Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

“Calcified nubs” and all: Jon Stewart isn’t leaving “The Daily Show” anytime soon

During Monday’s episode of "The Daily Show," an announcement that almost everyone saw coming was finally made.  

“I’m coming back, baby! We’re doing another year!” Jon Stewart enthusiastically exclaimed, confirming that what was originally intended to be a part-time hosting gig with a 2024 expiration date will now extend through the end of 2025. And for good reason.

In a statement reported on by Variety, Stewart shared, “I’ve truly enjoyed being back with the incredible team at 'The Daily Show' and Comedy Central. I was really hoping they’d let me stick to every other Monday, but I’ll just have to suck it up…”

Before winning an Emmy for his return to "The Daily Show," Stewart touched upon why dipping out would be a bad move in this political climate, saying, “Well, my feeling is this election will never end. So why would I? How could I leave? I won’t be allowed to leave until the election, until we’re all ground to some sort of calcified nubs. … We’re looking forward to it being awful.”

During Monday's episode, the comedian tackled Donald Trump and Kamala Harris' last-ditch efforts before the election to garner voters. Harris had Beyoncé appear at a rally in Houston. Trump invited comedian Tony Hinchcliffe to Madison Square Garden in New York City. However, Hinchcliffe is being met with allegations of xenophobia and racism from the public after he called Puerto Rico a "floating island of garbage."

“In retrospect, having a roast comedian come to a political rally a week before Election Day and roasting a key voting demographic is probably not the best decision by the campaign politically, but, to be fair, the guy’s just doing what he does,” Stewart said. The show played various clips of the comedian roasting different races and ethnicities and Stewart said, “Yes, yes, terrible. There’s something wrong with me. I find that guy very funny, so I’m sorry."

Halloween candy binges can overload your gut microbiome

Each October, as the days shorten and the air grows crisp, millions of Americans prepare for the beloved – and often sugar-fueled – tradition of Halloween. From jack-o'-lanterns glowing on porches to costumes ranging from the whimsical to the gory, Halloween is a time of playful scares, childhood memories and, of course, candy.

But as the wrappers pile up and the sugar rush hits, there's something far more sinister brewing beneath the surface: the negative effects of candy on your gut health.

Sugar and other ingredients in Halloween treats can cast a sickly spell on the trillions of microorganisms that reside in your gut, collectively known as the gut microbiome. As a gastroenterologist and gut microbiome researcher at the University of Washington School of Medicine, I have dedicated my career to decoding the cipher of how food affects this microbial community within your gut.

While no candy is truly healthy, some options are better for your gut than others. And there are ways you can help wake your gut from its sugar "spell" after holiday indulgence.

Gut-busting treats

What does all this candy do to your gut?

In a healthy state, your gut microbiome acts like a microbial factory. It digests nutrients your body can't – such as fiber and colorful, health-conferring plant compounds called polyphenols – and produces important molecules called metabolites that protect against infection and support brain health. It also regulates metabolism, or the transformation of food into useful components that power and grow cells.

A balanced diet keeps your gut's microbial cauldron churning smoothly. But the concentrated sugar, saturated fat and additives in candy can throw things into disarray by feeding inflammatory microbes that weaken your gut barrier – the protective lining that separates your microbiome from the rest of the body.

Once the gut barrier is breached, even friendly microbes can stir up inflammation, causing health issues ranging from overweight to obesity, infections to autoimmune disease, and mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's.

The food you eat shapes your gut microbes, which in turn shape your overall health.

Sugar and inflammation impair your microbiome's ability to digest food and regulate metabolism. Instead of producing healthy byproducts – such as butyrate from fiber and urolithin A from polyphenols – candy lacking these nutrients may trick your system into storing more fat, providing less energy for your muscles and brain.

Too much candy can also affect your immune system. A healthy gut microbiome helps your immune system distinguish between friend and foe, reducing the risk of infections and autoimmune disorders. Sugar and inflammation undermine the microbiome's role in training the immune system to distinguish between harmful invaders and harmless substances. Without a carefully calibrated immune system, your body may not effectively clear infections or may strongly react to its own cells.

Neurologically, excess sweets can also affect the gut-brain axis, the two-way communication between the gut and brain. A healthy microbiome normally produces neurotransmitters and metabolites, such as serotonin and butyrate, that influence mood and cognitive performance. Sugar and inflammation adversely affects the microbiome's role in mental health and cognitive function, contributing to depression, anxiety and memory troubles.

The candy conundrum

Not all Halloween treats are created equal, especially when it comes to their nutritional value and effects on gut health. Sugar-coated nuts and fruit such as honey-roasted almonds and candy apples rank among the top, offering whole food benefits just beneath the sugary coating. Packed with fiber and polyphenols, they help support gut health and healthy metabolism.

On the opposite end of the spectrum are chewy treats such as candy corn, Skittles, Starbursts and Twizzlers. These sugar-laden confections are mostly made of high fructose corn syrup, saturated fat and additives. They can increase the unsavory bacterial species in your gut and lead to inflammation, making them one of the least healthy Halloween choices.

Chocolate-based candies, however, stand out as a more microbiome-friendly option. While varieties such as Twix, Three Musketeers and Milky Way contain only a small amount of chocolate, pure chocolate bars – especially dark chocolate – are rich in fiber and polyphenols. In moderation, dark chocolate with at least 80% to 85% cacao may even benefit your gut microbiome and mood by encouraging beneficial bacterial species to grow.

Chocolates with whole nuts, such as almonds or peanuts, offer a boost of fiber, protein and omega-3 fats, making them a healthier choice. Dark chocolate with nuts is best. But when sorting through Halloween treats, Peanut M&Ms, 100 Grands and Almond Joys may be better options over Rolos, Krackels and Crunches. Even candies with processed nuts, such as Reese's Peanut Butter Cups and Butterfingers, retain small amounts of fiber and protein, making them preferable to nut-free options.

At the bottom of the list, along with chewy sugar candies, are pure sugar candies such as lollipops, Jolly Ranchers, gummies and Smarties. These sweets lack nutritional value, and their high sugar content can contribute to the growth of unhealthy bacteria in your gut microbiome.

In the end, all candies are high in sugar, which can be harmful when consumed in large quantities. Moderation and an otherwise balanced diet is key to enjoying Halloween treats.

Rebalancing after indulgence

If the microbiome is critical for health, and candy can disrupt its balance, how can you restore gut health after Halloween?

One simple strategy is focusing on the four F's of food: fiber, phytochemicals, unsaturated fats and fermented foods. These food components can help support gut health.

Fiber-rich foods such as whole grains, nuts, seeds, beans, fruits and vegetables regulate digestion and nourish beneficial gut bacteria.

Polyphenol-rich foods such as dark chocolate, berries, red grapes, green tea and extra virgin olive oil help reduce inflammation and encourage the growth of healthy gut bacteria.

Unsaturated fats such as omega-3 fats, walnuts, chia seeds, flaxseed, avocados and fatty fish such as salmon can also support a healthy microbiome.

Fermented foods such as sauerkraut, kimchi, yogurt, kefir and miso help replenish beneficial bacteria and restore gut balance.

To make tracking your diet easier, consider using a food calculator to measure how well your meals align with the four F's and microbiome friendly options. Like a virtual "spellbook," an online tool can help ensure your food choices support your gut health and ward off the effects of sugar overload.

As my daughters often remind me, it's perfectly fine to indulge every now and then in a few tricks and treats. But remember, moderation is key. With a balanced diet, you'll keep your gut healthy and strong long after the Halloween season ends.

Christopher Damman, Associate Professor of Gastroenterology, School of Medicine, University of Washington

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How McDonald’s became an unlikely icon in American politics

Last Sunday, former President Donald Trump briefly worked at a suburban Pennsylvania McDonald’s, staffing the fry station and drive-thru window, handing bags to car-bound customers who had been pre-screened by his campaign for security. While working a shift at a job outside the typical confines of politics for a photo opp isn’t exactly a new campaign strategy, Trump’s visit was less about advocating for a particular position or even connecting with so-called everyday voters.

Rather, it was engineered to needle Kamala Harris.

At several campaign stops and in speeches, Vice President Harris has mentioned she worked at McDonald’s while earning her degree at Howard University. The Trump campaign has since suggested — without proof — that Harris is lying about her experience, asking her to present evidence of her employment. 

McDonald’s has stated they don’t “have records for all positions dating back to the early ‘80s,” the time period during which Harris would have worked, but Trump has pushed on. When he walked into the fast-food restaurant on Sunday, he said to the franchise owner, “I’ve always wanted to work at McDonald’s, but I never did. I’m running against somebody that said she did, but it turned out to be a totally phony story.” 

In an internal memo obtained by the Associated Press the following day, McDonald’s Corp. told employees the company would not be endorsing a political candidate, nor should Trump’s recent drive-thru photo op be misconstrued as an endorsement. 

“Upon learning of the former president’s request, we approached it through the lens of one of our core values: we open our doors to everyone,” the company said. “McDonald’s does not endorse candidates for elected office and that remains true in this race for the next president. We are not red or blue – we are golden.”

However, by that point, it looked like the Trump campaign had already started producing “MAGADonald’s” merch, a collection of now sold-out T-shirts featuring an image of the president handing out bags of food. Then, during a live Twitch stream last week, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and vice presidential candidate Tim Walz jokingly linked Trump’s visit to McDonald’s recent, deadly E. coli outbreak. “That man stuck his hands in the fries,” Ocasio-Cortez said. 

So, for all of McDonald’s statements about remaining neutral, the fast-food giant has nonetheless become a prominent symbol in this election cycle — and it’s easy to see why. 

@salonofficial

 

Fox News is going wild for Trump's McDonald's stunt.

♬ original sound – Salon

We need your help to stay independent

At its core, McDonald’s really feels like an American business. It’s not one of the regional chains towards which politicians sometimes flock to establish their local bona fides, like in the case of President Joe Biden’s well-documented affinity for Wawa, nor is it too foreign-feeling for the masses (put another way, no one is going to stump at Au Bon Pain). 

McDonald's originated in 1940 in San Bernardino, California, where Richard and Maurice McDonald opened the first restaurant. It was acquired by businessman Ray Kroc in 1961 and has since expanded to over 39,000 locations worldwide, with about 13,450 of those in the United States. 

It’s the kind of audacious success story that feels like an American dream, only made better by the fact that it was built on heartland commodity products like grain and beef (plus, an ample amount of minimum-wage labor). The iconography of McDonald’s — namely the golden arches — has become so interwoven with both the cultural and literal landscape of the country that when people think of the United States as the land of apple pie and hamburgers, they could just as well be envisioning the McDonald’s fried variety and Big Macs. 

Part of this, of course, can be attributed to McDonald’s sheer ubiquity. 

"We are not red or blue – we are golden."

The fast-food giant reportedly has a presence in every U.S. state, and in 49 of the 50 state capitals. McDonald’s has often pointed out that “1 in 8 Americans have worked at a McDonald’s restaurant” — a figure some economists question, though its implication is hard to miss: nearly everyone knows someone with a personal connection to the company.

Yet, McDonald’s cultural impact goes well beyond its footprint or workforce. Its cross-generational relevance stems from a blend of nostalgia and well-timed partnerships. Classic seasonal offerings like the Shamrock Shake and Halloween-themed “Boo Buckets” have remained fan favorites, while new collaborations, such as the 2020 “Adult Happy Meals” with cult streetwear brand Cactus Plant Flea Market, keep the brand contemporary.

Over the years, it has teamed up with cultural heavyweights — from Disney, Michael Jordan and Larry Bird in the '90s to modern-day celebrities like BTS, Travis Scott and Saweetie — building a bridge between past and present customers. It’s no wonder politicians might try to align themselves with a brand that resonates so universally.

However, in the realm of politics, McDonald’s also operates more broadly as a convenient, yet powerful rhetorical chameleon. Because the fast-food company is so large and multifaceted, and because it means something a little different to a lot of people, politicians can graft whatever the topic of the day is to the company, from concerns over public health and corporate power to questions about the minimum wage. 

In the case of Kamala Harris, her experience working at McDonald’s has been held up by her campaign as evidence to both minimum-wage workers and middle-class Americans that Harris understands their economic struggles. “I was a student when I was working at McDonald’s,” Harris said, for instance, at a 2019 SEIU rally advocating for higher wages. 

"In the realm of politics, McDonald’s also operates more broadly as a convenient, yet powerful rhetorical chameleon."

“There was not a family relying on me to pay the rent, put food on the table and keep the bills paid by the end of the month,” she continued. “But the reality of McDonald's is that a majority of the folks who are working there today are relying on that income to sustain a household and a family.”

Trump, for his part, has a track record of supporting economic measures that are amenable to large corporations, like McDonald’s, but his affinity for the company is more personal. As reported by Newsweek, the former president has a well-documented fear of being poisoned or made ill by food and perceives fast food to be a solution. 

“I’m a very clean person. I like cleanliness, and I think you’re better off going there than maybe someplace that you have no idea where the food’s coming from. It’s a certain standard,” Trump told CNN in a 2016 town hall. “One bad hamburger, you can destroy McDonald’s.”

He has also made knowing the menu well a point of pride while on the campaign trail. Speaking to Fox News last week, Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. said his father “knows the McDonald’s menu much better than Kamala Harris ever did.” 

Regardless of the approach, it’s clear that for candidates, McDonald’s isn’t just a brand, but part of the American identity, one that continues to hold meaning across generations. Whether it’s through a nostalgic lens or a critique of American capitalism, it’s a business that remains a constant in the public consciousness. And in this election season, it’s clear the Golden Arches will continue to be a familiar signpost for the political stage.

“Not the smartest thing to do”: Trump MSG rally fallout “spreading like wildfire” in Pennsylvania

A range of hateful, racist remarks were spewed throughout former President Donald Trump's rally at Madison Square Garden on Sunday, but none has gotten more attention than comedian Tony Hinchcliffe's jab about Puerto Rico.

“There’s a lot going on. I don’t know if you guys know this, but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it’s called Puerto Rico,” Hinchcliffe told the crowd.

Trump did not denounce Hinchliffe's comments at the rally. The campaign later sought to distance itself from the comedian's set even though a Bulwark report suggests it vetted his material. 

The remarks spread rapidly online, sparking outrage. In Pennsylvania, anger rippled across the community of over 472,000 Puerto Ricans, giving Vice President Kamala Harris a new line of attack with a key constituency in the incredibly close race for the battleground state.

“It’s not the smartest thing to do, to insult people — a large group of voters here in a swing state — and then go to their home asking for votes,” a local Democratic party member, Norberto Dominguez told Politico, adding that “it’s spreading like wildfire through the community." 

“This was just like a gift from the gods,” added Victor Martinez, who owns a Spanish-language radio station in Allentown. “If we weren’t engaged before, we’re all paying attention now."

In a rare defensive move, the Trump campaign has tried to distance itself from the Hinchcliffe’s remarks. “This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign,” senior adviser Danielle Alvarez said in a statement.

But the attempts have proven futile as the joke has reminded voters of Trump’s history of hostility towards Puerto Rico. When Hurricane Maria struck Puerto Rico in 2017, the Trump administration was slow to respond and intentionally withheld aid from the island, which has been a U.S. territory since 1917. The former president repeatedly downplayed the death toll of Maria and infamously threw toilet paper into a crowd like he was shooting a free throw while visiting San Juan. 

The Archbishop of San Juan called on Trump to personally apologize to all Puerto Ricans. 

“Hinchcliffe's remarks do not promote a climate of equality, fraternity and good will among and for all women and men of every race, color and way of life which is the foundation of the American dream. These kinds of remarks should not be a part of the political discourse of a civilized society.” the Archbishop wrote in a letter posted to his Facebook page. 

We need your help to stay independent

“I call upon you, Mr. Trump, to disavow these comments as reflecting in any way your personal or political,” he wrote, adding that an apology from Trump’s campaign was not sufficient in excusing the remarks.

Moments after his home was referred to as an “island of garbage,” Puerto Rican rapper Bad Bunny signaled his support for Harris, sharing a video with his 46 million Instagram followers of her speaking at a rally targeting Latino voters in Pennsylvania on Sunday. At the same event, Harris unveiled a new economic proposal for the U.S. territory.

“I will never forget what Donald Trump did. He abandoned the island and offered nothing more than paper towels and insults,” she told voters. 

With the candidates tied in the polls in Pennsylvania, Harris has seized the opportunity to win over Latino voters, a constituency she has underperformed with compared to the last three Democratic presidential candidates. According to a recent New York Times/Siena College poll, just 56% of Hispanic voters support Harris, the lowest rate of support from a Democratic nominee since 2004. In the same poll, 37% of Hispanic voters supported Trump.

Shortly after the MSG rally, the Harris’ campaign released an ad telling Puerto Ricans that they “deserve better,” that will air in swing states across the country. North Carolina, Wisconsin and Michigan — all states where both candidates are neck and neck — are home to sizeable Puerto Rican populations.

Other prominent Democrats like Vice Presidential nominee Tim Walz and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., condemned the comments on social media, adding to the Democratic effort to clinch an unexpected but consequential opening just a week before one of the closest elections in American history. 

This Trump supporter was labeled a noncitizen and kicked off Texas’ voter rolls

This article is co-published with ProPublica, a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power, and with Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration. Sign up to receive ProPublica’s biggest stories and Votebeat’s newsletters. And sign up for The Brief, the Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.


Mary Howard-Elley fervently believes illegal immigration in the U.S. is a critical problem that only former President Donald Trump can solve. She says the continuation of his border wall and promised mass deportations will make the country safer.

She agrees with Trump’s unfounded claims that Democrats are opening the borders to allow noncitizens to vote, fearing that it could ultimately cost him the election.

Howard-Elley didn’t pay much attention when Texas Gov. Greg Abbott helped fuel that narrative by announcing that the state had removed thousands of supposed noncitizens from its rolls, claiming some had a history of voting.

Then the U.S. citizen learned she was among them.

The retired Transportation Security Administration agent was confused by how the county could come to that conclusion. And she seethed at the idea that anyone would question the citizenship of a former federal employee with the “whitest name you could have.”

[As Texas refuses online voter registration, paper applications get lost]

The elections office in Montgomery County, just north of Houston, had sent Howard-Elley a letter in late January saying that she had been flagged after she indicated that she was not a U.S. citizen in response to a jury summons. She had 30 days to provide the county proof of citizenship or she would be removed from the voter rolls, according to the letter.

“Who is allowing people to do this to United States citizens? I understand we have a problem with immigration, but come on now,” Howard-Elley said in an interview.

The 52-year-old disputes the county’s claim that she responded to the jury duty summons by saying she was not a citizen. Instead, Howard-Elley said, she called and asked to be exempted from jury duty because of guardianship duties for three of her grandchildren.

The Montgomery County district clerk’s office, which organizes jury duty, did not respond to repeated questions and denied a public records request for Howard-Elley’s response to the jury summons, asserting it was exempt from disclosure.

Regardless of how she was flagged as a noncitizen, Howard-Elley wanted to ensure she could vote. She ordered several copies of her certified Louisiana birth certificate and confirmed receipt with an elections office employee. She thought the matter was resolved.

But Howard-Elley’s registration was not reinstated, making her the 10th U.S. citizen identified by ProPublica, The Texas Tribune and Votebeat who was removed from the rolls as a potential noncitizen. The news organizations tracked them down as part of an investigation that found Abbott’s claims about the state removing more than 6,500 noncitizens were likely inflated and, in some cases, wrong.

The 10 U.S. citizens who were struck from the rolls represented a range of racial and political backgrounds, and most were removed as the result of human error.

Abbott’s press release provided fodder for Republicans warning that noncitizens could vote in large numbers and sway the election, though experts say such instances are exceedingly rare.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the federal government last week, claiming the Department of Homeland Security has refused to help the state check the citizenship status of some registered voters. The federal agency offers states access to a database that can be used to verify immigration status, but Paxton argued it’s inadequate and requires a fee for each verification. Ten other states use the database for voting-related purposes.

Neither Abbott nor Paxton responded to questions for this story. DHS has not filed a response to the attorney general’s lawsuit in federal court.

From left: Howard-Elley with her grandsons, Skylar Lopez, 6, and Bryson Lopez, 8, at her home in Splendora

From left: Howard-Elley with her grandsons, Skylar Lopez, 6, and Bryson Lopez, 8, at her home in Splendora Credit: Danielle Villasana for ProPublica and The Texas Tribune

Howard-Elley’s case shows how eligible voters can be removed from the rolls — and how tough it can be to get back on.

She didn’t realize her registration was canceled until reporters called her this month. Darla Brooks, the Montgomery County voter registration manager, told both Howard-Elley and the news organizations that she had not been reinstated in March because her birth certificate arrived after the 30-day window she was given to prove her citizenship.

On Oct. 14, Brooks said Howard-Elley had now also missed the registration deadline for this year’s election and would not be able to vote.

The election official was wrong.

Multiple voting rights lawyers pointed to a state law that says counties should immediately reinstate voters’ registrations that were wrongly canceled. Brooks initially told reporters that the law did not apply to Howard-Elley because the county had followed proper procedures when removing her.

But when the news organizations brought the same question to the secretary of state’s office, which provides counties with guidance on implementing election laws, the answer was different.

A 2021 agency advisory instructs counties to immediately reinstate voters removed for failing to respond to a notice as soon as they present proof of citizenship. They can even be reinstated at a polling place on Election Day.

Less than two hours after the news organizations sent the secretary of state’s advisory to Montgomery County, Howard-Elley was back on the rolls.

“I’m sorry that Montgomery County has to be shown the law to abide by it,” Howard-Elley said. She added that this election would have been the first time in more than 30 years she failed to cast a ballot for president. “I just hope they don’t do this to anybody else ever again because it’s not fair.”

Montgomery County elections administrator Suzie Harvey said her office had never had to deal with a situation like Howard-Elley’s, and while she likely saw the advisory when it was issued, she had forgotten about the specific guidance. She said her office worked quickly to reinstate Howard-Elley when the news organizations flagged the advisory and she is gratified that Howard-Elley will be able to vote.

“That would have been extremely tragic,” Harvey said.

Not every voter has Howard-Elley’s tenacity, or news organizations asking persistent questions about how their case was handled.

“Voting should not be so hard that you have to be a lawyer or have lawyer skills to be able to vote,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Perales said it would take “heroic efforts” by the average voter to research the election laws and advocate for their registration to be reinstated.

Even then, the decision would depend on how election officials in their county interpret laws and guidance.

Three county election officials gave different answers to the question of whether they would reinstate a voter in Howard-Elley’s situation, though all stressed they would try their best to follow the law.

One said the voter should be reinstated. The other two said they would likely reinstate the voter after the registration deadline only if the county had erred in some way.

Those differences give “voters in some counties fewer rights than voters in other counties,” said Emily Eby French, the policy director at Common Cause Texas, a nonprofit that advocates for voting access.

Howard-Elley said she is disturbed at how close she came to losing her ability to vote. If reporters hadn’t called her, Howard-Elley said, she might have been turned away at the polls.

She said she worries about whether other eligible voters are among those labeled as noncitizens and that Abbott should look into whether there are more U.S. citizens among them. The lifelong Republican said state and county officials need to be held accountable to ensure more U.S. citizens are not erroneously removed.

“The system is very flawed,” Howard-Elley said. “I feel really sad that we’re in a situation like this. You would think in 2024 we wouldn’t have issues like this.”

She intends to cast her ballot for Trump.

How to dispute your removal

If your voter registration is canceled because you failed to respond to a letter trying to confirm your citizenship, here’s what you can do:

  • Contact your county elections office before heading to the polls. Show proof of your citizenship and ask to be reinstated.
  • You can also share this 2021 advisory from the Texas secretary of state’s office on reinstating citizens to the voter rolls.
  • Common forms of documentation include a U.S. passport or certified birth certificate. See the full list of acceptable proof of citizenship in the advisory.
  • If you don’t find out until you arrive at the polls that you need to show proof of citizenship, that advisory still requires election officials to reinstate you immediately after you do so.

Contact the Texas secretary of state’s office for additional assistance.

Disclosure: Common Cause and the Texas secretary of state have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Get the data and visuals that accompany this story →

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2024/10/29/texas-noncitizen-voter-roll-removal-mary-howard-elley/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

“Put them in trauma”: Inside a key MAGA leader’s plans for a new Trump agenda

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Reporting Highlights

  • “In Trauma”: A key Trump adviser says a Trump administration will seek to make civil servants miserable in their jobs.
  • Military: In private speeches, he laid out plans to use armed forces to quell any domestic “riots.”
  • 1776 and 1860: He likened the country’s moment to those fractious periods in American history.

These highlights were written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.

A key ally to former President Donald Trump detailed plans to deploy the military in response to domestic unrest, defund the Environmental Protection Agency and put career civil servants “in trauma” in a series of previously unreported speeches that provide a sweeping vision for a second Trump term.

In private speeches delivered in 2023 and 2024, Russell Vought, who served as Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget, described his work crafting legal justifications so that military leaders or government lawyers would not stop Trump’s executive actions.

He said the plans are a response to a “Marxist takeover” of the country; likened the moment to 1776 and 1860, when the country was at war or on the brink of it; and said the timing of Trump’s candidacy was a “gift of God.”

ProPublica and Documented obtained videos of the two speeches Vought delivered during events for the Center for Renewing America, a pro-Trump think tank led by Vought. The think tank’s employees or fellows include Jeffrey Clark, the former senior Justice Department lawyer who aided Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election result; Ken Cuccinelli, a former acting deputy secretary in the Department of Homeland Security under Trump; and Mark Paoletta, a former senior budget official in the Trump administration. Other Trump allies such as former White House adviser Steve Bannon and U.S. Reps. Chip Roy and Scott Perry either spoke at the conferences or appeared on promotional materials for the events.

Vought does not hide his agenda or shy away from using extreme rhetoric in public. But the apocalyptic tone and hard-line policy prescriptions in the two private speeches go further than his earlier pronouncements. As OMB director, Vought sought to use Trump’s 2020 “Schedule F” executive order to strip away job protections for nonpartisan government workers. But he has never spoken in such pointed terms about demoralizing federal workers to the point that they don’t want to do their jobs. He has spoken in broad terms about undercutting independent agencies but never spelled out sweeping plans to defund the EPA and other federal agencies.

Vought’s plans track closely with Trump’s campaign rhetoric about using the military against domestic protesters or what Trump has called the “enemy within.” Trump’s desire to use the military on U.S. soil recently prompted his longest-serving chief of staff, retired Marine Gen. John Kelly, to speak out, saying Trump “certainly prefers the dictator approach to government.”

Other policies mentioned by Vought dovetail with Trump’s plans, such as embracing a wartime footing on the southern border and rolling back transgender rights. Agenda 47, the campaign’s policy blueprint, calls for revoking President Joe Biden’s order expanding gender-affirming care for transgender people; Vought uses even more extreme language, decrying the “transgender sewage that’s being pumped into our schools and institutions” and referring to gender-affirming care as “chemical castration.”

Since leaving government, Vought has reportedly remained a close ally of the former president. Speaking in July to undercover journalists posing as relatives of a potential donor, Vought said Trump had “blessed” the Center for Renewing America and was “very supportive of what we do,” CNN reported.

Vought did not respond to requests for comment.

"Since the Fall of 2023, President Trump’s campaign made it clear that only President Trump and the campaign, and NOT any other organization or former staff, represent policies for the second term,” Danielle Alvarez, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign, said in a statement. She did not directly address Vought’s statements.

Karoline Leavitt, his campaign’s national press secretary, added there have been no discussions on who would serve in a second Trump administration.

In addition to running his think tank, Vought was the policy director of the Republican National Committee’s official platform committee ahead of the nominating convention. He’s also an architect of Project 2025, the controversial coalition effort mapping out how a second Trump administration can quickly eliminate obstacles to rolling out a hard-right policy agenda.

As ProPublica and Documented reported, Project 2025 has launched a massive program to recruit, vet and train thousands of people to “be ready on day one” to serve in a future conservative administration. (Trump has repeatedly criticized Project 2025, and his top aides have said the effort has no connection to the official campaign despite the dozens of former Trump aides and advisers who contributed to Project 2025.)

Vought is widely expected to take a high-level government role if Trump wins a second term. His name has even been mentioned as a potential White House chief of staff. The videos obtained by ProPublica and Documented offer an unfiltered look at Vought’s worldview, his plans for a Trump administration and his fusing of MAGA ideology and Christian nationalism.

A Shadow Government in Waiting

In his 2024 speech, Vought said he was spending the majority of his time helping lead Project 2025 and drafting an agenda for a future Trump presidency. “We have detailed agency plans,” he said. “We are writing the actual executive orders. We are writing the actual regulations now, and we are sorting out the legal authorities for all of what President Trump is running on.”

Vought laid out how his think tank is crafting the legal rationale for invoking the Insurrection Act, a law that gives the president broad power to use the military for domestic law enforcement. The Washington Post previously reported the issue was at the top of the Center for Renewing America’s priorities.

“We want to be able to shut down the riots and not have the legal community or the defense community come in and say, ‘That’s an inappropriate use of what you’re trying to do,’” he said. Vought held up the summer 2020 unrest following George Floyd’s murder as an example of when Trump ought to have had the ability to deploy the armed forces but was stymied.

Vought’s preparations for a future Trump administration involve building a “shadow” Office of Legal Counsel, he told the gathered supporters in May 2023. That office, part of the Justice Department, advises the president on the scope of their powers. Vought made clear he wants the office to help Trump steamroll the kind of internal opposition he faced in his first term.

Historically, the OLC has operated with a degree of independence. “If, all of a sudden, the office is full of a bunch of loyalists whose only job is to rubber-stamp the White House’s latest policy directive, whose only goal is to justify the ends by whatever means, that would be quite dangerous,” said an attorney who worked in the office under a previous Republican administration and requested anonymity to speak freely.

Another priority, according to Vought, was to “defund” certain independent federal agencies and demonize career civil servants, which include scientists and subject matter experts. Project 2025’s plan to revive Schedule F, an attempt to make it easier to fire a large swath of government workers who currently have civil service protections, aligns with Vought’s vision.

“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” he said. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can't do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so.

“We want to put them in trauma.”

Vought also revealed the extent of the Center for Renewing America’s role in whipping up right-wing panic ahead of the 2022 midterms over an increase in asylum-seekers crossing at the U.S.-Mexico border.

In February 2022, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich released a legal opinion claiming the state was under “invasion” by violent cartels and could invoke war powers to deploy National Guard troops to its southern border. The legally dubious “invasion” theory became a potent Republican talking point.

Vought said in the 2023 speech that he and Cuccinelli, the former top Homeland Security official for Trump, personally lobbied Brnovich on the effort. “We said, ‘Look, you can write your own opinion, but here’s a draft opinion of what this should look like,’” Vought said.

The nonpartisan watchdog group American Oversight later obtained an email in which Vought pitched the “invasion” framework to Brnovich.

Brnovich wrote in an email to ProPublica that he recalled multiple discussions with Cuccinelli about border security. But he added that “the invasion opinion was the result of a formal request from a member of the Arizona legislature. And I can assure you it was drafted and written by hard working attorneys (including myself) in our office.”

In the event Trump loses, Vought called for Republican leaders of states such as Florida and Texas to “create red-state sanctuaries” by “kicking out all the feds as much as they possibly can.”

“Nothing Short of a Quiet Revolution”

The two speeches delivered by Vought, taken together, offer an unvarnished look at the animating ideology and political worldview of a key figure in the MAGA movement.

Over the last century, Vought said, the U.S. has “experienced nothing short of a quiet revolution” and abandoned what he saw as the true meaning and force of the Constitution. The country today, he argued, was a “post-constitutional regime,” one that no longer adhered to the separation of powers among the three branches of government as laid out by the framers.

He lamented that the conservative right and the nation writ large had become “too secular” and “too globalist.” He urged his allies to join his mission to “renew a consensus of America as a nation under God.”

And in one of his most dramatic flourishes, he likened the 2024 election to moments in America’s history when the country was facing all-out war.

“We are here in the year of 2024, a year that very well [could] — and I believe it will — rival 1776 and 1860 for the complexity and the uncertainty of the forces arrayed against us,” Vought told his audience, referring to years when the colonies declared independence from Britain and the first state seceded over President Abraham Lincoln’s election. “God put us here for such a time as this.”

Vought said that independent agencies and unelected bureaucrats and experts wield far too much power while the traditional legislative process is a sham. He extended that critique to agencies like the Department of Justice and the Federal Reserve, whose independence from the White House had long been protected by both political parties.

“The left in the U.S. doesn’t want an energetic president with the power to motivate the executive branch to the will of the American people consistent with the laws of the country,” he said in the 2024 speech. “They don’t want a vibrant Congress where great questions are debated and decided in front of the American people. They don’t want empowered members. They want discouraged and bored backbenchers.”

He added, “The all-empowered career expert like Tony Fauci is their model, wielding power behind the curtains.” Fauci was one of the top public health experts under Trump at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and a key figure in coordinating the national response.

What sets Vought apart from most of his fellow conservative activists is that he accuses powerful organizations on the right of being complicit in the current system of government, singling out the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, the conservative and libertarian legal network co-chaired by activist Leonard Leo. The society is widely seen as an instrumental force in cultivating young conservative lawyers and building a bench of future judges whose embrace of legal theories like originalism and textualism have led to decisions overturning abortion rights, environmental protections and social welfare policies.

Yet in his 2024 speech, Vought accused the Federalist Society and “originalist judges” of being a part of the problem, perpetuating the “post-constitutional structure” that Vought lamented by not ruling more aggressively to weaken or dismantle independent regulatory agencies that Vought and his allies view as illegitimate or unconstitutional.

It was “like being in a contract quietly revoked two decades ago, in which one party didn’t tell the other,” he said. “At some point, reality needs to set in. Instead, we have the vaunted so-called Federalist Society and originalist judges acting as a Praetorian Guard for this post-constitutional structure.”

Echoing Trump’s rhetoric, Vought implicitly endorsed the false claim of a stolen 2020 election and likened the media’s debunkings of that claim to Chinese Communist propaganda.

“In the aftermath of the election, we had all these people going around saying, ‘Well, I don’t see any evidence of voter fraud. The media’s not giving enough [of] a compelling case,’” he said. “Well, that compelling case has emerged. But does a Christian in China ask and come away saying, ‘You know, there’s no persecution, because I haven’t read about it in the state regime press?’ No, they don’t.”

Vought referred to the people detained for alleged crimes committed on Jan. 6, 2021, as “political prisoners” and defended the lawyers Jeffrey Clark and John Eastman, who have both faced criminal charges for their role in Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Federal law enforcement agencies, he added, “are keeping political opponents in jail, and I think we need to be honest about that.”

The left, Vought continued, has the ultimate goal of ending representative democracy altogether. “The stark reality in America is that we are in the late stages of a complete Marxist takeover of the country,” he said, “in which our adversaries already hold the weapons of the government apparatus, and they have aimed it at us. And they are going to continue to aim it until they no longer have to win elections.”

When Democrats called Trump an “existential threat to democracy,” they were not merely calling for his defeat at the ballot box, he said, but were using “coded language the national security state uses overseas when they are overthrowing other governments” to discourage the military from putting down anti-Trump protests should he win.

“They’re making Trump out to be a would-be dictator or an authoritarian,” he said. “So they’re actively working now to ensure, on a number of levels, that the military will perceive this as dictatorial and therefore not respond to any orders to quell any violence.”

Trump, Vought insisted, has the credibility and the track record to defeat the “Marxist” left and bring about the changes that Vought and his MAGA allies seek. In his view, the Democratic Party’s agenda and its “quiet revolution” could be stopped only by a “radical constitutionalist,” someone in the mold of Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. For Vought, no one was in a better position to fill that role than Trump.

“We have in Donald Trump a man who is so uniquely positioned to serve this role, a man whose own interests perfectly align with the interests of the country,” Vought said. “He has seen what it has done to him, and he has seen what they are trying to do to the country.

“That,” he added, “is nothing more than a gift of God.”

There is a great big hole in the surface of the Earth where a certain man’s heart should be

Donald Trump’s Sunday rally at New York’s Madison Square Garden was only the most recent of the many hate fests that have marked not only his campaign this year but arguably his entire history as an American political figure. Reading the Bulwark’s report, I stopped when I hit the words “Tucker Carlson.” That was enough. 

I went back, however, and read more mainstream coverage looking for a mention of any emotion that was not connected somehow to hate, fear or prejudice. I didn’t find one. Of course, I wasn’t expecting to find any of the normal stuff typically absent in discussions about Trump and his minions – empathy, humility, kindness. I knew that a Trump rally would be a desert when it came to anything smacking of what MAGA and its Dear Leader consider weakness.

The question is, where is his sorrow?

Still, I was looking for even a hint of the strength necessary to feel sorrow. I saw a story in Popular Mechanics, of all places, about the 17,000-year-old skeletal remains of a child that was discovered in 1998 in southern Italy buried in a cave in Monopoli, a town on the Adriatic Sea. Recent DNA analysis of the remains revealed that the child died when he was about one year and four months old, probably of a congenital defect called hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, a condition which makes the walls of one of the ventricles in the heart thicken until they can no longer pump enough blood to keep a body alive. So, 15,000 years before the date which marks the start of our calendar, a truly ancient man and woman had a baby that died probably before he could walk or speak. 

There are cave paintings in France depicting bison, other animals and humans from this time, called the Upper Paleolithic Era. A cave in the foothills of the Pyrenees has a wall painting from several thousand years later depicting a battle fought between humans using bows and arrows. So we know that there were human beings in southern Europe intelligent enough to record some of their lives, including the animals they hunted for food and at least one war fought between competing tribes. And now we know something of the depth of their sorrow. They were anguished enough by the death of their child that they saw to it that he was buried beneath two stone slabs in a cave, where the depth and method of burial preserved his remains to the extent that his teeth were recovered along with enough other skeletal material to make DNA analysis possible.

We need your help to stay independent

We can now say that we have a date, some 17,000 years in our past as humans, when sorrow was felt by this ancient grieving couple. Someone, perhaps the father and mother themselves, or the father and another man, or the mother and another woman from their settlement on the Adriatic, carried the child’s body deep into a cave and lifted two heavy slabs of stone and placed them over the body to mark the spot where he was buried. These early humans took time out of days which they probably devoted mostly to hunting and fishing for survival, to do this work to record that their boy existed.  Their work is evidence of their despair.

The capability of feeling sorrow is perhaps our most important emotion as humans. The death of a loved one, especially the death of a child, is so painful, that humans are motivated to do almost anything to prevent it or stop it. Medicine could be said to have resulted from sorrow; religions record sorrow by marking the deaths of holy figures; ceremonies and graves are the result of sorrow. To feel sorrow, to grieve, is the essence of what it is to be human.

We have seen sorrow recorded and shared by Democrats at rallies. During her debate with Trump, Kamala Harris highlighted the stories of women who have suffered and died due to extremist anti-abortion laws that prevent emergency care when pregnancies fail or go wrong. To feel sorrow for the despair of women and men alike who have been affected by these tragedies has become part of our politics as Democrats since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in 2022.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Jeffrey Goldberg reported in The Atlantic that Trump reneged on a promise to help pay for the funeral of a Hispanic soldier murdered at Fort Sill. “It doesn’t cost 60,000 bucks to bury a fucking Mexican!” Trump reportedly told his chief of staff in a White House meeting. He then ordered that the funeral not be paid for. Trump denigrated dead soldiers at Arlington Cemetery. He refused to attend a memorial for soldiers killed in World War I, calling them “losers.”

It isn’t a question of his lack of empathy or his disrespect for the military and for soldiers killed in battle. The question is, where is his sorrow? 

The answer is apparent. Donald Trump has no sorrow.  

The capability to feel human sorrow, an emotion we now know is at least 17,000 years old, does not exist within the former president. The evidence is in his words. It is in his actions. By that evidence, the look on his face as he spews hate on the campaign trail is not human.

Elon Musk’s “illegal” past doesn’t feel like hypocrisy to MAGA — Trump’s hate rally in NYC shows why

Last week, the Washington Post reported that Tesla CEO and Donald Trump super-fan Elon Musk was once, to use the term favored by MAGA, an "illegal." Which is to say, he did what the vast majority of undocumented immigrants do in the U.S. After he traveled here legally, he overstayed a visa and then worked without the legal authorization to do so. Investors were so worried the South African native would be deported that they even stipulated that he obtain legal status in their contracts, creating a paper trail proving his "illegal" status. As for why readers should care, the Post reporters offered a "hypocrisy" frame, noting, "Musk in recent months has amplified the Republican presidential candidate’s claims that 'open borders' and undocumented immigrants are destroying America."

When MAGA says "illegal," they mean anyone they don't think should be allowed to call themselves "American."

The MAGA world shrugged, but not because they are especially talented at managing cognitive dissonance. No, they don't see this story as evidence of hypocrisy. I generally loathe semantic debates, but this one matters. The Post reporters assume, incorrectly, that when Musk, Trump and their allies are ranting about "illegals," they mean immigrants who don't have proper documentation to live and work in the U.S. But if you pay attention to how the word is used in context, it's clear Musk and company use "illegals" as a catch-all category for all non-white immigrants, and, increasingly, any native-born American citizen whose skin color or ethnic heritage MAGA dislikes. To MAGA, an undocumented white immigrant is fine. But a legal immigrant with darker skin — or even a native-born citizen — is an "illegal." 

A scan of Musk's relentless tweets on this front illustrates this. A recent middle-of-the-night tweet from Musk screeched about "the magnitude of the illegal voter importation program under Biden-Harris." President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris are not "importing" anyone. Other tweets show Musk is alluding to immigrants, most of whom aren't white, who are entering under international asylum laws, which means they have a legal right to be here. This isn't "importing" immigrants, but a government program allowing those with a pre-existing desire to relocate to do so legally. By definition, it's legal. 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Nor is Musk alone. Most of the time, when MAGA leaders say "illegals" or "illegal immigrants," they are demonizing legal immigrants. When Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, pushed a lie that Haitian immigrants steal and eat people's pets, they weren't just lying about their behavior. They characterized them as "illegal," even though these folks are part of a government program allowing them to live and work in the U.S. When Vance was corrected during the vice presidential debate by moderator Margaret Brennan, who told viewers the Haitians in question have legal status, Vance whined "You guys weren’t going to fact-check" so obnoxiously they cut his microphone. 

But in case there was any doubt the "immigration" issue is about MAGA racism and not immigration, it was wiped away by the speakers at Sunday night's Trump rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City. The comment that got the most press attention was from "comedian" Tony Hinchcliffe, who rolled out a series of racist jokes. Specifically, he called Puerto Rico a "floating island of garbage," which no one mistook for being a comment about the famous vacation spot's natural beauty. 

The comment got the lion's share of media attention because it came early in the evening, drew rebukes from influential Puerto Ricans like Bad Bunny, and — most crucially for the horse race-focused media — because Puerto Ricans living in the 50 states have a right to vote in the presidential election. But what may be even more important is that, by going after a group of native-born citizens, Hinchcliffe gave the MAGA game away. This isn't and never was about "immigration," legal or otherwise. Puerto Ricans aren't immigrants, but natural-born citizens, with the same legal status as any random white guy in a diner in Iowa. 

The Trump campaign issued a mealy-mouthed comment saying the "joke does not reflect the views of President Trump," but it was quickly verified that the joke had been loaded into the teleprompter. The campaign knew full well what Hinchcliffe was going to say and only scrambled when reminded how many Puerto Ricans vote in swing states. But it's self-evident that the campaign spokesperson lied because she didn't disavow any of the many other racist jokes Hinchcliffe told, such as a tired joke about Black people and watermelon and another complaining about Latinos having babies. The "humor" at a 2024 MAGA rally comes right out of cartoons in 50s-era KKK pamphlets. 

Nor was Hinchcliffe alone. The entire rally was built on rhetoric aimed directly at denying the legitimacy of native-born Americans, often in grossly racist terms. Right-wing "influencer" Grant Cardone accused Harris of having "pimp handlers" and said, of Democratic voters, "We need to slaughter these people." Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson described Harris, who was born a U.S. citizen in California, as a "Samoan-Malaysian, low IQ former California prosecutor." That "Low IQ" claim is a favorite, unsubtle dog whistle Trump often applies to Black people, following his lifelong obsession with the racist pseudoscience of eugenics. Carlson's "joke" about Harris, who he knows full well has a Jamaican father and Indian mother, is just a trollish way of saying all non-white people are the same — and that none of them are real Americans. By the time Trump speechwriter Stephen Miller took the stage to declare, "America is for Americans and Americans only," there was no remaining doubt that "American" only means "white people" in the MAGA world. 

Trump's speech made it clear, as well, that the expanding circle of people whose Americanness he denies now includes white people who oppose him, or even just dare tell the truth on occasion about him. His now-catchphrase of "enemies within" had already grown to encompass Democratic elected officials and journalists. On Sunday, he declared it covered an "amorphous group of people" which Biden and Harris are mere "vessels" for. It's a sinister recasting of the system where people vote for leaders who then represent their interests, i.e. democracy. While some pundits hand-wring over whether it "insults" Trump voters to call him a fascist, the fascist leader of the GOP just declared the majority of American voters — over 81 million people — to be un-American "enemies from within." 

We need your help to stay independent

The heat of MAGA rhetoric has turned red-hot, but this idea that the only "real" Americans are people who look, act, and vote like them was baked into Trumpism from before he even ran for the Republican nomination the first time. Trump first started to make national political news by championing the "birther" conspiracy theory about President Barack Obama. At the time, the press took this conspiracy theory literally, as if it represented real confusion among Republicans about whether Obama was a natural-born citizen. Now it's obvious that, like most right-wing conspiracy theories, it's more symbolic, a way to say someone like Obama — Black, liberal, cosmopolitan — cannot be a "real" American. The Big Lie, predicated on the idea that voters in racially diverse cities are "fraud," is more of the same. Republicans know the residents of Detroit, Philadelphia, and Atlanta are legal voters, but they feel they shouldn't be. 

And so it goes with the term "illegal." The press is unwise to take it as a literal description of an immigrant who is living and working without proper documentation. Such a term would apply to Musk in the past, but not to the Haitian immigrants that Vance and Trump have defamed. When MAGA says "illegal," however, they mean anyone they don't think should be allowed to call themselves "American." Coupled with "enemies within," it's clear that it's an ever-broadening category of non-white immigrants, native-born people of color and, increasingly, white liberals. It's like the Nazi term "undesirables" in the breadth of its scope. Which is why it's not a coincidence that Sunday's rally looked so much like the 1939 Nazi rally in the same location.  

Trump on Joe Rogan’s podcast leaves Kamala Harris with a winning opportunity

America’s social order has changed. There is a growing amount of economic and financial precarity, and previously marginalized groups are no longer confined to the margins of society. Future shock has left many members of American and global society feeling unmoored and increasingly confused and uncertain about their role in the present. Existential obsolescence breeds anger, resentment, irrationality and violence. Societies and individuals who are experiencing such a crisis of meaning are often attracted to fascists, authoritarians and other such leaders who promise salvation and empowerment. 

Male rage is misdirected at the wrong individuals and groups as it is processed through conspiracism and anti-intellectualism and manipulated by malign actors who are masters at gaming the algorithm and attention economy; facts and reality generally do not supersede or override the power of perception and emotions; joy and hope and calling people names such as “weird” are not effective strategies for stopping such destructive forces.

The male rage that powers Donald Trump and his MAGA project and the larger neofascist movement is not race-neutral: It is fueled by aggrieved white male entitlement, racism, and white supremacy. The “natural order of things” in America that is to be restored by Trump and MAGA is one where white men are placed above and made superior to all other groups forever. In practice, this means rich white men. The poor, working-class, and middle-class white men who form the base of Trumpism and American neofascism will be discarded once they prove to be inconvenient to Dictator Trump and the movement. Likewise, the Black and brown people and the women who are attracted to Trump and the MAGA movement will just be used as fuel for the infernal machine once their usefulness ends — and it will end very quickly and very soon if Dictator Trump takes power in 2025.

Jackson Katz, Ph.D., is an educator, author, and scholar-activist who has long been a major figure in the growing global movement of men working to promote gender equity and prevent gender-based violence. He is a frequent contributor to Ms. Magazine, where he writes about masculinities, politics, and violence. His new film is entitled “The Man Card: 50 Years of Gender, Power, and the American Presidency." He is also a co-founder of the Young Men Research Initiative. Katz is the author of two books, including the classic bestseller "The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help." His next book, entitled "Every Man: Why Violence Against Women Is a Men's Issue", is scheduled to be published by Penguin Random House UK in February 2025. His TEDx talk on that topic has been translated into 27 languages and has over 5.5 million views. He has lectured and trained in all fifty U.S. states, eight Canadian provinces and every continent except Antarctica.

In this conversation, Katz explains the relationship between the Age of Trump and the so-called manosphere and the “men’s rights movement.” He also highlights how Trump’s crude humor and juvenile humor and obsessions (in this example with golfer Arnold Palmer's penis size) reflect insecure masculinity and a larger culture of distraction and superficiality. At the end of this conversation, Katz shares his predictions about the outcome of the 2024 election and how, if Trump wins and becomes the country’s first dictator, angry (white) men will be mostly to blame.

This is the second part of a two-part conversation.

How is the Age of Trump related to the rise of the "men's rights" movement and the “manosphere” and male victimology entertainment propaganda machine?  

Many millions of white men, including young white men, are really kind of lost at sea. They’re uncertain about what it means to be a man and some of them are looking for guidance in some of the most dangerous places and leaders. Some are being radicalized online, where the algorithms take them from an interest in men’s issues all the way to chat rooms for organizations that espouse white nationalism and advocate for armed resistance to federal tyranny. It’s a little shocking how much the language and ideas of the misogynous manosphere have made their way into “mainstream” social media.

On the other side, many liberals and progressives are more interested in mobilizing communities of color, women, the LGBTQ community, and other marginalized communities than they are in addressing the needs and interests of cis white men. I think that's a huge mistake politically because what happens when liberals and progressives don’t speak directly to the needs and aspirations of those men is that Donald Trump gets elected President of the United States — and has a good chance of winning again. And ending American democracy as we know it. 

Liberals and progressives need to tell a better story to young men, specifically young white men, which lets them know there’s a role for them to play in progressive social change. There is a way for them to be self-respecting people who are respected by others. We want them to be part of positive change in the United States and the world. How are we going to live with each other? How are we going to build a healthier society with men, women, people of all genders, white, Black and brown people, all of us together? Men have a role to play in that. If Democrats, liberals, and progressives can figure out how to do that, they can turn back the tide against Trump and his movement in the years and decades to come. Protecting, defending, and renewing American democracy is going to be a long struggle. 

Trump recently joked about Hall of Fame professional golfer Arnold Palmer's penis and how endowed he supposedly was. In his joking, Trump was also sharing his admiration for Palmer's penis. How does this type of crude behavior fit into Trump's performance of masculinity and why do his followers love him so much? 

Trump has immeasurably degraded our political culture at the highest level. Who knows if we’ll ever come back from that? Neil Postman was right when he wrote in "Amusing Ourselves to Death" — in 1985! — that democracy is doomed when entertainment values take over political discourse. That said, I’m interested in the ways in which so many men continue to take Trump seriously as an “alpha male” when he says such obviously juvenile things like that. A penis-size reference about a sports and cultural icon like Arnold Palmer? This isn’t serious adult man talk — certainly not in public. 

Then again, it’s not lost on anybody that Trump is obsessed with matters of size, so if we want to psychoanalyze him, it’s pretty easy to see there is deep anxiety bubbling underneath the joking exterior. If he’s voted back into office, historians, political scientists and social theorists of every stripe will be analyzing the masculinity politics of Trumpism for the next hundred years. Why do so many millions of men identify with him, especially but not exclusively white men? And for every man who somehow identifies with him, I’m sure there are many more who will vote for him because of his position on immigration or tax cuts. They’re willing to overlook his glaring deficiencies of character and temperament — which of course is s statement about their values and their commitment to democratic principles. 

Donald Trump recently appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast. Rogan has many millions of listeners across the "manosphere" and more broadly. Rogan's influence is underestimated by those in the mainstream news media and commentariat. I would include mainstream liberals and progressives as well. What do you think of Trump's move here? 

Trump has been appearing on podcasts with a string of “manfluencers” as part of a broader strategy to convince impressionable young men that “real men vote Republican.” It’s an embarrassingly cartoonish tactic, but I’m afraid it can work with some male voters. In response, the Democrats and aligned groups have been running ads that show “traditional” looking men saying they support Harris. The idea is to create a permission structure for men to support Harris and not feel emasculated by doing so. It’s come down to this: They need to give permission to white men to vote for a Democrat and against fascism. 

We need your help to stay independent

When I heard that Trump was going on Joe Rogan, I worried that Rogan would play it safe and down the middle, and not confront Trump about all his lies, his obvious corruption, his fawning praise for authoritarian dictators, and the fact that dozens and hundreds of people who worked closely with him in the first administration are trying to frantically warn the public against re-electing him. And that’s what happened. Rogan didn’t bring up any of that. He engaged Trump in a conversation that made him sound normal and relatable. Rogan never pushed back when Trump called generals who served under him stupid and incompetent because they don’t support him now. He didn’t raise any objections when Trump repeatedly called Kamala Harris — who might become the first woman president — “low IQ” and worse.

Many of Rogan’s questions and comments fed the Trumpian narrative that he’s been unfairly persecuted by his enemies, the big disrupter who the “establishment” and the “deep state” fear and are trying to take down. Rogan played right into that cheap storyline, the one that has helped convince millions of working-class white men to vote for a fake populist whose biggest legislative achievement was tax cuts for the wealthy.

I know that Rogan is not a political interviewer and can’t be judged by conventional journalistic standards. But he had the Republican candidate for president in an incredibly tight race for a three-hour conversation less than two weeks before the election. Rogan’s audience is over 80 percent male, and it skews young. It’s worth restating that the Trump campaign’s overarching strategy is to run the table with white male voters, especially high school-educated white men. This was a totally political interview — whether Joe Rogan acknowledges it or not. It’s gotten something like 27 million views and counting!

Rogan asked Trump mostly softball questions. He mainly gave him a forum to use his interpersonal charm and charisma. Much of the conversation was devoted to subjects where Trump shines, like the two men trading stories about UFC and boxing. The Trump campaign’s cynical but ultimately sound calculation is that many low-information, low-engagement voters don’t know or care too much about policy. They know that when Trump appears on podcasts that are popular with young men it feeds the narrative that he can relate to them and that he cares about them. He is, after all, a highly skilled con man. One of the best ever. 

Rogan’s devoted fans regularly repeat the podcaster’s stock line that he’s a guy who doesn’t take strong positions on many political issues…he’s “just asking questions.” But his audience is overwhelmingly white men who vote and lean libertarian and conservative. His political interviews platform way more people from the center-right and far-right than anything on the liberal or progressive side. Imagine if Rogan decided to pivot and began to provide his vast audience of men exposure to more progressive and feminist guests — including men who support feminism and don’t reflexively lash out against it. I think many of them would be blown away because they’ve been fed a distorted caricature of feminism and racial justice as based on man-hating and white guilt. Few of them realize, for example, that profeminist men have been researching, writing, and talking about issues of men’s emotional, physical, sexual and mental health since the 1970s! 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


I do hope Kamala Harris goes on Rogan, but time is running out. The Trump campaign and the conservative infotainment complex have thoroughly discredited her as a lightweight and “DEI hire,” and not the very smart and serious person she is. All those slurs by Trump and his surrogates have had their intended effect. The propaganda has been very effective. She needs to go into the lion’s den — similar to going on Fox News — and prove that she’s strong and unintimidated. And by doing so she’ll signal that she respects his audience — a respect they crave, even if they have to keep up the public act and pretend not to care. 

Last Sunday, Donald Trump held his much-anticipated rally at Madison Square Garden. It was a fascist spectacle — and included a speaker who said the "enemies" of the Trump movement need to be “slaughtered.” Trump continued to expand his enemies list to basically include anyone who opposes him as he talked about "the enemy within." The personal is the political. What type of masculinity was being performed and channeled at Madison Square Garden on Sunday?

In 2008 the New York Times described Sarah Palin’s rallies as “spectacles of anger and insult,” which came to mind as I reflected on that ugly evening at MSG. The entire vibe of the event was a mix of right-wing triumphalism — hopefully premature! — and relentless chest-beating, male-centric aggression, and rhetorical violence. For the second time in less than a week, Tucker Carlson said the quiet part out loud when he praised Trump for “liberating us in the deepest and truest sense… Donald Trump has made it possible for the rest of us to tell the truth about the world around us.” Most of the post-rally commentary rightly interpreted this to mean that he was referring to how Trump gave white people permission to express racist sentiments without shame. That was on full display. But so was a deep well of masculinist anger. From the moment Trump emerged as a political figure he has been a vehicle for both white racial resentment and a defiant cry of white male victimhood. I know many women and people of color have little to no patience for the idea that so many white American men see themselves as the true victims of race and gender-based discrimination. When Carlson talks about “telling the truth” about the world, one thing he means is how white working-class men have been disrespected by the feminized elites. This is mighty rich coming from a member of the wealthy white conservative elite like him, but here we are. 

A big part of the appeal of Trump’s rallies is that he’s a talented and insightful insult comic. When he mocks and ridicules people who many right-leaning men believe have disrespected them, it puffs them up a little bit. But what’s even more insidious is that when Trump and other right-wing speakers invoke the “threat” posed by dark-skinned immigrants, he’s tapping into many white men’s sense of themselves as protectors. Of course, this is a very old narrative that goes back to the early days of colonial America, when white male European settlers were the protectors of white womanhood against the dangerous Native American “savages.” But it gives these men a feeling of self-worth and a sense that they still matter.

On a symbolic-emotional level, what are the Democrats giving them? I also think it’s important to note that misogyny has been so normalized in the Trump years that when it surfaces at events like this, commentators often downplay or simply overlook it. Trump constantly refers to Harris as “lazy, stupid, low-IQ.” All by itself, speaking this way about the first woman of color to be a major party’s nominee should make him unfit to be president. One speaker implied Harris was a prostitute who had a “pimp handler.” I read that Tony Hinchcliffe, the comedian and podcaster who’s getting lots of blowback for his racist jokes against Puerto Ricans and others, was set to use the c-word in his routine until party officials took it out. And let’s not forget about Carlson’s issues with women. That rant last week about “daddy’s coming home and he’s pissed” at his disobedient daughter was very creepy, but it also provides a revealing glimpse into some of the deeper psycho-sexual resentments and frustrations of right-wing masculinity in an era of steady feminist progress that Trump, MAGA, and their white evangelical allies are furiously trying to roll back and undo.

Who do you think will win the 2024 election?

Like many people, I read the polls, follow the news closely, and worry a lot about the election. Trump is so deeply unfit for office that it shouldn’t even be close. But it is. One way to think about the outcome is that if he wins, it will be because he was able to get more votes from men than Harris was able to get from women. And that truly will be a dark day for this country and the world. But after mourning, we’ll need to redouble our efforts to fight back against Trump’s plans for retribution against his many enemies, the mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, and other anti-democratic moves outlined in Project 2025 and elsewhere.

I’m also worried that his election will give further license to some of the most regressive, misogynous men to openly express and enact hostility to women. It’s a totally different picture if Kamala Harris wins. I know that she and others have downplayed this, largely for strategic reasons, but I’m convinced that the election of the first woman and first woman of color, to be president of the United States will be a huge step forward for this country — and the world. It won’t change everything, but it will permanently disrupt the deeply rooted idea that men are the natural leaders of both the family and the nation. And not only women, girls, and non-binary people will benefit too! I think the best thing that could happen to American men and boys on November 5 is the election of Harris-Walz. We need to say a resounding and definitive no! to Donald Trump and all the damage he has caused with the anger, hostility and violence he has unleashed since he emerged as a national political figure over a decade ago with his racist birther crusade against Barack Obama.

I am worried about violence in the streets for days, weeks and even months after Harris wins because violence is one of right-wing populism’s animating energies. Many people in that movement — especially men — believe that violence is justified if they don’t get what they feel entitled to. But we can’t let the fear of violence get in the way of what we need to do.

Harris pushing abortion rights as the winning issue in campaign’s final stretch

Last Friday, an estimated 30,000 people gathered in Houston's Shell Energy Stadium to support Kamala Harris as her historic presidential campaign entered its final days. Neither Harris nor anyone else expects her to carry Texas, but the vice president and a star-studded roster of supporters ventured to the Lone Star State for another reason, and with a national audience in mind. They delivered a warning that Texas' near-total abortion ban could become the norm nationwide if Donald Trump is elected. In other words, it was an attempt to focus attention on an issue the Harris campaign thinks can win her the White House: reproductive rights. 

“What we’re experiencing here is a health care crisis, and Donald Trump is the architect of it,” Harris told her largest rally crowd to date. “Let us be clear: If Donald Trump wins again, he will ban abortion nationwide.”

Pop music superstar Beyoncé put in an appearance to endorse Harris, telling the crowd she wasn’t there as a celebrity but as a mother, “who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in.” 

Addressing “all the men and women in this room, and watching around the country," Beyoncé said, "We need you."

She and Harris were joined at the rally by several women who have nearly died from sepsis and other pregnancy complications in Texas because the state's restrictive abortion laws meant they were unable to obtain appropriate medical care. Under a set of laws enacted in 2022, abortion is prohibited in Texas except when the life or health of the pregnant patient is at risk. But as in several other states with similar laws, such exceptions are not clear-cut. Women in Texas have reportedly been denied care for conditions like ectopic pregnancies — without doubt a life-threatening condition — and in other situations that clearly posed a threat to life and future health. If physicians violate the law in Texas, they face up to 99 years in prison, loss of their medical license and $100,000 in fines, which has created an obvious impediment to providing treatment to pregnant women. Todd Ivey, an OB-GYN in Houston, addressed the crowd at the rally, surrounded by other physicians. “These laws are designed to handcuff me – literally,” Ivey said. “There is no place for Donald Trump in my exam room.”

Abortion laws in Texas "are designed to handcuff me – literally,” said a Houston OB-GYN. "There is no place for Donald Trump in my exam room."

On Saturday, Harris held another large rally, this time in Michigan, a key swing state, where Michelle Obama spoke directly to men who may be considering voting for Trump, warning them that women’s lives will be at risk if the ex-president returns to power. ”If we don’t get this election right, your wife, your daughter, your mother, we as women will become collateral damage to your rage,” Obama said. “So are you as men prepared to look into the eyes of the women and children you love and tell them you supported this assault on our safety?”

Big rallies in the last stages of an election cycle are meant to signal a candidate’s final message, an effort to close the deal with voters. So it's noteworthy that Harris is pushing a forceful message on reproductive rights and the possibility of a national abortion ban, not high-priority issues in previous presidential elections. While polls continue to show that the economy is the biggest issue for voters in 2024, abortion rights are increasingly important as well, especially among Democratic voters. In August of 2020, Pew Research Center found that fewer than half of all voters cited abortion as a very important issue — and those people were more likely to be Trump voters. That all changed after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade with the 2022 Dobbs decision. Now, 67 percent of Harris supporters say the issue is critical to them, while only about one-third of Trump supporters say abortion is important to their vote.

We need your help to stay independent

“Kamala Harris is leading the most unapologetic campaign on abortion rights in history," said Emily Martin, chief program officer of National Women's Law Center Action Fund, in a previous interview with Salon. “That's not only a winning strategy, as we've seen since the Dobbs decision, but it's also essential to destigmatizing this essential care.”

Throughout her term as vice president, Harris has been a leading voice on abortion access within the Biden administration. Last spring, Harris became the first sitting vice president to visit an abortion provider at a Planned Parenthood clinic. While there, she met with about two dozen health care workers to thank them for their work. As Julie Burkhart, president of Wyoming’s Wellspring Health Access clinic and co-owner of Hope Clinic, put it in a media statement, the 2024 election is “the most reproductive rights-centered election in our nation’s history.”

“As the owner of multiple abortion clinics throughout the country, primarily in more conservative, underserved areas," Burkhart continued, "we see the direct impact caused by state abortion bans exacerbated by the overturning of Roe v. Wade." Not just abortion care but also contraception and IVF “would likely all be severely impacted" if Trump is elected, she said. 


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.


Some Democratic strategists believe that Harris’ final focus on reproductive rights could lead to victory on Nov. 5. As Salon has previously reported, campaign managers on the ground in red states seek to galvanize support for pro-choice ballot initiatives say they're hearing that many Republican and independent voters think post-Roe abortion measures are too extreme. Some experts believe this issue alone could motivate a significant subset of Republican voters to defect to Harris in this election. According to the latest New York Times/Siena poll, Harris leads among female voters by a 54% to 42% margin, which is about the same as the margin between Joe Biden and Trump four years ago.

It remains to be seen if a focus on reproductive rights can deliver key swing states for Harris, but abortion is also directly on the ballot in 10 states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New York and South Dakota — largely in the form of initiatives that seek to enshrine abortion rights in state constitutions.

Donald Trump, meanwhile, has tried to downplay abortion as a salient issue in this year's campaign, claiming it has “dropped way down” and even suggesting he would veto a hypothetical national abortion ban. Pro-choice advocates say that rhetoric is deliberately deceptive.  

“Donald Trump is responsible for the end of Roe v. Wade and continues to brag about it, saying that abortion bans are a ‘beautiful thing,’” said Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All. “Don’t pay attention to what Donald Trump says, but what he’s done. If he is elected in November, he will do everything he can to ban abortion as well as IVF and contraception.”

It’s hard to save for retirement. Here’s what Gen Z and millennials can do instead

Americans on average believe they’ll need $1.46 million in savings to retire comfortably, according to a 2024 study from Northwestern Mutual. That might feel like a big number, but at the recommended annual withdrawal rate of 4%, that would provide about $58,000 per year in income, well below the current median income in the U.S.

“It seems like the amount of money that would be needed to retire in 30 years is absurd and unreachable,” said Cody Norris, a millennial worker. “How do we do real planning when it seems like the current trends will be unsustainable?”

Millennials in the Northwestern Mutual study had saved an average of $62,600; many are well behind that. To reach their target savings by retirement age, the average millennial would need to contribute between $500 and $1,000 per month to a retirement account — on top of the unprecedented student loan debt and housing prices our generation is navigating.

Plus, that savings plan only works if someone has access to a workplace account that allows that level of tax-advantaged savings. It also assumes a reliable stock market return over the next 30 years, a variable that’s become much less dependable since Americans started relying on our investment-based system of retirement planning.

Norris asked the question that’s on the minds of many American workers staring down an uncertain financial future: “Are we still saving what we can or saying f*** it?”

You might not get to choose whether you retire

Many folks, overwhelmed by the lack of nuance or sense of reality in typical retirement planning advice, would answer Norris’ question with the latter response. The increasing number doing work that doesn’t take a physical toll think: Maybe we’ll just work forever, so why bother saving now? That could be magical thinking.

“We don't always get to choose if we retire,” said financial planner Maura Madden. “People become disabled, people have circumstances that don't allow them to work…You don't always have the option [to work], so even if you don't save enough to fully retire, if you're saving, at least you've got something to fall back on.”

We need your help to stay independent

Investment-based retirement savings: the best we can do?

Before Congress enacted Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code in 1978, American workers were generally not responsible for the bulk of their post-retirement income. Social Security in the mid-20th century replaced a higher portion of pre-retirement income, and many more Americans could rely on pensions because of stronger unions that fought for them. A pension, a defined-benefit plan, relies on employer rather than employee contributions. And it guarantees a worker a certain income after retirement.

Section 401(k) was never intended as a retirement-planning provision, but its mechanics allowed employers to shift the responsibility for retirement planning onto employees. By the time Gen X joined the workforce, saving through a 401(k) was being touted as clearly responsible financial planning; for millennials and Gen Z, it’s treated as a must-have.

Despite our cultural reliance on the 401(k) and subsequently spawned tax-advantaged retirement plans, this system has never paid off for most workers. Boomers — the youngest of whom are already over 60 years old — have an average of just $120,300 in retirement savings this year. They expect to need nearly $1 million to retire comfortably.

But few alternatives exist. Tax-advantaged retirement accounts are the most viable way to prepare for retirement in our current environment.

“To save the cash and make investments tends to be the simplest way to go,” said Madden.

Madden acknowledges alternatives, like building and selling a business or purchasing and renting out real estate, work for some individuals. But these routes aren’t reliable for the culture at large. And we’ve seen from the inflated housing market that our decades-long obsession with turning real estate into an investment has actually rendered that option obsolete for younger generations.

“That's great if you happen to buy a house cheaply 30 years ago,” said Madden, “but that ship’s sailed.”

Thinking broadly, a slate of policy changes could get American workers back on track for secure, comfortable retirements. Adjusting the income cap for Social Security taxes would better fund that program and help increase the payouts from public funds. Reinstating union protections could bolster workers’ ability to negotiate for employer-funded pensions. Enacting universal health care (and related supports like in-home care) would reduce the cost of living in old age. Policies that rein in the cost of housing would make saving more feasible during our working years.

Millennials and younger generations, in particular, can work toward the political and social change necessary to realize these policies and transform how Americans retire.

In the meantime, though, Madden guides her (mostly Gen X) clients toward retirement not with admonishments to tighten their belts and hit arbitrary savings targets, but with a new way to think about our relationship to work.

“It's about reframing that retirement isn't just before and after retirement,” she said. “It's more of a shifting process of your life and how you work.”

"It's about reframing that retirement isn't just before and after retirement"

The advice millennials and Gen Z hear about retirement planning still imagines we’ll live like our grandparents did: 40 years of work followed by a couple of decades of not working. Most of us won’t and don’t need to follow that model. Many of Madden’s clients plan to work full-time into their 70s or transition into part-time work once they’re eligible to draw Social Security benefits.

“Instead of saying, ‘How much do you need to save right now,’ oftentimes we're playing with, ‘How long are you going to have to work?’” Madden said.

This shift in thinking isn’t fully satisfying — many people will continue to work full-time or part-time past retirement age purely out of financial desperation. But it might be just enough to relieve the millions of American workers who panic when they’re told how much they should have saved for retirement by now.

What did we learn from Donald Trump’s “Joe Rogan Experience”? Nothing good

“What is happening with the whales? I've read about this.”

Over the years, Joe Rogan has welcomed an array of accredited scientists and nature conservationists to “The Joe Rogan Experience.” Ten days before he subjected the planet to three hours of Donald Trump’s logorrheic free associations, he gave wildlife biologist Diane K. Boyd almost the exact same amount of time, almost to the minute, to talk about what she’s learned over four decades of studying wolves.

One wagers that if Boyd didn’t have a knowledgeable answer to why dead whales were washing ashore in New Jersey at a much higher rate than in past years, she’d say so and refer Rogan to a marine biologist or published findings.

But Trump has an answer. It’s windmills. “Well, they say that the wind drives them crazy. You know, it's a vibration because you have those, you know, those things are 50-story buildings, some of them.”

“Right. And they’re super sensitive to vibrations and sounds,” Rogan offered.

“You know, the wind is rushing, the things are blowing. It's a vibration and it makes noise. You know what it is? I want to be a whale psychiatrist. It drives the whales freaking crazy and something happens with them. But for whatever reason, they’re getting washed up on shore, you know. And yet —”

“Conveniently ignored by the environmental people,” Rogan finished.

Climate change was not on the discussion list here, as you might surmise. Still, surviving Trump’s three hours on “The Joe Rogan Experience” has some value to his listeners who, for whatever reason, wanted to hear the Republican candidate and 34-count felon “freeball it,” as Rogan called Trump’s verbal meanderings.

Let other swing-state suckers wait in freezing weather for an audience with the Great Pumpkin. Rogan, affable bro that he is, made Trump’s barely decipherable “weave” audible, if not intellectually accessible, from whichever comfortable place a listener prefers to receive the unfiltered blathering of a 78-year-old would-be autocrat.

The minimal editing is the selling point for the politician and Rogan’s listeners, who, according to a recent Gallup survey's results, are among the 69% of Americans who trust the mass media “not very much” or “not at all. 

Rogan has refused to describe himself as Trump-leaning and in 2020 endorsed Bernie Sanders. He also notoriously promoted COVID-19 misinformation and maintains his anti-vaccination views, which he touched upon briefly when he mentioned vaccine-derived polio during their conversation about the disease reemerging in Gaza.

As he told Trump and recurring guests Eddie Bravo, Brendan Schaub and Bryan Callen on his Sunday episode, his view of handling politicians is to make conversation instead of playing to their talking points, which I agree with. Trump, he told his guests, was difficult to wrangle: “You ask him a question, and he starts to answer it, but then he takes you on a totally different route,” he said. “You’ve got to bring him back in, but you got to be respectful.”

Part of that respect in Rogan’s view is to lay off calling Trump a dictator. Later on Sunday, Trump was the headliner at a Madison Square Garden rally where Tony Hinchcliffe, a comic who Rogan suggested on an August podcast that Trump’s campaign should hire, warmed up the crowd by calling Puerto Rico a "floating island of garbage” along with racist jokes about Black and Latino people.

He’s been branded, transphobic, homophobic and anti-feminist and refers to women as “chicks.” And he still hopes Vice President Kamala Harris will agree to appear on an upcoming show.

If reach is what she’s looking for, Rogan’s invitation would seem to be a magnetizing one. “The Joe Rogan Experience” reaches some 17.9 million YouTube subscribers and 15.7 million followers on Spotify, where it is the platform’s No. 1 podcast, as it is on Apple. As of Monday evening, the episode had 35.5 million views on YouTube.

But that doesn't appear to be her closing podcast strategy, evidenced in her choice to spend a straightforward hour with Shannon Sharpe tossing her policy softballs on "Club Shay Shay."

In the days since Rogan’s Trump episode went live on Friday (as in, almost immediately after it was recorded) a handful of mainstream news outlets dutifully churned out the standard fact-checking list since it was a given that Rogan wouldn’t challenge Trump on anything he said.

What I found more useful was to look at what Rogan asked Trump and what he agreed with, presumably in the name of the conversations he prizes over standard journalistic interviews.

During last Friday’s episode, he lumped election fraud claims into the same pile as anti-vaxxer rhetoric, calling it a “forbidden topic.” The suggestion of anything taboo is candy to the Extremely Online, and styling the Big Lie as such gives power to the groundwork being laid to doubt any wins that don’t favor Republicans, especially Trump.

Trump’s near admission to Rogan that he lost the 2020 election has been widely reported. Rogan’s framing, meanwhile, doesn’t receive much mention. “I want to talk about 2020 because you said over and over again that you were robbed in 2020. . . How do you think you were robbed?” he asked. Trump starts to mention papers, and Rogan presses him: “But give me some examples of how. Let's start at the top, and the easy ones.”

Somehow the easy ones were allegations of Russian collusion somehow related to Hunter Biden's laptop and supposed ballot box chicanery.

“So that's two examples that are real examples,” Rogan said. “Now, anyone who considers himself a legitimate, objective observer of American politics, if you really want the best person to win, you would want people to not lie. And the only reason why they got away with this lie was because they continually labeled you as this horrible threat to democracy.”

He continued, “They kept saying you were going to be a dictator, ignoring the fact that you weren't a dictator for the four years where you were actually the president.”

We need your help to stay independent

In the name of conversation, Rogan parroted debunked anti-migrant rhetoric in asking Trump for his take on border policy: “In San Antonio, they've taken over apartment buildings,” he said. “In Aurora, Colorado, they've taken over apartment buildings. These Venezuelan gangs, just the beginning.” Referring to the Democrats, Rogan asked, “What do you think the strategy is?”

When Trump didn’t have an answer, Rogan repeated, “We should just tell people what the strategy is.” That there is no nefarious strategy concerning undocumented migrants crossing the border doesn’t occur to Rogan; there’s always something. So again he insists, “There's a strategy that's involved in letting these people in,” pointing to an app used by cartels.

Then at long last, Trump cobbled together…something.

“And now it's used to deal with the cartels, the cartel, heads of the cartel, rich people. By the way, these are loaded…these people have so much money, they would call up — think of this. They call up the app and the app tells them where they should take their load of illegal migrants from the Congo. You know, we have a lot from the Congo, prisons in the Congo. I made a little bit of a sarcastic joke. A man named Dana White, who you love, who I love. I assume you love him.”

At that point, Trump’s weave stumbled into a lengthy back and forth about the Ultimate Fighting Championship CEO and Rogan's observations about fighters.

I will give Rogan a bit of credit, though. In addition to prodding Trump on topics with little bearing on current events, like opening the file on John F. Kennedy, he also flatly asked Trump, since he says he has so much evidence that it was rigged, “Why haven't you put this evidence in a consumable form?” The answer, somehow is, “What's happened is judges don't want to touch it. They would say you don't have standing. They didn't rule on the merits. They. The merits never got there. The judges didn't have what it took to turn over.”

By now we know what Trump had to gain from sitting down with Rogan, whose listenership is overwhelmingly male (to the tune of somewhere between 71% according to 2020 data from Media Monitors, and 81% according to YouGov) and young; the average listener’s age is 24.

In contradicting his past stance concerning Trump – in 2022 he told fellow podcaster Lex Fridman that he wasn’t a Trump fan and had no intention to feature him — Rogan further cements his dominance in podcasting and found common ground with Trump, which isn’t a stretch. They’re both entertainers, businessmen and effective doubt-sowers.

Rogan has a disdain for mainstream journalism, referring to consumers who watch broadcast and cable news as “low information people.” During their chat, Rogan describes the mass media as a creepy, corrupt business that “to a large extent, acts as a propaganda arm for the Democratic Party.”

“It's bizarre to watch. And most young people, I think, are aware of it,” Rogan said, explaining to Trump, who pretended not to know why he drew more publicity than other candidates in 2016, that “the Internet's giving people information that they're not getting from anywhere else.” 

But that episode also shows what they’re not getting, which is accurate information. Some of it is easy to disprove on its surface, as when he opened by softening up Trump by pointing to what he says is an episode of “The View” from 2015 or 2016 where “Whoopi Goldberg gives you a big hug and a kiss. Joy Behar gives you a big hug. Barbara Walters gives you a big hug. They all loved you . . .  And then you actually started winning in the polls, and then the machine started working towards you.”

“There's probably no one in history that I've ever seen that's been attacked the way you've been attacked and the way they've done it so coordinated and systematically, when you see those same people in the past, very favorable to you,” Rogan said.

Later he added, “If you watch the episode, it's bananas. It's like an alternative universe. And it's only nine years ago!” Except .  . . it wasn’t. The episode Rogan referenced aired in 2011, and it’s “The View” segment where he first takes his birther conspiracy claims against then-President Barack Obama to a mainstream audience, toying with a presidential run in the same chat.

Many things happened in the years since that changed the way Goldberg and the rest of “The View” hosts saw Trump. Walters retired in 2014, for example (another clue Rogan’s big revelation doesn’t hold) and Trump hadn’t yet descended his golden escalator and called Mexicans rapists and drug mules. Rogan, it seems, only remembers the part about him barely conceding that some, he assumes, “are good people.”

There is something to Rogan’s take that conversations have a way of getting more honest and unscripted answers out of a guest.

Analysts are correct in noting that mainstream journalists can learn from the conversational bent taken by podcast hosts. I’ve said as much previously that it serves voters to learn as much about who candidates are as it does to have them spell out their policy positions, and a decent host can do both.

But this also is highly reliant on the host’s relationship with facts based on empirical data and whether they’re more interested in being liked or making their guests likable instead of being honest and questioning whether what they’re hearing is honest. Trump meandered, but Rogan skipped right alongside him.

I didn’t expect anything less, but it’s not unreasonable to hope for a mote of skepticism from the guy who two years ago said of his guest, “I don’t want to help him. I have no interest in helping him” as his reason for not having Trump on before.

Fridman smoothly and somewhat prophetically replied, “The night is still young.”

Indeed. In 2022 the Doomsday Clock still had 100 seconds on it when those two spoke. In 2023 the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists shifted the countdown to 90.

Here we are a few clicks from midnight of a presidential campaign Trump has been mounting in some form since 2011, and the world is ending. But that's just what a few scientists say  . . . and what do they know?

Volcanoes don’t cause climate change — but it could be the other way around

A recent report from the Icelandic Meteorological Office suggests that magma is building up underground near a volcano known as Askja, a mountain about the size of Mount St. Helens in Vatnajokull National Park in Iceland’s central highlands. Although volcanic eruptions are difficult to predict accurately, this indicates a high likelihood that Askja may erupt in the near future

Such events are nothing new in Iceland, an island nation of just 400,000 people that has numerous active volcanoes. But researchers funded by the Icelandic government believe that the rapid retreat of glaciers due to climate change is raising the threat to their nation, and may foreshadow increased volcanic activity all over the world. As glacial ice melts, the downward pressure on Earth’s thin outer crust eases, causing the ground to rebound. That can cause the dynamic subterranean forces below volcanoes to produce increased quantities of magma, leading to more frequent eruptions.


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.


“Iceland is essentially one of the best places in the world to study this … because we have both volcanism and glaciers,” volcanologist Michelle Parks of the Icelandic Meteorological Office told Reuters. “At the end of the day, what we’re aiming for with this project is a much bigger picture. It’s the future of volcanic eruptions. How large can they be? … And what’s in store for us in the future, not only in Iceland but for the rest of Europe and potentially farther afield.”

Volcanologists see early signs of this type of activity at Askja. If it continues, that could lead to a repeat of the conditions during the last major ice age, roughly 10,000 to 15,000 years ago. At that time, rates of volcanic eruption were much higher than they are today, indeed 30 to 50 times higher. That same set of circumstances, with the glaciers that weigh down Iceland's 34 active volcanic systems melting and losing volume due to rising temperatures, appears to exist now.

Ironically enough, climate-change deniers sometimes attribute the current rise in temperatures to volcanic activity, a hypothesis that has been thoroughly debunked. It’s true that volcanic eruptions can warm the Earth’s temperature, but scientific evidence clearly shows that’s not the chief culprit behind current climate change.

"The burning of fossil fuels and the manufacture of cement releases 37 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere per year," Yves Moussallam, a professor of earth and environmental sciences and geochemistry at Columbia Climate School, told Salon last year. Volcanic activity, he estimated, "contribute about 100 times less CO2” than those human activities.

“Deliver Me From Nowhere”: Everything we know about Jeremy Allen White in Springsteen biopic

Jeremy Allen White has swapped his white chef’s coat for a leather jacket and flannel to portray one of rock’s most iconic musicians, Bruce Springsteen.

In a newly released photo, White embodies Springsteen in his "Nebraska" era. The upcoming biopic, "Deliver Me From Nowhere," written and directed by Scott Cooper, delves into the making of Springsteen’s 1982 album. Cooper’s adaptation is based on Warren Zanes' book of the same name, which chronicles the album’s creation through the perspectives of Springsteen's collaborators and influences, including Rosanne Cash and Steven Van Zandt.

"Nebraska" is widely celebrated as one of Springsteen’s defining works. Reflecting on its legacy, Springsteen told CBS Sunday Morning last year, "If I had to pick out one album and say, ‘This is going to represent you 50 years from now,’ I’d pick 'Nebraska.'"

As production gears up, Cooper said in a statement released on Monday, "This film is an incredibly humbling and thrilling journey." 

“Bruce Springsteen’s ‘Nebraska’ has profoundly shaped my artistic vision. The album’s raw, unvarnished portrayal of life’s trials and resilience resonates deeply with me," Cooper furthered. "Our film aims to capture that same spirit, bringing Warren Zanes’ compelling narrative of Bruce’s life to the screen with authenticity and hope, honoring Bruce’s legacy in a transformative cinematic experience."

The statement stressed how the making of "Nebraska" “marked a pivotal time in [Springsteen's] life, one that he would only openly talk about decades after its release," highlighting that "It’s regarded as a landmark in his musical odyssey and a source of inspiration for a generation of artists and musicians. Recorded on a 4-track recorder in Springsteen’s New Jersey bedroom and without The E Street Band, ‘Nebraska’ is considered one of Springsteen’s most enduring works — a raw, haunted acoustic record populated by lost souls searching for a reason to believe.”

The story of Springsteen's watershed musical moment will take place in the musician's home state of New Jersey, with scenes also shot in Los Angeles. While there is no set release date, the film is shaping up to hit screens in 2025.

We need your help to stay independent

Other heavy-hitting actors are also attached to the project including Stephen Graham as Springsteen’s dad, Paul Walter Hauser as guitar technician Mike Batlan, Odessa Young as a rumored love interest and Jeremy Strong, who is reportedly in talks to play Jon Landau, Springsteen’s longtime manager.

Cooper also spoke of an exciting collaboration for the project, saying, "It has been a great pleasure to collaborate with Bruce and Jon [Landau] as I tell their story, and their creative energy fuels every part of this journey."

In an interview with GQ in August, White spoke of the switch from "Yes, Chef" to "Yes, Boss," saying real-life Springsteen is “really supportive of the project."


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


“It’s really great to go down a YouTube rabbit hole and find him at all these different periods in his life and be able to listen to his speaking voice as well as his singing voice. That’s kind of been the deal, just listening to him a lot and watching him a lot. It’s been really fun preparing," White said. 

Earlier this year, Springsteen has documented parts of his expansive musical career, appearing in the "Stevie Van Zandt: Disciple" documentary. In September, the musician also released a music documentary, "Road Diary: Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band" highlighting his experiences with his band and some of their most legendary live performances. 

How beef became a marker of American identity

Beef is one of America's most beloved foods. In fact, today's average American eats three hamburgers per week.

American diets have long revolved around beef. On an 1861 trip to the United States, the English novelist Anthony Trollope marveled that Americans consumed twice as much beef as Englishmen. Through war, industry, development and settlement, America's love of beef continued. In 2022, the U.S. as a whole consumed almost 30 billion pounds (13.6 billion kilograms) of it, or 21% of the world's beef supply.  

Beef has also reached iconic status in American culture. As "Slaughterhouse-Five" author Kurt Vonnegut once penned, "Being American is to eat a lot of beef, and boy, we've got a lot more beef steak than any other country, and that's why you ought to be glad you're an American."

In part, the dominance of beef in American cuisine can be traced to settler colonialism, a form of colonization in which settlers claim – and then transform – lands inhabited by Indigenous people. In America, this process centered on the systemic and often violent displacement of Native Americans. Settlers brought with them new cultural norms, including beef-heavy diets that required massive swaths of land for grazing cattle.

As a food historian, I am interested in how, in the 19th century, the beef industry both propelled and benefited from colonialism, and how these intertwined forces continue to affect our diets, culture and environment today.

Cattle and cowboys

Beginning in the 16th century, the first Europeans to settle across the Americas – and later, Australia and New Zealand – brought their livestock with them. A global economy built on appropriated Indigenous territories allowed these nations to become among the highest consumers and producers of meat in the world.

The United States in particular tied its burgeoning national identity and westward expansion to the settlement and acquisition of cattle-ranching lands. Until 1848, Arizona, California, Texas, Nevada, Utah, western Colorado and New Mexico were part of Mexico and inhabited by numerous tribes, Indigenous cowboys and Mexican ranchers.

The Mexican-American War, which lasted from 1846-48, led to 525,000 square miles being ceded to the United States – land that became central to American beef production. Gold, discovered in the northern Sierra by 1849, drew hundreds of thousands more settlers to the region.

The desire for cattle-supporting land played an integral role in the systematic decimation of bison populations, as well. For thousands of years, Native Americans relied on bison for physical and cultural survival. At least 30 million roamed the western United States in 1800; by 1890, 60 million head of cattle had taken their place.

Beef replaces bison

It is no coincidence that the rise of an extensive and powerful American beef industry coincided with the near-elimination of bison across the United States.

Bison populations were already in steep decline by the mid-1800s, but after the Civil War, as industrialization transformed transportation, communication and mass production, the U.S. Army actively encouraged the wholesale slaughter of bison herds.

In 1875, Philip Sheridan, a general in the U.S. Army, applauded the impact bison hunters could have on the beef industry. Hunters "have done more in the last two years, and will do more in the next year, to settle the vexed Indian question, than the entire regular army has done in the last forty years," Sheridan said. "They are destroying the Indians' commissary … (and so) for a lasting peace, let them kill, skin and sell until the buffaloes are exterminated. Then your prairies can be covered with speckled cattle."  

In 1884, with no hint of irony, the U.S. Department of Indian Affairs constructed a slaughterhouse on the Blackfeet Reservation in Montana and required tribal members to provide the factory's labor in exchange for its beef.

By 1888, New York politician and sometimes rancher Theodore Roosevelt described Western stockmen as "the pioneers of civilization," who with "their daring and adventurousness make the after settlement of the region possible." Later, during Roosevelt's presidency – from 1900 to 1908 – the U.S. claimed another 230 million acres of Indigenous lands for public use, further opening the West to ranching and settlement.

The Union Stock Yards in Chicago, the most modern slaughterhouse of the era, opened on Christmas Day in 1865 and marked a turning point for industrial beef production. No longer delivered "on the hoof" to cities, cattle were now slaughtered in Chicago and sent East as tinned meat or, after the 1870s, in refrigerated railcars.

Processing over 1 million head of cattle annually at its height, the Union Stock Yards, a global technological marvel and international tourist attraction, symbolized industrial progress and inspired national pride.

         

Where's the beef?

By the turn of the 20th century, beef was solidly linked to American identity both at home and globally. In 1900, the average American consumed over 100 pounds of beef per year, almost twice the amount eaten by Americans today.

Canadian food writer Marta Zaraska argues in her 2021 book "Meathooked" that beef became a key part of the American origin myth of rugged individualism that was emerging at this time. And cowboys, working the grueling cattle drives, came to embody values linked to the frontier: self-reliance, strength and independence.

Popular for decades as a street food, America's proudest culinary invention – the hamburger – debuted at the St. Louis World's Fair in 1904 alongside other novelties such as Dr. Pepper and ice cream.

After World War II, suburban markets and fast-food chains dominated the American foodscape, where beef burgers reigned supreme. By the end of the century, more people around the globe recognized the golden arches of McDonald's than the Christian cross.

At the same time, national programs reinforced food insecurity for Native Americans. In efforts to eventually dissolve reservations and open these lands to private development, for example, in 1952 the U.S. government launched the Voluntary Relocation Program, in which the Bureau of Indian Affairs persuaded many living on reservations to move to cities. The promised well-paying jobs did not materialize, and most of those who relocated traded rural for urban poverty.  

The true cost of a burger

        

Policies encouraging settler colonialism ultimately led to more sedentary lifestyles and a dependence on fast, convenient and processed foods – such as hamburgers – regardless of the individual or environmental costs.

In recent decades, scientists have warned that industrial meat production, and beef in particular, fuels climate change and leads to deforestation, soil erosion, species extinction, ocean dead zones and high levels of methane emissions. It is also a threat to biodiversity. Nutritionist Diego Rose believes the best way "to reduce your carbon footprint (is to) eat less beef," a view shared by other sustainability experts.

As of January 2022, about 10% of Americans over the age of 18 considered themselves vegetarian or vegan. Another recent study found that 47% of American adults are "flexitarians" who eat primarily, but not wholly, plant-based diets.

At the same time, small-scale farmers and cooperatives are working to restore soil health by reintegrating cows and other grazing animals into sustainable farming practices to produce more high-quality, environmentally friendly meat.

More encouraging still, tribes in Montana – Blackfeet Nation, Fort Belknap Indian Community, Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes, and South Dakota's Rosebud Sioux – have reintroduced bison to the northern Great Plains to revive the prairie ecosystem, tackle food insecurity and lessen the impacts of climate change.

Even so, in the summer of 2024, Americans consumed 375 million hamburgers in celebration of Independence Day – more than any other food.

 

Hannah Cutting-Jones, Assistant Professor, Department of Global Studies; Director of Food Studies, University of Oregon

 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

“This is real joy”: Trump fans cheer at MSG rally as speakers spew hate

NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden may have been the zenith of his roles as entertainer-in-chief for the MAGA faithful but those in attendance were sure it wouldn’t be his last act.

Attending Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden proved to be a feat of endurance. Arriving around four hours ahead of the event’s official start at 2:30 pm, rallygoers were whisked from the exit of Penn Station into a packed crowd with little to no direction from staffers or volunteers. Many looking for the general admission line ended up waiting in the VIP line and many others wandered back and forth looking for someone to ask.

At the entrance on West 32nd Street and 6th Ave., peddlers hocked knock-off Trump merchandise, some of it apparently on an end-of-election season fire sale, with classic MAGA hats going for as low as $10 with newer Dark MAGA merch climbing from there.

While much of the crowd poured directly out of Penn Station, the sea of MAGA hats engulfed multiple city blocks as early as 11 am. Though most rallygoers wouldn’t have seen the crowd after getting in one of the lines for the stadium, latecomers reported that the crowd stretched for blocks, with some claiming that the crowd of MAGA adherents stretched all the way to Columbus Circle, 25 blocks uptown of the entrance to Madison Square Garden. It was clear from overheard conversations that Trump’s acolytes were gleeful at the prospect of inconveniencing the Democratic residents of New York.

When someone did find their way into one of the street-wide corrals serving as a line, they were, for all intents and purposes, on their own in a sea of people. 

There were no facilities provided for the tens of thousands of people standing in the street, no bathrooms and no place to get water except for a few restaurants on that block of 32nd street and stepping inside any of them would require you to forfeit your place in line. This created an ad hoc business for industrious bystanders who would take orders from the crowd and who acted as a courier between the MAGA crowd and the Sbarro on 33rd and 7th.

So the crowd waited. Some had arrived the previous day to secure their entry, others filtered in throughout the morning. Advice online suggested arriving four to five hours before the rally began to make sure you could get in, though this would later prove to be insufficient. People passed the time watching right-wing news broadcasts or chatting. One man watched cartoonist Scott Adams’s podcast out loud on his phone and another woman filmed different people in the crowd while yelling “Trump, Trump, Trump.”

There was an overwhelming sense of confidence among fans that Trump would not only win the election but that he couldn’t lose it, with many if not most rallygoers saying they thought Democrats would have to cheat to win.

One rallygoer, William Tate, a forty-something caterer and audio engineer, said he was “uptight” because “you have a political party that has proven that they will do anything under the sun to retain power,” referencing the Democrats. He later said he thought that the Democrats would refuse to certify the results if Trump won and that they would “fabricate some form of an attack” in order to delegitimize Trump’s support.

We need your help to stay independent

Ellison Talbung, a 48-year-old product support engineer from Massachusetts, said that he was confident Trump was going to win and said that the event was “joyous.” When asked whether he thought Democrats would have to cheat to win he said, “honestly, at this, at this, at this time of election, I would have to say yes, for a lot of reasons.”

Another rallygoer, Carrie Wise, a registered nurse from Nassau County, said that she was feeling hopeful for Trump’s victory and that “I feel like Trump will protect us.” She added that “I will be curious as to the validity of it” if Democrats win this year.

During the hours spent in line on 32nd Street, chants of “USA” and “let us in” echoed through the Midtown streets. When speakers started at 2:30 pm people began watching the broadcast on their phones. 

People weaved in and out of the crowd, filming for their own small-time online broadcasts and passing out fliers and stickers. One handout was a sticker for “CNN” where the “C” was replaced with a “hammer and sickle.” Another read “truth is the new hate speech” and many more were crude mockups of "virgin vs. chad" memes put onto stickers airing the imagined threat that the LGBTQ community poses to children.

One man wandered the crowd passing out a flier he described as “instructions for having elections without government involvement,” laying out baffling claims of election fraud and advocating for a new constitution under which there would be an election "whenever 50% of the people assemble in the streets.” The betting company Kalshi also had employees throwing t-shirts into the crowd, encouraging people to “bet on Trump,” while ads for the site flashed on screens across the streets.

What was at first a trickle became a stream and the crowds outside began to thin out. It was as if people had been waiting simply to say that they’d seen Trump at Madison Square Garden.

There was considerable drinking and smoking in the crowd, making the environment akin to some sort of right-wing Shakedown Street and even on the windswept midtown street the smell of tobacco hung over the crowd. Despite the guest instructions, Trump supporters discussed plans to sneak booze into the venue while others smoked cigarettes and a few more cannabis. Young men at the event were wary of speaking on the record for fear of potential impacts on their romantic prospects and the notion that they might be ostracized at work.

Unfortunately, arriving four hours before the event started landed you in the first group in line that would not be allowed into the stadium. Instead, this cohort was the first group to be ushered into the semi-exclusive overflow area directly outside the arena underneath the Jumbotron outside the Garden. When the gates opened people rushed inside, scrambling to get closest to the screen. One woman during the event said she was excited to be so close because she could “smell the Trump from here.”

In due time, the crowd pushed down the barrier between the overflow area and 7th Ave., because after hours of standing people had begun to climb and sit on the temporary fence. Others stood on the planters outside the Garden handing onto the leafless trees for a vantage point from which they could drink canned cocktails and have their cries heard over the rest of the crowd. 

There were early applause lines, like when comedian Tony Hinchcliffe made a bizarre and racist joke about how Latinos were outbreeding other Americans, an apparent reference to the frequent MAGA talking point, the Great Replacement Theory, which was alluded to throughout the night.

“These Latinos, they love making babies, too,” Hinchcliffe said. “There’s no pulling out. They don’t do that. They come inside just like they did to our country.”

At the beginning of the night, however, the Trump fans ignored many of the speakers and the hum of the crowd was as loud as the sound from the Jumbotron. In conversations throughout the whole event, Trump supporters congratulated themselves and each other on being free thinkers while rehashing the very talking points they were there to receive.

One of the first guests to receive an uproar of applause was former Fox News Host Tucker Carlson. The crowd cheered as he claimed Vice President Kamala Harris was not Black, with many in the crowd hurling epithets and obscenities at the Jumbotron expressing their hatred for Harris and the people who plan to vote for her.

Throughout the night, young men dressed as Trump rattled off impressions of the former president, promising to put immigrants in camps and decrying impeachment while imitating the former president’s signature raspy tone. Others crushed beer cans and shouted slurs from their perches and hurled epithets about Democrats.

Hulk Hogan, the former professional wrestler was also a crowd favorite, with his “hawk tuah” joke inspired the crowd to cheer that Harris is a “slut,” as was Dr. Phil McGraw, whose speech directly addressed the MAGA desire for mainstream cultural legitimacy and to not be criticized for the things they say and do.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


McGraw’s speech, like Carlson and Hogan’s, also cut directly to the significance of Trump’s event at the Garden. Behind the hate, the xenophobia, the racism, the promises of retribution and the eerie echoes of the 1939 Nazi rally at the Garden, the event was the epitome of Trump’s version of politics as entertainment. The entertainer-in-chief had finally sold out the most iconic venue in America and the gaping maw of the MAGA movement had engulfed city blocks in the media capital of the world.

Other speakers like Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, billionaire Elon Musk and former presidential hopeful Robert Kennedy Jr., drew enormous applause from the crowds. At one point when Vance began to speak of Gov. Tim Walz some in the crowd turned to the topic of joy with one young man closing his eyes, bowing his head and saying  “That’s not joy, this is real joy, this is real love” as he swayed with the crowd.

The praise for the other speakers, however, paled in comparison to the applause Trump himself received when he took the stage nearly two and a half hours late. Standing at the rally, listening to Trump speak after nearly a decade of campaigning for president was like attending a rock concert for a band that’s past its prime. Like a washed-up guitarist, Trump’s so-called “weave” was often aimless and longwinded but filled with riffs that longtime listeners would know and love. By far the biggest applause line of the night was went Trump promised the death penalty for any immigrant found to have killed an American citizen.

Shortly after Trump took the stage, however, something else almost began to happen. People steadily filed out of the venue. What was at first a trickle became a stream and the crowds outside began to thin out. It was as if people had been waiting simply to say that they’d seen Trump at Madison Square Garden and didn’t feel the need to stay for the hour-plus main event that was his speech.

A more practical explanation might be that by the time Trump started speaking people near or inside the venue had probably been standing for at least ten or eleven hours to see their entertainer, if not more. Only the most dedicated had managed to wait to see Trump speak at the Garden but even many of them were not willing to see it through to the end.

Matthew Perry’s family slam drug supplier and doctor ahead of trial: “You are going down, baby”

One year after Matthew Perry's sudden and tragic death, his family delivered a very direct message to the two people accused of supplying the late actor ketamine prior to his passing: "You are going down, baby.”

In an exclusive interview with the "Today Show," Perry's mother, Suzanne Morrison, stepfather Keith Morrison and three younger sisters talked to Savannah Guthrie reflecting on Perry's life and legacy, saying they hope to get a sense of justice now that an official trial date has been set for March 2025.

“I’m thrilled,” Perry’s mother said of the upcoming spring trial.

“What I’m hoping, and I think the agencies that got involved in this are hoping, is that people who have put themselves in the business of supplying people with the drugs that will kill them are now on notice,” Perry's stepfather — a correspondent for Dateline NBC — added. “It doesn’t matter what your professional credentials are, you are going down, baby.”

Perry's death has led to a federal drug investigation with the Los Angeles Police Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration. It resulted in the arrest of five people in August, including Perry’s assistant, doctors and Jasveen Sangha, who is nicknamed the “Ketamine Queen." Sangha and one of Perry's doctors face several decades in prison if convicted. 

Last year on Oct. 28, 2023, Perry died from the effects of ketamine after being found in a hot tub at his Los Angeles home. Officials ruled that his death was an accident but the drowning, coronary artery disease and the effects of an opioid treatment drug, were also contributing factors.

Authorities say “hundreds” of ballots were damaged by fire in Oregon and Washington

Authorities are investigating after two ballot boxes were set on fire in Washington and Oregon early Monday morning, The Oregonian reported.

Around 3:30 am local time, police responded to a call about a ballot box on fire in Portland. It was later revealed that an incendiary device had been placed inside the ballot box. Three ballots were destroyed.

Just 30 minutes down the road, a ballot box outside a bus station in Vancouver, Washington, was found on fire three hours later, KATU reported.The local news station captured footage of first responders and smoking ballots around 6:30 am local time, just under 24 hours after the last ballot pickup at that location, the Clark County elections auditor, Greg Kimsey told KATU. 

The box contained hundreds of ballots, of which only a few were saved. 

“It appears that a device was attached to the outside of the ballot drop box that resulted in the ballots being ignited,” Kimsey told The Oregonian. “We don’t have the exact number, but it was hundreds."

Though Vancouver typically leans blue, this year’s race for Washington’s 3rd Congressional district is a tight race between incumbent Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., and Republican challenger Joe Kent.

The apparent attacks come after at least 20 mail-in ballots in Arizona were similarly set on fire and destroyed in what authorities termed a "deliberate act of vandalism."

Kathy Griffin’s comeback wins the night at Carnegie Hall, despite Trumpian turbulence outside

Ramping up to a nail-biting election, a slew of people with steadfast political beliefs and questionable moral values descended on New York City from far and wide. They made their pilgrimage with intention, arriving in the city to attend an event held by their favorite former reality TV star. This was their chance to show their support for someone who amassed their loyal audience by “telling it like it is,” consequences be damned. 

When you leave out identifying details, it’s almost scary how similar crimson-haired comedian Kathy Griffin and political lightning rod Donald Trump are to one another. They both leveraged their fame for highly successful mid-aughts reality shows; they both used television to become zeitgeist staples for a new generation; and they both were investigated at a federal level. And yet, Griffin and Trump couldn’t be more different, which is why it’s almost cosmically funny that these rivals had shows scheduled for the same late October weekend, in the same city, 20 blocks apart. 

Griffin’s “My Life on the PTSD List” comedy tour stopped at New York’s historic Carnegie Hall Oct. 26, less than 24 hours before Trump took the stage for his rally at the decidedly less chic Madison Square Garden. Though the two events didn’t overlap, Trump’s presence marked the streets outside Griffin’s venue. The former president’s supporters parked their souped-up pickup trucks covered in tacky decals and flags outside Carnegie Hall, blasting Kid Rock music and holding styrofoam busts poorly made up to look like Griffin. (The shade of red chosen for the wig was all wrong.) 

While Trump’s rally was a queasy melange of racist insults and frightening promises, Griffin’s show was a spectacle of raw, force-of-nature talent. Her audience remained doubled over in laughter for two straight hours as the comedian worked her way through a laundry list of what she’s been through since Trump’s election in 2016. Like Griffin’s Emmy-winning Bravo show “My Life on the D-List,” the new standup tour deftly balances outrageous stories about Griffin’s celebrity run-ins with thoughtful ruminations on life, death and moving forward in the public eye. At 63, Griffin’s humor has never been more finely tuned; her timing is sharp, her anecdotes are fresh, and her callbacks are brilliant. “My Life on the PTSD List” is a middle finger to anyone who thought Kathy Griffin should lay down and die, performed by a woman who clawed her way back from being consumed by the very same thought. 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Griffin’s reluctance to shuffle into obscurity has certainly angered her dissenters, but the gaudy display of political extremism outside the show only excited Griffin’s fans, who rumbled about whether the comedian would address the nonsense on stage. After all, the styrofoam bust with the off-color wig was a riff on the infamous photo of Griffin holding a head made to look like a bloodied Trump. The blowback was immediate and severe from the moment the photo made its way online in 2017. Despite a quick apology from Griffin — an uncharacteristic move for the famously unapologetic comedian — it was too late: The backlash cost Griffin everything she had. To make matters worse, the photo resulted in Griffin being investigated by the Department of Justice and the Secret Service, landing her on the no-fly list and kneecapping any remaining prospects of live standup work. 

Griffin’s reluctance to shuffle into obscurity has certainly angered her dissenters

That experience alone would be enough material for a show about post-traumatic stress disorder, but as Griffin tells it, the worst moment of her life was only the beginning. A lung cancer diagnosis that would hamper her ability to speak followed in 2021 and a battle with prescription pill addiction was hot on its heels. At her lowest point, Griffin attempted suicide. “The worst part of trying to take your own life is waking up and finding out you weren’t successful,” Griffin told her Carnegie Hall audience, who responded with equal parts shock and laughter. The act is Griffin’s darkest yet, but you’d never know it by how the crowd responds. She prefaced the show by warning us that things would get scary but that she’d keep it funny, and that was a promise Griffin never went back on. 

After a well-deserved standing ovation opened her act, Griffin got to work, pausing occasionally to bask in the applause and cheers. She even deferred some of the acclaim to her mother, Maggie Griffin, who stole so many scenes in “My Life on the D-List” that she became a star in her own right before passing in 2020. Griffin mirrored the audience’s applause for Maggie, raising her hands toward Heaven before bowing back down in the direction of Hell. As the noise of the crowd doubled, Griffin comically crossed her fingers before moving on with the act. Moments later, as if by her mother’s divine intervention, Griffin’s Valentino belt popped off of her waist and hit the stage with a thud. A consummate professional, she turned it into a punchline and continued with the act.

Even if this tour is a victory lap of sorts, Griffin isn’t one to rest on her laurels. She made a name for herself in standup by bringing her audiences juicy insider stories about the celebrity elite, twisted into no-holds-barred anecdotes that turned her into a prickly figure in Hollywood. In her old standup specials, it’s not uncommon to hear Griffin hurl barbs like “slut” or “cokehead” at celebrities. But humor has changed in the internet age, and even if she is now basically uncancelable, Griffin has softened her touch accordingly, acknowledging that she is part of the tax bracket she lampoons. She tells tales of the trials that came with being Kim Kardashian’s neighbor, expressing surprise that Kardashian would ever want to associate with her after Griffin spent years calling Kardashian “a dirty whore.” 

Even if this tour is a victory lap of sorts, Griffin isn’t one to rest on her laurels

Griffin mines the polarity between her envelope-pushing persona and the buttoned-up glamour of A-List celebrity with aplomb to reveal that even the biggest stars are as absurd as the rest of us. Her stories about meeting a nude Sharon Stone for dinner, Sia’s penchant for bursting into song, and Jane Fonda making the world’s worst quesadilla are hysterical, but even those brushes with fame are kept grounded by Griffin’s perspective. Often, she’s telling tales that are born out of heartbreak and trauma, stressing that some of her funniest experiences with her fellow celebrities have been a result of Griffin enduring the relentless scrutiny she once lobbed at them.

There is no denying, though, that the microscope Griffin found herself under was far more crushing. When she dives into the Trump photo — or, as she refers to it: “a Halloween mask covered in ketchup” — and everything that it brought her, her act enters its most resonant stretch. Griffin knows how to make a meal out of her trauma, expertly peppering a whole lot of levity into the darkness. As Griffin began to talk about her suicide attempt, all the air left the room. But she counted on the crowd holding their breath and had a punchline ready to ease the tension.

“I thought, ‘Alright, I’m alone now, this is when I’m going to do it,’” she said. “Then, I’m not even kidding, I started walking around my house looking for ideas.” Griffin marched around the stage, mimicking the way she strolled through her home looking for ways to take her own life. Unable to fold herself into a massive decorative vase and roll herself into her pool, she settled on gulping down 100 benzos. It’s heavy, sure, but Griffin isn’t downplaying the macabre somberness of suicide, she’s emphasizing how silly and shortsighted our darkest impulses can be.

That’s a tricky line to walk, and it’s a balancing act that not every comedian can pull off. But after so many years in the business, Griffin understands how to maneuver her audience and keep them molded in her hands like putty. In a time when it seems like TikTok comedians are in constant competition to go viral by saying the most offensive things imaginable, Griffin reiterates that any comic worth their salt should keep the crowd in on the joke. A good standup comedian should walk hand-in-hand with their audience, traversing through the dark to emerge into the light together.

A memorable set will challenge a viewer as much as it informs and delights them, and Griffin’s “My Life on the PTSD List” dextrously manages to do all three. By the end of her two-hour set, Griffin was still charged with energy, perhaps thanks to the vocal chord implant she received just nine weeks prior which has strengthened her once-diminished voice back to its old thunder. With her outspoken, singular comedic voice restored, Griffin is stronger than she’s ever been. Toward the end of her act, she assured the crowd she wasn’t going anywhere. “I’m like this belt,” Griffin said, picking up her busted Valentino accessory and holding it up to the audience. “Broken, but still here.”

Costco recalls smoked salmon due to potential listeria contamination

Following a barrage of other similar recalls, Costco is now recalling its smoked salmon due to possible listeria contamination. 

According to John Towfighi with CNN, "Costco said certain packages of its Kirkland Signature Smoked Salmon purchased between Oct. 9 and Oct. 13 are affected by the recall, according to an Oct. 22 letter to customers." The recall specifically references lot number 8512801270, and any customers who have purchases the product should either dispose of it or return to Costco for a refund.

"The recall was initiated by the store’s smoked salmon supplier, Acme Smoked Fish Corp., which identified potential listeria bacteria in its product," Towfighi reported. "No illnesses have been reported." In an Oct. 22 letter, ACME Smoked Fish CEO Eduardo Carbajosa wrote, "We regret this unfortunate incident and have taken immediate corrective steps to ensure that this issue never happens again"

The long culinary history of pumpkins – from ancient Mexican soups to modern spiced lattes

October heralds the beginning of pumpkin season. Over the course of the month, they will be used for a variety of non-culinary purposes. In Belgium, they are hollowed out for boat races, and in Ludwigsburg, Germany, thousands of multi-coloured pumpkins are used to make seasonal sculpture parks. At the end of the month, they will be carved up with a ghoulish grin to celebrate Halloween, a tradition that is becoming increasingly popular across the globe.

Despite being harvested until December, for many, Halloween will mark the end of pumpkin season with the decorations unceremoniously binned. Studies show that just over half of the pumpkins bought in the UK each year (18,000 tonnes of them) go to waste uneaten. Many people don't even realise that pumpkins are edible.

But it hasn't always been this way: pumpkin carving is actually a fairly recent tradition, practiced in the US since around the 1890s. Before becoming the symbol of Halloween, pumpkins had a very long history as a foodstuff.

Like tomatoes, maize and potatoes, the pumpkin is indigenous to the Americas, with the earliest evidence of pumpkin consumption dating as far back as 8,000BC in Oaxaca, Mexico.

Pumpkins have come a long way since then, as Indigenous American communities carefully adapted the wild pumpkin into successively bigger and better-tasting varieties. These weren't all the bright orange we're familiar with: white, green and yellow varieties were also common, mixed in with squashes (a genetically identical relation).

In pre-colonial America, there were a host of different ways to prepare the vegetable, as pumpkin historian Cindy Ott explains. She wrote that Indigenous communities ate pumpkins in soups, roasted them on embers, made them into sauces and baked them into a "bread".

Pumpkins and squash were commonly grown and eaten with maize and beans; a combination sometimes called the "three sisters".

The rise of the 'pompion'

The pumpkin only came to Europe in the 1500s, following the invasion of the Americas. This new vegetable wasn't as much of a surprise to Europeans as we might expect: gourds, cucumbers and melons are from the same family as pumpkins, Curcubitaceae, and the plants all look very similar, with trailing vines and large golden flowers.

In European languages, the new plant was given the name of these more familiar foods, so that in English and French it became the pompion (another name for melons), in Italian the zucca and in German the kürbis (both names for gourds).

All these overlapping names caused some confusion. In 1640, botanist John Parkinson wrote of "gourds or millions, or pompions, or whatsoever else you please to call them".

The recipes that pumpkins are best known for in today's Anglo-American cuisine come from this era of food history. "Pumpion" pies started to appear in English recipe books in the 1660s, but they weren't much like today's versions.

An early printed recipe was written by Hannah Woolley, an English writer who published books on household management, in 1672. It instructs the reader to fry egg-coated slices, mix these with raisins, sugar and fortified wine then place the mixture in a pie dish on top of apples. A little different maybe, but it doesn't sound too bad.

The apple association stayed strong in England. Another method, recorded in 1735, was to scoop out the pulp, mix it with chopped apples and sugar, bake this in the hollowed pumpkin, then eat it spread on bread. The author was careful to note that this meal was "too strong for persons of weak stomachs, and only proper for country people who use much exercise" – so be careful if you try this at home.

The pie recipes followed a longer tradition of sweet-and-savoury pies which were popular in England at the time. This is also where we get the typical "pumpkin spice" from. These pies were made with artichokes, sweet and ordinary potatoes, and even earlier with parsnips, skirrets and eryngoes (once popular root vegetables). They were mixed with the go-to expensive spices of the day: cinnamon, nutmeg, mace, cloves, ginger and sugar. Maybe we should be calling it the "skirret spice latte".

As Europeans steadily colonised America over the 17th century, they brought with them their familiar recipes, including spiced pies. Here, in the home of pumpkins, they had an abundance to make them from.

The steady rise of Halloween in the globalised age suggests our current waste issue will get worse before it gets better. Reviving the egg-apple-pumpkin pie might not be the solution, but there are plenty of other ways we can use these versatile vegetables. Remembering that pumpkins had millennia of history as a food before they were a decoration is one step on the way.


           
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.The Conversation


 

Serin Quinn, PhD Candidate, Department of History, University of Warwick

 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

“Somebody Somewhere”: Tim Bagley enlists hope, faith and St. Louis sushi to make his role sing

Tim Bagley had no idea what St. Louis sushi was before he joined “Somebody Somewhere.” The oddball appetizer — pickle slathered in cream cheese and wrapped in ham — is his character Brad Schraeder’s signature dish and one of the first ways the show’s star duo Sam (Bridget Everett) and Joel (Jeff Hiller) get to know him. The other comes before they taste it, at a voice recital where Brad inelegantly blasts through a recitation of Francesco Durante’s solfeggio “Danza danza fanciulla gentile."

As for Brad’s culinary coup, “The day that we shot that scene, I googled it and saw that it was a real thing, and it looked horrible to me, and it is,” he said. 

But he also understands why something like that would make sense on a post-recital reception table in Manhattan, KS. “A lot of times in the Midwest they'll have food like that that’s just gross. And I grew up on that food, so I say that lovingly.”

“Anyway,” Bagley added, “I've never had it before or since. And that was really fun the way that they introduced my character: I'm responsible for giving them both explosive diarrhea. And how could that possibly work out in any way for anybody to be friends with me?”

If you love TV, especially comforting TV, Bagley is anything but a stranger. Long before he joined “Somebody Somewhere,” he appeared in classics such as “Coach,” “Wings” and “Seinfeld,” and had a recurring part in “Will & Grace” before stealing the show out from under Lily Tomlin and Jane Fonda whenever he appeared on “Grace and Frankie.”  

“Somebody Somewhere” and Brad are closer in temperament to who he truly is than the many gigantic personas he’s played in other shows. Brad is a gentle, prayerful man who wins Joel’s heart and ours by extension. 

"The things that people love usually are just horrible people behaving badly, and this is a very sweet, gentle, kind show that's all about possibilities and hope."

In the tender comedy’s third and final season, which premiered Sunday night, Joel and Brad have joined their lives and homes, creating some of the sweeter season premiere scenes in which they have barely-there conflicts over how to arrange their kitchen items. Elsewhere, Sam’s sister Tricia (Mary Catherine Garrison) relaunches her life as a divorced, successful entrepreneur whose curse word throw pillows are an Etsy hit.

This inadvertently leaves Sam, who’s still grieving their sister’s death, alone to figure out how to move forward in life, and the first glimpse of her navigating this unexpected bout of loneliness is heartbreaking. 

But “Somebody Somewhere” frames this grief as part of being alive, something Bagley appreciates. “This show is very hopeful about humanity and people, and it deals a lot with kindness.” This makes it unusual TV fare, Bagley adds, citing that HBO was also home to “Succession.” 

“The things that people love usually are just horrible people behaving badly, and this is a very sweet, gentle, kind show that's all about possibilities and hope," he said. "That's something that we collectively need in our culture.” 

In our conversation about the third season, Bagley spoke about the show's loving depiction of Brad's faith, how its stories capture its theme of growth and what it was like to sing again.

This interview transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Were you a fan of "Somebody Somewhere" before the script came to you?

I watched the show and loved it. It's absolutely my sensibility — it's funny, and it's very full of heart, all the things that I love in comedy. So I loved it instantly. And then I got a call … I didn't have to audition. It was a straight offer. They wanted to use me and I think initially it was just going to be three episodes, and then they just kept writing them.  

People know you from so many different shows. This, I think, is going to be an interesting juxtaposition, to someone who remembers all the scene-stealing you did in “Grace and Frankie,” and your work in “The Perfect Couple.” There’s such dynamism and difference between those roles and this. And I'm wondering what you wanted to bring out in Brad that may resonate with you.

Oh, that's a good question. I think of myself as somebody who has climbed my own mountain, kind of figured everything out on my own, with some similar obstacles that Brad had. I just kind of quietly have been walking on this path for a very long time on my own, and I've had relationships and things like that.

"I can't even tell you what a thrill it is to play a fully realized gay character."

But what I responded to [is], I noticed that Brad was somebody that was kind of climbing his own mountain — doing these voice lessons, knowing that he's not a great singer, but it makes him feel good to do it. I love that. Then also having the religious part. Back in the day before churches were really open and welcoming to LGBTQ people — before there was even LGBTQ, it was just gay people or lesbians, is what it was — I would leave the church once they would start talking about gays, homosexuals and murderers and pedophiles all in the same thing.

Eventually, I left, like, maybe six different churches, and I couldn't find one that supported gay people. And so I thought, OK, I'm going to do institutional religion, I'll have a private relationship with God. And that's still a part of my life. And so I really identified with that part of Brad too. There's a spiritual side to him that’s going to be unwavering, no matter what the Church says or does.

Does that make sense?

It makes absolute sense. When I spoke to Jeff [Hiller], he said it was very meaningful to have this story that is not just about a small town in the Midwest that's depicted in a way that you don't usually see, but also a place where there's a faith center that's all welcoming, and it isn't seen as an outlier. It's a natural part of the community's weave. And the thing that I loved about this season so much was seeing how Brad and Joel have to find a way to merge their lives. . . while figuring out what they want in terms of their spiritual paths.

Right. . . I just feel like it's a fully developed relationship between two gay men that includes spirituality. People that, at our age, are moving in together, and trying to figure out how to bring somebody into your life no matter what age you are can be tricky. And I can't even tell you what a thrill it is to play a fully realized gay character or a character that happens to be gay.

We need your help to stay independent

This season captures a different way of considering the show’s overarching theme of moving forward. At first, I thought it was “moving on,” but now I don't. I mean, the show itself is asking all of us to move on since it's ending. But I think about this being a show that debuted in the middle of a pandemic when everybody was retreating, and it opened up a different part of the world and showed sunshine and possibility.

You're somebody who has seen it since the beginning and became a part of it in the middle season. How do you think that this final season will leave us — and how did it leave you?

"Everything is not tied up in a little bow."

Well, everything is not tied up in a little bow. It left me kind of feeling like the continuum of life continues. It just kind of goes on, and who knows what's going to happen with these characters? Unless some other network picks us up or something. But it's just the continuum of life and how Bridget — who plays her role so beautifully, and it's just so heartbreaking – [shows] we all can grow. We can all learn, and no matter how old you are, you can continue to grow and be curious about life and, like you said, move forward. My hope is that people get encouraged to maybe take voice lessons, or maybe not be afraid to go on a date if you're a certain age, or, whatever it might be. To be open to what life has to offer you. No matter what age you are, you can continue learning and being curious and moving forward.

One of the things that Jeff said was that music is the unspoken other main character in the ensemble, which we see in the song that you perform this year. I know some things transform in the writing and then in the actual execution of the scene, and I'm curious to know what that was like for you.

You know, my character in season two’s second episode sings in front of people, and he's not real good, but, you know, I did it to the best of my ability. I knew that way they could see that Brad was not a great singer, but he was really serious about it.

Then Bridget kind of showed me how to sing something personal and my character had never really done that. How did I approach it? I learned the song, but then what I really wanted to do was I wanted to get everything that I needed in that moment off of Bridget and off of Jeff.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


And I mean, I don't know if I should be saying this, but I listened to a specific song on my headphones before we shot the scene. That is a very optimistic song because I wanted it to not be sad for me, but to be really trying to show him how much I love [Joel], you know. And then to be with Bridget and to look into that beautiful face and have her giving me all this support and love, letting me know it's okay like . . . everything that I needed was kind of right there with those two. Does that make sense?

Yes. And now I want to know what song you were listening to. Unless that’s too personal.

Yes, sure. I hope that doesn't ruin it for people. But it was a song from Sounds of Blackness called “Optimistic.” It's just a beautiful, uplifting song about going through life and all the troubles and remaining optimistic and all the things that we have to be grateful for.

Why would you think that would ruin the surprise for people?

Because it's like telling people how the sausage is made.

But the sausage is good! We’re still going to eat the sausage. And now I’m going to go listen to Sounds of Blackness.

They're so good. To me that's one of my go-tos for any time I want to feel really good. Their catalog of music is so powerful and positive and uplifting, and I don't know, it gets me feeling connected. I didn't even tell Bridget Jeff or anybody. I've never told anybody what I was listening to beforehand, but it put me in the right frame of mind to be in that moment.

Was that intentional not telling them?

No, I just didn't tell them. It's like, sometimes actors like to have secrets of how they work. And to me, that was, you know, something that I didn't really want to tell them. I just knew that it was going to be the thing that put me in that moment, in a way that I wanted to be present.

I think that's one of the reasons that this series is so magical, because you can sense all that feeling. It translates into visuals very well.

You know, to me, the thing about acting is setting yourself up in the right circumstances. All you have to do is look into the face of the person and listen to what they're saying, and everything is just right there. Like Jeff, you know his face, he's so sweet and wonderful. And every time I look at his face, I fall in love with him.

New episodes of "Somebody Somewhere" debut 10:30 p.m. Sundays on HBO and stream on Max.

“Top Chef” alum Nini Nguyen’s new cookbook is an “extra-special” love letter to Vietnamese food

"Top Chef" remains a fan favorite for a host of reasons: top-notch hosting, meticulous judging, abundant expertise, and food that both looks and sounds delicious. Yet, as a television show, it relies on more than just appetizing dishes; memorable personalities are key to drawing in new viewers and keeping audiences engaged.

In recent seasons, one standout personality has been Chef Nini Nguyen. She made an impact during her debut on "Top Chef: Kentucky" and later returned just one season later for "Top Chef: All-Stars L.A." With her charisma, humor, and entertaining confessionals, Nguyen brought a levity to the show that not all cheftestants manage to achieve. She quickly became a fan favorite — not just for her lively personality, but also for her impressive dishes, which consistently looked and sounded outstanding.

As noted by her "Top Chef" bio on the Bravo website, Nguyen "started as a pastry cook at restaurants like Coquette and Eleven Madison Park" before working with Dinner Lab and Cook Space, where she taught classes, hosted pop-up dinners and private events before going all-in on online cooking classes in 2020 and beyond. 

Now, Nguyen is releasing her first cookbook, the amazingly colorful and bright "Dac Biet: An Extra-Special Vietnamese Cookbook," which she has dedicated to her late younger brother, Bobby. Nguyen captures that same joie de vive from the show throughout the pages of the book, writing openly and candidly while sharing incredible-sounding food (and complete with truly stunning photography). It's one of my favorite new cookbooks released this year.

In the introduction of the book, Nguyen writes that Vietnamese food “is very herbaceous, very textural, and very much in balance, in that it only takes a few components to get the result that you want. Whether it's a bunch of family-style dishes served separately, or all grouped together in a bowl, every element — salty, sour, bitter, spicy, or sweet —plays a key role in your meal." 

You see this come through in every recipe, including her ginger-braised chicken, which I made recently. It was absolutely tantalizing, came together in under a half hour and called for only a handful of ingredients. I can't recommend it enough.

Salon recently had the opportunity to speak with Nguyen about the cookbook, her time on "Top Chef," how the pandemic influenced her career and what's to come next.

The following interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length. 

Chef Nini NguyenChef Nini Nguyen (William Hereford)

For those unaware of your journey since Top Chef, can you break it down for them?

I competed in two seasons of Top Chef and honestly, the pandemic is what really shaped who I am today. The second season, which was the All-Stars season, aired during the pandemic and that’s when I started offering online cooking classes. Those classes helped me build a wonderful audience and they’re a big reason I’m where I am today.

Do you have a number-one favorite ingredient to work with?

My secret weapon is fish sauce — it’s magic. But when it comes to favorites, I absolutely love working with fresh herbs. They just elevate everything.

Did you prefer the experience of one of your "Top Chef" seasons over the other?

The "All-Stars" season was hands down my favorite! Watching seasoned chefs go head-to-head was amazing. Cooking competitions are a whole different ballgame compared to cooking in a restaurant kitchen. It was eye-opening and really helped me grow as a competition chef.

If yet another "All Stars" were to be planned or another opportunity to compete on the show arose, would you be open to a third round?

Oh no, I’m good! I think I’ve had my fill of competing on "Top Chef." I’d love to judge, though! There are so many incredible chefs coming up and I’m all about making room for fresh talent.

What was the biggest lesson or takeaway you gleaned from competing in "Top Chef" twice?

The biggest lesson I learned? It’s okay if you don’t win. I was pretty heartbroken the first time, but doing it a second time made me realize just being there is an honor. The experience doesn’t break you—it makes you stronger and helps your career.

What stands out for you as a formative moment that got you into cooking or food at large?

I’ve always loved cooking. But graduating in 2008-2009 during the recession, I knew my degree wasn’t going to land me a high-paying job. So, I decided to cook because it was something I truly loved.

Dac BietDac Biet: An Extra-Special Vietnamese Cookbook by Nini Nguyen (Photo courtesy of Penguin Random House)

What would you say are your three most used ingredients?

Rice, fish sauce and onions — they’re staples in my kitchen.

What is your favorite cooking memory?

It might sound cliché, but going to the market on Saturdays with my grandma and cooking with her is my favorite memory. Family cooking moments are the best.

What’s your biggest tip for cutting down on food waste?

Save your trimmings! I keep everything — onions, celery, veggie scraps — to make broth. Same with bones! And if you buy shrimp, get them with the shells on; that makes amazing shrimp stock for all sorts of dishes.

How do you practice sustainability in your cooking?

I grew up in a household where wasting food just wasn’t an option. We ate seasonally and that’s a great way to be sustainable. It makes everything taste better, plus it’s exciting to look forward to seasonal ingredients each year.

You’ve been on many shows since appearing on "Top Chef." How do they compare? How do the competition —and anxiety — levels differ?

"Top Chef" was tough on my confidence, but "All-Stars" really helped me bounce back. I took a break from competitive cooking because it’s so stressful. I’m back now on a new network, but it’s more playful for me this time around.

Is there a particular dish from your "Top Chef" tenure that you are still especially proud of?

Definitely my Masa Ball Soup! I made matzo balls with masa harina in a Tom Kha broth. It made other chefs so jealous — I loved that. I just wish I had nailed the masa balls. It would’ve been epic!

What did the "Top Chef" incubator teach you? I spoke with Buddha just after his win last year and he referenced how it can be so great to singularly focus on cooking — not bills, not customers, not the daily minutiae of running or working in restaurants, etcetera/ 

It taught me how to be present and make friends. I made a ton of chef friends and I definitely learned from them. But honestly, it was stressful. Buddha can say he enjoyed it because he won, but it was a lot for me!

In your book, I love the "architecture of the banh mi" section, as well as some of the other super-detailed step-by-step visual breakdown pages. Can you speak a bit to the development of those section?

I’m a visual learner and I think a lot of people are, too. So, I wanted to show how things work in my brain — how to set up, prep and host. Developing those sections was so much fun and I’m grateful my editors loved the idea too!

What does it mean to be "dac biet"?

"Dac Biet" means "extra special." It’s the best way to describe who I am, how I cook and how I like to live! I’m loving that people are starting to associate me with the term—especially now on book tour. It’s everywhere!

Banh Khot, Coconut Crispy Rice CrepesBanh Khot, Coconut Crispy Rice Crepes (Photo courtesy of Penguin Random House)

Your cooking classes were all the rage throughout the pandemic. Can you talk a bit about how you pivoted to that  and what you've been prioritizing since?

The cooking classes during the pandemic were so much fun! Honestly, I wish they were still in demand because it was such a special time. Even though the pandemic was scary, I loved being able to stay at home but still connect with so many people through these virtual classes. I’ve made friends all over the country through them — it's been such a blessing. I’ve seen people move, have babies and grow in their lives — and they’ve been part of mine too. I even met Jo, who works with me now, through these classes!

Before that, I had run a cooking school in Brooklyn, so teaching has always been a passion of mine. I love showing people how to cook and building that connection, especially when everyone was craving that during such an isolating time. It was truly one of the most rewarding experiences and I’m so thankful for everyone who joined me during that period. Teaching is still a big priority for me and I’ll always be grateful for how much it’s shaped my journey.

I'd love to hear a bit about the Vietnamese food and culture in NOLA and how it's influenced you, both personally and professionally?

Being Vietnamese and growing up in New Orleans is such a unique experience. There are so many beautiful similarities between the two cultures and I try to highlight that in my book. It’s part of my identity and I love showing the world that people like me are here, making our mark in American culture.

What makes Dac Biet "extra special"?

It’s the way I add a little extra to everything — flavors, textures and techniques. My recipes are traditional, but I add chef twists to make them stand out. This book is my way of preserving Vietnamese culture as I know it and I hope people can connect with it — whether they’re Southeast Asian or not.

Do you have a favorite recipe in the book? Or even just a favorite section or chapter?

I can’t pick a favorite recipe — they’re all my babies! But I do love the Món Nhậu (drinking snacks) chapter. It’s playful and I’m a big fan of throwing a party with fun snacks and cocktails!

Flaky meat piesFlaky meat pies (Photo courtesy of Penguin Random House)

Is there a recipe in the book that you think is perfect for those new to Vietnamese cuisine or cooking at large? And is there a more involved recipe in the book that you think would make for a great weekend project?

If you're new to Vietnamese cooking, I’d recommend starting with the Gà Kho Gừng — ginger-braised chicken. It’s actually the most popular recipe people make as their first introduction to Vietnamese cuisine from the book. It’s simple but packed with flavor and it's a great way to dive into those classic Vietnamese flavors without feeling overwhelmed.

For a weekend project, I’d suggest the Patê Sô — Vietnamese meat pies. They’re really fun to make. You can even cheat and use store-bought puff pastry!

We need your help to stay independent

I know that you'll be filming something new soon. Would we be able to get a hint at what that might be? 

Ooh, I can’t spill too much, but I will say it’s for Food Network and Max and it’s the second season of something . . . that’s all I can share for now!

What's next for you, ideally?

In a perfect world, I’d love to turn Dac Biet into a restaurant! I want to focus on hyper-local ingredients — seafood from Vietnamese fishermen in the Gulf and produce from the farmers in the neighborhood I grew up in. I want to create a space where people can experience true Vietnamese cuisine in New Orleans.

“Hot Ones”: Ali Wong reminisces on the most cathartic scene she shot for Netflix’s “Beef”

Following the release of her fourth original comedy special for Netflix, Ali Wong tested her luck with extra spicy chicken wings on this week’s episode of “Hot Ones.” The acclaimed comedian, actor and writer took a trip down memory lane to discuss her early days doing stand-up and shooting the hit Netflix series “Beef.”

“I read that the first place you ever did stand-up was at the BrainWash Cafe on Folsom Street in San Francisco,” host Sean Evans said shortly after he and Wong enjoyed their first wing. “Can you paint the picture for what an open mic showcase hosted by Tony Sparks might have looked and felt like for a performer onstage?”

Wong — who was surprised by the question (“Oh my gosh, this is a deep cut!”) — said, “It was like, literally half cafe, half laundromat, 100% homeless shelter. And the show would start at 5 p.m. and you’d do three minutes to people jerking off into their eggs and folding their laundry. And a lot of comics judging you. And it was great.”

After talking about other San Francisco comedy venues, Evans pivoted the conversation to “Beef,” asking Wong what scene from the show was the most cathartic and fun to shoot. She mentioned the scene where her character, Amy Lau, pulls out a gun after discovering that Danny Cho (played by Steven Yeun) has urinated all over her floor.

“I like that one a lot. That was scary because…it was a lot of dialogue and I had never done something like that before and we were really limited on time, so I knew we only had like three takes,” she said.

Wong continued, “I liked getting a piggyback ride from Steven at the end. That was really funny. That was fun because every time I would get on his back, he would ‘pop’ a little bit. So I have fond memories of that.”

Elsewhere in her interview, Wong spoke about having the dress from her first Netflix stand-up special “Baby Cobra” be displayed at the Smithsonian. Wong said her kids, ex-husband and boyfriend Bill Hader all saw the exhibit when they came to Washington D.C. to watch her perform at the Kennedy Center. 

“To have all of them with me, just as meaningful as the dress itself, you know, being in the museum,” she told Evans. 


Want more great food writing and recipes? Subscribe to Salon Food's newsletter, The Bite.


“I was shocked I was so emotional. And my daughter Mari, who I was pregnant with at the time, she pointed at it and she was so excited. She was like, ‘That’s me in there!’” Wong reminisced on visiting the exhibit. “I think even more meaningful than that is when people dress up in a striped dress and shove a pillow under there for Halloween. It’s happened every year since, and that’s probably my favorite thing — that’s my favorite superlative that’s happened.”

Wong is currently promoting her new comedy special “Single Lady” along with Netflix’s upcoming animated series “Jentry Chau Vs. The Underworld.”

Watch the full episode below, via YouTube: