Destabilized Saturday Edition #43
Democracy. It's what's for dinner, Schadenfreude battery needed, "Of poodles crossbred with retrievers and unbroken right-wing fevers", 80-degree ice skating
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free
And the home of the brave?
—
I’m going to hold-off on a full analysis of the midterms at least until all the races are decided and we have clarity about what happened. But below are some initial thoughts and reactions:
The first line of last week’s Destabilized Saturday Edition was “Nobody knows what’s going to happen in the election next week.” It reflected my general view that the polling and early vote data (and other intensity indicators like small dollar donations) was saying the election could go either way, and my specific view that the reversal of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority, a watershed moment in American politics, was being underappreciated as a factor. That turned out to be correct despite the fact that…
Republicans pushed a “red wave” narrative for months and the mainstream political press really fell for it in the couple weeks leading up to the election. (If you haven’t seen Chris Hayes’ “red wave”/“red tsunami” Fox News supercut, it’s an enjoyable 2 minutes.) The media buying in to the red wave story affected my emotional equilibrium vis a vis the election – last week I wrote, “Still, when I think about next week I feel anxious” – so while I stuck to my analytical guns, my convictions weren’t enough to stay level emotionally.
In August I wrote: “The Kansas abortion rights results suggest we may be entering an era of politics where abortion rights being on the ballot creates a headwind for Republicans…”, and indeed an initial scan of the midterm outcomes indicates Democrats over-performed in places where voters perceived abortion rights and/or democracy to be at stake. According to Nate Cohn, “The two matters [abortion and democracy] were at stake in direct ways in some states, whether through referendums on abortion rights or candidates on the ballot who had taken antidemocratic stances. In many of those places, Democrats defied political gravity. In states where democracy and abortion were less directly at issue, the typical midterm dynamics often took hold and Republicans excelled.” The point about democracy is only partly true – e.g., election denier Kari Lake may yet be the next governor of Arizona – but abortion was definitely a headwind for Republicans in certain states, including Michigan and Pennsylvania. The abortion ban issue is significant because it’s not going away. Indeed, as more people run into its restrictions its political traction could actually grow over time.
Despite a few armed and masked dropbox watchers in Arizona, the administration of the election, vote counting, etc. has gone even better than I had hoped. So far. Most losing Republican candidates even conceded reasonably promptly (though not all). This was the most important issue of the 2022 midterms from a democracy perspective.
As I’ve been thinking about the question “How did American democracy fare in the 2022 midterms?”, I’ve found myself answering it with another question: “Compared to what?” Compared to the 2020 election (up to and including January 6th), 2022 has been incredibly smooth so far. Compared to how I feared it might go, it’s been amazing. But compared to how elections should and do work in healthy democracies, there have been some bumps. These include Kari Lake’s campaign sowing doubts about the integrity of the vote count in Arizona:
We won this election on Election night. Everything after was narrative. They didn't want @KariLake to have her victory speech. They want you to think this isn't a movement. They are very wrong. When this victory comes, we're going to celebrate. Then Kari is going to lead.
Lindsey Graham saying the Nevada Senate election results are a “lie” unless the Republican wins (which, it looks increasingly likely, he won’t):
Lindsey Graham suggested on NRSC call yesterday that fraud in NV would be the only way GOP loses. “There is no mathematical way Laxalt loses,” Graham said. “If he does, then it’s a lie.”
And, of course, the likely Republican U.S. House majority (though control of the House hasn’t been called yet) being dominated by election deniers, including many who voted, after the January 6th attack, against certifying the 2020 presidential election:
Despite the emotionally relatable triumphalism of some pro-democracy pundits this week, the claim that America rejected fascism in 2022 doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. For example, Governor Ron DeSantis, who arrested (Black) people for having voted in 2020 despite being allowed by authorities to register and vote, passed the “Don’t say gay” law banning teachers from mentioning homosexuality in school, and then materially punished Disney for voicing opposition to the law, won Florida by a 20-point margin. Would-be authoritarian Kris Kobach was elected Attorney General in Kansas, Republicans came within fewer than 10,000 votes of winning supermajorities in both houses of the Wisconsin legislature despite a 50-50 electorate, wannabe fascist Kari Lake either is the next governor of Arizona or came awfully close, etc. etc.
I want as badly as anyone to live in a stable political system rather than under threat from a fascist movement. But my commitment in publishing Destabilized is to explain what I see in the climate change, political, and media/information spheres and tease out the implications, and to do so clearly and directly. I take pains not to hedge in order to avoid unpleasantness and I’m similarly careful not to overstate risks for dramatic effect or any other reason.
The 2022 election went much better than many feared, and better than history suggested it would. It did not go well enough to declare that American fascism is on its way out – not even close. But it did go well and that gives us hope.
My Work
Following Hurricane Nicole’s damaging arrival on Florida’s east coast this week, I’m re-upping a piece I wrote three weeks ago, on the heels of Hurricane Ian.
Has Florida already started to unravel? (link)
If prospective home buyers can’t access home insurance, they generally can’t get a mortgage. If buyers can’t get mortgages, the market for buying and selling homes would nearly evaporate, causing home values to crash. If buyers can only access really expensive property insurance, the value of homes also plummets… though not quite as catastrophically. In this scenario, even renting becomes expensive because landlords have to cover their now-elevated insurance costs.
Interesting Reads
Thoughts on Last Night: A Step Back from the Precipice on Election Denialism and a Slightly Rosier Forecast for a Free and Fair Election in 2024 (link)
The votes are still being tallied and there are still some worrisome places to watch (most importantly at this point, Arizona), but the worst case scenario seemed to have been avoided yesterday and last night in terms of risks to free and fair elections.
First, there was very little violence and disruption of voting locations…
Are Texas Republicans Serious About Secession? (link)
Last November, while speaking to students at Texas A&M University, U.S. senator Ted Cruz said he wasn’t quite ready to endorse secession—before revealing how little stood in the way of him changing his mind. “If [Democrats in Washington] pack the Supreme Court, if they make D.C. a state, if they federalize elections and massively expand voter fraud, there may come a point where it’s hopeless,” Cruz said. “We’re not there yet. And if there comes a point where it’s hopeless, then I think we take NASA, we take the military, we take the oil.”
Tweets of the Week
Extreme Weather Watch
Creeping Fascism Watch
Progress Joy and Hope
My first read of this newsletter and very enjoyable. After observing elections at the national level since 1968, my conclusion is that there are way too many variables out there for anyone, even the most astute, to be able to detect any other than narrow amplitude trends. It's best to figuratively shrug ones shoulders and say "who knows?" The situation improves as the elections narrow down to state and best, local.. there predictions become more accurate. I'm not saying one can't make descriptors of the current political situation at time t° but the accuracy rapidly falls off as time increased even with our best Bayesian methodology. Case in point, Trump in 2016.