A weekly window on the American political scene hosted by the Monitor's politics editors.

Who decides when an election is over?

The media don’t determine the winner, and President Trump has the right not to concede. But there are after-effects. Enter America’s next great civics lesson.

John Minchillo/AP
Supporters of President Donald Trump are separated from celebrating demonstrators by police after the 2020 presidential election is called for President-elect Joe Biden, Nov. 7, in Philadelphia.

Dear reader:
 When the presidential race was “called” last Saturday for former Vice President Joe Biden, I was sitting with a few other reporters in an Italian restaurant near the Trump National Golf Club in northern Virginia. We, the White House “press pool,” weren’t invited to accompany President Donald Trump into his club. But when it came time to leave, we got to see what he saw from inside the motorcade – crowds of Biden and Trump supporters, holding signs, waving flags, making noise.
 Scenes like this played out around the country, all based on the announcements of news media “decision desks” that call elections. But President Trump has not conceded the race, nor has his administration “ascertained” that Mr. Biden is the “apparent successful candidate.” Such a legal designation has existed since 1963 to help with an orderly transition, as I wrote Tuesday.
 Here’s the issue: The election, technically, isn’t over – as many readers have pointed out. Votes are still being counted, court challenges are in progress, most states have yet to certify results, and the Electoral College hasn’t met. That happens Dec. 14.
 Mr. Trump has the right not to concede the election. But he isn’t just sitting idly by, waiting for final results. He’s actively promoting, via social media, the idea that the election was stolen. Twitter labels his tweets “disputed,” but his message is still breaking through. A Politico/Morning Consult poll taken Nov. 6-9 found that 70% of Republicans don’t believe the election was “free and fair.” To many Americans, the president’s behavior poses a threat to democracy.
 The challenge for the mainstream media, repeatedly dubbed “fake news,” is profound. This year, media outlets have gone out of their way to explain how they declare election winners, as with this Associated Press article. The people who work at decision desks are green-eyeshade data scientists committed to getting it right, not partisans projecting a desired outcome.
 In the meantime, before the 2020 election fully resolves, here’s some advice from my old friend Bob Carolla, a former aide to retired Democratic Sen. George Mitchell of Maine.
 “If I learned anything from George Mitchell as a lawyer and legislator,” it’s this, Mr. Carolla writes in an email. “If a person is being reasonable, be reasonable and flexible. If they are unreasonable but within their rights, be patient but firm and keep advancing steadily.”
 He concludes: We are passing through a “Great American Civics Lesson.”
 Let us know what you’re thinking at csmpolitics@csmonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Who decides when an election is over?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today