SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
midterm elections
How Journalists Can Cover the Midterms to Help Protect Their Legitimacy
As President Donald Trump continues to insist he won the 2020 election, reporters must keep their readers informed about the 2026 voting process and press all candidates on whether or not they will accept the voters' decision.
Apr 10, 2026
A few weeks before the 2020 presidential election, I wrote “An Open Letter to My Old Tribe,” urging “every reporter who is covering this election at any level” to focus on a crucial question—whether the public would trust the election procedure and the losing candidate would accept the result as legitimate. “It does not seem an exaggeration,” I wrote then, “to say that the future of American democracy, perhaps its very survival, depends on the answer.”
More than five years later, with less than seven months to go before the midterm elections, that question is before us again, but in far starker terms than I could have imagined in 2020. So, here’s an updated letter to the media tribe I once belonged to, with suggestions broadly similar to those I made five years ago, but with a far sharper sense of urgency, even fear.
Here’s my first suggestion: Reporters in 2026 need to pay more attention to and offer more forceful coverage of President Donald Trump’s continuing insistence that Joe Biden’s victory in 2020 was fraudulent and that year’s election illegitimate. (As recently as March 15, he tweeted this completely false allegation: “With time, it [the 2020 election] has been conclusively proven to be stolen.”)
While Trump keeps repeating that long-discredited claim, journalists should not treat his falsehoods as “old news” that no longer requires detailed coverage anymore. They should instead consider it an important and newsworthy story right now. Instead of briefly repeating a shorthand conclusion (“false” or “without evidence”) after a quote from the president, they should take a few more lines of type or minutes of air time to remind readers or listeners of the facts that show irrefutably why they should never believe his words. After all, Trump’s “rigged election” claims haven’t been validated in a single one of 64 court cases—that’s right, 64!—challenging the election results, or in any official investigation or recount.
Ask every Republican candidate on your state’s ballot to answer this question: Do you really believe that Donald Trump won the 2020 election, and lost only because of massive vote fraud?
On that point, reporters can cite an authoritative 2022 report, “Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case That Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Election,” written by a panel of authors including two former Republican senators, a lawyer who served as solicitor-general under President George W. Bush, and five other prominent conservatives. After exhaustively reviewing every judicial proceeding and post-election probe in six states where election fraud was alleged, the authors concluded that “Donald Trump and his supporters had their day in court and failed to produce substantive evidence to make their case.” Their definitive verdict on the overall issue was: “There is absolutely no evidence of fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election on the magnitude necessary to shift the result in any state, let alone the nation as a whole. In fact, there was no fraud that changed the outcome in even a single precinct.”
(Journalists might also pass on this thought from David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, who, in a recent podcast, suggested that all 2020 election conspiracy theories rest on this dubious premise: “Democrats, being out of power, somehow managed a conspiracy against a sitting president, who controlled the entire government, to steal an election from him… and that four years later when those same Democrats held every lever of federal power, they forgot to do it again.”)
Reporters should also remind their audience of another important fact: Trump’s claims of fraud in the 2020 election were emphatically refuted by Mike Pence, his vice president, and Bill Barr, his attorney general, both of whom publicly broke with the president, strongly denied his allegations, and unequivocally recognized that Joe Biden had been legitimately elected.k
In that connection, here’s a related suggestion for reporters: Ask every Republican candidate on your state’s ballot to answer this question: Do you really believe that Donald Trump won the 2020 election, and lost only because of massive vote fraud? Press as hard as you can for an on-the-record, yes-or-no answer, and if you don’t get one, keep pushing. If a candidate says yes or evades the question, follow up with questions like: “What evidence do you have? How do you explain that those charges were not verified in a vote recount or in a single one of more than 60 judicial proceedings? Were judges in 64 courtrooms across six states all part of a nefarious conspiracy against Donald Trump, or do you have any other explanation?”
Report on the Process, Not Just the Arguments
Journalists in 2026 also have a much broader task: to keep their audiences informed on the details of the election process and the ongoing efforts to undermine its legitimacy. Covering those themes systematically and proactively will not be easy at a time when the headlines are bound to be filled with other explosive issues: a major war in the Middle East (and possibly beyond); the ongoing bitter controversy about the Trump administration’s chaotic immigration enforcement campaign that led to the violent deaths of two US citizens; the continuing effects of drastic staff reductions in federal agencies that have eliminated or significantly reduced government services and benefits for millions of Americans; and a long list of other divisive subjects. But the threat to public trust in the election process poses a clear and present danger to the principles, traditions, and values of the American political system, and news organizations need to adapt their campaign coverage accordingly.
So, here’s a suggestion (one I made in that earlier letter years ago) to reporters, editors, and news directors across the country:
Starting now, treat the election process in your state as a significant running news story. Make it a separate beat, alongside the traditional coverage of the reactions of candidates and voters. Touch base regularly with local and state election administrators. Learn (and then tell your readers or listeners) the details: how voters are registered, how and where the voting will be conducted, and exactly how their votes will be counted. Cultivate sources and regularly report what local officials are doing (or not doing) to ensure a credible election. Meanwhile, before any votes are cast or counted, press candidates and their minions to state exactly what they would define as evidence of miscounting or fraud, what they would consider grounds for contesting the outcomes of local or other races, and how they envisage conducting those contests—standards for which they can then be held accountable if they do end up disputing the official results.
Don’t cover such subjects only when they arise in a partisan debate where the traditional role of journalists is to report both sides (candidate A says the ballot count will be falsified or ineligible voters will be allowed to vote, candidate B or election administrator C says the voting will be legally conducted and the count will be accurate). Instead, monitor and regularly update your audience on what’s actually happening. Track problems as they appear and solutions as they are proposed, discussed, and adopted.
For example, on the controversy about voting by mail—an issue now before the Supreme Court—don’t just report the opposing arguments and leave it to readers and listeners to choose which side to believe. Give them the knowledge to decide for themselves. Don’t wait for partisans on one side or the other to bring up the subject. Take the initiative with a story detailing the rules in your state that define who can vote by mail and how to do so. When the time comes, report how many mail-in ballots have been distributed and track how many have been returned. Explain in detail how those ballots are stored and protected and when and how they will be opened and counted—facts that will let news consumers reach their own conclusion about the practice and whether it’s risky or not.
Reliable Sources
A useful resource for journalists covering such issues is the nonprofit news organization Votebeat, which focuses exclusively on covering how elections are conducted and distributes its articles at no cost to readers or local and national news outlets. Founded in 2020, Votebeat has reporters based in five states (Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin) that were centers of controversy in that year’s election. On the national level, in 2024 it operated an “Expert Desk” where journalists could ask voting-related questions and get knowledgeable answers from a panel of nearly 100 election administrators, cybersecurity experts, attorneys specializing in election law, and other professionals. It plans a similar program to assist journalists covering this year’s election. Reporters or anyone else concerned about election issues can sign up here to regularly receive its reports.
A variety of other organizations across the political spectrum can answer media queries on election procedures and management. Here are a few more groups whose work reporters should follow and contact if needed:
- Voting Rights Lab, “a campaign hub designed to supercharge the fight against voter suppression.” It operates the Election Policy Tracker, which “analyzes voting and election laws across all 50 states and the District of Columbia and provides near-real time analysis of election-related legislation pending across the country.” The tracker is designed to support “policy experts, advocates, researchers, legislators, and anyone on the front lines of the pro-democracy movement with critical information about the laws and legislation shaping our elections.”
- Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group bringing together “conservatives, moderates, and progressives” who share a common goal: “preventing American democracy from declining into a more authoritarian form of government.”
- The Center for Election Innovation & Research, whose stated goal is “to restore trust in the American election system and promote election procedures that encourage participation and ensure election integrity and security.” (David Becker, the group’s executive director, is quoted earlier in this article.)
- Defending Democracy Together, an organization created by “lifelong conservatives and Republicans” to defend “democratic norms, values, and institutions” and oppose “abuses of power that threaten to undermine the integrity of US elections, federal agencies, and the Republican Party as a whole.” Its list of directors includes William Kristol, founder of the right-wing magazine The Weekly Standard, and Mona Charen, a staff member and speechwriter in Ronald Reagan’s White House.
- Republicans for Voting Rights, committed to defending “the accessibility, integrity, and competitiveness of American elections” and to oppose Republicans “pushing for more restrictive voting laws designed to support unfounded accusations that the [2020] election was stolen and the results were illegitimate.”
And one last suggestion for journalists covering this year’s election: Go down the ballot in your state and ask every candidate running for the Senate or House of Representatives or any significant state or local office for an unequivocal on-the-record commitment to respect the voters’ decision, whatever it might be. If any candidates waffle or decline to answer, don’t just leave it at that and go on to the next story. Instead, keep asking them (and their political allies, campaign organizers, and spokespeople) the same question and press them to explain exactly why they are dodging the issue.
I ended my 2020 letter with this closing paragraph:
Journalists alone will not win the fight to protect the legitimacy of this election, but they can make an important contribution—perhaps the most important since reporters covering the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s helped make the country confront the realities and the profound injustice of the segregation era. In the coming weeks, it will be absolutely vital for journalists everywhere, in every medium, to recognize the challenge and greatly intensify their efforts in rising to it. The stakes could not be higher.
Sadly enough, in 2026, those words ring even more pertinently than when I wrote them.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The GOP Is Taking Our Healthcare to Fund Bombs and Tax Cuts; We’re Fighting Back
Republicans have decided that they don’t care about what the American people want, only about enabling Trump’s worst impulses. Our job is to make sure they regret that this November.
Apr 03, 2026
Last year, Republicans cut $1 trillion from Medicaid in the same bill that gave billionaires massive tax cuts. They also slashed funding for the Affordable Care Act, making healthcare unaffordable for Americans across the country.
As a result of these cuts, at least 1.5 million Americans have already lost their healthcare coverage, with an estimated 15 million set to lose coverage in the coming years. Nearly 450 hospitals, many of them in rural areas, are at risk of closing or shrinking.
Despite this devastation, Republicans are planning to make even deeper cuts to healthcare. Top Republicans, including House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), want to make even more cuts to the Affordable Care Act—to fund President Donald Trump’s catastrophic war with Iran. Trump himself is threatening cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, saying, “We’re fighting wars… It’s not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things.”
Republicans have decided that they don’t care about what the American people want, only about enabling Trump’s worst impulses. Our job is to make sure they regret that this November, when every member of the US House and one-third of the US Senate is on the ballot.
The Trump regime and their Republican minions in Congress think they can ignore the people, but when we stand together, when we raise our voices together, we cannot be ignored.
That’s why we are launching the Stop Taking Our Health Care Campaign to hold Republicans accountable. This month, members of Congress are home for recess—and we’ll make sure that they hear from their constituents.
We are holding dozens of events in targeted congressional districts across the country, demanding that Republicans Stop Taking Our Health Care. But, we need your help to host even more. Take a look and see if there is an event near you. If there isn’t one, then please sign up to host one yourself. We will help make it a success.
To kick off the Stop Taking Our Health Care Campaign, we held a live stream with guests including Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas).
Rep. Underwood said: “Donald Trump and Republicans’ failure to address these tax credits has created a healthcare crisis for working families. When premiums go up and help disappears, families are forced to make impossible choices. Do they keep their health insurance, or do they pay their rent? Do they refill their prescriptions, or do they buy groceries?”
Every day, the Trump administration is spending at least a billion dollars of taxpayer money in Iran.The American people do not want this war. They want affordable healthcare. - @underwood.house.gov @unrigoureconomy.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 2, 2026 at 12:01 PM
Rep. Casar said: “They’ve already gutted Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, kicking 15 million Americans potentially off of their healthcare. And now they want to kick off hundreds of thousands more everyday working families from their healthcare to pay for Trump’s completely unnecessary war of choice in Iran. We’ve got to put everyday Americans’ lives above more and more profits for the Trump administration and their rich friends.”
The Trump Administration already gutted Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act.Now they want to kick off hundreds of thousands more working families from their healthcare to pay for Trump's completely unnecessary war in Iran. - @repcasar.bsky.social @unrigoureconomy.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 2, 2026 at 12:05 PM
Theresa Luoni, a New Jersey mom and caregiver whose family relies on Medicaid, said: “Republicans in Washington have worked day and night to raise costs for families like mine and make it harder for us to make ends meet, and now they're doubling down, threatening even deeper cuts to Medicaid so they can pay for their war and continue handing out tax breaks to billionaires.”
Republicans in Washington have worked day and night to raise costs for families like mine.Now they're doubling down, threatening even deeper cuts to Medicaid, so they can pay for their war and continue handing out tax breaks to billionaires. - Theresa Luoni@unrigoureconomy.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 2, 2026 at 12:19 PM
Jon “Bowzer” Bauman, senior adviser at Social Security Works, said: “Our campaign and this month of action is designed to hold these people accountable for their vote on things like the Big Ugly Bill, which failed to extend the tax credits for the Affordable Care Act and cut a trillion dollars out of Medicaid. Our message is simple: Stop taking our healthcare.”
During this month of action, we will hold Republicans accountable for the Big Ugly Bill.Rural hospitals and nursing homes are already closing because of them. - @jonbowzerbauman.bsky.social @unrigoureconomy.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 2, 2026 at 12:17 PM
Unrig Our Economy Campaign Director Leor Tal said: “Republicans in Congress promised to lower costs, but instead, they cut our healthcare and made life even more expensive for working families. Now Republicans in Congress want to cut healthcare even more to pay for this unnecessary and expensive war that they've started, which is already driving up costs for working families. That's why we’re launching Stop Taking Our Health Care, a nationwide campaign fighting back against Republican efforts to rip healthcare coverage away from working families.”
Republicans in Congress promised to lower costs. Instead they cut our healthcare and made life even more expensive for working families. And now they want to cut health care even more to pay for this unnecessary and expensive war.- Leor Tal, @unrigoureconomy.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 2, 2026 at 11:55 AM
The Trump regime and their Republican minions in Congress think they can ignore the people, but when we stand together, when we raise our voices together, we cannot be ignored. It’s time to demand healthcare not warfare!
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Is the Most Dangerous Man in the World
There has never been a bigger sociopathic megalomaniac in Western democratic polities than Donald J. Trump.
Apr 03, 2026
Does President Donald Trump have an endgame in Iran? Are personality traits a factor in Trump’s foreign policy behavior? How different is Trump from his postwar predecessors? Will he end US democracy? Political scientist, political economist, author, and journalist C. J. Polychroniou tackles these questions in an interview with the French-Greek journalist and writer Alexandra Boutri, but does not hesitate to point out that whoever thought that some of the acts associated with mad Roman emperors (like Caligula’s war on Neptune) belong to a bygone era probably hasn’t been paying attention to how crazy and disruptive things are in the Trump era.
Alexandra Boutri: The war in Iran has entered its second month and one cannot rely on the US president for when it might end. Trump refuses to give a clear timeline, although he has boasted on numerous occasions that his war was won. In your view, what is Trump’s endgame in Iran?
C. J. Polychroniou: Let me start with the following statement: The second Trump presidency is far more dangerous than its first but no less incompetent. Whether it’s the economy and his “beautiful” tariffs or world affairs, Trump has no clue what he is doing. His decision-making style is governed by self-interest and a gut-instinct approach. And he has, given who he is, surrounded himself not only with loyalists but with subservient yes-people.
Indeed, it is most unlikely that Trump engaged in a comprehensive review of intelligence reports and military analyses before he initiated military action against Iran. My guess is that he simply became convinced by war-criminal and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the most pro-Israel officials in his administration that the strategy of taking out Iran’s leadership would paralyze the country and lead to regime change. That was a gamble, not a plan. The Iranian regime did not collapse after the decapitation strikes because it is not a one-man dictatorship like Iraq was under Saddam Hussein. The power hierarchy in Iran is very complicated. Power is actually distributed throughout several layers of the government, and there are parallel armies and intelligence services. Of course, the fact that power is not concentrated in the hands of one man does not make the Iranian regime less brutal. But it makes it less likely to collapse because of an attack on the country’s top political and military leaders.
The Trumpian nightmare has a long way to go before it is over, and it’s bound to get much worse.
Incidentally, and this needs to be strongly emphasized, the decapitation of Iran’s top leadership is criminal and illegal. Trump’s war on Iran is in violation of international (and US) law. It’s a war against the United Nations Charter. Israel and the United States don’t give a hoot about international law and human rights, but it doesn’t mean the world should allow them to think that they are being perceived as anything other than rogue states.
We live in dark, perilous times for humanity and the planet as a whole. Whoever thought that the acts of mad Roman emperors (like Caligula’s war on Neptune) belong to a bygone era probably hasn’t been paying attention to how crazy and disruptive things are in the Trump era. The current occupant of the White House is mentally unhinged. He threatens to bomb Iran “back to stone ages” and do whatever he wants with Cuba. I fear he is capable of unbelievable acts of cruelty and madness. In fact, and I said this about his second presidency long before he decided to go to war with Iran, we haven’t seen anything yet. The Trumpian nightmare has a long way to go before it is over, and it’s bound to get much worse.
Alexandra Boutri: How much worse can it get? What is it that you are really worried about Trump and his actions?
C. J. Polychroniou: Trump is a real threat to world peace. That’s already well established. He has unleashed what can be best described as lunacy imperialism. He is also dismantling US democracy at unprecedented rate and has launched an equally unprecedented assault on the environment. He is a wrecking ball, and it’s simply shocking that there is still a sizeable portion of the citizenry that thinks he is doing a great job. But what else can one expect from people who believe that explosive conflict in the Middle East will trigger Christ’s return and see Trump as the man God has chosen to defeat the satanic forces in the United States and Christianize it? No wonder why Trump behaves like a king and views himself as an emperor who can do whatever he pleases. There has never been a bigger sociopathic megalomaniac in Western democratic polities than Donald J. Trump, which is why he lacks self-awareness, lies about everything, all the time, and is so fixated with attaching his name to institutions, buildings, and symbols.
If it was entirely up to Trump, US democracy would be already dead by now.
Imperialist adventuring is standard US foreign policy. But Trump’s foreign policy agenda, I would argue, seems to be less about the advancement of US interests than about his own legacy, his own personal political immortality. The US doesn’t need Greenland for national security; it can access its resources without gaining sovereignty over land. The US doesn’t need Venezuela’s oil (there is a global oil oversupply anyway), and leaders of the industry have shown little interest in making the massive investments needed to revive its outdated infrastructure, despite the fact that Venezuela has the largest known oil reserves in the world. Annexing Canada and making it the 51st state will not make the US necessarily richer or more secure. But there is no doubt that Trump likes the idea of being the president who expanded the country’s borders. This is how he may be remembered by the future generations.
In saying all this, I do not doubt that there are “strategic” rationalizations circulated by Trump’s national security team for the revival of naked US imperialism. Or that these rationalizations are insignificant in the making of foreign policy. But, for Trump, I believe the foreign policy decisions that he ultimately reaches are based on how he thinks they may cement his own legacy. And most of these decisions are as irrational as those driving his domestic agenda. Abstract theorization about the revival of US imperialism under Trump II is fine and well, and much needed, but I think this is one outstanding case where personality becomes an important factor in decision-making and therefore adding to our understanding of both domestic and foreign policy behavior.
Alexandra Boutri: How different is Trump from his recent predecessors? Also, I can conclude from what you have already said that you don’t expect Trump to go down without a fight. But does he really want to end democracy in the United States?
C. J. Polychroniou: Trump is a very different president from all of his postwar predecessors in several critical ways. First, he has monetized the White House. Trump and his family have made huge amounts of money off of the presidency. Second, he views himself above the law and makes everything about his own ego. Third, he suppresses and ignores scientific research and findings like no other president I am aware of and simply doesn’t give a hoot about public health and the environment or the lives and the livelihoods of anyone outside his own family and his rich donors. Fourth, he is a racist, misogynist, and bigot who also hates working class people and the poor. Fifth, he is carrying out an anti-democracy project both inside the United States and across the globe, while also seeking to create “a kind of a Trump world.”
It would be naive and dangerous on the part of anyone to think that Trump will go down without a fight. His numbers are collapsing, and he is terrified of the possibility that the Democrats will flip the House and the Senate while he is still president, which is why he is trying to undermine this year’s midterm elections. If it was entirely up to Trump, US democracy would be already dead by now. But he is trying to rig the 2026 midterm elections, and my fear is that he may succeed. Also, I don’t think it is far-fetched to say that he may declare martial law to keep the Democrats from winning. I hope I am dead wrong, but I am of the view that the worst is yet to come with Trump.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular