Fact-Checked Source:
Laurie Garrett, "It's Time to Cancel the U.S. Presidential Campaign as We Know It"

A Closer Look: Five Facts Checked

“Democrats voted in 14 states in their presidential primaries, with some states showing record turnouts and long voting lines.”

Garrett cited an article from Max Greenwood, a reporter from The Hill. From Greenwood is doing extensive coverage of the 2020 Presidential Election. I trust Greenwood, not only is he reporting facts and providing evidence of the percent increase of voters, but also he provides video of the long lines in Virginia. From reading other coverage of the presidential primaries on Super Tuesday, it is clear there were many individuals waiting to vote. Because of my own research and reading, I trust Greenwood’s reporting and presentation of facts.

“A candidate’s hands can be a vector, taking the virus from one eager citizen to the next, and the next, and so on.”

When researching this claim, I went directly to the Center of Disease Control and Prevention. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is the national public health institute of the United States and a federal agency, under the Department of Health and Human Service. The trust the CDC because of their intensive research and long history of presenting facts and findings to the public. The CDC says the virus is spread “between people who are in close contact with one another (within about 6 feet)” and “through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks” (Center of Disease Control and Prevention 2020). The CDC also says the virus is very contagious, as symptoms include coughing and sneezing. Not only can you contract the virus from shaking hands, but just from being in close contact with people. I trust Garrett’s claims, as they are common knowledge and reiterated by the CDC.

“There is general anxiety in the Senate, as more than two-thirds of its members are at higher risk for coronavirus illness due to their over-60 ages.”

Again, I went directly to the CDC’s website to research Garrett’s claim that two-thirds of congress’ members are at higher risk. The CDC presented its month of research gathered and shared the following: “As of March 16, a total of 4,226 COVID-19 cases had been reported in the United States, with reports increasing to 500 or more cases per day beginning March 14. Among 2,449 patients with known age, 6% were aged ≥85, 25% were aged 65–84 years, 18% each were aged 55–64 years and 45–54 years, and 29% were aged 20–44 years. Only 5% of cases occurred in persons aged 0–19 years.” (Center of Disease Control and Prevention 2020). These statistics demonstrate those between 65-84 are severely at risk for contracting the virus.  The CDC restates Garrett’s claim, so the claim can be trusted, as the majority of Congress is made up of individuals over-60.

“Many of [Trump’s] supporters, including members of the American Christian Union, continue to attend very large evangelical gatherings and believe that the arrival of COVID-19 is biblically predicted, and their faith will protect them.”

Garrett’s source for this claim was Ruth Graham, a writer at Slate Magazine. Her article “Why Trump-Friendly Christian Leaders Are Feeling Totally Fine About the Coronavirus” discusses the strong beliefs of the American Christian Union (Graham 2020). One of these supporters Pat Robertson, is quoted as saying that “the people who have died so far are those who are already sick with something else” and “if your gut is healthy, you don’t have to worry about corona”. Robertson’s belief that if you are religious and put your faith in God, you will not contract the virus. Even though the claims from Robertson are scientific untrue, Garrett’s claim and source can be trusted.

“The United States has already struggled with cyberdisruption of its elections, trolls posting phony campaign material, and violent threats against journalists at political rallies.”

This claim that the US has struggled with cyber disruption of its election can be supported by different stories of the outdated machines used to vote and the outcome after recounts. When researching this, I found an article from the Guardian by Andrew Gumbel, a correspondent. In this article, it describes an issue in Georgia’s sixth congressional district, and “By mid-evening, Jon Ossoff, the leading Democrat, had 50.3% of the vote, enough to win outright without the need for a run-off against his closest Republican challenger. Then Marks noticed that the number of precincts reporting in Fulton County, encompassing the heart of Atlanta, was going down instead of up. Soon after, the computers crashed. Election officials later blamed a "rare error" with a memory card that didn’t properly upload its vote tallies. When the count resumed more than an hour later, Ossoff was suddenly down to 48.6% and ended up at 48.1%. (He lost in the run-off to Republican Karen Handel” (Gumbel 2018). This source can be trusted, as Atlanta news also reported the issues in the election. This is not the only United States issue with cyber disruption, but shows that the US is not immune to cyber attacks, and that Garrett’s claim can be trusted.

Analytic Essay

Get out and vote, or stay home and stay safe? The effect COVID-19 brings to the Presidential election

I will be exploring the effects the coronavirus will bring to the 2020 United States Presidential election. The source I have explored is Lauris Garrett’s voice piece for Foreign Policy. Garrett is a former senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations and a Pulitzer Prize-winning for explanatory journalism. Garrett’s perspective in the article helps convey the effect the pandemic will bring to the presidential election, and therefore, will bring to the American people. Garrett is not a political journalist, but is using her scientific background and passion to display to her audience of those questioning COVID-19’s potential impact on the election that precautions must be taken to maintain the integrity and fairness of voting. This issue matters to Garrett because as an American citizen, she knows the importance of voting and election in a democracy. Garrett expresses in her piece that COVID-19 will force the American political system to challenge and reexamine its structure of election campaigning and voting, and the outcome has the potential to change the history of our nation and the way the American people view and participate in politics.

Garrett’s audience is the US voting population and others who want to be informed of what the future of the United States presidential election may be. She reaches her audience through the Foreign Policy news publication website, which is releasing free COVID-19 news to those without a subscription. In the piece, Garrett discusses the facts that the coronavirus has already effected the primary election and congress. The turnout for voting in the Democratic primaries resulted in multiple virus cases in California, and during the Conservative Political Action Conference, multiple top-positioned Republicans in congress including the President, were present in the room with an attendee with the virus. Senator Ted Cruz began quarantining himself, as he shook hands with the attendee. The fact that matters to Garrett is how our political system is not built with this pandemic in mind.

Garrett discusses and shares information about other world-wide illnesses that have effected elections, including the Spanish influenza of 1918 and the swine flu of 1976. The swine flu of 1976 partly-mirrors the nation’s position today. In 1976, swine influenza was spreading in the United States. President Ford and the government took extreme caution and the mass immunization of the US population was ordered to defeat the swine flu strain (Seetoh, 2011). After over 40 million people received the vaccine, news broke that multiple individuals perished after receiving the shot. This scared the public, and the government had to handle the public distrust of the swine flu, and also its vaccine. There are multiple differences between the swine flu and COVID-19, but the fact of the matter is incumbent-President Gerald Ford lost the presidential campaign in 1976 to Democrat Jimmy Carter. Although multiple factors play into how citizens vote in November, people want a trustworthy president who they can rely on. Garrett uses her knowledge to inform the public of the effect the pandemic will have on the election, but also remembers there are many other issues and positions people hold about the candidates. She clarifies that the pandemic might change who people will vote for, but also how (in-person or online) and when they vote, an issue that is up-in-the-air right now. 

In the article, it seems Garrett does not trust the government, as she calls them to take action immediately. She brings to attention how the government handled the issue of cyber disruption of the 2016 election and insists if the government cannot handle to protect the integrity of the election during a non-pandemic, then what will happen during one? Garrett wants the American people and government to rally together to not only flatten the curve of the virus, but to preserve the foundation of the American political system. It is important to include this perspective, as the future of our country is on the line, and as American citizens, we all want to use our constitutional right to vote in the future election, however that may look. Although no one can predict the future of our country, we can take steps to protect the health of our country and the integrity of democracy.
 

References:

Garrett, L. (2020, March 11). It's Time to Cancel the U.S. Presidential Campaign as We Know  It. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/11/cancel-us-president-primary-campaign-democrat-coronavirus/

This is a voice piece from Foreign Policy. I can tell that the author is interested in how the election will continue, and the changes that will have to be made in campaigns and voting. The main point is the author is informing the public and candidates that society must become creative and reach voters in a new way. Evidence provided is the campaigns and rallies that took place while the virus was spreading, and how people have gotten sick just because they were in the same building as the virus. Because individuals cannot be in groups, leaders of politics must make a plan for proceeding with the election. I like this article because it discusses the usual way of campaigning for the election and swiftly says those will not work in a pandemic.
 

Lerer, L., & Epstein, R. J. (2020, March 12). How the Coronavirus Changed the 2020 Campaign. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/us/politics/coronavirus-2020-campaign.html

This is an analysis piece and it came from the New York Times. I can tell because the authors analyze how the pandemic has made the candidates and the current president face a test of leadership. The main argument is that this pandemic has forced the candidates to test their leadership, and what their presidency would look like. The evidence is how each candidate has given speeches and what their view on the virus and the government's way of handling it. There is no "right way" to handle this once-in-a-lifetime situation, but what is the best way the federal government can handle it. The candidates have discussed what they would do as sitting president. I think this is a good source because it uses quotes straight from the candidates and discusses how modern campaigning cannot be used.


Linge, M. K. (2020, March 28). How Trump's war on the coronavirus could win him re-election. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2020/03/28/how-trumps-war-on-the-coronavirus-could-win-him-re-election/

This is an opinion piece from the New York Post. The perspective is how history has supported incumbent presidents during times of need. The main purpose is to discuss Donald Trump's response to the pandemic and how the public may support him. The evidence the article uses is other presidents winning reelection during wartime or times of trouble. The selected source provides additional insight to not only the different campaigning needed for the election, but the different way of approaches to voting during the election. I like this source because it uses other examples and approving numbers, and talks more about the incumbent president.


Norden, L., Howard, E., Ramachandran, G., Cortés, E., & Tisler, D. (2020, March 19). Estimated Costs of Covid-19 Election Resiliency Measures. Brennan Center for Justice. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/estimated-costs-covid-19-election-resiliency-measures

Lawrence Norden is the Director of Election Reform at Brennan Center for Justice and is a graduate of the University of Chicago and NYU School of Law. This piece about the costs that COVID-19 will bring to the government for the election was determined using media studies. Proper planning can ensure that the pandemic does not prevent a free and fair election. To be effective, funding is urgently needed. The key evidence is the math involved with estimating the costs of the election during the pandemic.


Seetoh, Theresa, et al. (2012) Framing Risk in Pandemic Influenza Policy and Control. Global Public Health, 7(7), 717–730. https://www-tandfonline-com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/doi/full/10.1080/17441692.2012.699541?scroll=top&needAccess=true

This article came from the “Global Health Journal”. This article is not directly about the coronavirus, but it does discuss the risk of pandemics. The perspective it shows is how different pandemics/global illnesses have played out in history, including the 1976 swine flu outbreak and the 2004 H5N1 avian influenza in Thailand. The main purpose of the source is to understand the risks of pandemic policy and control. The author discusses the definition of risk and the effect on the economy and citizens. It discusses how President Ford’s decision during the 1976 outbreak influenced how people viewed him and may have resulted in him not getting reelected. I think this is a good source because it points directly to outbreaks that have already happened and the long-lasting effects. 


Center of Disease Control and Prevention. (2020, April 13). How to Protect Yourself & Others. Retrieved April 19, 2020, from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/prevention.html

Graham, R. (2020, March 6). Why Trump-Friendly Christian Leaders Are Feeling Totally Fine About the Coronavirus. Retrieved April 19, 2020, from https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/03/why-trump-friendly-christian-leaders-are-feeling-totally-fine-about-the-coronavirus.html

Greenwood, M. (2020, March 4). Democratic turnout surges on Super Tuesday. Retrieved April 19, 2020, from https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485994-democratic-turnout-surges-on-super-tuesday

Gumbel, A. (2018, August 13). Why US elections remain 'dangerously vulnerable' to cyber-attacks. Retrieved April 19, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/13/us-election-cybersecurity-hacking-voting

Severe Outcomes Among Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) — United States, February 12–March 16, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020;69:343-346. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6912e2external icon