Three-body solution: These massive blue stars may not be duos, but threesomes instead

Be stars are weird. They are rapidly rotating stars about 4 to 18 times larger than the sun, but a pleasing blue color surrounded by discs of gas, not unlike the rings of Saturn. They spin so fast that they approach "critical velocity" or the point where they would otherwise blast apart due to centrifugal force overpowering the star's gravity. And what they say about living fast and dying young holds true: these stars only live to be about be about 5 to 10 million years before sputtering out — a short life for a star.

These fascinating celestial bodies have captivated astronomers for generations, in no small part because of their mysterious nature. Among other things, astronomers were puzzled by how Be stars — which were first discovered by Italian astronomer Angelo Secchi in 1866 — were even formed in the first place.

Now a group of scientists have published a study in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society which offers a tantalizing clue in answer to that question: It postulates that massive Be stars – which were previously thought to exist as double stars – may in reality be triple stars.

How gravitational waves are opening up the hidden corners of the universe to human eyes

As the authors explain in their study, Be stars "are rapidly rotating stars surrounded by a disc; however the origin of this rotation remains unclear," with the previous main hypothesis being that that two close stars transfer mass between themselves. Yet by analyzing data from the European Space Agency’s Gaia satellite, the researchers found surprising evidence that Be stars exist in triple systems, meaning that three bodies interact with each other instead of two.

Artist’s impression of a vampire star (left) stealing material from its victim: New research using data from ESO’s Very Large Telescope has revealed that the hottest and brightest stars, which are known as O stars, are often found in close pairs. Many of such binaries will at some point transfer mass from one star to another, a kind of stellar vampirism depicted in this artist’s impression. (ESO/M. Kornmesser/S.E. de Mink)

“We observed the way the stars move across the night sky, over longer periods like 10 years, and shorter periods of around six months," University of Leeds PhD student Jonathan Dodd, the lead author of the study, explained in a statement. "If a star moves in a straight line, we know there’s just one star, but if there is more than one, we will see a slight wobble or, in the best case, a spiral."

Dodd added, “We applied this across the two groups of stars that we are looking at – the B stars and the Be stars – and what we found, confusingly, is that at first it looks like the Be stars have a lower rate of companions than the B stars. This is interesting because we’d expect them to have a higher rate.” Dr. René D Oudmaijer, a physics professor from the University of Leeds who co-authored the paper, speculated that this may happen because some of the stars are too faint to be detected by Gaia.

"Such stars would go undetected by the measures used within this paper, as they are too close, low-mass and dim to induce a significant enough deviation of the photocentre from the centre of mass," the paper's authors explain.

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

The new research may also shed light on the enigmatic phenomenon known as gravitational waves.

In addition to unlocking mysteries about the origins of Be stars, the new research may also shed light on the enigmatic phenomenon known as gravitational waves. Gravitational waves are ripples in the space-time fabric which are created in the aftermath of two black holes colliding with each other. They were first speculated to exist by acclaimed physicist Albert Einstein back in 1916, but they were not confirmed to be real for another century. Since that time, scientists have used what they have learned about gravitational waves to observe a black hole devour a neutron star, glimpse inside neutron stars and even discover the wobbliest black hole ever seen.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

"There's a revolution going on in physics at the moment around gravitational waves," Oudmaijer explained in his statement. "We have only been observing these gravitational waves for a few years now, and these have been found to be due to merging black holes."

Oudmaijer added, “We know that these enigmatic objects – black holes and neutron stars – exist, but we don't know much about the stars that would become them. Our findings provide a clue to understanding these gravitational wave sources.”

In addition to Dodd and Oudjmaijer, the scientists behind the recent discoveries include University of Leeds PhD student Isaac Radley and a pair of former Leeds academics, Dr Abigail Frost at the European Southern Observatory in Chile and Dr Miguel Vioque of the ALMA Observatory in Chile.

about astronomy

It’s a good thing most women don’t want to date Trump voters

It's an amusing truth that comes up with regularity: Men who love Donald Trump struggle on the dating market. This is neither surprising nor regrettable. Supporting Trump is much like refusing to bathe, blowing your nose in your hands or farting loudly on purpose. It's a repugnant habit that makes you repulsive to normal people. The whole point of dating and marriage is to find happiness, not to spend the rest of one's days suffering in silence while the racist you live with cackles over Greg Gutfeld's latest hateful diatribe disguised as "comedy."

This should be common sense. Yet our sexist culture remains too enamored by stories of female self-sacrifice to accept that it's just fine if Trump voters never get laid. Even people who really should know better have taken to bullying liberal women for their refusal to date male Trump voters. "If attitudes don’t shift, a political dating mismatch will threaten marriage," declared a recent headline of a Washington Post column by the editorial board. To make it even grosser, the op-ed was published the day before Thanksgiving, as if to arm "concerned" relatives who planned to spend the holiday pestering single women at dinner over when they will get serious about finding a husband.

Being married to someone you wanted to marry is very different than what is being suggested here: lowering your standards just to get married.

In this unsigned essay, the authors fret that the "ideological divide" between young men and women is preventing Gen Z — who range in age from 9 to 27— from getting married. Women under 30 are far more likely to be liberal than men, who are far more likely to identify as conservative. Citing data showing that Democratic voters generally refuse to date Trump voters, the Post editors argue that people should be more willing to date across party lines, and learn to appreciate "alternative perspectives that may at first seem odd or offensive."

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

The op-ed presents as if this entreaty to date across party lines as if it's generalized advice being offered to both men and women, and both Republicans and Democrats. But of course, it's aimed primarily, if not exclusively, at Democratic-voting women. The polling data shows that most Republicans are already willing to date Democrats. (Which makes sense, since Democrats make more attractive partners.) It's mostly Democrats — and mostly women — who decline to date those from the other party.

Adding further insult to injury, the editorial board cites right-wing sociologist Brad Wilcox, who is set to publish yet another in a long list of books that treat compulsory heterosexual marriage as a panacea for all social ills. Wilcox has a shady history of ties to anti-gay advocacy. Disturbingly, he once argued that marriage prevents domestic violence. In reality, marriage just traps women in relationships with their abusers.

In trying to sell women on this "marry men who repulse you" plan, the editorial board unconvincingly argues that simply being married makes people happier than being single. But while it may be true that married people — even those in politically mixed marriages — report higher levels of happiness than single people, it doesn't follow that the wedding ring is the reason. Most Americans marry for love, after all. Being married to someone you wanted to marry is very different than what is being suggested here: lowering your standards just to get married.

The insidious rise of "tradwives": A right-wing fantasy is rotting young men's minds

To be a bit crass about it, think about it this way: Two women buy a pair of shoes. The first one is allowed to try on every pair in the store until she finds ones that fit well and look good on her. The other woman buys the first pair on the rack, without even checking if it's her size. Which woman do you think will be happier with her purchase a week from now? And choosing who you marry has even more impact on your life!

But of course, women's happiness is not actually the concern of the Washington Post editorial board.

Marrying a Trump voter isn't just a matter of minor political differences, or expecting someone to be exactly like yourself. For women, in particular, it's about being able to be safe and respected inside your own home, which is a very minimum standard all people deserve. Voting for Trump means backing a man who has been accused of sexual assault by two dozen women, and who a judge and jury deemed responsible for rape. It means backing the man who repeatedly brags that he got Roe v. Wade overturned. In addition, the MAGA media consumed by most Republicans is hardly neutral on the question of sexism. They are all for it, from the tired sexist jokes on Fox News to bizarre internet trends like "tradwives." For a woman, marrying a Trump supporter isn't about being with someone who has different views on tax rates. It's bringing someone into your home who ascribes to an ideology in which you are not fully human.

But of course, women's happiness is not actually the concern of the Washington Post editorial board. The more serious argument comes from their insistence that cross-political marriages will help save the nation from "the Trump-era divisions" and social ills stemming from men's misogyny. Basically, it's a gussied-up version of the classic "Beauty and the Beast" fantasy, where a woman's love can turn the brute into a prince. It's cruel on its face to expect women to give up their own happiness in hopes they can turn a redhat into a better man through patience and love. But it's also a false hope. It's hard enough to get anyone to change their minds about politics. Trying to get men who already think women are inferior to listen to their liberal wives is a joke.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

I have a small sliver of sympathy for the frustration that drives this asinine hope that pity-marriages for Trump voters will save us from the MAGA threat. It's galling that nothing seems to wake up Trump voters from their fascist stupor. Reason doesn't change them. Evidence has no impact. Compassion or decency? We've tried appealing to their better angels for years, and all we get is "cry harder, libs." In the face of this MAGA unwillingness to suck less, there can be comfort in "Twilight"-style fantasies that the monster can be made into a man by a woman's loving touch. But it's simply not real.

Worse, it shifts responsibility for male misbehavior onto women. The blame for MAGA is subtly moved away from those who are perpetuating the problem, meaning Trump's predominantly male voters, onto the shoulders of Democratic women who have been doing everything right all along. It's reminiscent of the way women's hemlines are blamed for male violence or the way mothers are blamed for what their grown sons choose to do. It feels easier to blame women than to hold men accountable. But it's a distraction from the real source of the problem, and from thinking about real solutions.

about this topic

The voters “forgiving” Trump and “punishing” Biden: Obama pollster on “the biggest question” of 2024

If the public opinion polls and other data are to be believed, President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign – and by implication the future of American democracy – is in big trouble. If the presidency is the ultimate bully pulpit, President Biden has been too afraid to use it —at the detriment of us all.

For example, President Biden’s economy is historically strong, but the American people still feel that inflation, and in particular food and gas prices, are extremely high. The American people do not care about the technical details of how and why (price gouging and corporate profiteering); all that matters is that they are hurting. Moreover, the Biden administration and the Democratic Party’s spokespeople have been reluctant to target corporate greed as a winning political issue. Ultimately, that may prove to be a politically fatal miscalculation.

The 2024 election is less than a year away. President Biden and the Democrats are rapidly running out of time to go on the offense and shift the narrative. In an attempt to better understand what is actually happening with President Biden and Donald Trump and the early 2024 presidential polls, what Biden and the Democrats can potentially do to improve his political fortunes, and what may happen next, I recently spoke with Mike Kulisheck, the senior vice president of the Benenson Strategy Group, a consulting and marketing firm that worked as Barack Obama's pollsters during his 2012 re-election campaign.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

We spoke several months ago about President Biden and the Democrats’ polling numbers and the state of American politics in this time of crisis more generally. So much has happened since then. How are you feeling?

The 2024 race feels somewhat frozen. Instead of clarifying choices, the war in the Middle East, ongoing fight in Ukraine, chaos in the House, Trump’s legal woes, and ongoing economic worries raise questions about the incumbent without necessarily empowering the challenger.

"Polling is about understanding the universe you are measuring. The Age of Trump has been marked by the way the political universe changes in small but important ways when Trump is on the ballot."

Polling indicates an electorate that is unhappy with its choices for 2024. Neither Trump nor Biden is popular. Voters across the spectrum are vocal with concerns about both candidates, whether it is age, indictments, performance in office, or threats to democracy. The war in the Middle East reveals division in the Democratic coalition, particularly among younger voters. The Republican Party in the House is dysfunctional, except for its knee-jerk support for the ex-president. Being able to pass a stop-gap bill to keep the government open is a low bar for success.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

I see campaigns that need to make clearer to voters what these big events mean for them. Recent polls should be read as a message to President Biden and the Democrats. They show starkly that a scenario exists where Trump glides to "re-election."

It feels like we are potentially at an inflection point for the Biden campaign where it calibrates to the realities on the ground – namely, soft support among key parts of the Democratic base, ongoing concerns about prices (no matter what the economic statistics say about inflation, wages, and unemployment), and a general unhappiness about where we are as a country – both internally and externally.

In terms of public opinion polls and other ways of measuring the public mood, how much have things changed – or not – in the Age of Trump and beyond?

Polling is about understanding the universe you are measuring. The Age of Trump has been marked by the way the political universe changes in small but important ways when Trump is on the ballot. At my firm, we are spending a lot of time thinking about sampling and data collection methodologies because, as pollsters, we need to be talking to the right people in the right proportions. The Trump effect is real and on poll after poll, we test our assumptions about the make-up of the electorate. At the same time, when it comes to polling, rigor is rigor. We are worrying about the same things during the current Age of Trump as we worried about in 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020.

As an aside, polling in the Age of Trump must be especially nimble. Polling about breaking news can be more complicated when the playing field is being rocked constantly by new information. While the news cycle is fast in general, when Trump is involved, the changes seem to come faster and are bigger. We take this into account when writing questionnaires and interpreting results. Getting at the fundamentals in every poll is particularly important, as it serves to anchor the data and findings, no matter how much is going on in the news cycle. You have to anticipate how the fast-moving events swirling around Trump change – or do not change – how people view the broader political landscape and their choices.

How do we separate the noise from the signal one year out from the 2024 Election?

Outlier polls are the blaring noise that make the signal in polling harder to hear. Outlier polls get disproportionate attention – pretty much by definition – because they often include a man-bites-dog story. As I look at our numbers and public polling, I focus on the metrics and subgroups that have comparable history. For example, the first thing I look at when I read a poll is party identification and I compare it back to previous polls in the same cycle and previous cycles for the sample geography. Similarly, I look at the way young voters, voters of color, women are behaving in polls.

I am a pollster and I really like numbers, but there is art and science to separating the signal from the noise. When a poll feels out-of-step with what you’ve seen or know from years of work, my experience is that it is worth digging deeper and asking questions. That said, today’s outlier poll can turn into the first chapter of a new story. You have to be open to change too.

Rather than over-focusing on the horserace numbers in a poll, I believe it is smarter to look for the story the numbers tell. The horserace can be +3 or -3, but the race is close either way. Going beyond the horserace, what are the numbers telling us? Figuring out the story is about being sensitive to the fact that polling data are real people’s voices. Through the polls, people are telling us about their hopes, fears, aspirations, and concerns. Our polls are opportunities for everyday Americans to have their voices heard.

What is the early polling and other data actually telling us about the 2024 election? How are you and your fellow professionals sorting through all this information, which is often contradictory?

For me, the biggest question is whether support for Biden and the Democrats among key subgroups like younger voters and voters of color snap back to what we saw in 2020 and 2022, or if the openness to Trump and/or third parties that we’ve seen in some recent polls is real and long-term.

"Taking the time to understand voters’ deeper perspectives clarifies their answers to topline questions like, 'For whom will you vote for president in 2024?'"

This is where understanding the context within which voters are viewing their choices and answering polling questions matters. We know voters are unhappy with their likely options in 2024 – a Biden-Trump rematch of 2020. Many voters are looking at what they perceive as a suboptimal choice through the lens of higher prices, a dysfunctional government in Washington, DC, war, etc.

In the polls showing Biden doing poorly with young voters and voters of color compared to 2020, are these voters ‘punishing’ Biden in the poll to hold him accountable? Or, after nearly three years of the Biden presidency, are they looking at Trump with fresh (and forgiving) eyes? Or are they giving up on Biden in favor of a third-party candidate who can’t win but feels more in line with their views? These kinds of questions cannot be gleaned from tracking candidate preference, job approval numbers, or favorability ratings. It requires digging into voters’ hopes, their values, and their fears about the future. Taking the time to understand voters’ deeper perspectives clarifies their answers to topline questions like, “For whom will you vote for president in 2024?”

Can we have too much data and information about an election and political trends?

I’m not sure we have too much data, but I believe data can be confusing. Different methods serve different purposes. Think about the types of data that get reported on: national surveys, state surveys, battleground state surveys, and focus groups. Rather than laddering up to a better understanding of the state of politics, combining these data in people’s heads – without nuanced explanation – can lead to misinterpretation as well as overinterpretation.

From the point of view of the Democrats and Biden, how does the political battlefield look now as the 2024 Election approaches? For Trump and the Republicans?

There is a lot going on at the moment and I see both parties (and leading candidates) being more defensive than I might have expected as we head into 2024.

The Democrats are fretting about President Biden’s campaign and messaging. They have not figured out how to address concerns about Biden’s age or thread the needle on the economy. Their contrast with the Republicans and Trump is a work in progress.

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

The Republicans are dealing with the reality that their likely standard-bearer is making as much news in court rooms as on the campaign trail. Recent election results show how the party is on its heels when it comes to abortion. And the House of Representatives has a Speaker but lacks leadership and direction.

Several observations for Biden and the Democrats: First, President Biden is uniquely skilled at hearing people and connecting with their concerns. There is a lot to be worried about and I believe Biden can do a better job at connecting with voters and reassuring them about the state of the nation, the economy, and the world by sharing his natural empathy. You can’t change how people are experiencing prices in their daily lives, but you can change how the President talks about inflation. Does he talk about the good inflation numbers that came out last week in terms of macroeconomic indicators or does he explain what those declining inflation numbers mean for everyday Americans?

Second, the Democrats must drive the narrative that this election is a deeply important choice about our nation’s future. Democracy is an issue that people care about and there is research that points to its importance in 2022. Trump is repeatedly saying the quiet part out loud. Make Trump’s frightening statements about what he plans for his second term real for voters. Democrats need to explain to voters what Trump 2.0 means for them, for the future, and for the world their children will live in.

Trump and the Republicans have a lot of baggage. Their priority is to keep the focus on Biden, his age, and what he has not done in office. They need to find a way to neutralize the abortion issue. Trump and the Republicans will do better with an electorate that is angry and doesn’t see clear differences between the parties and the candidates. The muddier the water, the clearer the path forward is for Trump.

What about Trump’s criminal and civil trials?

The effect of Trump’s trials cannot be ignored or underestimated. We fielded a poll in August and found about one-in-four Republicans saying that the ex-President’s legal troubles made them less likely to vote for Trump. For context, Trump only lost about 6% of Republicans in 2020. His legal troubles could easily make the difference in a tight race.

So far, Trump’s trials are rallying Republicans around him in the GOP primary. The primary calendar probably works in Trump’s favor as he tries to secure the nomination. That said, there is a significant unknown around how Trump actually being convicted might affect the race. We could find ourselves in a position where Trump wins the nomination and is then convicted in a trial. Where does that leave Republicans? It seems unlikely his base will defect, but reaching out to Independents will likely be more difficult. The role of third parties could be outsized in this scenario. Republican-leaning voters could be turned off to voting for Trump again, but not be ready to vote to re-elect President Biden.

How are third-party candidates (and challengers from within the Democratic Party) impacting the polls and prospective support for Biden?

At this point, the effect of third-party challengers is not entirely clear, though the evidence would suggest Biden is being hurt more than Trump. I would expect the likes of Jill Stein and Cornel West to pull voters more from Biden. The RFK effect is a little harder to pin down, but his inclusion in several recent polls shows his candidacy costing Biden a bit more than Trump.

Biden and the Democrats need to campaign to win the support of people who might currently be attracted to third-party candidacies. They cannot take for granted that as Election Day approaches, people on the left who support Stein will end up casting their votes for Biden. Democrats need to earn their votes.

There is a two-pronged strategy for pulling third-party voters into the Democratic column. Democrats must not only reach them on issues but also make the 2024 race a choice about bigger things, such as our democracy. This requires taking people seriously and not dismissing their worries and concerns.

How do you think things will look in a few months as the presidential election is even closer?

More opinions and perceptions get baked into the cake the closer you get to elections. For example, we will begin to see how much of the current support for third party candidates is real versus a form of protest about a choice between Biden and Trump. The economy has been a drag on support for Biden. People are reminded about inflation every time they pay more for groceries and just about everything ese. There are macro-level signs that economic conditions – especially inflation – are actually improving.

Looking ahead, which economy will voters have in their heads when they actually vote in 11 months? The one defined by rising prices or the one that feels like it is getting better? The fact that Trump has been indicted (91 times) is already baked in the cake, but the effect of standing trial and possibly being convicted will also impact the race, but we can’t fully understand how until it happens – because it is so unprecedented. There are a lot of questions about what exactly we will know in a few months, but we will definitely know more than we do right now.

about the election

A quiet swing state crackdown: Could new voting laws shift the outcome in 2024?

The 2024 presidential election is a full year away – and many of the rules that will govern the pivotal contest have already been written.

The past three years make up one of the most prolific periods for election legislation in American history. Over 560 new laws governing our elections – many of them containing pages and pages of changes – have become law in states all across the country.

While voters in states like Michigan and Nevada will experience more voting options than ever, new restrictions in states like North Carolina and Georgia will create significant barriers in 2024 – barriers that didn't exist just four years ago.

The University of Virginia Center for Politics projects that the outcome of the elections in just eight states – Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – could determine our next president in 2024.

According to new research from my team at Voting Rights Lab, voters in half of these states will encounter significant new restrictions on their ability to cast a ballot. Their ability to overcome those restrictions could decide the outcome of next year's election.

Four key swing states restrict voter access

No swing state has erected more voting restrictions since 2020 than North Carolina. Whether voters cast their ballots in person or by mail in 2024, they will experience significant new barriers.

Just last month, North Carolina lawmakers overrode a veto from Governor Roy Cooper to restrict mail voting – an option used by more than one million of the state's voters in 2020. The new law will toss all mail ballots received after 7:30 p.m. on Election Day – no matter when the ballot was dropped in the mail and without any protection against postal delays like those we saw in 2020. If that rule was in place back in 2020, more than 11,000 votes would have been tossed. North Carolinians will also face the strictest mail voter ID requirement in the country – thanks to a recent decision from the newly reconfigured state supreme court that reinstated a 2018 law that the previous configuration of the court had declared racially discriminatory and unconstitutional just last year. That 2018 law also creates a new photo ID requirement for in-person voters. Unlike most voter ID laws, it does not allow voters without ID to verify their identity using other means.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Just to the south, voters in Georgia will also face new restrictions on mail voting, including new requirements for requesting and casting mail ballots, and more limited options for returning them. Meanwhile, local election officials now face the burden of an alarming new system that allows extremists to file frivolous mass challenges to voter registrations.

In Wisconsin, a total ban on drop boxes and extreme new rules to block anyone other than the voter – not their spouse, caregiver, nor neighbor – from returning a mail ballot in most circumstances threatens one of the most popular voting options in the state.

And in New Hampshire, the lapse of pandemic-era expansions to mail and in-person early voting make it one of just three states where the only options for most voters will be to cast their ballot in person on Election Day. And new voters who register to vote on Election Day face new rules that make it far more likely their ballot will be rejected.

Swing state election officials face serious challenges

Local election administrators will once again be entrusted to be fair, accurate, and accountable – especially in the states that capture the national spotlight. But as was the case four years ago, that spotlight has yielded an environment where those officials – civil servants often without any party affiliation – face serious threats for simply doing their jobs.

For many, recent years of unprecedented harassment and intimidation have proven too much to bear for election officials in several swing states. More than 50 top election officials in Pennsylvania have left their positions since the 2020 election. Top administrators in 13 of Arizona's 15 counties have done the same. Similar stories out of Nevada and North Carolina mean election offices throughout the country will face drains on experience, staffing, and resources – all while working hard to implement a deluge of new election laws for the first time in a presidential election.

Lawmakers seek personal control over elections in swing states

It's no secret that some extreme politicians are working to exert influence over our elections. Mega-donors have spent millions to spread disinformation and sow distrust in American democracy. Fringe groups have recruited thousands of poll observers to harass voters and disrupt polling places. Armed vigilantes have harassed and intimidated voters using drop boxes.

But there is perhaps no greater threat to voters than state lawmakers determined to exert personal control over our elections – to undermine the very fabric of American democracy by changing the rules for their own benefit.

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

Yet another new law in North Carolina – also enacted over the governor's veto – grants state lawmakers the authority to take over state and county election boards. This power grab opens the door for conspiracy theorists to gain influence over local elections, creates a scenario where deadlocked county boards could close dozens of early voting sites, and means new state and local election officials will step into office just days before early voting begins for next year's primaries.

Meanwhile, Wisconsin lawmakers have worked for months to remove the state's nonpartisan election administrator. And in Arizona, the state legislature has relentlessly advanced bills granting themselves more and more power over elections – including one that would allow lawmakers to officially reject the results of a fair and free election – only to be blocked by vetoes from Governor Katie Hobbs.

Partisans have worked hard to put their thumb on the scale in fully half of the nation’s projected 2024 swing states. Those who stand on the side of a vibrant, inclusive democracy – from election officials to voter education groups to the voters themselves – will have to work harder to overcome. To make sure these barriers don't affect the outcome in 2024, we have to start now.

about this deliberate degradation of voting rights

Thousands of preterm births likely prevented by COVID-19 vaccines, study finds

Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released data that brought attention to a horrifying trend: the infant death rate in the U.S. increased by 3 percent in 2022.

The rise in infant mortality marked the first significant increase in about two decades. After the news broke, some people took to social media to spread anti-vaccine misinformation and attempt to fabricate a story that COVID-19 vaccines were to blame. It’s no secret that online pregnancy support groups are rife with vaccine misinformation, and the power of misinformation has real-life impacts. Pregnant women, who are at a higher risk for severe illness, have relatively low vaccination rates against COVID-19.

Yet a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences adds to ongoing scientific evidence that there are benefits to getting vaccinated against the coronavirus while pregnant, like decreasing the likelihood of a premature birth.

Labor and delivery centers are closing in red states. What happens to pregnant women next?

The PNAS study specifically looked at the trend of preterm births in California by comparing the premature birth rates between siblings, meaning the birth of an infant before COVID-19 and a birth of an infant, to the same woman, who later had COVID-19.

"At the population level that means a substantial change with enormous costs for those families, for the healthcare system and for society."

According to the study, the likelihood that a mother with COVID-19 in California would have a premature birth grew from 6.9 percent to 12.3 percent as COVID-19 quickly spread between July to November of 2020. On average during the pandemic, between 2020 and 2023, the risk of preterm births increased by 1.2 percentage points. In an interview with Salon, the researchers behind the study emphasized that even a 1.2 percent increased risk is “very large,” and akin to "almost three weeks of being exposed to intense wildfires."

“At the population level that means a substantial change with enormous costs for those families, for the healthcare system and for society,” co-author of the study, Florencia Torche, a Stanford University sociology professor, told Salon.

In November 2022, March of Dimes reported that preterm births were at an all-time high in the United States. At the time, the nonprofit estimated more than 1 in 10 babies born in the U.S. in 2021 were delivered at least three weeks before what's considered full term at 40 weeks, putting them at a higher risk for physical and intellectual disabilities. Their most recent report published this month showed that rate only declined about 1 percent over the last year, stressing that overall premature births remain a problem nationwide.

But as the data revealed in California, there seemed to be a significant drop in the number of premature births after May 2021 — after vaccines were rolled out.

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

“The patterns we see also align both with the timing of vaccine rollout and differentially so by the level of vaccine uptake,” Jenna Nobles, a University of Wisconsin–Madison sociology professor, told Salon.

The researchers found that in ZIP codes with high vaccination rates the risk of preterm birth declined faster as opposed to ZIP codes with low vaccination rates. While variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus likely had something to do with the decline, the researchers said, the fact that there were faster declines in more vaccinated ZIP codes underscored the evidence that vaccines played a role.

“At this point in time, we have no evidence that the variants in some ZIP codes were different from the variants in others in a way that would drive this,” Nobles said. “It's very hard to come up with an alternative explanation for this sharp divergence and patterns after vaccines were rolled out.”

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Researchers say the biggest takeaway from their research is that there are significant benefits to pregnant women getting vaccinated against COVID-19. While a lot of attention around COVID-19 vaccines has gone to vulnerable populations like older adults, the researchers said that their study shows that pregnant women need to be prioritized, too.

The research also adds to previous literature showing that COVID-19 vaccines are safe for pregnant women. Early in the pandemic, the fact that pregnant women were left out of vaccine trials left little to no vaccine safety data, which wasn't always reassuring for many people, acting like fertilizer for the misinformation that followed. But this most recent study is one of several showing that vaccines are safe for pregnant women, and could save them from having adverse birth outcomes like a premature birth.

“Here, we find evidence that there are very strong, important and consequential adverse effects of avoiding vaccination,” Nobles said. “Vaccines are important and likely prevented thousands of preterm births in the United States.”

about maternal health

AOC: Pro-Israel donor’s $20 million offer to unseat Rashida Tlaib shows “corruption of our politics”

Recent news out of Michigan, where actor and union organizer Hill Harper is running for U.S. Senate and U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib has recently angered pro-Israel lawmakers and donors for her staunch support for Palestinian rights, offered an illustration of the "corruption" of the American political system, said one progressive House member late Wednesday.

As Politico reported, Harper recently rejected $20 million from an anti-Palestinian rights enterpreneur, Linden Nelson, who offered the money in exchange for Harper dropping out of his Senate race and running instead against Tlaib (D-Mich.) for her House seat.

The offer came on October 16, the day Tlaib joined Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) in introducing a resolution to back an immediate de-escalation and cease-fire in Gaza. The blockaded enclave was then nine days into a relentless bombardment by Israel, which was launched October 7 in retaliation for Hamas' attack on southern Israel but had already killed nearly 3,000 Palestinian civilians, including 1,000 children, at the time.

The death toll has now grown to more than 14,500 people, including 6,000 children.

Tlaib, the only Palestinian American member of Congress, has been the subject of vitriol from lawmakers who believe the U.S. should continue supporting Israel regardless of what human rights groups and the United Nations have warned may amount to war crimes in Gaza. Earlier this month, 22 Democrats joined Republicans in voting to censure Tlaib for using the rallying cry for Palestinian rights, "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free."

Pro-Israel Democrats are reportedly searching for a candidate to primary Tlaib, and last month, according to Politico, Nelson reached out to Harper offering $10 million in bundled donations directly to his campaign and $10 million in independent expenditures—if he would agree to be that House candidate instead of continuing his Senate run.

"The fact that in the U.S. just one wealthy person can make a call and offer millions to unseat an official they dislike tells you everything about the corruption of our politics," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

The fact that in the US just *1* wealthy person can make a call and offer millions to unseat an official they dislike tells you everything about the corruption of our politics.

It also tells you why the tiny # of members who have managed to beat them are seen as such a threat. https://t.co/DtwMjgg9x9

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 22, 2023

Nelson has been involved with the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the past, and has donated to both Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

AIPAC told The Hill that it "was absolutely not involved in any way in this matter" and said Nelson has not donated to the organization in over a decade, but considering the group's efforts to defeat other pro-Palestinian rights progressives in recent elections, Ocasio-Cortez expressed skepticism.

🌭: “we’re all trying to find the guy who did this” https://t.co/p5CHrTHSea

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 23, 2023

Harper, who is running for Sen. Debbie Stabenow's (D-Mich.) seat against the more conservative Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), echoed Ocasio-Cortez, saying Nelson's rejected offer exemplifies a "broken political and campaign finance system that's tilted towards the wealthy and powerful."

"I'm running to be a voice for the people," said Harper. "I'm not going to run against the only Palestinian American in Congress just because some special interests don't like her. I'm running because I want to break the stranglehold wealthy special interests have on our politics, whether it's the Israel lobby, the NRA, or Big Pharma."

For me, this isn’t about one person or one phone call. It’s about a broken political and campaign finance system that’s tilted towards the wealthy and powerful.

I’m running for the U.S. Senate because I believe the wealthy and powerful have too much representation in…

— Hill Harper (@hillharper) November 22, 2023

Harper himself has called for a "humanitarian cease-fire" in Gaza this month, saying in a statement, "The answers to ensure long-term peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians are neither simple nor pain-free, but one truth stands firm: violence against defenseless children, trapped and frightened, is abhorrent, regardless of who is behind it."

Saurav Ghosh, director for federal reform at the Campaign Legal Center, told Politico that Harper and Nelson would have broken the law if they had moved forward with the deal.

Nelson's offer, said Jewish-led anti-Zionist group IfNotNow, is "a clear example of how groups like AIPAC and [its super PAC, Democratic Majority for Israel] try to undermine the will of voters and attack representatives who truly represent our values."

“Don’t waste your time”: Marjorie Taylor Greene’s memoir a flop at bottom of Amazon best seller list

Looks like people couldn't care less about Marjorie Taylor Greene’s self-titled autobiography, which has received a slew of negative reviews following its recent release. Titled “MTG,” the memoir reveals Greene’s “personal account of the battles she fights in the halls of Congress and beyond,” according to its plot synopsis. It further tells the story of Greene’s rise in politics from “small town business owner to MAGA firebrand!”

Nearly a week after its release, “MTG” appeared at the very bottom of Amazon’s best seller list at No. 9,805. The book is also ranked at No. 26 on Amazon’s list of Political Commentary best sellers. For comparison, Ted Cruz’s Audible audiobook “Unwoke: How to Defeat Cultural Marxism in America” is currently ranked at No. 6, according to Newsweek.

As for its reviews, “MTG” has earned 1.8 out of 5 stars with many online critics poking fun at the memoir’s title and calling it straight-up “garbage.”

“I saw my neighbor throwing this book into the trash and [asked] him if I could read it first. Boy, what a boring mistake,” wrote one critic. “This book is far from any reality and full of imaginations. Don't waste your time.”

Greene isn’t the only one who recently released a major flop. Former CNN anchor and media reporter Brian Stelter’s “Network of Lies: The Epic Saga of Fox News, Donald Trump, and the Battle for American Democracy” is No. 6,638 on the best seller list and ranked No. 16 on Amazon’s list of Political Commentary best sellers.

King Charles allegedly called Harry “that fool” and dismissed Meghan Markle’s racism concerns

Another layer of the royal family saga has been uncovered — and no it's just because of the final season of "The Crown."

Excerpts from the book "Endgame" by royal expert Omid Scobie has been making the rounds lately for the extra behind-the-scenes insights (read: dirt) about the royal family, specifically the treatment of and attitude toward ex-senior royals Harry and Meghan.

King Charles called Harry "that fool"

A particular portion of the book details a tense environment in the family and palace after Netflix's release of the "Harry & Meghan" docuseries, reporting that the series "took the wind out of everyone's sails."

The then Prince Charles allegedly called Prince Harry "that fool," criticizing and mocking his son and daughter-in-law Meghan Markle over the claims they made in the 2022 docuseries.

After the series aired, King Charles allegedly "went from not wanting anyone to talk about his son to openly criticizing ‘that fool.'" While it is reported that the King was disheartened about the situation, Scobie wrote that Charles' empathy "soon disappeared" because the buzz from the docuseries "eclipsed" him "at every turn."

The intimate series examined the former duke and duchess's love story while highlighting the media scrutiny and internal pressures they faced throughout their jobs as senior royals.

“In this family, sometimes you’re part of the problem rather than part of the solution,” Harry said. “There is a huge level of unconscious bias."

Harry said in the docuseries that the royals failed to grasp that Meghan's half-Black identity was a factor in the vitriol she faced at the hands of the public and media. “What people need to understand is, as far as a lot of the family were concerned, everything that she was being put through, they’d been put through as well,” he said. “So it’s almost a rite of passage.”

Meghan told Charles which members of the family made comments on Archie's skin color

Not only does the book claim that Charles called Harry a fool but it addresses one of the largest scandals surrounding the family. In the couple's first-ever exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey following the aftermath of their leaving the royal family, Meghan revealed that members of the family had questioned the skin color of their unborn son Archie. Meghan said that Archie would be “the first member of color in this family” and would not be “titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be."

The royal family prevented Meghan Markle from saying this one word on "Suits"

The book claims that in a series of private letters between Meghan and Charles, she told him the names of the two royal household members who made the racist comment. Apparently in the letters, Megan told Charles that “unconscious bias and ignorance” were present in the royal household and needed to be addressed. But Charles said in response “he felt ‘no ill will’ or ‘casual prejudice’ had been involved."

According to the book, there were no "hard feelings" over the "specific incident" after Meghan and Charles' letters. "Both sides had been heard," but there was still plenty unresolved. It is unclear if any member of the royal family for the comments made about Archie."

But Buckingham Palace released a statement after Meghan's claims. “The issues raised, particularly of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately,” the statement said.

Princess Anne wanted Harry and Meghan evicted from their cottage

The book also revealed that Harry's aunt Princess Anne "persuaded Charles to withdraw the use" of the Frogmore Cottage after they quit their royal duties. The cottage was gifted to them by the late Queen Elizabeth after their wedding. Scobie wrote that Anne was “at the forefront of the supporters of the firm approach” to evict them.

Moreover, skeptics of Scobie's work have accused him of being a peddler for the former Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Critics have said that he uses the couple as sources for his work. He has denied any personal relationship with the couple and that "the Sussexes have nothing to do with" his new book.

about the royals

Taste depends on nature and nurture. Here are 7 ways you can learn to enjoy foods you don’t like

You're out for dinner with a bunch of friends, one of whom orders pizza with anchovies and olives to share, but you hate olives and anchovies! Do you pipe up with your preferred choice — Hawaiian — or stay quiet?

This scene plays out every day around the world. Some people ferociously defend their personal tastes. But many would rather expand their palate and not have to rock the boat the next time someone in their friend group orders pizza.

Is it possible to train your tastebuds to enjoy foods you previously didn't, like training a muscle at the gym?

What determines 'taste'?

Taste is a complex system we evolved to help us navigate the environment. It helps us select foods with nutritional value and reject anything potentially harmful.

Foods are made up of different compounds, including nutrients (such as proteins, sugars and fats) and aromas that are detected by sensors in the mouth and nose. These sensors create the flavour of food. While taste is what the tastebuds on your tongue pick up, flavor is the combination of how something smells and tastes. Together with texture, appearance and sound, these senses collectively influence your food preferences.

Flavor is the overall impression you get when eating.

Many factors influence food preferences, including age, genetics and environment. We each live in our own sensory world and no two people will have the same experience while eating.

Food preferences also change with age. Research has found young children have a natural preference for sweet and salty tastes and a dislike of bitter tastes. As they grow older their ability to like bitter foods grows.

Emerging evidence shows bacteria in saliva can also produce enzymes that influence the taste of foods. For instance, saliva has been shown to cause the release of sulphur aromas in cauliflower. The more sulphur that is produced, the less likely a kid is to enjoy the taste of cauliflower.

Nature versus nurture

Both genetics and the environment play a crucial role in determining food preferences. Twin studies estimate genetics have a moderate influence on food preferences (between 32% and 54%, depending on the food type) in children, adolescents and adults.

However, since our cultural environment and the foods we're exposed to also shape our preferences, these preferences are learned to a large degree.

A lot of this learning takes place during childhood, at home and other places we eat. This isn't textbook learning. It's learning by experiencing (eating), which typically leads to increased liking of the food — or by watching what others do (modelling), which can lead to both positive or negative associations.

Research has shown how environmental influences on food preferences change between childhood and adulthood. For children, the main factor is the home environment, which makes sense as kids are more likely to be influenced by foods prepared and eaten at home. Environmental factors influencing adults and adolescents are more varied.

The process of 'acquiring' taste

Coffee and beer are good examples of bitter foods people "acquire" a taste for as they grow up. The ability to overcome the dislike of these is largely due to:

the social context in which they're consumed. For example, in many countries they may be associated with passage into adulthood.
the physiological effects of the compounds they contain — caffeine in coffee and alcohol in beer. Many people find these effects desirable.

But what about acquiring a taste for foods that don't provide such desirable feelings, but which are good for you, such as kale or fatty fish? Is it possible to gain an acceptance for these?

Here are some strategies that can help you learn to enjoy foods you currently don't:

Eat and keep eating. Only a small portion is needed to build a liking for a specific taste over time. It may take 10–15 attempts or more before you can say you "like" the food.
Mask bitterness by eating it with other foods or ingredients that contain salt or sugar. For instance, you can pair bitter rocket with a sweet salad dressing.
Eat it repeatedly in a positive context. That could mean eating it after playing your favourite sport or with people you like. Alternatively, you could eat it with foods you already enjoy; if it's a specific vegetable, try pairing it with your favorite protein.
Eat it when you're hungry. In a hungry state you'll be more willing to accept a taste you might not appreciate on a full stomach.
Remind yourself why you want to enjoy this food. You may be changing your diet for health reasons or because you've moved countries and are struggling with the local cuisine. Your reason will help motivate you.
Start young (if possible). It's easier for children to learn to like new foods as their tastes are less established.
Remember: the more foods you like, the easier it'll become to learn to like others.

A balanced and varied diet is essential for good health. Picky eating can become a problem if it leads to vitamin and mineral deficiencies — especially if you're avoiding entire food groups, such as vegetables. At the same time, eating too many tasty but energy-dense foods can increase your risk of chronic disease, including obesity.

Understanding how your food preferences have formed, and how they can evolve, is a first step to getting on the path of healthier eating.

Nicholas Archer, Research Scientist, Sensory, Flavour and Consumer Sciences, CSIRO and Astrid Poelman, Principal Researcher, Public Health & Wellbeing Group, CSIRO

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

Alyssa Farah Griffin slams women’s groups for silence on reports of rape against Israeli women

On Monday’s episode of “The View,” co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin blasted international women’s groups for their silence on reports of gender-based violence by Hamas against Israeli women on Oct. 7.

“I am still devastated – we’re two months since this war has been underway — by silence from women’s groups in this country about rape being used as an act of war in this attack,” Griffin said. “The fact that sexual violence was used against Israeli women and the major women’s groups in this country have not come out and denounced it . . .That violates every rule of warfare.”

She continued, “It is the height of immorality and the fact that the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Women Empowerment has been silent, the U.N. Committee on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women has been silent, and the international MeToo movement has been silent.”

On Nov. 26, U.N. Women called for a “rigorous investigation” into reports of rape and sexual assault that cropped up in the Israel-Gaza conflict. Hamas also issued a statement back in October, per Al Jazeera English, rejecting allegations that it committed crimes against women and children.

Whoopi Goldberg later chimed in, suggesting that the reason why those who were released from captivity will be careful about criticizing Hamas is because “they don’t want their loved ones who are still in captivity to be tortured. . . . No one’s leaving the land so the question has to become, how do we live together on this land?” she added. “That is all that people should be thinking about so that this does not continue to happen.”

Watch the full clip below, via YouTube:

Cantaloupes recalled after salmonella infections result in 2 deaths and at least 28 hospitalizations

If you've recently purchased any whole or pre-cut cantaloupe or fruit salads containing cantaloupe, take caution and check the labeling and best-by dates. As reported by James Powel and Gabe Hauari with USA Today, the Center for Disease Control recently announced "that two people have died and 28 more people have been hospitalized in a salmonella outbreak in cantaloupes across 32 states." If you have any cantaloupes in your home or have recently purchased any, it's advisable to discard or return them. If you're unsure if the particulate cantaloupe you've purchased has been recalled, it's best to exercise caution and also discard that, too. Minnesota has reported the highest number of infections as of yet, with 13 officially declared cases .

Hauari and Powel note that "the most recently reported illness occurred on Nov 10," but that the illness itself can take weeks in order to "be determined as part of an outbreak." Some of the particular companies or brands recalling cantaloupes are Pacific Trellis Fruit and Delcinea Farms, which recalled nearly 5000 cases of "Malichita" brand cantaloupes. The fruit was sold in California, Illinois, Oklahoma, Texas and Wisconsin. If you see "Malichita" branding or labeling on your cantaloupe, do not eat it.

Other companies recalling cantaloupes are CG Dallas, Sofi Produce/Trufresh, Vinyard Fruit and Vegetable Company, as well as Aldi grocer, which recalled cantaloupe, cut cantaloupes and pineapple spears with best by dates between Oct. 27 and Oct. 31.

Legal scholar “confident” judge who lifted Trump gag order “greatly regrets” decision after threats

The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial released hundreds of transcripts detailing the bigoted and vulgar threats directed at him and his court staff in the aftermath of the former president's targeted social media attacks.

Judge Arthur Engoron is seeking the reinstatement of two gag orders that would bar Trump and other parties from publicly attacking his staff. The judge had previously asserted that his office faced an influx of "hundreds of harassing" messages following Trump's social media attacks on his chief law clerk, which initially led to the imposition of the gag orders.

Earlier this month Engoron issued an additional gag order that also included his attorneys after Trump’s lawyers repeatedly attacked law clerk Allison Greenfield in open court. While these orders specifically prohibited public comments about members of Engoron's staff and not the judge himself, an appeals court temporarily halted the orders last week, acknowledging the validity of the "constitutional and statutory rights" concerns raised by Trump's attorneys.

“The main legal challenge to gag orders in general is that they infringe on the First Amendment right to free speech,” Bennett Gershman, a law professor at Pace University, told Salon. “Courts have to balance the danger to the personal safety of the persons being targeted by Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric as well as the damage to the integrity of judicial proceedings with the right to speak.”

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani added that while Engoron faces “significant First Amendment challenges” to his gag orders, he’ll have a better chance of success on appeal if they are “narrowly tailored." This is the same issue Judge Tanya Chutkan is dealing with in the DC Court of Appeals.

"This is in purpose": Experts alarmed after filing reveals shocking extent of Trump-inspired threats

Charles Hollon, a court official in the Public Safety Department, wrote in the filing that threats and harassment “increased exponentially” after the former president suggested the Greenfield was in a romantic relationship with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Her cell phone number and email addresses were compromised with Greenfield being subjected to “harassing, disparaging comments and antisemitic tropes” on a daily basis, he wrote, according to Courthouse News Service.

The filing also contained transcripts of voicemails left on Engoron’s chambers phone, with certain portions redacted due to vulgar language.

“Resign now, you dirty, treasonous piece of trash snake,” one voicemail said. “We are going to get you and anyone of you dirty, backstabbing, lying, cheating American. You are nothing but a bunch of communists. We are coming to remove you permanently.”

Another voicemail threatened “I will come for you,” and “send every hacker in the world” to “expose you.”

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Trump's post led to "hundreds of threatening and harassing voicemail messages, which have been transcribed into over 275 single-spaced pages," Hollon wrote. He added that the threats are serious, “not hypothetical or speculative,” according to CNS.

"Engoron could ask for law enforcement protection for himself and his clerk, but I’m sure he would prefer the threats to stop in the first instance,” Rahmani said. “And they will probably get worse if and when Engoron holds Trump liable, fines him hundreds of millions of dollars, and cancels his business licenses.”

These messages have created an “ongoing security risk for the judge, his staff and his family,” Hollon wrote in the filing, noting that the implementation of the limited gag orders resulted in a decrease in the number of threats, harassment, and disparaging messages that the judge and his staff received. But, when Trump violated the gag orders, the number of threatening, harassing and disparaging messages increased.

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

“Trump could argue that he has no control over how the public views his incendiary statements and that he is protected by what courts call the ‘Heckler’s Veto,’ meaning that you can’t stop a person from speaking by a concern over how the audience might respond or that the speech might promote danger, unless that danger, in the words of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, is ‘clear and present,’ Gershman said.

He added that he has “confidence” that given the current circumstances, the gag order will be reinstated and potentially strengthened.

“The record of phone calls, voicemails, and emails … include death threats, insinuations into the personal lives of the judge and his clerk, and include antisemitic remarks,” Gershman said. “I’m confident that the appellate judge who vacated the gag order greatly regrets his decision.”

Trump’s attorneys dismissed the affidavit and 275 pages of transcripts as "irrelevant" to their federal case.

“To date, the prosecution has never submitted any evidence of alleged ‘threats’ or ‘harassment’ to any prosecutor, court staffer, or potential witness in this case,” Trump’s attorney wrote in the letter.

His lawyers are “using procedural tools'' to keep new evidence out of the federal appeal, Rahmani said. Generally, evidence must be presented in the trial court to be preserved on appeal.

about Trump's gag order appeals

Chicken doesn’t need to be washed before cooking — here’s why

Social media isn't exactly known for being a welcoming place to have a productive discussion or share your opinions. Even the most inoffensive posts can breed noxious comments sections. Take this seemingly harmful post on TikTok, in which a woman shares a step-by-step recipe for spatchcocking chicken.

While you might expect to find comments asking about the recipe or even sharing tips and advice, instead you find comment after comment of people expressing disbelief that the chef didn't wash her chicken before cooking it.

But despite the number of comments certain the chef has done the wrong thing, in reality she's made the right move. Washing chicken isn't just unnecessary — it can actually increase your risk of foodborne illness.

Why chicken really shouldn't be washed

Traces of feathers, slime or dirt might have necessitated washing chicken half a century ago. But nowadays, poultry is pre-washed and ready to cook when you buy it.

Still, some people seem to think you should wash your chicken in order to remove the dangerous microorganisms raw meat contains. While it's true chicken does contain harmful microorganisms, washing prior to cooking doesn't remove them.

Chicken in particular naturally carries Salmonella and Campylobacter. These can cause very severe illness, with infections causing symptoms such as fever, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and possibly even septicaemia (blood infection).

Children, elderly people, pregnant women and those with other health conditions or poor immune systems are most at risk of illness from these bacteria. But even in healthy people, Salmonella and Campylobacter infections can lead to hospitalisations and death.

Washing chicken prior to cooking does not eliminate all the germs within a chicken. At most, it may only remove the bacteria on the surface. But this practice actually makes the overall infection risk from raw chicken significantly worse, as it may potentially cause the pathogens washed off the chicken skin to spread throughout your kitchen.

When you put raw chicken under the tap, the bacteria on the skin move into the water stream. This will then be splashed into your sink — and potentially your surrounding counters, cupboards and dish rack. This water spray can travel up to 80cm — the length of the average adult arm. This makes cross-contamination pretty likely, especially if these water droplets have landed elsewhere in your kitchen. It may even contaminate other uncooked foods you later place in the same sink.

Even if you rinse the sink with water after washing the chicken, this may not be sufficient to remove all the pathogenic bacteria that have become attached.

It's also worth noting that soaking poultry in a brine of water and vinegar or citrus juice does not make it more hygienic. Research has shown that Salmonella weren't killed following soaking chicken in vinegar or citrus juice for more than five minutes. Other research shows that Campylobacter numbers may be reduced following a marinade in vinegar or lemon juice, but it takes 24 hours of soaking.

Handling raw chicken safely

There are many simple steps you should follow when preparing raw poultry to keep safe from foodborne illnesses.

The containers or wrappers that raw poultry comes in are often contaminated with bacteria. Once you've opened the package and removed the chicken, place it in a clean plastic bag so the contents don't drip on your kitchen floor or waste bin when you dispose of it.

Next, place your raw poultry on a clean cutting board so you can prepare it.

Since washing creates an unnecessary risk of cross-contamination, if there's dirt or slime on the surface of the chicken — or if the chicken is wet — simply wipe it off with a paper towel. Immediately dispose the paper towel to avoid contamination.

If you accidentally drop any meat debris on the work surfaces during preparation, mop it up with a paper towel, dispose of it, then clean the surface with diluted bleach or an antibacterial spray. Dry the surface with a clean paper towel. Likewise, if any spice containers you're using to season the chicken touch it before it's cooked, be sure to wipe these down with an antibacterial spray.

When you're finished preparing your chicken, immediately wash your hands with soap and warm water. You should wash your hands under warm water for at least 20 seconds as this will kill any bacteria on your hands.

Then wash your chopping board and utensils. It's also a good idea to disinfect the surrounding work area with an antibacterial spray or diluted bleach, which you should then dry with a clean paper towel.

You cannot remove the bacteria from your chicken, or indeed any poultry or meat, by washing it. The only way to kill germs and make the food safe to eat is by cooking it.

Cooking poultry at the correct temperature and for the right amount of time is essential for preventing many foodborne illnesses. While the time and temperature will vary depending on how large your chicken is or the recipe you're using, your chicken should reach an internal temperature of about 75°C. This is effective at killing bacterial pathogens, including Salmonella and Campylobacter.

Be sure to use a meat thermometer to check your chicken is safe to eat. Another test is to check the juices from the chicken. If they run clear and there's no trace of blood, the chicken is probably cooked sufficiently.

If you're served what looks like under-cooked chicken, or indeed any poultry, in a restaurant (you can see blood when you cut into the meat) send the food back to be cooked properly.

The bacteria found on raw poultry is natural even though it's harmful for humans. But so long as you adequately cook your chicken, it's still safe to eat.

Primrose Freestone, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Microbiology, University of Leicester

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

“It’s a revenue problem”: GOP panic over plummeting finances as donors grow frustrated with Trump

The Republican Party's finances are heightening concerns amid party members, advisors to Donald Trump and other operatives involved in the 2024 election effort, 10 people familiar with the matter told The Washington Post. The Republican National Committee revealed that, as of Oct. 30, it had $9.1 million in cash on hand, the lowest amount its recorded in any Federal Election Commission report since February 2015. At the same point in the 2016 and 2020 election cycles, the RNC had about $20 million and $61 million, respectively. In contrast, the Democratic National Committee reported having $17.7 million as of Oct. 30.

“It’s a revenue problem,” Tennessee RNC member Oscar Brock told the Post. “We’re going through the same efforts we always go through to raise money: the same donor meetings, retreats, digital advertising, direct mail. But the return is much lower this year. If you know the answer, I’d love to know it. The staff has managed to tighten down on expenses to keep the party from going into the red.” RNC donor support has dwindled in recent years while the party's small-dollar program has also taken a hit, sources told the outlet. Some donors aren't giving money to the RNC because they believe doing so will aid Trump, the sources added, while others said they prefer to wait until 2024 to make a donation. Some have also grown frustrated by party leadership, sources close to major donors said.

RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel told the Post that donors are more focused on supporting individual candidates during the primary and predicted that the party's finances will improve once there's a nominee. “There’s nothing unusual about this, because they know that once their candidate gets in that we will merge and that we’ll be working together to win the White House,” McDaniel said.

New Zealand reverses generational ban on smoking, a “major loss for public health,” advocates say

Tobacco's popularity has long been a scourge of public health advocates, from the idea that smoking is "cool" to Big Tobacco spreading pseudoscience. Now public health advocates in New Zealand are grappling with a new headache: The reversal of a law intended to phase out tobacco use among young people.

The law — which created a steadily rising smoking age so people born after January 2009 could never legally purchase cigarettes — was intended as a so-called "generation ban." The policy included other measures that decimated the number of stores legally allowed to sell cigarettes (from 6,000 to 600), as well as reduced the amount of nicotine legally allowed in tobacco products. While those have taken effect, the generation ban was not scheduled to be implemented until July 2024.

Now it won't be put into effect at all, thanks to recent political negotiations in The Land of the Long White Cloud. Finance Minister Nicola Willis announced on Saturday that the policy is being reversed as the new coalition government seeks alternative methods to fund its tax cuts. The new approach has been met with dismay from public health advocates.

“This is major loss for public health, and a huge win for the tobacco industry – whose profits will be boosted at the expense of Kiwi lives,” Prof Lisa Te Morenga, the chair of non-government industry group Health Coalition Aotearoa, told The Guardian.

“This is on purpose”: Experts alarmed after filing reveals shocking extent of Trump-inspired threats

The office of the New York judge overseeing Donald Trump's civil fraud trial has received an onslaught of death threats and antisemitic abuse in the wake of the former president's online attacks.

New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron and his principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield have been bombarded with hundreds of threatening, harassing and disparaging telephone and social media messages, according to a new court filing reported by The Guardian. New York state court system attorneys in the filing argued for the imposition of gag orders on Trump, citing the “serious and credible” threats against Engoron and Greenfield.

Transcribed voicemails, which were disclosed in the filing, exposed the extent of the vitriol directed at the duo. Several death threats came alongside racist and sexist attacks. “I mean, honestly, you should be assassinated,” one said. “You should be killed. You should be not assassin executed [sic]. You should be executed.”

“Resign now, you dirty, treasonous piece of trash snake. We are going to get you and anyone of you dirty, backstabbing, lying, cheating American. You are nothing but a bunch of communists. We are coming to remove you permanently," said another.

"Not going well": Legal experts say Trump lawyer "frustrated" judges in hearing to fight gag order

Last month, the former president posted an image of Greenfield on his social media platform Truth Social falsely describing her as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's "girlfriend" and linking to her personal Instagram account. The act prompted Engoron to issue a partial gag order barring Trump — and later his legal team — from commenting on court staff.

A New York appeals court earlier this month, however, paused the gag order, allowing Trump to speak freely about court staff while a longer appeals process takes place.

Greenfield's personal contact information has since been compromised, a court safety official, Charles Hollon, told The Guardian.

“I have been informed by Ms. Greenfield that she has been receiving approximately 20-30 calls per day to her personal cellphone and approximately 30-50 messages per day online,” Hollon said. “Ms Greenfield also informed me that since the interim stay was issued lifting the gag orders on November 16, 2023, approximately half of the harassing and disparaging messages have been antisemitic.”

“That is not the law”: Legal experts torch Trump lawyer for trying to “stonewall” gag order judges

Former Obama Associate White House Counsel Ian Bassin argued that Trump had to be aware that his attacks could incite that kind of barrage and accused the former president of using his influence as part of a strategy.

"This is on purpose," Bassin wrote on X, formerly Twitter. "This is Trump’s intent. He wants these people to feel threatened and intimidated. He’s taking a page right from the mafia, plain and simple. And the courts have a duty to stop it."

This is on purpose. This is Trump’s intent. He wants these people to feel threatened and intimidated. He’s taking a page right from the mafia, plain and simple. And the courts have a duty to stop it. https://t.co/a29n2dOBpk

— Ian Bassin 🇺🇸 (@ianbassin) November 23, 2023

"There is a dynamic here, where judges in an individual case have to be aware of Trump’s incendiary and dangerous rhetoric nationwide and the genuine risk that someone somewhere will get grievously hurt," former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman added.

There is a dynamic here, where judges in an individual case have to be aware of Trump’s incendiary and dangerous rhetoric nationwide and the genuine risk that someone somewhere will get grievously hurt. https://t.co/ZziywtNC66

— Harry Litman (@harrylitman) November 23, 2023

CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen asserted that the threats and attacks against Engoron and Greenfield justify the reinstatement of Trump's gag order.

"The threats that Trump is triggering against the New York judge & his law clerk are violent & anti-Semitic," CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen tweeted. "They shot up after the gag order was temporarily lifted on appeal 1st amend. protections are not absolute and the gag order should and eventually will be reinstated."

The threats that Trump is triggering against the New York judge & his law clerk are violent & anti-Semitic

They shot up after the gag order was temporarily lifted on appeal

1st amend. protections are not absolute and the gag order should & eventually will be reinstated

At…

— Norm Eisen (#TryingTrump out now!) (@NormEisen) November 23, 2023

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance argued that Trump's attacks and the subsequent onslaught of threats on his targets will ultimately hurt him.

"The danger is to the clerk, but it's really to the entire staff of this courthouse because the former president well-knows of the impact his words have," Vance said during a Sunday MSNBC appearance. She noted that if Trump was posting on social media innocently and without that awareness of his influence, then he would likely have stopped upon seeing the 275, single-spaced pages of threats that Greenfield has received.

"The fact that he hasn't stopped and he has accelerated while the gag order is temporarily lifted for purposes of this appeal really tells you what his intentions are here," Vance continued, calling it "disruptive" for the New York courts and "dangerous" for all court employees. "It's completely unacceptable. It makes clear that a gag order is going to be necessary."

The fraud lawsuit, which was brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, accuses Trump, his sons, other Trump Organization executives and the company of heavily exaggerating the value of the company's properties to receive more favorable loan terms and deals. She seeks $250 million in penalties and a ban on the Trumps' ability to do business in the state.

Engoron issued a pre-trial summary judgment in September, ruling Trump liable for defrauding banks and insurers and ordering the dissolution of Trump's businesses. The latter decision is currently paused pending appeal.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the case and has previously defended his property valuations.

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

Former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade warned that the latest filing in the New York gag order case could influence the federal appeals court reviewing a gag order imposed by D.C. Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing Trump's election subversion case.

In that case, lawyers for the former president have been "misleading" the court as they spar with the Department of Justice, McQuade said, asserting that arguments they made had nothing to do with the subject at hand. The appeals court hearing oral arguments Monday will likely take the threats against Engoron and Greenfield into perspective "because it shows that it's not imaginative or speculative harm," McQuade told MSNBC. "These are real threats coming in every day and disrupting the business of the court, putting its employees in harm's way.

"One of the things that the Trump lawyers have done, that is very misleading here, is to look at cases outside of the context of court, of opinion criminal cases," McQuade continued. "You know, prior restraints are frowned upon, of course. Anything that limits core political speech is antithetical to the 1st Amendment. But that's not the world that we're in. We are in the world of a trial."

She elaborated: "Inside a trial, to protect the parties, to protect court staff and to protect the fair administration of justice, those rules are different. And so I hope that the court sees the light and understands the very real threat on the one hand versus the restriction on the other."

about Trump's NY fraud trial

From kitchens to community leaders: Why “chefs have to lead” a new era of culinary advocacy

The role of chef has both stayed the same and changed dramatically over the last 30 years. Especially since the beginnings of The Food Network, the influx of food competition reality shows, and the ensuing bevy of food media and entertainment that helped stoke the culinary interests of the masses, chefs are no longer just the stars of their kitchens. They are celebrities and public figures, netting contracts, scads of money and millions of fans along the way.

Some use that platform to do the expected things, like sell condiments or a splashy line of cookware. But according to Katherine Miller, author of the new book "At the Table: The Chef's Guide to Advocacy" and the founding executive director of the Chef Action Network, chefs can and should leverage this cultural moment to operate as leaders — both inside and outside the kitchen.

Time, food and money: With hunger on the rise, here are ways to actually help

The Chef Action Network is an organization that was started in 2013 to coordinate the advocacy efforts of chefs who participated in the James Beard Foundation’s Chef Bootcamp for Policy and Change. Perhaps expectedly, many of the efforts were centered on food-based or industry-adjacent topics, like food insecurity, price gouging and inflation, food waste and labor rights. In the ten years since, there has been a lot of movement among culinary professionals to address those issues.

"The biggest strides that the industry have taken is fully understanding that chefs and restaurants have responsibilities outside of putting delicious food on the plate," Miller told Salon Food. "Over the last decade, chefs have used their restaurants to demonstrate sustainability and support for local and regional food systems."

She continued: "Chefs have stepped out of the kitchen to support organizations in their own cities and communities. And chefs have stepped up to leverage their networks and profile to raise awareness of the necessary policy changes needed — such as protecting SNAP funding, policies to encourage food waste reduction and funding for school meals."

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Miller highlights some notable project examples that have emerged over the last decade, including the work of organizations like Family Meal and The Lee Initiative, which worked to mitigate hunger and allow people to avoid the "stress and loss of dignity related to food insecurity."

She pointed to the work of Bakers Against Racism. Launched initially in 2020 by Chef Paula Velez, a James Beard Award finalist, Bakers Against Racism was a virtual worldwide bake sale that raised funds for charities that supported the Black Lives Matter movements. Miller classified it as "one of the best examples of how communities can mobilize to deliver money and awareness to important social causes” and "should be highlighted in every class about effective advocacy."

Katherine Miller (Courtesy of Brooks Craft)

Some particular chefs that Miller mentions are Chef Elle Simon, Chef Michel Nischan and Chef Renee Erickson for making strides within SNAP benefits and food aid, expanding excess to fresh produce, the importance of nutrition and the significance of sustainable seafood and sourcing. Furthermore, Miller recognizes the advocacy efforts of Chef Andrea Reusing, who is passionate about the topic of undocumented workers and harmful immigration policies.

In recent years, the restaurant industry has also become more comfortable with talking about some of the darker issues that are sometimes hidden in the back-of-house, like mental health struggles — something that chefs Patrick Mulvaney and Chris Shepard are trying to address through their organization Restaurant After Hours, Inc. — and inadequate wages.

"There's always going to be more room to grow and change when it comes to the inequities baked into the restaurant world," Miller said, pointing to the work of Hollis Silverman, the founder of the East Point Collective restaurant group which is "modeling ways to pay high wages, provide benefits and still maintain high levels of hospitality and food quality."

Following the COVID-19 pandemic, which demonstrated just how fragile our food systems really are, Miller says now is the time for members of the food industry to push for government cooperation when it comes to issues surrounding hunger, food access and the treatment of service workers.

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

"I would like to see the next administration appoint a food czar and really deliver on the promise of the White House Conference on Hunger, Food and Nutrition," she said. "That conference held in 2022 was the first one since the Nixon Administration and companies and policymakers made lots of commitments . . . We need a systemic redesign of our food system that involves discussions around how we use food to create jobs in local communities, rebuild our agriculture policies to prioritize the health of communities and also make delicious and healthy food readily available to all."

Table display of Miller's new book, At The Table (Courtesy of Katherine Miller)

The pandemic also prompted the organization of the Independent Restaurant Association, which was a collective of thousands of chefs and owners of independent restaurants and local chains. They originally formed to fight for relief aid, but are now organizing around other tax incentives and business practices that, according to Miller, will help grow a better industry for all.

"I want every chef to truly step up and become a leader in their kitchen and in their community," she said. "Chefs have tremendous power and with that comes real responsibility. They have a responsibility to lead by example and create work environments that are safe and free of violence and abuse. They need to recognize their role in the greater food economy and prioritize local and regional sourcing and purchases."

about this topic

Inside the canine mind: A “talking” dog’s owner on how to best connect with your furry pal

In her new book "I Am Bunny: How a 'Talking' Dog Taught Me Everything I Need to Know About Being Human," author and dog trainer Alexis Devine discusses — what else? — the story of her "talking" pet Sheepadoodle, Bunny.

Although Bunny does not literally use her mouth to speak human language, the canny canine has a series of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) buttons. These giant buttons, which are designed to emit a single word when pressed, were initially designed to help humans with communication disorders. Yet after Bunny was enrolled with thousands of other dogs and cats in a project called "They Can Talk," she began using the AAC buttons to seemingly express complex thoughts.

"Explore canine body language. Look at the things they look at."

Of course, there are scientists who are doubtful about whether Bunny truly understands what she is saying. Even for observers who think Bunny is the real deal, there still remain points of confusion, such as when the dog went viral in a TikTok video after pressing a button saying "Who's this?" while looking at a mirror, then pressing the button for "Help." Many Bunny fans thought the dog had experienced an existential crisis, but as Devine told Salon at the time, the likelier explanation is both simpler — and arguably more thought-provoking.

How Bunny the talking dog captured the internet and science's attention

"I don't think she's actually having an existential crisis," Devine told Salon in an interview. "I think that some people are just now beginning to realize that this isn't just like a fluffy potato that you have in your life — this is a deeply sentient creature that has a lot going on cognitively, that has emotions and that, you know, maybe should be treated more as an equal than as property."

In "I Am Bunny," Devine further explores these themes of animal sentience and animal rights, while also delving into her own personal story. As an autistic person myself, I identified strongly with Devine's discussions of neurodiversity, and was intrigued by how they intersected with her animal-related work.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

I want to start with part of the book where you write, "I was officially diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder in 2020, after many months of deeply relating to articles I read about autistic women and learning as much as I could about neurodiversity." How do you think being neurodivergent shaped your relationship with Bunny?

It's pretty clear in the title itself: "I am Bunny." We share so much and the deeper I went on my learning journey, the more I realized how similar we are as I started to examine these maladaptive coping strategies that she has. As I started to do more and more research, I realized that so much of this journey is about for me as a human understanding who I am and also adapting the environment to create a safe place for myself as someone who is neurodivergent. For Bunny is a dog who, if there were autism in dogs, I would expect that she would be autistic. The closest thing I could find to autism and dogs is called [Canine Dysfunctional disorder].

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

"After learning about many of these animal language studies, I was left feeling quite sad for a number of reasons."

Do you think that there is something about neurodivergent brains that make it easier for us to communicate and empathize with animals? You mentioned Temple Grandin in your book.

I think for some neurodivergent people, sure. As I'm sure you're aware, we all have special interests and those special interests can vary greatly. I think I do see in neurodivergent women more of this sort of chronic need to connect to non-humans. I guess I don't see that so much in typically-presenting male neurodivergence, but I suppose one can see that anywhere. I think it's just the fact that when we decide to focus on something, we focus so intensely.

And for me in particular, I think this sort of desperate need to connect on a deeper level — because I hadn't really found that in the neurotypical world around me, because I didn't understand myself well enough — really enabled me to connect deeply with Bunny. Because non-humans are completely non-judgmental, right? They take you at who you are, they love you regardless. And that is what I needed in the moment. I think I was really seeking a co-regulation, and although Bunny can't quite be my co-regulation because of the intensity of some of her challenges, I found that I was able to provide some of that co-regulatory… what's the word I'm looking for?

Equilibrium?

Yeah, that's a great word! Yes, for her. And it really helped me examine what I needed in terms of that.

Alexis Devine and Bunny the Talking Dog (Photo courtesy of author/Harper Collins)

Your book mentions the story of a lot of other talking animals like Alex the Gray Parrot or Nim Chimpsky. Are there any stories that particularly resonated with you as the companion of Bunny?

Well, they all resonated with me in the sense that most of the human caretakers of these animals bonded deeply with them and were searching for some larger truth. I think probably that's where the similarities end. After learning about many of these animal language studies, I was left feeling quite sad for a number of reasons. I think first and foremost it was because these were wild animals taken out of their natural habitats and forced to live a human life, sometimes in a lab environment. And they're not dogs.

"That's sort of what existentialism is at its core: deeper exploration and curiosity about what the heck are we doing here?"

Dogs have been evolutionarily selected for their ability to communicate and connect with us. So exploring this type of communication with a dog to me makes a whole lot more sense because they are our natural partners. They live with us, they love us. For centuries, this has been the case. So watching non-humans that don't have those adaptive traits be taken out of an environment in which they are incredibly well-suited and put into ours doesn't feel fair to me.

People often ask whether Bunny is self-aware, but your book makes it clear that she not only is self-aware, she actually has lessons to teach humans. More broadly, what do you think humans can learn from dogs and other animals once we move past asking whether they're self-aware and instead start hearing what they have to say?

I think one of the biggest and most immediate lessons that I learned was active listening. I've always been a good listener, but really trying to understand what Bunny was saying without the buttons became a crucial part of the journey towards adding buttons that would be sort of salient to her experience.

Another huge lesson was empathy, not just for non-humans, but for other humans. And almost most importantly for myself, there have been years and years and years during which I gave myself no grace. I struggled to look myself as a whole being. I felt chronically sort of under-socialized, chronically under-skilled, sort of lost in space with no purpose. And Bunny has given me purpose. I have become a dog trainer because of her and I have learned to really listen and look through the lens of empathy at everything that happens around me.

New research is changing our understanding of cat emotions, from purring to their facial expressions

There are several occasions in the book when you talk about existentialism relative to Bunny. Do you think this existentialist philosophy is specific to Bunny or innate to dogs as a species?

I don't necessarily think Bunny is existentialist. I kind of say that jokingly that she is because the internet went viral with conspiracy theories about her having an existential crisis and losing her mind. I think, more so than anything — like most of us hopefully do — she is simply exploring the world around her with the tools she has. We will probably never know whether she actually believes she's a human or a dog. And to me that doesn't really matter.

Like, she can call herself a human and I can say, okay, whatever, that's fine, because we're still communicating on a deep level. Unless she begins to show severe signs of distress surrounding that specifically, then I wouldn't necessarily call it existentialism. I would just call it exploring her world. And I think that's sort of what existentialism is at its core: deeper exploration and curiosity about what the heck are we doing here? Why is everything the way it is? And who am I?

Of all the advice that you received from Bunny and put in your book, what piece of advice is your favorite?

I think my ability to now say no with ease is one of the most important lessons that she has taught me. I've always had a really hard time saying no. I think that ties into being a high-masking autistic woman. But Bunny in no uncertain terms is very, very clear about her boundaries. The first thing she taught me is how to advocate for her, which was a hard-learned lesson. And the second part of that lesson was how to advocate for myself, which was also a hard learned lesson. But I do so with much greater ease now, and it has saved me a lot of headache and heartbreak.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

What advice do you have for other dog owners based on your experiences with Bunny, if they want to have a deep connection with their companion?

I would say, sit down with your dog. Watch them, listen to them. Explore canine body language. Look at the things they look at. If they smell something, tell them what it is. Label things in their environment when you're walking with them. Let them choose the path. When you are petting them, do consent tests so that they have the option to say no. I think as captive animals in a very human world that isn't naturally designed for them, giving them as much choice and control is the key to a more enriched life for them. So the more we can listen to what they are truly saying, with or without buttons, the stronger our connections will be.

about Bunny the talking dog

Extreme heat led to a Taylor Swift fan’s death in Brazil. Could it have been prevented?

Taylor Swift’s show at an open-air stadium in Rio de Janeiro this past Friday was supposed to be a raucous kickoff to the pop star’s first concert tour in Brazil. Instead, fans across the world were left reeling after a concertgoer died from extreme heat minutes into Swift’s Eras Tour performance.

Ana Clara Benevides Machado, 23, traveled 880 miles and waited in line outside for more than eight hours, along with tens of thousands of other fans, to see her favorite artist. That day, the heat index, or “feels-like” temperature accounting for humidity, soared to an all-time high of 138 degrees Fahrenheit in Rio. Brazil was sweltering through its eighth heat wave of the year — and it’s only spring. More than 1,000 people fainted from heat exhaustion inside the venue; others were vomiting.

Benevides lost consciousness just minutes into the set, during the song “Cruel Summer,” and later died of cardiac arrest at a nearby hospital.

Will climate change make our planet a desert? Why "uninhabitable" may be the wrong climate framework

Researchers have documented how hot weather vastly increases the risk of heart failure and other cardiovascular issues. Concertgoers say Time for Fun, the Brazil-based entertainment company running the event, refused to let people bring in water despite the heat and blocked air vents in the venue to prevent people outside from listening in. Swift postponed her second show in Rio, originally scheduled for Saturday, to Monday night, citing safety concerns due to the ongoing high temperatures. She also put out a statement on Instagram saying she was “devastated” by Benevides’ death. “This is the last thing I ever thought would happen when we decided to bring this tour to Brazil,” Swift wrote. (Time for Fun did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

The Swift concert disaster comes on the heels of a summer where fans experienced heat illness at a Beyoncé concert in Maryland and at an Ed Sheeran concert in Pittsburgh. These incidents serve as a stark reminder of the dangers of extreme heat, which will only grow worse as heat waves intensify as a result of climate change. But they also demonstrate that event mismanagement and a lack of heat preparedness can be deadly. Most heat-related deaths and illnesses, including at concerts and other large events, are preventable, climate health and heat safety experts told Grist. To avoid future injuries, concert organizers should take steps to proactively plan for heat, communicate health advisories and safety measures in advance, provide water and onsite medical care, and ensure proper airflow and ventilation.

“People go to these events to have fun. You never go to one of these thinking something horrible is going to happen,” Kevin Kloesel, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Oklahoma, told Grist. “So it’s incumbent upon the event organizers to make sure that it is the safest environment possible.”

"It is heartbreaking that preventable things happened."

Kloesel, who oversees weather forecasting and safety for around 400 annual outdoor events at the University of Oklahoma, said that when it comes to extreme heat, event organizers need to provide three key things: shade, hydration, and air movement. For example, setting up canopies to shade the endless lines concertgoers stood in for hours in Rio would have been one easy way to cool people down. Having enough water on hand, and providing it to attendees for free, is also crucial. Organizers should also find ways to ventilate the event space, including, potentially, by reducing seat capacity.

Morgan Zabow, a community heat and health information coordinator at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Program Office, specified that indoor venues should provide air conditioning and not rely solely on electric fans, which can make stifling conditions worse by blowing hot air at a faster rate.

Event organizers should also send out health advisories via text message or email well in advance, Zabow said. Those messages could include heat forecasts and tips to stay cool, like regularly drinking water and avoiding sugary beverages, caffeine, and alcohol, which can inhibit the body’s ability to cool off. Wearing loose, light-colored clothing is another preventative measure advisories could recommend.

But even with these precautions, heat can still take a toll, especially for people who are older or have pre-existing medical conditions, or those from cooler climates who aren’t used to hot weather. That’s why having easily accessible medical staff onsite is so important, Kloesel said. At football games, Kloesel and University of Oklahoma staff arrange cooling tents with medical personnel around the field in case attendees fall ill.

There are also ways to avoid the heat altogether. In Arizona, it’s become increasingly common to delay sports practices and other events until later in the evening when it cools off, said Ladd Keith, a heat policy expert and professor of urban planning at the University of Arizona. Kloesel noted that if concerts created more reserved seating, people wouldn’t have to line up outside for hours to secure a spot. Canceling or postponing events, as Swift did for her second concert in Rio, is another option. Organizers can also consider shifting summer events to a cooler season like fall or winter. All these steps, experts stress, require careful and intentional planning far in advance.

Individuals can take steps to stay safe, too. Keith noted that heat can affect anyone, including young people and those in good health — as the Taylor Swift concert demonstrated. Zabow suggested using a buddy system in which friends monitor one another for symptoms of heat exhaustion, including heavy sweating, dizziness, and nausea, and leave early to get help if needed. “I know it’s hard to leave a stadium early and miss things, but your life is so much more important,” she said.

At Swift’s concert on Friday, however, attendees said Time for Fun had blocked exits, making it difficult to leave. The company announced new measures to provide water and emergency responders Saturday morning. Meanwhile, Brazil’s consumer protection agency has announced that the federal government plans to investigate Time for Fun.

“It is heartbreaking that preventable things happened,” Kloesel said. “You have to know your venue, you have to know your fans, and you have to have a way of taking care of them and mitigating that risk as much as you possibly can, rather than just leaving it to chance.”

about climate change

Are we ready to head to Mars? Not so fast

In August 1998, 700 people came to Boulder, Colorado to attend the founding convention of the Mars Society. The group’s co-founder and president, Robert Zubrin, extolled the virtues of sending humans to Mars to terraform the planet and establish a human colony. The Mars Society’s founding declaration began, “The time has come for humanity to journey to the planet Mars,” and declared that “Given the will, we could have our first crews on Mars within a decade.” That was two and a half decades ago.

In their hilarious, highly informative and cheeky book, “A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and Have We Really Thought This Through?”, Kelly and Zach Weinersmith inventory the challenges standing in the way of Zubrin-like visions for Mars settlement. The wife-and-husband team serves a strong, but never stern, counterargument to the visionaries promising that we’ll put humans on Mars in the very near future. “Think of this book as the straight-talking homesteader’s guide to the rest of the solar system,” they write.

How living on Mars would warp the human body

Just as in their previous book, “Soonish: Ten Emerging Technologies That'll Improve and/or Ruin Everything,” the authors — she’s a faculty member in the biosciences department at Rice University and he’s a cartoonist — use humor and science to douse techno dreams with a dose of reality. “After a few years of researching space settlements, we began in secret to refer to ourselves as the ‘space bastards’ because we found we were more pessimistic than almost everyone in the space-settlement field,” they write. “We weren’t always this way. The data made us do it.”

While working on their deeply researched book, the Weinersmiths came to view sending people to Mars as a problem far more complicated and difficult than you’d know by listening to enthusiasts like Elon Musk or Robert Zubrin. It’s a challenge that “won’t be solved simply by ambitious fantasies or giant rockets.” Eventually humans are likely to expand into space, the Weinersmiths write, but for now, “the discourse needs more realism — not in order to ruin everyone’s fun, but to provide guardrails against genuinely dangerous directions for planet Earth.”

Figuring out rocket technology and determining the power needs of a settlement or the available minerals on different planets or asteroids is the easy part. The bigger challenges, they argue, are “the big, open questions about things like medicine, reproduction, law, ecology, economics, sociology, and warfare.”

Take physiology. Although we now have a small number of astronauts who have experienced living at the International Space Station for long stretches, these astronauts have not had to deal with nearly as much radiation as would befall travelers far beyond. “With current knowledge, it’s hard to predict the effect of radiation on the body,” the Weinersmiths write, adding that the need to manage exposure to radiation is “one of the major factors that will shape human habitation designs off-world.”

For now, “the discourse needs more realism — not in order to ruin everyone’s fun, but to provide guardrails against genuinely dangerous directions for planet Earth.”

In the book, they recount architect Brent Sherwood dismissing those popular images of crystalline domes with sweeping views of space as “baseless.” As Sherwood wrote, “Such architecture would bake the inhabitants and their parklands in strong sunlight while poisoning them with space radiation at the same time.” Instead, spomes (short for “space homes”) are likely to be placed underground or at the very least, surrounded in rocks to protect against radiation.

What’s more, if we’re going to sustain a population far away from Earth, we’ll need to figure out space sex, and the book spends several pages covering the debate over whether this activity has or has not happened yet. Although there’s been speculation that the 1992 space shuttle flight with married couple Mark Lee and Jan Davis would have provided a plausible opportunity for a successful “rendezvous and docking,” the authors write that there’s no evidence that this actually happened and there were five other crew members/potential witnesses aboard the flight that left little room for privacy.

If space travelers were somehow able to create a pregnancy, it would be no easy ride, the Weinersmiths write. We simply don’t know which, if any, part of the developmental process requires constant gravity, and the mother’s bones would be weakened in microgravity, which could make childbirth risky. If artificial gravity couldn’t be provided to the mother-to-be, an alternative might be a human-sized centrifuge to spin the pregnant person around. Such a device, called an “Apparatus for Facilitating the Birth of a Child by Centrifugal Force,” was patented in 1963, and Zach Weinersmith sketches a diagram of it that shows it to be just as bizarre as it sounds. In fact, his sketches often serve to demonstrate just how absurd some of the ideas promoted around space habitation really are.

What astronauts really long for when they’re away from home is, well, home. Anything that can help them recreate Earth far from home can provide some comfort. The book recalls how cosmonaut Anatoly Berezovoy loved to listen to cassette tapes with recordings of nature sounds like thunder, rain, and birdsongs during his 211-day spaceflight in 1982, saying, “We never grew tired of them.”

Living on Mars, which has no birds or rain, gets less than half the sunlight per area that Earth does, and is often plagued by dust storms that further blot out the sun, could be a soul-deadening experience.

The book spends several chapters covering space law and governance, which, in the Weinersmiths’ hands, is more interesting than it sounds. They explore the philosophical question of “who owns the universe?” and shoot down a common argument “that all law is pointless because if Elon Musk has a Mars settlement, who’s going to stop him?” (“One of your authors has a brother who makes this argument. His name is Marty and he is wrong.”)

In fact, there are already frameworks that could guide space law, and the book covers them, and their alternatives, in detail. They use Earth-bound examples, like the breakup of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the governance of Antarctica to explore how various governance scenarios might play out on other planets.

Mostly though, the Weinersmiths use facts to debunk grand ideas about how fun and easy life will be on Mars. “An Earth with climate change and nuclear war and, like, zombies and werewolves is still a way better place than Mars,” they write.

They also run through a list of “Bad Arguments for Space Settlement,” which include “Space Will Save Humanity from Near-Term Calamity by Providing a New Home,” and “Space Exploration Is a Natural Human Urge.” These detailed examinations of the stark realities regarding space travel and habitation serve as a foil to the breathlessly optimistic accounts that are so ubiquitous in popular media.

“An Earth with climate change and nuclear war and, like, zombies and werewolves is still a way better place than Mars.”

Despite often sounding like a couple of Debbie Downers, they somehow succeed at keeping the narrative upbeat and interesting. They do this with humor, frankness, and Zach’s fun sketches. Even as they shoot down a long list of space fantasies, they explore a lot of really interesting research and anecdotes (“Did you know the Colombian constitution asserts a claim to a specific region of space?”), so there’s rarely a dull moment.

The Weinersmiths view themselves not as “barriers on the road to progress” but as “guardrails” who want us to go to Mars as much as anybody. The trouble is that these self-professed science geeks (who watch late-night rocket launches with their kids) “just cannot convince ourselves that the usual arguments for space settlements are good.”

But they also assert, rather earnestly, that “If you hate our conclusions here, we have excellent news: we are not powerful people.”

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

about life on Mars

Xenophobic rumors about stabbing attack fuel far-right riots in Dublin

Irish authorities on Friday condemned a far-right, anti-immigrant faction that rapidly spread rumors about the perpetrator of a violent knife attack in Dublin and ultimately tore through the streets of Ireland's capital Thursday night, setting cars and buses on fire and smashing storefront windows.

The country was shocked Thursday by a mid-day stabbing attack on three young children—including a five-year-old girl who sustained serious injuries—and a woman who were reportedly on their way to a daycare facility when a man assaulted them.

The Garda Síochána, Ireland's police force, were able to take the suspect into custody after several bystanders—including a Brazilian delivery driver who immigrated to the country—overtook the man, who authorities said acted on his own.

But the "appalling crime," as Minister for Justice Helen McEntee called the stabbing, soon gave way to chaos at the crime scene when far-right protesters arrived and began chanting anti-immigrant slogans.

One protester told Agence France Presse that "Irish people are being attacked by these scum," even as the press reported that the suspected perpetrator was a naturalized Irish citizen who has lived in Ireland for 20 years.

The cost-of-living crisis in Ireland has fueled recent anti-immigrant protests and acts of violence, with a group of men violently attacking an encampment inhabited by migrants from several countries earlier this year. Such incidents have also led thousands of Irish people to march this year in support of the immigrant community.

The Brazil-born delivery driver, identified by The Irish Times as Ciao Benicio, told the paper that the far-right faction's decision to seize on the knife attack as evidence of a dangerous immigration crisis did not "make sense at all."

"I'm an immigrant myself and I was the one who helped out," said Benicio.

The city's public transit system was badly hit by the ensuing riots, with protesters setting trams and double-decker buses ablaze. They also smashed store windows on O'Connell Street, a major thoroughfare.

The scenes on O’Connell St this morning at 8am. Dublin City Council & local businesses work tirelessly to clean up after the mayhem that unfolded in Ireland’s most historic street.

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said that the rioters in Dublin brought “shame on Ireland” #dublinriots pic.twitter.com/yYE1WBju8P

— JOE.ie (@JOEdotie) November 24, 2023

"This appalling incident is a matter for the Gardaí and that it would be used or abused by groups with an agenda that attacks the principle of social inclusion is reprehensible and deserves condemnation by all those who believe in the rule of law and democracy," said Irish President Michael Higgins in a statement.

Police commissioner Drew Harris said the riots were driven by misinformation that was spread for "malevolent purposes."

Mary Lou McDonald, president of the left-wing opposition party Sinn Féin, said the city of Dublin was "traumatized twice: by the barbaric attack… and then by marauding racist mobs."

Our community has been traumatised twice: by the barbaric knife attack on young children and their teacher, and then by marauding racist mobs who ran riot on our streets. Our community does not feel safe – Has not felt safe for some time now. This must change. #DublinRiots

— Mary Lou McDonald (@MaryLouMcDonald) November 24, 2023

Thirty-four rioters were arrested Thursday evening, and Prime Minister Leo Varadkar addressed the country's immigrant community by saying Ireland would be "vastly inferior" without immigration.

The demonstrators did not wreak havoc across the city "out of any sense of patriotism, however warped," said Varadkar, "they did so because they are filled with hate."

"Those involved [in the riots] brought shame on Ireland"

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said those involved in the riots in Dublin City Centre last night were driven by hate, not patriotism.#VMNews pic.twitter.com/ZGETePGJId

— Virgin Media News (@VirginMediaNews) November 24, 2023

One critic of the riots noted that anti-immigrant sentiment has been egged on in recent years not only by politicians like Hermann Kelly, head of the far-right Irish Freedom Party, but also by liberal policymakers like British Labour Party Leader Keir Starmer.

Starmer said in a Sky News interview Thursday that migration levels in the U.K. are "shockingly high."

"We saw last night in Dublin," said agriculture researcher Alex Heffron, "a consequence of politicians spending years demonizing immigrants."

Why cynical superhero stories, not “The Marvels,” have power

Can superheroes save cinema? According to “The Marvels,” the Marvel Cinematic Universe movie that debuted earlier this month with the lowest opening weekend in MCU history, it’s not likely. The sequel to “Captain Marvel” sees Brie Larson reprise her role as the titular superhero to save the universe but few seemed to care. Projected to make $60 to $80 million in its first weekend, “The Marvels” made only about half of that at $47 million — compared to the first movie raking in $153.4 million in 2019.

The standard superhero narrative is failing because people no longer trust in saviors.

MCU movies are typically instant money-makers which makes “The Marvels” – alongside “Ant-man and the Wasp: Quantumania,” another box office flop from this year – peculiar. Some speculate it’s superhero fatigue; others wonder if the MCU fanbase is getting too old. But an overlooked trend indicates it's neither: The standard superhero narrative is failing because people no longer trust in saviors. Instead, satirical, antihero superheroes are on the rise.

Maybe "The Marvels" performed poorly because the MCU and its fanbase are getting old. Literally

After the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, more and more people have awoken to the fact that the police, our supposed real life superheroes, may not be protectors but rather the instigators of harm. They disproportionately target Black people, use excessive force against them that result in the unjust murder of Black lives like George Floyd, weaponize their power against women and are often shielded from facing justice by our own legal system. TV wasn’t immune to this reckoning. In the wake of the protests, shows made an effort to pull back on copaganda with decades-long favorites like “Brooklyn Nine Nine” and “Cops” coming to an end because of it. Just as the depiction of police were rethought in order to avoid glorifying them, so too did superheroes. Now, they’re not shown to be the faultless bastions of good they were cracked up to be.

Now we have shows like “The Boys,” spinoff “Gen V” and the “Invincible” – all on Prime Video – that satirize superheroes by turning them into villains who revel in violence. The Season 1 finale of the animated “Invincible” captures this in a nutshell. The series created by "The Walking Dead's" Robert Kirkman follows Mark Grayson (voiced by "Beef" star Steven Yeun) as he adjusts to having invincible powers and becoming a superhero like his dad, Earth’s favorite hero, Omni-Man (J.K. Simmons). But Omni-Man is hiding a secret: he’s not here to save Earth, he’s here to conquer it. As a member of the alien Viltrumite race, he believes that the Viltrumites are the superior species and thus are justified in their quest to colonize everyone else. Sound familiar?

Omni-Man (J.K. Simmons) in "Invincible" (Prime Video)Things come to a head in the finale when Omni-Man reveals to his son his true intentions as an intergalactic colonizer in order to sway Mark to his cause. What follows is what Vulture describes as “one of the most harrowing episodes of superhero TV ever produced”: Omni-Man brutalizes any civilian in his vicinity like ragdolls to prove to Mark how humans are inferior and expendable. In the most gripping scene, he holds Mark by the head to run through the Chicago subway, using Invincible’s durable noggin to rip the train apart and kill every passenger on board. After, a news report reveals how the people's revered hero is the one behind all the violence, a reckoning with corruption that, animation and aliens aside, could easily pass as 2020.

The second season, which began early this month, hints at Mark shedding his staunch morality and ethics for his own villain arc and joining in his father’s quest. Whether or not he has an about-face or this turns out to be an alternate multiverse version of Invincible, the show continues to challenge the idea that superheros aren't automatically ethically good — and clearly this subversion is appealing. After just one episode, “Invincible” has already tripled its viewership for Season 2.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

“The Boys” shares in the grotesque brutality of “Invincible.” In the third season, Termite (Brett Geddes) a character who can become very small or very large becomes tiny to dive into a urethra and take their erotic night to new heights — only to accidentally sneeze and, in doing so, becomes large again, exploding his partner from within. It’s a . . . creative metaphor for the dangers of having too much power and wielding it frivolously without fear of the consequences. It’s almost as if superheroes are also covered by qualified immunity that protect police from facing justice when violating constitutional rights.

But such is the running theme of the series. In this world, superpowers are commonplace, and the best of them dream of being in The Seven – the evil, Avengers-like counterparts of superheroes, aka supes. Behind them is Vought International, a corporate conglomerate that pulls the strings of The Seven, the government and the military. Just as police and prisons are marketed as a form of protecting the public but is really a part of a larger economic system that incentivizes the government and companies to incarcerate mass amounts of poor and Black citizens, the supes in “The Boys” are a part of larger entertainment scheme for Vought to sell and exploit. In Season 2, the CEO of Vought reveals to head villain Homelander (Antony Starr) that Vought isn’t actually a superhero company, it’s a pharmaceutical one that secretly manufactures the drug that gives people superhuman powers. And oh yeah, the company was also founded by a Nazi.

These newer superheroes won’t let us forget: the people meant to protect us are in the position to do us the most harm.

The racist and capitalistic infrastructure of superheroes in “The Boys” makes the show that much more disturbing, because it’s not just fantasy; it’s real life. In the latest season, there’s an even more direct relation to the show’s universe and real life when the only Black member of The Seven, A-Train (Jesse T. Usher), must do surface-level outreach to win the “Black vote” and comes to learn that the supes unjustly target Black citizens.

This could sound like a miserable experience to watch, but the themes are resonating, and the numbers don’t lie. “The Boys” was named the most popular show on Prime Video in 2022 when it aired its third season. It was so popular it got its own spinoff this year, “Gen V,” which debuted on Nielsen’s Streaming Originals chart after it amassed 374 million minutes views after only three episodes. A second season has already been confirmed.

These newer superheroes won’t let us forget: the people meant to protect us are in the position to do us the most harm. Even in “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse,” the antagonist turned out to be one of the spider-men, and that sequel was rewarded in the vein of $120.5 million at the box office for it. “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” saw similar success with $118 million at the box office, which makes sense given it follows a group of misfits and outlaws who, this time around, tackle OrgoCorp, a bioengineering corporation not unlike Vought International that illegally experiments on others.

These superhero success stories reflect society’s growing suspicions towards institutions. Viewers are no longer interested in the patriotic, individualistic hero worship à la Captain America. Perhaps instead the narrative can finally return to its roots when heroes used to be politically radical icons who fought against hierarchies. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster’s 1938 Superman was a populist hero who fought landlords and the wealthy. Wonder Woman used to extol feminism decades before its time, and it was co-created by polyamorous author William Moulton Marston.

Iman Vellani as Ms. Marvel/Kamala Khan, Brie Larson as Captain Marvel/Carol Danvers, and Teyonah Parris as Captain Monica Rambeau in "The Marvels" (Laura Radford/Marvel)This more subversive superhero trend sets the stage for why “The Marvels” flopped. It marketed itself as another run of the mill hero storyline with its final trailer full of the typical hero worship, Avengers and . . . Iron Man (whom, last we checked was dead).

It failed to convey that the movie was not actually that: Captain Marvel was not a faultless heroine, but through her own hubris caused devastation to a planet, igniting this new film villain's origin story. While actors may not have been able to market the film due to the SAG-AFTRA strike, the promotion for the movie buried the real lede: the tainted history and shortcomings of Captain Marvel.

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

As TV's new breed of grayscale supes show us, that concealment is pivotal. In an age where a tech bro has undermined democracy with an anti-woke and antisemtic platform, a former president is charged with stealing an election and people are marching on the streets because the U.S. government sells weapons to enable massacre, it makes sense that our superhero content has shifted to capture our growing opposition to those meant to keep us safe. If the system wasn’t created to save us, then superheroes won’t either.

about this topic

Trump insists he’s being “sarcastic” after being called out for repeatedly confusing Obama and Biden

Donald Trump ranted on social media Monday morning about recent jabs from 2024 presidential candidate and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — and recent focus in the media — over the former president's verbal slips during campaign appearances, including swapping President Biden's name with former President Barack Obama, confusing foreign leaders and misstating the name of a city he spoke in. Last month, per Axios, DeSantis' campaign unveiled a "Trump accident tracker" to compile those mishaps and asked whether Trump had the "stamina" to be president — using against Trump a word he often threw at his opponents.

Trump, who often mocks Biden's age and mental acuity despite his foes often knocking him over his own, defended his name swaps on the campaign trail. "Whenever I sarcastically insert the name Obama for Biden as an indication that others may actually be having a very big influence in running our Country, Ron DeSanctimonious and his failing campaign apparatus, together with the Democrat’s Radical Left 'Disinformation Machine,' go wild saying that 'Trump doesn’t know the name of our President, (CROOKED!) Joe Biden. He must be cognitively impaired.' No, I know both names very well, never mix them up, and know that they are destroying our Country," Trump wrote on Truth Social.

"Also, and as reported, I just took a cognitive test as part of my Physical Exam, and ACED it. Also ACED (a perfect score!) one taken while in the White House," he continued. "Biden should take one so we can determine why he wants Open Borders, No Energy Independence, A Woke Military, High Inflation, No Voter I.D., Men playing In Women’s Sports, Only Electric Cars & Trucks, A Weaponized DOJ/FBI, and so many other CRAZY things!!!" The former president took a cognitive test in 2020 in an effort to prove his mental soundness.

MTG claims Trump is “winning” after he’s booed at South Carolina college football game

Far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., rushed to Donald Trump's defense Sunday after the former president faced boos from some football fans at South Carolina's highly anticipated rivalry game against Clemson over the long weekend, The Daily Beast reports. Video clips of the historic Saturday game that were shared across social media show supporters cheering for him while several others visibly boo the 77-year-old. Trump was invited to attend as a guest of Gov. Henry McMaster, who has also endorsed his presidential bid, and, according to Politico, arrived at Williams-Brice Stadium to chants of “We want Trump! We want Trump.” As his vehicle approached the venue, however, a crowd began booing. The Associated Press also noted that Trump received “mostly cheers and a smattering of boos as he walked around, posed for a few photos and waved.”

Ahead of the event, more than half a dozen huge digital billboards in Columbia also displayed "You lost. You're guilty. Welcome to Columbia, Donald," according to The State. The billboards continued, “Sponsored by League of Radical Leftists Vermin – Jay Bender Instigator.” Bender told the outlet that in "a normal, rational world, anyone that crazy would not be considered a serious candidate for public office.” On Sunday, Greene, a vocal ally of the former president, took to X/Twitter to stick up for Trump and deny that anyone had any qualms with his presence at the game. “Trump is WINNING and the people love him!” she tweeted. "Joe Biden couldn’t stay up late enough to go to a football game let alone have this massive cheering crowd for him. If Joe had gone to the game, it would have been FJB!"

Trump is WINNING and the people love him!

Joe Biden couldn’t stay up late enough to go to a football game let alone have this massive cheering crowd for him.

If Joe had gone to the game, it would have been FJB! pic.twitter.com/5AXzh0PQwq

— Marjorie Taylor Greene 🇺🇸 (@mtgreenee) November 26, 2023