Vote NOW through Nov. 3

You have three options to vote in this year’s national election:

  • Vote in person now until Nov. 2 at Board of Elections, 104 Sugar St., Mount Vernon, OH.  Please visit the web site for hours. Please wear a mask and follow social distancing.
  • If you requested an absentee ballot, you should receive your ballot soon. Carefully complete it, following instructions, and either mail it or put it in the drop box at BOE, located on the east side of the building. (You can still request an absentee ballot, but do it soon!)
  • Or vote in person on Election Day, Nov. 3, at your precinct. Please wear a mask and follow social distancing.

Knight Foundation Polls College Student Voting Views

Oct 6,2020
Knight commissioned College Pulse to undertake a national poll of college student views on voting and the 2020 election, to gage their responses to voting during these unprecedented and uncertain times. Conducted from August 9 to 12, 2020, findings from “College Students, Voting and the COVID-19 Election” represent a sample of 4,000 full-time students currently enrolled in four-year degree programs surveyed via the College Pulse mobile app and web portal, and weighted to be nationally representative.

Key takeaways include:

  • Most students—led by college women and Democrats—say they are “absolutely certain” they will vote this year. About seven in 10 (71%) students say they are absolutely certain they will vote in the upcoming election, with female students expressing greater certainty than their male counterparts by a margin of 10 points. Students who identify as Democrat are the most likely to be absolutely certain they will vote (81%), followed by Republicans (74%) and Independents (63%).
  • Students lack confidence in the legitimacy of the 2020 election. Nearly half (49%) say it won’t be fair and open, and a majority (55%) say it will not be administered well. A full 81% say special interest groups have more influence over election outcomes than voters.
  • Students are likely to doubt the results of the presidential election. Half say that problems at polling places such as long lines or broken voting machines would lead them to have major doubts about the fairness of the election; followed by evidence of foreign interference (48%); the election winner losing the popular vote (46%); and low voter turnout (46%) or if most voters cast ballots by mail (31%). 74% will have major or minor doubts about the fairness of the election if it takes weeks to count.
  • Students plan to vote for Joe Biden by a wide margin, but enthusiasm is low for both major candidates and their parties. A full 70% say they will vote for Biden, versus only 18% for President Trump. But only 49% have a favorable impression of Biden, versus 51% unfavorable; for Trump, those numbers are 19% and 81%, respectively. When it comes to the two major parties, male college students view both about equally negatively, while female students express much more positive views of the Democratic Party.
  • Just over half of college students plan to vote by mail, with large partisan splits. The majority (63%) of Democratic students say they would prefer to vote by mail or absentee, compared to 31% of Republican students. Thirty nine percent of all students plan to vote in person.

The report, “College Students, Voting and the COVID-19 Election,” details the full findings on these and other issues related to the 2020 election and political participation among the rising generation of college-educated Americans — including notable breakout data by gender, party affiliation and race. College students’ responses reveal a polarized student body that’s unified in its skepticism of the electoral system, the candidates, and the idea that the government works to improve their lives. But most of them are still largely intent on casting a ballot in 2020.

How to Question Amy Coney Barrett, Supreme Court Nominee

Sept 28, 2020
published online at Medium.com
a good read!

I do not know who Bill Svelmoe is, but he has some brilliant suggestions for questions in the Barrett Supreme Court nomination hearings. Hopefully the Democratic senators will take some pointers from his recommendations. (Robert Oldershaw at Medium)

“If Democrats do attend the hearings, they should not focus on
Barrett’s views on any future cases. She’ll just dodge those questions anyway. They’re hypothetical. She should dodge them. Don’t even mention her religion. Instead Democrats should focus on the past four years of the Trump administration. This has been the most corrupt administration in American history. No need for hypotheticals. The questions are all right there.

Judge Barrett, would you please explain the emoluments clause in the Constitution. [She does.] Judge Barrett, if a president were to refuse to divest himself of his properties and, in fact, continue to steer millions of dollars of tax payer money to his properties, would this violate the emoluments clause?

Then simply go down the list of specific cases in which Trump and his family of grifters have used the presidency to enrich themselves. Ask her repeatedly if this violates the emoluments clause. Include of course using the American ambassador to Britain to try to get the British Open golf tournament at a Trump property. Judge Barrett, does this violate the emoluments clause?

Then turn to the Hatch Act.

Judge Barrett, would you please explain the Hatch Act to the American people. [She does.] Judge Barrett, did Kellyanne Conway violate the Hatch Act on these 60 occasions? [List them. Then after Barrett’s response, and just fyi, the Office of the Special Council already convicted her, ask Barrett this.] When Kellyanne Conway, one of the president’s top advisors openly mocked the Hatch Act after violating it over 60 times, should she have been removed from office?

Then turn to all the other violations of the Hatch Act during the Republican Convention. Get Barrett’s opinion on those.

Then turn to Congressional Oversight.

Judge Barrett, would you please explain to the American people the duties of Congress, according to the Constitution, to oversee the executive branch. [She does so.] Judge Barrett, when the Trump administration refuses time and again [list them] to respond to a subpoena from Congress, is this an obstruction of the constitutional duty of Congress for oversight? Is this an obstruction of justice?

Then turn to Trump’s impeachment.

Read the transcript of Trump’s phone call. Judge Barrett, would you describe this as a “perfect phone call”? Is there anything about this call that troubles you, as a judge, or as an American?

Judge Barrett, would you please define for the American people the technical definition of collusion. [She does.] Then go through all of the contacts between the Trump administration and Russians during the election and get her opinion on whether these amount to collusion. Doesn’t matter how she answers. It gets Trump’s perfidy back in front of Americans right before the election.

Such questions could go on for days. Get her opinion on the evidence for election fraud. Go through all the Trump “laws” that have been thrown out by the courts. Ask her about the separation of children from their parents at the border. And on and on and on through the worst and most corrupt administration in our history. Don’t forget to ask her opinion on the evidence presented by the 26 Trump accusers. Judge Barrett, do you think this is enough evidence of sexual assault to bring the perpetrator before a court of law? Do you think a sitting president should be able to postpone such cases until after his term? Judge Barrett, let’s listen again, shall we, to Trump’s “Access Hollywood” tape. I don’t have a question. I just want to hear it again. Or maybe, as a woman, how do you feel listening to this recording? Let’s listen to it again, shall we. Take your time.

Taking this approach does a number of things.

1. Even if Barrett bobs and weaves and dodges all of this, it reminds Americans right before the election of just how awful this administration has been.

2. None of these questions are hypothetical. They are all real documented incidents. The vast majority are pretty obvious examples of breaking one law or the other. If Barrett refuses to answer honestly, she demonstrates that she is willing to simply be another Trump toady. Any claims to high moral Christian character are shown to be as empty as the claims made by the 80% of white evangelicals who continue to support Trump.

3. If she answers honestly, as I rather suspect she would, then Americans get to watch Trump and his lawless administration convicted by Trump’s own chosen justice.

Any of these outcomes would go much further toward delegitimizing the entire Republican project than if Democrats go down the typical road of asking hypothetical questions or trying to undermine her character.

Use her supposed good character and keen legal mind against the administration that has nominated her. Let her either convict Trump or embarrass herself by trying to weasel out of convicting Trump. Either way, it’ll be great television …”

Anonymous Poetic Opinion

Anonymous Poetic Opinion in circulation (Facebook)

Part of the misery of these four years is there is no art in this White House.
There is no literature or poetry in this White House.
No music.
No Kennedy Center award celebrations.
There are no pets in this White House. No loyal man’s best friend. No Socks Clinton, the family cat.
No kid’s science fairs.
No times when this president takes off his blue suit, red tie uniform and becomes human; except when he puts on his white shirt, khaki pants uniform and hides from Americans to play golf.
There are no images of the first family enjoying themselves together in a moment of relaxation.
No Obamas on the beach in Hawaii moments, or Bushes fishing in Kennebunkport, no Reagans on horseback, no Kennedys playing touch football on the Cape.
Where did that country go?
Where did all of the fun and joy and expressions of love and happiness go?
We used to be a country that did the ice bucket challenge and raised millions for charity.
We used to have a president that calmed and soothed the nation instead dividing it.
And a First Lady that planted a garden instead of ripping one out.
We are rudderless and joyless.
We have lost the cultural aspects of society that make America great.
We have lost our mojo. Our fun, our happiness. The cheering on of others.
The shared experiences of humanity that makes it all worth it.
The challenges AND the triumphs that we shared and celebrated.
The unique can-do spirit Americans have always been known for.
We are lost.
We have lost so much in so short a time.
Let’s see if we can get some of these things back starting when we vote on November 3rd.”
_______________________________________________________________________________

New York Times obtains over 20 yrs of Trump’s tax returns

Sept 27, 2020
New York Times

Mr. Trump’s finances are under stress, beset by losses that he aggressively employs to avoid paying taxes, and hundreds of millions in debt that he has personally guaranteed, which comes due in the coming years.

He paid $750 in federal income taxes in 2016, and nothing in 10 of the previous 15 years — largely because he reported losing much more money than he made.

Also hanging over him is an audit battle that he has long been waging, out of public view, with the I.R.S. An adverse ruling could cost him more than $100 million.
Link to The Atlantic article on Trump’s tax returns