According to Ari Berman at The Nation, "The GOP's Attack on Voting Rights was the Most Undercovered Story of the 2016 Election." What, we expected the "liberal" media to cover it? That would have taken work, and why do work when Donald Trump is acting like an obnoxious 14-year-old boy on TV and Twitter? Of course, the GOP took the elections not just with the help of Voter ID laws (and Interstate Crosscheck, which Mr. Berman doesn't cover here), but also by reducing polling places and early voting days, and we'll never know how many good folks saw their relatives get mistreated at the polling place and just threw up their hands. What we do know, however, is that if Democrats ran better candidates, it wouldn't have mattered nearly as much.
In a peripherally-related note, the Brennan Center for Justice tabulates a lot of reports about voting problems during the 2016 election. Warning: some of them will make your blood boil (like reports of police intimidating voters in three counties) -- and the Brennan Center also finds, like Mr. Berman did above, that with 14 states passing more restrictive voting laws in the wake of Shelby County v. Holder, "confusion" kept a lot of good folks home. Why, it's almost like that's the idea. (Folks who find my concentration on vote suppression tiresome should answer why anyone, anywhere, should have trouble voting. Sadly, some folks have simply come out and said that certain people just don't vote the right way.)
Issie Lapowsky at Wired tells us that Facebook won the Presidency for Donald Trump -- "because it helped generate the bulk of the campaign’s $250 million in online fundraising." Trump fundraisers also cite their ability to get instant feedback on ads they were running, so they could target users better. Just remember, though, that all this may have won him the Presidency, but it only got him 47% of the vote -- and we might not be having this conversation had Bernie Sanders been his opponent. (On a side note, whenever I hear talk about people choosing their own "news bubbles" that don't admit outside views, I reflexively respond: you mean as opposed to the news bubbles the "liberal" media would choose for you?)
Chris Morran at The Consumerist tells us what might happen to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the next President. Observers suspect that Congress will "chip away" at the agency rather than deep-six it right away, which might be true, but might as well prepare for the worst -- not least by asking our Congressfolk what they think banksters might have to hide from us, and the agency that caught out the Wells Fargo fraud.
In case you were wondering, Jim Naureckas at FAIR chronicles the rise of Steve Bannon from relatively unknown Goldman-Sachs bankster to Trump Administration "senior advisor." Long story short: Mr. Bannon is a racist simple and plain, and he doesn't like Jews very much, either. But I spy an opportunity for Jews and Muslims to get together and bond over their mutual oppression. I know, I know, call me an optimist.
Finally, since this might be more of an issue in the future, Joseph Bien-Kahn at Wired offers up "Seven Tips for Reporting Live Via Your Phone From Anywhere." To sum: livestreaming is better than recording because it's harder for police to confiscate from you; don't believe the hype that filming police is illegal because it's not (unless you're actually interfering with police work); don't make sudden movements; film horizontally rather than vertically; don't use lights or flashes (it may interfere with police work, and the audio might be enough evidence anyway); remember to watch the scene, rather than your phone screen; and be sure to record any investigation police might be conducting on you (and remember, again, that audio may be all you need).
Comments