If you’re reading this newsletter, then you obviously haven’t had quite enough of what seems like the world’s longest election campaign.
What’s left to say at this point? I’m sure if you never heard the phrase “key battleground state” again, it would be too soon. Ditto for “locked in a bitter race,” “virtual dead heat” and “margin of error.”
At The Conversation, we’re planning for as many contingencies as we can in our upcoming Election Day and night coverage, ranging from the way things usually happen – someone’s declared a winner on election night or soon after – to the unpredictable. That could be anything from massive polling errors to the whole thing ending up in the courts. Among the authors we have lined up are political scientists, rhetoricians and election law scholars. And of course, because this is 2020, we’ve made these plans with the understanding that they could be rendered useless by something crazy happening that we had never considered.
The election night newsroom at The Conversation will of course be virtual. I won’t miss the cold pizza, vending machine coffee and the post-election snowstorm on my 3 a.m. ride home.
And here are a few stories that you shouldn’t miss from our recent coverage: Election law scholar Richard Pildes writes that there is a systemic reason why there may be trouble ahead in the election’s aftermath: “The way the country’s legal system is structured, we can’t get clear answers in advance to some critical legal questions, unless things actually get complicated enough to bring the courts into the picture.” Daniel Birdsong at the University of Dayton provides a great example of public service journalism with a story that outlines your rights as a voter and explains “where to turn if you encounter trouble at the polls.” And there’s a terrific and telling story from IUPUI's Chris Lamb about the candidate who gets less coverage in the election’s aftermath: the loser.
Get some sleep – it’s likely to be a long few days and nights this week.
|