’s hard to tell. He might actually believe some of the stuff he says, or has convinced himself it’s true.

The one time I clearly labeled a lie was when I had convincing evidence. Trump had insisted he knew nothing about hush-money payments to silence alleged paramours before he was elected president. Then his former attorney released a recording of Trump discussing an arrangement with the National Enquirer to pay $150,000 to one woman. Trump was caught on tape, so there was no doubt Trump had lied.

But, following Frankfurt’s theory, focusing only on Trump’s lies obscures a deeper danger to American society. As a bullshitter, Trump doesn’t care whether what he says reflects reality. He says whatever serves his momentary purpose, often contradicting himself without hesitation or shame. This indifference to truth makes Trump’s bullshit more insidious than lies.

Trump is the dominant political figure of the past decade — perhaps of our lifetimes. Tens of millions of Americans support his policies, or at least disdain the policies of his Democratic opponents. In the last election, he narrowly won both the Electoral College and the popular vote. He views those victories as a mandate for a reordering of the federal government, with an unchallenged executive wielding vast power.

The danger is that Trump’s bullshit has become woven into the fabric of American life. Many citizens now struggle to discern reality from spin. Was January 6 a violent attack on democracy — or a peaceful protest demonized by the media? Was Joe Biden legitimately elected — or did Democrats steal the presidency in the greatest fraud in U.S. history?

Trump bullshits to construct an alternative reality — one that almost half the country has accepted as fact. He has been aided by the balkanization of American society, where people live in blue or red zones and often absorb information that confirms what they already believe. Social media, unfiltered and often partisan, has replaced legacy media as a source of information.

Trump’s handling of the Covid pandemic in his first term was disastrous, with the exception of producing vaccines in record time. Yet Americans seemed to erase that period from memory. Thanks to Trump’s relentless bullshit during his first term about having created the “greatest economy in history” — in reality, it was on the brink of recession when the pandemic struck — many Americans retained halcyon memories of Trump’s economic policies, especially once inflation soared in the pandemic’s aftermath.

I often wondered how, if Trump had been re-elected in 2020, he would have explained the runaway inflation. I can only guess, but in any case, he would have spouted bullshit. Most economists agree Biden’s policies added some inflationary pressures on the margins, but pandemic-related supply-chain issues were mostly responsible.

In his second term, Trump has weaponized his bullshit. He is surrounded by lackeys who echo and defend his untruths.

No accurate damage estimate was available when Trump in June declared Iranian nuclear weapons sites had been obliterated. So when he made the statement he was bullshitting. In previous administrations, the results of such an attack might have received positive spin from unnamed officials, but since Trump is never wrong, once he puts it in his own words, the rest of government must twist its findings to conform with Trump’s claim.

Sometimes Trump gets lucky, and his bullshit turns out to be true. But more often than not, he just pretends he was right even when he was wrong.

Trump a few weeks ago fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because job-growth estimates were revised downward — a common occurrence, especially if an economy is stumbling. Trump claimed the BLS director had manipulated the figures because she was a Biden appointee. That was bullshit. The BLS director cannot manipulate the job numbers, which are derived from surveys conducted by professionals many rungs below in the Labor Department. Yet Trump’s bullshit now threatens to erode faith in the accuracy of federal data.

This week provided another example. Trump, desperate to win a Nobel Peace Prize ever since Barack Obama did, keeps claiming he ended six wars in six months. This is, of course, exaggerated, as numerous fact checks have documented. But Trump took it a step further when Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders visited the Oval Office and Trump explained to reporters why he had dropped his demand for a ceasefire in the Russia-Ukraine war.

“If you look at the six deals that I settled this year, they were all at war. I didn’t do any ceasefires,” Trump said.

That was bullshit. At least three of the conflicts on Trump’s “six wars” list were halted with ceasefires. But Trump needed to explain why he folded on his demand for an immediate ceasefire — embraced by Ukraine — in the face of Russian president Vladimir Putin’s charm offensive in Alaska last week.

So he just invented bullshit on the spot. The consequence is that Russia feels no pressure to end the war and can continue shelling Ukrainian cities. More people will die.

As part of this Substack, I intend to write a series of essays that examine specific examples of Trump’s bullshit and the consequences. I will likely start with Trump’s claim that he was a self-made business success — so central to the myth that carried him into office — but I also welcome suggestions from readers. Future posts on this theme will be limited to paid subscribers, so please consider signing up. 

Trump’s central tactic is saturation — flood the zone with bullshit until the truth becomes impossible to locate. I intend to create a record of what happened before it’s lost in a storm of revisionism and propaganda.

To open the next Glenn Kessler fact-checks, become a subscriber.

Categories Accountability, Character, Elections, Ethics, Lies, Trump

Jess Piper on “Dust-Licking Pimps”

By dianeravitch
September 4, 2025 //
1

Jess Piper lives in rural Missouri. She taught high school English for 16 years, then quit to run unsuccessfully for the legislature in Missouri. She is executive director of Blue Missouri and runs a weekly podcast called “Dirt Road Democrats.” She is relentless.

She wrote this post while listening to a biography of Mark Twain:

I am currently listening to Ron Chernow’s Mark Twain biography. The audio version is over 44 hours…Chernow is known for the very long biographies and I love to listen to him while driving across the heartland to speak to rural Democrats.

I spoke to about 130 people in Quincy, IL last Thursday. I drove through Hannibal (Twain’s hometown) on my way to the event, and I had been listening to Chernow’s book for about four hours when I finally arrived at the Machinists Lodge for the Adams County summer cookout. 

This was my second time at the Adams County event, and when I arrived, I couldn’t help thinking there’s no way it had been a year since my last visit. 

Time marches on, but I didn’t know it would be at such a quick pace.

When I last drove to Quincy, we hadn’t elected the current regime. I was still hopeful that Trump was in the past and we were moving forward. I was sure the country was going to vote for our first woman President because I was constantly in rooms with hundreds of rural Democrats across the country — they were motivated and excited and on the ground doing the work.

We all know how that went.

Adams County Democratic Party Picnic. Quincy, IL. 7/31/25.

When I arrived at the event, there were already several people there, so I decided to change in the back of my car instead of walking in with my bags and hangers and hairspray and makeup. My car has tinted windows, and if I push the front seats all the way up, I have enough room to hide behind the seats and do a quick change.

Superman’s phone booth has nothing on my Mazda.

Before speaking, I sat down to fresh tomatoes and a grilled pork chop and a salad and a piece of chocolate cake. No Diet Coke available, so I was forced to give my body the water I usually avoid.

After the event, a man came up, introduced himself, and said he was at the same event last year as well. He told me something I have been thinking about ever since: he said, “I saw you last year and your message has changed. You were light-hearted last year. You are pointed this year.”

True enough. 

Last year, I had hope that we would make progress. This year I hope we won’t devolve into an autocratic police state. I hope I heave healthcare in January after the subsidies dry up. I hope my kids can afford to buy groceries and pay their rent. I hope my grandkids’ schools are funded. I hope my neighbor isn’t deported. I hope concentration camps don’t become a normal experience.

I have hope. I am also paying attention.

I have spoken so often that I almost have an autopilot switch. I rearrange the order at most events so I don’t get stale, and I usually throw in a new story or talking point at each event. I can speak unscripted for about 45 minutes, however, I would never. I am an old teacher, so I watch the audience for cues. I watch to see if I should hit a point even harder or if I should wrap up.

There is nothing as awful as a speaker who has gone on too long. I’d rather be booed than be boring.

Since March or so, I have spoken on the cruelty of ICE and the instances of kidnappings on American streets. I talk about the folks who are disappearing before our eyes. I speak on the ICE “agents” without badges or warrants or marked cars. Thugs covering their faces. Thugs who seem to have unlimited power from a regime who wants to turn the US into a police state.

I speak on my privilege and what people who look like me should do if they encounter their neighbors being kidnapped or harassed…get in the way. 

Film the encounter. Ask for badges and warrants. Warn your neighbors if you see ICE. Remind them to not open the door for agents. Narrate your video, focusing on the agents not the detained.

Throw sand in the gears as best you can. 

I reflected on my talking points on the drive home the next morning. My sweet host was up with me by 5:45 to let her dogs out and say goodbye and I started the journey home via Highway 36, the Twain bio roaring through my speakers. 

A quick stop in Hannibal for a McDonald’s Diet Coke and back to the drive home.

And back to my audiobook. The narrator reminded me of Mark Twain’s newspaper writing in the West. How Twain had used racist rhetoric in both his notebooks and his writings since the beginning, but his attitude was slowly changing after leaving Missouri, a slave state. 

Twain is a deeply complex man whose views changed and evolved throughout his life. He was vain and always seeking wealth, but he also fought for the oppressed through humor and satire.

The narrator coming through my speakers told of how offended Twain became at the treatment of Chinese immigrants in California and the constant berating and beating at the hands of both the police and politicians and random men on the streets.

As a reporter in San Francisco, Mark Twain witnessed police standing by while white men attacked a Chinese man for no reason. The narrator told me of Twain’s frustration with police complicity in racial violence perpetrated against Chinese immigrants.

In “Roughing It”, Twain said:

No Californian gentleman or lady ever abuses or opposes a [Chinese person], under any circumstances, an explanation that seems to be much needed in the East. Only the scum of the population do it – they and their children; they, and, naturally and consistently the policeman and politicians likewise, for these are the dust-licking pimps and slaves of the scum…

I like that phrase. I usually call the folks fighting on behalf of the fascists “bootlickers”, but I think Twain’s description may predate the word bootlicker.

Dust-licking pimps and slaves of the scum…it seems very appropriate for the ICE agents I have seen and read about in the news. 

ICE is getting closer and closer to my home. I just read of a raid in Lenexa, Kansas at a Mexican restaurant. I watched a video of the incident, and I am proud to say that Lenexa community members did in fact get in the way. They stood with their neighbors and tried to protect people in their community. 

Rabbi Moti Rieber is the executive director of Kansas Interfaith Action, and says the raids happen without rhyme or reason.

“Because anyone who is perceived as Latino or African, wherever they are at a Home Depot, at a court hearing, out gardening, picking up their kids or at a restaurant in suburban Johnson County can be set upon by armed thugs, armed gunmen in masks, dragged into a van and disappeared. My friends, fascism in the form of uncontrolled executive power, lawlessness, political persecutions and racist law enforcement is not coming. It is here.”

The Rabbi is right. It’s not coming. It’s here. And we have to be ready to fight back on behalf of the people who are being persecuted by the police state. 

The kidnappings are brazen to induce fear, but we have to act in solidarity and without hesitation. We can’t let this stand.

Twain was right in his summation of the dust-licking scum detaining and harming people for the color of their skin in the 1800s. Rabbi Rieber is correct in his description of ICE agents in the present.

As I travel around the center of the country helping to organize rural Democrats, I need you to know they exist. Rural people are also progressive people. There are people in every space in every state standing up for their neighbors and against thugs and fascism and authoritarianism. Against the racism and the disappearings. 

Bootlickers be damned.

~Jess

Categories Democracy, Democrats, Elections, Ethics, Missouri, Republicans

A Day in the White House: You Can’t Make This Stuff Up

By dianeravitch
August 20, 2025 //
10

Jeff Tiedrich, graphic designer, writes a blog called “Everyone Is Entitled to My Own Opinion.” It’s hilarious, it’s filled with obscenities that I never post, and it captures the essence of whatever he’s writing about.

Please consider subscribing.

I disclaim all of Jeff Tiedrich’s four-letter words and urge you to read this post.

Jeff Tiedrich writes:

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, flanked by European leaders, visited the White House yesterday. they did Statesmanship Kabuki, where everyone tiptoes around and pretends that Donny Convict’s hand is firmly guiding his ship of state — when in reality, America’s Mad King is a semi-sentient drool-bucket who’s only a handful of frayed synapses away from wearing his diaper on his head.

can we just talk about how totally fucking insane Dear Leader is?

I mean, who in the hallowed name of Mentally Unbalanced Jesus does this?

Donny has a huge-ass painting of his Miracle Ear Nicking hanging in the White House — and he makes sure everyone sees it by pointing and whining “this was not a good day.”

if it wasn’t a good day, then why are you forever reminding yourself of it by commissioning a wall-size painting so you can relive it daily?

normal people don’t act like this.

let’s gif that shit, because you would never believe it if you didn’t see it with your own eyes.

everyone in attendance — Zelenskyy, Mark Rutte, Ursula von der Leyen, Keir Starmer, Alexander Stubb, Emmanuel Macron, Friedrich Merz, and Giorgia Meloni — these are serious people who run countries, and this is what they have to endure when they come to Donny’s White House: a lunatic wants them to admire his assassination painting. 

what must be going through their minds?

Donny has literally devolved into the insane dictator General Garcia from the film The In-Laws, proudly showing off his crazypants art collection.

but Donny’s outdone General Garcia — because not even the general thought to sell merch at his presidential palace.

that’s right, the White House Gift Shop has now become your one-stop destination for all merchandise MAGA. I’ll bet Zelenskyy was thrilled with his new hat. I’ll bet it’s sitting in a treasured wastebin in Ukraine right now.

tell me, does Dear Leader’s inability to read simple words — or even recognize someone sitting right across from him — make his ass seem demented?

Donny: “President Stubb of… Finland and he’s… uh… he’s somebody that where are we here, huh? where? where?”
Stubb: “I’m right here.”
Donny: “oh.”

Stubb was, in fact, sitting directly across from Donny.

hey Jake Tapper, are you watching this?

again, these are serious people dealing with serious issues — and Donny reacts to them like a bored child who can’t wait for the other person to stop talking, so he can start.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen: “every single child has to go back to its family. this should be one of our main priorities in negotiations is to make sure that the children come back to Ukraine, to their families.”

Donny: “thank you, and we did. I was just thinking, we’re hear for a different reason, but we uh just a couple of weeks ago made the largest trade deal in history. that’s a big, that’s a big thing, and congratulations, that’s great. thank you very much.”

shut the fuck up with your children, lady, whoever you are. Donny wants to brag about his trade deals.

everyone was there to talk about ending Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, but Donny was more interested in playing ever-more-outlandish rounds of Things That Never Happened The Most.

“we’re gonna stop mail-in ballots because it’s corrupt. you know, when you go to a voting booth and you do it the right way, you go to a state that runs it properly, you go in, they even ask me, they ask me for my license plate for identify, I said ‘I don’t know if I have it,’ they said ‘sir, you have to have it.’ I was very impressed, actually. but it’s very hard to cheat.”

what the fuck? okay, let’s just give Sundowning President Chucklefuck the benefit of the doubt here, and presume he meant to say drivers license, not license plate. Donny has lived in two states: Florida and New York. granted, Donny also lives in a Perpetual State of Confusion, but you can’t vote there. so let’s talk about New York and Florida. neither of those states require a drivers license to vote, so what the fuck is Donny talking about? oh wait, it’s a sir story. big strong election workers, their faces wet with tears of gratitude, were going ‘sir! sir! we need your license plate, sir! go pry that sucker off the presidential limousine, sir, and fork it over.’

so Donny’s just making shit up, but wait a minute. that clip is from Donny’s one-on-one morning meeting with Zelenskyy, ostensibly about bringing an end to the war in Ukraine — so why is Donny prattling on about whatever nonsensical ‘sir story’ pops into his empty head?

it’s because Donny has lost his fucking marbles — and we’ve all become numb to it. presidents aren’t supposed to act this way. Joe Biden didn’t wander into the tall weeds in the middle of a meeting and start blithering incoherently about whatever he’d seen on TV that morning. neither did Obama. neither did the Bushes.

Reagan did, but he was almost as demented as Donny is — so what does that tell you?

by the way, my What The Fuck Is Wrong With You Challenge is now in its 1,967th day.

would any of the worthless scribblers of the corporate-controlled media care to take me up on it?

oh wait, I think President Scramblebrains wants to talk about some more shit that never happened the most. lay it on us, hotshot.

“we have a thing going on right now in DC. we went from the most unsafe place anywhere to a place that now, people, friends are calling me up, Democrats are calling me up and they’re saying, ‘sir, I want to thank you. my wife and I went out to dinner last night for the first time in four years, and Washington, DC is safe, and you did that in four days.’ I’ll tell you it’s safe. I had another friend of mine, he has a son who’s a great golfer, he’s on tour, and he came in fourth yesterday in the big tournament where Scott Scheffler made the great shot and uh he said his son is going to dinner in Washington DC tonight. I said would you have allowed that to happen a year ago? he said no way, no way. he said ‘what you’ve done is incredible’ and I think the people realize it. but the press says ‘he’s a dictator, he’s trying to take over.’ no, all I want is security for our people. but people that haven’t gone out to dinner in Washington DC in two years are going out to dinner, and the restaurants in the last two days were busier than they’ve been in a long time.”

oh. Donny’s bragging that the police state he’s inflicted on the nation’s capitol has brought untold prosperity to its nightspots. 

fact check: fuck straight off.

Research by Open Table found that restaurant attendance was down every day last week compared with 2024, with the number of diners dipping by 31% on Wednesday, two days after Trump ordered the national guard to patrol Washington.

people would rather stay home in DC than risk being hassled by Donny’s gestapo thugs — yet here’s Donny spinning farcical nonsense about Democrats and golfer-dads phoning him with the tears in their eyes. poor Zelenkyy has to sit there and try keep a straight face while this complete fucking insanity happens right next to him.

Categories Elections, Ethics, Extremism, For-Profit, Humor, Ignorance, Insane, Stupid, Trump

Trump Wants to Ban Mail-In Voting Because Putin Told Him So

By dianeravitch
August 19, 2025 //
5

Thom Hartmann is outraged. Trump proclaimed that he would issue an executive order banning mail-in voting. Why? Because Putin told him that mail-in voting caused him to lose the 2020 election. Republicans know that they will lose control of the House and possibly the Senate unless they can suppress the vote or redistrict, as they are in Texas, drawing lines that squeeze out Democrats.

Hartmann wrote:

Yesterday, Donald Trump crossed another line that no president in our history has ever dared p to touch. With the echo of Vladimir Putin’s whisper in his ear, in front of President Zelenskyy and seven other European leaders, Trump announced he’s preparing an executive order to ban mail-in ballots and even outlaw voting machines across America ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. 

Sitting in front of the Chancellor of Germany and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, — both nations that allow and even encourage mail-in voting — Trump said:

“Mail-in ballots are corrupt mail-in ballots. You can never have a real democracy with mail-in ballots, and we as a Republican Party are gonna do everything possible that we get rid of mail-in ballots. We’re gonna start with an executive order that’s being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail-in ballots because they’re corrupt. And, you know that we’re the only country in the world, I believe, I may be wrong, but just about the only country in the world that uses it because of what’s happened.”

This is not just a partisan maneuver. It’s an open assault on the Constitution, a grotesque power grab, and a direct threat to the foundation of democracy itself. And it’s happening in real time, in broad daylight, with a criminally compliant Republican Party cheering him on. 

Republicans hate mail-in voting for multiple reasons.

First, for people who’re paid by the hour, mail-in voting increases participation because they can fill out their ballots at the kitchen table after work. Republicans don’t want people to vote, and have introduced over 400 pieces of legislation in the past three years nationwide to make voting more difficult. 

Second, mail-in voting makes voters better informed and less vulnerable to sound-byte TV ads because, while perusing that ballot at the kitchen table, they can look up candidates on their laptops and get more detail and information. Republicans hate informed voters and rely heavily on often-dishonest advertisements to swing voters. 

Third, mail-in ballots — because they arrive in the mail weeks before the election — give voters an early chance to discover if they’ve been the victim of Republican voter-roll purges, one of their favorite tactics to pre-rig elections. 

Fourth, mail-in ballots end the GOP trick of understaffing and underresourcing polling places in minority neighborhoods, leading to hours-long lines. Hispanic voters generally wait 150% longer than white voters, and Black voters must endure a 200% longer wait; mail-in ballots put an end to this favorite of the GOP’s voter suppression efforts. 

Trump, knowing all this, couldn’t help himself yesterday, finally blurting out his real reason for wanting to end mail-in voting in America:

“We got to stop mail-in voting, and the Republicans have to lead the charge. The Democrats want it because they have horrible policy,” Trump proclaimed. “If you [don’t] have mail-in voting, you’re not gonna have many Democrats get elected. That’s bigger than anything having to do with redistricting, believe me.”

Once again, Trump is ignoring the law and the Constitution, which explicitly delegates the administration of elections to the states and Congress, not presidential executive orders.

That’s not some vague norm or debatable tradition: it’s written into the very DNA of our system of government. States set the rules, unless Congress — not the president — overrides them. States decide how their citizens vote, as the Constitution’s Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 dictates:

“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”

Yet here we have a president declaring that he alone will dictate the terms of elections nationwide, in direct violation of two centuries of law and precedent. This is not only unconstitutional, it’s tyrannical. 

When a president asserts powers he does not have, with the full knowledge that they aren’t his to wield, he’s announcing to the country that the rule of law no longer constrains him. That’s the definition of dictatorship.

And what makes this even more obscene is the source of Trump’s inspiration. According to multiple reports, Trump’s sudden rant on mail-in ballots followed a private conversation with Vladimir Putin, who reportedly told him that mail-in voting was the reason he lost in 2020.

The man occupying the Oval Office is now taking advice about how to rig American elections from the very dictator who has spent his career poisoning journalists, jailing opponents, and staging sham referendums to annex entire countries. 

It’s bad enough that Trump has always been Putin’s toady, but now we see the Kremlin effectively writing U.S. election law. If Jefferson, Madison, or Lincoln were alive to hear this, they would spit.

Mail-in voting is not a scam. It’s not a trick. It’s how tens of millions of Americans — Republicans, Democrats, independents — exercise their right to vote. 

Seniors rely on it. People with disabilities rely on it. Military service members overseas rely on it. Hourly workers who can’t take a day off rely on it. Parents with young children rely on it. Rural voters, who often live miles from polling places, rely on it. 

And every study, every audit, every bipartisan commission has found mail-in voting to be secure, safe, and reliable. Five states do it exclusively; we’ve had it more than two decades here in Oregon with nary a single scandal or problem. To call it fraudulent is a lie. To ban it is voter suppression on a scale this country has never seen.

And voting machines? Trump is openly declaring that he’ll return us to mind-numbingly slow hand-counting of ballots, a tactic straight from the authoritarian playbook designed to create chaos, delays, and endless opportunities to dispute the results in 2026 and 2028. 

I’ve had concerns about voting machines and Windows-based tabulators for decades, but my solution isn’t to end them. Instead, we should use machines owned by the government itself, generating paper ballots and operating transparently on open-source software with every election subject to sample audits. 

Instead of trying to make elections more secure, Trump’s laying the groundwork for election theft in plain sight. This isn’t subtle: it’s the loud declaration of a man preparing to overturn the will of the voters, with the blessing of a foreign adversary, and with a Republican Party too craven to object.

If Trump succeeds in outlawing mail-in ballots and voting machines, millions of Americans will simply not be able to vote. Seniors in nursing homes, service members abroad, people with disabilities, single parents, rural citizens: they will all be disenfranchised overnight. And make no mistake: that’s the point. 

This is not about integrity. This is not about security. This is about shrinking the electorate to a size that Republicans believe will guarantee them victory forever.

Republicans know they can’t win free and fair elections in much of America. They know their policies are unpopular. They know their agenda is toxic. 

So they cheat. They gerrymander districts into grotesque shapes that make a mockery of representative government. They purge voters from the rolls. They criminalize voter registration drives. They intimidate voters at the polls. 

And now, at Trump’s command and Putin’s urging, they want to ban the very methods by which millions of Americans vote. This is not politics as usual. This is the slow-motion strangulation of democracy.

Every American who believes in self-government must rise up against this. Governors must prepare to defy such an executive order in court and in practice. State legislatures must assert their constitutional authority. 

Attorneys general must be ready to sue. And ordinary citizens must take to the streets, the phones, the ballot box, and every civic space available to declare that this will not stand. Because if it does, we’ll have surrendered the very essence of the American experiment.

We’ve been here before in spirit if not in form.

Reagan’s campaign cut a deal with the Iranian Ayatollahs to hang onto the hostages until after the election. Richard Nixon tried to sabotage our democracy by killing LBJ’s peace negotiations with Vietnam and followed-up with burglaries and cover-ups when he thought Democrats were onto him. He was forced to resign. George W. Bush and the GOP stopped the counting of votes in Florida and handed the presidency to themselves. That assault has scarred our politics for decades. 

But never — not once in 250 years — has a president openly declared that he will strip states of their constitutional right to run elections, end mail-in voting, and ban voting machines altogether. This is unprecedented, authoritarian, and it must be stopped.

It’s also just one in a broad spectrum of attacks Republicans have launched against your right to vote, with the SAVE Act — which will prevent women from voting if their birth certificate and drivers’ license have different names on them and they’ve never had an official change-of-name in the courts — teed up in the US Senate. All while millions are being purged from the voting rolls as you read these words.

This is the moment when the American people must decide whether they still believe in democracy. If we shrug, if we accept this as just more noise from a corrupt and broken con man, we will lose it. If we wait for someone else to act, we will lose it. If we tell ourselves the courts will save us, we may be bitterly disappointed. 

The survival of democracy has never been guaranteed. It has always required vigilance, courage, and action. Now it requires all three from each of us.

Trump’s promised executive order is not just a legal maneuver. It’s a declaration of war against the American people. It’s the dream of every tyrant: to control who votes and who does not, to dictate the rules of elections so that the outcome is predetermined. 

What Putin and Trump are proposing is not democracy. It’s not freedom. It’s not America.

And the Republicans who are enabling this treachery are as guilty as Trump himself. They’re betraying their oaths, their constituents, and our country. History will remember them not as conservatives or patriots, but as the gravediggers of our Republic.

This is the line. This is the moment. We cannot let Trump and his cronies bulldoze democracy into the ground at Putin’s command. Every patriot, every progressive, every independent, every honest conservative who still believes in the Constitution must join together and say no. 

No to dictatorship. No to disenfranchisement. No to treason.

If we fail now, there may not be another chance.

Categories Democracy, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Fraud, Trump

Heather Cox Richardson: Trump Goes Off the Rails

By dianeravitch
August 19, 2025 //
5

Trump has a fragile ego in need of constant stroking. When he doesn’t get enough, he praises himself. Two posts appeared overnight that I recommend. One, by the esteemed Heather Cox Richardson, is posted here. The other, by Robert Hubbell, is well worth reading.

Heather Cox Richardson reviews yesterday’s bizarre summit at the White House, where European leaders tried to convince Trump to support a ceasefire in Ukraine. Trump favored a ceasefire until he met with Putin last Friday, then dropped the idea. Strangest of all, Trump abruptly left the meeting to have a 40-minute conversation with Putin. Our allies had no choice but to stand by until Trump finished his private chat with the Russian tyrant. Was he calling for instructions?

Someday historians might be able to explain Trump’s bizarre reliance on Putin.

She writes:

This morning, J.D. Wolf of Meidas News pulled together all of Trump’s self-congratulatory posts from Sunday morning, when the president evidently was boosting his ego after Friday’s disastrous meeting with Russia’s president Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Trump shared an AI-generated meme of himself with a large male lion standing next to him and the words “Peace through Strength. Anyone can make war, but only most courageous [sic] can make peace.” He posted memes claiming he is the “best president…in American history” and the “G[reatest] O[f] A[ll] T[ime], a “legend.”

Trump also reposted material from two QAnon-related accounts and pushed the QAnon belief that the Democratic Party is “the party of hate, evil, and Satan.” Trump has faced a rebellion among his QAnon supporters as he and administration officials have refused to release information from the federal investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and have moved Epstein’s associate Ghislaine Maxwell, convicted of sex trafficking children, to a minimum-security prison camp and given her work-release privileges. It appears he’s working to make QAnon supporters forget that he was named in those files and to lure them back to his support.

For their part, Russia Today trolled Trump’s “peace through strength” boast this morning by posting a video of an armored vehicle first going slowly on a road and then dramatically speeding up. The vehicle was flying both Russian and U.S. flags.

Trump’s social media account this morning posted a long screed saying the president is “going to lead a movement to get rid of” mail-in ballots and voting machines, and lying that the U.S. is the only country that uses mail-in voting because it is rife with fraud. As usual, the post claimed that Democrats “CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE” and claimed they “are virtually Unelectable without using this completely disproven Mail-In SCAM.” The post said he would sign an executive order “to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections.”

Then the post claimed that “the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do.”

This is bonkers across the board. Dozens of countries use mail-in voting, and there is zero evidence of widespread voter fraud in the U.S. Just today, news broke that right-wing channel Newsmax will pay $67 million to Dominion Voting Systems for spreading false claims that the company’s voting technology had been rigged to give the 2020 presidential election to Democrat Joe Biden.

Combining that sum with the $787 million Fox News paid for spreading the same lies means, as Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) wrote today, that media entities have paid out nearly $900 million “for publishing lies about the 2020 presidential election. Yet Donald Trump, who lost by more than seven million votes, keeps repeating the Big Lie and makes it compulsory dogma for his employees.”

Certainly, if Democratic leaders were so unelectable, the Republicans would not go to such lengths to rig district voting maps and keep Democratic voters from the polls. Indeed, while voter fraud is vanishingly rare, the Republicans are using the specter of it to engage in election fraud: manipulating the mechanics of an election to favor one side over another.

This manipulation is happening dramatically right now in Texas, where Trump pressured Governor Greg Abbott to redistrict the state in a highly unusual mid-decade map change in order to set Republicans up to gain five more seats in Congress in the next election. Abbott dutifully called a special session of the legislature to change the maps. Texas Democrats tried to stop the redistricting by leaving the state to deprive the Republicans of a quorum, that is, the minimum number of lawmakers necessary to conduct business. They stayed away until the special session expired. Abbott immediately called another one.

Today, with it clear Abbott would simply call special sessions until they returned, the Democratic legislators went back to Texas fifteen days after they left. “We killed the corrupt special session, withstood unprecedented surveillance and intimidation, and rallied Democrats nationwide to join this existential fight for fair representation—reshaping the entire 2026 landscape,” said the leader of the Texas House Democrats Gene Wu, acknowledging the protests across Texas at the legislative steal. “We’re returning to Texas more dangerous to Republicans’ plans than when we left. Our return allows us to build the legal record necessary to defeat this racist map in court, take our message to communities across the state and country, and inspire legislators across the country how to fight these undemocratic redistricting schemes in their own statehouses.”

Finally, the U.S. Constitution is very clear that no president has the power to dictate election rules. The framers were determined to prevent that power from falling into the hands of a potential dictator and so gave it to the states and Congress, establishing that “[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”

These obvious lies make it seem crystal clear that Trump and his loyalists are preparing to reject any election results that they don’t like.

Trump’s panic about facing voters is increasingly evident. His job approval ratings are already abysmal, and the fallout from his tariffs and deportations is only now beginning to show. Last Thursday, a report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that the Producer Price Index—wholesale costs that will likely show up later in consumer costs—jumped 0.9% in July, the largest jump since June 2022, when the U.S. was mired in post-pandemic inflation. The wholesale price of vegetables jumped 38.9% in July.

On Friday, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that the budget reconciliation bill (called by Republicans the OBBBA, for “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act”) that adds $3.4 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade will trigger cuts of up to $491 billion in Medicare (not a typo) from 2027 to 2034 in addition to its cuts of almost a trillion dollars to Medicaid over the next ten years. The 2010 Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act (S-PAYGO) automatically triggers cuts to government programs if the budget deficit increases as it is expected to under the new law, and Medicare spending would be on the chopping block.

Although Democrats called attention to this threat to Medicare during debates over the measure, Republicans promised their cuts to Medicaid would target only “waste, fraud, and abuse” and promised they would not touch Medicare.

Today Marty Schladen of the Ohio Capital Journal showed what those cuts actually look like in one state. Schladen reported that the cuts to Medicaid will take insurance from 310,000 people. Schladen also noted that the law ended the “enhanced premium tax credit” that made health insurance purchased on the Affordable Care Act’s insurance markets more affordable for those who make between 100% and 400% of federal poverty guidelines. More than 530,000 people in Ohio have benefited from the program. Their premiums will go up dramatically when it expires at the end of this year, and experts warn that more than 100,000 healthier people will drop their coverage. That loss, in turn, will drive up costs for those remaining in the market.

Scott Horsley of NPR reported on Saturday that electricity prices in the country have “jumped more than twice as fast as the overall cost of living in the last year.” Prices are going up as producers export liquid natural gas and as data centers swallow energy to fuel the AI boom.

Elected on his promises to lower prices, Trump is in trouble with those who believed those promises. Today, former Ohio senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, formally announced his candidacy for the Senate seat vacated when J.D. Vance became vice president. Brown noted that in Ohio, which has a population of about 12 million people, “half a million are going to lose their [health] insurance. These are mostly working families that are working for an employer that doesn’t provide insurance, or they’re kids, or they’re seniors, or they’re disabled people. Those are the people who are losing their health insurance. People didn’t vote for that. They didn’t vote for drug prices to go up. They didn’t vote for higher grocery bills. They didn’t vote for veterans’ benefits being slashed. They didn’t vote for any of this.”

On Thursday, the Pew Research Center reported that only 38% of Americans approve of Trump’s job performance, with 61% disapproving of it.

And then there is the increasing evidence that Trump is unable to manage the presidency. Today Trump met with Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, French president Emmanuel Macron, Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni, German chancellor Friedrich Merz, NATO secretary general Mark Rutte, United Kingdom prime minister Keir Starmer, and Finnish president Alexander Stubb. That so many foreign leaders dropped everything to rush to Washington, D.C., after Trump’s meeting with Putin on Friday indicated their alarm. The leaders reiterated that Putin started the war and could stop it at any time, and pressed Trump to back a ceasefire.

At today’s meetings, Trump repeated Russian talking points, complained about how poorly he is treated, said he had ended six wars, insisted that voting in the U.S. is full of fraud, and suggested he would cancel the 2028 elections. By the late afternoon, the president was unable to recognize President Stubb, who was sitting directly across the table from him. “President Stubb of Finland,” Trump said. Looking around, Trump continued: “And he’s uh, he’s somebody that, where are we here? Huh? Where? Where?” Stubb said, “I’m right here.” Trump focused on him and answered: “Oh. You look better than I’ve ever seen you look.”

This evening, CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes reported that Trump paused his negotiation with European leaders to call Vladimir Putin. Her source said that European leaders were not present for the conversation. Ivan Nechepurenko of the New York Times reported that the call was forty minutes long.

Categories Elections, Extremism, Failure, International, Trump
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »