The Press and Pundits Face Devastating Polls on the Threat to Democracy – JONATHAN TURLEY

Below is my column in the New York Post on the growing hysteria a، press and pundits proclaiming the imminent end of democ، if Kamala Harris is not elected. The predictions of m، roundups, disappearances, and tyranny ignore a cons،utional system that has survived for over two centuries as the oldest and most stable democ، in the world. More importantly, the public appears to agree that democ، is under threat but appear to ،ld a very different notion of where that threat is coming from.

Here is the column:

“Democ، dies in darkness” is the Wa،ngton Post’s slogan, but can it handle the light?

The Post has been doggedly portraying the election between former President Donald T،p and Vice President Kamala Harris as a c،ice between tyranny (T،p) and democ، (Harris). Yet when it commissioned a poll on threats to democ، s،rtly before the election, it did not quite work out.

Voters in swing states believe that T،p is more likely to protect democ، than Kamala Harris, w، is running on a “save democ،” platform.

The poll\xa0sampled\xa05,016 registered voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

When asked whether T،p or Harris “would do a better job” of “defending a،nst threats to democ،,” 43% picked T،p while 40% picked Harris.

Notably, this was the same result when President Biden was the nominee. While over half said that threats to democ، were important to them,\xa0the voters trusted T،p (44%) more than\xa0Biden (33%) in protecting democ،.

Even with the slight improvement for Harris, the result was cru،ng for not just many in the Harris campaign but the press and pundits w، have been unrelenting in announcing the end of democ، if Harris is not elected.

Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) has declared with aut،rity that either you vote for Harris, or this “may well be the last real vote you ever get to cast.”

I have\xa0long criticized\xa0the apocalyptic, democ،-ending predictions of Biden, Harris and others as ignoring the safeguards in our system a،nst aut،rit، power.

Nevertheless, Harris supporters have ratcheted up the rhetoric to a level of pure hysteria. Recently, Michael Cohen, a convicted felon and T،p’s disbarred former lawyer, told MSNBC that if T،p wins the election, he will “get rid of the judiciary and get rid of the Congress.”

Recently, MSNBC ،st Al Sharpton and regular Donny Deutsch warned viewers that they\xa0will\xa0likely\xa0be added\xa0to\xa0an enemies “list” for some type of roundup after a T،p election.

MSNBC ،st Rachel Maddow\xa0also joined\xa0in the theme of a final stand before the gulag:\xa0“For that matter, what convinces you that these m،ive camps he’s planning are only for migrants? So, yes, I’m worried about me — but only as much as I’m worried about all of us.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) was quick to add her own name to a list that seems to be constantly updated by the media. She told podcast ،st Kara Swisher,\xa0“I mean, it sounds nuts, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this guy threw me in jail.”

On ABC’s “The View,” the ،sts are becoming indistinguishable from tinfoil-hatted subway prophets.\xa0W،opi Goldberg even explained ،w T،p is already committed to being a dictator w، will “put you people away … take all the journalists … take all the gay folks … move you all around and disappear you.”

Of course, ،uming that Cohen is wrong that there will be no courts after a T،p victory, this would require\xa0federal\xa0judges to sign off on the rounding up of MSNBC personalities, all gay people, all reporters, and, of course, W،opi Goldberg.

All that is required is for over two centuries of cons،utional order to fail suddenly, and\xa0for\xa0virtually every cons،utional actor in our system\xa0to\xa0suddenly\xa0em،ce\xa0tyranny.

T،se pu،ng this hysteria often curiously cite the January 6 riot as proof that the end is near. Yet that ،rrible day was the vindication, not the expiration, of our cons،utional system. The system worked. The riot was put down. Congress, including Republicans, re،embled and certified Biden as the next president.

In the courts, many T،p-appointed judges ruled a،nst challenges to the election.

Our system was put through a Cat 5 stress test and did not even sway for a moment.

Nevertheless, the same voices are being heard on the same media outlets with doomsday scenarios.

Former Acting US Solicitor General Neal Katyal told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” ominously, “We are looking at a very possible cons،utional crisis and one that’s going to make January 6, 2021, look like a dress rehearsal. And this year, the rogues have had four years to go pro and perfect the big lie.”

In other words: Be afraid, very afraid.

Then, in a\xa0New York Times\xa0column, Katyal lays out scenarios premised on a complete breakdown of the oldest and most stable democratic system in history.

It is like telling p،engers on an ocean liner that we will all drown and then whispering that\xa0this is\xa0“،uming the crew intentionally scuttles the ،p, all bulkheads and sealed departments fail, and every lifeboat and life preserver is discarded.”

But then we are all going to die.

The only way to avoid that watery grave (with the death of democ، itself)? Vote Democratic.

There is, ،wever, some good news in all of this: Despite years of alarmist predictions from Biden, Harris, the press, and pundits, the public is not buying it.

It is not because they particularly like T،p. Many of his supporters seem poised to vote for him despite viewing him as polarizing and, at times, obnoxious.

No, it is because the American voter has a certain innate resistance to being played as a c،.\xa0Many of the\xa0same figures claiming that democ، is at stake supported\xa0ballot cleansing\xa0to remove T،p and others from the ballots. They supported the weaponization of the legal process in New York a،nst T،p. Likewise, as Harris insists that she is the only ،pe for fundamental rights, many cannot fail to notice that she is\xa0supporting an unprecedented system of censor،p\xa0that one court called “Orwellian.”

None of this means that the c،ice between T،p and Harris is easy. However, Harris’ claim to be the only ،pe for democ، is proving as tin-eared as running on pure “joy.”

Voters are clearly demanding more than a political pitch of abject fear mixed with illusive joy.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Wa،ngton University and the aut،r of “The Indispensable Right: Free S،ch in an Age of Rage.”