Kevin Drum: ‘The Real Source of America’s Rising Rage’

 

From Mother Jones:

 

Americans sure are angry these days. Everyone says so, so it must be true.

But who or what are we angry at? Pandemic stresses aside, I’d bet you’re not especially angry at your family. Or your friends. Or your priest or your plumber or your postal carrier. Or even your boss.

Unless, of course, the conversation turns to politics. That’s when we start shouting at each other. We are way, way angrier about politics than we used to be, something confirmed by both common experience and formal research.

When did this all start? Here are a few data points to consider. From 1994 to 2000, according to the Pew Research Center, only 16 percent of Democrats held a “very unfavorable” view of Republicans, but then these feelings started to climb. Between 2000 and 2014 it rose to 38 percent and by 2021 it was about 52 percent. And the same is true in reverse for Republicans: The share who intensely dislike Democrats went from 17 percent to 43 percent to about 52 percent….

What’s the reason for this? There’s no shortage of speculation. Political scientists talk about the fragility of presidential systems. Sociologists explicate the culture wars. Historians note the widening divide between the parties after white Southerners abandoned the Democratic Party following the civil rights era. Reporters will regale you with stories about the impact of Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich.

There’s truth in all of these, but even taken together they are unlikely to explain the underlying problem.
 

 

Read the full article.

David A. Graham: ‘Biden Is Speaking to an America That Doesn’t Exist’

 From The Atlantic:

Joe Biden is not known as a fiery orator, but the president was riled up yesterday [Tuesday, July 13, 2021].

 

Biden spoke in Philadelphia about voting rights, calling a current round of state laws and bills, plus rhetoric emanating from Donald Trump and others, “the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War.” The president defended the 2020 election, celebrating the record voter turnout, praising election officials who made sure voting was smooth, and rebutting attacks lodged by Trump and his aides, who have baselessly claimed that the election was stolen or marred by fraud. “No other election has ever been held under such scrutiny, such high standards,” Biden said. “The big lie is just that: a big lie.”

 

But the president’s main focus was the next election, which he warned was gravely threatened. “I’m not saying this to alarm you,” he said. “I’m saying this because you should be alarmed.” He added, “We have to prepare now.”

 

The question is, who is we?

 

Biden’s speech assumes a unified American people who support democratic norms, and it assumes that once they understand the threat posed to those norms, they’ll be willing and able to fend it off. That nation is a chimera. Many Americans support these attacks on democracy, and those who don’t, face a system stacked against them.

 

 

Read the full story.

Dan Balz: ‘Democrats have no clear strategy to counter voting restrictions’

 

From the Washington Post:

 

The 1965 Voting Rights Act has long stood as a symbol of the progress America has made in the struggle for civil rights and as a guardian of the right of all citizens to vote. Today, with two main provisions stripped of their power by the Supreme Court, the law has become a symbol of the weakening of resistance to the states’ efforts to restrict rather than expand and protect those rights.

In two decisions over eight years, the high court has taken away much of the law’s power, first in 2013 by gutting Section 5, which required states with a history of discrimination to seek clearance from the Justice Department before making any changes in election procedures, and on Thursday [July 1, 2021] by limiting the potential for successfully challenging voting changes after they have been enacted under Section 2.

The decision on Thursday involved two provisions in an Arizona law, one that called for discarding ballots cast at the wrong precinct, the other prohibiting what is known as “ballot harvesting,” a controversial practice in which partisans or activists collect absentee or mail ballots and deliver them to polling places. In allowing those provisions to stand, the court did nothing surprising. Many court watchers expected that to happen.

 

 

Read the full article.