When do we give up on democracy?

November 4, 2022

         When do we give up on democracy? Short answer: Never . . . but there is much more to say on this topic. Before I do, I would like to address some surprising feedback I received in response to yesterday’s newsletter titled “No effort is wasted.” Some readers worried that I was giving a “pep talk” to prepare for a “red wave” next Tuesday. Not so! I believe Democrats can win in significant and surprising ways on November 8th—but only if we defy conventional wisdom about low turnout in midterms.

          True, there is anecdotal evidence to suggest that early voting by Democrats will be record-breaking in some areas and demographics, especially among younger voters. But there are also isolated reports that early voting in some states is lagging behind 2018. As I said in my concluding thoughts yesterday, “No effort is wasted . . .  except worrying about the polls. Keep working, until the last vote is cast.” We can still win this thing, so do not relent!

          Another reader criticized my “No effort is wasted” advice by saying,

          No, Professor. “Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.”—Vince Lombardi. Getting to the twenty-yard line instead of the forty because we worked really hard—that just is not good enough. Only touchdowns matter.

          I responded to the reader by saying,

          While winning is the ultimate objective, the question I was addressing is, “When is the game over?” If we “lose” on November 8th, are we going to say, “Game over! We give up!” Or are we going to say, “It isn’t even halftime yet!”

          If the “game isn’t over” on November 8th, getting to the twenty-yard line instead of the forty makes a big difference! And getting a field goal instead of a touchdown can advance us toward our ultimate victory. (Apologies to all of the football metaphors. I will stop!)  

          The above exchange provides a good segue into tonight’s reflection on the midterms. Many commentators are speaking as though November 8th is the “end of history”—or, at least, the “end of democracy” if Democrats lose control of one or both chambers of Congress. Neither statement is true and is, in fact, counterproductive and destructive to our long-term effort to defend democracy that must follow November 8th—regardless of the outcome! If you tell people frequently enough that a loss on November 8th means “democracy is over,” they might believe you and give up.

          The intense focus on the effort to defend control of Congress is obscuring the fact that we have endured more significant setbacks than a change in control of Congress and have abided and prevailed. Indeed, we need only look back to the results of 2016, which left the nation with Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress and a Republican president.

          Did we give up in 2016? No! We fought like hell and flipped control of the House in 2018 and of the Senate and the presidency in 2020! So, “No,” 2022 will not be “the end of history” or the “end of democracy,” whatever happens. And do not forget that Joe Biden will remain president and wield veto power.

          If Republicans succeed in gaining control of Congress, the most they can do is to obstruct and investigate. While those actions will be consequential and destructive, they do not constitute governing. [And then there is this: The more obstructive and destructive Republicans are if they gain control of Congress, the more they will damage their prospects in 2024.]

          So, let me return to my question: When do we give up on democracy?

• Do we give up if we lose control of Congress in 2022?

• Do we give up if Republicans cheat their way to control of Congress in 2022 by voter suppression or excluding legitimate votes?

• Do we give up if Republicans cheat their way into the presidency in 2024?

          While any of those outcomes would be disappointing and maddening, we cannot give up if any of those outcomes occur. We stand on the shoulders of patriots and martyrs who refused to give up at crucial moments in American history. Like them, we must continue to fight despite setbacks.

          A reader, Bruce C., left the following Comment to yesterday’s newsletter:

I feel it is important to define the idea of a political win or loss more carefully. A loss occurs when we cease to resist the forces who would tear down democracy. Anything short of ceasing to resist is a setback but not a loss. As long as there are forces seeking to “tear it all down” there is a need for continued resistance. There likely will always be that need. Therefore, do not seek or depend on “wins,” only commit to continued resistance.

          Another reader (David W. C.), left the following Comment:

I just came back from a civil rights tour in the US South. Many museums and historical sites recount the efforts of leaders and foot soldiers in the long struggle toward racial justice. The one take-away is that they never gave up. Honoring their struggle requires acknowledging the enormous progress that has been made as a result of their efforts while dedicating ourselves to the long hard struggle that must continue toward true racial justice that still has not been attained. No matter the setback, we must acknowledge the success of our experiment in democracy while continuing the struggle to protect and preserve it.

          Well said, on both counts!

          I could go on, but you probably got the point several paragraphs ago. Don’t surrender to apocalyptic predictions and keep your spirits up! If we do suffer a setback on Tuesday (and am I not saying we will), someone will have to continue the struggle. That will be us. There is no greater privilege or honor than to be a “foot soldier in the long struggle” to preserve democracy. Remain calm, stay strong, and lead by example!

And now, the news . . . .

          My Managing Editor has strongly advised that I keep the rest of this newsletter short. I always follow my Managing Editor’s advice, so here is the news in brief:

Advertisers are fleeing Twitter.

          It’s tough to be king. Prominent Twitter advertisers are hitting “pause” while they wait to see “which version” of Elon Musk will show up at Twitter headquarters. WSJ, General Mills, Audi and Pfizer Join Growing List of Companies Pausing Twitter Ads, and Fortune, Brands are ‘quiet quitting’ Twitter over worries of what Musk will bring.

NY Attorney General secures “monitor” to supervise Trump Organization.

          In a devastating development for the Trump Organization, a NY state court has appointed a “monitor” to supervise the affairs of the Trump Organization. See CNBC, Trump news: Judge approves independent monitor in win for New York AG. The court appointed the monitor due to “the persistent misrepresentations throughout every one of Mr. Trump’s [Statements of Financial Condition] between 2011 and 2021.” The monitor will “ensure there is no further fraud or illegality that violates” the New York state law prohibiting fraud.

          As usual, Trump has responded by filing a lawsuit in Florida to enjoin the NY Attorney General’s lawsuit. According to reporting in the NYTimes, Trump’s lawyers in New York are worried that Trump’s lawyers in Florida “might be committing malpractice” by filing a bad-faith lawsuit in Florida. In other words, it is a typical Trump lawsuit. The complaint is here. Note that the caption of the complaint lists the plaintiff as “President Donald Trump.” In other words, Trump managed to tell a lie in the caption of the complaint—a feat rarely matched in American jurisprudence.

Trump adviser Kash Patel is forced to testify in grand jury investigation of Trump’s theft of defense secrets.

          Trump adviser Kash Patel said that Trump could declassify large groups of defense secrets by “standing over a set of documents and saying these are now declassified.” Of course, Patel never said that Trump did, in fact, declassify any documents. When he was examined in front of a grand jury about Trump’s knowledge of the classified status of the documents, Patel invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. DOJ lawyers have now obtained an order granting limited immunity from prosecution for Patel, which means that he must now answer questions before the grand jury. See WSJ, Trump Aide, Granted Immunity, Set to Testify at Grand Jury Probing Mar-a-Lago Documents. It couldn’t happen to a more miserable guy.

FCC may ban TikTok in US.

          As I noted yesterday, TikTok is not an acceptable alternative to Twitter because it is “Chinese-controlled.” Here is what I meant by that statement: China has two national security laws that force Chinese citizens to divulge commercial trade secrets of their employers to the Chinese government—even if their employer is a US-affiliate or US corporation. TikTok captures massive amounts of personal information on its users—many of whom have sensitive governmental or commercial jobs. That information could help China spy on the US military and defense companies. According to one FCC commissioner, that agency is considering banning TikTok in the US. See CNN, FCC commissioner calls for TikTok ban. In negotiations earlier this year, TikTok refused to commit that its user data would not be shared with the Chinese government.

Concluding Thoughts.

          Given my lengthy introductory essay, I will close with a phrase that has become the motto of this newsletter: We have every reason to be hopeful, but no reason to be complacent!

          I will be in touch over the weekend! Stay strong, remain calm, and lead by example!