Tuesday, December 15, 2020

The blog begins

                                      Jack Doppelt
Dec. 15, 2020

I'm starting today to archive my writings, commentaries, and musings going back to college during the 1970s. I'll upload as I go, so for awhile, it will be randomly fed. You can watch it go up, as you might with a high rise in downtown Evanston or a Jeanne Gang building in Chicago.

Jeanne Gang's Aqua Tower

Thursday, December 3, 2020

Fountain of Yahoo

                                                                                                             Jack Doppelt

Dec. 3, 2020

The Fountain of Youth may be a mythical spring that restores the youth of anyone who drinks or bathes in it.
“Drinking the kool-aid” may be a grotesque reference that reminds us of the 900 people who died in Jonestown, Guyana in 1978 when Jim Jones, the cult leader of the Peoples Temple movement turned on his followers and on a congressman who visited to investigate the settlement that was preying on Americans.
We are now in the throes of the unseemly phenomenon of millions of Americans drinking with blind faith from the Fountain of Yahoo. They are the sympathizers of Donald Trump who in the month since the Nov. 3 election has stepped up his fundraising campaign that is driven by the need for him to play into the stoked beliefs that he was elected President and has been defrauded of his rightful place as the incumbent winner. To bilk as much as he can out of these believers, one surefire way is to prolong his unremitting conga line of lawsuits.
Within two weeks of the election, Trump and his henchmen hatched the coordinated plan that seamlessly converted his official campaign site into the Official Election Defense Fund. Go to the campaign site, click to donate and it takes you and others thirsting to support to the defense fund site, which in only a couple of weeks has raised more than $170 million, far more than his campaign did over any similar period before the election. Now he’s being victimized. As his claims of election fraud become more insistent, they are debunked by anyone with a shred of dignity or a grip on reality.
It only matters that the blindly faithful cling to his visions of grandeur. In one interview after another, the small-dollar donors are fine with the idea that their contributions don’t go toward recounts or legal expenses to challenge the election results. They’re fine in being told not one of the lawsuits has succeeded. Their blind faith is reinforced by Republican officials at the highest levels and by Fox News and other conservative outlets. They assert his victory being snatched from him with the same apparent certainty and indignation as Trump. If 75% of each contribution goes to Trump’s future or into his pockets, no matter what he chooses to do with it, so be it. They trust him to do what’s best.
The “drinking the kool-aid” reference is a harsh reminder, often used lightly. When Trump was interviewed by Bob Woodward for his book Rage, Trump's reaction to his question about the responsibility of white, privileged people to help understand the motivations of Black Lives Matter protesters, Trump said: "You really drank the Kool-Aid, didn't you?”
I hope fervently that Donald Trump’s careless use of his presidential and charismatic powers of persuasion will not result in anything unthinkable from some of his sympathizers acting in his name. Many well-meaning people dread the possibility.
I prefer at this juncture to caution people to not drink from the Fountain of Yahoo he’s offering.
Yahoo, aside from being a social media provider, is a word that conjures the image of a rude person, or as used originally in Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver's Travels, a book many of us read in school, a Yahoo is a primitive creature obsessed with digging in the mud whom Swift invoked to represent distasteful materialism and ignorant elitism.
Stay clear of the fountain.

#####

Friday, November 6, 2020

Iowa disappoints big time in 2020

   Jack Doppelt


Iowa voters successfully penetrated the GOP-controlled legislature’s persistent efforts to suppress the vote, but to little end in holding the GOP responsible. A record number of Iowans – 1.7 million – voted. That’s 78.6% of all eligible voters, 3rd in the nation behind only Maine and Minnesota. Nearly 1 million voted early. Another 700,000 voted on election day.



Still, Iowa raised the red GOP banner almost across the board -the Presidency, US Senate, two of four US Congressional seats (with a 3rd too close to call), and both houses of the Iowa legislature. 97 of Iowa’s 99 counties are now represented by a Republican in either the state House or Senate.

       Thanks all for your work, efforts, and spirit. https://bit.ly/3n0mzDy

#####

Tuesday, November 3, 2020

Election day - it's in Iowans' hands now

   Jack Doppelt


Election day. The finish line looms. Iowa takes 2,095,581 registered voters, the most ever, into today's election potential. Almost 1 million have already voted. Another million are in position to vote today. Final call.

Since the primaries in June, Republican registrations have climbed faster than, and surpassed, Democratic registrations. Independent registrations went down before the primaries because unaffiliateds can’t vote in the primaries.

That's where things stand, polls aside.



#####



Friday, October 30, 2020

A personal get well soon to President Trump

                                                                                                                                                  Jack Doppelt

                                                                                                                                                 Oct. 30, 2020


I wish you a speedy recovery from the flu, as you’ve often referred to COVID-19. 

You have the best, most comprehensive health care system at your disposal. It affords for hospitalization for a few days even for “monitoring” or for an "abundance of caution" or for those pre-existing conditions you may have. 

I am joined in my wishes, I’m sure, by the millions of fellow Americans, uninsured, undocumented, elderly, racial and ethnic minorities, and those like you with pre-existing conditions. 


In the meantime, it must be disconcerting to have to be away from family and to have to wear a mask. We know how deeply you and your family’s convictions run against masks. During your debate with Joe Biden the other day, it was exhilarating to see your whole family act in solidarity by whipping off their masks after being seated for the debate. The act of resistance was particularly patriotic and courageous in that the debate took place in a medical clinic. Rules are meant for suckers. As you said to Biden, masks are ok when needed, but you wouldn’t wear a mask like Biden who shows up "wearing the biggest mask I’ve ever seen." [click on the link-you'll love hearing yourself put it to him]

As you entered Walter Reed Hospital, you had on a mask suitable for being hospitalized among medical teams who were in place to monitor you, whether they signed non-disclosure agreements or not.

By all appearances, it’s possible you may have others join you in your Presidential COVID-denial sycophant movement. Your wife will loyally join you; as may your campaign manager Bill Stepien; Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee; your former adviser Kellyanne Conway; Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson; Utah Senator Mike Lee; North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis; Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie; and of course your confidante Hope Hicks, all of whom have clung by your side and dutifully tested positive for the flu. 

As you tweeted, we will get through this TOGETHER!” 

It is customary in the Jewish faith to wish a person a “refuah shlema,” a renewal of body and an epiphany for a spirit of empathy. 

Amen. 



 #####

Wednesday, July 15, 2020

Iowa’s voter suppression by 1,000 cuts

                                                                                                                                                   July 2020 

By the time state lawmakers in Iowa went home at 6 am on June 24, the night had turned stealthily into Sunday morning and the Republican majority in both the House and Senate could close the books on an unusual and unanticipated election law. The law prohibits the Secretary of State from mailing registered voter applications for absentee ballots (ABRs) for November’s election until voters apply for it and provide IDs. 

The legislature added a provision that if election officials detect errors or omissions in a voter’s application, the officials are to contact the voter by phone or electronically within 24 hours. The officials can’t cross-check records in their office. The law doesn’t address this, but presumably, if the voter isn’t reached or doesn’t correct the form in a day, the voter is disqualified from voting absentee. There is nothing in the law that indicates if a voter will be notified that the application didn’t go through. 

All that was needed was for the Governor, a Republican, to sign the bill into law. She did, and the law is now in effect. 

The law was enacted only three weeks after the state’s primary for all offices other than president. (The Iowa caucuses held back in February involve only the presidential race.) The primary on June 2 attracted 530,000 voters, by far the most in any Iowa primary, this despite the pandemic. Much of the success goes to the absentee ballot process triggered by the Secretary of State who mailed absentee applications to all registered voters without being asked. Mail-in ballots made up 80% of all the voting. 

The process was seamless. Voters had ballots at home. All they needed to do was complete them and mail them in. No lines that threatened people’s health. No long waits on election night to get the vote totals. 

It was so successful that Republican strategists in and outside Iowa saw the writing on the ballots. As the Des Moines Register put it, the only possible justification for the legislature’s overnight stunt, which passed along party lines, is “voter suppression.” 

It fell in line as part of Donald Trump’s clear strategy – if you can’t beat ‘em, complicate the voting or rig the election, whichever is needed. During this year’s primary season, states have already rejected tens of thousands of mail-in ballots, according to NBC News. The reasons cited are ballots tossed out for such trivial errors as not signing in all the right places, using a signature that doesn't exactly match one's voter registration signature, or reaching election officials too late. 

Iowa presents as a red state. A red state, though, shouldn’t need to resort to voter suppression. As Iowans often say, the GOP has won the trifecta. They control the state House, the state Senate and the governorship. Together, they make the rules even for national elections. It has not always been that way, and barring tactics to undermine the election, it’s not likely to continue that way. 


For 30 years, between 1984 and 2014, Iowa sent one Republican, Chuck Grassley, and one Democrat, Tom Harkin, to the U.S. Senate. After Harkin retired in 2014, Joni Ernst joined Grassley to make the Senate delegation from Iowa all Republican. 

When I was in college in Iowa in the 1970s, three U.S. Senate luminaries - Harold Hughes, Dick Clark and John Culver – were all Iowa Democrats. 


Since Joni Ernst’s fluke election in 2014 after Tom Harkin retired and Trump’s win two years later, national pundits have colored Iowa red. They wrote off Iowa to the GOP until recent polls showed both Trump and Ernst vulnerable and faltering. 

Iowa is of only modest consequence in the presidential race. It controls only six of the 270 electoral votes needed to win. 

Ernst’s Senate seat is of seismic importance. Republicans hold 53 Senate seats, a majority of lockstep voters who defy the president only when it doesn’t matter. Twenty-three seats are up for election. Most of the 23 are considered safe. Polls and pundits differ on how many, and which, are vulnerable, and as the campaign has evolved, the conventional wisdom has moved from five, with Ernst’s Iowa seat considered safe, to 11, with Ernst’s seat shifting to vulnerable as Trump’s ratings drop. If Trump is re-elected and the Democrats lose none of their Senate seats, the Republicans would have to lose four seats to give up control of the body. If Trump loses and the Democrats keep all their Senate seats, three lost Republican seats would turn the Senate and the federal government around. 

Joni Ernst’s seat is all the more critical in that she has voted in line with Trump’s positions 91% of the time. Most recently Ernst voiced support for Trump’s deployment of federal troops in Portland and for his handling of the coronavirus epidemic

Trump has announced many times that he opposes mail-in voting. The last time Ernst addressed the state’s recent stealth absentee ballot law, she deferred, saying that “elections are a state issue.” Her opposition for the Senate, Democrat Theresa Greenfield said, “Republican politicians are trying to make it harder to vote. This is unacceptable and wrong.” 

To the extent that Iowa is misperceived as red, its palette is showing its true colors again. Two years ago, in 2018, in the off-year election after Trump became president, Iowa’s four Congressional districts flipped from three Republicans to three Democrats. The fourth Republican has been Stephen King whose racist and vulgar language resulted in fellow Republicans stripping him of House committee assignments before he was defeated in the recent Republican primary. 

Iowa is neither red nor blue, but a lush mix of red, blue and independent. There are 680,000 Republicans, 680,000 Democrats and 627,000 independents, as of July. Can it get any more dynamic than that? 

That would make for a fair fight for president and U.S. Senate if it weren’t for the wild cards that the GOP has hidden away to spring at any time. 

They’ve enacted the laws so that voters will be confused as they await absentee ballot applications as were mailed for the June 2 primary. After a number of the state’s 99 county auditors from Democratic-leaning counties decided to mail out absentee applications as the Secretary of State did for the primary, the Secretary of State returned to the legislature to get permission to take the lead again. He got it. 

The Republicans imposed a condition. The ABRs can be sent to registered voters either by the Secretary of State or by the county auditors but the ABRs have to be blank “to ensure uniformity.” The Democrats tried to add a provision that would require election officials to mail voters PIN numbers with or before the ABRs so voters would have the information needed to vote. It was voted down. 

One county auditor suggested that to make it easier, he would mail out the ABRs with the individualized PIN numbers already on the ABR form. The Republican lawmaker who leads the GOP in the Iowa Senate was quoted as setting things straight: “With this order, any auditor who sends out the pre-populated form with the Voter ID pin is frankly ignoring the law. Period." 

The result is that the confluence of laws is confusing and onerous; ideal conditions for the Trump campaign strategy of challenging people’s votes and claiming the election is illegitimate. 

Some county auditors will be lenient about insignificant errors or omissions in a voter’s absentee application. Those who are could be setting up challenges after the election as the Trump campaign works to show that absentee ballots are fraudulent. 

Then there will be some county auditors who will vigilantly detect errors or omissions in a voter’s absentee application and then lackadaisically try to contact the voter by phone or electronically within 24 hours. If the voter isn’t contacted and the errors aren’t corrected, there’s nothing in the law that would keep those auditors from not mailing out absentee ballots to those people. 

Then there’s the Trump playbook that he’s signaled publicly. After the election, he’s prepared to claim that the absentee ballots are fraudulent and that Iowa’s results, among others, can’t be trusted. 

It’s easier to have Iowa to come out red through voter suppression tactics when Iowa is wrongly expected to vote red anyway. 

What to do about it? The election bromide is that to make change, people need to vote. This time, in Iowa, and in all states, to vote, people need to be vigilant, know exactly where the pitfalls lurk and avoid them. 

As the Register warned in its June 8 editorial headline: “Message from GOP lawmakers to Iowans: We don't want you voting.” Show them you know what they’re up to. 

 ##### 

Friday, June 5, 2020

The effects of Covid-19 on immigrant communities


Jack Doppelt

June 5, 2020 

[A version of this series of stories was published on Immigrant Connect on Jun 5, 2020]

The spring of 2020 brought fear, death and grief to hundreds of thousands across the globe. In the few months that my students and I were getting to know immigrants and refugees, more than 400,000 people died of the coronavirus pandemic. More than ¼ of them died in the U.S. 

As we were meeting for the first times in early April, we decided to focus our reporting on the pandemic’s effect on different immigrant and refugee communities. So many Good Questions can use exploration, so we set out to answer some of them. 

What we came to realize is that one of the potential effects of a global pandemic is to recognize that the experiences of migration and decisions about cross-national travel may pull the U.S., willingly or not, out of its exceptionalist posture and into a more cooperative arena. We shall see. 

Here are our stories on how the COVID-19 pandemic has effected different immigrant and refugee communities: 







 In the process of doing the series on COVID-19, we encountered a couple of extraordinary people you should know: 



 —————————- 

 The student reporters wanted you to know something about themselves and their inspiration for investing in reporting on immigrants unlike themselves. The stories are captured here and on the Immigrant Connect staff page: 











#####

Tuesday, May 5, 2020

Addressing the dissemination and spread of intended disinformation

 Jack Doppelt 

 May 5, 2020

In issuing the report, “Fair Elections during a Crisis,” the Ad Hoc Committee for 2020 Election Fairness and Legitimacy proposed 14 recommendations for presidential elections that have become even more timely because the pandemic’s indeterminate end leaves the election even more susceptible to the whims of those in power federally and in each state. 

What balloting will be acceptable? Will attempts to open up voting be stymied by contrived concerns of vote fraud? Will the elections be held? On Nov. 3? If so, will the losing part of the electorate accept the results? 

Our committee took on these questions immediately before the pandemic set in. They resonate now, as the election looms six months off, and because of the pandemic, are barely on the edge of the media radar. 

To many, that’s just as well. Campaigns had become all encompassing, grotesquely expensive, and driven by negative, divisive strains of the body politic. All true but what lurks beneath the surface, regardless of the duration of the campaigning, is disinformation that has overtaken our elections. 

Disinformation, from the Russian term dezinformatsiya, is designed to stick and spread through word of mouth, social media and unwitting news outlets. It is used by government intelligence agencies, in the negative advertising of political campaigns, and recently by foreign governments, such as Russia obviously. Representatives of Facebook, Twitter and Google have testified in Congress that disinformation leading up to the 2016 election and planted by Russian operatives alone reached more than 125 million people, according to NPR. Twitter representatives invoked these numbers: 2,752 Russia-linked Twitter accounts and more than 36,000 automated "bots" tweeting 1.4 million times about the election. Much of the content was aimed at widening divides in American culture. 

When responsible media identify disinformation, they tend to dutifully ignore it so as to not give it oxygen to circulate. The damage is done though. The disinformation has seeped into the bloodstream of conversation and social media, often with a boost from the President, whose campaign has been reported to be heavily financing a strategy, called “death star,” that is primed to unleash disinformation during the campaign cycle. The piece, "The Billion-Dollar Disinformation Campaign to Reelect the President: How new technologies and techniques pioneered by dictators will shape the 2020 elections" in the Feb. 10 issue of the Atlantic, is a playbook worth accounting for in the nation's defense strategies and worth circulating to all college students.

Instead of ignoring disinformation campaigns, responsible media should call out the disinformation as such in as real time as possible. It is, of course, tricky to distinguish disinformation from differing points of view in a messy democracy, but we’ve come to expect it of Facebook and Twitter. One cautious step for the media is to piggyback off Facebook and Twitter, and when they take measures to keep disinformation off their platforms, the media can step in and call attention to that disinformation. The way the media should do that is to lead in given stories with the truth or the reality and back into the debunked disinformation efforts, citing the sources seeking to pollute the democratic discourse. This is a technique we teach in social justice journalism and is directed at giving prominence to accuracy and at punishing through sunlight those who intentionally are a corrupting influence. How to write those stories without pumping oxygen into the disinformation is a conversation starter for news organizations. One model might be how news outlets handle corrections without repeating and magnifying the error being corrected. 

A useful primer is the American Press Institute’s Trusted Elections Network Guide to Covering Elections amd Misinformation. 

It's incumbent on we in the media to take it on. We’re on deadline.


#####