we've reached a historic moment in this election.”

我們在這次選舉中達到了一個歷史性的時刻。"

“Joe Biden is president-elect.”

"喬-拜登是當選總統"

“America's democracy is not guaranteed.

"美國的民主是沒有保障的。

It is only as strong as our willingness to fight for it.”

只有我們願意為之奮鬥，它才會強大。"

When I look back on Biden's campaign,

當我回顧拜登的競選活動時。

I think the single most impressive thing he did,

我想這是他做的印象最深刻的一件事。

were the Biden-Sanders task forces that followed the primary.

是初選後的拜登-桑德斯專案組。

“CBS News projects the former vice president

"CBS新聞預測，前副總統

beat Senator Bernie Sanders in Florida, Illinois, and Arizona.”

在佛羅里達州、伊利諾伊州和亞利桑那州擊敗參議員伯尼-桑德斯。"

“Biden now has more than half of the 1,991 delegates

"拜登現在擁有1,991名代表中的一半以上。

needed to clinch the Democratic nomination.”

所需，以獲得民主黨的提名。"

“My goal as a candidate for president is to unify this party,

"我作為總統候選人的目標是統一這個黨。

and then to unify the nation.”

然後統一全國"。

He invited all of these different players

他邀請了所有這些不同的球員

who had been harsh critics of the Biden campaign.

曾對拜登競選活動提出嚴厲批評的人。

The Sunrise Movement, which is the youth-led climate movement,

朝陽運動，就是青年主導的氣候運動。

he invited the Sunrise Movement into the task force.

他邀請 "日出運動 "加入工作隊。

They'd been incredibly critical of Biden.

他們對拜登的責備令人難以置信。

They'd given his climate plan an F.

他們給他的氣候計劃打了個F。

“You have had at least some hand in shaping Joe Biden's climate plan.”

"你至少參與了喬-拜登氣候計劃的制定。"

“Joe Biden's plan will represent

"喬-拜登的計劃將代表

a seismic shift in climate policy at the federal level,

聯邦一級的氣候政策發生了巨大的變化。

[more] than anything we've seen in the last 40 years.”

[更]比我們在過去40年中看到的任何東西。"

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who had said that in another country,

亞歷山大-奧卡西奧-科特茲，他曾在另一個國家說過。

her and Biden wouldn't even be in the same political party.

她和拜登甚至不會在同一個政黨。

Into the task force -- and it worked.

進入工作隊 -- -- 而且很有效。

“Voting for Joe Biden is not about whether you agree with him.

"投票給喬-拜登，並不在於你是否同意他的觀點。

It's a vote to let our democracy live another day.

這是讓我們的民主多活一天的投票。

That's what this is about.”

這就是我們的目的。"

“It's so beautiful to see someone who stood for oppression, and the system,

"看到一個人站在壓迫，和制度上，真是太美了。

change because of activism, and the voice of young people crying out.”

因為行動主義而改變，也因為年輕人的呼聲而改變。"

But: There is no reason to think that because Joe Biden won the election,

但是我們沒有理由認為喬・拜登贏得了大選

he'll be able to govern.

他就能治理。

I think the likeliest outcome is that we're going to have

我認為最可能的結果是，我們將有

a Joe Biden presidency and a Mitch McConnell Senate.

喬-拜登任總統，米奇-麥康奈爾任參議院。

And that means that lots of things Joe Biden wants to do

這就意味著喬-拜登想做的很多事情。

are not going to happen.

是不會發生的。

I was looking at some data from a Fox News analysis.

我在看福克斯新聞分析的一些數據。

There's these questions like,

有這些問題，比如。

“How concerned about the effects of climate change are you?”

"你對氣候變化的影響有多關注？"

And you're getting 46% Very, 26% Somewhat…

而你得到46%非常，26%有點... ...

Gun laws…

槍支法...

Pathway to citizenship…

通往公民身份的道路...

Changing to a government-run health care plan…

改為政府經營的醫療計劃... ...

It seems clear from this data that what the American people want

從這些數據看來，美國人民想要的顯然是

is not being translated to law and policy.

沒有轉化為法律和政策。

And I'm wondering if you can give some context as to why that is.

我想知道你能不能給出一些背景資料來解釋為什麼會這樣。

Those numbers don't in any way surprise me.

這些數字絲毫不令我吃驚。

We've seen numbers like that for a very long time.

我們已經看到這樣的數字很長時間了。

“As of right now, Joe Biden holds a lead of about 13,500 votes…”

"截至目前，喬-拜登領先約13500票..."

“Stop the count! Stop the count!”

"停止計數！停止計數！"

The key thing to understand about the modern Republican Party,

要了解現代共和黨的關鍵之處。

is it is a party that routinely is not able to win the most votes

是一個經常無法贏得最多選票的政黨。

at any level of the national system.

在國家系統的任何一級。

It has lost the popular vote in seven of the last presidential elections...

在過去的七次總統選舉中，它失去了民眾的選票。

It has gotten fewer votes in the last three or four Senate elections in a row...

在過去三四次參議院選舉中，它的得票率連續減少...

A party that wins power without winning the most votes

一個沒有贏得最多選票就贏得政權的政黨。

is going to turn against democracy itself.

是要反對民主本身。

“Many forced to wait for hours, in part because of new voting machines

"許多人被迫等待數小時，部分原因是新的投票機。

that were either missing or not working.”

的，要麼是缺失的，要麼是不能用的。"

“20% fewer polling places than we had in 2016.”

"比2016年的投票站少了20%"。

“This line of people wraps around the block.

"這一行人繞著街區走。

There's a line of cars to curbside vote.”

車子要排隊去路邊投票。"

“People waited in line for two, three, four hours, just to cast a vote.”

"大家排隊等了兩三個小時、四個小時，就是為了投一票。"

Right after the House attempted to pass a bill

就在眾議院試圖通過一項法案的時候。

that would have made voting during a pandemic easier,

這將使投票 在大流行期間更容易。

what Trump said on Fox and Friends was,

特朗普在《福克斯和朋友》上說的話是：

“They had things, levels of voting, that if you'd ever agreed to it,

"他們有一些東西，投票的級別，如果你曾經同意過。

you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again.”

你將永遠不會有一個共和黨人當選 在這個國家了。"

What I'm wondering is,

我想知道的是：

obviously there are conservative parties, in other democratic systems,

很明顯，在其他民主制度下，也有保守的政黨。

that win power all the time,

贏得權力的一直。

in Canada or Great Britain, or Australia…

在加拿大或英國，或澳洲... ...

other majoritarian democracies.

其他主要民主國家。

He's wrong that the Republican Party would never win power again.

他錯了，共和黨永遠不會再贏得政權。

What he's right about is that HIS Republican Party

他說的沒錯，他的共和黨。

would never win power again.

將永遠不會再贏得權力。

They're a party that is increasingly afraid of what would happen to it

他們是一個越來越害怕發生在自己身上的黨。

if it was exposed to full-on, actual democracy.

如果它被暴露在全面的、實際的民主中。

You're saying that if they if they really had to compete for votes,

你是說，如果他們如果真的要爭奪選票。

that they would have to begin to embrace some of those policies,

他們將不得不開始接受其中的一些政策。

as conservative parties in those countries have done?

如同這些國家的保守派政黨所做的那樣？

Yes.

是的，我知道

As we speak, Donald Trump is functionally engaged

就在我們說話的時候，唐納德-特朗普在功能上參與了

in what we would understand, in another country, as a coup attempt.

在另一個國家，我們會理解為政變企圖。

“If you count the legal votes, I easily win.

"如果算上合法的票數，我輕鬆獲勝。

If you count the illegal votes, they can try to steal the election from us.

如果你把非法的選票算進去，他們就可以從我們這裡偷走選舉。

Our goal is to defend the integrity of the election.

我們的目標是捍衛選舉的完整性。

We will not allow the corruption to steal such an important election…”

我們不會允許腐敗分子偷走如此重要的選舉......"

“Well, we're interrupting this because

"好吧，我們打斷這個，因為... ...

what the president of the United States is saying,

美國總統在說什麼。

in large part, is absolutely untrue.”

在很大程度上，是絕對不真實的。"

It's a very dangerous moment.

這是一個非常危險的時刻。

But even beneath that, what you then end up having is,

但即使在這之下，你然後最終擁有的是。

when a party wins power without winning votes,

當一個政黨在沒有贏得選票的情況下贏得權力時；

they will tend to use that power

他們會傾向於使用這種權力

to make it easier to win power without winning votes.

以期在不贏得選票的情況下更容易贏得權力。

“All signs, guys, all signs point to a runoff in Georgia.

"所有的跡象，夥計們，所有的跡象都表明，喬治亞州將進行第二輪選舉。

Not just one, but two Senate races here in Georgia.

佐治亞州不僅有一場，還有兩場參議院選舉。

What that means here, is that Georgia could be at

這意味著，喬治亞州可能會在。

the center of the political universe, through early next year.

政治宇宙的中心，到明年初。

January 5th is when the runoff is.”

1月5日就是跑路的時候。"

So those Georgia runoffs, they're really, really, really important.

所以，那些喬治亞州的第二輪選舉， 他們是真的，真的，真的很重要。

“A record number of Americans, of all races, faiths, religions,

"創紀錄的美國人，各種族、各種信仰、各種宗教。

chose change over more of the same.”

選擇改變，而不是更多的相同。"

If Democrats win the Senate,

如果民主黨贏得參議院。

and choose to make democracy a priority,

並選擇將民主作為優先事項。

there's a lot they can actually do.

他們其實可以做很多事情。

DC and Puerto Rico should be offered statehood. That's obvious.

華盛頓特區和波多黎各應該被授予州地位。這是顯而易見的。

Things like automatic voter registration,

比如選民自動登記。

mail-in balloting…

郵寄投票...

We should just make elections a lot simpler to participate in,

我們應該讓選舉變得更容易參與。

and make sure the people's voices are being heard more clearly.

並確保更清晰地聽到人民的聲音。

“Democracy works.

"民主是有效的。

And I want you to know that I'll work as hard

我想讓你知道，我會努力工作的。

for those who voted against me as those who voted for me.

投反對票的人和投贊成票的人一樣。

That's the job. That's the job."

這就是工作。這就是工作。"