Sunday, September 15, 2024

The Long-Term Effects of Covid, iPhones, Games and Social Media on Students/Children


I promised that I would share some of the responses to my invitation to teachers to share their observations about the lingering effects of the Covid years. I haven’t heard from a lot of teachers which is hardly a surprise during this energy- and time-consuming start up period in the school year. I know I would get a better yield by contacting specific teachers, but I’d rather not impose on anyone right now.

Marcus was one of the early teachers in our charter school, stretching way back to 1999. I’m delighted to know that he’s still at it. Here’s his response:

"I’m curious if you have done a piece on effects of smart phones and games/social media. I’m sure there are issues from covid but the issues from smart phones and devices I believe are exponentially bigger. Our school just implemented a no phone policy where kids have to store their phones in pouches all day (minus lunch) and so far, it’s been amazingly successful. Kids are once again talking to each other. Laughing with each other. Playing with each other and not just glued to a screen. The irony doesn’t escape me as I send this glued to a screen. I worry at times that effects of Covid can be a cover up for the effects of cellphone and devices. I even have a working theory that major league baseball batting averages are at an all-time low due to cellphone gaming and social media with the players."

No one can contest Marcus’s contention that smart phones and devices have had a profound impact on students – academically, socially and emotionally – and that perhaps some of what’s blamed on Covid is actually caused by those infernal but invaluable machines. I would say in response that it’s not either/or but both/and, particularly as you move up the age ladder. You can’t blame the phones on what we’re seeing in the early grades because the kids who were 2 or 3 hadn’t been exposed to them yet, for the most part.

I can’t resist commenting on Marcus’ baseball connection. I look at those statistics pretty regularly and have been puzzled by the fact that only 3 National League players are batting over .300. Purists will cite the proliferation of 100 mph fastballs, but who’s to say that locker room time on devices might be the cause.

Devorah is a dear friend.  She’s not a teacher, but she’s one of the most astute observers of kids that I know:

"You probably read or heard about Anya Kamenetz’s book 'The Stolen Year' about students and COVID—it is a good one on this topic. I think the effects on teachers are also worth thinking about—so many left the profession. And the missing on-boarding times for important 'extra' things—Harold (ed: her now high school-age son) missed 6th grade which is when many kids start an instrument at school. The high school band teacher told me they are still way down in their numbers.

"The richest people kept their kids in sports and music lessons but everyone else got totally screwed. And the decline in school enrollment with people who never went back is going to reverberate for years…. I will say, one of the most impressive things about Harold’s HS orientation was the art and band leaders making their plea to give it a try and 'it’s not too late.' As someone starting banjo lessons at 49, it is funny to hear that 14-year-olds think it is “too late” for anything, but the reality is many budding musicians and athletes are well on their way by then."

There are a number of interesting points in Devorah’s message. First, the delayed effect of the missed sixth grade start of musical instrument instruction is such a perfect example of the kind of land mines laid down by Covid that only make themselves known later, in this case in high school band programs. And who knows what effects will become evident even later, in the adult years.

Devorah also touches on another potentially cataclysmic event resulting from some students’ Covid school experience. The online learning without any direct human interaction didn’t work for many young people and led them to drop out of high school or college. There’s a lot of centrifugal force in such an action that propels you away from your original course. It’s not an easy trajectory to reverse. Talk about life-changing! The aggregated result of such action by significant numbers of people might surface decades from now in unaccountable data about education, employment, earnings, etc. Thank you, Devorah.

Finally, my former student Mari, who is now inspiring her own students at the University of Illinois, sent me a link to a story that appeared online at the New York Times.  Research shows that a phenomenon called cortical thinning accelerated dramatically, especially for girls, during Covid. Under normal circumstances this is a natural maturing process that, as I understand it, involves a realignment and consolidation of brain cells, but a rapid acceleration of the process – it was happening more than four times faster for girls than for boys – is associated with depression and anxiety.

One explanation for this discrepancy is that girls are much more dependent on their interactions with peers and those were severely curtailed during Covid. Many observers have noted the rise in depression and anxiety in young people, although, truth to tell, that process was already under way long before Covid. Here we need to acknowledge that Marcus’s point about the effects of screen time could be the real culprit here.

There are a lot of questions raised by this research, but the fact that there are measurable changes in brain structure that may be related to the Covid years opens many avenues of speculation about the hidden effects of that period that may surface in the distant future.

I’m still hoping to hear from teachers at all grade levels about what they’ve observed that may be attributable to experiences – or the lack thereof – during those dark years. And I don’t want to ignore one of Devorah’s other reminders to pay attention to the effects of those years on teachers themselves, including the many who left the profession as a result of the stress of that period. We need to hear more about that too.

PS. I have the book, "The Art of Screen Time," by Anya Kamenetz that Devorah recommended on order at the library. You might want to check it out too.

-Marv Hoffman


Thursday, September 12, 2024

Notes From a Phony Campaign: Catfight in Philly by Jeffrey St. Clair

 


“When a politician is in opposition, he is an expert on the means to some end, and when he is in office, he is an expert on the obstacles to it.”

– G.K. Chesterton

+ The title of this column comes from Jean-Paul Sartre’s diary of the first eight months of World War II, when he was stationed in Alsace, working as a meteorologist, watching weather balloons and recording barometric pressure, while waiting for something, anything, profound to happen.

+ So Harris pretty effectively rebutted GOP accusations that she’s a communist, Marxist, socialist, pacifist, progressive, environmentalist, civil libertarian, or humanist.

+ With Harris, it sounds like we will get Cheney’s foreign policy, AIPAC’s Middle East policy, Goldman Sachs’ economic policy, and Exxon’s climate policy.

+ Fires are burning down towns and resorts in California, Texas is running out of water, and a hurricane is bearing down on Louisiana once again. Yet, neither candidate advanced a position on climate change last night that went much beyond drill, drill, drill and frack, frack, frack…

+ Harris is fighting climate change by, checks notes, expanding fracking, boosting oil and gas production and building new factories!

+ Can’t we all now agree that the Democrats are objectively worse than the Republicans on climate change? The Republicans don’t believe in climate change and do nothing about it. The Democrats say they believe in climate change and still do nothing about it.

+ Move along, nothing to see here…

+ Harris’s emphasis on home ownership–instead of the cost of housing—appeals to a generation that no longer exists and is just as nostalgic as any backward-looking fantasy being peddled by Trump. Most young people have no interest in getting a 30-year mortgage. They want an affordable place to live while they spend 30 years paying off their student loans before being buried under medical debt in their 60s.

+ Harris put more distance between herself and Biden than Trump did with JD Vance, but all in the wrong direction, such as trimming Biden’s proposed tax on capital gains from 40% to 28%–an indication that FTC Chair Lina Khan should be putting feelers out for a new job.

+ A week after a school shooting in Georgia and a freeway shooting in Kentucky, Harris answered a question on gun control this way: “Both Tim and I own guns.”

+ This was basically the same Trump we saw against Biden, where the polls showed Trump winning 67-33. This debate’s polls show Harris–who was scripted & robotic–winning by something like 66-34–which shows you what merely being coherent, audible & not having moments of drooling aphasia can do for a candidate…

+ It’s evident that Harris could have won this debate just as decisively without the full spectrum of rightwing positions she’s adopted during the campaign, which suggests she will try to implement them if she’s elected.

+ Listening to Kenneth Branaugh’s terrific reading of Heart of Darkness on my morning walk (in a glorious rain today), I was struck by a Conradian phrase (there are so many memorable ones) that serves as a pretty good description of Trump when exposed: “a papier-mache Mephistopheles.”

+ Hot new MAGA conspiracy: Harris’s earrings were actually earbuds transmitting answers from HRC and Michelle Obama.

+ Hot new MAGA conspiracy 2: Harris’s earrings were a trap to get MAGA activists to speculate that Harris’s earrings were earphones.

+ It’s true that ABC’s moderators fact-checked Trump’s statements three times and let Harris spew falsehoods without correction. To compensate, they allowed Trump to blather on for six minutes more than Harris, though given what he had to say, this probably worked against him. In fact, at the next debate, Trump might want to have his mic muted for the entire 90 minutes.

+ On Thursday morning, the Springfield, Ohio City Hall, which had shot down JD Vance’s racist fantasies about Haitians pet-knapping dogs, cats and geese for food, had to be evacuated after getting a bomb threat. Alexander Cockburn often got terribly incensed about meddlesome “fact checkers,” but never called in a bomb threat to The Nation or LA Times, as far as I know…

+ Haiti will never be forgiven for its revolution, and 220 years later, its people are still being starved, immiserated, invaded, occupied, demeaned, and dehumanized…

+ As the anti-immigrant conspiracy theories inflamed by Trump, Vance and Elon Musk spread, many Haitians in Springfield, Ohio, are keeping their children home and reporting vandalism to their homes and property.

+ Aiden Clark’s father urged these MAGA creeps, led by creepoid-in-chief JD Vance, to stop using his son to further their rancid political views.

Aidan Simardone: “Eating cats is not part of Haitian voodoo. The real reason voodoo is demonized is because voodoo rituals were used by Haitian slaves to plan the first-ever successful slave rebellion. White supremacist then made the word ‘voodoo’ synonymous with ‘evil.’”

+ Here’s a bigoted blast from Trump “influencer” Laura Loomer, who flew to Philadelphia with the former President and his entourage. Loomer apparently isn’t a fan of Tikka Masala…

+ I bet Usha Vance can’t wait to share a flight with Loomer…

+ Childless Cat Lady Taylor Swift quickly eclipsed a dull debate by Tweeting out her endorsement of Harris to her 280 million followers.

+ Her Tweet should have come with a trigger warning since it set off deeply buried anxieties, especially among Trump incels and women like Megyn Kelly, who, try as she might, still can’t manage to squirm her way back into Trump’s favor…

+ Meanwhile, Jeanine Pirro on Fox’s The Five told Swift she should shut up and sing…

+ Then there was Elon Musk’s depraved stalker Tweet: “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.”

+ In his new coffee table book, Save America, Trump includes ten pages of photos with Kim Jong-un, suggests Canada’s Justin Trudeau is Fidel Castro’s secret love child and claims that Mark Zuckerberg will “spend the rest of his life in prison” if he “does anything illegal.”

+ Et tu, Matt?

+ “The GOP will track our menstrual cycles, so we don’t have to.”

+ Sure, Bernie. Dick Cheney believes so firmly in the US’s “democratic foundations” that he helped steal the 2000 election, lied the country into a war and trashed the most basic Constitutional rights for eight years.

+ After the debate, former Attorney General and torture legalizer Alberto Gonzales threw his backing behind Harris, writing in Politico:  “I can’t sit quietly as Donald Trump — perhaps the most serious threat to the rule of law in a generation — eyes a return to the White House.” Too bad Rumsfeld isn’t alive to rejoin the old gang. Perhaps the Harris campaign can Ouija Board an endorsement from him. Does anyone know which Circle of Hell he’s been assigned to?

+ Of course, Obama’s imprimatur is scarcely an upgrade.

+ Not only did Obama indemnify the post-911 criminals of the Bush administration for lying the US into a war and committing heinous crimes against humanity in the process, he actually extended their crimes by using drones in the extra-judicial assassination of American citizens.

+ Harris won the debate. However, there’s little evidence that winning a debate against Trump means much to the electorate. If you read the transcript of the Biden debate, Trump’s answers were filled with lies and nonsense. They received almost no attention. People know he’s a hybrid of a WWE character and the world’s most obnoxious used car salesman & at least 45% of the country doesn’t care.

+ The one thing Harris could have done was use the debate to condemn the killing of Americans (if she can’t bring herself to condemn the killing of Palestinians) by Israeli forces and announce her support for an arms embargo. This is, of course, the one thing she would never risk doing (and didn’t).

+ 40 years of neoliberalism has demonstrated that the answer to our current political crisis certainly isn’t for activists to continue compromising with the likes of Dick Cheney and Jamie Dimon on genocide, police brutality, austerity or the climate crisis. We know what compromising liberals have given us: Serbian war, don’t ask, don’t tell, welfare destruction, NAFTA, Iraq war, torture, Deepwater Horizon, Wall Street bailouts, Libyan war, assassination by drone, Trump, record oil production in the US, and genocide…

+ Chicago Calling…

Jeffrey St. Clair is editor of CounterPunch. His most recent book is An Orgy of Thieves: Neoliberalism and Its Discontents (with Alexander Cockburn). He can be reached at: sitka@comcast.net or on Twitter @JeffreyStClair3

 


"I'm a loser, and I'm not what I appear to be" -McCartney & Lennon

 


Fallout from the presidential debate between Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and Republican nominee former president Donald Trump has shown Harris solidifying her dominant position. Trump increasingly looks as if the anger he has been displaying is a way to hide the fear that he is losing control. 

After debates, surrogates for a nominee talk to journalists in what’s known as a “spin room,” where they try to spin the event in favor of their candidate. John Bowden of The Independent described his time in last night’s spin room as “the strangest moments of my political career.” As usual, Republican surrogates immediately attacked the moderators for fact-checking the debate.

But it was clear, Bowden wrote, that the campaign officials were panicking. Even Fox News Channel reporters said that Trump had performed badly, and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called the debate a “disaster.” But MAGA Republicans, whom Trump has elevated far beyond any position they could achieve without him, were lashing out on his behalf. 

Republican vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance attacked the moderators and doubled down on the lie that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating their neighbors’ pets, despite statements from Springfield police and the town manager that there is no evidence for such a statement. Anti-immigrant Trump advisor Stephen Miller melted down when Hispanic reporter José María Del Pino asked him where he got his figures saying that crime in Venezuela had dropped dramatically. 

The Trump campaign had told reporters that Vance would be the top surrogate for the evening, but after the debate, Trump himself appeared in the spin room to override his surrogates’ attempts to blame his performance on the moderators and instead assure reporters that he had won the debate. 

It is highly unusual for a candidate to go to the spin room in person, and his appearance demonstrated that Trump was aware that he was in trouble. Reporters seemed to agree: “If you won tonight, why are you here?” one can be heard saying to him. “Why not let the performance speak for itself?”

“Trump has come in the spin room and he is desperately trying to get the attention that I think he needs as oxygen at this point,” an MSNBC reporter told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. “Is he literally standing there like he’s his own surrogate trying to get people to talk to him about his own performance?” Maddow asked. “Wow. That’s something. That is not a sign of strength or confidence in your own performance when you’re trying to extend past the final bell….” 

Answering questions did not appear to help him. When asked once again to answer whether he would veto a national abortion bill, he answered: “It was a perfect answer on abortion, and I’ve done a great job on that, and I’ve brought our country together.” And then he walked out.

All day, he posted and reposted statements that he had won the debate—including a message of support from former Tenet Media commentator Benny Johnson, whose paycheck was paid by Russia—but it was hard to miss that Trump’s performance was historically bad. Sarah Longwell of The Bulwark, who studies focus groups, said that “[a]cross the board,’ a “focus group of swing voters from swing states” thought Harris won the debate. 

Longtime Republican pollster Frank Luntz went on record saying that Trump’s debate performance would cost him the presidential race. The Harris campaign’s ongoing trolling of Trump was perhaps even harsher: it posted the entire hour and forty-minute debate as a campaign ad.

Meanwhile, by 2:00 this afternoon, Taylor Swift’s endorsement had prompted 337,826 people to start the process of registering to vote. 

All day today, reporters fact checked Trump’s statements, proving them lies. But lies have never damaged him; they reinforce his dominance by forcing subordinates to agree that the person in charge gets to determine what reality is. Victims must surrender either their integrity or their ownership of their own perceptions; in either case, once they have agreed to a deliberate lie, it becomes harder to challenge later ones since that means acknowledging the other times they caved.

That’s why the lie about the size of the crowd at Trump’s inauguration is so important: it is the foundational lie on which all the others stand. Harris, who spent her legal career dealing with criminals and abusers who depend on this technique, knew exactly how to undermine it. She made fun of it, making his “obsession with crowd sizes” a national joke. The jokes set him off not only because he cannot bear to be laughed at, but also because challenging that lie challenges all the others. 

Following Harris’s lead, posters on social media turned to memes today, setting Trump’s assertion that “they’re eating the cats,” to Vince Guaraldi’s theme “Linus and Lucy” from the Peanuts movies, for example, and designing the same statement as a Dr. Seuss book, as well as posting pictures of live pets wrapped in bread and rolls. 

Observers correctly noted that the racist trope of immigrants eating pets dehumanizes marginalized people who are already vulnerable, putting them in danger. While posters and media have repeatedly pointed out that the Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are there legally and have revitalized the city, making fun of those sharing such a stupid lie has a different kind of potential to defang it.  

And, aside from Trump’s evident worry, there are signs that Trump is vulnerable. House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) had scheduled a vote today on the continuing resolution to fund the government before the government will have to shut down on October 1. That measure included the voter suppression measure Trump demanded yesterday in all caps. Today, Johnson pulled the vote. 

Republicans are also breaking with Trump over the idea of an interest rate cut. Trump does not want the Fed to lower the cost of borrowing money before the election despite the softening job market—cheaper money should bolster the economy and provide more jobs—and has vowed that if he is reelected, he will take control of the Fed, which is now an independent institution. 

But Republicans are backing away from his demands. Representative Dan Meuser, a Trump supporter from the swing state of Pennsylvania, told Jasper Goodman and Eleanor Mueller of Politico that he supports a cut. “You’ve got to put the greater good ahead of looking political,” he said. 

Today the share price of Trump Media & Technology Group (DJT), the owner of the Truth Social platform, fell to new lows. The stock fell more than 10% today, ending the day at $16.68 from a high over $60 a share in April. In May, Trump’s stock was valued at more than $6 billion, although the company is losing money and has very few users. 

The drop over the last several months has wiped away more than $4 billion of that value. Trump needs money for his legal bills and settlements, as well as his businesses, and can begin to cash out on his stock soon, but selling much of it was always going to be a problem because if he dumped it, the bottom would fall out. Now selling is a problem because its value is dropping. 

In the face of concern that Trump and Vance have been suggesting they would challenge the results of the 2024 election, the Department of Homeland Security took steps to protect the January 6, 2025, session of Congress that will count the electoral votes that will decide the presidency. They have put January 6, 2025, on the same security level as the Super Bowl or a major event like the U.N. General Assembly. 


Finally, yesterday was the 23rd anniversary of 9/11, the day terrorists from the al-Qaeda network used four civilian airplanes as weapons against the United States, and Trump used its commemoration to demonstrate another dominance trait: that he will behave however he wishes. Trump attended a remembrance with right-wing extremist Laura Loomer, who has shared not only the false pet-eating conspiracy theory, but also the false theory that “9/11 was an Inside Job!” 

Recently, she posted an appalling attack on Vice President Harris. Today she posted that she joined Trump because “I believe in unconditional loyalty to those who are deserving. And there is nobody more deserving of our loyalty and unwavering support than Donald Trump."

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris each issued statements about the anniversary. Biden vowed that the nation will never forget the attack, those lost, their families, and “the heroic citizens and survivors who rushed to help their fellow Americans. And never forget that when faced with evil—and an enemy that sought to tear us apart—we endured.”

Harris echoed Biden. She also emphasized the national unity the crisis created as people came together to deny the terrorists the achievement of their goal “to attack and destroy our way of life—our democracy, our freedoms, and everything we hold dear as Americans.” She thanked the military personnel who served in Afghanistan and elsewhere to root out terrorism, and urged Americans to “reflect on what binds us together as one: the greatest privilege on Earth, the pride and privilege of being an American.” 

All three were at a commemoration of 9/11. Trump and Harris shook hands, and he tried the dominance trick of using the handshake to pull Harris toward him, which she firmly resisted. His social media website confirmed that the world of professional wrestling is very much on Trump’s mind as he apparently tried to reassure himself he, and not Kamala Harris, is the dominant political figure in the country. He clearly doesn’t want to agree to another debate and is trying to spin his reluctance as a show of power. 

“In the World of Boxing or U[ltimate] F[ighting] C[hampionship] when a Fighter gets beaten or knocked out, they get up and scream, ‘I DEMAND A REMATCH, I DEMAND A REMATCH!’” he wrote. “Well, it’s no different with a Debate. She was beaten badly last night. Every Poll has us WINNING, in one case, 92–8, so why would I do a Rematch?”

—Heather Cox Richardson

Notes:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/abc-trump-kamala-debate-reactions-b2610662.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-republicans-vote-trump-backed-plan-avoid-shutdown-defections-rcna170592

https://www.thedailybeast.com/longtime-gop-pollster-frank-luntz-says-trumps-campaign-is-over-after-bad-debate

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/11/republicans-defy-trump-fed-rate-cut-00178758

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/11/congress-election-certification-protection-riot-00178809

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/29/business/trump-truth-social-stock/index.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/11/us/politics/trump-media-stock-truth-social-debate.html

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/kamala-harris-donald-trump-shake-hands-911-anniversary/story?id=113583540

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-911-laura-loomer-conspiracy-theorist-rcna170743

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/09/11/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-the-anniversary-of-september-11/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/09/11/statement-by-vice-president-kamala-harris-on-the-anniversary-of-september-11/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/over-300000-people-visit-taylor-swift-link-register-vote-rcna170740

X:

andyfknight/status/1833755141167632864

cwebbonline/status/1833732464059302258

Acyn/status/1833699867207905311

Timodc/status/1833703484853465194

NoahGarfinkel/status/1833708370974695574

SarahLongwell25/status/1833868942344941630

josemdelpino/status/1833910213096722479

kamalahq/status/1833905765981003784

NickKnudsenUS/status/1833975949475631590/photo/1

highbrow_nobrow/status/1833828542905295049

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), Truth Social, September 11, 2024, at 12:01 PM.

 

Wednesday, September 11, 2024

Ebullient and Somber

 


Emotions today, September 11, 2024, run the gamut from the joy at the remarkable experience of watching Kamala Harris mop the floor with Donald Trump in the debate last night to the horrific sadness of yet another commemoration of the 9/11 anniversary, 23 years later.

Today should be a day of national remembrance and public service. Instead, democracy is fighting for its life. It feels theatrical to write those words, but that doesn't change the fact that they are true. We saw it on full display in the debate last night.

Greg Sargent, who often hits these things dead on the nose, had an observation about the ridiculous "Haitian immigrants eating cats" nonsense that Donald Trump has been peddling and repeated last night and that JD Vance doubled down on in a post-debate interview.

It's not just that the Haitian story is ridiculous. It's not just that it’s a lie. It is both of those things, but it is more than that; it is also dangerous. Dehumanizing people is what makes inhuman treatment of them possible. It’s how you justify the family separation policy that ripped children from their parents, some of them so young that reunification is still elusive more than five years later.

In extreme cases, dehumanization is a path towards genocide, the way the Nazis called Jews in Germany vermin and claimed that they spread disease and used the blood of non-Jewish children in rituals as prelude to the Holocaust. 

Trump is using similar language as a prelude to the proposed mass deportations of migrants that both he and Project 2025 (which he claimed last night he’d never read) call for. Trump and Vance are setting up a society where atrocities against other human beings can be justified by dehumanizing them first.

That cannot be the legacy of our country post-9/11. Democracy is too important to fall prey to that. We are not the country of Donald Trump’s cult. Last night, Kamala Harris reminded us of who we are and who Trump is, reducing him to a cartoonish figure, the rumored portrayal of him in the “Back to the Future” movies.

Sunday night, in The Week Ahead edition of the newsletter, we talked about what Vice President Harris needed to accomplish in the debate. Many of us agreed the key was reassuring undecided voters that whether they agreed with her on all of the issues or not, there would be room for them in an America led by Kamala Harris, that they would be welcome. Harris did exactly that, repeatedly committing to be a president who would care about everyone. Kamala Harris for the people:

“Honestly, I think it’s a tragedy that we have someone who wants to be president who has consistently, over the course of his career, attempted to use race to divide the American people. You know, I do believe that the vast majority of us know that we have so much more in common than what separates us, and we don’t want this kind of approach that is just constantly trying to divide us, and especially by race.”

That's the message. We have so much more in common.

Donald Trump may have the concept of a plan, but Kamala Harris is committed to the hard work of governing. You are going to hear him lie a lot tonight, Harris said in her opening statement. Trump proceeded to deliver on her promise.

We rarely, if ever, see reporting on what the Democratic base thinks about its candidates. We've seen plenty of reporting on what Trump’s base thinks about Trump. Endless focus groups of voters who are devoted to Trump, or who turned to Trump after being Obama voters, or who voted for him once and are deciding whether to do it again. People at Trump rallies. 

But I can’t remember the last time I saw a focus group of voters for Kamala on the news, talking about why they were committed to her. Last night in our Civil Discourse debate chat room I saw it, though.

I saw the power in a room full of dedicated, unapologetic, Democratic voters, a room united behind the purpose of electing Kamala Harris and restoring democracy. It made me wonder why we don’t see that kind of reporting in the media. 

Your comments last night were wise and witty, sometimes marked by frustration over the unfair advantage Trump was given in interrupting Harris and bogarting speaking time, while recognizing he repeatedly skewered himself when given that advantage. You were excited about the possibilities but also pragmatic and practical about what is necessary for a democratic victory. You lifted me up.

Did the debate make a difference in the coming election? That was what I was looking for. For the most part, it’s likely that Trump voters and Harris voters stay confirmed in their beliefs. It’s possible some voters may shift having seen Harris’ strengths and Trump’s weaknesses on display. There was one particular moment in the debate that may have shifted some votes in Harris’ favor.

Trump droned on about how wars, the ones in Ukraine and Israel, would've never happened on his watch. Harris turned to him and said that if he had been president, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv looking towards Poland next. It’s a powerful moment and worth watching the clip.

Then, Harris closed. She made the point that in Pennsylvania (a, if not the, key swing state), there are 800,000 Polish American voters. Might they be more inclined to choose Harris after that if they were previously undecided? It was a compelling moment.

Thanks to all of you who joined the Civil Discourse live stream debate chat last night. It was crazy and fast moving, and I'm not sure I would've made it through the tense first minutes of the debate without you all. I loved reading your comments and having the opportunity to share our takes on the debate in real time. I’m tremendously proud of the Civil Discourse community.

Were in this together,

Joyce Vance

 


The Most Satisfying Moment of the Harris-Trump Debate

 


It was about as close to perfect as Kamala Harris has come in a debate, and it was as close to self-parody as Donald Trump—who doesn’t comprehend parody—can manage. Harris repeatedly laid out the bait, and Trump couldn’t resist taking it, spiraling through rabbit warrens of gibberish about his crowd sizes and the Central Park Five and pet-eating migrants, all of which served to distract from whatever canned answers he had prepared. That mostly came later; first, before almost anything and after a slightly nervous start from Harris, whatever momentum Trump may have achieved was lost immediately when he attempted to answer an inevitable question about women and abortion. It ended there.

For over two years—since Roe v. Wade was reversed by a Supreme Court more interested in their feelings than your health care—women have waited for one crisp, cogent answer to the simple question: Who decides what happens to your body when you are pregnant? On Tuesday, Harris offered it flawlessly. It was a long time coming.

Indeed, one reason it felt like such a specific relief is because in the infamous June debate, President Joe Biden coughed up an excruciating rhetorical hairball when questioned about the fall of Roe: “I supported Roe v. Wade, which had three trimesters,” he temporized. “The first time is between a woman and a doctor. Second time is between the doctor and an extreme situation. And a third time is between the doctor—I mean, it’d be between the woman and the state.” On this he sort of did get something right—abortion, as constructed in Roe, is a physicians’ rights issue. But it was not a satisfying answer by any means for the women who have been living out the consequences of Dobbs in states around the country.

In Tuesday’s debate, by the third question of the evening, Trump was offered a chance to explain his prior incoherent evasions around which abortions will be deemed lawful and what kinds of abortion bans he would endorse. The moderator, ABC News anchor Linsey Davis, ended the inquiry with the simple question: “Why should women trust you?”

Trump responded as he now unerringly responds to this question: with a pair of lies. The first is the now-familiar lie that Democrats support aborting babies “in the ninth month” and also are in favor of “executing babies” after they are born. Even before allowing Harris to respond, Davis stopped that set of lies cold: “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born,” she said, before offering Harris a chance to respond more fully.

Harris was also tasked with responding to Trump’s second lie, which was subtler but stupider. Abortion has nothing to do with women, as he frames it, but with the “legal scholars” who get to decide what women need. Trump intoned his familiar pitch that “for 52 years they’ve been trying to get Roe v. Wade into the states,” and that “every legal scholar, every Democrat, every Republican, liberal, conservative, they all wanted this issue to be brought back to the states where the people could vote.” The word “woman” appeared nowhere in his answer, by the way, because in his imaginary construction of the problem, the imaginary “scholars” get to decide for the rest of us. (Well, the scholars and “the genius and heart and strength of six supreme court justices.”) In other words, Trump’s answer to why women should trust him was quite literally that “scholars” and the Supreme Court got to decide—and they sent it to the states to decide. So trust Trump!

Harris’ response highlighted who loses because their bodily autonomy was vaulted over “into the states” after Dobbs:

“In over 20 states there are Trump abortion bans which make it criminal for a doctor or nurse to provide health care. In one state it provides prison for life. Trump abortion bans that make no exception even for rape and incest. Which—understand what that means. A survivor of a crime, a violation to their body, does not have the right to make a decision about what happens to their body next. That is immoral. And one does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree: The government, and Donald Trump certainly, should not be telling a woman what to do with her body.”

Then she explained what Trump’s make-believe legal scholars and handpicked Supreme Court zealots never cared to understand:

“You want to talk about, this is what people wanted? Pregnant women who want to carry a pregnancy to term, suffering from a miscarriage, being denied care in an emergency room because the health care providers are afraid they might go to jail, and she’s bleeding out in a car in the parking lot? She didn’t want that. Her husband didn’t want that. A 12 or 13-year-old survivor of incest being forced to carry a pregnancy to term? They don’t want that. Understand in his Project 2025, there would be a national abortion—a monitor that would be monitoring your pregnancies, your miscarriages.”

Asked whether he would veto a national abortion ban, Trump would not answer. Asked why his running mate, J.D. Vance, said he would do so, Trump replied that he and Vance hadn’t discussed it. The vibe was that the matter is not even worthy of discussion between running mates; best left to the “scholars” and the “courageous” Supreme Court.

Harris’ rejoinder was to provide a still life in American women, post-Dobbs—a snapshot of the people whose lives have been disrupted and decimated by the former president and his handpicked Supreme Court justices who genuinely never cared about their dignity or autonomy:

“Nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion. That isn’t happening. It’s insulting to the women of America. And understand what has been happening under Donald Trump’s abortion bans. Couples who pray and dream of having a family are being denied IVF treatments. What is happening in our country, working people, working women who are working one or two jobs, who can barely afford childcare as it is, have to travel to another state, to get on a plane sitting next to strangers, to go and get the health care she needs. Barely can afford to do it. And what you are putting her through is unconscionable.”

And for millions of us, it was finally, oh my God, finally, the right answer, delivered cogently and passionately, without apology or triangulation. As Harris put it: “The majority of Americans believe in a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body. And that is why in every state where this issue has been on the ballot, in red and blue states both, the people of America have voted for freedom.”

There is a robust minority of American voters so infatuated with Donald Trump that his solipsism affords them great comfort: If Donald Trump says Haitian immigrants in Ohio feast on domestic pets, it must be true; if Donald Trump says there would not be a war in Ukraine today if he were president, it must be true; if Donald Trump says that every single American expert, Republican or Democrat, believes that your most intimate health care decisions should be voted in the state legislatures, it must be true. For them, Trump’s abortion answers must feel like soothing reminders that Big Daddy knows all the things and that Viktor Orbán has his back, if there’s any remaining doubt.

But for an awful lot of Americans, and the majority of American women, to be fobbed off with debunked falsehoods about executing live babies, then razzle-dazzled with claims that you shouldn’t make your own miscarriage care or fertility choices, because the “scholars” and the “courageous” justices wanted your state legislators to decide in your stead, is not something that soothes. It’s a tactic so thin as to signal contempt. It ends up feeling like Trump is saying: I had eight years to prepare for this debate question and all I could manage is that you are invisible to me.

-Dahlia Lithwick, Slate

 

Takeaways from the Presidential Debate

 


PHILADELPHIA, Sept 11 (Reuters) - Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump met on Tuesday for their first and perhaps only debate, a square-off that could have a significant impact on the Nov. 5 election as polls show a tight race.

Here are takeaways from the debate:

RILING HER RIVAL

Harris made a point to get under Trump's skin, as her campaign had forecast - and it worked.

She urged viewers to attend a Trump rally, where she said Trump would say bizarre things such as windmills cause cancer (something he has, in fact, said) and where, she taunted, attendees would leave out of exhaustion and boredom (something they have, in fact, done.)

Trump, who prides himself on the crowds he draws, was clearly riled.

"My rallies, we have the biggest rallies, the most incredible rallies in the history of politics," he said. He accused Harris of busing in attendees to her rallies.

Trump then falsely claimed that immigrants in the country illegally were killing and eating people's pets in the city of Springfield, Ohio, an unsubstantiated assertion that has circulated on social media and been amplified by Trump's vice presidential running mate JD Vance.

"In Springfield, they're eating the dogs! The people that came in, they're eating the cats!" Trump said. "They're eating the pets of the people that live there."

City officials in Springfield have said those reports are untrue, which the ABC moderators pointed out after Trump’s comments.

"Talk about extreme," Harris responded, laughing.

PLAYING DEFENSE

Another of Harris’ goals, as a former California prosecutor, was to call Trump out for his past actions, particularly his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

An hour into the debate, her strategy appeared to be paying off. Trump was continually on the defensive.

Asked about the Jan. 6, 2021, siege of the U.S. Capitol, he insisted he “had nothing to do with that, other than they asked me to make a speech." He also maintained, falsely, that he had won the 2020 election.

Harris used Trump's actions as an argument for the country to turn the page, which she would do throughout the evening.

"Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people, so let's be clear about that, and clearly he is having a very difficult time processing that, but we cannot afford to have a president of the United States who attempts as he did in the past to upend the will of the voters in a free and fair election,” Harris said.

The vice president dug at Trump a little more, saying world leaders were “laughing” at him and calling him a disgrace – language that Trump has employed himself at rallies in reference to how he says other countries view President Joe Biden.

A few minutes later, Trump erupted, claiming Harris had received “no votes” in claiming the Democratic nomination and suggesting she replaced Biden as part of some sort of coup.

“He hates her,” Trump said of Biden. “He can’t stand her.”

The exchanges may have aided Harris' argument that Trump, as she put it, lacks the “temperament” to be president.

'WEAPONIZED' JUSTICE

Trump and Harris accused each other of conspiring to "weaponize" the Justice Department in a bid to go after their enemies.

Trump said the indictments he faces for conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss and for his mishandling of classified documents - as well as his conviction for forging documents related to hush money payments to a porn star - are all the result of a conspiracy cooked up by Harris and Biden. There is no evidence for that assertion.

Harris shot back by pointing out that Trump has promised to prosecute his enemies if he wins a second term.

"Understand this is someone who has openly said he would terminate, I'm quoting, terminate the Constitution," Harris said.

The heated exchange underlined how Harris and Trump see the stakes of this election as existential. Both claimed their opponent to be a threat to democracy itself.

RACIAL DIVIDE

Deep into the debate, the long-simmering topic of race came up. Trump was asked why he had publicly questioned Harris’ dual heritage as a Black and South Asian woman.

“I don’t care what she is,” he responded. “I read that she was Black. Then I read that she was not Black.”

Asked to respond, Harris accused Trump of using race to divide Americans throughout his career. She cited how he and his father turned away Black renters in the 1970s and how Trump led the public outcry against five young Black and Latino men who were wrongly convicted of assaulting a jogger in New York City's Central Park in 1989.

He also has openly questioned whether President Barack Obama, who was born in the United States, was an American citizen, Harris noted.

"I think it's a tragedy that we have someone who wants to be president who has, consistently, over the course of his career, attempted to use race to divide the American people," she said.

"I think the American people want better than that," Harris added. "We don't want a leader who is constantly trying to have Americans point their fingers at each other."

Instead of trying to defend his record, Trump pivoted back to the economy and sought to pin Biden’s economic policies on Harris. “She’s trying to get away from Biden,” he said.

HANDSHAKE

Heading into the debate, there was a question as to how Harris and Trump, who have never met, would greet each other.

Harris settled the issue, definitively. She walked over to Trump at his podium, extended her hand and introduced herself as “Kamala Harris.”

It was an assertive way to approach a man who has spent weeks insulting her with racist and sexist attacks. Trump had no choice but to accept the gesture.

SPARRING ON THE ECONOMY

In the debate’s opening minutes, Trump and Harris went to battle on one of the issues that is top of mind for voters: the economy.

Harris detailed the economic policies she has rolled out in recent weeks, which include a substantial tax credit for small start-ups. Trump focused his comments on tariffs, saying he would protect the American economy from unfair foreign competition.

While both sides got their jabs in, Harris got to speak first on a topic where she trails Trump in terms of voter trust. She appeared to force the former president onto his back foot, and Trump essentially played defense on one of his strongest issues.

"She doesn't have a plan," Trump said, after Harris' opening comments. "It's like Run, Spot, Run."

A SCHISM ON ABORTION

The two candidates also engaged in a fractious debate about abortion, an issue where polls show Harris has the upper hand.

Trump defended the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that ended constitutional protection for abortion and sent the issue back to individual states, arguing, incorrectly, that it was an outcome desired by both Republicans and Democrats. Democrats have long supported a constitutional right to abortion.

“I did a great service in doing it. It took courage to do it,” Trump said.

Trump contended that some states allow babies to be aborted after birth, a point corrected by ABC News moderator, Linsey Davis.

Harris flashed some outrage at Trump’s assertion that abortion becoming a states-rights issue was a popular result, referring to states that have passed restrictive bans.

“This is what people wanted?” Harris asked. “People being denied care in an emergency room because healthcare providers are being afraid of being hauled off to jail?"

Trump was asked whether he would veto a federal abortion ban if one were passed by Congress. He insisted a federal ban would never happen.

WORLDS APART

One of the most heated policy discussions came when Trump and Harris clashed over how they would handle Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

The candidates' responses revealed the degree to which their views on America's role in the world fundamentally differ.

Trump refused to say he wanted Ukraine to win the war, even as ABC moderator David Muir pushed him on the point, saying only that he wanted to wrap up the conflict as soon as possible.

Harris shot back, arguing that what Trump really wanted was Ukraine's quick and unconditional capitulation.

"If Donald Trump were president, (Russian President Vladimir) Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now," Harris said.

She also pushed back at Trump's claim she had been sent by Biden to talk to Putin to resolve the conflict. Harris has never met with Putin, but has met several times with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

"I said at the beginning of this debate, you're going to hear a bunch of lies coming from this fellow, and that is another one," Harris said.

 

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Reporting by James Oliphant in Washington and Gram Slattery in Philadelphia; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Daniel Wallis

 


Monday, September 9, 2024

The Atlantic Cover

 


When are we going to rebel against his control over the Republican Party, his constitutional ignorance, his obstruction of justice and concealment, his lawless demagoguery, his pathological narcissism, his grandiose delusions, his anti-social personality disorder, his malignant arrogance, his moral relativism, his white nationalism, his perfidious nationalism, his hateful racism, his infectious nihilism, his outrageous iconoclasm, his ruthless competition, his puerile dereliction, his disgusting buffoonery, his embarrassing idiocy, his provocative transgressions, his mocking disrespect, his impetuous vulgarity, his sexual predation, his belligerent intimidation, his incessant lying, his conspiratorial gaslighting, his obsessive vindictiveness, his hypocritical cowardice, his compulsive xenophobia, his callous misogyny, his insufferable bigotry, his histrionic rallying, his dangerous idiocy, his sociopathic bullying and seditious behavior…?  

-Glen Brown



Vote

 

..Something I hear in Trump’s rhetoric is an effort to convince people there will be no place for them in Kamala Harris’ America. It is the same strategy he has always used: Divide people. Stoke hate. Stoke fear. 

And all too often, it seems to work, especially in an era where changing demographics mean that instead of a majority-white country, we are rapidly becoming a majority-minority country. Along with that, we have the emergence of strength in the LGBTQ+ community, with women, people with disabilities, religious minorities, immigrants, and others. 

All of that seems to be a concern for people who fear change, especially when those fears are enflamed by Donald Trump, who doesn’t hesitate to use lies to his own benefit.

In this moment, people need to be assured that with the changes, there will still be a place for them in America, that they are welcome. I’m always a little taken aback by people who support Trump even though it’s not in their own best interests to do so. But they are the people who need this reassurance the most. 

It’s easier to understand the political types—they want power. Or, they want relevance. In his new book, On Heroism: McCain, Milley, Mattis, and the Cowardice of Donald Trump, the editor of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, tells a story about Lindsey Graham that’s illustrative. 

After John McCain died and Lindsey Graham attached himself to Trump, Goldberg had the opportunity to ask Graham why he was doing it, especially after Trump had initially refused to lower the flags at the White House to half-mast in the Senator’s honor following his death. Goldberg writes that Graham said to him, “Jeff, if you know about me, you know that I need to be relevant … You know who I was just on the phone with … Donald Trump is the president of the United States. That’s the truth. You think I’m going to go into exile?”

The people who can’t live without power and relevance are one thing, but what about the cashier at your local grocery store or the group of people traveling for a church ministry I chatted with in the airport today who were all Trump voters? What about family members, friends? Do they want their daughters to die from tubal pregnancies because they can’t get a lifesaving abortion procedure? Do they want to miss out on the joy of having grandchildren because IVF is unavailable? 

There are no easy answers. Maybe some of them don’t believe Trump will really do what he says he’ll do because it sounds so crazy—that’s what they will tell you. These are the folks who are in denial about Project 2025. It won’t be that bad, they say. 

That’s hard to comprehend since we all lived through the Muslim ban, family separation policy, and bleach and lights for Covid. At bottom, it’s hard to believe that anyone with a modicum of common sense supports Trump because of his policies, like this week’s “childcare is childcare” hold promise for the future.

Trump is a racist. He used anger and white grievance about change to attract his base, and he continues to use it to persuade people that there won’t be any room for them in America if Democrats win. That means it’s important for Kamala Harris to reassure people that there is room for everyone, that a rising tide lifts all boats, and that her America is one with space for everyone to enjoy life and to succeed. Trump's policies don’t make sense, so I’m forced to conclude it’s fear and hate that he successfully peddles. 

But our strength as a country has always been in our diversity and our ability to embrace diversity, and especially new immigrants, and to emerge better, stronger, more successful, and more interesting. We can do that again.

That’s the message I’m hoping to hear from Harris in the debate Tuesday night when the folks who are committed to neither Trump nor Harris will be listening. We need a joyful warrior who can help people understand that they don’t need to be afraid of change and that it can work for them. 

What we should fear is going back or treading water, particularly in a world that requires us to evolve if we are going to compete successfully in a new global economy. 

This is a moment for a leader who offers compassion and inspiration, the kind of courage that John F. Kennedy evoked in Americans, so that the country can finally reject the malignant cancer Trump injected into the body politic. 

Harris really means it when she says, “for the people,” and her record proves it. The debate is a chance for her to explain that to people who need to hear it. So, despite the polls, don’t get discouraged. Get to work. Don’t despair. Vote.

-Joyce Vance