It is only 19 days until the midterm elections in the U.S., and since there are some who will be voting early (and some may have already voted), I am writing about those extraordinarily important elections now—although I realize that this post will not likely change how anyone will vote. Still . . . .
John Darkow in the Columbia Missourian (10/12)
The most important elections on November 8 are those
for the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, although there are also
significant gubernatorial and other state elections as well.
For example, each state’s secretary of state is quite
important as they could skew elections, as The Washington Post clearly delineated
last month in an article titled "What
an election denier could do if elected secretary of state.”
By far, though, the most important elections are in the 34
states that will be voting for a Senator. The voters in those states will
determine which Party will be in control of the Senate for the next two years.
And, as is true every two years, all 435 Representatives in
Congress will be elected in November.
The winners of many of those 469 elections are almost
certain already. In my home state of Missouri, the Republican candidate for
Senator has a 99% chance of winning according to FiveThirtyEight (538), the website
that focuses on opinion poll analysis
And Rep. Sam Graves in Missouri’s sixth district (where I
live) will almost certainly be re-elected for a twelfth term as a U.S.
Representative. So, for us Missouri (and sixth district) voters, voting is
important mainly for statewide and county offices.
But there are several states where the senatorial election
is of great importance. According to 538, the closest, and thus the most
significant, races currently are in Nevada, Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North
Carolina, and Ohio.
The most troubling elections on November 8 are those that
include candidates who do not accept the outcome of the 2020 presidential
election.
“A majority of GOP
nominees deny or question the 2020 election results” is the title of an October
12 article in The Washington Post. According to author Amy Gardner, there
are 291 candidates who have challenged or refused to accept Joe Biden’s victory—51
percent of the 569 analyzed.
In spite of warnings that citizens should not vote for
candidates who deny or question the outcome of the 2020 election even though
there is ample evidence that it was a fair election and there is no proof whatsoever
that it was “stolen,” sadly, many will vote for those nominees anyway.
The article mentioned above links to a list of the deniers
in every state. The Missouri Republican candidate for the Senate and for the
sixth district are both on that list—and as I indicated above, both are almost
certain to win their respective races.
The November 8 elections are extraordinarily important
because the future of democracy in the USA is in grave jeopardy if those who
deny or disregard election results take control of Congress.
The October 10 opinion piece by eminent
columnist Eugene Robinson (b. 1954) was titled, “The 2022 midterms are the most
important of my lifetime.” (Click
here to read that article without a paywall.) Here is part of what he
wrote:
Vital issues are at stake on Election Day. Abortion rights are gravely threatened after the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Voting rights, especially for minorities, are imperiled. Efforts to fight climate change and make the transition to a clean-energy economy would at least be slowed if Republicans took either the House or the Senate.
But the overarching issue is what President Biden calls the fight for “the soul of this nation.” Do we continue our halting but undeniable progress toward making the Constitution’s guarantees of rights and freedoms apply to all Americans? Or do we reverse course?
“Will the U.S. Remain a Democracy?” was the title of my May
25 blog post. Now, nearly five months later, it is even more questionable
that democracy will prevail in this country. To a large extent, the answer to
the question depends on the outcome of the November 8—and the 2024—elections.
How will you vote?
.jpg)
Leroy, this is well stated and, of course, most important, not just for USAmerican democracy, but for the world, too, because we're one of the biggest kids on the block. I will repost on FB.
ReplyDeleteI read your comments in the email about our theological-philosophical exchanges. I want you to know that I greatly appreciate them. They challenge me and frequently send me back into my own library to read and reread things, much of which I'm sure I don't understand.
Your blog today reminds me of the minuscule relevance of my own lifetime struggles with theological-philosophical issues, of which, as we know, are greatly important in the aggregate. I sometimes suspect that my own preoccupation with the metaphysical-ontological questions is, in part, if not in large part, a narcotic of avoidance of the really hard challenge of embodying the Gospel in life.
Your blog also reminds me of how much Christianity has missed what I see as the powerful Christian doctrine of the incarnation. By turning it nearly exclusively into a ticket into some sweet bye and bye after we die, we've completely de-incarnated faith. The Christ is not so much about a free pass to a glorious afterlife as it is about embodied love, liberation, and justice in a world and a universe in which God is as deeply invested as we. Many years ago, Harvey Cox wrote a book, God's Revolution and Man's Responsibility, which I found to be eye-opening, in some ways more so than his better-known books. Therein, he lays out simply, concisely, and clearly the biblical case for investment in the material reality of the world and its history.
Thanks, Anton, for these comments--and for posting the link to my blog on Facebook.
DeleteWhile we had disagreements about theological/philosophical matters related to my 10/15 blog post, I agree with what you wrote here. In the early 1970s I read Cox's book "God's Revolution and Man's Responsibility" (1965), and like you was positively influenced by it.
Thanks, Leroy. Your blog post led me to review the procedures for my absentee ballot so that I can vote absentee here in RI. My state of residency, MD, has an interesting governor's race. Will the Republicans hold this office in this blue state? Inquiring minds want to know.
ReplyDeleteInquiring theological minds also want to know what President Biden means when he speaks about "the soul of this nation." The cynical part of me wants to say that he is attempting to garner support from the religious right. Biden, however, is certainly a person of faith so a flight into religious language is not foreign to him. It seems that "the soul of this nation" is democracy, unity, and hope, while the MAGA movement represents a "shriveling" (my word) of the USA soul into despair, division, and authoritarianism. I can get on board with that.
I am a bit uncomfortable with the binaries (unity/division, etc.), which so often characterize political and religious rhetoric. Life of course is more complicated than that. Didn't Hillary say something like you campaign in poetry but govern in prose? Oh that would be governing, no matter how prosaically! Nevertheless, I pray that my soul and the soul of the nation would somehow thrive in this election cycle. Peace to all who read my comments.
Thanks for your comments, Michael. Here are two quick responses: (1) I listened to Pres. Biden's speech that you referred to, and I don't think it was primarily political, trying to gain support from the religious right. My impression was that it was a sincere, heartfelt call for protecting democracy in the U.S.--and in the world. (2) I found that Hillary did use those words in a 2008 debate with Bernie Sanders, but she was quoting Mario Cuomo (1932-2015), the governor of New York from 1983 to 1994, who had said those words many years earlier. I hadn't remembered hearing those words, and I find them quite interesting.
DeleteWasn't it Zephanasticus who prophesied, "Woe unto the people who have gorged on lies and the lies now devour them, the swilled prevarications now drown them and the things they once held dear, yea, even Truth and Wisdom"? Since 2015 when the Anticipated Dread Ascent of another "Empire of Lies" began, and 2016 when the Impossible Dread Results of an Enlightened Citizenry's ballot choices brought the incarnation of Berzilius Windrip and Co. to national power and eminence in the states, I fear we have commenced already a diseased condition greater than that even of COVID. Sadly, the solutions of Left and Right cannot bind up and heal every wound.
ReplyDeleteThere's no going back, yet I hope the electorate votes moderately, sensibly. Yes, good luck with that: history's echoes warrant concerns. I cannot shake knowing of a book mentor's realization of crisis, when, having heard the speeches of Hitler and Goebbels repeatedly over the years, immediately upon Hitler's appointment as Reich Chancellor in 1933, he arranged for his family to leave Germany, and they emigrated permanently to America--before it was too late--the socio-political framework only needed an authoritarian hand to enshrine into law things that should not be. A Jew, then, he should reasonably expect not to survive long in the Empire of Lies that had been developing some time in Germany as in much of Europe.
I do place hope for better responses, more sober approaches, to our national crisis. I do fear that the "axial" qualities (in that aforementioned "soul of the nation") that pertain to democratic life may be so damaged that too many folk (even the Righteous), caught up in the impulses and coercions of a hostile time, seek in their leaders what Clive S. Lewis called (disparagingly) the "Highest Common Factor" (lowest common denominator). I pray we may have cause for hope in the midterms, though, and that I can speak reasonably about the hope among my fellow citizens. America has survived attempts against democracy even from the beginning, and survival has never precluded changes, adjustments, even amid all hope.
Thanks, Jerry, for your comments, but you stumped me with the "prophet" you cited. "Dr. Google" didn't seem to know that name or the good words you attributed to him. -- I join you in your prayer that we "may have hope in the midterms," but I am not very optimistic at this point. Not only have many "gorged on lies," but so many are seemingly more worried about the price of gasoline than the future of democracy.
DeleteIn response to what I wrote above, Dr. Summers, the erudite retired history professor, wrote,
Delete"Of course the prophet is a phantasm and my mouthpiece on the point. I deliberated about using the device.
"The other was Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy who migrated to the USA in 1933 and taught a year or so at Harvard before they kicked him out and he finished out his career at Dartmouth College. He was a Jewish Christian . . . there’s more I could say. Well, I first recognized the “Empire of Lies” that he referenced once or twice in his writings; otherwise he was always resisting and countering that empire.
Jerry, I am a bit embarrassed that I did not recognize your comments for what they were. I thought that sounded like a strange name, but I am not well-versed in ancient Greek philosophers, and you have previously made reference to classical thinkers that I knew little about. Your comments are even more meaningful and important coming from you about the current situation in the U.S. rather than being from some ancient philosopher I had never heard of.
DeleteDr. Summers responded, "It seems I need signal the reader more clearly when I am attempting a satirical, or is it ironic, vibe. And the 'prophet’s' statement was of my own composition. I hope it did not send too many to the OT in vain!"
DeleteHe also apologized for embarrassing me, which I certainly think he didn't need to do. It was my fault for not being more perceptive, and I will read his comments more carefully and try to be more perceptive in the future. I also hope that in the weeks ahead we will hear more good words from "Zephanasticus."
I much much appreciate the fairly lengthy, erudite comments above, but I also appreciate the brief comments below.
ReplyDeleteThinking Friend LeRoy Roberts, who was a freshman when I was a sophomore at Southwest Baptist College in 1956-57 and who now lives in North Carolina, wrote,
ReplyDelete"Excellent article, Leroy. Very well said. Democracy is at stake."
And then Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson, whom I came to know in 1962 when he was an instructor (and my professor) at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, where he lives now, comments:
"Well said, Leroy. I have never been more anxious about an election. I will vote for Democrats; they are thew ones who adhere to the Constitution and believes in fair elections. Unfortunately, Kentucky, like Missouri, is a red state."
About an hour ago I received the following comments by email from Thinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago:
ReplyDelete"What really concerns me is the case, Moore v Harper, now pending before the SCOTUS. If the court adopts the 'independent state legislature theory,' it could well be the last nail in the coffin of democracy. Such a decision would allow state legislatures to overturn any election results the controlling party finds distasteful. If so, then the ruling party in any state legislature can simply overturn any election result, which ends the party's control of the legislature, effectively making elections worthless.
"The SCOTUS has recently adopted some extreme (in my opinion) positions regarding the interpretation of the Constitution, so I am cautiously pessimistic. It is unlikely that the Court will issue a decision in this case before any elected officials are sworn into office in January, but the decision could definitely affect the 2024 election."
Thanks, Eric, for bringing up this important issue regarding elections. It seems that this is what Trump wanted the secretaries of state to do after the 2020 election--and what some of the secretary of state candidates want to do if elected next month. That is why I included the paragraph in the blog post about the importance of the secretary of state elections. I agree that if the SCOTUS decides in the wrong way, the presidential election results in 2024 will be in dire jeopardy.
DeleteLast night local Thinking Friend Dennis Boatright sent the following comments about politics here in Missouri:
ReplyDelete"You could follow the advice of our honorable Senator Josh Hawley and leave Missouri. He was speaking to people that disagree with Missouri's abortion ban, but it could apply to anyone that does not feel represented. Interestingly, that is actually the majority of Missourians since they have bypassed their elected representatives on expanding Medicare, medical marijuana and may approve recreational marijuana in November. Sometimes the elected reps still reverse the electorate, as they did when puppy mills were banned and they unsuccessfully tried to prevent Medicare expansion. The representatives are trying to make voter initiatives harder to put on the ballot, which is important to them because the abortion ban could be reversed with popular vote, probably with an amendment that guarantees the right in the constitution."
Thanks for writing, Dennis, but I don't think that I will take Sen. Hawley's and what I assume is your tongue-in-cheek advice to leave Missouri because of my dissatisfaction with the top elected officials here (including the governor). As you pointed out, Missourians have voted for important matters that are contrary to what the Republican politicians want, the most important of those being Medicaid (not Medicare) expansion. And locally, I have been very pleased with Mark Ellebracht, my state representative, and Lauren Authur, my state senator. And someday, even though it will probably be after I am dead and gone, I think there will be politicians of their caliber who will represent Mo. in Washington, D.C.
DeleteAre you saying that voting in Missouri is only important in state wide and local elections because the Republicans are winning in the bigger races? Or are you saying that it's only important because the bigger races are pretty much already decided? I know it may seem like a distinction without a difference, but to me voting my conscience is always important regardless of what impact it may have on the race. Also if you are saying the former it seems like you are saying that voting is only important if your side wins.
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting, David, but I wish you would identify yourself more fully on your blogsite. I found out you live in Illinois, but I don't know your last name or what you do mostly now that you are no longer a "home school Dad."
DeleteI am sorry I didn't make it clear that I think voting is not so important in political races that are almost certainly to go one way or the other. The closer a race is, the more important voting is. That is true no matter which side is winning, and I am certainly not saying that voting is important only if my side wins. I will vote for candidates who are almost certain to lose, but I don't know what it means to say voting your conscience "is always important regardless of what impact it may have." Who is going to know how you voted?