Let’s begin with the simplest and most obvious observation: A majority of Americans prefer what Donald Trump has been selling over Kamala Harris. It’s hard to stomach, because this election offered a pretty clear choice between a cheerful and humane future and a rapturously brutish one. But the latter won out. More Americans wanted the 1939 German-American Bund–style hate rally at Madison Square Garden than the big-tent party with high ideals about the American constitutional order. And we can no longer reassure ourselves, as we did in 2016, that Trump voters didn’t precisely know what they were getting or that much of what he promised to do was not to be taken seriously. We know what he’s about now, and a majority of voters clearly want it.
The country is set to change in stark ways, as Project 2025 jumps from the pages of a far-right dream journal into our lives. There will be big rollbacks in the civil rights many of us have come to enjoy, causing disproportionate pain to women and members of the LGBTQ community. I feel terribly for all the people who voted to protect reproductive freedoms in their states because the effort may be all for naught. As we have relentlessly explained on TNR’s pages, Trump’s Department of Justice can create a national abortion ban by enforcing the Comstock Act, thus bypassing the legislative process and the will of voters entirely. Wherever reproductive rights have managed to secure a haven in a state constitution, those rights will be fought over in inhospitable venues, like the Supreme Court.
Trump’s signature policy proposal is a mass deportation scheme that will target legal citizens for “remigration” alongside the undocumented. The regulatory state will be transformed into something that serves corporations instead of the public. The civil service, as I have mentioned before, will be reconfigured into something that, at best, may look like the “spoils system” of yesteryear; more likely it will exist to dole out punishments to Trump’s political opponents. Imagine a world in which blue states don’t receive disaster relief; where Democrats don’t get their Social Security checks.
Part of Trump’s second-term agenda includes a plan to crush left-liberal organizing. The movement to end the war in Gaza, which was highly effective in shifting public opinion on Israel’s ongoing military assault, will feel this hammer blow first. Trump has been lately dogged by generals who opposed his fascist inclinations; his future generals will be much less reluctant. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito will retire and be replaced by younger versions of themselves. Probably worst of all, the timeline on permanent climate catastrophe has moved up—it’s not unfair to say that we may soon arrive at a point of no return (though my strong suspicion is that we have reached it already).
At the moment, I can’t exactly figure out what kind of Democratic Party emerges from the wreckage of this election. Harris ran a distinctly centrist style of politics, for which influential members of the punditocracy and the party’s most entrenched elites had long agitated. This approach flopped, badly. This brand of politics makes complete sense on paper to a lot of people who now need to contend with the fact that the voters that Democrats need the most to win presidential elections are rejecting it in substantial numbers.
But these failures are not the biggest problem Democrats face. The real crisis is that all the roads ahead are fraught with peril. The country has clearly tacked to the right in substantial ways. It’s going to make sense to a lot of Democrats to keep chasing the electorate in that direction. But a party that, in 2024, was only really defending a narrow portfolio of traditionally Democratic principles ceases to be the Democratic Party in any meaningful sense if they abandon those few battlements which they’ve retained the courage to defend. Tacking right might be a path to power, but we should dispense with the delusion that a Democratic Party choosing this path would continue to be a liberal party. Rather, it would come to reside in the same ideological province of the pre-Trump Republican Party—and remember, that’s a movement that Trumpism dispatched far more rapidly and soundly than the Democrats.
At the same time, organizing the party around a bolder, leftward direction is difficult to fathom. A more leftist set of domestic policy prescriptions requires its proponents to run the sort of piping-hot, high-spending economy that Biden attempted—and probably to a greater extent than Biden was willing to go. The failure of Bidenomics to impress the very voters it strove so mightily to help will make politicians extremely skittish about taking that approach again anytime soon. But even if Democrats were brave enough to let it rip, bolder policies also require a functioning administrative state to administer them. Right now, the Supreme Court is not committed to the administrative state’s survival and is more likely to keep dismantling it. So a Democratic Party that shifts in this direction is destined to make a ton of near-term promises that it can’t fulfill and risk making voters more cynical about government, which helps strongmen like Trump stay in power.
All that said, Trump might very well run up against the problem of unfulfillable promises a lot sooner than the Democrats. Trumpism has always been a slow march into the thickets of its own policy paradoxes, and this will only grow more pronounced as all the reins and fetters that impeded Trump’s first-term ambitions come off in the second. Here, the laws of gravity snap back with a vengeance. Trump cannot deport millions of people without sending the economy into a doom spiral. He can’t create a more efficient government by asking a noodlehead failure like Elon Musk to manage it. He can’t put a quack like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in charge of public health without people getting a lot sicker. You can’t make America great again while destroying the regulatory regime that keeps a staggering range of everyday harms at bay: coal ash spills and E. coli and shoddy building construction and, lest we forget, pandemics. And, no, you can’t arrest climate change by pretending it’s not happening.
The problem, of course, is that the rug-pull always arrives too late for the conned to prevent. While we are waiting for these bills to come due, however, Trump will probably manage to keep two of his promises: He will duck accountability for the malfeasances for which he’s already facing judgment in various legal fora (and likely extend this privilege to a grip of bad actors, beginning with the January 6 rioters), and he will hurt the people he deems to be his enemy. Those supporters who are inclined to dole out punishments of their own will feel a freer hand to do so. This is going to be an immediately more dangerous country to reside in for lots of Americans.
This has, unfortunately, been the cauldron in which recent Democratic electoral successes have been conjured: The collapsed reality and widespread destruction wrought from GOP misrule provokes a backlash that drives up enough public support for a change. This is how we got Barack Obama and Joe Biden to the White House. This is also the widening gyre in which we’re now trapped: Republican failures, and the intense period of crisis management that follows, have made it harder for Democrats to build anything of their own that’s truly enduring, which in turn gives them little to run on. I’m left with the strong impression that the only thing most people know about Democrats is that they didn’t want Trump to be president.
As Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall noted on election night, “Incumbent parties have been losing in basically every industrial democracy since the pandemic.” Perhaps this outcome was predetermined. But it wasn’t our fate to end up with, as Marshall described, “Trump, with his degenerate, autocratic ways” as the alternative. That a cruel president is returning to office on the promise of doubling down on the cruelty speaks to something really unpleasant about ourselves. There was a notion, once, that Obama’s election indicated that the United States was closer than ever to becoming the nation we were always destined to be. With Trump’s reelection, we should reckon with the dreadful possibility that New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie is correct when he says, “Most of us will probably die living in the political order that will emerge out of this election.”
The long and winding political campaign road is ending (we hope) on the doorsteps of the 60th U.S. Presidential Election. This is only my 16th, my first was just after I joined the Army. But I would wager no other election in our history will compare to 2024’s, in length, breadth, cost or more importantly, historical consequence.
Most clear thinking voters refuse to believe pollsters, who claim this is way, way, too close to predict. They insist it will again come down to the smallest percentage of voters in a handful of states. Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada they say, hold the keys to the White House, and the fate of the Republic.
The residents of those swing states have suffered the brunt of the $16 billion onslaught of political ads. Thanks to the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the campaign finance floodgates sprung wide open to Corporate and special interest quid pro quo. This judicial abomination of the First Amendment has inflicted America with endless campaigning, astronomical expenditures and a potentially violent polarization. Too many MAGA faithful predict a Civil War on steroids, unless Trump is returned to his ordained position as their White Christian Savior and President.
But I’m not ready to give up on the American Experiment. I honestly and reasonably believe Kamala Harris could get between 6 and 15 million more popular votes that trump. The electoral congress is a bit uncertain, but the Dem’s should prevail; by how much depends on disaffected true Conservative Republicans. I believe the Democrats could take back the House of Representatives, and have an even chance at retaining the U.S. Senate. Hope springs eternal. Polling yesterday revealed a three point lead for V.P Harris, in Iowa of all states. And I like Colin Allred’s chances in Texas at last. The Democrats as usual, have enlisted highly qualified, intelligent, committed and honorable candidates across the country. The republi-cons have insisted on election denying, unthinking, dimwitted, sycophantic cult followers of trump Inc. Inquiring minds have to wonder why people who hate government and governing principles, run for positions running the government. I guess the answer is obvious.
OnSeptember 29, 2023 – Sarah Pruitt, a writer and editor based in New Hampshire wrote:
“The Founding Fathers Feared Political Factions Would Tear the Nation Apart”
“Today, it may seem impossible to imagine the U.S. government without its two leading political parties, Democrats and Republicans. But in 1787, when delegates to the Constitutional Convention gathered in Philadelphia to hash out the foundations of their new government, they entirely omitted political parties from the new nation’s founding document.”
“This was no accident. The framers of the new Constitution desperately wanted to avoid the divisions that had ripped England apart in the bloody civil wars of the 17th century. Many of them saw parties—or “factions,” as they called them—as corrupt relics of the monarchical British system that they wanted to discard in favor of a truly democratic government.”
‘“It was not that they didn’t think of parties,” says Willard Sterne Randall, professor emeritus of history at Champlain College and biographer of six of the Founding Fathers. “Just the idea of a party brought back bitter memories to some of them.”’
“George Washington’s family had fled England precisely to avoid the civil wars there, while Alexander Hamiltononce called political parties “the most fatal disease” of popular governments. James Madison, who worked with Hamilton to defend the new Constitution to the public in the Federalist Papers, wrote in Federalist 10 that one of the functions of a “well-constructed Union” should be “its tendency to break and control the violence of faction.”’
As he stepped down from the presidency, Washington urged Americans to always place the interests of the nation over their political and regional affiliations.
“In George Washington’s Farewell Address to the Nation, Washington and Hamilton worked closely together on the address, which took the form of a public letter to the American people. It was published in the Daily American Advertiser, a Philadelphia newspaper, on September 19, 1796, and later reprinted in papers throughout the country. The letter included three main principles:”
1. Importance of Unity:
“After opening with an explanation of his choice not to seek a third term, Washington’s farewell address urged Americans not to put their regional and sectional interests above the interests of the nation as a whole. “You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together,” Washington declared. “The Independence and Liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts, of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.”
“Regions such as North, South, East and West should see their common interests rather than their differences, he continued. “Your Union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty and…the love of the one ought to endear you to the preservation of the other.”
2. The ‘Worst Enemy’ of Government: Loyalty to Party Over Nation:
“According to Washington, one of the chief dangers of letting regional loyalties dominate loyalty to the nation as a whole was that it would lead to factionalism, or the development of competing political parties. When Americans voted according to party loyalty, rather than the common interest of the nation, Washington feared it would foster a “spirit of revenge,” and enable the rise of “cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men” who would “usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterward the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
“In fact, political parties had already begun to emerge by the time Washington stepped aside. Federalists, who drew their support largely from New England, advocated a strong national government and the fiscal programs created by Hamilton, the nation’s first secretary of the treasury. Republicans (later Democratic-Republicans) led by Southerners like Thomas Jefferson and Madison, opposed Hamilton’s economic policies. They also split with the Federalists in foreign policy, favoring a closer relationship with France over Great Britain.”
“Washington supported Hamilton’s financial programs and sided with the Federalists in supporting the Jay Treaty with Britain. By the end of his presidency, Washington was weathering increasingly bitter attacks from his Republican critics, and his farewell address represented his response to such attacks, as well as a more general statement of his principles.”
3. Danger of Foreign Entanglements:
“Just as regionalism would lead to the formation of political parties, Washington believed, partisanship would open the door to “foreign influence and corruption.” While he advocated for the United States to be on good terms with all nations, especially in commercial relations, he argued that “inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded.”
“Europe had its own, very complicated, set of interests, and the United States should keep its distance from European affairs, Washington believed. A foreign policy based on neutrality was the safest way to maintain national unity, and stability, in the United States. Although Washington saw the need for the nation to involve itself in foreign affairs in the case of war or other emergencies, he argued that it must “steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” Sarah Pruitt, Updated July 6, 2023
Needless to say, the Founding Fathers would be stunned and appalled at the current state of our multi-billion dollar campaigns and political divide.
“Consider, for example, that after a wealthy 25-year-old man named George Washington, in 1757, bought “$195 worth of punch and hard cider for friends prior to an election,” the Virginia Legislature enacted a law prohibiting candidates, “or persons on their behalf,” from giving voters “money, meat, drink, entertainment or provision . . . any present, gift, reward or entertainment, etc. in order to be elected.”
That historic guard rail hasn’t dissuaded Elon Musk from pledging to give away $1 million each day to registered voters in battleground states, just for signing on the dotted line, and purportedly to vote for his BF Trump.
“Washington’s farewell address urged Americans not to put their regional and sectional interests above the interests of the nation as a whole.”
But Trump’s first and foremost principle, is to divide America into MAGA’s and everyone else. To pit his faithful against the others. To demonize immigrants, in spite of two of his wives and in-laws being recent immigrants. And most recently, to scare the bejesus out of as many American’s as possible, on the dangers of immigration from non-Christians.
Washington warned:The ‘Worst Enemy’ of Government: Loyalty to Party Over Nation:
It’s blaringly obvious that Trump and his myriad of sycophantic MAGAnians, are not loyal to the Republic or to our Democratic institutions, they’re government hating bomb throwers.
Washington feared:Danger of Foreign Entanglements:
But in this ever dangerous and fractured world, with growing numbers of anti-Democratic, autocratic, kleptocratic, theocratic and fascist regimes, NATO, the Indo-Pacific Alliance and other international pacts are necessarily more important than ever.
Unfortunately, trump and his followers are more aligned with leaders he admires and is clearly envious of; trump regards Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un, Viktor Orban, and Nicolás Maduro as great world leaders to be applauded and emulated.
Trump, cowardly and treasonous Republi-cons in Congress, Musk and other billionaire MAGA benefactors, and the millions of MAGA, hate filled sheeple, and most importantly, a majority of extreme right supreme court justices, have failed American Democracy on all three of Washington’s governing principles.
The MAGA Republi-cons in the U.S. Senate could have stopped trump, at any time in his 5 year reign of Anti-American terrorism, and then failed to convict him at his two impeachments. The supreme court could have reigned in trump, instead, they gave him free rein to subvert the Department of Justice’s attempts to hold him accountable for his crimes and also ruled to allow him to commit even more consequential malfeasances if he’s returned to the White House.
Numerous journalists and news organizations have attempted to shine a light through the trump smoke-screen of disinformation, conspiracy theories, and countless lies he used to subvert, the Grand Old Party, the conservative movement and MAGA-ward Christians. We know what trump accomplished in his first term. Above all, he attempted to overthrow our Democracy and Democratic institutions, and hired government hating, self-serving like-minded operatives to turn over federal and state power to the rich and powerful, to fossil fuel and extractive benefactors and to enemies foreign and domestic. No opportunity to enrich himself and his friends and family was left untapped. And we know what trump and the MAGA republi-cons in congress would inflict on America and the world if they get control of the White House and the congress. More on the order of massive budget busting tax cuts for the ultra-rich and tax dodging corporations, 80% of which will go, as before, to the top 1%.
But a second trump administration will be operating in “Katie bar the door” territory, thanks to the SCOTUS.
MAGA operatives published their plans in a 887-page book, which was written in part by the former president’s aides.
FactCheck.org®A Project of The Annenberg Public Policy Center enlightens: “Project 2025 provides a roadmap for “the next conservative President” to downsize the federal government and fundamentally change how it works, including the tax system, immigration enforcement, social welfare programs and energy policy, particularly those designed to address climate change.”
“It also wades deeply into the culture war that has been dividing the country. Project 2025 calls for abolishing the teaching of “‘critical race theory’ and ‘gender ideology’” in public schools, and “deleting” terms such as “diversity, equity and inclusion,” “gender equity,” and “reproductive health” from “every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant … and piece of legislation that exists.”
“The project is being led and funded by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative public policy think tank founded in 1973. In addition to Heritage, there are more than 100 conservative organizations on Project 2025’s advisory board. Among those “coalition partners” are the Center for Immigration Studies, Moms for Liberty, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Tea Party Patriots, Turning Point USA and America First Legal Foundation, which is headed by Stephen Miller, a former Trump senior adviser.”
“In fact, at least 140 people who worked in the Trump administration had a hand in Project 2025,” a CNN review found.
Government ‘efficiency’: Project 2025 proposes cutting federal spending and firing “supposedly ‘un-fireable’ federal bureaucrats.” (Separately, Trump has praised businessman Elon Musk for firing employees, and floated the idea of putting Musk in charge of a government efficiency commission.)
“The project recommends privatizing government functions, including the National Weather Service, Transportation Security Administration, or TSA, and the National Flood Insurance Program, as well as eliminating the Department of Education and scores of programs, bureaus and offices throughout government. The project also calls for removing the Biden administration’s expansion of Title IX, which bans sex discrimination in education, to include sexual orientation and gender identity. The courts have blocked the rule from taking effect.”
“As for other departments, the project calls for the “wholesale overhaul” of the Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, the “top-to-bottom overhaul” of the Department of Justice, and a return “to the right mission, the right size, and the right budget” at the Department of Homeland Security. The Justice Department overhaul would include “a plan to end immediately any policies, investigations, or cases that run contrary to law or Administration policies.”
“One frequent target for cuts are offices and programs that promote clean energy and monitor or mitigate the effects of climate change.”
“For example, the project calls for the dismantling of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which conducts research and issues reports on climate change. Project 2025 says “many” of NOAA’s functions can be “eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories.”
“Social welfare programs: Project 2025 cites fraud and waste in safety net programs and calls for eliminating or reducing basic benefits for low-income individuals and families.”
“For Medicaid, Project 2025 proposes adding work requirements for beneficiaries and “time limits or lifetime caps … to disincentivize permanent dependence.” The health insurance program for low-income Americans covered nearly 74 million people in May, according to the latest data.”
“The conservative plan also calls for tightening work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps, and changing the eligibility requirements for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which was created by the overhaul of the welfare system in 1996. New eligibility requirements would also reduce the number of students served by the national school breakfast and lunch programs — which were described in the book as “inefficient, wasteful” programs.”
“Project 2025 also seeks to incentivize at-home child care. “Instead of providing universal day care, funding should go to parents either to offset the cost of staying home with a child or to pay for familial, in-home childcare,” the plan states.”
“The plan calls for the elimination of Head Start, a program that funds education, health and social services programs for low-income children under 5 years old.”
I would personally like to thank all the critical thinking patriots – journalists, activists, fact based news organizations and others, for helping America to think critically about who’s attempting to turn our Democratic Republic over to anti-Democratic autocrats, self-serving kleptocrats, theocrats, misogynists, white national racists and fascists. They’ve gallantly tried to help turn the page on America’s trump presidential nightmare.
Hundreds of true conservative, Eisenhower and Regan Republican party faithful, who’ve been driven out of the party, or fled for their lives, have advocated for and endorsed Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in this consequential election. There are Republican’s for Harris, scientists for Harris, historian’s for Harris, Puerto Rican’s for Harris, Dad’s for Harris, White Dudes for Harris, Black Men for Harris, Mom’s for Harris and probably dozens that I haven’t heard about.
Some, like Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and others, have went further and endorsed Democrats running against election denying trump apologists and January 6th sympathizers in congress. Many tens or hundreds of thousands have resigned themselves to vote against their long lost party. Virtually everyone who worked for trump in his administration have declared they would refuse to endorse or vote for trump in 2024.
trump, fearing another lost election, has become more unhinged from political reality. The MAGA rally lies and campaign promises have become more outrageous by the day. The twice impeached, 4 times indicted, thrice convicted felon, can’t help but envision himself spending time in a federal prison at the ripe old age of 80. If he loses, odds are favoring him fleeing the country before the Justice Department overcomes the $100 million dollars he’s spent trying to subvert a just reckoning. Also if he loses the election, the campaign faithful piggy-bank will dry up and he’ll be forced to spend his own dwindling wealth on his many legal defenses.
trump’s campaign rhetoric becomes darker and more ominous by the day. Aside from immigrants eating cats and dogs, something that should not even be repeated, trump blames immigrants for every crime, malady, immorality, and unfairness imposed on real white Christian citizens.
Kamala, on the other hand, preaches joy, inclusion, unity and optimism. Her message is somehow getting through the right-wing MAGA-phones, republi-con congressional treason and obfuscation, foreign interference, social media conspiracies, and trump’s fantasized, Democratic dystopian future.
Although Jeffrey Preston Bezos, American business magnate and oligarch best known as the founder, executive chairman, and former president and CEO of Amazon, decided to block a Washington Post endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris for president, most of the Post’s journalists have voiced their choices in the election, through their reporting and writings. “Chief Executive and Publisher Will Lewis explained the decision not to endorse in this year’s presidential race or in future elections as a return to the Post’s roots: It has for years styled itself an “independent paper.” It’s too bad that More than 200,000 people had canceled their digital subscriptions to the paper. Don’t blame the messenger.
I, on the other hand, am not afraid of endorsing Kamala and Tim to bring America back from the abyss. I’m a Veteran who served my country for 3 years in the Army, in a nuclear missile artillery battalion. We had our missiles aimed at the Soviets and they had theirs aimed at us. I think I fell asleep 60 years ago, just woke up and nothing has changed. We’re still butting heads with the Russkies. We were required to have secret clearances to serve in our Pershing unit. We had monthly seminars from intelligence officers on the necessity of protecting secrets and documents, especially when we were out in public. We couldn’t even have a camera near the military Kaserne. They found a camera on one soldier and we never heard from him again. It shocks myself and fellow veterans how trump abused the national trust by illegally taking highly classified government secrets and documents from government intelligence agencies, and then refusing to turn them over when ordered by the courts, and also by recklessly storing them in a public bathroom. A president who betrays his country and his oath of office should not be returned to the White House. I can’t believe how any Veteran could vote for trump.
As a member of a dozen or so unions and working in manufacturing and construction, I vote for the folks who valiantly fought to stem the flight of manufacturing jobs offshore. Those were all Democrats, including Joe Biden, Three-term Democratic U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, Independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and many other Democrats. The republi-cons in congress greased the pathways and fought for tax incentives for corporations to offshore high-paying middle class jobs.
trump and J.D. Vance have already proposed trying to overturn the Joe Biden and Kamala Harris administrations Chips and Science Act. “The act authorizes roughly $280 billion in new funding to boost domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors in the United States, for which it appropriates $52.7 billion. The act includes $39 billion in subsidies for chip manufacturing on U.S. soil along with 25% investment tax credits for costs of manufacturing equipment, and $13 billion for semiconductor research and workforce training, with the dual aim of strengthening American supply chain resilience and countering China.
“When the CHIPS and Science Act passed in 2022, it had bipartisan support. Lawmakers from both political parties hailed the law’s importance for reviving US chip-making capacity in the face of China’s growing influence in the semiconductor sector.”
“But in the final days of this presidential election cycle, the law has become a point of contention between the political parties, putting its future in doubt.”
On Friday, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican who voted against the CHIPS Act, drew criticism after suggesting he would consider repealing the program under the Trump administration
“Analysts estimated that the act incentivized between 25 and 50 separate potential projects, with total projected investments of $160–200 billion and 25,000–45,000 new jobs.”
How can any laborer, union member or otherwise, vote for trump and his anti-labor supporters in congress, who overwhelmingly vote against labor issues at every chance.
President Biden, Vice President and Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris, her running mate Tim Walz and the Democratic party as a whole, are strong supporters of labor and labor unions.
The Democratic party, Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have always, and will always fight for women’s reproductive freedom and the right to make their own healthcare decisions, and to have access to safe and legal abortions. Harris wants to restore Roe v. Wade, which protects abortion up until the time of fetal viability or about 22 weeks. The vast majority of voters agree with her; 89%, think this election will have an impact on abortion rights, and 61% said it will have a “major” impact.
If trump and his MAGA Christian supporters regain control of the White House, a national abortion ban will be at the top of their to-do lists.
For all these reasons, and the fact that trump is the absolute worst, most vile inhabitant of the White House in U.S. history, I believe the Democrats and Kamala Harris will prevail in this election and will be able to turn the page on this ugly and divisive period in our history. As she says, we’re not going back. I just hope that a large resounding victory, might force the republi-cons to alter their anti-Democratic mind set.
So where does that leave the MAGA republi-cons and the unholy, un Christ-like prosperity Christians who went all in on trump’s campaign of grievance, revenge and retribution? They ignored the hundreds of red flags, the habitual lies, the rampant self-serving, the crimes, the indiscretions, the flagrant immorality, and the daily un-presidential conduct. Millions of true and faithful conservative Republicans have fled the party, or the party has left them in it’s toxic wake. Are there enough influential, authentic, conservative Republican’s like Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Mitt Romney and others, capable of resurrecting the Grand Old Party, or it it destined for the waste bin of history.
trump, Christian Nationalists, and MAGAnians in congress, believe scaring their faithful out of their wits, and holding together their coalition of disaffected, grievance based bro-crew faithful is enough to win trump a second term and keep him out of prison.
$170 million has already been wagered on this election, an abomination causing the founding fathers to turn over in their graves. Who will lose their political shirts.
I believe they’re wrong on all counts. The others, and especially women in every town and burb, in every corner of the nation are not settling for returning to the dark ages of female subjugation and purgatory. The women of America might just save the Republic.
The New York Times editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.
Column: Listen to Trump’s former aides: He’d be far more dangerous in a second term
Doyle McManus – October 28, 2024
Donald Trump “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, any time he wanted,” his former chief of staff said. (Alex Brandon / Associated Press)
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what’s in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
Donald Trump’s former White House chief of staff, retired Marine Gen. John F. Kelly, broke a long silence and denounced his former boss as a man who fits “the general definition of fascist.”
The conservative, normally taciturn Kelly was moved to speak out after Trump condemned former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Adam B. Schiff and other Democrats as “the enemy from within” and said he would deploy troops onto the nation’s streets to suppress opposition.
“Using the military on, to go after, American citizens is … a very, very bad thing,” Kelly told the New York Times. “Even to say it for political purposes to get elected, I think it’s a very, very bad thing.”
Kelly wasn’t the only former Trump aide to warn that the GOP candidate shouldn’t be trusted with the nuclear codes. Dozens of people who worked in senior positions in the Trump administration have chimed in. Gen. Mark A. Milley, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called him “fascist to the core … the most dangerous person to the country.” Former national security advisor John Bolton said he was “unfit to be president.”
Trump “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, any time he wanted,” Kelly said.
Did those warnings from authoritative sources — eminent figures Trump once appointed to high-ranking jobs — have any effect on his voters as election day approaches?
Readers of this column won’t be surprised to learn that I agree wholeheartedly with Kelly, Milley, Bolton and their colleagues: Trump is a danger to our democracy.
He neither understands nor respects the Constitution. He yearns openly to rule the way China’s Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin do, as an autocrat answerable to no one. “He controls 1.4 billion people with an iron fist,” he said admiringly of Xi.
Some, his hardcore base, agree with everything the former president says right down to the coarsest insults.
Others admit to qualms about Trump’s style but say they support him because they hope he can bring back the low-inflation prosperity of his first two years in office.
But a third group, which includes many independents as well as moderate Republicans, is the most perplexing. Not only do they dislike Trump’s style, they worry about some of his positions: his desire to unravel Obamacare, his threats to deploy the military against domestic opponents, his indiscriminate tariffs, his plan to fire thousands of civil servants and replace them with MAGA loyalists.
But many say they don’t think Trump would — or could — actually make those things happen.
In a focus group last week organized for NBC News by the public opinion consulting firm Engagious, for example, an Atlanta home inspector named Kevin said he worried that Trump’s tariffs would make consumer prices go up.
“It’s a bad idea,” he said. “But I don’t think it’s going to really go anywhere. I think it’ll cost too much money. It’ll be too difficult politically.” He’ll probably vote for Trump anyway, he said.
Pollsters have called this Trump’s “believability gap.” Voters hear what he says, but they discount it — they think that “he’s just talking” or that surely somebody will stop his more outlandish ideas.
But there are two problems with those Trump voters’ self-comforting rationalizations.
The first is that Trump already has a track record of trying to do most of those things. He tried to repeal Obamacare, but a handful of moderate Republican senators got in his way. He issued an executive order that would have enabled him to replace civil servants with political appointees, but time ran out on his term before he could use it.
And when demonstrators assembled across the street from the White House, he urged military officials to deploy troops and shoot protesters in the legs — but Gen. Milley and Defense Secretary Mark Esper stopped him.
“When he starts talking about using the military against people … I think we should take that very seriously,” Olivia Troye, who served as an aide to Trump’s vice president, Mike Pence, told my colleague Noah Bierman recently. “He actually talked about shooting Americans. I was there … I witnessed that.”
The second problem with the “believability gap” is that if Trump gets back to the White House, he will be more likely to get his way.
He has frequently complained that he made a mistake in his first term by appointing aides like Kelly, Milley and Bolton, who believed it was their duty to restrain the president’s ill-considered impulses. If he gets a second term, he’ll surround himself with more people who will do his bidding without raising pesky questions.
He’ll run into less opposition from other institutions too.
Republicans in Congress, who occasionally restrained Trump when he was president, have purged most of the moderates from their ranks. Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah is retiring. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, an occasional Trump critic, will no longer be his party’s leader in the Senate.
Federal courts may be more hospitable, too, thanks to judges Trump appointed his first time around.
So moderate Republicans and independents who are tempted to vote for Trump because they hope he will lower taxes or improve the economy should think long and hard about the risks of that bargain.
When Trump says he’ll order prosecutors to go after Joe Biden and “the Pelosis,” he means it. When Trump says he’ll punish businesses like Amazon if he doesn’t like their owners’ views, he means it. When Trump says he believes the Constitution gives him “the right to do whatever I want as president,” he means it.
And this time, he would know better how to turn his wishes into reality. A second Trump term wouldn’t be a benign rerun of the first version. As his former aides are trying their best to warn us, it would be far worse.
Striking photographs document environmental decay on world’s largest lake
Zoe Whitfield, CNN – October 18, 2024
Moving from Tehran to the more northerly lakeside city of Rasht aged 13, Khashayar Javanmardi’s youth was punctuated by weekends and extended holidays on the Iranian coastline of the Caspian Sea. “It was a dreamy place,” the photographer reminisced on a phonecall with CNN. “It was my utopia; everything happened for me at the Caspian.”
Diluting this picturesque vignette, Javanmardi recalled the nuisance of the accompanying gammarus: an amphipod crustacean similar to a freshwater shrimp that would nibble at his feet whenever he ventured into the water. He had always hated them, but as he grew aware of their absence, alarm bells started to ring. “That was the first thing I noticed change,” he said. “Later I read that, due to pollution, they were extinct. They had been food for bigger species…”
Climate change and a lack of rainfall has caused one of Iran’s longest rivers, the Ghezel Ozen, to almost completely dry up, resulting in a devastating loss of aquatic wildlife. (Image taken in February 2022). – Khashayar Javanmardi 2024 courtesy Loose JointsMore
Situated between Europe and Asia, the Caspian is the world’s largest inland body of water; a colossal-sized endorheic basin — or a major lake — that is also bounded by five countries, Iran, Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. In recent years it has been the source of much concern for those privy to its shorelines, owing to what the UN Environment Programme has described as “an enormous burden of pollution from oil extraction and refining, offshore oil fields, radioactive wastes from nuclear power plants and huge volumes of untreated sewage and industrial waste introduced mainly by the Volga River (which flows through Russia and into the Caspian Sea).”
It was anxieties about the water’s biodiversity that kickstarted Javanmardi’s decade-long photography project, highlighting the environmental and social impact of the area’s man-made deterioration. A new monograph “Caspian: A Southern Reflection,” published by Loose Joints, is the result of this extensive survey and operates simultaneously as a warning and an invitation to learn. “This project is the essence of my life and career,” acknowledged Javanmardi, speaking from Lausanne in Switzerland, where he is based today. “As an artist, I’ve always wanted to be an honest witness.”
Locals call it the lake “Mother Caspian.” One shepherd told Javanmardi of the lake’s decline; “It’s like we were not good to our mother, we were not that kind to our mother and now she’s sad and she’s not going to share her love.’” Image taken January 2021. – Khashayar Javanmardi 2024 courtesy Loose JointsMore
The book oscillates between landscapes, portraits and the quiet scenes that fit somewhere in the middle. On one page three family members stand facing out to rough white waves, the foot of a presumed fourth poking out of the window of a car to their left; elsewhere a mustached man sits alone at a plastic table, a look of despondence creeping across his face. Pictures of abandoned ships and other discarded objects further foreground the damage, coupled with a sense of loss.
Nominated at last year’s Prix Elysée (one of the world’s most prestigious photographic prizes run in conjunction with the Elysée Museum, also in Lausanne), an early iteration of the project received the special jury mention. Subsequently, the museum’s director Nathalie Herschdorfer penned the book’s introduction, describing how throughout its pages “we discover scenes that leave an aftertaste of desolation” and noting that “the inhabitants who pass through these landscapes, often photographed from a distance, express loneliness mixed with a sense of sorrow.”
The illegal dumping of waste close to the Caspian Sea is increasing pollution, as runoff seeps into the groundwater and directly contaminates the sea. – Khashayar Javanmardi 2024 courtesy Loose Joints
“A question that I asked people was, ‘what is the role of the Caspian in your life?’,” said Javanmardi, who began working on the project at Iran’s Anzali Lagoon. “They were really open, sharing their memories and how they feel. They call it the Mother Caspian and one guy, a shepherd, said ‘it’s like we were not good to our mother, we were not that kind to our mother and now she’s sad and she’s not going to share her love.’”
Indeed, while the Caspian was once a major hub for movement between Iran and Europe, in the last century it became a venue for leisure. Today though, Iran’s Environment Department says its waters are contaminated with over 120,000 tons of pollutants annually — domestic and industrial as well as oil remnants — while Javanmardi estimates the fishing rate has slumped by 70%. “If it shrinks, people’s lives shrink,” he explained, citing further statistics that project water levels could drop by between nine and 18 meters by the end of the century. Military activity, namely Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is a further aggravating cause (the former is suspected of having used its Caspian Flotilla to launch a number of strikes).
Abandoned boats at Kiashahr Port, northern Iran, taken in July 2022. – Khashayar Javanmardi 2024 courtesy Loose Joints
Furthermore, the photographer characterized language as at the core of the negligence: though it’s widely talked about as the Caspian “Sea”, the Caspian is technically a lake, a categorization that would imply stricter regulations by the respective governing bodies around waste and pollution (than the sea). “They (politicians) don’t call it a lake, and one of the reasons is that if they change it, the whole conversation around regulation would change,” Javanmardi suggested.
His objectives for the project have always been to raise awareness, he continued. “That’s my goal, and so I tried to use the body of water as a way to communicate culture and politics, global politics — because this is not just about Iran,” he said. “I’ve tried to show how the Caspian is still alive. For me, it’s the last cry of life — you always feel something is in the air when you see the photos. I like to give this space to the audience, to feel this.”
May 2020: A farmer rests while water is pumping from the lagoon to his farm. Extracting water directly from the lagoon has no regulation. – Khashayar Javanmardi 2024 courtesy Loose Joints
Despite the recklessness of higher political powers, during his travels Javanmardi found a sense of community in the people he met. “How they pay attention to the environment and are careful and in love with the Caspian, this is something that makes me hopeful,” he shared. “As long as I see this spirituality, that people know how privileged they are to live beside that sea… I know, as a person from there, we won’t let it be ruined.”
“Caspian: A Southern Reflection” by Khashayar Javanmardi is published by Loose Joints and out now
Fact check: Trump, on a lying spree, made at least 40 separate false claims in two Pennsylvania speeches
Daniel Dale, CNN – October 10, 2024
Former President Donald Trump is on a lying spree.
As Election Day draws nearer, the Republican presidential nominee has made false claim after false claim on a dizzying variety of subjects. He has both come up with new falsehoods on pressing issues, most notably the federal response to Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton, and repeated old favorites about subjects he has been railing about since his 2016 presidential campaign.
We went through the speeches Trump made at his two Wednesday campaign rallies in the critical swing state of Pennsylvania, one in Scranton and one in Reading. In those two addresses alone, he uttered at least 40 separate false claims.
Here is a fact check.
FEMA and migrants: Trump falsely claimed of the Federal Emergency Management Agency: “They have no money. You know where they gave the money? To illegal immigrants coming in.” He also said, “They spent all their funds; they have no funds to take care…”
This is false in two ways. FEMA does have money for the immediate responses to Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton, though a string of recent disasters has depleted its disaster relief fund; the fund had about $11 billion remaining as of Wednesday. And FEMA did not give all of its disaster relief money to undocumented people; rather, as mandated by Congress, FEMA also administers an entirely separate pool of money for sheltering migrants.
FEMA and employees: Trump added another false claim about FEMA, saying: “They have no workers, they have no nothing.” FEMA has more than 20,000 employees.
Harris and the response: Trump falsely claimed that as desperate people tried to survive Hurricane Helene in North Carolina, Vice President Kamala Harris “didn’t send anything or anyone at all” to help them. There were extensive federal and state rescue and relief efforts in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Helene. It’s true that some residents died and others were stranded for days, but the state was not ignored by Harris or the Biden administration; North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, has repeatedly thanked President Joe Biden for his assistance.
Schools and transgender children: Trump told a slightly vaguer version of his usual false story about schools supposedly obtaining or performing gender-affirming surgeries for transgender children behind their parents’ backs, saying, “Your child go goes to school, and they take your child. It was a ‘he.’ And comes back a ‘she.’ And they do this…And often without parental consent.”
There is no evidence that US schools have sent children into gender-affirming surgeries without their parents knowing or performed gender-affirming surgeries on site; Trump’s own presidential campaign could not provide a single example of any of this ever happening. Even in states where gender-affirming surgery is legal for people under age 18, parental consent is required before a minor can undergo such a procedure.
Trump’s opponents and the election: In Reading, Trump falsely claimed of his election opponents: “They are cheatin’ dogs, I will tell you that.” In Scranton, he falsely claimed, “Their first meeting is: ‘How do we cheat?’” This is all nonsense. There is no basis for the claim that Trump’s opponents are election cheaters.
Harris’ previous presidential campaign: Trump repeated his false claim that, when Harris ran for president in 2020, “she was the first one to drop out, of like 22 people” in the Democratic primary. In fact, 13 other Democratic candidates dropped out of that primary before Harris exited in December 2019 – including the sitting or former governors of Washington, Montana and Colorado; the sitting mayor of New York City; andsitting or former members of the House of Representatives and Senate.
Harris and the press: Trump falsely claimed of Harris: “She doesn’t do any interviews.” Trump is entitled to argue that Harris has not done a sufficient number of interviews as the Democratic presidential nominee, but the assertion she doesn’t do “any” is wrong; Harris has done multiple interviews in recent weeks. Notably, Harris did an interview with the CBS News show “60 Minutes,” which aired Monday, while Trump backed out of his own interview with the show.
Harris-Walz and the Supreme Court: After correctly noting that Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, recently expressed support for getting rid of the Electoral College, Trump falsely claimed, “They want to add… they’re thinking about – first time I heard this number – 25: they want to have 25 Supreme Court justices.” There is no basis for the claim that Harris or Walz is pushing for a 25-justice Supreme Court.
Walz and menstrual products in schools: Trump disparaged Walz as “Tampon Tim,” then said, “You know why they call him that? ’Cause they sell tampons, with special legislation, in boys’ locker rooms.” Trump’s claim is false. The law Walz signed in 2023 requires schools to provide free menstrual products in bathrooms, not the sale of menstrual products in locker rooms – and all 18 public school districts that responded to CNN’s questions about the law say they do not provide the products in boys’ bathrooms. You can read more here.
Wind power: Trump repeated a familiar nonsensical story about how the use of wind power means people “can’t watch” television if “there’s no wind tonight.” Using wind power as part of a mix of power sources does not cause power outages when the wind isn’t blowing, as the federal Department of Energy explained on its website even during the Trump administration.
The Biden administration and electric vehicles: Trump falsely claimed that under a Biden administration electric vehicle mandate, “everybody’s got to have an electric car almost immediately.” There is no Biden administration requirement that consumers must buy an electric car or give up their existing gas-powered cars, “almost immediately” or otherwise. The Biden administration has made a push to get automakers to reduce emissions and adopt electric vehicles, but there is not a mandate for consumers; the tailpipe rules for automakers that were unveiled by the administration earlier this year aim to have electric vehicles make up 35% to 56% new vehicles sold in 2032.
The Paris climate accord and emissions: Trump repeated his false claim that under the Paris climate accord, the US “had to pay a trillion dollars” while some other countries didn’t have to pay.
Trump’s “trillion” figure is a wild exaggeration. Under the Obama administration, the US paid $1 billion of a $3 billion commitment it originally made in 2014. After Trump pulled the country out of the Paris accord, the US paid nothing to the global finance goal. And while Biden pledged $11.4 billion annually from the US, this level of funding hasn’t materialized. That’s because Congress, responsible for appropriating the nation’s budget, has allocated only a fraction of that – roughly $1 billion in 2022.
Harris’ comments on fracking: Trump said, “Listen to Kamala in her own words very recently,” then played two video clips in which Harris said she was in favor of banning fracking. But those clips are from 2019, beyond any reasonable definition of “very recently.” Harris has said during the 2024 campaign that she no longer favors banning fracking.
Venezuela, prisons and migration: Trump falsely claimed, “In Venezuela, many countries, they’re emptying their prisons into our country.” This is false. Trump has never corroborated this claim about Venezuela, let alone “many countries,” and experts have told CNN, PolitiFact and FactCheck.org that they know of no evidence for it.
“We have no evidence that the Venezuelan government is emptying its prisons or mental health institutions to send them outside the country, in other words, to the U.S. or any other country,” Roberto Briceño-León, founder and director of the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence, an independent organization that tracks violence in the country, said in an email to CNN in June, after Trump made similar claims.
Venezuela, criminals and migration: Adding another colorful story about Venezuela, Trump falsely claimed that “they take the criminal gangs from Caracas off the streets and they bus them into the United States and drop them.” This is false. There is no evidence of Venezuelan authorities somehow busing gang members into the US.
The world prison population: Trump repeated his false claim that “the prison population all over the world is down, because they put them in our country.” The recorded global prison population increased from October 2021 to April 2024, from at least about 10.77 million people to at least about 10.99 million people, according to the World Prison Population List compiled by experts in the United Kingdom.
“I do a daily news search to see what’s going on in prisons around the world and have seen absolutely no evidence that any country is emptying its prisons and sending them all to the US,” Helen Fair, co-author of the prison population list and research fellow at the Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research at Birkbeck, University of London, said in June, when Trump made a similar claim.
The number of migrants: Trump, speaking about migration, falsely claimed that “21 million people – plus – came into our nation” under the Biden-Harris administration. Through August, the country had recorded about 10.3 million nationwide “encounters” with migrants during the Biden-Harris administration, including millions who were rapidly expelled from the country; even adding in so-called “gotaways” who evaded detection, estimated by House Republicans as being roughly 2 million, there’s no way the total is “21 million.”
Harris, migrants and criminals: Trump, criticizing Harris on immigration, again wrongly described a set of statistics that was released in September. He falsely claimed in Scranton, “You saw that last week: 13,099 murderers allowed to come in, through them.” He falsely claimed in Reading that “as we speak she has – and this was just announced last week – 13,099, so over 13,000 illegal alien convicted murderers, roaming free in our country.”
This 13,099 figure includes people who are incarcerated in federal, state and local prisons and jails – and it includes people who entered the country over decades, including during Trump’s administration, not just under Biden and Harris. You can read more here.
Harris’ record as attorney general: Trump falsely claimed that when Harris was attorney general of California, “she said under no circumstances” will people be prosecuted for the crimes of child sex trafficking, assault with a deadly weapon or the rape of an unconscious person. Harris did not say anything like that; Trump was grossly mischaracterizing a debate over the language Harris’ office used to summarize California ballot initiatives.
Trump’s border wall: Trump repeated his false claim that “I built over 500 miles of wall” on the southern border. Official government data shows 458 miles were built under Trump – including both wall built where no barriers had existed before and wall built to replace previous barriers.
Trump’s crowds: Trump falsely claimed of his rallies: “We never have an empty seat.” There have been empty seats at numerous Trump rallies over the years – including hundreds at this very rally in Reading. And at many Trump rallies, some once-filled seats empty out during his speeches when supporters leave.
Trump’s crowd in Butler: Trump falsely claimed there were “over 100,000 people” at the rally he held Saturday in Butler, Pennsylvania, at the same site where a gunman had attempted to assassinate him in July. CNN affiliate KDKA in Pittsburgh reported that the Secret Service put the crowd at 24,000 people, while the Trump-supporting sheriff of Blair County, Pennsylvania, James Ott, said in his speech at the rally itself (more than three hours before Trump took the stage) that he was looking out at “21,000-plus people.”
Trump’s response to the assassination attempt: Trump, speaking of his response to the attempted assassination in July, falsely claimed, “I said as I was getting up – before I even got up – I said, ‘How many people were killed?’ Because, you know, it was wall to wall people, and I said, ‘How many people were killed?’ They said, ‘We think three, sir,’ and I said, ‘That’s not good.’”
Trump’s rally microphone picked up what was said by Trump and Secret Service agents while he was on the ground and just after, and he did not ask, before or after he got up, how many people were killed. It’s possible he did so after he was whisked off stage (and, of course, possible he was genuinely misremembering what happened in such a traumatic moment).
Trump and firefighters: Trump falsely claimed, “We got the firefighters endorse us, you probably heard.” But the actual recent national news was that the International Association of Firefighters had decided not to endorse any candidate in the race; while Trump is free to argue that this was a victory for him, given that the union endorsed Biden in 2020, it was not an actual endorsement. And while there were some people in the Scranton crowd holding “Scranton Firefighters for Trump” signs, the Scranton chapter of the union also has not issued an endorsement. The president of the chapter told the Scranton Times-Tribune that none of the people he saw holding the signs were active or retired local firefighters.
Trump and classified documents: Speaking of the criminal case against him over his post-presidency retention of classified documents, Trump repeated his false claim that “I had the Presidential Records Act; I was totally allowed to do it.” The Presidential Records Act says that, the moment a president leaves office, the National Archives and Records Administration gets custody and control of all presidential records from their administration. (Trump’s case was dismissed by a federal judge in July on other grounds, that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith was unconstitutional; Smith has appealed.)
The New York Times and the Russia investigation: Trump, calling claims about his 2016 campaign’s connections to Russia a “scam,” repeated his false claim that The New York Times “admitted they were wrong” about the coverage that won its journalists a Pulitzer Prize along with journalists from The Washington Post.
“The claim is completely false,” Times spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander said in an email to CNN in 2023, when Trump made a similar claim; Stadtlander noted that “the award was upheld by the Pulitzer Prize Board after an independent review” and said the Times’ reporting “was also substantiated by the Mueller investigation and Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into the matter.”
The New York Times and the 2016 election: Trump repeated a false claim he made during his presidency, saying of The New York Times’ coverage of the 2016 election: “Remember in 2016 they had to do an editorial apologizing to their readers because they said, ‘He’s going to lose’…and then I won?”
As the Times noted in 2017 in response to such Trump claims, it did not apologize for its 2016 election coverage. It did publish a post-election letter, from then-executive editor Dean Baquet and publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., that said the election had raised several questions, including this: “Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?” But the letter did not include an apology, to Trump or anyone else.
Trump and the defeat of ISIS: Trump repeated his false claim that “we defeated ISIS in four weeks; it was supposed to take four or five years.” The ISIS “caliphate” was declared fully liberated more than two years into Trump’s presidency.
Military equipment surrendered to the Taliban: Trump repeated his false claim that “we gave $85 billion worth” of US military equipment to the Taliban. Trump’s figure is a massive exaggeration; the Pentagon has estimated that the equipment abandoned to the Taliban by Afghan forces upon their 2021 collapse was worth about $7.1 billion – a chunk of the roughly $18.6 billion worth of equipment provided to Afghan forces between 2005 and 2021.
Biden and foreign income: Trump repeated his false claim that “Biden got a lot of money from China.” After years of investigation by House Republicans, there is still no evidence Biden has received any Chinese money.
Chris Wallace and a question about the Biden family: Trump told his familiar false story about how he had asked Biden at a 2020 presidential debate why the wife of a mayor of Moscow had paid Biden $3.5 million – in fact, the money was sent to a firm connected to the president’s son Hunter Biden, not to the president – but moderator Chris Wallace, then of Fox News and now of CNN, had interjected to say, “Well, please don’t ask him that question.” Wallace never did that. As the transcript shows, Wallace interjected during this debate exchange to try to get Trump to allow Biden to answer Trump’s question about the payment, not to stop Trump from asking.
Inflation: Trump repeated his false claim that inflation under Biden and Harris is “the worst inflation in the history of our country.” Trump could fairly say that the US inflation rate hit a 40-year high in June 2022, when it was 9.1%, but that was not close to the all-time record of 23.7%, set in 1920, and the rate has since plummeted; the most recent available inflation rate at the time Trump spoke here was 2.5% in August.
Mortgage rates: Trump falsely claimed that young people can’t buy a house because interest rates are higher than 10%: “It’s not 10%, it’s 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 percent.” This is false. The average rate on a standard 30-year fixed mortgage was 6.12% in the week ending October 3, according to mortgage financing provider Freddie Mac, and 6.32% in the week ending October 10.
Trump’s tax cut: Trump repeated his false claim that “I gave you, as you know, the largest tax cut in the history of our country.” Expert analyses have found that his 2017 tax cut law was not the largest in US history, either in percentage of gross domestic product or in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Tariffs on China: Trump repeated two of his regular false claims about tariffs on imported Chinese products. He falsely claimed that China “paid hundreds of billions of dollars” in these tariffs during his presidency, then falsely claimed that before his presidency, “nobody ever brought in 10 cents, not one other – not 10 cents, you check those records.”
The 1890s and tariffs: Touting the supposed benefits of tariffs, Trump falsely claimed that in the 1890s, when the US had very high tariffs, “Our country was the richest it ever was.” The US is far richer today than in the 1890s; per capita gross domestic product is now many times higher than it was then.
The trade deficit with China: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that the US trade deficit with China has averaged “$500 billion” per year. The US has never had a $500 billion trade deficit with China even if you only count trade in goods and ignore the services trade in which the US traditionally runs a surplus with China; the all-time record, about $418 billion, was set under Trump in 2018.
Harris and taxes: Trump played a deceptively edited video showing “The View” co-host Meghan McCain saying to Harris in 2019, “Everything from a 70 to 80% tax rate,” and Harris responding, “I think that’s fantastic.”
This video cuts out key words from the exchange; Harris was not specifically endorsing high tax rates when she made the “fantastic” comment.
Here’s the transcript of the 2019 exchange:
McCain: “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the new darling of the party. She officially has more Twitter followers than Nancy Pelosi. She was on ‘60 Minutes’ this weekend proudly calling herself a radical. And she’s promoting policies like saying that every single carbon emission in the country, every car, should be eliminated within the next 11 years, everything from a 70 to 80 percent tax rate. Do you agree that she could possibly – and this ideology, of the socialist left – could splinter your party?”
Harris: “No. You know, I think that she is challenging the status quo. I think that’s fantastic. I think that – you know, I used to teach, before, especially before – in the last few years – and the thing that I always loved about teaching was when you teach, it requires you to defend the premise. And it requires you to re-examine the premise. And question, is it still relevant? Is it – does it have impact? Does it have meaning? And I think that she is introducing bold ideas that should be discussed. And I think it’s good for the party, I frankly think it’s good for the country. Let’s look at the bold ideas. And I’m eager that we have those discussions. And when we are able to defend status quo, then do it, and if there are – you know, if there’s not merit to that, then let’s explore new ideas.”
Biden’s documents case: Trump falsely claimed in Reading that, in an investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents, “Biden was essentially convicted” and in Scranton that “they ruled on him, they said he’s guilty.” Biden was not convicted, “essentially” or not, and was not found guilty; in fact, Biden was not even charged with a crime. The special counsel in the case, Robert Hur, wrote in his public report that “the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” adding that “several defenses are likely to create reasonable doubt as to such charges.”
A supposed Biden gaffe: Mocking Biden’s gaffes, Trump falsely claimed, “But the worst was when he was in New Hampshire and he said, ‘It’s great to be in Florida.’ That’s palm trees.” This never happened. Biden has certainly made various geographic gaffes, as hasTrump, but he never said he was in Florida when he was actually in New Hampshire.
Longevity Experts Say This Seemingly “Healthy” Habit Can Actually Take Years Off Your Life
Emily Laurence – October 10, 2024
Aleksandr Zubkov via Getty Images
Getting 10,000 steps a day. Improving your VO2 max. Putting berries on your breakfast. What are the habits you embrace in an effort to live a long, healthy life? Certainly it’s the routines we do regularly that impact our health the most.
But there’s one well-intentioned habit in particular that longevity experts say can actually take years off your life instead of adding more to it: eating too much animal-based protein. Thought a high-protein diet was a good thing? As doctors explain here, getting too much can backfire.
Why Overemphasizing Protein Isn’t Actually Healthy
Ronnie Kaufman / Getty Images
Before we get into why too much protein isn’t good for longevity, it’s important to note that the nutrient is absolutely important. Dr. Suzanne J. Ferree, who is double-board-certified in family medicine and anti-aging and regenerative medicine, told HuffPost that it’s especially important to get enough as we age.
“The common theory is that we need to cut protein-rich foods as we age, but the research actually only supports this in younger people, not in those of us over 50,” Ferree said. Scientific research backs this up, showing that older adults need more protein than younger adults because our bodies naturally lose muscle as we age.
So yes, protein is absolutely important. How much protein a person needs each day varies based on one’s individual health and needs, but the Food and Drug Administration recommends aiming for 50 grams of protein a day as part of a 2,000-calorie diet. The problem is that many people are eating more protein than they need. On top of that, Americans are overconsuming a specific type of protein that isn’t all that healthy.
In general, there are two types of proteins: animal-based proteins and plant-based proteins. Research has shown that plant-based proteins are healthier than animal-based proteins. Unfortunately, Americans are consuming more of the latter than the former.
“A common mistake is the overemphasis on consuming a high-protein diet, particularly one rich in animal-based proteins, with the belief that it is essential for longevity and muscle preservation. Many people assume that the more protein they consume, the healthier they will be, leading to an overconsumption of animal products like meat, dairy and eggs,” said Dr. Monisha Bhanote, a quintuple-board-certified physician and longevity expert.
Most Americans are eating about 100 grams of protein a day, double the recommended amount. According to a Dietary Guidelines for Americans report, 75% of Americans meet or exceed the recommendation for meat, poultry and eggs. Bhanote says this is exactly what can take years off one’s life.
Anna Blazhuk / Getty Images
“Excessive consumption of animal-based proteins can actually accelerate aging and undermine cellular health, contrary to popular belief,” she said. She explained that the biggest reasons for this come down to two harmful compounds: advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO).
“AGEs are harmful compounds that form when proteins or fats combine with sugar in the bloodstream,” Bhanote said. She explained that animal-based foods — especially if they are grilled, fried or roasted — are high in AGEs. Research shows that these compounds can accumulate in your tissues and, over time, can lead to oxidative stress and inflammation, which are key drivers of cellular aging. “AGEs damage proteins, DNA and other vital cellular structures, accelerating the aging process and contributing to chronic diseases like diabetes, cardiovascular disease and Alzheimer’s,” Bhanote said.
What about TMAO? Bhanote explained that elevated levels of TMAO have been linked to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, including atherosclerosis, heart attack and stroke — all of which obviously are not good for longevity. “TMAO promotes the accumulation of cholesterol in the arteries and impairs the body’s ability to remove it, leading to inflammation and further damage to the cardiovascular system. This not only compromises heart health but also affects overall cellular function and longevity,” Bhanote said.
Related to the mistake many people make of overemphasizing protein in their diet, Raghav Sehgal, a Ph.D. student and Gruber fellow at Yale University whose research focuses on human aging, told HuffPost that one common mistake people make when it comes to longevity is focusing on “miracle diets” promising fast results. The biggie that’s relevant here: the ketogenic diet, which prioritizes fat and protein while minimizing carbohydrates. For many people doing keto, meat and eggs are hero foods; however, as previously explained, eating too many animal products can take years off your life.
How To Use Protein To Work For You, Not Against You
Mike Kemp / Getty Images/Tetra images RF
So, how should we approach protein with an eye toward longevity? Bhanote and Sehgal are of the same mind about this: Eat more protein-rich plants and fish.
While fish certainly isn’t a plant, it is thought of differently than animal-based proteins because it has a completely different nutritional makeup than meat, and scientific research has repeatedly shown benefits to human health when consumed regularly. Eating fish regularly has been associated with reducing the risk of premature death by 12%.
Sehgal explained that plant-based proteins (such as beans, lentils, chickpeas, soy, nuts and seeds) are loaded with antioxidants, fiber and nutrients that keep our hearts healthy, reduce inflammation and lower the risk of chronic diseases. “These foods are naturally low in AGEs and do not contribute to TMAO production, making them much gentler on your cells and overall health,” Bhanote added.
Scientific studies show that having a diet that prioritizes plant-based proteins lowers the risk of mortality associated with cardiovascular disease and other causes. In other words, replacing animal proteins with plant proteins can add years to your life.
Again, no one is disputing that protein is important. It’s crucial to get enough and, as Ferree pointed out, it’s especially important to get enough as we age. But other nutrients are important too, which is why Sehgal said the best diet for longevity is a balanced one that includes a wide variety of nutrient-rich foods.
The benefit of eating a balanced diet full of plants certainly isn’t revolutionary news, but it is backed up by many scientific studies. When it comes to longevity — and health in general — science-backed wins out over trendy and new. This article originally appeared onHuffPost.
A new report says that 13 percent of cancers are linked to bacteria or viruses. Vaccines and treatments offer powerful protection.
By Nina Agrawal – September 19, 2024
Credit…Getty Images
Most cases of stomach cancer are caused by bacteria. A majority of cervical cancers, as well as some genital and oral cancers, are caused by a virus. And certain chronic viral infections can lead to liver cancer.
Infections like these account for an estimated 13 percent of all cancer cases globally, according to a new report published Wednesday by the American Association for Cancer Research. But knowing which infections can lead to cancer means scientists also have a good idea how to prevent them from ever getting that far: There are effective vaccines and medications to prevent and treat these infections, and they can be detected early on through screening.
Dr. Michael Pignone, a professor of medicine at the Duke School of Medicine and member of the steering committee that oversaw the report, said the progress made in preventing and treating these four infections, among others that can cause cancer, was one reason for highlighting them. We are now close to “turning what would have previously been some common cancers into rare diseases,” he said.
Human papillomavirus
There are more than 200 types of the HPV virus, including a dozen that significantly increase the risk of cervical, genital and oral cancers.
Most people infected with HPV will clear it on their own. But about 10 percent of women with HPV infection in the cervix will develop a persistent infection with a high-risk type. This can cause cells to replicate rapidly and inactivate proteins that suppress tumors, said Denise Galloway, scientific director of the Pathogen-Associated Malignancies Integrated Research Center at Fred Hutch Cancer Center in Washington.
Most sexually active people will be infected with human papillomavirus at least once in their lives. Using condoms can protect against infection with HPV, though not fully. Vaccination offers the strongest protection.
“If you vaccinate someone who’s young, the risk goes down to zero,” Dr. Galloway said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend two or three doses of the HPV vaccine starting around age 11 or 12 and through age 26. Some older adults may also choose to get the vaccine.
But research has shown that many young people who are eligible for the shots haven’t received them.
“Increasing vaccination rates is the most important long-term strategy,” Dr. Pignone said. Early detection is also essential to treating cellular abnormalities caused by HPV before they turn into cancer. Doctors can look for an HPV infection with a vaginal or cervical swab. Many people are tested for HPV at the same time as a Pap smear.
Hepatitis B and C
These viruses primarily lead to cancer by causing inflammation in liver cells, said Dr. Sunyoung Lee, a gastrointestinal medical oncologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Texas. Chronic inflammation leads to a buildup of scar tissue in the liver, called cirrhosis, which is a strong risk factor for cancer. In certain cases, hepatitis B can also directly cause cancer by altering healthy liver cells, Dr. Lee said.
Hepatitis B and C can both be transmitted through contact with blood, semen or other bodily fluids. In the United States, hepatitis C most commonly occurs among intravenous drug users who share contaminated needles.
Hepatitis B can commonly spread from a mother to her baby. The virus is more common in East Asia — China, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam — and among Asian patients in the United States who became infected via their mothers at birth, Dr. Lee said.
Doctors can detect both infections with blood tests.
There is a highly effective vaccine against hepatitis B, and it has been recommended to vaccinate infants against the virus since 1991. Adults up to age 60 and those of any age who have certain risk factors should be screened and vaccinated if they haven’t already.
There is no vaccine for hepatitis C, but not sharing needles is the best way to help prevent the risk of infection.
Antiviral medications can cure hepatitis C, Dr. Lee said. But patients often go untreated for years — either because they don’t realize their infection is serious and requires treatment, or because they lose contact with the health system.
Dr. Lee always asks patients when their hepatitis was diagnosed, he said. Some tell him it was 20 years ago. That prolonged exposure can lead to liver damage and put patients at a much higher risk of liver cancer.
Hepatitis B can range from an acute, mild infection to a chronic infection. These persistent infections require treatment, including with antiviral medications and, in some cases, interferon, a protein that helps the immune system fight off infections.
Because hepatitis B is commonly transmitted from mother to child, pregnant women should be tested, Dr. Lee said.
H. pylori
H. pylori infections are very common: About half the world’s population carries the bacteria. But only 1 to 3 percent of them will develop cancer. Scientists aren’t completely sure why that is, or how the bacteria actually causes cancer, said Nina Salama, senior vice president of education at the Fred Hutch Cancer Center who has studied H. pylori.
The bacteria are found in saliva, the plaque on teeth and feces. Infections commonly occur in childhood through close family contact or crowded living quarters, Dr. Salama said, and most people are asymptomatic.
The infection produces chronic inflammation in the stomach lining, which promotes cancer, Dr. Salama said; the bacteria also bring toxic proteins into cells that can cause mutations. The strain of the bacteria and a person’s genetics can also play a role.
The best way to prevent H. pylori spread within families is to avoid sharing food utensils, drinking glasses and toothbrushes when possible, Dr. Salama said. Washing hands well with soap and water for at least 20 seconds before preparing food or eating, as well as after using the bathroom, will kill it.
The United States does not routinely screen for gastric cancer, Dr. Salama said. But people with stomach ulcers, stomach pain or bloody stools should be tested for the bacteria.
Doctors treat H. pylori infections with antibiotics and also often prescribe drugs that reduce acid and protect the stomach lining, she said.
The Fight Against Cancer
A new report described deep links between alcohol and cancer, as scientists continue to rethink the idea that moderate drinking offers health benefits.
An estimated 13% of all cancer cases globally are linked to four common infections, according to researchers.
Scientists looked deep beneath the Doomsday Glacier. What they found spells potential disaster for the planet
Laura Paddison – September 20, 2024
Scientists using ice-breaking ships and underwater robots have found the Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica is melting at an accelerating rate and could be on an irreversible path to collapse, spelling catastrophe for global sea level rise.
Since 2018, a team of scientists forming the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration, has been studying Thwaites — often dubbed the “Doomsday Glacier” — up close to better understand how and when it might collapse.
Their findings, set out across a collection of studies, provide the clearest picture yet of this complex, ever-changing glacier. The outlook is “grim,” the scientists said in a report published Thursday, revealing the key conclusions of their six years of research.
They found rapid ice loss is set to speed up this century. Thwaites’ retreat has accelerated considerably over the past 30 years, said Rob Larter, a marine geophysicist at the British Antarctic Survey and part of the ITGC team. “Our findings indicate it is set to retreat further and faster,” he said.
The scientists project Thwaites and the Antarctic Ice Sheet could collapse within 200 years, which would have devastating consequences.
Thwaites holds enough water to increase sea levels by more than 2 feet. But because it also acts like a cork, holding back the vast Antarctic ice sheet, its collapse could ultimately lead to around 10 feet of sea level rise, devastating coastal communities from Miami and London to Bangladesh and the Pacific Islands.
Photograph of the high cliffs of Thwaites Glacier taken from the British Antarctic Survey Twin Otter aircraft. – Rob Larter
Scientists have long known Florida-sized Thwaites was vulnerable, in part because of its geography. The land on which it sits slopes downwards, meaning as it melts, more ice is exposed to relatively warm ocean water.
Yet previously, relatively little was understood about the mechanisms behind its retreat. “Antarctica remains the biggest wild card for understanding and forecasting future sea level rise,” ITGC scientists said in a statement.
Over the last six years, the scientists’ range of experiments sought to bring more clarity.
They sent a torpedo-shaped robot called Icefin to Thwaites’ grounding line, the point at which the ice rises up from the seabed and starts to float, a key point of vulnerability.
The first clip of Icefin swimming up to the grounding line was emotional, said Kiya Riverman, a glaciologist at the University of Portland. “For glaciologists, I think this had the emotional impact that perhaps the moon landing had on the rest of society,” she said at a new conference. “It was a big deal. We were seeing this place for the first time.”
Through images Icefin beamed back, they discovered the glacier is melting in unexpected ways, with warm ocean water able to funnel through deep cracks and “staircase” formations in the ice.
Image of Icefin under the sea ice near McMurdo Station. – Rob Robbins/ITGC
Another study used satellite and GPS data to look at the impacts of the tides and found seawater was able to push more than 6 miles beneath Thwaites, squeezing warm water under the ice and causing rapid melting.
Yet more scientists delved into Thwaites’ history. A team including Julia Wellner, a professor at the University of Houston, analyzed marine sediment cores to reconstruct the glacier’s past and found it started retreating rapidly in the 1940s, likely triggered by a very strong El Niño event — a natural climate fluctuation which tends to have a warming impact.
These results “teach us broadly about ice behavior, adding more detail than is available by just looking at the modern ice,” Wellner told CNN.
Among the gloom, there was also some good news about one process which scientists fear could cause rapid melting.
There is a concern that if Thwaites’ ice shelves collapse, it will leave towering cliffs of ice exposed to the ocean. These tall cliffs could easily become unstable and tumble into the ocean, exposing yet taller cliffs behind them, with the process repeating again and again.
Computer modeling, however, showed while this phenomenon is real, the chances of it happening are less likely than previously feared.
The Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica – NASA/Reuters
That’s not to say Thwaites is safe.
The scientists predict the whole of Thwaites and the Antarctic Ice Sheet behind it could be gone in the 23rd Century. Even if humans stop burning fossil fuels rapidly — which is not happening — it may be too late to save it.
While this stage of the ITGC project is wrapping up, the scientists say far more research is still needed to figure out this complex glacier and to understand if its retreat is now irreversible.
“While progress has been made, we still have deep uncertainty about the future,” said Eric Rignot, a glaciologist at the University of California, Irvine and part of ITGC. “I remain very worried that this sector of Antarctica is already in a state of collapse.”
Scientific American makes presidential endorsement for only the second time in its 179-year history
Myriam Page – September 18, 2024
Scroll back up to restore default view.Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what’s in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
A top science magazine has waded into the political sphere after making a presidential endorsement, only the second in its 179-year history.
“Vote for Kamala Harris to Support Science, Health and the Environment,” read the headline in Scientific American on Monday, announcing the publication’s official support for the Democratic presidential candidate.
Harris is Scientific American’s second presidential endorsement in its history, after the magazine backed President Joe Biden during the 2020 election.
“The US faces two futures,” the editors wrote, pushing one candidate who “offers the country better prospects, relying on science, solid evidence and the willingness to learn from experience.”
They continued: “In the other future, the new president endangers public health and safety and rejects evidence, preferring instead nonsensical conspiracy fantasies.”
Scientific American, which has a global readership of six million, cited Harris’s record as vice president, senator and presidential candidate as reasons for endorsing her.
The magazine firstly focused on the candidates’ healthcare policies and proposals, in particular, health insurance in its comparison.
Praising the Biden-Harris administration for bolstering the Affordable Care Act (ACA) – which expanded the number of adults eligible for health insurance – the editors noted that while Harris has said she would expand the program, Trump has pledged to repeal it but failed to clarify what he would replace it with.
“I have concepts of a plan,” he said while facing off against Harris during the September 10 presidential debate.
Kamala Harris shakes hands with Donald Trump before the debate on September 10 in Philadelphia (AFP via Getty Images)
The article refers to the debate multiple times, seemingly agreeing with many across the political spectrum (including some of Trump’s closest allies) that Harris won.
The article highlights Trump’s baseless claim during the debate that some states allow a person to obtain an abortion in the ninth month of pregnancy, and calling it “execution after birth.”
“No state allows this,” Scientific American clarified. The magazine also emphasized that Trump refused to answer whether he would veto a national abortion ban.
Meanwhile, Harris was hailed as a “staunch supporter of reproductive rights” for vowing to improve access to abortion care and for co-sponsoring a package of bills to reduce rising maternal mortality rates when she was a senator.
Turning to technology, the editors highlighted the CHIPS and Science Act, signed into law by Biden in 2022, which brought more funding to the chip-making industry to boost homegrown production and research.
They said the legislation “invigorates the chipmaking industry and semiconductor research while growing the workforce.”
The magazine claimed that a second Trump administration would “quickly” undo this progress under a conservative framework, Project 2025, that has been set out to guide his potential second term.
“Under the devious and divisive Project 2025 framework, technology safeguards on AI would be overturned,” the editors wrote. “AI influences our criminal justice, labor and health-care systems.
“As is the rightful complaint now, there would be no knowing how these programs are developed, how they are tested or whether they even work.”
The article concludes: “One of two futures will materialize according to our choices in this election.”
The editors closed by underlining their point. “We urge you to vote for Kamala Harris.”
Scroll back up to restore default view.Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what’s in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways