That's certainly true and I haven't posted all of the articles with
predictions about what may happen as a result and others with suggestions
about what ought to be done and it's being discussed on many of the podcasts
I listen to. In 2000, there was no clear winner on election night. When I
was thinking about this issue later, I remember that Republicans stole Ohio
in 2004 and although that was important in the electoral count and everyone
knew, Kerry chose to say nothing. Back in 1960, Kennedy won the election,
but is campaign did all sorts of illegal things in order to do so. Nixon
knew, but kept quiet.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Andy Baracco
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 10:16 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'This Is How You Normalize a Madman':
Scholars, Press Watchdogs Call on Corporate Media to Treat Trump Like the
Authoritarian Threat He Is
But muy point was that if major swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania
are willing to count ballots that are several days late, it is likely that
there will not be an apparent clear winner on election night.
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 7:01 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'This Is How You Normalize a Madman':
Scholars, Press Watchdogs Call on Corporate Media to Treat Trump Like the
Authoritarian Threat He Is
But Al Gore never really lost. The election was stolen from him and heunder those circumstances.
did concede in order to keep the peace. There were dirty tricks played
by the Republicans in Florida and the recount was stopped. The Supreme
Court made a political decision. Had the Democrats resisted, we
wouldn't have had ongoing war in Afghanistan and our country wouldn't
have gone to war in Iraq.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Andy Baracco
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 9:42 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'This Is How You Normalize a Madman':
Scholars, Press Watchdogs Call on Corporate Media to Treat Trump Like
the Authoritarian Threat He Is
Well, Al Gore didn't immediately concede in 2000 when it appeared that
he had lost. Earlier this week a court in Pennsylvania ruled that
mail in ballots must be counted even if they are a week late. In
Wisconsin the Democratic governor signed a bill that says pretty much
the same thing. I don't think that any candidate under these
conditions would be willing to concede a close election on election night
----- Original Message -----November:
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 5:56 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] 'This Is How You Normalize a Madman':
Scholars, Press Watchdogs Call on Corporate Media to Treat Trump Like
the Authoritarian Threat He Is
Published on
Friday, September 25, 2020
byCommon Dreams
'This Is How You Normalize a Madman': Scholars, Press Watchdogs Call
on Corporate Media to Treat Trump Like the Authoritarian Threat He Is
"Our democracy is at stake. Trump is trying to steal an election, and
the press should say so, every day until Election Day."
byLisa Newcomb, staff writer
President Donald Trump talks to journalists while departing the White
House for a 'Keep America Great' rally in Kentucky in November, 2019.
(Photo:Chip
Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Major news outlets failed the American people, critics say, when they
chose to bury coverage of President Donald Trump's Wednesday comment
that he would not commit to a peaceful transition of power-a
statement watchdogs say demanded above-the-fold, front-page headlines
that simply did not materialize.
They should have gone on a war footing-and by that I don't mean a
partisan war against Trump, I mean a journalistic war against lies,
ignorance, and intolerance.
-Dan Froomkin, PressWatchers.org
"Newsroom leaders made a considered, intentional decision not to
panic after Trump was elected," Dan Froomkin, editor of
PressWatchers.org, wrote in a scathing rebuke of corporate media's
apparent nonchalant attitude towards the president's rhetoric. "This
was an epic, obvious mistake, and everything that has happened since
was in some sense entirely predictable."
Froomkin continued, "They should have gone on a war footing-and by
that I don't mean a partisan war against Trump, I mean a journalistic
war against lies, ignorance, and intolerance."
Critics weighed in on the relative non-importance corporate news
outlets assigned-in print and online-to Trump's latest suggestion
that he may not cede the office of the presidency should he lose in
continue to "do the work."transfer-of-power story.)"
Some observers balked when Peter Baker, chief White House
correspondent for the New York Times, attempted to explain away the
Times' decision to bury the news by citing print publication
deadlines. One pointed to the late-evening news of Supreme Court
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death last week, which was an
above-the-fold feature in the next day's Times print edition.
Broadcast media also drew rebukes for its lack of emphasis on Trump's
veiled threat at the democratic process.
"Wednesday's network evening newscasts on ABC, CBS, and NBC were no
better,"
Eric Boehlert, founder and editor of PressRun wrote. "Not only did
none of them lead with Trump's stunning proclamation, none of the
broadcasts even reported on Trump's comments. This is how you
normalize a madman. (CNN and MSNBC did a much better job covering the
At PressWatchers.org, Froomkin explained how the dynamics in
corporate newsrooms have led to complacency among journalists tasked
with reporting on Trump's presidency:
One overarching problem is that our major newsrooms have simply
gotten so corporate and even-keeled that our top editors value
unflappability as a signal virtue. (OK, I admit I take this one a
little personally, being a flappable person. A top Washington Post
editor once called me
"hysterical.")
Flappable people don't rise through the ranks. Corporate people do.
Journalism to me is about crusading for the truth. But the notion
that a serious, major news organization would pursue a crusade on
behalf of its community is considered hippy shit by the people in
charge these days. So is consistently standing up to a lawless con
man. They've gotten used to printing lies. They barely squawk when
Trump calls them the "enemy of the people." They have their
algorithms, and they won't give them up no matter what. They just
presidency.
So yeah, their news souls are dead. There, I said it.
Lawmakers and progressive advocates called out the dangerous threat
to democracy uttered by the commander-in-chief-and the corporate
media for treating it like any other day in Trump's scandal-laden
Sargent.
"Great (not) to watch journalists reporting Trump's latest direct
attacks on the republic as if it's all just a regular press
conference," longtime journalist Dan Gillmor tweeted Wednesday.
"Historians will see Big Journalism's business as usual in this
emergency as one of the proximate causes of the American republic's
death."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) gave a speech Thursday denouncing Trump's
declared refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power, saying:
"This
is not just an election between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. This is
an election between Donald Trump and democracy-and democracy must win."
Sanders also outlined steps necessary to prepare the American public
and lawmakers for chaos of election night and beyond, calling on the
news media specifically to "prepare the American people to understand
there is no longer a single election day and that it is very possible
that we may not know the results on November 3."
Froomkin pointed out that corporate media's opinion pages are more
accurately depicting the real danger of Trump's recent rhetoric than
front-page headlines.
"But as usual, to capture the real drama of what's going on, you have
to go to the opinion writers-and the editorial cartoonists," he
wrote, sharing a link to an op-ed by Washington Post columnist Greg
Day."
"What really matters here is that Trump is making an actual
declaration of intent," Sargent wrote, "not just to refuse to respect
the outcome, but rather to try to cancel and override it, if he is
able to get away with it."
Boehlert issued a more dire warning:
Trump isn't running for re-election in the sense he's hoping to
accumulate more voter support than Biden. (His campaign keeps taking
down ads in swing
states.) Trump's running to maintain power. He's signaling that he'll
refuse to give it up and will not accept his defeat as being
legitimate. He's trying to steal an election. In reality, he doesn't
care what the results are-he has no intention of abiding by the
nation's will, and thinks he can count on the corrupt support of the
GOP, the Department of Justice, and the United States Supreme Court
to win his lawless battle in the days and weeks after the election.
"Our democracy is at stake," Boehlert concluded. "Trump is trying to
steal an election, and the press should say so, every day until
Election
