Help keep Salon independent

When natural disaster strikes, the legacy of Ronald Reagan haunts

It’s long been a cliché that Republicans are against the government until disaster strikes. At a 1986 press conference, Ronald Reagan uttered the words “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help” as an irony-laden expression of Republican distrust and suspicion of the federal government. An argument could be made that Trumpism has only amplified the anti-government ideology that has been the heart and soul of the GOP for decades. Yet those exact words are expressed by the actions of thousands of federal government employees fanned out over the states of Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, South Carolina and Virginia to help with rescue and cleanup operations in the wake of Hurricane Helene last week.

Politics and disaster relief don’t mix.

Congressman Jeff Jackson, who represents the 14th District of North Carolina, located to the west of Charlotte, sent a message Monday outlining the needs of the mountainous region of the Tar Heel state, hardest hit by what he called a “once-in-500-year flood.” Governor Roy Cooper’s request for a declaration of disaster was swiftly approved by President Joe Biden, who did the same for Florida before the storm even touched down.  The North Carolina National Guard has dispatched hundreds of troops, large trucks and other vehicles capable of driving through high water, helicopters, and tents to the region. They’re delivering badly needed food and water to areas of the state that are completely cut off because of flood damage to roads and are supplementing search and rescue teams that have surged into North Carolina, Georgia and the other hard-hit states searching for flood victims. According to Jackson, the National Guard has done more than 100 rescues of people cut off by floods, and the search for more continues. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has sent more than 3,000 employees into affected states to help with search and rescue operations and to supply needed food and water to affected areas. North Carolina Department of Transportation has 1,600 people on the ground clearing fallen trees and power lines so that roads can be reopened to reach villages and towns cut off by the floods. News film from North Carolina has shown at least one town completely wiped out by massive flooding. States not hit by Hurricane Helene are sending rescue crews and electrical linemen to help restore power. According to Jackson, two days ago, there were as many as a million people without power, a number that has been reduced to 400,000 as power lines are repaired and substations that were flooded are cleaned up and rehabbed. 

Communications are being restored by emergency cell towers that have been erected in areas of Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee where they were knocked out. The emergency towers will provide “disaster roaming” so that cell phones using any network can access them. 

Helene was one of the largest and most powerful hurricanes to hit the United States in decades. Coming ashore as a Category 4, the storm was hundreds of miles wide and caused extremes of rainfall hundreds of miles inland from the Gulf Coast, where its storm surge flooded towns, knocked out power, and caused widespread devastation. By late afternoon on Monday, more than 130 people had been killed by flooding, fallen trees, and other disastrous results of the hurricane, and North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper told reporters that he expected that number to go up.

So many bridges were destroyed throughout the region that the Army Corps of Engineers is moving emergency “bridging solutions” into Tennessee and North Carolina and Georgia, according to NBC News. Damage in the Lake Lure/Chimney Rock area of North Carolina is being described as post-apocalyptic, with the lake’s surface almost completely covered by debris from destroyed houses, docks, and commercial buildings. 

Only state governments and the federal government are large enough and have access to enough resources to deal with devastation of this magnitude. After rescue operations and the supply of immediate food, water, and shelter needs are concluded, it will take months just to clean up the damage done by the storm. Photos of some of the towns show carpets of two-by-fours and roof rafters where homes and businesses once stood. Cars and light trucks were tossed around by the flooding as if they were toys.   

We need your help to stay independent

Donald Trump visited Valdosta, Georgia on Monday. The campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris canceled her scheduled events Monday and she returned to Washington D.C. for in-person briefs on the recovery efforts. She is expected to begin visiting affected areas on Tuesday.

Politics will inevitably enter the picture of the reaction to this storm as it has after others. Already, a Tennessee legislator has been quoted as saying that the federal declaration of emergency necessary for FEMA relief was “finally” given, as if the White House was late in granting it. Actually, the White House approved a federal disaster declaration immediately after the governor of Tennessee asked for it. All states affected by Hurricane Helene have received a federal declaration of disaster, setting in motion federal emergency relief through FEMA and other federal agencies.

In 2019, Donald Trump redirected $271 million, including $155 million from FEMA, to efforts on the Mexican border to stem the flow of refugees, reducing the amount of disaster relief available to Puerto Rico for Hurricane Dorian. In 2020, Trump took $44 billion from FEMA’s disaster relief fund to pay for a $300 per month supplement to regular unemployment benefits. Trump looted the FEMA funds because he refused to urge Congress to approve a bill to extend the additional $600 a month unemployment relief passed by the CARES Act when it was held up by Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in the Senate. 

Politics and disaster relief don’t mix. The money being spent today to help victims of Hurricane Helene in southeastern states does not come from “spending,” to use Republican’s favorite word for federal money that doesn’t go into the budget of the Department of Defense. It comes from a rational and empathetic desire to help people in need. 

Sure, those are voters in North Carolina and Georgia who need help from the federal government. But they’re taxpayers, too. It’s their tax money that will be spent to bring the affected states back from the disaster that hit them. It’s all of our tax money, and it’s from our federal government, and it’s there to help, and support for it shouldn’t have to be dragged out of one of our two political parties every time a FEMA bill comes up for a vote. 

Birkin bags: Pricey purses or smart investments?

I can’t remember the first time I learned about Birkin bags. Knowing my TV-watching habits, it was either from an episode of “Sex and the City” (Season 4, Episode 11) or “Gilmore Girls” (Season 6, Episode 6).

In the former, Samantha tries to buy a Birkin bag straight from the store, only to be told there’s a shocking five-year waiting list. In the latter, Rory is given a Birkin bag by her wealthy boyfriend Logan, not realizing what the bag means as a status symbol.

But a Birkin is more than just a fancy purse — it’s also an investment. On average, the value of a Birkin bag has increased about 14% per year, while the S&P 500, the stock market benchmark, increased about 10% on average. 

So what makes a purse a potentially better investment than the 500 biggest companies in the U.S.? 

First off, what the heck is a Birkin bag?

If you’re not tuned into pop culture, here’s a quick primer on what a Birkin bag is. Named for actress and singer Jane Birkin, these stylish and roomy purses were first made by Hermès — a French leather producer with a storied history dating back to the 1830s — in the 1980s. Since then, they’ve become a status symbol.

Buying a Hermès bag is not like buying any other kind of luxury bag. If you want to buy a Louis Vuitton, Gucci or Prada bag, you can simply visit the showroom or the retailer’s website and purchase one immediately. 

However, buying a Birkin bag is much more complicated. According to Dallas-based stylist Bobbi Schwartz, you need to pick a specific Hermès store — ideally one near you — and buy other items there before you can be added to the waitlist for a Birkin. Often, the pre-spend before getting your coveted bag is two times or more the cost of the bag. And no, shopping online at Hermes.com doesn’t count. 

“It’s really about creating a solid relationship,” Schwartz said. “You cannot walk into that store and try to get a Birkin bag.”

If you want a Birkin bag right now, you can always buy one from a second-hand seller like eBay, The Real Real, Poshmark or even an auction house like Sotheby’s. The challenge with this is that the market is flooded with counterfeits. You will want to make sure to have a bag authenticated before buying it. 

Like any other kind of good, Birkin bags are subject to the laws of supply and demand. Because Hermès does not produce enough Birkin bags to cover demand, exclusivity remains high year after year, which protects value.

Also, Birkin bags are much more expensive even compared to other designer purses. You can buy a purse from one of the afore-mentioned designers for a few thousand bucks, but a Birkin bag starts at about $10,000, and the price can go much higher if you are interested in an exotic leather. 

We need your help to stay independent

How to protect your investment

First, if you have a Birkin bag, make sure it’s insured. Your renters or homeowners insurance can provide coverage if it’s damaged in a fire, tornado or hurricane. Of course, you will usually have to pay a deductible to file a claim. The size of your deductible will depend on your specific policy.

However, it may not be covered if it’s stolen. Rob Baker, part owner of Lowder Insurance Agency, said he called three major insurance providers and none of them said they cover purse theft as part of a homeowners policy.

“If it’s stolen, you’re out of luck,” he said.

If you want to get your Birkin covered for theft, you may have to search for a boutique or specialty firm to get insurance.

So should I buy a Birkin or invest in the S&P 500?

Birkin bags are less liquid than most types of investments. If you want to cash in on your investment, you’ll have to find a specific buyer. Depending on what you price it at, it can take hours, days or even longer to sell. If you sell a Birkin bag through a third-party retailer, they’ll also take a cut of the proceeds. 

For example, the Real Real currently takes a 30% cut if you sell anything for more than $5,000. Some people — depending on the color, size and condition of their Birkin — may lose money on the resale market, especially when considering commissions.

Selling an investment is generally much simpler. If you want to cash out shares of an index fund or stock, you can simply visit your online brokerage or investment company’s website and click “sell.”

Buying a share in the stock market is much more accessible, solely because you can start with as little as a few dollars. You don’t need $10,000 to begin investing. With fractional investing, you can buy a share of an index fund for only $5. But you can’t buy a scrap of a purse — you have to have the entire amount. 

 

JD Vance isn’t just thin-skinned — he thinks whining is a winning political strategy

To know Sen. JD Vance is to dislike him. The Ohio Republican was relatively unknown to most Americans before Donald Trump picked him as a running mate, and few, if any, politicians have garnered such a negative reaction in such a short period. It's not just his rants about "childless cat ladies." Focus groups show that voters are well aware that, while Vance publicly praises Trump like he's a god, he talks smack about his boss behind his back. But I suspect, like Heather "Digby" Parton wrote at Salon Monday, "his nasty, cold personality" is a factor in Vance's unpopularity.

Vance can't seem to speak without whining. Every interview with him is a grievance-fest where he plays the victim of "the media," lies while falsely accusing his opponents of lying, and acts put out by inconsequential nonsense. He's as full of self-pity as Trump. Vance can be even more aggravating because, by all accounts, has a great life well beyond what he deserves: a beautiful family he doesn't appear to appreciate, a Senate seat purchased for him by a tech billionaire, and millions of dollars, despite not offering any real value to society or the economy. 

Vance's tendency to whine ad nauseam has not gone unnoticed. Jess Bidgood of the New York Times wrote a report Friday of how Vance reacts to even the most minor press questions with a torrent of complaining, such as when a local TV station reporter asked Vance about Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, whose Republican campaign for North Carolina's gubernatorial seat has been gone up in smoke after it was revealed he bragged about being a "black NAZI."

“I knew I’d get this,” Vance said, throwing one hand up with the air of a parent allowing a troublesome child to have his say, instead of a candidate for vice president answering a reasonable question.

As Bidgood notes, Vance reacts to practically every question this way, as if he can't believe reporters are even allowed to ask questions, even though they usually only do so after Vance invites them. Adam Wren of Politico also wrote on Saturday about Vance's relentless bellyaching. Often, reporters don't even get the question out before Vance is crying about it, encouraging the crowd of MAGA supporters to boo so loudly that the reporter can't be heard. 


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


On Sunday, David Frum of the Atlantic argued that Vance "seethes with petty peevishness." But Frum also appears to believe that Vance is acting like a brat on accident. For instance, Vance threw a fit on CNN after host Dana Bash asked him why he lies about Haitians eating cats. The freshman senator insisted he was forced to lie by "the media," because they otherwise won't cover the stories he wants them to. Frum paints this tantrum as a "mistake," an impulsive admission by a thin-skinned bully who let his ego get the better of him. Frum also views Vance's aggrieved responses whenever he's asked about "cat ladies" in the same light, as Vance's childish inability to control his petulant emotions. 

The would-be vice president is a man who spends an excessive amount of time online and in conversation with alt-right, incel-adjacent posters and Elon Musk.

Perhaps, but looking at the reporting from the New York Times and Politico — and adding my own experience observing Vance — I'd say the likelier explanation is that Vance thinks whining is a political strategy. The would-be vice president is a man who spends an excessive amount of time online and in conversation with alt-right, incel-adjacent posters and Elon Musk. He inhabits a space populated by right-wing windbags who have convinced each other, through endless repetition, that they are the most put-upon people in history. Having spent that much time in that toxic brew, Vance has come to believe that griping non-stop is political gold. 

It's been well-documented how much of Vance's linguistic tics, allusions, and ideas stem from what Martyn Wendell Jones of the Bulwark describes as the "hyper-online far-right milieu." Vance was mentored and funded by Silicon Valley billionaires who imagine themselves to be bold and edgy thinkers because they embrace "neo-reactionary" views, which is just a fancy term for fascism. It's a movement that imagines itself to be intellectually heady, replete with allusions to ancient writers and philosophers that mostly go unread. In practice, as Ginny Hogan at the Nation wrote, it's mostly defined by the childish behavior of men who should have outgrown this long ago: silly memes, lazy trolling and lots of whining.

Nothing is too small or light to avoid being sucked into the vortex of the extremely online right's decade-plus of endless griping. As Hogan documents, Vance caterwauled about everything, from TV shows being "woke" to — always — "cat ladies." It's a world full of men like Musk and Vance, who think they are unbearably clever but are incapable of even coming up with a new way to insult people, beyond accusing them of having pets. The result is a life of perpetual outrage because the rest of the world seems uninterested in flattering them endlessly about how they are the greatest, smartest, funniest, best boys of all time. 

In the dull world of the extremely online right, where "cat lady" is forever the sickest of burns, it is also common to mistake throwing a tantrum for strength. "Free speech" is defined as "we speak, you listen — and faint in adoration." Live in that space long enough and you start to think that yelling at a reporter for asking a question isn't embarrassing behavior. No, in the online MAGA world, sputtering "How dare you!" at a journalist for doing their job is regarded as a feat of strength on par with storming the beach at Normandy. It's tempting to see Vance whining yet again and assume that he's sorely in need of therapy. That may be so, but it's also true that his online space is a culture where whimpering like a spoiled child is mistaken for toughness, and he's forgotten that most people are rightfully grossed out by it. 

Social media generally breeds this problem of people getting so enmeshed in their subcultures that they forget that most people don't share their jargon or euphemisms. That can be relatively innocent, such as Swifties forgetting most people haven't memorized all the details of Taylor Swift's dating career. It can be self-defeating, such as Twitter-addicted leftists who forget most people don't see socialism as the obvious solution to all problems. It can turn into cults like QAnon. But what Vance's special sandbox of alt-right dudes shares is this bottomless sense of grievance, which they mistake for a manly virtue, instead of a sign of arrested development.  

As I've written about before, many on the left and in the media assume the Trump campaign regrets the Vance pick, but in truth, it seems Trump and his allies are pleased since they share Vance's view that petulance is strength. We were reminded of this again on Sunday when Donald Trump Jr. told Fox Business that Vance is "outstanding" and "Every time I watch him, whether it’s the Sunday morning shows, just dismantling the left on their home turf — I just feel totally vindicated in all of that decision." He might be BS-ing, but really, I think he means it. Trump Jr. is also a consummate crybaby, complaining to every camera about every little thing. So of course he feels this way. But it's hard to imagine that most Americans will start liking Vance after they hear him pull the "woe is me" act for the full length of tonight's debate.

“The map looks easier for her”: Ipsos pollsters find “Harris is more effective” on voters’ top issue

The stakes of the 2024 election are existential for the future of American democracy. On one side is Donald Trump, a man who has demonstrated contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law. He has also repeatedly shown himself to be a racist, a misogynist, and both a likely and convicted criminal who is obsessed with violence. In total, Donald Trump is extremely dangerous to the United States and the world. On the other side is Kamala Harris, a defender of American multiracial democracy and the rule of law. Her candidacy is truly historic. She is the first Black woman to become the presidential nominee for a major political party in the United States. Trump’s vision of America’s present and future is a dystopian hellscape. Harris believes in the American project, our goodness and ability to improve.

In a healthy society, the choice between the two candidates would be clear. Instead, public opinion polls show an election that is basically tied and one of the closest in modern American history. Harris has the momentum and is now ahead nationally. However, Trump and Harris are very close in the key battleground states that will decide the outcome of the Electoral College.

"Harris has a slight lead in the rustbelt states and Nevada."

In an attempt to make better sense of the 2024 election and what the public opinion polls currently indicate (or not) about the state of the race for the White House, I recently spoke with public opinion and politics experts Elizabeth Jarosz and Clifford Young from the global leading independent market research firm Ipsos. Jarosz is an Ipsos market research expert. She is a trusted advisor to Fortune 500 companies, known for her ability to decode audience behavior with unparalleled accuracy. Young is Ipsos President of U.S. Public Affairs and leads the global election and political polling risk practice. He has conducted polling for over 100 elections globally, including 25 U.S. midterm races in 2010 and various elections in Nigeria, Canada, Egypt, and Kuwait.

In this conversation, Jarosz and Young explain the fundamentals, limits and potential of public opinion polling. They also reflect on the public’s mistrust and cynicism about public opinion polls following the surprise outcome of the 2016 election.

Notably, Jarosz and Young also share their insights on the phenomenon of so-called shy Trump voters, who are believed to be systematically undercounted in polling. They conclude that the 2024 election is a battle between Harris’ likeability and Trump’s perceived strengths on the economy and immigration — and that Harris has an easier path to victory than Trump.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length. The written responses represent both interviewees

Public opinion has famously been described as a type of chorus. What is that chorus telling us now with 30 days or so until the election?

America is in a transitory place today. The country is stuck between looking to the future and wanting to go back to the past. This is the primary rift today and it differentiates and defines the two candidates. While the election rests on a razor’s edge, our qualitative interviews reveal that deep down, America is still quietly hoping for someone they can wholeheartedly believe in and get behind: “America’s Quiet Hope: A Leader Worthy Of My Wholehearted Support.” How this plays out of course we will have to see.

What are some of the basic concepts of public opinion research?

Perhaps it is best to start with a definition of the pollster. A pollster measures or analyzes public opinion. Ultimately, we believe that polls are the linchpins of democracy because they allow for immediate feedback to those in power; elections are feedback mechanisms as well but slower in their effect. As we see it, public opinion is the most important societal stakeholder today as it gives legitimacy and license to those in power. Again, the pollster and the poll are the conduit for that dialogue.

The most important thing is transparency. Many different types of methodologies are employed today (mail, telephone, online), all with decent track records.

What is actually going on with the polling and the state of the presidential contest?

It is always best to take the average of the polls instead of looking at any one poll. Applying that approach we see an extremely close presidential race. It looks like Harris has a slight lead in the rustbelt states and Nevada. In the end, we believe it will come down to the relative ability of each campaign to win the framing war. “Throw the Bums Out” because of inflation versus future economic opportunity for all Americans. Harris is more effective with the latter narrative frame.

What do you think the mainstream news media does not correctly understand about public opinion polling and what it can tell us or not?

Polls are only fuzzy forecasts at best; they are a snapshot of a moment in time. Responses to polling are influenced by media effects. As such, any given poll or event can make public opinion seem capricious when it is not in the aggregate. 

Therefore, we should be very focused on the issues. In the 2024 election, the major tension is between “personality” and “policy.” Donald Trump wins on policy (2 of the 3 top issues are the economy and immigration where he holds strong leads). But he’s not the clear frontrunner because Harris wins on personality. 

One of the recurring themes since at least 2016 is how the polls are so wrong, inaccurate, and should not be believed.

The industry has taken a lot of steps to understand the consistent Trump undercount. We have found this in other countries as well such as France, Brazil, and Turkey among others. Support for right-wing candidates is consistently undercounted by the polls.

We need your help to stay independent

Leading pollsters in the United States have employed adjustments to correct for this problem, especially taking into consideration the past voting behavior of the mass public. We think we have a solution, but we will see. 

What is the approach that Ipsos uses in its modeling and overall approach to public opinion polling?

We use a probabilistic approach to sampling and modeling. This is the gold standard in the industry. We recruit panelists offline. We also interview them online. At Ipsos we are also focused a lot on context and meaning. We proceed from questions such as what does the election all mean? How does it stack up against past elections? What is the mood and spirit in America today? 

How is success measured when evaluating a public opinion poll?

That is a difficult question. From an election standpoint, how accurate is the poll in picking the right winner and doing so within the margin of error? But most importantly, it should be about how well a given poll helps us to better understand public opinion. A horserace poll by itself says little about the state of the nation.

What do we know about Trump and his “silent” and/or “shy” voters? Is it actually true that Donald Trump systematically underperforms in the polls or is that just speculation and conjecture that has solidified into conventional wisdom among the news media and punditry?

We know that politics today is wreaking havoc on our methods. We have seen a rise of anti-establishment sentiment around the world which in turn has led to strong anti-establishment political leaders and brands such as Trump, Le Pen, and Bolsonaro. They in turn attract voters who are hostile to normal politics and civil society. So, the pollster's central challenge is to ensure that such individuals are captured in our polls. Yes, the “shy Trump voter” or the “Trump disconnected voter” keeps us up at night. We think we have solutions as an industry. We find out how correct we are on Election Day in a few weeks.

You use sophisticated tools to evaluate how voters and the mass public respond to a given candidate. Can you share how that works?

The pollster is a multidisciplinary profession that demands an understanding of statistics, political science, sociology, survey methodology, and cognitive psychology among other disciplines. We employ models from social and cognitive psychology to understand how attitudes are formed and the role emotions play.

"In the end, we believe it will come down to the relative ability of each campaign to win the framing war. 'Throw the Bums Out' because of inflation versus future economic opportunity for all Americans. Harris is more effective with the latter narrative frame."

Very simply attitudes are a function of the importance people place on the issue and how well they think a candidate performs on that issue. Inflation is the most important issue today and Trump is stronger on it than Harris. The question is how can Harris change that perception? She will do this by leaning into emotion and the credibility of her message. To that point, Harris is now emphasizing “price gouging” and “future economic opportunities for all Americans.” That language conjures up strong emotional reactions. The first is populist and directed at big business and the second is a fundamental American value. Harris’ messaging is an attempt to break through already existing attitudes. Will this be successful? We will see.


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


Technically, polls are the “what;” Qualitative research is the “why.” At Ipsos we use focus groups, in-depth interviews, ethnography, and neuroscience tools to uncover why voters feel the way they do. We give voice to the numbers. The role of psychologists and sociologists is important, as it gives us innovative ways to ask questions and analyze responses (like linking decisions to deep human motivations). We use experts in behavioral science, facial coding, galvanic skin response, and other subjects and research methods as well. 

What do we know about the relative likeability of Harris and Trump?

If you look at the United States as a whole, Trump is underwater on favorability, whereas Harris is in the positive. That indicates that on a national level, Harris is more likeable. However, when we interview Trump supporters and loyalists, they are diehard and committed. When we interview Harris supporters, they are not as enthusiastic and dedicated because they are still getting to know her. We live in highly polarized times. Negative partisanship and “the anti-vote” are much more important in our minds than straight-up favorability.

How is the public responding to Tim Walz and JD Vance?

Voters see Walz and Vance through a highly partisan lens. If you’re a strong Democrat who watches liberal and/or progressive media (MSNBC, etc.) you think Vance is the devil. If you’re a strong Republican watching conservative media (Fox News, NewsMax, OAN, etc.) you think that Waltz lies and avoided going to Iraq.

These are unprecedented times here in America. How does that uniqueness challenge data-driven political analysis such as polling?

Pollsters should be humble right now. As a country given all these recent events, and this era more generally, pollsters need to pause, sit back, and reflect on the state of our political culture. With Biden stepping aside as the nominee, the contrast between two older white men has been overwritten by Kamala Harris. The past might just not be prologue this year.

What are you focusing on in the vice presidential debate tonight? 

Vice presidential debates — and this is true of presidential debates as well — do not historically determine the winner. We will look at tonight’s debate as a metaphor for who (and which campaign) is more on message.

Looking at the polls and other data, who would you rather be right now Kamala Harris or Donald Trump?

The map looks easier for her. Her campaign is also firing on all cylinders. But to reiterate, the presidential race is so close which means that any number of things can happen in the remaining weeks that will determine the final outcome.

Both sides understand that the game will be won or lost around the issue of inflation. Right now, Harris is more effective at this than Trump. But there still is a month until Election Day.

Qualitatively, we are finding that gender and race may be impacting underlying decision-making more than voters are aware of (and are articulating in polls). There is a great deal of quiet sexism in America. Racism also exists, even if it is subconscious. Both show up when voters (primarily men) say Kamala Harris “is not qualified” or they “can’t recall one thing she did as VP” or that she’s “a DEI hire." When given her credentials, or when I ask in panels and focus groups, "What did Pence do as VP” these respondents may deflect and then pivot back to “but she slept her way to the top.” This is not something often said about men.

In addition, there continues to be an inability to hold complex thoughts on most issues. For example, abortion is not about the number of weeks. Immigration reform is multifaceted and not just about building a wall, or deporting people. Most voters are not truly 100% aligned with the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, and yet we act as if we are all on one side or the other and there is no gray. 

Sloths are straining under climate change, study finds

Sloths are among the most beloved of jungle animals. The famously sluggish and furry tree-dwellers are found throughout Central and South America, giving off the vibe of relaxed lifestyle. Yet a recent study in the journal PeerJ Life and Environment revealed that sloths' laid back lives are imperiled by the same human-caused problem endangering much of the planet — climate change.

The scientists studied the metabolisms of two-fingered sloths (Choloepus hoffmanni) in both the highland and lowland regions as they respond to various temperatures, particularly those that are anticipated due to climate change. The researchers particularly focused on the animals' core body temperatures and their levels of oxygen consumption. In the process, they discovered that highland sloths experience a sharp spike in their resting metabolic rates as temperatures increase, meaning they will face a high metabolic burden as their ambient temperatures increased by 2º C to 6º C. Because sloths digest food at a rate 24 times slower than most other animals their size, they cannot easily make up for the lack of energy with increased food intake.

"Based on climate change estimates for the year 2100, we predict that high-altitude sloths are likely to experience a substantial increase in metabolic rate which, due to their intrinsic energy processing limitations and restricted geographical plasticity, may make their survival untenable in a warming climate," the authors conclude. "The metabolic impacts of climate change on sloths are expected to be profound."

Sloths are hardly the only animals to be victims of climate change. A 2021 study in the journal Communications Earth & Environment found that the average predicted extinction rate for freshwater animals and plants today is three orders of magnitude higher than it was 66 million years ago during the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. Similarly a 2023 study in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences revealed that humanity has caused so many extinctions over the previous five centuries that if our species had never existed, 18,000 years would have needed to pass for that same number of genera to have vanished on its own. Extinction, after all, is a natural occurrence — but the kind that humans are causing is anything but natural and it's a choice we can reverse.

“What a great loss”: Reactions pour in after news of Kris Kristofferson’s death

Kris Kristofferson, the lauded country singer, songwriter and actor who saw hundreds of artists record his songs, died on Saturday at his home in Maui, Hawaii. He was 88.

Family spokeswoman Ebie McFarland announced Kristofferson's passing in an email, acknowledging that he died peacefully and surrounded by family, per The Associated Press. McFarland did not share a cause of death. 

Originally from Brownsville, Texas, Kristofferson's career took off in the late 1960s, when he began writing country and rock n' roll music. After forgoing a career in the military, Kristofferson moved to Nashville where he worked as a janitor at Columbia Records and observed Bob Dylan record his album, "Blonde on Blonde," as noted by The Hollywood Reporter.

Kristofferson's first big hit was "For the Good Times" in 1970, followed by "Sunday Morning Coming Down" later that year, which Kristofferson's mentor and friend, singer Johnny Cash recorded. In a 2006 interview with The AP, Kristofferson spoke about the role Cash played in his own career. “Shaking his hand when I was still in the Army backstage at the Grand Ole Opry was the moment I’d decided I’d come back,” Kristofferson said. “It was electric. He kind of took me under his wing before he cut any of my songs. He cut my first record that was record of the year. He put me on stage the first time.”

While Kristofferson did sing himself, his greatest hits were those performed by others, including Ray Price singing "For the Good Time," Janis Joplin howling "Me and Bobby McGee," and the Grateful Dead, Michael Bublé, Gladys Knight and the Pips and Al Green all bringing his music to life.

Kristofferson was well-versed in poetry and often imbued his country songs with lyrics grounded in themes of love and loneliness. "Steeped in a neo-Romantic sensibility that owed as much to John Keats as to the Beat Generation and Bob Dylan, Mr. Kristofferson’s work explored themes of freedom and commitment, alienation and desire, darkness and light," Bill Friskics-Warren of The New York Times wrote in an obituary published Monday. This sensibility led Kristofferson to find company with the likes of singers Roger Miller and Willie Nelson. “We took it seriously enough to think that our work was important, to think that what we were creating would mean something in the big picture," Kristofferson said of the like-minded singer-songwriters in an interview with the journal No Depression in 2006. “Looking back on it, I feel like it was kind of our Paris in the ’20s,” he said. “Real creative and real exciting — and intense.”


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


Kristofferson was similarly prolific in his acting career as he was in his capacity to be a hit-generating songwriter. His first role was in Dennis Hopper's "The Last Movie," in 1971, followed by a spate of Western films. One of Kristofferson's most memorable roles came in 1976 when he starred alongside Barbra Streisand in the musical drama, "A Star Is Born." Actor Bradley Cooper reprised the film in 2018, directing it and serving as a lead opposite to Lady Gaga. 

As news of Kristofferson's death spread, a number of A-listers who knew him personally have made statements intended to honor the multihyphenate's memory. Streisand shared a series of Instagram posts on Sunday and Monday paying tribute to her "A Star Is Born" co-star.

"The first time I saw Kris performing at the Troubadour club in L.A. I knew he was something special," she wrote in a Sunday post. "Barefoot and strumming his guitar, he seemed like the perfect choice for a script I was developing, which eventually became 'A Star Is Born.' In the movie, Kris and I sang the song I’d written for the film’s main love theme, 'Evergreen.'"

"For my latest concert in 2019 at London’s Hyde Park, I asked Kris to join me on-stage to sing our other 'A Star Is Born' duet, 'Lost Inside Of You,' Streisand continued. "He was as charming as ever, and the audience showered him with applause. It was a joy seeing him receive the recognition and love he so richly deserved."

https://www.instagram.com/p/DAhdWbhojl_/?hl=en&img_index=1

https://www.instagram.com/p/DAjUk-DOQLB/?hl=en

Country singer Dolly Parton shared her own thoughts on Sunday as well, taking to her Instagram to celebrate the life of her "great friend."

"What a great loss, what a great writer, what a great actor, what a great friend," she wrote, signing her message, "I will always love you."

"What a gentleman, kind soul, and a lover of words," singer and actor Reba McEntire posted on X/Twitter. "I am so glad I got to meet him and be around him. One of my favorite people. Rest in peace, Kris."

Singer-songwriter LeAnn Rimes wrote on the platform that Kristofferson was "an epic human with the biggest heart. You will be so, so missed. rest easy, my friend."

Inflated Jupiter-sized planet has a uniquely uneven atmosphere, study finds

Imagine a planet the size of Neptune, itself about four times the size of our home planet. Instead of orbiting our Sun, this exoplanet revolves around a star in the Virgo constellation roughly 200 light-years from Earth. Perhaps most notably, it has a very low mass — 10% the mass of Jupiter despite being 80% its volume, with an atmosphere of water vapor, methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and ammonia. Which means it probably smells pretty gnarly.

"Astronomy has the power to unite the world while pushing us into the future."

Meet WASP-107 b, a planet that has long transfixed astronomers ever since it was discovered in 2017 with help from an array of telescopes known as the Wide Angle Search for Planets (WASP), which is also where its name comes from.

Now a recent study in the journal Nature Astronomy reveals something new and enigmatic about WASP-107 b. It has to do with all of those light gases that comprise the planet's atmosphere, or more specifically how they are composed within the atmosphere. Although most planets have relatively even atmospheres, WASP-107 b's is a few hundred meters taller on one side than on the other. This leads to more serious limb asymmetry, or the contrast between morning and evening conditions at a planet's opposite sides.

Dr. Matthew N. Murphy, lead author of the Nature Astronomy study and an astronomer at the University of Arizona's Steward Observatory, told Salon that the new findings help astronomers better understand not only this weird distant world, but our own home.

"There are a lot of strange and unexpected worlds out there beyond our own," Murphy said. "While they may not be like our own planet, every one of them teaches us a little more about how planets work, how they formed in the first place, and ultimately how special our own planet is. This knowledge is incredibly important — it pushes us closer to figuring out exactly how we got here, and the importance of our tiny planet in the (ever-growing) diversity of other planets out there."

To discover this, Murphy and his colleagues utilized the James Webb Space Telescope to examine the planet as it passed between Earth and its star. Analyzing the planet's terminators, or the moving line separating the daylight and nocturnal sides of a given world, the scientists realized that there was tremendous asymmetry. From there, the scientists further crunched their numbers and learned two things for sure that were not known before.

"First, it proves that exoplanetary atmospheres can be inhomogeneously mixed in regimes that we didn't expect," Murphy said. "We expected (and have since confirmed) that large temperature differences between evening and morning should exist on very hot exoplanets, but these were supposed to go away as the planet got colder because, at that point, it should be easier for winds and air currents to mix up and uniformly distribute heat and molecules around the entire planet. Our study proves that this isn't necessarily the case, and you can still have an extreme atmosphere at colder temperatures."

Additionally, the study demonstrates that transmission spectroscopy, or the technique of studying the atmospheres of distant planets through the sunlight it absorbs, can effectively separate the difference between what is happening in a day region of a planet and what is happening in its night region. The planet is tidally locked, meaning that one side is always facing its star, experiencing daytime, while the other is in perpetual night.

"With the new power of the James Webb Space Telescope and new analysis techniques, we can finally do so for the first time in this study," Murphy said. "This paves the way for a lot more exciting discoveries going forward."


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


"This paves the way for a lot more exciting discoveries going forward."

That said, even the current cutting edge technology is not entirely adequate to the task of teaching us about these distant planets. In the Nature Astronomy paper, the authors conclude by explaining that they have learned a great deal about how the planet's asymmetric atmosphere impacts the world itself.

"We found that the temperature has the strongest effect on both the relative shapes of the evening and morning spectra as well as their relative offset," the authors explain, adding that clouds also became more or less opaque as temperatures adjusted. Yet they could not observe more because of technological limitations.

"This precise behaviour is obviously subject to our parametrization of these clouds as a vertically uniform grey opacity source," the authors write. "For example, more detailed cloud or haze models, especially ones focused on specific species, may affect the shapes differently or even induce relative slopes across the spectra. Disentangling these details will require more observations over a wider wavelength coverage as well as much more complex multi-dimensional modelling. Nevertheless, our results show that recovering the separate properties of a transiting exoplanet’s morning and evening terminators is possible, and that WASP-107 b exhibits significant morning-to-evening asymmetry."

We need your help to stay independent

For his part, Murphy is optimistic that the scientists behind the latest set of discoveries are up to the challenge of cracking more of the mysteries behind WASP-107 b and other far away exoplanets.

"First, this research would not have been possible without the help of my amazing and supportive team of researchers from around the world," Murphy said. "I cannot thank them enough. It goes to show that the best work comes from collaborations."

He also pointed to the importance of ongoing government and private sector subsidies, saying that "none of this, and none of science, would be possible without the generous and noble funding from public and private institutions. As I touched on, astronomy has the power to unite the world while pushing us into the future. Recently, funding for science in general has generally been at risk, and there are so many other brilliant young scientists out there who deserve the support to do groundbreaking research, and contribute to a better world. We should all push for more support!"

“Weirdest mayor in this city’s history”: John Oliver slams Eric Adams for corruption scandal

John Oliver is not letting NYC Mayor Eric Adams off easy, following his arrest and indictment capping off a corruption scandal that rocked the city last week.

During a new episode of "Last Week Tonight" on Sunday, Oliver weighed in on the headlines frenzy over Adams' alleged involvement in taking bribes for political favors — accused of receiving over $100,000 in luxury international flights and high-end hotels. The scandal has led to numerous calls for Adams to resign, but the politician has refused to leave office and maintains his innocence. 

Detailing key points from the indictment, which Oliver pointed out is primarily focused on gifts and donations from Turkey, the most troubling charge against Adams is his alleged acceptance of "illegal campaign donations from foreign donors. Some of which, by the way, helped him qualify for more than 10 million in matching public campaign funds," the host underlined. 

The comedian skewered the mayor and his staffers by reading texts found in the indictment. Oliver explained that Adams was allegedly requesting his aides to get him to Chile through Turkish Airlines, which prompted the airline to confirm they did not have routes between the countries.

"He did seem to know what he was doing was shady, given an aide once reminded him to 'please delete all messages you send me,'" Oliver said, tacking on Adams' response to that aide was: "Always do."

"That was clearly a foolproof plan given I'm reading those texts to you right now," Oliver joked.

“Adams is entitled to due process like anyone else, but he has not been helping himself,” the host said. “Last year, Adams said he’d be ‘shocked’ if anyone on his campaign had acted illegally because, quote, 'I cannot tell you how much I start the day with telling my team we’ve got to follow the law.' I’m not convinced you have a ton of respect for the law if every day you have to hype yourself up into obeying it.”

Oliver familiarized the audience with "arguably the weirdest mayor in this city's history," whose name is now added to a long list of similarly weird New York City mayors like Bill de Blasio, Michael Bloomberg and Rudy Giuliani. Oliver joked "We're no strangers to weird mayors. In recent years we've had goober slenderman, billionaire lawn gnome and a man who was disbarred in D.C. this week for his efforts to overturn a presidential election. Eric Adams takes the cake."

We need your help to stay independent

The comedian ran several clips of Adams that have "aged poorly," including a clip of him handing the key to the city to another disgraced New York figure, rapper Sean "Diddy" Combs, who was also recently arrested and indicted, for his alleged involvement in sex trafficking.

"The bad boy of entertainment is getting the key to the city from the bad boy of politics," Adams is shown saying in the clip.

"Hey hey hey! You might not want to be associated with that guy because things are not looking good for him right now. And if you're wondering which one I'm talking to, the answer is yes!" Oliver joked. 

"Last Week Tonight with John Oliver" airs on Sundays at 11 p.m. ET on Max.

Dockworkers strike imminent: What does it mean and what do they want?

Negotiations between longshore workers and the shipping industry are mired in impasse with the workers' union contract expired on September 30, all but guaranteeing a strike Tuesday that will halt activity at the busiest U.S. ports and disrupt an already fragile economy.

Leaders of the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), a union covering 47,000 workers along the East and Gulf Coasts, have not called an all-ports strike since 1977. But the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), the employers' negotiating group, has this time refused to meet the ILA's demands for higher compensation and a ban on automated cranes, gates and container-moving trucks that are traditionally handled by the workers.

Under the current contract, longshoremen earn a top rate of $39 an hour. The ILA wants a $5-an-hour raise for each of the six years covered by the new contract to help workers catch up with inflation. That would give them a maximum of $69 an hour in the final year of the contract, and perhaps an annual income of $200,000 with overtime and shift work, compensation that the longshoremen claim is well-deserved for all the long shifts they have to put in to keep goods moving.

The shipping industry made windfall profits in 2021 and 2022 before seeing a subsequent drop-off as war disrupted trade along the Red Sea. Despite a swift recovery that landed more record profits in 2024, USMX has not agreed to conditions they view as unreasonably generous.

“The Ocean Carriers represented by USMX want to enjoy rich billion-dollar profits that they are making in 2024, while they offer ILA Longshore Workers an unacceptable wage package that we reject,” the ILA said in a statement on Monday.

The two sides haven't held public talks since June, when communication broke down over union allegations that Mobile, Alabama and several other unnamed ports had automated the processing of trucks entering and leaving the facilities even as the status of automation was being discussed. USMX, insisting that the automation technology had been in use since 2008, asked the National Labor Relations Board to force the ILA back to the negotiating table. However, it will likely take weeks for the board to investigate the ILA's claims of foul play.

“We remain prepared to bargain at any time, but both sides must come to the table if we are going to reach a deal, and there is no indication that the ILA is interested in negotiating at this time,” USMX said in a statement September 25.

Despite concerns about what automation might portend for their livelihoods in the future, the longshoremen know that right now the ports still need their labor to function; there is no practical alternative in the eastern half of the United States for employers to rely on instead.

In the event of a strike, the absence of longshoremen to unload and process most cargo containers along the East and Gulf Coasts would prevent shipments from reaching businesses, potentially raising prices and causing shortages in a vast array of goods, from groceries to cars during the peak of holiday shipping season. If the strike is resolved within a couple of weeks the effect might be minimal — any longer, and the backlog and extra warehouse storage costs will be more difficult to overcome. Some companies have been pulling forward shipments and diverting them to West Coast ports in anticipation.

This is all bad news for the Democratic Party, coming just one month before the election, as voters may blame President Joe Biden for any economic troubles that ensue. Biden can use federal labor law enshrined in the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 to force the longshoremen back to work for 80 days, during which negotiations may continue. But the president, who has long described himself as an ally of labor, has shown no interest in invoking the law, which allows him to intervene in strikes deemed threatening to the national economy, instead directing his administration to pressure both sides to reach a deal.

“Because it’s collective bargaining, I don’t believe in Taft-Hartley,” Biden told reporters Sunday. He urged Congress to halt a freight rail strike in 2022, provoking backlash for "siding with billionaires" over workers, though the latter eventually got much of what they asked for. This time, he appears to have chosen a different tack.

The election could shape the future of America’s food system

Nathan Ryder raises livestock and grows vegetables on 10 acres of pasture in Golconda, Illinois, with his wife and three kids. They also live in a food desert; the local grocery store closed a few months ago, and the closest farmers market is at least 45 miles away, leaving their community struggling to access nutritious food. 

Opening another supermarket isn't the answer. The U.S. government has spent the last decade investing millions to establish them in similar areas, with mixed results. Ryder thinks it would be better to expand federal assistance programs to make them more available to those in need, allowing more people to use those benefits at local farms like his own. 

Expanding the reach of the nation's small growers and producers could be a way to address growing food insecurity, he said, a problem augmented by inflation and supply chains strained by climate change. "It's a great opportunity, not only to help the bottom-line of local farmers, instead of some of these giant commodity food corporations … but to [help people] buy healthy, wholesome foods," said Ryder.

That is just one of the solutions that could be codified into the 2024 farm bill, but it isn't likely to happen anytime soon. The deadline to finalize the omnibus bill arrives Monday, and with lawmakers deadlocked along partisan lines, it appears likely that they will simply extend the current law for at least another year. 

Congress has been here before. Although the farm bill is supposed to be renewed every five years, legislators passed a one-year extension of the 2018 policy last November after struggling to agree on key nutrition and conservation facets of the $1.5 trillion-dollar spending package. 

Extensions and delays have grave implications, because the farm bill governs many aspects of America's food and agricultural systems. It covers everything from food assistance programs and crop subsidies to international food aid and even conservation measures. Some of them, like crop insurance, are permanently funded, meaning any hiccups in the reauthorization timeline do not impact them. But others, such as beginning farmer and rancher development grants and local food promotion programs, are entirely dependent upon the appropriations within the law. Without a new appropriation or an extension of the existing one, some would shut down until the bill is reauthorized. If Congress fails to act before January 1, several programs would even revert to 1940s-era policies with considerable impacts on consumer prices for commodities like milk.

After nearly a century of bipartisanship, negotiations over recent farm bills have been punctuated by partisan stalemates. The main difference this time around is that a new piece is dominating the Hill's political chessboard: The election. "It doesn't seem like it's going to happen before the election, which puts a lot of teeth-gnashing and hair-wringing into hand," said Ryder. He is worried that a new administration and a new Congress could result in a farm bill that further disadvantages small farmers and producers. "It's like a choose-your-own-adventure novel right now. Which way is this farm bill going to go?"

The new president will bring their own agricultural policy agenda to the job, which could influence aspects of the bill. And, of course, whoever sits in the Oval Office can veto whatever emerges from Congress. (President Obama threatened to nix the bill House Republicans put forward in 2013 because it proposed up to $39 billion in cuts to food benefits.) Of even greater consequence is the potential for a dramatically different Congress. Of the 535 seats in the House and Senate, 468 are up for election. That will likely lead to renewed negotiations among a new slate of lawmakers, a process further complicated by the pending retirement of Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, the Democratic chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Although representatives are ramping up pressure on congressional leadership to enact a new farm bill before this Congress reaches the end of its term, there is a high chance all of this will result in added delays, if not require an entirely new bill to be written.

That has profound implications for consumers already struggling with rising prices and farmers facing the compounding pressures of consolidation, not to mention efforts to remake U.S. food systems to mitigate, and adapt to, a warming world, said Rebecca Wolf, a senior food policy analyst with Food & Water Watch. (The nonprofit advocates for policies that ensure access to safe food, clean water, and a livable climate.) "The farm bill has a really big impact on changing the kind of food and farm system that we're building," said Wolf. 

Still, Monday's looming deadline is somewhat arbitrary — lawmakers have until the end of the calendar year to pass a bill, because most key programs have already been extended through the appropriations cycle. But DeShawn Blanding, who analyzes food and environment policy for the science nonprofit the Union of Concerned Scientists, finds the likelihood of that happening low. He expects to see negotiations stretch into next year, and perhaps into 2026. "Congress is much more divided now," he said. 

The House Agriculture committee passed a draft bill in May, but the proposal has not reached the floor for a vote because of negotiating hang-ups. Meanwhile, the Senate Agriculture committee has yet to introduce a bill, although the chamber's Democrats and Republicans have introduced frameworks that reflect their agendas. Given the forthcoming election and higher legislative priorities, like funding the government before December 20, the last legislative day on the congressional calendar, "it's a likelihood that this could be one of the longest farm bills that we've had," Blanding said.

As is often the case, food assistance funding is among the biggest points of contention. SNAP and the Thrifty Food Plan, which determines how much a household receives through SNAP, have remained two of the biggest sticking points, with Democrats and Republicans largely divided over how the program is structured and funded. The Republican-controlled House Agriculture committee's draft bill proposed the equivalent of nearly $30 billion in cuts to SNAP by limiting the U.S. Department of Agriculture's ability to adjust the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan, used to set SNAP benefits. The provision, supported by Republicans, met staunch opposition from Democrats who have criticized the plan for limiting benefits during an escalating food insecurity crisis

The farm bill "was supposed to be designed to help address food insecurity and the food system at large and should boost and expand programs like SNAP that help do that," said Blanding, which becomes all the more vital as climate change continues to dwindle food access for many Americans. Without a new farm bill, "we're stuck with what [food insecurity] looked like in 2018, which is not what it looks like today in 2024." 

Nutrition programs governed by the current law were designed to address pre-pandemic levels of hunger in a world that had not yet crossed key climate thresholds. As the crisis of planetary warming deepens, fueling crises that tend to deepen existing barriers to food access in areas affected, food programs authorized in the farm bill are "an extraordinarily important part of disaster response," said Vince Hall, chief government relations officer at the nonprofit Feeding America. "The number of disasters that Feeding America food banks are asked to respond to each year is only increasing with extreme weather fueled by climate change." 

That strain is making it more critical than ever that Congress increase funding for programs like the Emergency Food Assistance Program, or TEFAP. Its Farm to Food Bank Project Grants, established under the 2018 law, underwrites projects that enable the nation's food banks to have a supply of fresh food produced by local farmers and growers. It must be written into the new bill or risk being phased out. 

David Toledo, an urban farmer in Chicago, used to work with a local food pantry and community garden that supplies fresh produce to neighborhoods that need it. To Toledo, the farm bill is a gateway to solutions to the impacts of climate change on the accessibility of food in the U.S. He wants to see lawmakers put aside politics and pass a bill for the good of the people they serve.

"With the farm bill, what is at stake is a healthy nation, healthy communities, engagements from farmers and rising farmers. And I mean, God forbid, but the potential of seeing a lot more hunger," Toledo said. "It needs to pass. It needs to pass with bipartisan support. There's so much at the table right now."

This article originally appeared in Grist at https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-election-could-shape-the-future-of-americas-food-system/.

Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org

"This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist's weekly newsletter here."

                

George Harrison’s legacy as “the quiet Beatle” is amplified in “Within You Without You”

When it comes to the so-called Quiet Beatle, author Seth Rogovoy’s "Within You Without You: Listening to George Harrison" accomplishes a rare feat. In a sea of ineffectual biographies devoted to the Beatles’ guitarist, Rogovoy makes a case for Harrison’s most important contribution: the music itself.

A self-described amateur guitarist, Rogovoy draws upon his musical skills to deliver a powerful new reading of Harrison’s role in fueling one Lennon-McCartney classic after another. Rogovoy offers a careful delineation of the mottos, riffs, and licks via which Harrison left a distinctive imprint upon the Beatles’ sound, from early hits such as “Please Please Me” and “She Loves You” through "Abbey Road" and the group’s twilight years. 

As Rogovoy astutely writes, Harrison “was one of four, and if sometimes it was hard to get a word in edgewise when your bandmates were the wickedly outrageous John Lennon, the voluble Paul McCartney, and the affable Ringo Starr, Harrison made every word count. His wit was as quick and biting as Lennon's. He did not suffer fools gladly—by the evidence of his songs, he despised them.” 

Rogovoy’s forensic analysis of Harrison’s musical contributions is well-balanced with his discussion of the guitarist’s uneasy relationship with the Beatles’ unique and overwhelming fame, as well as the spirituality that he experienced through his nearly lifelong study of Eastern religion and philosophy. Indeed, Rogovoy allows, “Harrison's ambivalence about the Beatles and fame could well be his defining characteristic, if it were not for the essential role he played in helping to create the Beatles sound and inspiring his bandmates to follow along on his musical and spiritual journeys.”


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


In one of his finest moments in "Within You Without You," Rogovoy painstakingly dismantles long-held beliefs that Harrison’s decision to quit the Beatles, if only briefly, in January 1969 had anything whatsoever to do with an infamous conversation with McCartney earlier that month. Through an exclusive interview with "Let It Be" director Michael Lindsay-Hogg, Rogovoy illuminates the reality behind that interchange. “For them, it wasn't a rift or a fight,” says Lindsay-Hogg, “it was two people talking about something to do with the music, as they had for the last fifteen years.”


Love the Beatles? Listen to Ken's podcast "Everything Fab Four."


Instead, Rogovoy rightly underscores Harrison’s troubled marriage that month, as well as a fateful visit by Northern Songs’ polarizing publisher Dick James on the morning of Harrison’s work-stoppage. As the publisher held court at Twickenham Studios, “James bragged to McCartney about the staggering revenue that would begin to flow from the publishing royalties for these songs, doing so right in front of Ringo Starr, who, like Harrison, owned a ridiculously small share of the publishing company, something to the tune of a half percent (as opposed to Lennon and McCartney's twenty percent apiece). Starr was a good sport about it, but his face betrays a confusion of emotions and embarrassment.”

As with his analyses of Harrison’s indelible musical contributions to the Act You’ve Known for All These Years, Rogovoy’s eye towards soberly capturing the history of the Beatles with a welcome dose of critical objectivity makes "Within You Without You" required reading when it comes to the guitarist. It’s that good.

“One Person, One Vote”: Finally, a film that explains the Electoral College in an engaging way

The last step that “One Person, One Vote” director Maximina Juson needed to complete her documentary on the Electoral College was to film the ceremonial certification of the states’ electoral votes. She’d spent the previous months following Colorodo-based electors from the two major political parties, as well as a pair representing the Green Party and Kanye West

At the time, Juson recalled to Salon, “I didn't have major funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities, but I had frequent flyer miles” and her equipment. She imagined she’d capture some footage on the ground in D.C. of protests and counterprotests, and that would be that.

We know now that January 6, 2021, turned out much differently than anyone predicted. “Never in a million years did I imagine that I would be witnessing the first non-peaceful trends transfer power in American history,” she said. “After years of researching the electoral college and then to be delivered to a moment where the history was unfolding before my very eyes was, there's just no words for it.”

But it also speaks to the timeliness of this project – a documentary that explains on a granular level how the Electoral College works, why we have it, and why it’s so difficult to get rid of. This institution affects all Americans, yet so few of us understand its intricacies. And after she finished editing her documentary, Juson realized that it served another purpose, too. “What we haven't seen in the analysis of January 6,” she said, “is what the Electoral College did to bring us to that moment.”

Juson says her debut feature is informed by her being the child of a peacekeeper.” My mom worked for United Nations peacekeeping mission,” she said. "I went to the UN school, and I graduated inside the UN headquarters.”

This informs the push for understanding reflected in “One Person, One Vote,” which resists what might be a common urge among fellow documentarians to paint one party as less reasonable than the other. Instead of featuring politicians, Juson focused on the regular people who form the grassroots of political movements. 

Premiering a little over a month before the 2024 presidential election as part of  PBS' "Independent Lens" lineup, “One Person, One Vote” joins several documentaries about the political system. Most profile its major players and the societal toxins pushing us to the brink.

Not only is Juson’s documentary non-partisan to a refreshing degree, it is bighearted and even humorous at times. A few scenes she captured on January 6 are frightening, however, especially her recording protesters threatening her and hemming her in.

In July, when I sat down with Juson and two of her subjects, Polly Baca, a Democrat who worked closely in every presidential election since 1960, and New Yorker writer Jelani Cobb, who is also the Dean of Columbia Journalism School, it had been 48 hours since an assassination attempt had been made against Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally.

To Cobb, that moment proved the import of works like “One Person, One Vote” that aid citizens in comprehending our democracy’s structure. “The idea of democracy has gotten lost in so much of what we see going on in our politics right now,” he said. “And when people lose faith in democracy, they gain faith in their guns. We start shooting at each other."

He added, “We put together a group of people, and we run for this office because we have an agenda, and we want to see those things achieved. And if you don't have faith that that can happen nonviolently, people start looking for violent ways to get what they want. They don't just abandon the thing they want. They try to get it through other means that are ultimately more destructive to everyone.”

“We the people are better off in a democracy if we really understand how our democracy works,” Baca told me, further explaining that she participates as an elector even though she’s on the side of doing away with the Electoral College. 

“Now, there are positives and negatives, and I can argue both sides of whether or not it's good to have the system we have,” she said. “The reality is we just have it. And so you have to learn how to use it and how to participate in it, and what it really means in terms of how well we represent the folks, the common citizen.”

Baca continued, “Every single American, every single person in our country, ought to take a course in how the elections really work, and how you can become engaged and be a participant in this process."

During the Jan. 6 riot, Juson was mugged while filming. Half of her footage was stolen.

Nevertheless, she also said that the people who helped keep her safe were QAnon followers who shielded her from more aggressive people, reminding those surrounding her of Juson’s right to free speech. Even in this darkest hour, she told me, there was evidence of the good in the unlikeliest settings.

The most hopeful feedback she’s received from community screenings, Juson said, is that people congratulated her on making an instructional film on the Electoral College that isn’t boring.  

Part of the credit for that feat is due to her thoughtful inclusion of subjects beyond the usual experts, which was guided by the understanding that most American voters have never met an elector.

“One of my main goals in this film, was to put a human face on the Electoral College, because right now, it's this opaque process that's somewhere over there and really distant from the actual voter,” she said. “And I thought the best way for people to learn about the electoral college would be through real-world elector and through real-world grassroots activists that are working for and against Electoral College.”

We need your help to stay independent

Fortunately for Juson, Colorado had several examples of major issues at play related to the Electoral College. 

In 2019, its statehouse made Colorado part of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which, if enough states representing 270 electors join, pledges to award all of their electoral votes to the winner of a presidential election's popular vote. Colorado's voters reaffirmed the decision in 2020. As of April 2024, seventeen states and the District of Columbia have adopted the compact, jurisdictions that comprise 209 electoral votes.

But the film's strongest draws are the four electors Juson followed, beginning in the fall of 2020. There’s Baca, Derrick Wilburn, a Republican conservative ready to cast his electoral votes for Donald Trump; Patricia McCracken, an elector for the Green Party; and the documentary’s main comic relief, an elector for Kanye West named Kit MacLean.

“I’m hoping this changes the course of my destiny. I’m hoping this is my calling,” MacLean says in the film. “And maybe I’ll meet a Kardashian or a West. Maybe this will be what skyrockets my career and my life.”

“He’s actually a Sasha Baron Cohen type,” Juson told me, predicting the reactions of viewers who might see in MacLean the fall of civilization – because his act really is that convincing, and he really was a Kanye West elector. Juson posts the paperwork to prove it. 

Balancing the information download and the levity are artful animations and reading of the Framers’ words debating the intricacies of devising how states’ electors would be designated. 

For that, Juson cast Black actors to add emotional heft to historical statements, and to make it impossible to ignore the reality of the Electoral College’s origins in slavery. 

“They say that it's about protecting small states,” Juson said, “But I went to the records of the federal convention, and I worked with a lead historian."

She was directed to the documentation of the five-month private convention that had been closed to the press so that delegates to speak candidly about slavery. “It was very powerful to me to read the actual words unspun, straight from the source,” she recalled, adding that as a spoken word artist, the language had a Shakespearean quality. 


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


That inspired Juson to juxtapose the humanity of Black people against the words that sought to dehumanize them. Just as importantly, she said, it keeps the viewers’ attention. “It's just so poignant and so powerful to hear those words coming out of Black people, who were not given a seat, not given a voice when the Constitution was being written yet were being used for more political power.”

By combining artistry with straightforward information, Juson hopes that “One Person, One Vote” allows the audience to feel not simply more aware of our political process but engaged to actively take part in it. As part of that, she hopes that it helps forward the idea that Americans are more alike than separate, as our extreme partisanship would lead us to believe.

“My job is to say, how do we take a moment and listen to each other, even though we don't agree? I went into it with a curiosity to learn, an effort of understanding, because we're not taking that time to understand each other,” she said.

“I think that's a good exercise that we all need to try,” Juson concluded, “because what's happening right now is not working.”

"Independent Lens: One Person, One Vote" premieres at 10 p.m. Monday, Sept. 30 on PBS members stations nationwide. Check your local listings for precise time slot information. The film will also be available to stream via the PBS App and PBS’ YouTube channel.

 

 

Zachary Levi of “Shazam!” endorses Donald Trump, acknowledging it as “career suicide”

Actor Zachary Levi, known for his role as DC Comics Superhero, Shazam, endorsed Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election over the weekend, acknowledging the move as a form of "career suicide."

Levi appeared at MAGA's “Team Trump’s Reclaim America Tour" on Saturday to moderate an event with RFK Jr. and former Democratic congresswoman turned conservative, Tulsi Gabbard.

Speaking to the crowd, Levi said, “We’re here for unity . . . whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican . . . every one of us is a child of God," per The Daily Beast.

“We’re here to make sure that we are going to take back this country," the "Shazam!" star continued. "We are going to make it great again. We are going to make it healthy again. And so, I stand with Bobby, and I stand with Tulsi, and I stand with everyone else who is standing with President Trump. He’s gonna get us there because he’s gonna have the backing and the support and the wisdom and the knowledge and the fight that exists in Robert Kennedy Jr. and former representative Tulsi Gabbard."

Levi acknowledged that his show of support for the Republican presidential nominee was not likely to earn him favor among his colleagues. “Within my industry, as you can probably imagine, Hollywood is a very, very liberal town and this very well could constitute career suicide, so I’m glad I did it with you guys,” he said. 

Levi stoked controversy in January of 2023 when he showed support for misinformation regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. Responding to a tweet asking, "Do you agree or not that Pfizer is a real danger to the world?” Levi replied, “Hardcore agree," as noted by Variety.

Right-wing hoax: Letter claims Pennsylvanians will have to provide housing for “homeless immigrants”

A Pennsylvania woman received a fake letter this month telling her she’d been selected to house five refugees as part of a nonexistent program led by President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported. 

"Congratulations," the fake letter stated, "you have been selected as a Wayward Steward exchange home for homeless immigrants and victims of foreign wars."

The letter was sent to Elizabeth Bennett from the "Pennsylvania Congressional Office of Immigration Affairs," which does not exist. Bennett was supposedly selected based on “property and income records” for a migrant housing program as part of  “US5Ca12-B,” a law implemented by the Biden administration, the letter asserted. No such law exists.

According to the letter, recipients would supposedly be paid an $80 stipend for food costs and be provided with “government-approved” bunks. The letter was written on official-looking state letterhead and stamped with a fake Pennsylvania seal. 

“Thank you for your dedication to the health and safety of these future Americans!” the letter concluded.

Warren, who quickly realized the letter she received was fake, said it was clearly written to scare recipients and meant to threaten recipients.

“I could definitely see, even for me reading this letter, it felt threatening even though I’m very pro-immigrant because it felt like something that was being imposed on me,” she said.

Warren has a Harris-Walz sign up in her yard, but her targeting appears to be random, The Inquirer reported. It’s unclear whether the letter was sent to other Pennsylvanians.

With just over a month until November’s presidential election, Pennsylvania has emerged as a key battleground state and could decide the fate of the election. Harris currently leads Trump 49-48 in the state across national polling averages. 

 

 

Bowen Yang addresses “mocking” Chappell Roan in “SNL” sketch

Just like viral baby hippo Moo Deng, Bowen Yang can also deliver a little bite here and there. 

During the 50th season premiere of "Saturday Night Live," hosted by Jean Smart, Yang's sketch as the pygmy hippopotamus caught some pushback from people online for "mocking" Chappell Roan and her struggles, having canceled performances for mental health reasons in the wake of controversy surrounding her politically charged statements in the past weeks. 

In the sketch during the Weekend Update segment, Yang performed as a "dewy" hippo influencer and echoed lines from several of Roan's TikToks where she addressed her fans about respecting boundaries. And the feedback from those fans was heated. 

“For the past 10 weeks, I have been going nonstop. The response has been overwhelming, but it has come to the point where I need to set some boundaries,” Yang joked in the sketch, obviously referencing Roan.

“Reminder, women owe you nothing. When I’m in my enclosure, tripping over stuff, biting my trainer’s knee, I’m at work, that is the project. Do not yell my name or expect a photo just because I’m your parasocial bestie or because you appreciate my talent,” the comedian said, riffing on the singer's recent statements. 

The sketch was met with fury online, with some people taking particular issue with Yang being the one to joke about the queer singer.

"Something about Bowen being the one to voice this joke despite his interview with Chappell sympathizing with her concerns less than a month ago makes me sad," one person wrote in a post to X.

Bowen took to Instagram to address the controversy shortly after, posting a screenshot of a Variety headline that used the word "mock" in association with the sketch.

"Oh geez. Mocks??? If my personal stance and this piece aren’t absolutely clear in terms of supporting her than there it is I guess.”

The comedian continued, “Everything she has ever asked for has been reasonable and even then we can connect it to another story about boundaries or whatever. Needing the hose rn…”

Chappell Roan is scheduled to perform on "Saturday Night Live" on November 2.

The “patriotic choice”: New York Times endorses Kamala Harris

The New York Times editorial board endorsed Kamala Harris Monday in a piece that called the vice president the only "patriotic choice" when pitted against former President Donald Trump, who the Times described as "morally unfit for an office that asks its occupant to put the good of the nation above self-interest" and temperamentally unfit for a role that "requires the very qualities — wisdom, honesty, empathy, courage, restraint, humility, discipline — that he most lacks."

This election, the Times said, is more than just a contest of ideas, but a question of whether to elect a man who will "degrade the values, defy the norms and dismantle the institutions that have made our country strong" or a "dedicated public servant who has demonstrated care, competence and an unwavering commitment to the Constitution."

While the piece says that Harris may not be the perfect candidate for every voter, it argues that her plans to "help Americans better afford the things they need, to make it easier to own a home, to support small businesses and to help workers" are a far better choice than Trump's commitment to cut taxes for the rich and raise the cost of goods with across-the-board tariffs.

The editorial board also drew contrasts between Harris and Trump on other policy areas.

The vice president, the paper said, would expand access to healthcare, protect women's reproductive freedom, strengthen foreign alliances and find global solutions to fight climate change. By contrast, Trump spent years trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, boasted about appointing the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade, praises autocrats like Russian President Vladimir Putin and rejects climate science. On immigration, the board condemned Trump for demonizing and dehumanizing refugees, while saying Harris "offers hope for a compromise, long denied by Congress, to secure the borders and return the nation to a sane immigration system."

Despite the clear differences on policy and fitness for leadership, the Times said, Harris must do more to explain her policies in detail to the public. At the same time, the board praised her for making clear the "dangers" of re-electing Trump, whose "disdain for the rule of law goes beyond his efforts to obtain power."

Since its founding in 1851, the New York Times has endorsed a presidential candidate in every election. The editorial board has not endorsed a Republican since Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956.

Cookbook author Lesley Enston on why Caribbean cuisine is “the world’s first fusion food”

Recipe developer and food writer Lesley Enston's new cookbook "Belly Full: Exploring Caribbean Cuisine Though 11 Fundamental Ingredients and Over 100 Recipes" delve deep into the staple ingredients which make up the rich tapestry that is Caribbean food. From Trinidad and Tobago to Cuba, from Antigua to Jamaica, from Barbados to Martinique, Enston details the classic cuisine of each country, both disparate and uniting in its familiar base flavors.

Enston specifically references eleven ingredients — beans, cassava, coconut and rice among them — which make up the backbone of Caribbean cuisine at large, including unique recipes and varying uses for each staple ingredient based in the history and culture of each country. 

As Enston told me, to her, is holistic: "[it means] both a full belly and a full heart. It means satisfied and satiated and like all is right with the world."

Salon Food had the opportunity to speak with Enston about her favorite Caribbean dishes, the aforementioned eleven staple ingredients, a formative moment when she embraced food and cooking, her most used ingredients how her experience with the Haiti Culture Exchange influenced her cooking (and this book!), plus much more.

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

Belly FullBelly Full: Exploring Caribbean Cuisine Through 11 Fundamental Ingredients and Over 100 Recipes by Lesley Enston (Cover art by Nicholas Huggins/Ten Speed Press)

Hello there, I love the cover art! Who was the illustrator? How was the art direction ideated? 

Thank you, I love it too! The artist is a Trinidad and Tobago based Illustrator, Nicholas Huggins,  who was recommended to me by branding consulting Best Dressed Plate. I knew from the beginning I wanted an illustrated cover, and rather than featuring one cooked dish, I wanted it to represent the 11 ingredients in the book. I wanted anyone from any culture that uses any of these ingredients be able to see themselves in this cover. Markets in the Caribbean have been one of my favorite places since I was a kid in Trinidad. I love the colors, the smells and the bustle. I wanted a cover that represented that which is so part of our culture. 

Do you have a favorite dish in the book? 

That’s hard! I love so many of the dishes. One that has a special place in my heart is the Buljol (stewed salted cod) which is something my mom made so often growing up. It’s something she could make with her eyes closed and which I can too now. And it was something that I might whine about having again but secretly I’d always love eating it, which is sort of how it is with my daughter today.

What does "Belly Full" mean to you? 

To me this phrase means both a full belly and a full heart. It means satisfied and satiated and like all is right with the world.
Snapper Escovitch-ishSnapper Escovitch-ish (Photo by Marc Baptiste)

Could you give a breakdown of the eleven staple ingredients you use to provide a foundation for Caribbean cooking throughout the book? 

The 11 ingredients in the book — beans, calabaza, cassava, chayote, coconut, cornmeal, okra, plantains, rice, salted cod and scotch bonnet peppers — are all inherently Caribbean ingredients. 

Some, like beans, calabaza, cassava, cornmeal and scotch bonnet peppers, are indigenous to the islands and were being processed and consumed by the people living there when the colonizers arrived. Others, such as coconut, plantains and salted cod, came from far away places, brought by the Europeans. Others, like okra and rice, were staples in Africa before the enslaved were brought to the islands.

All these ingredients met and melded together to create the dishes you see in this book. I always say Caribbean cuisine is the world’s first fusion food and you can see it with these ingredients. While we use different seasonings with them, and sometimes different cooking methods, they show up across the region and create a sense of familiarity and connection from island to island.

I visited Trinidad back in college and was absolutely smitten with it. What are some of your favorite Trindadian dishes and comfort food go-tos?

It’s such a magical place! There are so many dishes I love that didn’t make it in the book. One of my favorite things is shark and bake, which is a fried fillet of shark served in a piece of fry bread with a variety of condiments like chandon beni sauce and pepper sauce. I have made this myself and it was good but nothing beats having this on the beach freshly fried. 

Doubles are also one of my all time top favorite things to eat, which are stewed chick peas served with two pieces of another kind of fried bread called bara. This is probably one of my favorite foods in this world and I just discovered that the person who invented doubles is from my mother’s hometown! 

There's such a wide breadth in the book, touching on the all of the islands and how the history of colonialism and the Atlantic Slave Trade impacted the cuisine, the food and the people  and how that's still reverberating and felt today. You touch on so many different islands in the book, from Haiti and Jamaica to Puerto Rico and Cuba — what do you feel is the most unifying aspect amongst those disparate island nations? Either culinary or otherwise 

Ultimately, I think what unifies us is our history. We all had indigenous populations that were decimated by Europeans, and while those nations were different, they all ultimately did the same things. They then all brought enslaved people to do free labor. When you combine these things with the foods that were there, the foods brought by enslaved Africans or Europeans combined, you have a commonality that allows you to understand each other.

There are many aspects of other island’s culture that are drastically different than Trinidad’s, for instance, but there are other things, because of this history, that are so similar and that can often be found on the plate.  


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


I read in a press release that most of the recipes are gluten-free and plant based — is that typical of most Caribbean cuisines?

I would say many rather than most. I think there are many gluten free and plant based dishes in the Caribbean, but by no means do most people eat this way. There are a lot of gluten-free recipes in part because Europeans couldn’t get wheat to grow there, so they had to come up with alternatives. However today flour is a very common ingredient and there are so many variations of bread and dumplings.

Meat is certainly common, especially chicken and pork. I grew up not eating that much meat in part because my mother grew up too poor to eat much meat, and because she grew up Seventh Day Adventist in which they often follow a plant based diet. Also, the islands are small and don’t have a lot of space for large animals. So while meat is available, it’s not nearly as ubiquitous in every meal the way it is in North America. 

What would you say you'd love for people to take from this cookbook?

I hope people learn about real Caribbean cooking, and how flavorful and accessible it is. I also hope readers learn more about this region and take away an understanding of how history has affected our cuisine. I think a lot of people think of the Caribbean as a sunny, happy place with fruity cocktails and beautiful beaches. And it is those things, but there is so, so much more. 

Lesley EnstonLesley Enston (Photo by Atibon Nazaire)

How does this book represent your culinary ethos and outlook? 

Aside from the fact that I am of Trinidadian descent and have always gravitated towards food from the islands, what I love about our cuisine is its flexibility and adaptability. While people will always argue about the “right” way to make certain dishes, the reality is our mothers and grandmothers and aunties would make a dish with what they had and there’s nothing you can do which is “wrong” as long as you're following the heart of the dish.
 

What would you say is a good recipe from the book that’d be great as a start for a beginner cook? 

I think any of the stewed beans recipes are a great place to start. Beans cooked in this fashion are very forgiving and precise technique is less important than intention and patience. It’s hard to mess up beans, and though they do take time, the rewards are great!

Conversely, is there a more complicated dish in the book that you think would make for a wonderful “project” on a long weekend for a more advanced cook? 

The Plantain Tarte Tantin is definitely a project, but I think it’s a fun one. Also the different variations of stuffed chayote (such as Chayotes Rellenos or Gratin au Christophene. They do require several steps but are very cathartic. Lastly, Pepperpot, though not complicated, takes a long time and cannot be rushed, so it’s great for a cold weekend with lots of indoor time. 

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

I think that would have to be garlic. All my friends know that my average measurement is something like a “boat load.” I feel strongly like you can never have too much.

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

It’s difficult to think of one moment. While I always loved food, when I lived in London I suddenly found myself unable to easily access a lot of the foods I was used to, and even then they often lacked the flavor that I was used to. So I found myself making a lot of things from scratch, or foods that I would normally only order from restaurants. I think it was then that I realized how much I enjoyed cooking. 

Oil DownOil Down (Photo by Marc Baptiste)

What would you say are your three most used ingredients? 

See garlic above. Are we talking about outside of standard things like olive oil or salt? Possibly citrus, I hardly ever cook without lemon, lime or a sour orange finding its way in there. Also thyme. Of all the herbs (and I use them all a lot!)  I probably use that the most.

What is your favorite cooking memory? 

It’s hard to pinpoint one, but early memories in the kitchen with my mother stay with me. With her I learned that food equals love, and her ease in the kitchen is something that impressed on my memory. My mother could get worked up about a lot of things, but cooking or baking, regardless of how much she was doing at once, never phased her. I always loved being in the kitchen with her while she cooked, or just encountering it. Coming home from an outing in the winter to steamy windows and the smells of her cooking in the kitchen was always the best. 

We need your help to stay independent

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

Get creative! If something that’s lurking in your fridge sounds like it might taste good in a dish, try it. Don’t let anything languish in there. If nothing else, cook the heck out of it in a stock.
 

 How do you practice sustainability in your cooking?
As per the above, I try to cut down on food waste, by cooking everything I have in whatever way possible, by trying to loosely plan out meals so I know where I’m going, and stocking up on staples I know I’ll always use and having a hearty spice/seasoning collection to take any ingredient in different directions.

Gratin au ChristophineGratin au Christophine (Photo by Marc Baptiste)

Can you tell me a bit about your background in food and recipe development?

I have always loved cooking for my loved ones and hosting dinner parties. Though I worked for a long time in fashion, both editorial and PR,  my very dear, long time friend Lukas Volger had always encouraged me to get into food. I recipe tested most of his books, because I was one of the only people he could trust to make the recipe as written! During the pandemic, when America had its moment of racial reckoning, opportunities arose to do recipe development for Bon Appetit. I pitched some recipes, and it snowballed from there. The idea for this book had been forming since maybe 2015, and it was during this time period I finally realized what I wanted it to be.

I read that you worked at the Haiti Cultural Exchange. How did that influence some of the work and research you did for the book?

I had been introduced to the Haitian community through my daughter’s Haitian father, and he also introduced me to this wonderful organization highlighting Haitian arts and culture. Through my work there I got to further understand both Haitian art and culture, and through it Caribbean culture on a whole, through a more nuanced lens, and gained a deeper appreciation of why it’s important to tell our stories, and how few voices are being amplified to do it. I was also introduced to the brilliant Chef Cybille St. Aude, who did the Soup Joumou recipe for the book, via HCX. 

Do you feel like your Caribbean roots and your time living in London, Toronto and now Brooklyn has also influenced your cooking and your culinary ethos/approach?

100% My mother didn’t always cook Trinidadian food, but she always used a Trinidadian approach. Which is season, more seasoning, and season again. It’s also to not be fussy about what you have to make a dish. Even if she was missing an ingredient, or threw in something unusual, her food was always recognizable and distinctive because she cooked it with the same style. I think Caribbean cooks are some of the most inventive out there, in part because our food comes from so many sources. I think above anything food has to taste good, and that is something our food always does. 

Springfield businessman dubbed a “traitor” and threatened for defending Haitian employees

A businessman in Springfield, Ohio has received death threats and been labeled a traitor after defending his Haitian employees, The New York Times reported

Jamie McGregor, a fifth-generation Springfield resident and the owner of McGregor Metal, first hired Haitian workers after a large population of Haitian immigrants settled in the Ohio town in 2020. They now make up 10% of McGregor’s team of over 300 employees.

Chaos and violence descended on Springfield after a false rumor that Haitian immigrants in the town were eating local pets was spread nationally by Republican nominee Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio. Amid that campaign, McGregor felt the need to speak up and defend the Haitian employees who are crucial to his business’ success.

“They come to work every day. They don’t cause drama. They’re on time,” he told The New York Times earlier this month. He also defended his employees on PBS NewsHour, noting that his Haitian employees are also his most reliable.

Since then, McGregor has faced a number of death threats, including posters around town with his face printed alongside the word, "traitor," forcing him to increase security at his business.

“Why are you importing Third World savages who eat animals and giving them jobs over United States citizens?” a voicemail left for McGregor said.

McGregor, who is a lifelong Republican and two-time Trump voter, has since purchased a gun, something he had previously vowed never to do.

But that step was advised by the FBI, whose agents visited McGregor’s family home on Sept. 12 and told him to take the threats seriously, saying they had found several to be "credible." They told him to keep his blinds shut, vary his driving routes, lock his business doors and wear gloves when opening his mail.

In the last month, schools, hospitals and government buildings have received over 30 bomb threats.

“You know, things are just different now,” McGregor told The Times.

Helene leaves over 100 dead and thousands without water

The death toll from Hurricane Helene has risen to over 100 people across six states as officials scramble to get water, food and supplies to the most impacted areas, CBS News reported Monday morning.

Helene first touched down in Florida on Thursday and ripped its way through Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina and North Carolina, where the devastation has been most severe. 

In North Carolina alone, 42 people have died, 30 of whom were in Buncombe County, which includes Asheville, a city home to nearly 100,000 people. Supplies have been slow to reach the county, with mudslides and flooding blocking interstate highways, The Asheville Citizen Times reported.   

More than 400 roads in North Carolina are still closed and Asheville mayor Esther Manheimer is urging residents to prepare for a long-term water outage, WLOS News 13 reported.

The category 4 hurricane is already one of the deadliest storms in American history, just behind Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and Hurricane Ian in 2022. There have been hundreds of water rescues and evacuations across the southeast, including over 100 rescues In North Carolina.

The Red Cross has opened more than 140 shelters to temporarily house over 2,000 people, the organization told the BBC. 

“It’s still very much an active search and rescue mission,” FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell told the Associated Press.

On Sunday, President Joe Biden declared Hurricane Helene a major disaster in North Carolina and ordered federal aid to “supplement state, tribal, and local recovery efforts.”

"I am deeply saddened by the loss of life and devastation caused by Hurricane Helene across the Southeast,” Biden said in a statement. “As the storm continues to track north, Vice President Harris and I remain focused on life-saving and life-sustaining response and recovery efforts.”

The White House said Biden intends to visit impacted areas this week, provided it does not interfere with recovery efforts.

Trump reiterates call for police to be unleashed in “violent” purge of society

Donald Trump called for police to be allowed "one real tough, nasty" and "violent day" to eradicate crime "immediately" at a rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, on Sunday.

The remarks are the latest from the former president in a long line of statements endorsing police violence. In 2020, for example, he urged governors to use more force against Black Lives Matter protesters. In 2017, he suggested that when police throw "thugs into the back of a paddy wagon," they shouldn't "be too nice."

Speaking Sunday, Trump reiterated his call for police to do as they wish. “One rough hour — and I mean real rough — the word will get out and it will end immediately, you know? It will end immediately,” he said.

When asked by Politico what exactly Trump meant by that, a campaign official claimed that he was “clearly just floating it in jest.”

Trump, who was convicted this summer on 34 felony counts for covering up hush-money payments to an adult film actress, also falsely claimed in his speech that people can steal up to $950 worth of merchandise without facing criminal penalties in California. That was a reference to Proposition 47, which re-classified some theft from felonies to misdemeanors. While Harris was the state's attorney general when voters approved the ballot measure, she remained neutral on the issue.

Many Republican officials and some Democrats, including Eric Adams, the mayor of New York City indicted on corruption charges, have justified their support of relatively unfettered police action by invoking the specter of rampant crime and disorder. While social media and right-wing outlets have helped fuel public perception that the streets are as dangerous as ever, FBI statistics show that crime has actually decreased nationally by 2.4%, falling to well below the level of violence seen in decades past.

Tim Walz can call out JD Vance’s true game plan

I don't normally pay too much attention to the vice presidential debate during a presidential election campaign because they tend not to matter all that much. Certainly, everyone was excited to see Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin debate Delaware Sen. Joe Biden in 2008 because she was such a wild card. Many people tuned in to see if she would fall on her face. (She actually held up pretty well.) There have been famous vice presidential debates in which one of the candidates skewered the other, as when Democratic Sen. Lloyd Benson of Texas deftly took down the callow senator from Indiana Dan Quayle with his withering, "I knew John Kennedy, John Kennedy was a friend of mine. And you, sir, are no John Kennedy." But mostly the vice presidential debates are forgettable. Overall, vice presidential candidates, even the ones who are part of the winning ticket, are often forgotten parts of the campaign.

Vance's nasty accusations may not play as well against "the coach," who is apparently a pretty solid debater himself.

But this year I think it might be different. Mostly it's because it really does appear there will only be one debate between Harris and Trump. He is intellectually lazy and knows that he's incapable of actually preparing for a debate against Harris again. He can't risk another catastrophic failure. So, regrettably, Tuesday's vice presidential debate may be the last big event of campaign season before the election is over.

According to a recent Pew Survey, a quarter of the American people haven't heard of either vice presidential candidate — Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Ohio Sen. JD Vance — so the debate will be very enlightening for them. (I somehow doubt they are the type of people who will tune in, but you never know.) Of those who have heard of them, 34% of Americans view Vance favorably, while 42% view the freshman senator unfavorably. Meanwhile, 39% of Americans see Walz favorably, while 33% view him unfavorably. (Vance has the worst favorable ratings of any presidential running mate in the last 20 years.) In that respect, Walz goes into the CBS News debate with a pretty fair advantage.

I would guess that Vance has made a very bad impression because of his nasty, cold personality and very extreme ideology but that's just a guess. The creepy stuff about unmarried cat ladies destroying the world was not a winning introduction to the national stage and his latest crusade against immigrants from "Haitia" has been, well, deplorable.

Walz, on the other hand, comes off as a very warm, regular guy. At the very least, that's not something that offends people.

Whether those perceptions will hold up in a debate remains to be seen. The two presidential debates in this election campaign so far have been among the most consequential we've ever seen so who knows what might happen with this one?

Apparently, Vance and Walz have both been preparing like candidates usually do, unlike Donald Trump who says he already knows everything he needs to know. Vance has been working with various members of his team, including Trump confidante Jason Miller, going over Walz's record as a congressman and governor. Walz is being played by Rep. Tom Emmer of Minnesota, who has known Walz for years and reportedly can do a fair impression of his voice and mannerisms.

Emmer appeared on ABC's "This Week" Sunday and refused to talk about Vance. He instead stuck to his talking points about Walz being "Gavin Newsom in a flannel shirt" and Trump as the guy who "fixed the country then Biden and Harris broke it and he's going to fix it again." Maybe that's just one big feint but I'm guessing that's the true Vance game plan: attack Walz as a San Francisco hippie, hit Biden and Harris and pump up Trump.

We need your help to stay independent

Walz has Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg playing Vance in his debate prep. His team also includes some of the veterans who worked with Harris on her debate prep (which is a good sign). Buttigieg appeared on Tim Miller's Bulwark podcast and — while not giving away the game plan  — said this when Miller joked that he hoped playing Vance wouldn't adversely affect him: "I'm going into that head space but hopefully I'll be able to find my way back out of it. It's an interesting place to be."

Both Vance and Walz have fairly recent experience debating. The LA Times' Paul Thornton went back and watched some of them and came away with some interesting impressions. He believes that Vance has the edge because "he comes off as fluent on policy, and he can nimbly respond to attack." In the 2022 senatorial debates with Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, Thornton noted that Vance "used just about every question from moderators as an opportunity to paint Ryan as petty and hypocritical." That sure sounds like Vance, doesn't it?

But as Thornton points out, that was before Vance was known and thoroughly disliked by so many people "a drawback that only more brightly highlights Walz’s best attribute: People just like the guy."

Vance's nasty accusations may not play as well against "the coach," who is apparently a pretty solid debater himself. Notably, however, Walz has downplayed his skills to lower expectations. Thornton writes about his 2018 and 2022 gubernatorial debates:

[T]he opponents attacked in ways that Vance did in his debate with Ryan — but with Walz, nothing rattled him. And Walz did indeed get attacked, perhaps because he was the favorite in both races… He answered policy questions on climate change, mineral extraction, working with the federal government and pandemic response straightforwardly but not in much detail, something for which both Jensen and Johnson attacked Walz.

And Walz never really took the bait. Nice guys whom people like can do that, and perhaps that is Walz’s biggest advantage over the unpopular yet fully policy-briefed Vance. 

I have a sneaking suspicion that Walz is being underestimated. He was a teacher for years but he's been a politician for the past two decades and is in his second term as governor of Minnesota. He's a pro. His folksy demeanor may just fool the Yale-educated but still very green JD Vance into thinking his rival doesn't understand politics. I think that may be a mistake.

Will tomorrow's debate tip the scales in this inexplicably close election? Maybe. But in the end, it all comes down to the same question: Do people want to go back to the negative, chaotic Trump years and spend four more of them dealing with his rage, revenge and retribution?  We won't find out until the votes are counted. 

“Pride paradox”: Sociologist Arlie Hochschild on Trump’s manipulation of white working class voters

With slightly more than a month until Election Day, the polls show that Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are basically tied. Political scientists, historians, and other experts are describing the 2024 presidential election as one of the closest in modern American history. For those outside of the so-called MAGAverse, Trump’s popularity, even after more than eight years, remains a riddle. Unfortunately, the future of American democracy may be decided by their inability to break the Trump Code. The mainstream news media’s failure to decipher Trumpism has repeatedly led them to normalize the wantonly corrupt ex-president’s extremely malignant behavior.

In her new book “Stolen Pride: Loss, Shame, and the Rise of the Right,” leading sociologist and author Arlie Hochschild has taken on the task of trying to explain Trump’s powerful appeal for and power over “white working class” voters and other downwardly mobile Americans. She argues that Trump speaks to their grievances, pain, rage, and feelings of lost pride, manhood, purpose and honor.

Ultimately, as Hochschild explains in this conversation, to defeat Trumpism and the larger neofascist movement will require that the country’s responsible political leaders, news media, and other elites and influentials become “emotionally bilingual” so that they can better hear and understand how and why a large swath of the public is economically alienated, angry, and feeling left behind from the American Dream.

Arlie Hochschild is a Professor Emerita of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. In addition to “Stolen Pride,” she is the author of many books including “Strangers in Their Own Land,” “The Managed Heart,” and “The Second Shift.”

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length

The 40 or so days until the election are going to feel very slow and very fast at the same time. It is all so disorienting and maddening. How are you feeling? How are you making sense of it?

I am focused on the election. I am caught between anxiety and concern because the election is too close right now. Harris and Trump are neck and neck and in recent polls, Trump leads by a bit in the battleground states. In the last 100 years there has not been an election as important as the one between Trump and Harris. If we take Trump at his word, he's talking about changing the Constitution and making himself a dictator. As a country we are not as alarmed as we should be by Trump's threats, because he has so flagrantly broken so many rules of politics and life. The scary thing is that we’ve become used to it.

Many on the Democratic side are still baffled by Trump’s enormous appeal. That’s a big problem too because we really need to know what we’re up against. We need to break the code that Trump is speaking as the leader to his followers. People outside of the MAGA movement all too often throw up their hands and say Trump is nuts and his followers are duped. But when we leave matters there, we’re not looking at what’s dangerous about Trump and his movement. Once we really tune into what Trump is saying and get why his MAGA devotees are so loyal to him then we can come to understand what is happening. This will not make any non-Trumper more relaxed, but it will help us see the danger in what’s happening and better gauge what to do about it.

Once we tune into what Trump is saying — i.e., become emotionally “bilingual” — we can get why he has gained MAGA loyalists among the 42% of non-BA-holding whites, and even an increasing proportion of Black and Latino men — and why the Dems have lost them. Why are poor Appalachians – whose parents and grandparents were FDR Democrats — I wondered, voting 80% for Donald Trump?

I am a product of and a proud member of the Black working class. That background and growing up with white working class people have given me great insight into Trump and his appeal that many of my colleagues from more upper class, if not rich white, backgrounds lack.

Your working-class background gives you access to an important mode of communication — one that many if not most journalists and reporters do not yet have. One of the reasons I wrote “Stolen Pride” is to help us all become bilingual by understanding the language and logic of Trump and his appeal. You can take what Donald Trump says literally, and by doing so miss what is being said emotively. In red states, and Appalachia in particular, that I write about in "Stolen Pride," there is a story of struggle, loss, poverty and addiction.

"He dismissed Trump but saw little for himself in the Democratic Party. He was pointing to a missing bridge."

Pike County, in Kentucky's fifth congressional district, is the whitest and second poorest district in the nation. Only 13% – less than half the national average — have BA degrees. Of those aged 20 to 64, only some 58% are working or looking for work. In a once proud, thriving coal region, a higher-than-average number live alone, are in poor health or have died of drug addiction. After the coal industry collapse, men worked local jobs for seven, eight or nine dollars an hour —“high-school” or “girly” jobs, as many saw them — wages too low to support a family. Some left town for Midwest industrial towns, but came home empty-handed, and felt shame at that. Then they got on welfare and felt shame at that. Or they got into drugs and felt shame at that. A once-proud people, shamed.

That story in my opinion can be generalized more broadly to a national story about the large percentage of Americans who are white and lack college degrees, and who are now downwardly mobile. Over the last two decades, noncollege whites have suffered a decline in wages and property. So, they’re worse off than before. But they’ve also become worse off than both whites with BAs, and Blacks with or without BAs. So, they feel headed downward.

One thing makes bad job news worse — a strict culture of individual responsibility — or what I call a pride paradox. Many in eastern Kentucky are living in economic free fall. But at the same time, they hold to an individualism-based culture of pride. If they succeed, they can say, “I worked hard and can and feel proud. But if I fail, I didn't work hard enough, or in the right way, and I deserve shame.” They are sitting ducks for undeserved shame.

Trump has brilliantly prospected for white, blue-collar shame, found it, converted shame to blame and set it on fire.

What does it mean to be working class? How is the white working class different from the Black and/or brown working class? That is important because Black and brown working-class people, like Black and brown folks more generally, reject Trumpism even though they too are experiencing economic precarity and downward mobility — if not more than their white peers. How do you explain that divergence?

There are a number of definitions of "working class." The one I use here is a person who does not have a bachelor's degree and works with his or her hands. Being "working class" in this era also means an experience of diminishing social capital and access to higher jobs and upper mobility. There is a great deal of denial about what working class people are experiencing in this country.

The Democratic Party has dropped its earlier civil-rights-based, union-based, cross-racial, cross-ethnic narrative. It’s not on the airwaves. It’s not even much in the talk on college campuses. That’s what’s missing — a track to an alternative politic focused across ethnicity and race on issues of social class. There is more to say about race, but the discussion should begin with poverty and include everyone who suffers from it.

In "Stolen Pride," I describe former vibrant mining camps where Black and white pro-union workers punched into and out of work together. In the 1940s Harlan County had over 8,000 Black coal miners and their families, Kentucky being, for many, a stopover in the Great Migration to the industrial North. In 1917 US Steel recruited coal miners from 38 nations. Such recruitment strategies were likely designed to divide and rule and thereby dampen union activism, but such coal camps were more diverse than many middle-sized American towns today.

Unions used to act as the middleman between the white working class and the Democratic Party and I noticed a link between a dad’s – or even granddad’s — membership in the union and a grandchild’s lean toward the Democrats. But I met even more poor whites who were either pro-Trump — or turned off by him but felt disinvited from the Democratic Party by “identity politics” that they felt excluded them as “privileged” when they felt — and were — poor.

We need your help to stay independent

One man, who is white and high school educated, described himself as “trailer trash” and told me, “Compare me to a Black guy I knew in high school who came from a ghetto in Louisville. What's the difference between him and me? I'm poor; he's poor. I've got drugs all around me. He's got drugs all around him. I've got cousins who are in jail. He's got cousins who are in jail. I didn't get beyond high school. He didn't get beyond high school. What's the difference between him and me, except the music — I’ve got twangy country string music; he’s got rap.”

He went on: “I feel naked. I am white. I am poor. I’ve always lived here. I am not middle class. But society says I am white so I must be privileged. Society also says if you are middle class, you must have worked hard. If you are Black and poor, racism must have stopped you. But I am white and I’m still poor. So, I must be less than nothing because it is somehow all my fault.” He dismissed Trump but saw little for himself in the Democratic Party. He was pointing to a missing bridge.

What role does pride play for the white working-class people in Pikeville, Kentucky, and other parts of red state America (and elsewhere) who support Donald Trump?

I think we live in both a material economy and a pride economy. In politics, sometimes the material economy matters more, and sometimes the pride economy matters more. Trump made all sorts of promises to Appalachians. He promised to bring back coal and other “great” jobs. But between 2016 and 2000, coal jobs continued to drop. Great jobs did not come in. His tax cuts didn’t help these poor whites. So, there was no rise in the material economy.

But guess what? Trump helped those same poor and working-class white people feel proud and seen again. He talked about national pride and Making America Great Again. His voters feel that language and take it personally. Yes, Trump is lifting them up psychologically and emotionally by putting other people down — in particular, nonwhites and others deemed by him and the right as not being "real Americans." But that psychological and emotional wage in the pride economy is very real and very powerful — sometimes, even more than the wages paid in the material economy.

For the people you spoke to, what does it mean to be "a real man?"

In mining country, a coal miner was like a decorated GI. He faced danger and took risks. He felt he was contributing to society by keeping the lights on and providing energy to win wars. He worked hard and felt proud of his blackened face. He provided well for his wife and kids. Sons were also proud to follow their dad into the trade. But now all these liberal environmentalists were suddenly blaming guys like him for climate change and calling coal a dirty industry. As an unemployed man, or a low-wage worker or as a migrant out of Appalachia looking for a better job, he’d taken a hit in male pride.

How do the people you got to know and learn from in “Stolen Pride” rationalize and explain their support for Donald Trump given that he has not improved their economic and material lives?

To answer that question, we have to look at politics as felt, and sometimes the best way to convey feeling is through a deep story. So, if you’re a Trump voter, here’s your deep story: You’re waiting in a long line leading up to the American Dream. The line is not moving. You're not looking at the long line of people behind you, instead you are just looking ahead, and you see you're not moving. Then you see people you perceive as “line cutters": women, Black and brown people, immigrants, refugees, and well-paid public servants. You notice a bad bully in line who is helping these undeserving line-cutters. But — hey — there is the good bully, who is going to help people like you. Yes, he has flaws, but he is still your bully: Donald Trump.

People on the left are aghast and decry the bully and yell about how he or she is a bad person. The Trump voters and other people on the right set all that aside because Trump is a charismatic leader defending them, their “good bully.” That’s how one of many explained things to me, and others agreed with him.

The mainstream news media and political class, even after eight years, continue to fall on the fainting couch when Trump does or says bad things. They are waiting for a breaking point where Trump does something so horrific that his MAGA people and other supporters will abandon him. Guess what? It will not happen.

"Trump is standing up for people like us." Trump presents himself as a fighter for his MAGA people and the "lost" and "forgotten" white Americans. That is why they love him. Some I spoke with feel like the Democrats have — in the realms of opportunity and recognition — shut white men out. However much they dislike Trump, they see him as their best option. As for Trump’s damage to democracy, it’s not on their radar.

What was Pikeville, Kentucky like during the time you were there? In many ways, it was a microcosm of the Age of Trump.

When I first arrived in Pikeville, I gradually realized I was looking at a perfect storm of events. Coal jobs were leaving, and a drug crisis was coming in. "Deaths of despair" — which Anne Case and Angus Deaton write about in their book by that name — are a fact of life here.


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


In 2017, white supremacists were going to march through the town, a trial run for the deadly march that was to follow months later in Charlottesville. I talked to many people during that time for the book — city leaders, the potential victims of that Nazi march such as a Black civil servant who had lived in Pike County a lot longer than most people, and a Holocaust survivor who was a lawyer. I also talked to the Imam of a small mosque. And yes, I talked extensively to one of the organizers of that hate march too. I interviewed regular people on both sides of the political divide to try to get a feeling for the pulse of the community. I have to say that of all the people I talked to, the most insightful were the recovering addicts who had kind of been out of the culture for a while and were not trying to come back to normal society. I talked to people in Pike County for seven years and one of the people I talked to fit into a neat box. In both 2016 and 2020, 80% voted for Trump, but that left 20% who were horrified at Trump, or felt ignored by the Democrats, and many used to vote Democratic.

What you are detailing is a story of why so-called white pride and other white victimology and white identity politics have become so powerful in the Age of Trump and the global democracy crisis.

Donald Trump appeals to "white pride" by telling his followers that the Democrats look down on people like you. Trump also plays on white grievance politics by telling his followers that "I am lifting you up. You white men, I’m the only one looking out for you. The Democrats have been taken over by women and minorities. They don’t care about you. I do.”

Trump accuses the Democrats of identity politics by favoring women and minorities, but his mantra of “make America great again” boils down to identity politics for white men. I talked to guys who said, “neither party focuses on social class or poverty. How did that get squeezed out of the conversation?” Reverend William Barber — a Black minister writing about white poverty –- has been heroically trying to address this exclusion –- but I don’t think we’re hearing it enough in Harris’ speeches.

How are you making sense of JD Vance and his “Hillbilly Elegy” narrative?

One Trump voter told me, “Vance is a drag on our ticket.” Others accepted Vance but don’t like him, mainly because his book criticizes hillbillies for their “bad choices” and flawed culture and celebrates his own desperate escape out of it.

Ironically, Vance's speeches invite America’s women to take a path that would trap them in the very same circumstances that led his own mother — pregnant at 13 to become the trapped, depressed, addicted single mother she became — all of which shaped the traumatic boyhood Vance hated and fled. But speaking now as the vice presidential candidate on the Trump ticket, Vance advises America’s women to have babies — to avoid the stigma of being “childless cat ladies.” Otherwise, he says they won’t grow up to care about America’s future.

He also tells women to have their babies young — don’t wait until you need in vitro fertilization. Then if she has an unwanted pregnancy, don’t look to him or the Republican Party for any help. Should she become depressed and turn to drugs, again, Vance would seem to be saying, “more bad choices.” He says nothing about public dollars for drug recovery, job retraining, or other social services. So, while celebrating his own great escape from his mother’s trauma, it seems Vance’s views and policies, if enacted, would return all the rest of the nation’s women to the same bleak “choices” faced by his 13-year-old mom.

“It’s a desire to affiliate with Donald Trump”: An exvangelical on the implosion of his former faith

Large numbers of Americans are giving up on Christianity. The trendlines are unmistakable. Fewer people are going to church. The number of people who say they have no religious affiliation has risen. The "nones" are the biggest religious group now, outnumbering both evangelicals and Catholics. For some, walking away from religion is easy. But for a lot of people, especially those who once counted themselves in the ranks of the evangelicals, it can be a lot harder. The evangelical identity can be all-consuming, shaping not just how a person prays, but how they identify, how they vote and how they live their daily life. So it's no surprise that an online community of ex-evangelicals — exvangelical— has formed, giving those who have walked away a space to process their experience, move into a new life, and, often, warn other Americans about the political threat looming from this subset of Christianity. 

In his new book "Exvangelical and Beyond: How American Christianity Went Radical and the Movement That's Fighting Back," podcast host Blake Chastain goes beyond recounting his own journey out of the Christian right, and into the larger story of how that community even came to be. He chronicles how white evangelicalism is not an ancient tradition, as its proponents often assume, but an American phenomenon. The faith, he argues, exists as much to justify racism and unbridled capitalism as it does to praise Jesus. 

Chastain spoke with Salon about his story and why evangelicalism needs to be understood more as an identity than a theology.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

Let's start with the most basic question: Why write about ex-evangelicals, and why at this point?

The last eight or 10 years have illustrated longer-term issues within American Christianity. One outcome is that many people are disaffiliating from their churches, their belief systems, and their communities. In particular, people are leaving white evangelicalism, due to the inherently political nature of those spaces. Exvangelicalism isn't a complete belief system, like evangelicalism is. In many ways, though, it's a mirror of it and is in dialogue with evangelicalism. People who use the term "exvangelical" or "ex-evangelical" to describe themselves had a formative experience within evangelicalism. They no longer identify with that belief or belong to those communities.

"You can see through different surveys that have been done, especially since 2016, that there's a drift of what the word 'evangelical' means. Many people who have not participated in a local evangelical church or community self-describe as "evangelical." It's a desire to affiliate with Donald Trump, the GOP, or general conservatism."

The thing that is distinct over the last decade or so is the maturation of social media. Far more people can share their individual experiences than ever before. Whereas in the past, to tell a story of deconstruction or de-conversion you had to write a book. Now you can start an Instagram page, a TikTok page, a podcast, or a YouTube channel.

What I hope to do with my book is show a history of people both trying to reform evangelicalism from within and people who have not been able to do that and have had to leave. They're our predecessors to today's online ex-evangelical movement.


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


It feels to me that the rise of exvangelicals came out of the ashes of the New Atheist movement, which imploded because so many New Atheist leaders were replicating the racism, sexism, and reactionary politics of the white evangelical church. But that's a rabbit hole. The larger question is how does being an exvangelical differ from being a critic of right-wing religion?

It's distinct in that it's a bit more specific. The thing that makes exvangelicalism is it's specifically speaking about the evangelical traditions, the particular presentation and orientation of that faith and speaking directly to that. You can see examples of similar movements from other faith traditions. There is a very active "ex-mo" or ex-Mormon community online. You can see other spaces that are more broadly ex-Christian. 

In this book, you don't seem too interested in the theological discourse about what constitutes evangelicalism. Instead, you write about evangelicalism as a socio-political phenomenon. Why do you center the politics and white identity politics of evangelicals, and not so much their theological beliefs in things like the rapture?

Conservative evangelicals decry identity politics, but they also take part in them. You can see through different surveys that have been done, especially since 2016, that there's a drift of what the word "evangelical" means. Many people who have not participated in a local evangelical church or community self-describe as "evangelical." It's a desire to affiliate with Donald Trump, the GOP, or general conservatism. It's drifted for those theological markers.

But even before that, scholars for years have argued that theology is not necessarily the defining characteristic of evangelicalism. Whiteness, capitalism, and power helped to develop an evangelical industry. The theology takes a back seat. That may not be the case for every single person that uses the term "evangelical." But conservative white evangelicals act in a particular way, and that deserves our attention. It deserves to be criticized within those terms, as much as whether they live up to their espoused theological beliefs.

Even after nine years of Trump's non-stop campaign for president, I still see a lot of pundits who seem baffled by the fact that the vast majority of white evangelicals support Donald Trump. Why is it so hard for them to understand it?

From an outsider's perspective, it's still common to underestimate the degree to which political conservatism permeates mass evangelical culture. That is why, in my book, I look at prior attempts to moderate evangelical spaces, which evangelicals have rejected for the past 40 to 50 years. The groups that maintain the most power are on the conservative side, whether from a theological or political perspective.

There are progressive evangelical spaces and people. But they do have a difficult road. They've been steadfastly pushed out. With such an uphill battle, people burn out. That often means they leave evangelicalism and become, exvangelical or move on to another spiritual community. The entrenched conservativism has been built up for decades within evangelical spaces. It just seems de facto for evangelicals to align themselves with the GOP.

A lot of evangelicals talk about their faith as if it is this deep tradition going back thousands of years. But, as you detail, it's relatively new and cannot be disassociated from the history of the United States. 

Certainly, there's an assumption that evangelicalism was this immutable thing passed down from the time of Jesus to today. That's the result of beliefs in things like biblical inerrancy, this idea that the Bible had no textual errors. It created a rift between those more conservative communities and the more moderate and even liberal ones. That's why a lot of more progressive forms of Christianity today don't have much dialogue with evangelical partners. And evangelicals often aren't in dialogue with people from other faith communities.

"It's distressing to learn what motivated those initial leaders and subsequently influenced all these other people in your life was racism. It can make you curious about what else needs to be learned about evangelical history."

Take the teaching of "the rapture." That is a recent development. John Nelson Darby popularized that idea in the 19th century. That's a blink of an eye, compared to the 2000-year history of Christianity. But it did train American Christians to feel dread about the future and this idea that Jesus is going to be coming back soon. It's created a pessimism, a belief we should focus on converting people, not social welfare and reform. Its proponents in the 19th century opposed those who espoused the gospel of improving society for everyone. They emphasize just evangelism because Jesus is coming. We're still living with the consequences.

We need your help to stay independent

In this book, you deal with the misconception that the Moral Majority and larger Christian right development in the late 20th century was due to abortion. You argue it was really more about race. Why is that?

This has been documented by a lot of scholars and journalists. One significant piece was a 2014 article by Randall Balmer, who is an evangelical historian. As a millennial who was raised in the eighties and nineties, I assumed that the politically active Christians that I saw were primarily motivated by restricting abortion access, and that was the animating issue that brought evangelicals into the political sphere.

But when you look at the historical record, you find that figures like Billy Graham called abortion a Catholic issue. After Roe v. Wade was initially announced, the Southern Baptist Convention affirmed it as a good development. What drew evangelicals into politics was actually a federal lawsuit against the fundamentalist school Bob Jones University. They threatened the tax-exempt status of the university for failing to integrate racially in the seventies. It was then that Paul Weyrich, who founded the Heritage Foundation, saw an opportunity to align with evangelicals. He was a conservative Catholic, but he saw an opportunity to generate animosity and motivate evangelicals to rally to conservative causes.

It's distressing to learn what motivated those initial leaders and subsequently influenced all these other people in your life was racism. It can make you curious about what else needs to be learned about evangelical history. 

Both the evangelical and exvangelical movements are very online. They often encounter each other. You write that, in your experience, most evangelicals can only deal with a strawman version of exvangelicals. Can you say more about what you mean by that?

Evangelical leaders could reach out to exvangelical commentators, who would happily accept a reasonable request for public conversations. Instead, they characterize ex-evangelicals as people who simply wanted to leave because they wanted to sin, or because there was some fleeting online social clout. That feels disingenuous. Instead of listening to what we have to say or speaking to us directly, they'd rather criticize a theoretical person. They don't want the perspective of someone who can, with examples, explain why they left.

Ironically, we have insights they could benefit from. We can tell them why their beliefs are harmful. But they don't wish to hear that. There's not much you can do to encourage that dialogue any further. These dialogues have to happen at a remove. 

I mean, didn't you want to sin a little bit?

(Laughs) I didn't believe that what they called a sin was a sin. 

Navigating the sudden grief of severe hearing loss

It was one of those foggy, yet shimmering evenings that makes San Francisco the city it is. My wife and I met our oldest friends at a way-too-hip restaurant on lower Divisadero Street, near where we all used to live. It was a very San Francisco place, having been in a previous life a laundromat and Bank of Italy branch. We toasted to our friendship of three decades. Clinks all around. Friends since our now-grown children had been infants.

More people jammed into the restaurant. The buzz grew into a roar. We found ourselves shouting, but that was all right. We were part of a gathering of merrymakers. Iris was trying to convince Barry that the four of us ought to go to Portugal for a vacation. Val and I were talking about when our respective sons were toddlers, throwing from a crib a mountain of Beanie Babies while smiling like Cheshire cats.

At least, that’s what I think we were talking about. I was feeling good, but nowhere near tipsy.

And that’s when I realized: I was going deaf.

Nothing seemed to be coming out of Val’s mouth. She was moving her lips, definitely talking. But the speech bubble between us was empty. I could hear bits and pieces, but I couldn’t make out what they meant. The guts of each word had been stripped bare. Like a fish deboned, leaving a skeleton.

The moment is forever etched in my brain and it was terrifying.

I nodded and smiled, picking up scraps of what I was left trying to figure out. I asked Val to repeat herself, touching my index finger to my ear, angling my chin to the crowd six-deep at the bar. This wasn’t the time to fess up that something horribly wrong was happening. I felt like I had stepped into an Edvard Munch painting.

That night I didn’t say anything to my wife about the episode. I chalked it up to yet another high-decibel brasserie that made me feel like I was dining in a hangar at SFO.

I felt like I had stepped into an Edvard Munch painting.

We returned home to Iowa City, where I’m a professor at the University of Iowa. But when classes started in the fall, I noticed something was askew. I had to ask a few students to “speak up.” This wasn’t cause for concern — a lot of students mumble.

But the signs became impossible to ignore. I made an appointment for a hearing test at the university hospital, where I was put in a soundproof vault and outfitted with headphones and asked to repeat what was drilled into my ears. “Say the word ‘hello.’ Say the word ‘baseball.’”

The audiologist noted that I had missed several. When I met with an ENT physician following my vault experience, after examining my ears for wax and finding none, he made the suggestion that I might have a neuroma, or flap, which might be blocking sound coming into one or both of my ears.

“It’s unusual but an MRI will tell. Just to be sure,” they said.

The technician positioned me to slide through the metal arc of an MRI machine while the sound of jackhammers pounded. If I already wasn’t deaf, the racket surely pushed me along the way. In a week, the test came back “unremarkable.” I wasn’t sure whether this was a summary of my inner-ear workings or my brain acuity. There was no neuroma.

Over the next six months, in class and in meetings, my hearing got worse. I found myself strategically moving to position myself in front of whoever was talking, at least when I could. I took to focusing on the speaker’s mouth; sometimes I nodded at conversation stops even though I wasn’t sure what I was agreeing with. At restaurants, I tried to snag a seat with my back against the wall.


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


Nine months later, I went back into the hearing vault. My hearing had gotten worse, as shown on an audiogram filled with X’s, O’s and squiggles connecting them. Another ENT physician suggested that I was suffering from general and assorted hearing loss — and yes, I really should consider hearing aids.

“Jeez,” I said more to myself than to the physician. It was my turn to mutter.

“Everyone’s got something in their ears these days,” he replied, trying to soften the blow.

In fact, as I was to learn, not having some degree of hearing loss is unusual, particularly for those who are middle-aged and older. Men in their fifties are three times as likely to have hearing loss than women of the same age, and the average age of a person buying hearing aids today is 60.

But why did I have to wear hearing aids in the first place? Was it something I did? Too many after-shower Q-Tips? Should I not have sat front row for the 1985 Born in the U.S.A. Tour?

And, if indeed my hearing was going, in the high-tech world of medicine, why wasn’t there some operation to improve it? You can get a replacement heart, ocular lens, liver, knee, hip, kidney, why not an ear — or the delicate bones inside it? It turns out that not only are there no such transplants, but little surgery is ever done on the ear.

Unlike eye surgery, which is common, operations aren’t often performed on the pliable bones and hair cell receptors of the middle ear, the source of natural hearing. There’s no equivalent of LASIK or cataract surgery when it comes to ears. Apart from a rare stapedectomy performed in response to a condition known as otosclerosis, if you’re hearing disabled, no operation can fix the condition.

Without other options, I figured with some embarrassment that I’d try hearing aids. I was gobsmacked at how expensive they were. The money, though, wasn’t the only thing that set me back. It was what wearing them meant. I had to face up to the fact that medically nothing was going to help me.

It’s with particular irony that I find myself with hearing aids. My head is large — I have a difficult time finding hats that fit — and my ears are correspondingly oversized, so large that a dreaded childhood taunt bullies used to hurl at me was “Ears!” The fleshy auriculae protruding on either side of my head are a caricature artist’s dream.

Outfitted with the top-of-the-line Phonak Audéo model, the devices were far from perfect. The hearing aids had to be calibrated numerous times. Yes, they improved my hearing, but in no way corrected it. The sound was tinny, distorted, mechanical and artificial-sounding. It felt like a miniature and flimsy speaker cone jammed into my ear. It itched, too. Where was all the rich high-fidelity we’ve come to expect from Sensurround electronics?

It’s now been three years since I first got outfitted. Do I like them? No. Do I need them? Yes.

If indeed my hearing was going, in the high-tech world of medicine, why wasn’t there some operation to improve it?

Unlike glasses or contacts, they don’t correct hearing to the equivalent of 20/20 eyesight. I switched audiologists. As in all professions, not all audiologists are equally skilled. Adjusting hearing aids, I learned, is as much an art as it is a skill. Some audiologists will rush you. Some may talk (too loudly or softly) your ear off. Others might balk at the myriad adjustments you’ll ask them to tweak.

While no longer resembling a bulky transmitter, the basic hearing-aid concept is the same as when I was in high school 50 years ago. Essentially, they are combination microphones and amplifiers. They can be fully inserted in your ear or positioned atop it. They’ve gotten smaller over the years , and they’re now equipped with bluetooth, so talking on the phone, watching TV or listening to music through them is easier and more seamless.

They can also narrow or widen the field of sound of what the devices pick up, minimizing disrupting background noise. But they don’t materially alter the quality or substance of the sound that comes into your ears. They amplify sound directly into your ear canal. No matter how advanced they are, they don’t do much to make the sound clearer — just louder and slightly reformatted.

Because the FDA now allows the public to purchase hearing aids without a prescription, some devices have dropped in price. But for anyone with more than moderate hearing loss, getting an audiologist to perform a hearing test and then outfitting you with an appropriate device is the preferential way to go — if you can afford it.

I’ve seen a half dozen physicians who specialize in diseases of the ear, nose and throat, known technically as otolaryngologists and at least in my case, few of these physicians seemed all that interested in my hearing deficiency. Unless you have severe-to-profound hearing loss that makes you a candidate for a cochlear implant, these doctors seemed to have better things to do. Another aging guy whose wife tells him to turn down the TV.

The otolaryngologists I saw at three major university hospitals took a cursory look in my ears and then sent me on my way. The visits were over in ten minutes.

We need your help to stay independent

To improve hearing, it’s the device that’s essential. Most of the extras hearing-aid companies tout today include adjustments for comfort, clarity, speech and ambient sound, but few users will rely on any of these settings three months into wearing them, opting instead to default to the hearing aid’s preset settings. Additional presets (like while driving or for windy walks on the beach) can be made by an authorized dealer with access to the manufacturer’s programs custom set to your individual device. The wearer can make adjustments for noisy locations like restaurants, but in my case, that helped only minimally.

You’ll likely want to get an intuitive hearing aid that can be operated with minimal training via your smartphone, which carries the device’s controls. Each brand is different, so it makes sense to try out several models made by different manufacturers. Your provider should allow you to take units home and experiment.

There are some nifty innovations on the market that may change the shape of things to hear. One is a patented device pioneered by Silicon Valley neuroscientist David Eagleman called the Neosensory Clarify. This device seeks to help hearing-disabled users with a Fitbit-looking device strapped on the wrist. It uses ancillary senses to pick up the slack when the body’s primary anatomical organ — the ear — starts to falter.

My initial vanity — that the hearing aids would stick out like a flashing neon sign — proved to be mostly a non-issue.

The Clarify supposedly redeploys the brain to pick up sounds translated to vibrations on the wrist. In a sense, it seeks to do for the hearing-impaired what braille does for the blind: It creates an alternative pathway to cognition. After wearing these devices for a month, the Clarify purports to train the brain to translate the electrical impulses to register in your brain as sounds. The device asks a revolutionary question: Do we really need our ears to hear? Might we be able to get the same data to our brains through another peripheral? Instead of your ears, why not your skin? Some users say the device works, others suggest it’s snake oil.

My initial vanity — that the hearing aids would stick out like a flashing neon sign — proved to be mostly a non-issue. The devices I ended up with rest comfortably on the top of my ear. I don’t feel them and their weight is inconsequential. They’re small, kidney-shaped, and come in color-coordinated shades, which camouflages them to near-invisibility. I chose a subtle salt-and-pepper gray model. A clear, hollow tube connects the microphone housing to the miniature speakers inserted into my ears. To the casual observer, I’m going ear commando.

Audiologists advise wearing the hearing aids from the moment you wake till the second you hit your pillow. Even if you’re alone all day. Even if you don’t anticipate encountering another soul. The reason: Wearing the devices just occasionally tricks your brain into thinking you don’t need them, and that’ll confuse the prized three-pound master cranial organ a top your spinal cord. On-and-off wearing is not recommended.

But wearing the devices is a commitment to being dependent on them. The design of hearing aids muffles or blocks almost all of the natural unamplified sounds that stream into your ear canal.

Occasionally, depending on what interactions I have planned for the day, I won’t put them in — despite my provider’s cautionary advice. Going au natural means not hearing a lot of the annoying sounds we all endure: leaf blowers, airplanes, car alarms, neighbors and their relatives chowing down brats in the backyard. Without the devices, there’s a sublime and supreme sense of quietude.

When I fly, I don’t need to wear noise-canceling headsets or Airbuds; all I need to do is keep the hearing aids in and turned off.

The fact that hearing loss doesn’t happen suddenly might be considered the cruelest part of having to wear hearing aids. Every month, you stealthily realize you’re in the process of losing more and more. It's scary to realize that one of your senses, one you’ve cherished and taken for granted for decades, is taking a hike and never returning.

Hearing is the intimate sense that made it possible for you to comprehend a parent’s first words to you, your teenage crush whispering, “I love you”; your newborn’s nightingale cooing, not to mention the enjoyment of a performance of “Der Ring des Nibelungen” or marveling over Elis Regina dulcet singing of “The Girl from Ipanema.”

The scariest part is that hearing loss is irreversible. To have possessed something, to have nurtured and treasured it, and for it to be stolen from you never to return, that can be crushing.

Sometimes I get angry about the disparity of health, however much of a nonevent hearing disability is when compared to other maladies. Perhaps to comfort myself, I peel my eyes whenever I’m in any similarly-aged crowd to see if others are wearing hearing aids. I’ve gotten so adept that I try to figure out which brand and model they’re sporting.

I still hate putting them in most mornings. I have mixed results in a classroom. Zoom classes work better for me than in-person classes, during which I can utilize the bluetooth capability. When I’m out of a controlled environment, when I’m in an airport or at the supermarket or post office, I’ll sometimes preemptively say, “I’m hearing disabled,” even though I hate doing that and it usually does nothing.

You don’t realize how complicated comprehending speech can be until your hearing abilities are compromised.

Understanding someone wearing a COVID-19 mask is nearly impossible for me. Trying to decipher a pronounced foreign accent is equally difficult. Crowded restaurants are still difficult for me to navigate; large parties and functions are not generally welcomed. I don’t lipread, but I find myself looking to the speaker’s mouth for clues, and that seems to help. I have to be aware of how loud or soft my own voice is because my ears don’t register it as resolutely as they used to. Hearing aids carry their own eccentricities. I can hear the faint creaking of floorboards in my house yet when I’m in the middle of a robust three-way conversation, I feel like the odd man out.

It’s all exhausting. You don’t realize how complicated comprehending speech can be until your hearing abilities are compromised.

Where will it all end? My hearing acuity continues to get worse. There are four main stages of hearing loss: mild, moderate, severe and profound. I’ve gone from mild to moderate to moderately severe in three years. That's what a stack of audiograms indicate. The slope of decline is steeper than a ski jump at the Sochi Olympics.

Being the journalist I am, from the beginning of this strange and bewildering acoustic saga, I wanted to determine the etiology of my hearing decline. How bad was it going to get? How come such an unrelenting, unforgiving decline? Will I eventually go deaf? Should I start learning American Sign Language?

My hearing deficiency likely had been going downhill for years. But it was declining so incrementally that I hadn’t really noticed it until that evening at the sound-ricocheting restaurant. But I thought there had to be something more to it than just age-related hearing loss. It seemed to be slipping so fast and precipitously that its cause had to be more than the accumulation of nonspecific skirmishes with aging.

Why was a mystery — until my son called several months ago.

Michael and his wife, wanting to start a family, did what lots of young people do: They got preemptive, routine genetic counseling. Three weeks later, their tests came back. Everything normal. No cause for alarm. They can and ought to proceed, the counselor told them.

Michael called to share the news. As an afterthought, he added that on his genetic report card it was noted that he tested positive for an obscure genetic condition, so rare that it’s not even considered a disease, just a “syndrome,” called Alport. Some 150,000 Americans are estimated to have either the dominant or recessive gene that causes Alport syndrome, named after a South African physician, Arthur Cecil Alport, an expert on malaria, who wrote about the mutation in 1927 in The British Medical Journal.

“It’s something about irregular collagen in three parts of the body: your kidneys, inner ear, and eyes,” Michael said.

I signed up for my own genetic test, which confirmed that I, too, have Alport Syndrome (my variant is autosomal dominant Alport syndrome), one that has spared my eyes, but has manifested in my kidneys and ears. My kidneys are holding fairly strong. It’s the progressive hearing loss that seemingly is the byproduct of Alport syndrome, which I likely inherited from my father.

For now, my aural symptoms aren’t much different from those someone with age-related hearing loss might experience. Some Alport patients are deaf; others have moderate hearing impairment. It’s the type IV collagen in the basement membrane of my cochlea, or inner ear, that is abnormal and contributes to sensorineural hearing loss.

Until there’s something better to stick in my ear, it seems that I’ll need to make a separate peace with my not-so-trusty but none-the-less essential salt-and-pepper hearing aids. Will I eventually go deaf? No one can predict. But if I live another 20 years, I’ll likely have other assorted maladies so that my hearing loss will be just another medical issue that I’ll have to learn to contend with.