Happy Independence Day!

This Land Is Your Land: Anti-Trump Protesters Will Once Again Marshall Their Forces

Multiple groups are planning anti-Trump protests today, all over the country. The focus is blue cities, even in red states. Here is a map showing where they will be:

There are at least 200 events planned, as many as on "No Kings Day." The Women's March is one of the biggest organizers, but there are more. The protests are about freeing the United States from rule by and for billionaires. Clearly, the protesters guessed (correctly) that Donald Trump would get the big, beautiful budget bill on his desk by today, the deadline he demanded.

If we may be so bold, allow us to remind readers of our advice for would-be protesters. First, try to remain positive. Protesters with upbeat expressions on their faces are much more compelling and sympathetic, both to in-person witnesses and to cameras. Second, tell someone where you are going, and arrange with them to check in when you return home. This is a government that disappears people. Third, if you are not white or are not a natural-born citizen, think very carefully about whether it's worth the risk. Fourth, and finally, take some water. Protesting is a thirsty business, and often there is no water available (or, if it is available, it's at abusive prices). Of course, for those who do protest, we are always interested to receive reports and/or photos at comments@electoral-vote.com.

Given that today is a holiday that asks us to contemplate the meaning of America, and what it means to be an American, we are going to have protest as a theme that runs through the entire posting today. The right to speak out, to question the nation's leaders, to seek redress of grievances may be the single most important element of the American system of government. Certainly, it is the thing that most clearly distinguishes the American system from the absolutist/monarchial systems that came before. (Z & V)

In Congress: Jeffries Parks Himself in the Speaker's Well for Almost 9 Hours

In a development that surprises absolutely no one, the House of Representatives rolled over and approved the budget that passed the Senate earlier this week. The vote was 218-214, which means two Republicans crossed the aisle to vote with the Democrats. Those two Republicans were Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), a moderate who has to worry about getting reelected in a D+1 district, and Thomas Massie (KY), a firebrand who actually stands on his budget-hawk principles.

That means that, as per usual, the Freedom Caucus chickened out. Actually, if we may use a technical term, they demonstrated that they are Trump's little bitches. Now, before you fire up an e-mail telling us that you are deeply offended by that characterization, note that it's not coming from us. It comes from Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-WI). When reporters said it was clearly Donald Trump who compelled the Freedom Caucusers to fold like a lawn chair after their big, bold words on the budget and the deficit, Van Orden got angry and said: "The president of the United States didn't give us an assignment. We're not a bunch of little bitches around here."

Because the FCers are desperately trying to convince the world that they are not a bunch of cowards with spines of jelly, they have already explained what generous concession they got from Trump in order to secure their votes: Trump said he would use executive orders to get rid of as many renewable energy credits as is possible. At this point, allow us to note three things: (1) Trump was already going to do this, regardless of the Freedom Caucus; (2) the cost of these programs is a drop in the bucket as compared to trillion-dollar deficits; and (3) the day will come, probably sooner rather than later, when the Democrats will put the programs back in place. For these reasons, one cannot take seriously that this "concession" was enough to overcome all the bloviating about wrecking the economy, etc.

There has also been reporting, first from The New York Times, about a second thing that won over the holdouts. Reportedly, after inviting the FCers to the Oval Office, Trump gave them a bunch of autographed swag—photos, and unspecified other stuff. Was it signed bottles of Trump cologne? Trump Bibles? Trump guitars? Knee pads for the next time there are "negotiations," so they'll be more comfortable when they kneel and grovel before him? Who knows.

The point is, if the question is "bitches or not bitches," we choose "bitches;" our evidence is above. Readers are free to disagree with our conclusions at comments@electoral-vote.com. If readers disagree with the verbiage, however, then Van Orden's eX-Twitter account is here, and his contact form is here. To use the latter, you have to be in his district (or, at least, you have to pretend to be in his district, which means finding a fake address in WI-03).

Is this a big "win" for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA)? Is it evidence he can herd cats nearly as well as Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)? It could be, and readers might well reach that conclusion, and give him some grudging respect. For our part, however, we just don't see it. Note, first of all, that the bill that was passed was the one written by the Senate. Not that much remains of the House bill. So, it's not like Johnson did all that much to shape the final legislation. Further, it was not Johnson who brought the holdouts into line, it was Trump, with some combination of promises, threats, and merchandise. Would yesterday's outcome have been different if, say, Kevin McCarthy was still speaker? Or if Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) was speaker? Or, for that matter, if Staff Dachshund Otto was speaker? We think the answer to all three questions is "no." If we are right, then it means Johnson didn't do anything special.

Incidentally, have you seen Johnson's official Speaker portrait? Here it is:

That's the Washington Monument in the background. The Washington Monument is the nation's most famous phallic symbol, a metaphor for the presidential penis. Just lingering, lingering, lingering behind Johnson at all times. Did NOBODY take note of the symbolic/Freudian implications of this photo?

We did, of course, say that protest is going to be a motif that runs throughout today's posting, so let's get to that. There are 441 members of the House of Representatives (435 voting, 6 non-voting). Under House Rules, each of them gets 1 minute to comment on legislation on the floor of the House. It's only 1 minute because, if each of them avails themselves of the privilege, that's over 7 hours. If it was 2 minutes, then it would be nearly 15 hours.

However, party leaders are not subject to the 60-second limit, and can speak for as long as they wish. This is called the "magic minute" and, in protest of the bill, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) decided to use the privilege to the hilt. Channeling his inner Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Jeffries held the floor for 8 hours and 44 minutes, which is a record. He spent that time reading from several binders, which were full of personal accounts from Americans who will be negatively impacted by the budget bill. And note that the record Jeffries broke was held by then-Minority Leader McCarthy, who spoke for a little over 8 hours in 2021 in protest of Joe Biden's budget bill. In other words, turnabout is fair play.

Jeffries' performance really communicates three things. First, Democrats don't like the bill. Second, Democrats are aware of, and upset about, the harms that will be done by the bill. Third, with the other party holding the trifecta, there is really nothing that Democrats can do about the bill. There has already been much criticism of Jeffries for not doing more, but those op-ed writers never seem to explain what else he should have done. There's an old line about former Yankees owner George Steinbrenner, from one of the team's minority owners: "There is nothing quite so limited as being a limited partner of George Steinbrenner." That may be true, but in second place is being the minority party in the U.S. House of Representatives.

There is also criticism of Jeffries in the other direction, that he was engaging in empty grandstanding that just wasted people's time. Most of this criticism came from members of the House, and from both sides of the aisle. As regards the Republicans (including Johnson) who took potshots at Jeffries, see the above note about whose record he broke. The Republicans weren't complaining when the speechifying was coming from someone on their side, so they can just shut their yaps. As to the Democrats, most of the carping came from members who made travel plans to be home for the holiday today, and had to rearrange their flights and other accommodations. This is a bad look; it's not too hard to turn this into the conclusion that these members are more concerned about their beer and hot dogs than, say, fighting for their constituents in any way possible. So, these folks should probably shut their yaps, too.

The budget bill, having been approved by both chambers, will presumably be signed today. With any other president, that would be a 100% certainty. With Trump, it's a 98% certainty. Remember, there have already been occasions where he's received the bill he wanted, and yet had a last minute change of heart, and refused to sign (such a situation led to the shutdown that lasted from December 2018 to February 2019). We doubt Trump will do a 180 this time, but we would be remiss if we did not note that it's at least possible with him.

Beyond that, it's time for the two parties to get to work selling their narratives of this bill. Team Trump is already hard at work on that; for example, after the vote, the Social Security Administration sent out an obviously pre-written e-mail blast that began:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is celebrating the passage of the One Big, Beautiful Bill, a landmark piece of legislation that delivers long-awaited tax relief to millions of older Americans.

The bill ensures that nearly 90% of Social Security beneficiaries will no longer pay federal income taxes on their benefits, providing meaningful and immediate relief to seniors who have spent a lifetime contributing to our nation's economy.

This is not a wholesale lie, but it's some pretty aggressive spin. It does not mention that: (1) a big chunk of Social Security recipients already pay no taxes on those benefits; (2) while 90% of people could theoretically qualify for the tax waiver, the real percentage will be much smaller than that; (3) the tax break will be even harder to claim next year, and the year after that; and (4) the tax break goes away entirely in January 2029, which coincidentally happens to be the month that Trump leaves office.

The Democrats, for their part, are also gearing up to sell their narrative. Certainly, prominent members of the Party will be all over the media this weekend, blasting the bill. But beyond that, the blue team also realizes that it's much less important to win this news cycle than it is to win 2026. So, expect them to keep at least some of their powder dry for use at a future date.

The bad news for the Democrats is that they are generally not as good as the Republicans at communicating their views to the American people. However, there are also two pieces of good news. First, as we have written several times this week, the Democrats have the easier hand to play, because the Republican bill is already very unpopular. Second, the Republicans are much more likely to suffer from foot-in-mouth disease. For example, at a rally in Iowa yesterday, which was meant to be a victory lap, Trump declared that the budget bill would protect Americans from "shylocks and bad people." This is the same man who regularly uses the word "globalist." You can only use so many different well-known antisemitic slurs before you can no longer claim ignorance of their meaning.

Similarly, the aforementioned Van Orden hopped on eX-Twitter after the vote yesterday to share this opinion:

He left that up for several hours and then, after a bunch of blowback, decided to announce he had "made a mistake" and deleted his response. On the other hand, when Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) was asked about the 11 million people who will lose their healthcare, he said it doesn't matter because those 11 million are "Just some Americans that aren't Americans, and that is the illegals." That's a pretty mean-spirited notion, even if it's correct. And if it's not correct, and millions of citizens lose their healthcare, THEN what is Nehls going to say about it?

We really hope that some reporter, when they get Johnson or Van Orden or Nehls on the hot seat, will ask them how they can reconcile their professed Christian values with their support for a bill that hurts the poor and helps the rich. We seem to remember Jesus having a few things to say on that subject, and none of them were "Screw the poor." Of course, even if a reporter asks this question, the Republican "Christian" being interrogated will deflect or will refuse to answer, because they know full well there is no way to reconcile the theology of Jesus of Nazareth with the theology of Trump of Mar-a-Lago. (Z)

Looking Back: No Kings Protests Demand... Well, No King

We asked readers for reports on the No Kings protests, and then we ended up going dark unexpectedly. We still want to share some of those reports, even if it's a little late. And today's an ideal day to do that (although we will also share some more next week). Today's post is already very heavy on images (see below), so we're going to limit ourselves to some written accounts from readers; we'll share some of the pictures next week:

J.G. in Inver Grove Heights, MN: My wife and I went to bed unsure if we were going to attend the "No Kings" rally being hosted in our second-ring suburb of 36,000 or not. Waking to the news of the attacks on two Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses made attending much more important. As we were working on our signs, word came that Gov. Tim Walz (DFL-MN) and the State Patrol recommended people not attend rallies. This was followed shortly by an e-mail saying our event had been canceled. We weren't sure what to do, but decided that we would still go if we found others prioritizing being heard over the warnings and cancellations.

We needn't have worried about finding no one to join with. Plenty of people lined the street waving flags and signs. The event organizer was there advising people that it was "officially" canceled, and explaining how we should behave if we decided to stay. They also said that there was a police officer walking around keeping us safe, but I never saw one. (Our rally was only a few blocks from the police station, so there were plenty of squad cars driving by.) I counted 250 people, with more arriving after I had finished counting. The mood was remarkably positive, especially considering the morning's news and the heightened threat of violence. The honks and signs of support from passing cars vastly outnumbered the negative reactions we saw. (Our DFL candidate for the state house won with 57.7%, but there are plenty of Trump signs and flags as you drive around.)

This was my first protest, and I found it therapeutic after a tough morning.

J.L. in Colorado Springs, CO: I read an article saying that protests aren't enough and we need to do more serious disruption. Maybe they're right, but I went to the No Kings rally here in my city. There were lots of people out—the crowd had to be in the four digits. Talking with like-minded people raised my spirits, the signs made me chuckle, and the atmosphere was invigorating. I think protests are super important to encourage us to keep fighting the good fight and to give us hope that we aren't powerless and maybe there can be a brighter future in this country.

M.C. in Glasgow, Scotland, UK: You may enjoy noting that London got to be both a site of the "No Kings" protests (against Trump) and the site of King Charles III's birthday parade, wherein a regiment troops their colour. The protest was therefore dubbed "One King" or "No Tyrants."

M.F. in Burbank, CA: My girlfriend and I attended the Pasadena, CA, "No Kings" rally. We arrived an hour early, and the crowds were already massing on the street corners. By the official start time, we had begun spilling onto the streets. Over time we closed one lane, and then another, and then another, until finally (after about an hour) the police closed the streets to cars, and everyone was able to roam freely. At the peak, we were well into the thousands.

The demonstration was extremely peaceful. The signs ranged from brilliantly witty to remarkably vulgar, and in many different languages. There was singing, dancing, chanting, drumming, and oh-so-much cow bell. The only thing that was missing was any formal ceremony. There were no speakers, no petitions, no official merch, or anything that resembled a centralized authority or plan. It was the most organic-feeling rally I have ever attended.

The most humorous moment actually occurred on the trip home, while waiting alongside other attendees at the metro train station. It is situated in the median between the eastbound and westbound 210 freeway, such that cars driving by in both directions could see us. We filled the platform, and were all still waving signs and flags at the passing cars. Many honked, waved, gave a thumbs up or a peace sign out the window. And then, out the window of a Rolls-Royce, came a middle finger. We all just laughed and shook our heads. It was the only form of counterprotest I saw; the finger of a pretentious rich person driving by at freeway speed. It was the cherry on top of an uplifting afternoon that helped remind me that I am not crazy (or, at least, that I have lots of company).

M.F. in McHenry, IL: McHenry (which is Very Red) had a No Kings protest. Both sidewalks on both sides of Route 31 through McHenry were lined with people three or four deep for almost 1 mile. I would estimate about 10,000+ very enthusiastic people. Most drivers passing by were honking their support.

R.L. in Alameda, CA: It was wonderful to be out with so many people carrying so many clever signs. I've been to a few protests in Oakland in the past and I don't recall seeing Ogawa Plaza filled to the brim with people and Broadway Avenue and 14th Street full of people, as well. This was probably the largest protest I've seen.

My beef is that I'd like to see these protests more tightly focused on the matter at hand. They tend to leak into other lefty bugaboos. Of course, there is no way to control what individuals do. While I was slow-walking with thousands of people down 10th Street towards Broadway, I noted more than a few Palestinian flags and some people started chanting "from the river to the sea" (which, by the way, was co-opted from early Zionist settlers who declared in the 1940s that they wanted the land "from the river to the sea" for Jews). I quietly moved away from them, not because I disagree with them (I'm actually in alignment with their goal of a free Palestine), but because this wasn't a pro-Palestine protest. It was a pro-democracy in America protest.

What bugs me is that some of the speakers at the rally had a lot to say about Israel, Gaza, Palestinians' rights and the bombs that Israel had dropped on Tehran the night before. I don't disagree with any of this (although I felt uncomfortable seeing people cheer for Iran, who is also an enemy, simply because they don't like Israel—and we knew nothing about this conflict at the time; it was literally 12 hours after the first bombs dropped).

The reason I feel it is important to keep a pro-democracy rally focused on pro-democracy stuff is that this movement needs to build a large coalition. There were reportedly many never-Trump, former Republicans joining the rally, many of whom for which this was their first rally ever. Protest isn't a natural part of the constitution of conservative-minded people. These folks are probably not as pro-Palestine/anti-Israel as we lefties are. In fact, some of them may still disagree with us on Israel/Palestine. But we need them in the pro-democracy tent. I feel it is imperative for the speakers at the rally to be focused on the pro-democracy movement. We don't want to turn our new conservative allies away.

This is a movement that needs to grow and it is going to include people who don't agree with each other. So let's stay focused on the most important thing, the purpose of the rally, saving our democracy.

T.G. in Daleyville, WI: I was at the "No Kings" rally in the obscure, pretty Republican, corner of southwest Wisco-world today. Dodgeville is a small town of about 4800, and there were about 500 at the rally. It was completely peaceful. We marched on the sidewalks about three blocks to the courthouse, where there was music and speakers. The former sheriff of the county, as well as a current deputy, both spoke movingly about the importance of preserving democracy, as did Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI).

What gives me great hope was the response of the community. The rally was on the main street of town and traffic was heavy. The huge majority of the passers-by were honking and waving signs out their sunroofs in support. Only two pickups came by in counter-protest. One had a MAGA flag hanging out the window, and the other guy just waved his red hat. None of the usual coal-rolling in-your-face MAGA response! I was amazed. This is a sea-change in attitude for this very rural farm-town.

I am sensing that we are at a point of inflection now. What I saw in rural Wisconsin is inspiring. Watching Trump actually behave himself at his birthday fete reinforced that impression. Could it be that having millions turn out in thousands of different towns and cities across the country to protest him gave him an epiphany?

Nah... I'm just wallowing in irrational exuberance. This is far from over...

W.L. in Springfield, MO: Although I was unable to attend (prior engagements), I was no less proud to see a strong turnout for the No Kings demonstration here in the Queen City of the Ozarks.

Springfield, MO, is deep in the center of MO-7, the same district that was once represented by former Rep./Sen. Roy Blunt and Rep. Billy Long, and former U.S. Sec. of State John Ashcroft called nearby Willard his home (he also taught at Missouri State University here in Springfield before embarking on his political career). So this area is clearly not a bastion of liberalism. We are a college town, so we're a little more blue-leaning than the surrounding area (2 districts that represent Springfield have or had Democrats representing them). We are also home to the world headquarters of the Assemblies of God and Bass Pro Shops.

This is all preface to say that the attendance of these protests was impressive. 2,000 or so people is excellent turnout and looking at the crowds, it was clear that it wasn't solely college students that made up the majority. Even from afar, it gives me hope that we can ride out this wave of fascism, though it's still a scary time to be alive.

Thanks to all of you! (Z)

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Wings at the Speed of Sound

You could say we offered two hints as to last week's theme, or you could say we offered five. Here is the first hint (or the first three hints): "[W]e'll say that we can imagine certain people having an advantage when it comes to the solution. For example, all the folks listed in the Congress: Retirements link at the top left of this page. Or a very bad doctor. Or the Marx Brothers, particularly circa 1933." And here is the second hint (or the last two hints): "[T]here were a few readers who figured it out and wondered if we were inspired by the fact that the president is named Donald. But that theory is just Daffy."

And here is the solution, courtesy of reader P.A. in Redwood City, CA:

Every clue contains a part of a duck:

• Adventures in Overreach, Part I: More Trouble for the Big, Beautiful Bill—Duck "mouth"
• Adventures in Overreach, Part II: Trump Managed to Shank the Iran Bombing—The part of the leg above the foot
• Adventures in Overreach, Part III: Trump, Bondi Have Managed to Saddle Themselves with a Real Mess—The area along the spine between the wings and the tail
• Adventures in Overreach, Part IV: Dodgers Throw a Bean Ball at Trump—Hook at the end of the bill
• I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Deep Down—Fine soft feathers
• This Week in Schadenfreude: $JPROOF Gets Knocked on Its Rump—The part of the back just above the tail
• This Week in Freudenfreude: Helping the Children of Gaza Back on Their Feet—Like water off a duck's back

Retiring Congress members are lame ducks, a very bad doctor is a quack, and the Marx Brothers made Duck Soup in 1933. (That was the hint that confirmed I was on the right track with my guess.)

"Wings," from this headline, are another duck part, of course. And Donald and Daffy, from the Saturday hint, are both famous cartoon ducks.

Here are the first 50 readers to get it right:

M.S. in Canton, NY W.R.S. in Tucson, AZ K.R. in Austin, TX J.N. in Zionsville, IN D.D. in Carversville, PA N.H. in London, England, UK T.K. in Half Moon Bay, St. Kitts S.K. in Ardmore, PA N.K. in Cleveland Heights, OH B.E. in Brooklyn, NY S.W. in Winter Garden, FL P.A. in Redwood City M.W. in Altea, Spain D.B. in Glendale, CA J.T. in Philadelphia, PA R.N. in Cleveland, OH I.B. in Victoria, BC, Canada M.B. in Menlo Park, CA D.B. in Pittsboro, NC G.K. in Blue Island, IL M.T. in Wheat Ridge, CO A.F. in Minneapolis, MN W.S. in Greenville, NC D.E. in High Springs, FL J.C. in Trenton, NJ

D.M. in Oakland, CA P.R. in Kirksville, MO D.S. in Layton, UT R.K. in Bel Air, MD G.W. in Avon, CT T.T. in Conway, AR B.N. in San Rafael. M.M. in Wylie, TX D.C.W. in Fredericksburg, TX M.B. in Albany, NY B.G. in Houston, TX K.H. in Albuquerque, NM D.L. in Springfield, IL E.S. in Maine, NY K.J.O. in Brookdale, NJ M.M. in Dunellen, NJ D.H. in Portland, OR E.G.Å. in Trondheim, Norway A.R. in Los Angeles, CA H.B. in Toronto, ON, Canada J.E. in San Jose, CA S.K. in Bethesda, MD S.R. in Robbinsville, NJ J.W. in Newton, MA C.W. in Atlantic Beach, FL

The 50th correct response was received at 10:23 a.m. PT on Saturday.

For this week's theme, it relies on one word per headline, and it's in the category History. For a hint, we'll note that even if you're having trouble with the solution, eventually, you shall overcome.

If you have a guess, send it to comments@electoral-vote.com with subject line July 4 Headlines. (Z)

This Week in Schadenfreude: Dr. Phil Has Burned His Bridges

In the U.S., the word "protest" tends to be associated with progressive and/or left-wing causes. However, this is not always the case (for example, several of the photos below include right-wing or reactionary protesters). One of the more prominent right-wing protesters, in the last year, is Dr. Phil McGraw. He maintained a largely neutral political persona while he was hosting a show that was meant for mass consumption. However, once that show ended (or was canceled, depending on whom you believe), he pursued a much more "niche" role, with a TV channel called Merit Street that was supposed to be streaming in some markets, and to be on cable, but with a VERY high channel number, in other markets. McGraw did this in partnership with Trinity Broadcasting Network and TCT Ministries, which are both religious broadcasters.

With this change in his career, McGraw decided he could let his hair down (well, metaphorically), and could unleash his inner right-winger. It's absolutely his right to be a right-winger, and it's absolutely his right to use his fame and his platform to share his political views, if that is what he wants to do. However, his right-wing activism has largely taken the form of anti-immigrant xenophobia (which is certainly at odds with the "empathetic" character he played on his syndicated show). Further, he's been showing up at ICE raids, and effectively using the raids and the people targeted by raids as props in service of his worldview. That part of it is absolutely vile.

And so, there is certainly some schadenfreude in the fact that McGraw's new venture just blew up in his face. Exactly what went wrong depends on who you believe, and is pretty weedy. However, what it boils down to is that Trinity and TCT have decided, after less than a year, that they don't want to be in business with McGraw after all. And so, McGraw's new media venture has declared bankruptcy, and he has sued his two "partners" for $100 million. McGraw had also expended much oxygen badmouthing Trinity and TCT.

At this point, then, McGraw is off the air. His ICE theatrics have cost him any chance of returning to mainstream airwaves, or of partnering with his former benefactor Oprah Winfrey. Meanwhile, he's angered many Christians, either because they don't like his ideas about immigrants, or they don't like his badmouthing Trinity/TCT. He's also telegraphed to any other potential broadcast partner that he's not reliable, and that he's got an itchy trigger finger when it comes to unleashing the lawyers.

The fact that McGraw was willing to use ICE-targeted individuals was not actually out of character for him. Back when he was "America's counselor," and he had a choice between: (1) ratings, and (2) the well-being of his "patients," he always chose #1. And now, he's not only off the air, but he's unlikely to find another platform, given all the business partners and viewers he's alienated. All we can say is: "Good riddance, you quack." (Z)

This Week in Freudenfreude: The Farmer Is the Man

The original Populist Movement is among the more famous protest movements in American history, and "The Farmer Is the Man" was their unofficial theme song. Hence the headline for this item.

However, they are not the only famous protest movement in American history. Not even close, in fact. And consistent with the overall theme today, we thought we would highlight some of the other notable protest movements and protesters, and let readers see how well they know that important part of the nation's history. So, we've put together a 15-question (plus tiebreaker) visual quiz on that theme.

Note that, as is always the case with multiple choice, you're looking for the BEST answer, and not the "Well, you COULD make an argument" answer. And with that said, here goes:

1. What is being protested in this image, which documents events that took place on December 16, 1773?
   
   
   
   a. Merchants charging exorbitant prices for salt
   b. Taxes on tea
   c. An outbreak of diptheria, blamed (incorrectly) on tainted, imported spices
   d. "Immoral" tobacco
   
   
   
2. What is being protested by this flag, which was created in the year 1844?
   
   
   
   a. Catholic immigrants
   b. Chinese immigrants
   c. Communist immigrants
   d. Canadian immigrants
   
   
   
3. What is being protested by this newspaper, which began publication in 1831?
   
   
   
   a. Women's oppression
   b. Masonic influence in American culture
   c. Andrew Jackson (and, later, Jacksonian policies)
   d. Slavery
   
   
   
4. What is being protested in this image, which documents events that took place on April 2, 1863?
   
   
   
   a. The price of bread
   b. Native American raids on Southern cities
   c. The disputed New Orleans mayoral election
   d. The publication of the "pornographic" The Portrait of a Lady by Henry James
   
   
   
5. What is being protested in this image, which documents events that took place on July 14, 1863?
   
   
   
   a. A tax on wool and wool clothing (essential for winter, in that era)
   b. The military draft
   c. Unsafe drinking water
   d. A ban on firearms within the city limits of New York City
   
   
   
6. What is being protested in this image, which documents events that took place on July 6, 1892?
   
   
   
   a. The damage wrought by the Johnstown Flood
   b. Immigration
   c. Wages for steel workers
   d. A tax on whiskey
   
   
   
7. What are the women protesting for, in this photo taken on January 26, 1917?
   
   
   
   a. Child labor laws
   b. Women's suffrage
   c. The outlawing of gender-segregated universities
   d. Temperance
   
   
   
8. What are the people protesting for, in this photo taken on August 28, 1963?
   
   
   
   a. Jobs and freedom
   b. Law and order
   c. Fairness and equality
   d. Peace and prosperity
   
   
   
9. This headline, from June 21, 1967, was the result of a protest against what?
   
   
   
   a. Segregation
   b. The assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.
   c. The criminalization of marijuana
   d. The Vietnam War
   
   
   
10. What is being protested, in this photo taken on April 22, 1970?
    
    
    
    a. The damage done to the environment by mankind
    b. Chicago's infamous "Flower Law" (repealed soon after)
    c. The meltdown at Three Mile Island
    d. The use of chemical weapons, especially Agent Orange, in Vietnam
    
    
    
11. What triggered this protest, in this photo taken on January 22, 1973?
    
    
    
    a. The Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade
    b. The Supreme Court's lifting the national moratorium on the death penalty
    c. The United States' final withdrawal from Vietnam
    d. The successful test of the "Castle Bravo" nuclear bomb
    
    
    
12. What are the people protesting for, in this photo taken on June 28, 1978?
    
    
    
    a. Funding for public transportation
    b. Better healthcare for veterans
    c. Gay rights
    d. Ending discrimination in housing
    
    
    
13. What was being protested against, in this photo taken on September 12, 2016?
    
    
    
    a. Police brutality
    b. Donald Trump
    c. The "slave wages" paid to football players
    d. Poverty
    
    
    
14. What was being protested for, in this photo taken on March 24, 2018?
    
    
    
    a. Stronger vaccine requirements, particularly the COVID vaccine
    b. Forgiveness of student loans
    c. Stricter limits on abortion
    d. Better gun-control laws
    
    
    
15. This photo, taken on June 11, 2020, was part of protests that emerged in response to what?
    
    
    
    a. The Keystone XL Pipeline
    b. The death of George Floyd
    c. The publication of new history "standards" in Texas
    d. The renomination of Donald Trump at the 2020 RNC

And finally, a tiebreaker: The largest protest in U.S. history (by number of participants nationwide) that also included participation from the sitting president took place in what year?

You can register your answers here. We'll have the answers and results next week. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger