“Knives are out for Kevin”: McCarthy’s dream of becoming House speaker just became a nightmare

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s, R-Calif., path to becoming House speaker got a lot dicier after Republicans failed to pull off the “red wave” he had predicted for weeks.

Republicans are still likely to take over the House of Representatives but McCarthy’s grasp on the speakership may be a struggle if a slim majority hands significant power to extreme right-wing members like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., according to several House GOP sources who spoke with CBS News chief election and campaign correspondent Robert Costa.

“A restless morn inside congressional GOP,” Costa wrote on Twitter. “Haven’t seen this level of anxiety and loathing since late 2015 as Trump ascended. Widespread consensus that McCarthy still in a position to be speaker if Rs win House. But his allies now wonder: at what cost? with what kind of power?”

He added Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., the No. 2 Republican in the House, would most likely rise as a potential challenger to McCarthy should he start “shedding support” — even if Scalise isn’t interested in initiating a fight.

“Biggest loser tonight”: Trumpworld is “catatonic” over his MAGA midterm failure

McCarthy, who planned a victory party in D.C. on Tuesday, predicted that his party would clinch the majority within hours while crucial races had yet to be called, The New York Times reported.

“When you wake up tomorrow, we will be in the majority and Nancy Pelosi will be in the minority,” McCarthy said to a mostly empty ballroom early Wednesday morning.

Some House Republicans, like Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., are “just as happy with a slim majority” because it would benefit them, Politico reported.

“I mean, look at what Joe Manchin has done in the Senate as the one deciding vote, right? I would love for the Massie caucus to be relevant. If there’s a one seat majority, my caucus has one person. It’s me. So I can decide whether a bill passes or not,” Massie told the outlet. “I’d be the wrong guy if you’re trying to find somebody who’s heartbroken that we don’t have a 40-seat majority.”

Far-right extremists like Greene and Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., both of whom have spoken at white nationalist conferences, would have more sway in a tight GOP House.

Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman said while McCarthy is expected to run for speaker, it may come down to him buying people off “with perks, favors and concessions.”

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

In the case that McCarthy is elected speaker, the GOP agenda and messaging will be dictated by the “loudest, craziest voices on the right,” Josh Schwerin, a former spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Hillary Clinton, told Insider. He would remain “speaker in name only.”

Instead of passing legislation that can move in the dealmaking Senate, the group would instead remain focused on investigations into Democrats, appearing on Fox News and “getting Donald Trump to say nice things about them,” he added.

But some are predicting that McCarthy may never become speaker at all.

“Folks, if you’re wondering how Speaker Kevin McCarthy would handle a 6- or 7-seat majority, it’s worth considering there may never be a Speaker Kevin McCarthy at all,” The Atlantic’s Tim Alberta tweeted.

A lot of rank-and-file members of Congress have already started thinking about the idea of a “new energized leadership that is going to be focused on the working class voters,” a GOP source told Fox News White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich.

“Knives are out for Kevin McCarthy,” another GOP source told Heinrich, “if he is under 225 [seats], expect Scalise to make a move quickly for speaker.”

about the midterms

Who sees what you flush? Wastewater surveillance for public health is on the rise

Flush and forget? Not if you have a toilet that flushes to one of over 3,000 sites around the world where researchers are using wastewater to track SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

But what do members of the public actually know about wastewater surveillance? And what do they think about researchers tracking what they send down the drain at their home?

While not new, this form of public health surveillance has gained attention since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Tracking the rise and fall of the level of coronavirus in wastewater provides officials with a snapshot of how much SARS-CoV-2 is circulating in a community. Together with data on case counts, health officials can use this information to guide their local actions — for example, choosing to increase testing or vaccination campaigns. Where available, immunocompromised individuals may also find it useful to access data for their local area via online dashboards as they try to manage their overall exposure risk.

In our recent study, my colleagues and I explored public perceptions of using sewer samples for monitoring community health in the United States. Using an online survey of more than 3,000 adults in the U.S., we were able to gauge respondents’ general boundaries in this expanding field of community monitoring. We didn’t find much consensus, suggesting the need for more public outreach and education.

What happens after you flush

Households connected to sewer lines pay utilities to remove their waste. In the absence of a sewer problem, most people are able to flush and forget.

Sewage typically travels through publicly owned infrastructure to a treatment plant operated by a utility. Researchers and officials currently sample wastewater not just for the coronavirus but also for polio and flu monitoring. Samples are usually collected with permission of the utility, but no one asks the households being sampled if they are willing to participate. Treatment plants conduct other kinds of Environmental Protection Agency-mandated testing, such as looking for pollutants in wastewater.

In our survey, we found that a large portion of the public was unaware that sewage surveillance takes place for public health purposes in many areas. Respondents were more aware of other forms of public health monitoring, such as restaurant inspections and water quality testing.

That about half of respondents didn’t even know sewage monitoring is happening underscores the fact that no one asks individual residents for permission to test an area’s wastewater.

We found more support for monitoring external threats in wastewater, such as diseases, environmental toxins and terrorist threats like anthrax. Fewer people expressed support for tracking lifestyle behaviors, such as smoking or use of birth control, diet, and indicators of mental health, including stress hormones, which are emerging areas of monitoring not yet tracked in many local areas.

Our results suggest that the public may not want unchecked monitoring of their toilet flushes.

When we asked people to consider the various scales at which wastewater surveillance can happen, we found a general theme of “the bigger, the better.” Sampling from a larger area is a way to protect privacy, since one person’s information is mixed in with many others’.

More respondents said they were OK with monitoring an entire city compared with monitoring at the level of individual residences. Notably, more respondents who self-reported living in urban areas endorsed monitoring the entire city than those who self-reported living in suburban areas.

Looking at flushes is not going away

My colleagues and I did not find significant nationwide fear about sewage surveillance among our survey respondents. But those surveyed certainly had opinions that officials may want to consider more deeply when it comes to wastewater tracking.

While wastewater surveillance in urban or suburban areas provides good coverage for an overall picture of COVID-19 in the community, coverage is still not fully inclusive of the entire public. It would not capture data from the approximately 15% of the United States population whose homes do not have a sewer connection. That group includes people who have septic tanks in more rural areas.

How protected is individual privacy? Confirming that SARS-CoV-2 is present in a city is different than confirming it’s present in a neighborhood, and that’s different from confirming it’s present in a dormitory or prison building. Looking at a wider area ensures the sample stays anonymous. At the moment, there are no health privacy protection laws or regulations about sewage surveillance in the U.S. Officials rely on goodwill from utilities to gain access to wastewater and the health information it holds, and often partner with commercial laboratories, such as Biobot.

Wastewater data is immensely valuable. However this public health surveillance tool is used in the future, our survey suggests that there’s room for more education and conversation with the public. After all, they’re the one’s being monitored.

Rochelle H. Holm, Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Louisville

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

Five states just voted on legalizing recreational marijuana. These are the results

Whether Democrat, Republican or independent, legalizing cannabis is a popular topic among voters. According to an October 2022 poll from Monmouth University, more than two-thirds (68%) of Americans support legalizing marijuana, including 76% of Democrats, 52% of Republicans and 73% of independents. Many see the drug as being less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco.

Prior to this year’s elections, medical marijuana had been legalized in 39 states and the District of Columbia, while adult-use of cannabis had been legalized in D.C. and 19 states. Multiple U.S. colonies, such as Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, had also passed progressive cannabis laws.

What’s the difference between medical- and adult-use marijuana? Medical marijuana generally requires a doctor’s evaluation, which can be somewhat expensive and only covers certain conditions like cancer or HIV. Products sold in medical marijuana markets are generally more geared toward the health benefits of cannabis, with strains higher in CBD than THC, the two main drugs in marijuana. Adult-use markets don’t require such scrutiny, and products with higher THC content, for a more “recreational” experience, are generally more widely available.

This election cycle, five states voted on adult-use cannabis legalization: Arkansas, Maryland, Missouri, North Dakota and South Dakota. Colorado also voted on a ballot initiative that would legalize possession of some psychedelic drugs and also allow psilocybin “healing centers” to open, somewhat like a “magic” mushrooms law Oregon voters passed in 2020 that is due to roll out next year.

Overall, this midterm cycle was a big opportunity for advocates of drug policy reform. Here’s how the states fared on Election Day:

Arkansas: Issue 4

Results: FAIL — 44.20% YES / 55.80% NO

In 2016, Arkansas became the first Bible Belt state to approve medical marijuana after 53% of voters approved Amendment 98. This year, Arkansans could have voted to expand marijuana access with Issue 4 but decided against doing so. The measure attracted strong criticism from local Republicans like Sen. Tom Cotton, who described the proposed law as bringing “California’s drug laws” to Arkansas.

The Dobbs effect is real: Voters, still angry about the Roe overturn, turned out to protect abortion

The law would have permitted adults 21 and over to purchase and possess up to 1 ounce of cannabis from licensed dispensaries. To meet demand, the law would have doubled the number of dispensary licenses, while the 40 or so existing medical cannabis dispensaries would be permitted to serve adult consumers starting on March 8, 2023. It would not have allowed home cultivation.

Maryland: Question 4

Results: PASS — 65.53% YES / 34.47% NO

The Old Line State was the first to report cannabis-related election results, with nearly two-thirds of voters delivering a strong “yes” vote. It has now become the 20th state to legalize adult-use cannabis. With strong polling going back several months, Maryland was generally considered the most likely to pass out of the five states voting on cannabis this election cycle, according to Marijuana Moment. In 2013, Maryland legalized medicinal marijuana and decriminalized possession of 10 grams of marijuana or less a year later.

“Maryland voters were loud and clear in their support for legalizing the responsible adult-use of cannabis,” Maryland NORML Executive Director Losia Nyankale said in a statement. (NORML is the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.) “Question 4 activates long overdue changes to Maryland’s judicial, social and economic climates. This is an important first step in the right direction.”

The text of the ballot initiative was pretty straightforward, simply asking voters: “Do you favor the legalization of the use of cannabis by an individual who is at least 21 years of age on or after July 1, 2023, in the State of Maryland?” Sales won’t begin until next summer, but in the meantime, the bill will temporarily expand decriminalization from Jan. 1 to June 30, 2023, with possession of up to 1.5 ounces punishable with a civil fine of around $100, for example.

Missouri: Amendment 3

Results: PASS — 53.34% YES / 46.66% NO

In 2014, Missourians voted to decriminalize the possession of 10 grams or less of cannabis, with a medical cannabis law established in 2018, passing with 65.5% support. This year, voters decided YES on Amendment 3, which legalizes adult-use cannabis for adults 21 and older. They can possess and purchase up to 3 ounces of cannabis flower and cultivate up to six mature cannabis plants after obtaining a noncommercial cultivation registration card.

“This is truly a historic occasion,” Dan Viets, one of the co-authors of Amendment 3, a Missouri NORML coordinator and chair of the Amendment 3 Advisory Board, said in a statement. “This means that the great majority of the 20,000 people who have been arrested year after year in Missouri will no longer be subject to criminal prosecution for victimless marijuana law violations.”

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

Missouri is the 21st state to legalize adult-use cannabis, but this campaign attracted criticism from all sides. A legal challenge that sought to remove the question from the ballot was dismissed in September, while Rep. Cori Bush and the Missouri NAACP both expressed dissatisfaction with the bill.

North Dakota: Measure 2

Results: FAIL — 45.05% YES / 54.95% NO

Early in the evening, North Dakota’s Measure 2 was trailing. It would have legalized the use and sale of marijuana by adults age 21 and older, allowing the possession of up to 1 ounce of marijuana with home cultivation limited to three plants. It would also have opened retail stores, testing labs and related businesses, directing regulators to establish the industry by Oct. 1, 2023.

Ultimately, voters decided against the measure by about a 10% spread. Voters previously attempted to pass a similar cannabis legalization law in 2018, which also failed to launch. A legislative attempt in 2021 was also defeated in the state senate. However, medical marijuana was legalized in North Dakota in 2016 through Measure 5.

South Dakota: Measure 27

Results: FAIL — 47.15% YES / 52.85% NO

South Dakota may feel a little like déjà vu. That’s because in 2020, the Mount Rushmore State approved both medical- and adult-use marijuana at the same time. It was a historic vote, described at the time as a “stunning rebuke” of drug laws in the state. But Gov. Kristi Noem — a Republican who just won a decisive re-election bid — did all that she could to nullify the adult-use law. While state Supreme Court eventually overturned the decision, the medical cannabis law did go through.

This time around, South Dakotans voted “no” on the initiative, which would have again legalized cannabis for adults 21 and older. Polling consistently showed residents intended to vote against the measure.

Colorado: Prop 122

Results: PASS — 52.22% YES / 47.78% NO

A decade ago, Colorado was the first state to legalize adult-use cannabis, while its capitol Denver was the first city to decriminalize psilocybin “magic” mushrooms in 2019 via a local ordinance. This year, the Centennial State faced another progressive drug policy question, essentially expanding on Denver’s progress with psychedelic plants and fungi.

With Prop 122, voters decided whether or not to establish the Regulated Natural Medicine Access Program, which would open licensed healing centers to administer natural psychedelic drugs. Personal use, possession and cultivation would also be decriminalized for anyone 21 and older. The list of substances includes dimethyltryptamine (DMT), which is the main ingredient in ayahuasca; ibogaine, a psychedelic plant from Africa that can help with addiction; mescaline (excluding peyote), the trippy component of San Pedro cactus; and psilocybin and psilocin, the two main components of “magic” mushrooms.

By the end of the night Tuesday, it seemed that voters had approved Prop 122, with less than one percentage point deciding the outcome, but some outlets reported the results as too close to call. The next day, it was announced that the initiative had passed, marking more progressive drug policy in Colorado.

Local ballot initiatives across America

On a local level, Texas voters in five cities (Denton, Elgin, Harker Heights, Killeen, and San Marcos) approved cannabis decriminalization ballot initiatives. The same happened in five cities across Ohio: Corning, Kent, Laurelville, Rushville and Shawnee. And in Wisconsin, nine local cannabis reform measures were voted on and all nine were approved.

about Election Day

210+ GOP candidates who spread doubt and lies about 2020 election won power in the midterms

More than 210 Republicans who cast doubt on President Joe Biden’s 2020 victory won congressional seats and races for governor, secretary of state, and attorney general on Tuesday night, underscoring the extent to which right-wing election denialism has become entrenched in the GOP and threatens to remain a noxious force in U.S. politics for the foreseeable future.

In a recent investigation of Republican candidates’ statements,The New York Times identified more than 370 so-called “election skeptics” who sowed doubt in some way about the 2020 contest. According to the newspaper’s Wednesday morning analysis, over half of them have won their midterm campaigns so far. It may take days or weeks for the final results to be tallied.

While more than 30 of these winning GOP candidates are outright “election deniers” who refuse to accept Biden’s presidency as legitimate, the majority have sown doubt “by suggesting, sometimes again and again, that there were irregularities or unresolved questions about the way the election was conducted, or by saying that further investigation was needed,” the Times reported.

Biden defeated former President Donald Trump by seven million votes and 74 electors two years ago. Nevertheless, “more than 100 of the winners questioned the 2020 election within this past year,” the Times noted, months after “judges across the nation rejected attempts by Mr. Trump and his allies to dispute the results.”

Dispensing with the newspaper’s differentiation between “deniers” and “skeptics,” socialist writer Ashley Smith summarized the development as follows: “Two hundred deranged reactionaries elected to government.”

200 deranged reactionaries elected to government. https://t.co/KQ7xmqzZIe

— Ashley Smith (@AshleyAreeSmith) November 9, 2022

More than 170 “skeptics,” including nearly 30 who explicitly said the 2020 presidential election was stolen or rigged, have been elected in the House. As a result, over a third of the chamber will be populated by Republicans who have questioned or denied the validity of Biden’s victory, and the vast majority of states will have at least one federal lawmaker who fits that description.

“Most of the election skeptics who will serve in the House next year are incumbents who objected to the 2020 Electoral College results, supported a lawsuit to throw out results in four states, or spread falsehoods in other public statements. Some did all three,” the Times reported. “About half of skeptics who are newcomers have said the 2020 election was stolen or rigged.”

In the Senate, more than a dozen Republicans who have expressed doubt or lied about the 2020 results have been elected so far, including deniers such as Ohio’s J.D. Vance, who claimed in March that “the election was stolen from Trump.”

At the state level, two dozen GOP candidates who have questioned or denied the outcome of the last presidential contest won races for governor, secretary of state, and attorney general. The list of victorious deniers includes Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, who said earlier this year that “blue-state liberals stole the election from President Trump,” as well as Texas AG Ken Paxton and Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray.

Although the GOP is projected to gain control of the U.S. House and still has an outside chance of taking the U.S. Senate, things could have been much worse for Democrats had the presumed nationwide “red wave” of Republican midterm victories materialized.

As NBC News correspondent Vaughn Hillyard pointed out on social media, several Republican gubernatorial candidates who refused to say whether they would have certified Biden’s 2020 victory in their states and many election-denying secretary of state candidates lost on Tuesday.

Tonight, the Election-Denying Secretary of State Candidates from States Biden Won:

❔ Mark Finchem, Arizona
❔ Jim Marchant, Nevada
❌ Kristina Karamo, Michigan
❌ Kim Crockett, Minnesota
❌ Audrey Mendonca-Trujillo, NM
❌ Pennsylvania/Picked by GOV:https://t.co/OVNpnHZqtX

— Vaughn Hillyard (@VaughnHillyard) November 9, 2022

“Progressives everywhere should take pride in knowing they held off [the] MAGA wave Republicans were hoping for,” Leah Greenberg, co-founder and co-executive director of Indivisible, said in a statement.

“Coming off four years of Trump, followed by an insurrection, and two years of a MAGA Supreme Court stripping our fundamental rights, we can’t help but feel enraged, exhausted, and uncertain,” Greenberg continued.

“But even though we knew the odds for this election were stacked against us from the start, and we knew we were going to be outspent by Republicans, Indivisibles and progressives all over the country put up a tough and impactful fight against all the forces working against progress and we still have hope,” she added. “We will not stop fighting for our democracy.”

“Unprecedented irregularities”: MAGA election losers stoke conspiracies and refuse to concede

Several Republican candidates have refused to concede their losses and some are even stoking conspiracy theories about “irregularities” after the widely-hyped “red wave” never came to fruition on Tuesday.

Pennsylvania State Sen. Doug Mastriano, a 2020 election denier and Jan. 6 rally attendee, refused to concede in the Pennsylvania governor’s race on Tuesday.

His opponent, Democratic Attorney General Josh Shapiro, was projected as the winner by most major news outlets before midnight on Tuesday. Shapiro leads the race by 13 points with more 94% of the votes counted, according to the Associated Press. Other networks also called the race for Shapiro, including NBC News, Fox News, and CNN.

Despite Shapiro’s projected win, Mastriano said that there’s still “a ways to go,” noting that there are more votes to be counted.

“Have faith, we’re gonna, uh, of course, we’re gonna have faith and have patience,” he told his supporters in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania late Tuesday night. “We’re gonna wait until every vote counts, right?”

Pennsylvania gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano (R) is not conceding to Governor-elect Josh Shapiro (D) despite every reputable network calling the race.

A supporter pops confetti in the front row. pic.twitter.com/UKJq75gSVu

— The Recount (@therecount) November 9, 2022

Meanwhile, Shapiro celebrated his victory, telling voters at his election night party that they “stood up to the extremism that has taken root in some parts of our society.”

Shapiro had a steady lead in the polls in the days leading up to the election, while the far-right Mastriano went on the defensive and refused to speak with the mainstream press.

“Here we go again”: Trump stokes Arizona conspiracy theories over Maricopa voting machine problems

In Arizona, Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake suggested that the results of her race against Democratic Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, which remains too close to call, may not be legitimate due to technical issues in Maricopa County Tuesday morning.

“Two minutes into voting, we had people being told, ‘Well, you’re going to have to put your little ballot over here into another box,” she said onstage in Scottsdale, Arizona. “The fake media over there tried to tell us we were wrong for asking questions about our elections.”

Lake has repeatedly claimed that if she had been in charge, she would not have certified President Joe Biden’s win in Arizona in 2020.

The Associated Press on Wednesday morning called the New York gubernatorial race for Gov. Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y., the first woman elected governor in the state.

Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., the Republican nominee, refused to concede defeat early Wednesday despite 71% of precincts reporting Hochul had 54% of the vote compared to Zeldin’s 45%.

“We hope that as these results come in that we’ll be able to prevail,” he said, waiting for additional votes to be counted.

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

Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y., also declared victory in his bid for re-election in Rochester after he was projected as the winner of the 25th District in New York, with 53% of the vote according to AP.

But his Republican opponent La’Ron Singletary has not conceded and called into question the legitimacy of the election. Singletary — the former chief of the Rochester Police Department — called for an investigation into “unprecedented irregularities in our election process.” He cited concerns over the validity of ballots and whether they were counted and recorded properly.

“I don’t have any specific reason to say this wasn’t a fair and just election,” said Singletary’s attorney Dan Strollo. “We just want to know what happened, why the servers went down.”

Strollo also questioned why Monroe County Republican Board of Elections Commissioner Lisa Nicolay “wouldn’t come down and answer questions,” about their claims.

The statements from Mastriano, Lake, Zeldin and Singletary stand in stark contrast to other Republicans who have conceded to their Democratic opponents. Republican Mehmet Oz called Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, D-Pa., to concede the Senate race early Wednesday morning, according to Fetterman’s campaign.

Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, announced on Tuesday that he had the “privilege” to concede the Ohio Senate race to Republican J.D. Vance, and called out the election deniers.

“The way this country operates is that when you lose an election you concede,” he said in his concession speech. “You respect the will of the people. We can’t have a system where if you win it’s a legitimate election and if you lose someone stole it.”

Tim Ryan: “I have the privilege to concede this race to JD Vance, bc the way this country operates is that when you lose an election you concede. You respect the will of the people. We can’t have a system where if you win it’s a legitimate election & if you lose someone stole it” pic.twitter.com/7BTPJAsVu0

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 9, 2022

about the midterms

“Wounded” Trump is “furious” and blaming Melania for his decision to endorse Oz: report

Still more reports are coming in about former President Donald Trump’s angry reactions to seeing some of his hand-picked candidates face defeat during Tuesday’s midterm elections.

The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman chimed in on Twitter with her own dispatch that claimed the twice-impeached former president is now even blaming former first lady Melania Trump for some of his own poor endorsements.

“Trump is indeed furious this morning, particularly about Mehmet Oz, and is blaming everyone who advised him to back Oz — including his wife, describing it as not her best decision, according to people close to him,” Haberman writes.

Haberman also reports that the losses of Trump-backed candidates such as Oz and Don Bolduc may impact his decision to announce his third presidential campaign next week.

“There are people pushing Trump to reschedule his announcement next week, and several Rs have texted asking whether he will, but it’s risky and would be acknowledging he’s wounded by yesterday, something that some of his advisers insist is not the case,” she writes.

Trump started teasing his third presidential campaign earlier this week, and he also issued a warning against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis against pursuing the presidency in 2024.

“I really believe he could hurt himself badly,” Trump said of a potential DeSantis White House run. “I think he would be making a mistake, I think the base would not like it — I don’t think it would be good for the party.”

“Andor” shows how exploitation leads to the Dark Side, from bureaucratic drudgery to prison labor

There are enough stories about the wrongfully convicted to make the circumstances that land the titular hero of “Andor” in prison seem entirely plausible.

In the drama’s seventh episode, “Announcement,” Diego Luna’s Cassian Andor is hiding out beachside in a place called Niamo. He has money, romantic companionship and an appropriately low profile under the alias Keef Girgo.

None of that matters when he’s walking to the store to pick up some snacks and happens to be nearby when a group of other men runs by him in an attempt to escape some local stormtroopers. Cassian thinks he’s keeping his cool, but his decision to dash up a staircase is his undoing. A trooper detains him, accusing him of being “part of it” without saying what “it” is.

Next thing you know he’s in front of a local magistrate sentencing him to six years imprisonment. She doesn’t care about his claims that he’s just a tourist. Take it up with the Emperor, she says, knowing that’s impossible.

Cassian looks and dresses like an unimportant local, someone who can vanish without consequence. Eventually, that will make him a great spy. At present, he’s disappeared to Narkina 5, a factory facility in the middle of some unknown sea, where inmates are kept barefoot and disciplined through a reward and punishment system.

There’s no hiding from it: The politics of “Andor” look a lot like the type troubling our world

Prisoners are divided into groups and spend their days assembling mechanical parts used for unspecified purposes. Those who misbehave are shocked with crippling current delivered through the floorboards. The most productive groups are rewarded with flavored nutritional paste. The least productive is shocked to the point of collapse. Without any legal representation or hope for appeal, the prisoners endure their lot, trusting they’ll be released that when they’ve completed their sentence.

But between the threat of a nascent rebellion and the Imperial bureaucracy’s determination to expand, prison slave labor is an economically sound solution to growing the manufacturing workforce needed to create the war machines necessary to bring the galaxy to heel.

Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) in “Andor” (Photo courtesy of Disney+ / Lucasfilm Ltd)

Cassian doesn’t quite get this at first, but he picks it up soon enough when another inmate warns him to keep his head down and work, and ignore the count of the days remaining on his sentence. “Anyone who thinks they’re getting out of here now is dreaming,” he says. “Those days are over.”

“Andor” follows the slow burn progression of a serious TV drama as opposed to the industrial light and magic dominating other “Star Wars” shows.

“Andor,” another offshoot of Disney’s steadily expanding “Star Wars” galaxy, is the least space operatic title in the franchise’s library next to “Rogue One.” No one in this show prays to the Force, knowing that every inch of liberation that can be gained only results from extensive planning, risk, sacrifice and luck.

As of now, Cassian is no rebel. The man we’re getting to know remains a mercenary, albeit one with principles, doing whatever he can to survive. Occasionally that has meant shooting first when it looks like someone might betray him but, unlike other shows and movies, there’s no need to explain why.

“Andor” follows the slow burn progression of a serious TV drama as opposed to the industrial light and magic and familiar characters dominating other “Star Wars” shows. Because of this some longtime “Star Wars” followers complain about this drama’s unhurried approach compared to other action-forward tales in the franchise’s stable such as “The Mandalorian.”

But if the goal is to make a persuasive case for the humanity of these characters and explain the chilly inhumanity of the people who side with the Empire, leisurely precision is what a story like this requires. Explaining how and why people like Cassian Andor, are driven to rise against an oppressive system requires a steady ratcheting-up of tension via an array of insults.

In this way it does a better job of explaining how the Empire becomes the sprawling, all-ensnaring force that we know it to be, and why some humans – and it is mostly humans, you’ll notice – intentionally profit from its destructive aims. Showing others pay the price up close also negates the bloodlessness taken for granted in other “Star Wars” chapters.

Syril Karn (Kyle Soller) and Supervisor Dedra Meero (Denise Gough) in “Andor” (Photo courtesy of Disney+ / Lucasfilm Ltd)

Indeed, the cold reduction of lives into units only makes the Empire more chilling, along with tacitly inviting us to consider our society’s embrace of corporate dominance. When Imperial Security Bureau head officer Major Partagaz (Anton Lesser) engages a subordinate in sanitized corporate speak about resistance to a hostile Imperial invasion of a planet, the exchange might as well be taking place at any team meeting in any major office building.

“The dimensions of the conflict have diminished sufficiently that mining has resumed on the occupied land,” the man says, which Partagaz responds to by asking him about “storage issues with the displaced.” This occurs a few episodes before Cassian finds himself in the wrong place at the wrong time and is whisked off to Narkina 5, one of those “storage issue” solutions.

Anyone who claims not to understand the concept of the poverty-to-prison pipeline or disbelieves the word of the wrongfully convicted cannot watch this show and still legitimately hold on to that illusion. It isn’t as if series creator Tony Gilroy and Beau Willimon, the former “House of Cards” showrunner who wrote the three-episode Narkina 5 arc, pulled the idea of Cassian’s plight out of thin air. Prison labor and exploitation is a frequent part of the supply chain that brings us many first-world conveniences.

Mon Mothma (Genevieve O’Reilly) and Vel Sartha (Faye Marsay) in “Andor” (Photo courtesy of Disney+ / Lucasfilm Ltd)

But Willimon also uses Cassian’s prison stay to delineate the lines more starkly between classes in this society even as he connects them, and not simply via the elegant Coruscant parties hosted by Mon Mothma (Genevieve O’Reilly). She also has a past and a path that led to the Rebel Alliance, and O’Reilly’s steeled calm adds welcome layers to a character mainly known in the broader “Star Wars” legend for delivering a short speech and wearing the hell out of a flowy gown.

Still, as a Senator, we’ve seen her type before. What we haven’t seen, and appreciated, are the nameless schemers and aggressive cubicle drones who make Imperial domination possible and efficient.

Death by the repetitive execution of tedious tasks thousands of times is a true risk, and pain is an effective jailor. More than anything else, this is what should alarm us.

The Narkina facility is simply one stop on a conveyor belt that leads back to a sterile building stuffed with desk jockeys. This is where Kyle Soller’s desperate striver Syril Karn tries to make his mark after Cassian gets him fired from his security officer job. But Denise Gough’s Dedra Meero is a career-driven shark who could devour him whole. Dedra is determined to stand out and will chew through anyone in her way.

As one of two women seen in the Imperial Security Bureau’s supervisory council room – you can’t claim the Empire isn’t an enthusiastic patriarchy! – her zealous quest to climb the ranks makes her exacting and cruel. She cares less about who Cassian Andor is than what his capture can do for her reputation.

Syril Karn (Kyle Soller) and Flob (Alex Blake) in “Andor” (Photo courtesy of Disney+ / Lucasfilm Ltd)

Whether in Imperial office space, which could be the inside of any American office building, or within the Narkina prison, which seems like an advanced version of modern incarceration facilities, death by the repetitive execution of tedious tasks thousands of times is a true risk, and pain is an effective jailor. More than anything else, this the disquieting aspect of the show should alarm us most acutely.

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

It takes the blithe execution of another group of Narkina prisoners, and failed effort to keep the other inmates in the dark about what happened, to finally persuade Cassian’s inmate supervisor Kino Loy (Andy Serkis) to stop trusting that the system cares enough about them to live up to its promise to free them, let alone spying on their conversations.

In an earlier hour of “Andor,” Partagaz warns his people that security is an illusion. Narkina proves this to be true.

The “Star Wars” mythology has been drilled into our culture since Generation X was in its infancy, sold as a comfortable fairy tale set long ago in a place far, far away assuring children that good always triumphs over evil. “Andor” pierces that fantasy by placing a tight focus on the familiar bureaucracy monotony and drudgery that eventually leads to the destruction of planets. This isn’t merely the stuff of speculative fiction or space opera.

Nearly every situation we’ve seen is a fictionalized, heightened version of the type of corporate-sponsored environmental and political exploitation taking place somewhere on Earth, and very likely in your work life or one of someone you know. Of course, since it’s part of “Star Wars” we’re encouraged to embrace “Andor” as fantasy, a story told very well.

For the same reason, and especially now, we should believe in what this story is telling us, along with appreciating how effectively it wraps the cautionary message of Cassian Andor’s journey inside the franchise’s pageantry. Like Mon Mothma, it cuts an impressive picture of steadiness with no intention of apologizing for being up to something more dangerous . . . and honorable.

New episodes of “Andor” stream Wednesdays on Disney+.

about the “Star Wars” TV universe

“I should not be blamed at all”: Trump throws his MAGA candidates under the bus after midterm losses

Former President Donald Trump has already started throwing Republicans he endorsed ahead of their midterm losses under the bus, rejecting any blame for the failed “red wave” on Tuesday.

Trump sought to distance himself from Republican Don Bolduc, whom he endorsed in the race against Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., after he was projected to lose. Bolduc endorsed Trump’s false 2020 election claims during the Republican primary but tried to downplay his claims about fraud after winning the nomination. Trump ultimately endorsed him after Bolduc floated a baseless claim that people were being “bussed” into New Hampshire to vote during a debate.

Trump on Truth Social claimed Bolduc lost because he wavered on election denial.

“Don Bolduc was a very nice guy, but he lost tonight when he disavowed, after his big primary win, his longstanding stance on Election Fraud in the 2020 Presidential Primary,” Trump wrote. “Had he stayed strong and true, he would have won easily. Lessons Learned!!!”

“Biggest loser tonight”: Trumpworld is “catatonic” over his MAGA midterm failure

Trump offered a tepid endorsement on Truth Social last month.

“General Don Bolduc has run a great campaign to be the U.S. Senator from the beautiful State of New Hampshire,” Trump wrote at the time. “He was a strong and proud ‘Election Denier,’ a big reason that he won the Nomination, but he then disavowed. He has since come back, at least on busing, but that is only a small part of N.H. Election Fraud.”

Trump also took to Truth Social to dunk on Republican candidate Joe O’Dea on Tuesday. O’Dea was endorsed by Trump rival Gov. Ron DeSantis and is projected to lose to Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., according to AP.

“Joe O’Dea lost BIG! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Trump wrote late Tuesday night. Trump had also previously told his followers not to vote for O’Dea, calling him a RINO, or a “Republican in name only,” according to reporting from Axios.

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

Trump has also been “privately trashing” Republican Mehmet Oz, who conceded the Pennsylvania Senate seat to Democratic Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, according to Axios.

Hard to think of a worse senate endorsement in recent memory than Dr Oz. And DJT is … not happy.. also views Oz as disloyal. Has been privately trashing “MEHMET Oz”

— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 9, 2022

Trump ahead of the results on Tuesday made clear that he should not shoulder any blame if Republicans lose.

“Well, I think if they win, I should get all the credit. If they lose, I should not be blamed at all,” Trump said in an interview with NewsNation.

Former President Donald Trump said if Republicans he backed win, he “should get all the credit… But it will probably be just the opposite.” Watch the interview tonight at 6p/5C — find your channel: https://t.co/ZH35VUp1Ik #Election2022 pic.twitter.com/nDTEM1uWOf

— NewsNation (@NewsNation) November 8, 2022

“But it will probably be just the opposite,” he said, predicting that “when” Republicans win, he will “probably be given very little credit” despite his endorsements, but “if they do badly, they will blame everything on me.”

He also went on to say that he was responsible for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ victory in 2016, and that his potential rival for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination “could have been more gracious. But that’s up to him.”

about the midterms

“How is this not a red wave?”: Fox News struggles to cope with “how to explain” GOP midterm failure

Fox News hosts and pundits were stunned after the big Republican “red wave” the network predicted failed to materialize on Tuesday.

Marc Thiessen, a Fox News contributor, criticized the GOP’s overall performance during the network’s coverage of the election and urged the Republican Party “to do a really deep, introspective look in the mirror right now because this is an absolute disaster.”

“There is a broader issue and think about this, we had the worst inflation in four decades … the worst crime wave since the 1990s with the worst border crisis in U.S. history here we had Joe Biden who’s the least popular president since Harry Truman since presidential polling happened and there wasn’t a red wave,” Thiessen said. “That is a searing indictment of the Republican Party. That is a searing indictment of the message we have been sending to the voters where they looked at all of that, and looked at Republican alternative and said ‘no thanks.'”

He also said that “the Democrats’ anti-MAGA strategy worked,” noting that several far-right candidates lost on Tuesday night.

Pointing to the victories of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who all won reelection in their states, Thiessen said this was the “path to the future,” instead of “radical candidates who ran far behind them,” putting the GOP “in a terrible position and voters have indicted the Republican Party.”

Fox News' Marc Thiessen: The midterm results are “a searing indictment of the Republican Party … The Republican Party needs to do a really deep introspection look in the mirror right now because this is an absolute disaster." pic.twitter.com/m4aOfLTjLG

— The Recount (@therecount) November 9, 2022

Republicans may still win control of the House, but their margin of victory will likely be narrower than anticipated. Democrats were able to beat back Republican challengers in several key congressional races, including Senate seats in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, where both Trump-backed candidates Don Bolduc and Mehmet Oz lost to their Democratic opponents.

“Fox & Friends” co-host Ainsley Earhardt also reflected on the GOP losses.

“Our country is completely divided now,” Earhardt said. “You are either very conservative or radical progressive and woke left. The facts don’t seem to matter here. Some of these individuals that won, when you look at their records, they are so extreme and so progressive. People are just dug in, they are dug in really deep right now and so extreme.”

“Biggest loser tonight”: Trumpworld is “catatonic” over his MAGA midterm failure

“How do you explain this country?” she added. “Open borders, record gas prices, inflation is the worst in 40 years, the president’s approval ratings are so bad, worst crime since the 1980s. Yet I heard last night this is an indictment on the Republican Party. Is it? How are these — these issues, when our country is in such a bad state right now, how is this not a red wave?”

“How do you explain this country? I heard last night that this is in indictment on the Republican Party. Is it? How is this not a red wave?” pic.twitter.com/8Q1kW6xx2O

— Acyn (@Acyn) November 9, 2022

Commentator Brit Hume, who was bewildered that a “red wave” did not transpire, discussed how political conditions suggested otherwise.

“I was skeptical of the polling. The polling has held up pretty well tonight. They called these races close, one way or another—certainly within the margin of error,” Hume said.

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

Republicans were projected to pick up at least 20 seats in the House. Hume suggested that if Republicans get control of the House of Representatives, President Joe Biden’s “legislative agenda cannot be the kind of legislative agenda he had for the last two years.”

“The political effect is…will this encourage him to run again? ‘Hey, I came out unscathed. I don’t look like the guy that dragged my party down to some terrible defeat. I am good to go.'”

Fox News' Brit Hume concedes that there is no red tsunami for the GOP:

"I thought the political conditions were such that would suggest a red wave. The polling said otherwise. And I was skeptical of the polling." pic.twitter.com/XGvwMHXo8a

— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) November 9, 2022

about the midterms

Autism and gender dysphoria are linked, according to a study

At first glance, it may not seem apparent that autism and gender dysphoria would be linked. Autism is a developmental disorder that, among other things, leads to difficulty with social interaction. Gender dysphoria, by contrast, involves a person experiencing mental health issues because their assigned sex does not match their gender identity. When describing autism and gender dysphoria in strictly clinical terms, they do not seem to inherently overlap.

The authors concluded that there is likely a link between autism and gender dysphoria, one that “warrants the investigation.”

Yet a new study published in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders reveals that — consistent with many anecdotal experiences — there is a link between autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and gender dysphoria/incongruence (GD/GI). To do this, the authors performed a meta-analysis, or a type of study that aggregates and analyzes the data from a number of individual studies. The goal is to ascertain larger trends, and in the case of the study by researchers from the University of Kent in the United Kingdom, they found that “the chances that there is not a link between ASD and GD/GI are negligible, yet the size of it needs further investigation.”

Strangers explain my autism to me

“The number of publications on the suggested overlap between ASD and GD/GI has more than doubled in the last two years, reflecting the increased attention this topic has received from clinicians, researchers, as well as the lay press,” the authors explain.

Yet that does not mean the research can simply be compiled and reviewed. The authors had to create clear criteria to explain how they would ascertain overlap between ASD and GD/GI, then eliminate studies which for one reason or another fell short. Ultimately they selected 47 studies including “five were conducted with children, 13 with children and adolescents, two with adolescents, two with children, adolescents, and adults, nine with adolescents and adults, and 16 with adults.”

The authors arrived at three conclusions. First, they found that there is “a positive relationship between ASD traits and GD/GI feelings among people from the general population.” In addition, they found that there is “an increased prevalence of GD/GI in the autistic population.” Finally, they determined that there is “an increased prevalence of ASD diagnoses and ASD traits in the GD/GI population.” As a result, the authors concluded that there is likely a link between autism and gender dysphoria, one that “warrants the investigation of mechanisms that could explain that link and the intensification of clinical attention to autistic GD/GI individuals.”

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

The authors also noted that the intersections between ASD and GD/GI are “under recognized” by large swathes of the health care community, creating an urgency for their research.

“Evidence about a link between ASD and GD/GI might stimulate the development of appropriate trainings to raise their awareness (Strauss, et al., 2021), so that GD/GI people are screened for ASD and autistic people for gender related issues (Mahfouda et al., 2019; Strang, Meagher, et al., 2018),” the authors write.

According to the American Psychiatric Association (APA), gender dysphoria is a condition in which the patient experiences “psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity. Though gender dysphoria often begins in childhood, some people may not experience it until after puberty or much later.” Although many transgender individuals experience gender dysphoria, that is not always the case (a transgender person in a supportive environment, for example, may not experience this distress). Someone who neither has gender dysphoria nor is transgender, but rather whose gender identity aligns with their assigned sex, is known as cisgender.

This study is significant both for scientific and social justice reasons. From a scientific perspective, it clarifies early reports that children with elevated levels of ASD traits were more likely to display gender nonconforming behaviors. As the study put it regarding a survey from 2019, “The greater the number of ASD traits reported by parents in these children, the more parent-reported gender variance in these children.” The new information could lead to understanding both conditions better. In addition, the study is socially significant because it further elucidates how both ASD and GD/GI are clinically diagnosable and legitimate medical conditions, despite the claims of many naysayers. The skepticism and misunderstanding surrounding these conditions often leads to persecution.

“The number of publications on the suggested overlap between ASD and GD/GI has more than doubled in the last two years.”

Despite this, transphobia is still widely used among conservative politicians and remains an issue within the general public. Homicides against transgender people nearly doubled between 2017 and 2021. Politicians like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, have vilified transgender people as part of their political brand. Popular comedians like Dave Chappelle regularly target transgender people in their material.

“In a recent study conducted by the Southern Poverty Law Center and Tulchin Research to examine the extent to which the extremist beliefs and narratives that mobilize the hard right have been absorbed by the wider American public, we found concerning trends with regards to anti-LGBTQ sentiments,” the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) told Salon. “In the study, the 1,500 respondents were asked if they believe ‘gender ideology has corrupted American culture.’ The term ‘gender ideology’ is widespread on the right, and generally refers to a belief that LGBTQ people are a threat to children and families and that men and women should adhere to ‘traditional’ notions of masculinity and femininity.”

People with autism also face unique challenges. Autistic individuals are more likely to be mistreated in education, face hostility and bias by both the judicial system and law enforcement, and struggle to both obtain and maintain employment. Like transgender individuals, autistic people often face skepticism and even outright denial about the realities of their experiences. Additionally, just as there is a spectrum of sex and gender identities, there is also a wide spectrum of ways in which people process reality through their neurology. This latter concept is referred to as neurodiversity.

As Harvard Health put it, “Neurodiversity describes the idea that people experience and interact with the world around them in many different ways; there is no one ‘right’ way of thinking, learning, and behaving, and differences are not viewed as deficits.”

about autism and gender dysphoria

The Dobbs effect is real: Voters, still angry about the Roe overturn, turned out to protect abortion

“Is the Dobbs effect fading?” blared a headline from October 10 at Politico Playbook, the nerve center for the smug centrist take on Beltway politics.

The story helped kick off a month of hand-wringing in the press about how abortion was fading from voters’ minds. Over the summer, there had been a massive national backlash to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. Over the past few weeks, however, pundits insisted, fears about reproductive rights were replaced with concerns about inflation. (Even though, as the talking heads carefully avoided noting, Republicans are a serious threat to the economy as well.) Mid-October, MSNBC pundit Mike Barnicle summed up the argument by arguing that “while abortion is an issue, it nowhere reaches the level of interest of voters in terms of the cost of gas, food, bread, milk, things like that.” “Democrats’ Reliance on Abortion for Midterms May Not Be Enough,” read a USA Today headline, ignoring that the mythical Democrat who only campaigns on abortion is a strawman. In a classic of the circular-firing-squad genre, the New York Times ran a piece elevating those who “say there has been too much focus on abortion rights and too little attention on worries about crime or the cost of living.”

The results of Tuesday’s midterm, as these things often go, are a mixed bag. It’s hard to discern definitive answers about much, since voters broke every which way all over the country. But one conclusion can be drawn without caveat: Abortion rights are wildly popular. And Americans are still ready to step up and vote to protect them where they can.

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

First and foremost, everywhere abortion was put directly on the ballot, abortion won. Not just in California, where voters, as expected, backed a constitutional amendment enshrining abortion as a right by a healthy margin. In Michigan, voters approved a state constitutional amendment guaranteeing abortion rights. In Kentucky, an amendment to explicitly deny abortion rights in the constitution was voted down. Voters in Vermont, as expected, amended their constitution to protect abortion rights. Even in Montana, an anti-abortion law appears to be voted down. The law was misleadingly packaged as protection for infants “born alive,” based on a particularly nasty anti-choice lie. In reality, the law was about prosecuting doctors, potentially criminalizing palliative care for newborns with fatal conditions.

None of these votes are particularly surprising. Over the summer, anti-choice activists in Kansas put a constitutional amendment that would have stated there was no right to an abortion in the state and lost. And they did everything in their power to tilt the playing field. They put it up for a vote in the summer’s primary election when few Democrats were expected to turn out. They ran misleading ads that implied a “yes” vote was pro-choice, when it was the opposite. Voters turned out in record numbers anyway. Abortion remains a constitutional right in Kansas.

Kansas abortion win is a wake-up call: Americans do not want GOP bans

Still, Tuesday was a test of whether reproductive rights matter not just when voters are asked directly about the issue, but when they are choosing candidates. On that front, things are a little hazier, as candidates run on complex platforms and voters have to decide on many issues. But the results so far suggest that putting abortion front and center in a campaign mattered.

In Pennsylvania, the abortion issue was especially prominent, as the GOP-controlled legislature has been expected to pass a draconian ban the second they had a Republican governor who will sign it. Indeed, the GOP gubernatorial candidate, Doug Mastriano, was on the record saying he would like to charge women who get abortions with murder, a position he unconvincingly backed down from during the later parts of the campaign. The Democratic candidate, Josh Shapiro, made protecting abortion rights a central part of his campaign, building on a career of strong support for reproductive health care. Mastriano was a poor candidate in many ways — he participated in the January 6 insurrection — but his stance on abortion rights helped underscore the threats of Republican extremism to voters.

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

Even more telling, however, may be the Pennsylvania Senate race. Even though it’s unlikely to have an immediate impact on abortion rights, the issues stayed at the forefront of the race. For much of the summer, the Democratic candidate, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, had a comfortable lead over the Donald Trump-picked Republican candidate, TV snake oil peddler Dr. Mehmet Oz. The race tightened up in the last month, as the Oz campaign, with a big assist from the mainstream media, successfully stigmatized Fetterman for his halting speech post-stroke, even as doctors assured voters he is expected to recover. Fetterman, however, leaned hard on his pro-choice stance. His campaign heavily highlighted Oz’s remark about how he wanted to enlist “local politicians” to make the abortion choice for women. The strategy no doubt helped Fetterman land a victory in one of the biggest nail-biters of the midterms. Exit polls suggest that abortion was a top-of-mind issue for Pennsylvania voters.

PRELIMINARY CBS NEWS EXIT POLL — PENNSYLVANIA:

Which ONE of these issues mattered most to your vote?

Abortion 36%
Inflation 28%
Crime 11%
Gun policy 10%
Immigration 8%

— Steven Portnoy (@stevenportnoy) November 8, 2022

A similar race played out in Michigan, where Democratic incumbent Gov. Gretchen Whitmer forefronted her pro-choice views in a race against Trump-picked Republican candidate Tudor Dixon. Whitmer has always been outspoken on the subject, tying her experiences as a rape survivor to her support for abortion rights, giving her a moral gravitas on this issue that’s hard to assail. Meanwhile, Dixon was out there claiming that a 14-year-old incest victim is a “perfect example” of someone who should be forced into childbirth. She also argued that forcing a rape victim to give birth to her attacker’s child is a “healing” experience.

The 3 biggest lies Republicans use to avoid admitting they plan to ban abortion

Make no mistake: Republicans are still winning in significant numbers and will likely end up controlling one or both houses of Congress. The fundamentals in this race predicted a Republican win: The party that has the White House usually loses the midterms. That’s made worse by the inflation problem and general voter disapproval of President Joe Biden as a result. With Trump out of headlines, it’s been hard to get low-information swing voters to take seriously the Republican threat to democracy.

Still, as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., griped to NBC News Tuesday night, “Definitely not a Republican wave, that’s for darn sure.”

Of course, Graham only has himself to blame. He’s the one who floated a national abortion ban bill in September that largely targets abortions performed due to fetal anomalies. Forcing women to give birth to babies who are destined to die within hours is not popular with voters! But Graham, like much of the punditry and many of his fellow Republicans, seemed to feel voters would not care enough to punish Republicans for laws that serve no other purpose but sadism and misogyny. Tuesday, they were proven wrong.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story described Kansas voting down “a constitutional amendment to ban abortion.” The proposed amendment, which was defeated, would have said there was no right to abortion in the state.

midterms coverage:

“Biggest loser tonight”: Trumpworld is “catatonic” over his MAGA midterm failure

Prominent current and former supporters of Donald Trump have cast blame on the former president after the widely hyped “red wave” failed to materialize in Tuesday’s midterm elections.

Republicans may still win control of the House but the race is currently a dead heat, and will definitely not yield the huge majority the GOP expected to pick up. Democrats have a decent chance to hold the Senate after Trump-backed candidates like Don Bolduc in New Hampshire and Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania failed to defeat their Democratic opponents. Trump-endorsed gubernatorial candidates Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania and Tudor Dixon in Michigan also lost their races.

Overall, this appears to be one of the worst performances by an “out party” in a midterm for many years, more like a stalemate than like the famous Republican wins of 2010 and 1994, when they successfully pushed back against an unpopular Democratic president, or for that matter like the Democratic “blue wave” of 2018.

Former Trump White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney contrasted Trump’s performance on Tuesday with that of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who won his re-election race by nearly 20 points after Trump refused to endorse him.

“Between being Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis tonight, you want to be Ron DeSantis,” he told CBS News. “DeSantis wins tonight and Trump is not doing very well.”

Former Trump White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin urged the Republican Party to ditch the former president.

“If you want the Republican Party to thrive, we’ve got to just finally speak out and say, ‘This man is a loser,'” she told CNN.

Former Trump White House deputy press secretary Sarah Matthews agreed that Trump was a drag on the party.

“I think last night was the biggest indicator that Donald Trump should not be the Republican nominee in 2024,” she said. “He cost Republicans winnable seats by boosting poor quality candidates.”

Republican strategist Scott Jennings, a frequent Trump defender who was offered a job in his White House, predicted that the results bode poorly for Trump’s chances to win the presidency.

“How could you look at these results tonight and conclude Trump has any chance of winning a national election in 2024?” he tweeted.

Conservative pundit Erick Erickson, another frequent Trump defender, said the former president shoulders the blame for Republican losses.

“Of the $100 million Trump had, he only spent $15 million and saddled the GOP with a lot of clunker candidates,” he wrote. “Part of the base, however, would rather blame conspiracies than ever cast doubt on Trump.”

What “red wave”? Democrats on the verge of major November surprise

Republican donors took notice too.

“Big money donors are telling me tonight they are ready to turn the page on Donald Trump,” CNN’s Alice Stewart reported on Wednesday. “They now see he is an anchor on the party and this is not just people that have not been supportive of Trump, these are Trump allies.”

Leading TrumpWorld figures like Steve Bannon are “despondent” and “catatonic” over Tuesday’s failures, NBC News’ Ben Collins reported.

“They were looking at all these other places that did not really line up with all the polls that we’re seeing in the weeks beforehand. They sort of can’t believe it,” he said on MSNBC. “They really did not have a plan. They were making fun of the Democrats’ ability to get out the vote while they started to lose some of these races.”

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

An anonymous Republican source told Fox News that “if it wasn’t clear before it should be now: we have a Trump problem.”

The Fox News website published a headline calling Trump the “biggest loser tonight.” The New York Post, which is also owned by Fox News chief Rupert Murdoch, touted DeSantis’ win on its front page Wednesday, labeling him “DeFUTURE.”

Pundits across cable news spent Tuesday night in awe of Trump’s weakness throughout the night.

“I think you have to say Donald Trump has now presided over two disastrous midterm elections,” former Obama strategist David Plouffe told MSNBC. “He’s deeply unpopular, he supported a bunch of horrible Senate candidates,” he added.

MSNBC host Chris Hayes said Trump “screwed” his own party.

“He is unpopular. He is unpopular,” Hayes said. “He screwed you today. Screwed you. It’s not the full story… but it is part of the story, and the sooner you dump him, the better it is for the Republican Party and American democracy, full stop.”

ABC News’ Jon Karl noted it’s still unclear who will control the House but “what I can tell you is the biggest loser tonight is Donald Trump.”

Trump, meanwhile, took to Truth Social to accuse the media of downplaying his wins.

“174 wins and 9 losses, A GREAT EVENING, and the Fake News Media, together with their partner in crime, the Democrats, are doing everything possible to play it down,” he wrote. “Amazing job by some really fantastic candidates!”

It’s not clear how the former president calculated those numbers. With many races in West Coast states still undecided, there could be several more prominent losses yet to come.

about the midterms and 2024

After the GOP’s midterm stinkbomb, the Trump-DeSantis 2024 throwdown is next

It appears the pollsters were more or less right in predicting a very close election, within the margin of error — but pundits and analysts were dead wrong in assuming that meant that the “hidden” Trump voters would sweep in and deliver a sweeping victory to the Republicans. They insisted that the “fundamentals” all pointed that way: The out party always wins in midterms and “it’s the economy, stupid,” along with “crime,” the great Republican bogeyman, meaning the Democrats were toast. Well, so much for that.

As I write this, it looks as though the Democrats have a better than even chance of holding on to the Senate and even some statistical possibility they won’t lose the House. NBC projects a very narrow Republican majority of about 220-215 — with an estimated wobble of plus or minus 10 seats. Win or lose, there’s no red wave, let alone a “red tsunami.” If Republicans do win, it’s more like a tiny pink trickle, eking out a victory on the margins in an election they thought would end with a triumphant sweep.

What “red wave”? Democrats on the verge of major November surprise

Over the next few days there will be many words written and spoken about what exactly happened and why the projections were so wrong. But I doubt that the media will do any soul-searching about listening to Republican operatives who whisper “secret” polling numbers in their ears in service to the “bandwagon effect,” or will start giving less credence to pollsters’ practice of fighting the last war instead of this one. That’s too bad. By allowing Republicans to play this deceptive expectations game, mainstream media pundits and reporters are simply laying the groundwork for more ludicrous lies about voter fraud, which we’re almost to see rolled out after some close GOP losses. The media helped convince many Republican voters that their party was on the way to a major victory — without a whole lot of evidence to back that up — and will bear some responsibility if there’s blowback from the true believers.

However this all ends up, Republicans largely failed to capitalize on one of the most promising political environments either party has had in years. Soaring inflation and Biden’s dreadful approval ratings alone should have destroyed the Democrats. Yes, the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was a blow to the GOP’s prospects but if they had fielded competent candidates across the board they could have finessed the issue enough to get past that. Let’s be clear about the X factor that led Republicans to defeat (or near-defeat, as the case may be). That was Donald Trump, with his endorsement of extremist candidates, his massive vanity and constant interference, his insistence on remaining the dominant figure two years after his conclusive defeat. That threw their entire midterm campaign off course. He’s an albatross hanging around the party’s neck, and he’s choking it.

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

Republicans are not happy with him at the moment, to put it mildly. They see that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis pulled off a big victory in Florida pulling all of his personally drawn House districts with him. If Republicans do end up with a House majority after so many losses elsewhere, that will be the biggest reason why. Florida is one of the only true bright spots on the entire map for them and they’re furious with Trump for how badly things look in the rest of the country. After all, he’s the one who painted himself as the big kingmaker.

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes put it this way:

"I think Republicans still ascribe to that man this totemic power that he does not have. He doesn't have some magic power," says @chrislhayes on Donald Trump.

"Republicans: He is unpopular. He screwed you today. He screwed you." pic.twitter.com/01LJN4Tlxd

— All In with Chris Hayes (@allinwithchris) November 9, 2022

He’s right. This is now the third straight election in which Donald Trump has cost the Republican Party winnable seats. Will that finally break the spell? You’d think it would, but we’ve been here before.

Trump, of course, is just lying about it. He posted the following on Truth Social:

174 wins and 9 losses, A GREAT EVENING, and the Fake News Media, together with their partner in crime, the Democrats, are doing everything possible to play it down. Amazing job by some really fantastic candidates!

I don’t know whether he completely made up those numbers or if they have some notional basis in reality. But this was not a “GREAT EVENING” for Republicans. As is his wont, he lashed out at a couple of Republicans who lost, blaming their defeats on insufficient enthusiasm for his 2020 election Big Lie. He is preparing the base for his excuse for 2022: Republicans can’t win anything without him.

Sadly, I suspect that a large and devoted faction of the Republican base would rather believe him than their lying eyes. By next week, this loss will be forgotten and the party will probably fall in line. Next week, you see, Donald Trump will maybe, sort of, kind of be announcing his next presidential campaign.

Trump: I'm going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday November 15 pic.twitter.com/EmpMcqYVt0

— Acyn (@Acyn) November 8, 2022

That’s right, folks. The 2022 midterms aren’t even over — we might not have final results from Arizona, Nevada and California until next week — and the 2024 campaign has officially begun. Get ready: It’s going to be exactly as awful as you imagine. All the reporting suggests that Trump is loaded for bear and I can’t imagine this election night will make him back down. His instinct is always to hit back harder.

It’s hard to say how this midterm dud will affect his main rival’s prospect. I’ve long believed that Ron DeSantis would ultimately decide to sit the 2024 race out. Why take on Trump for a bloody battle that will only leave him scarred or mortally wounded, when he can be governor for four more years and then go into 2028 as the frontrunner? Thing is, there will be a clamor among certain GOP movers and shakers for him to do it anyway. It’s increasingly obvious that Trump’s alleged magical powers are a complete fiction, and DeSantis may just decide his time is now. He’s not without ego, that’s for sure.

Trump’s already gunning for him. After dubbing him “Ron DeSanctimonious” at a rally over the weekend, the ex-prez dropped this to reporters over the weekend.

“If he runs, he runs,” Mr. Trump said of Mr. DeSantis to a handful of reporters traveling with him on his private plane — recently refurbished and put back into use — after a rally Monday night in Dayton, Ohio.

But Mr. Trump added, in remarks published on Tuesday by The Wall Street Journal, “If he did run, I will tell you things about him that won’t be very flattering. I know more about him than anybody other than perhaps his wife, who is really running his campaign.”

As the New Yorker’s Susan Glasser quipped on Twitter (referencing Trump’s famous quote about the ambassador to Ukraine in his “perfect phone call”): “Looks like Ron DeSantis is going to go through some things.” Regardless of what the Sunshine State’s governor decides to do, America is going to go through some things too. Again.

about the big midterm surprise

Trump plots to “imprison significant numbers of reporters” if he wins in 2024: report

Amid speculation that former U.S. President Donald Trump will announce his 2024 run next week, Rolling Stone reported Tuesday that the Republican leader has sought advice about how he could ramp up his war with the news media by jailing journalists if he regains control of the White House.

Trump’s first presidential campaign and four years in office featured constant attacks on reporters, outlets, and the industry in general, from his frequent declarations of “fake news” to going after journalists for reporting on leaked information.

“This year, as Trump has privately strategized about what a second term, potentially starting in 2025, could look like, he’s begun occasionally soliciting ideas from conservative allies for how the U.S. government and Justice Department could go about turning his desires—for brutally imprisoning significant numbers of reporters—into reality,” Rolling Stone revealed.

As the magazine detailed:

Several months ago, the former president briefly asked a small gathering of his allies and at least one of his attorneys about what would have to be done to make that authoritarian, First Amendment-shredding vision a norm, according to a source who was present.

“He said other countries do it—the implication being: Well, why not here?” the source recounts.

“We’ve become used to this sort of thing from him, but we shouldn’t,” author and lawyer Warren Kinsella tweeted in response to the reporting.

The revelation comes as Trump continues to publicly imagine journalists who work with leakers getting raped in prison, Rolling Stone noted. He has made such comments during rallies—including one in Ohio Monday night and another in Texas last month.

Election-eve Trump “joke” about prison rape of a reporter locked up for shielding a confidential source https://t.co/Mr6WcnOlzj

— Dan Mihalopoulos (@dmihalopoulos) November 8, 2022

Trump’s open hostility toward the media has carried over to his supporters—as was on display when a MAGA mob raided the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Participants chased reporters on the scene, destroyed their equipment, and carved “murder the media” into a door.

A few months later, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) highlighted in its annual World Press Freedom Index that “Trump’s final year in the White House was marked by a record number of assaults against journalists (around 400) and arrests of members of the media (130), according to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker,” a partner of the global group.

Rolling Stone‘s new reporting was published on Election Day. Trump has actively campaigned for midterm candidates who support his “Big Lie” that the 2020 election was stolen from him, and voters are weighing in on not only who will control Congress for the next two years but also key state races that could significantly impact the 2024 presidential contest.

For the love of God, if you’re American vote Democrat tonight. https://t.co/e4TVna8woN

— Nick de Semlyen (@NickdeSemlyen) November 8, 2022

During the Monday rally in Ohio, Trump—who currently faces several legal challenges—said that “not to detract from tomorrow’s very important, even critical, election, and I would say in the strongest way it’s a country-saving election… I’m going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday, November 15 at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida.”

Ohio man killed his neighbor because “he thought he was a Democrat,” family says

A southwest Ohio man shot and killed his neighbor because he believed he was a Democrat, according to the victim’s family.

Austin Gene Combs was taken into custody by Butler County sheriff’s deputies just before noon Monday after the shooting was reported in Okeana, and investigators found Anthony Lee King dead from multiple gunshot wounds, reported the Journal-News.

“My neighbor just shot my dad,” the victim’s son told dispatchers. “[He] has come over multiple times making statements. He’s insane.”

The caller’s mother sobbed in the background and told dispatchers the 43-year-old King had been cutting grass and doing yardwork when she went inside to let their dog out, and that’s when she heard gunshots.

“I look in the backyard and that man is walking away from my husband and my husband is on the ground,” the woman told dispatchers. “He has come over like four times confronting my husband because he thought he was a Democrat, Why, why … Please, I don’t understand.”

The 26-year-old Combs was arrested a short time later while driving away from the shooting scene with his father.

His bond was set at $950,000 on suspicion of murder.

“Don’t fall for it”: AOC issues warning as GOP revives “red mirage” conspiracy

As Americans head to the polls to vote in Tuesday’s midterm elections, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other Democrats warned that, as they tried to do in 2020, Republican candidates may attempt to prematurely declare victory or even claim fraud in contests in which they’re initially ahead but they ultimately lose once all outstanding ballots are counted.

Noting that it can take a day or more to count all ballots including those submitted by mail, Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted Tuesday that “this is normal, but some GOP are laying ground to claim any race not called tonight is suspicious. Don’t fall for it.”

The campaign of Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a Democrat running against Republican Mehmet Oz for U.S. Senate, released a memo Monday claiming Republicans “are already laying the groundwork to potentially spread false conspiracy theories about the likely ‘red mirage’ of ballot processing in Pennsylvania.”

“The reality is Pennsylvania law means in-person votes that skew Republican tend to disproportionately be counted and reported before Democratic-leaning mail-in votes,” the memo said.

Many states don’t allow mail-in ballots to be counted before Election Day.

But many races can’t be called until mail-ins are counted, which can take over 24h.

This is normal, but some GOP are laying ground to claim any race not called tonight is suspicious. Don’t fall for it.

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 8, 2022

The specter of a so-called “red mirage” loomed large over the 2020 election. Chris Stirewalt, who during that contest was a political editor for Fox News—the first network to call the key battleground state of Arizona for President Joe Biden—explained earlier this year to the congressional committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol how his newsroom knew that then-President Donald Trump’s early lead would evaporate as states tallied mail-in ballots favoring Biden.

Stirewalt testified:

So basically in every election, Republicans win Election Day and Democrats win the early vote, and then you wait and start counting. And it depends on which ones you count first, but usually it’s Election Day votes that get counted first. And you see the Republicans shoot ahead.

So in every election and certainly a national election, you expect to see the Republican with a lead, but it’s not really a lead. We had gone to pains—and I’m proud of the pains we went to—to make sure that we were informing viewers that this was going to happen, because the Trump campaign and the president had made it clear that they were going to try to exploit this anomaly.

While some countries utilizing nationwide electronic voting systems swiftly tally elections—Brazilian officials announced that Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva had won last month’s presidential runoff just a few hours after polls closed—separate state and local systems and rules across the United States mean that elections can take days, weeks, and sometimes even longer to decide.

Disinformation alert! With large numbers of absentee and mail-in votes, and rules prohibiting early counting, we may not know election winners for days. There is nothing to suggest that delay indicates fraud. Counting every vote takes time. Don’t fall for this scam! https://t.co/pr73FI2zS1

— Barb McQuade (@BarbMcQuade) November 8, 2022

Noting that Pennsylvania, like most U.S. states, doesn’t allow officials to start counting ballots until Election Day, the watchdog group Common Cause Pennsylvania reminded voters that “it may take days for election officials to finalize results.”

“Before election officials can begin counting ballots, they must first process ballots, which includes checking to make sure the declaration on the outside of the envelope is signed and correctly dated by the voter and that the voter is on the absentee or mail-in ballot list,” the group said.

Khalif Ali, executive director of Common Cause Pennsylvania, said in a statement that “it’s crucial every voice is heard in this election and that means counting every vote.”

The GOP plan for election night is clear: they will count on a "red mirage" due to mail-in ballots being counted last, they will demand vote counting stop, and they will use the time it takes to count ballots to spread disinformation about election fraud.

Don't fall for it.

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) November 8, 2022

“It takes time to count every vote accurately and that’s why Election Day is not results day,” Ali explained. “Even if we don’t know the election winners when we go to bed, what matters most is making sure every voter’s ballot is counted accurately.”

“State law means that Pennsylvania’s election workers will be tasked with carefully processing and counting every ballot starting November 8, likely requiring days to accurately count all ballots,” he added.

What “red wave”? Democrats on the verge of major November surprise

Republicans may well end up with a narrow House majority in the midterm elections, based on Tuesday night’s returns. But they are nowhere near the “red wave” or “red tsunami” they were hoping for. Once again, it appears the pollsters and analysts got it wrong.

To this point, the battle for the U.S. Senate remains undecided, but Democrats are poised to win several major races. In perhaps the biggest news of the night, it appears that Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman has won that state’s open seat, defeating Trump-endorsed Republican Dr. Mehmet Oz.

The midterms will determine which party controls the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as dozens of governors’ mansions and state legislatures. Republicans only need a net gain of five seats to regain control of the House, and still seem likely to get that. But they could wind up with an exceedingly narrow majority, akin to the one Democrats hold in the current Congress.

It may take days to determine the precise makeup of the new Congress, but to this point the major surprise of these midterms is that Democrats are well positioned to hold their Senate majority — and seem likely to defeat a number of prominent Republicans closely tied to Donald Trump.

Fetterman’s apparent win in Pennsylvania is a massive pickup for Democrats in a seat currently held by Republican Sen. Pat Toomey. Incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona is leading another pro-Trump Republican, Blake Masters, with about half the votes counted, and Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire has easily defeated Republican Don Bolduc, a booster of Trump’s Big Lie. With those apparent or projected Democratic victories, it will be very difficult for Republicans to win a Senate majority.

Another tightly contested race, between Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia and former NFL star Herschel Walker, another Trump-allied Republican, is likely to end almost dead even. Assuming that neither candidate clears 50%, that will require a runoff on Dec. 6. Republicans have held onto open Senate seats in North Carolina and Ohio, and incumbent Republican Sen. Ron Johnson appears headed toward a narrow victory in Wisconsin. Control of the Senate may be decided by the race in Nevada between incumbent Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and Republican Adam Laxalt, with early results on Wednesday morning narrowly favoring Cortez Masto.

One undecided race that could lead to post-election fireworks is the gubernatorial contest in Arizona, where Democrat Katie Hobbs holds a lead over Republican Kari Lake early on Wednesday morning. Almost as soon as those early returns were announced, Lake appeared at her campaign headquarters to promise eventual victory, while suggesting that the Arizona election had been plagued by incompetence and corruption. She is a forceful supporter of Donald Trump’s false claims about widespread voter fraud in 2020, and has said she is unlikely to concede if she loses.

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, a frequent target of Republican anger, easily defeated her Trump-endorsed opponent. Somewhat more surprisingly, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers of Wisconsin, who was believed to face an extremely tight race against Republican Tim Michels, holds the lead with better than 93% of votes counted.

Historically, the sitting president’s party fares poorly in the midterms, and numerous pre-election polls appeared to show Republicans surging in the final days of the campaign as a large majority of voters disapproves of President Joe Biden’s performance. But in evaluating the vote count on Tuesday evening, New York Times election analyst Nate Cohn wrote on Twitter that “Democrats are running about a point ahead of our expectations outside of Florida, with the GOP lead in the House starting to come down a bit. Not many signs of a red wave at this point.”

After a muddled fall campaign, American voters appear to be delivering a mixed verdict. Democrats briefly hoped for outright victory as their poll numbers improved over the summer after the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. Those numbers appeared to collapse down the stretch as Republicans relentlessly attacked on their signature issues of crime, inflation and immigration. But it now appears that the abortion issue may have been a major factor after all, driving women voters to the polls in several battleground states.

Early on Wednesday morning, the infamous New York Times election needle gives Republicans better than a 70% chance of capturing the House — but slightly favors Democrats in the Senate.

“Definitely not a red wave, that’s for darn sure,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in an interview with NBC News.

Here’s what we know so far:

Senate:

The most important races in deciding the Senate majority were in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Several of those may not be decided until Wednesday or later. Republican Sen. Ron Johnson is leading Democrat Mandela Barnes in Wisconsin but the race remains too early to call. The Georgia race between Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock and Republican challenger Herschel Walker is deadlocked and appears likely to go to a runoff.

Republican J.D. Vance is projected to defeat Rep. Tim Ryan in the race to replace retiring Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio.

Rep. Ted Budd, R-N.C., is projected to defeat Democrat Cheri Beasley to replace retiring Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., is projected to defeat election denier Don Bolduc in a race that tightened up in recent weeks.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is projected to easily defeat Rep. Val Demings, securing his third term in Congress, according to the Associated Press.

Republican Katie Britt is projected to win the seat vacated by retiring Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala. Republican Markwayne Mullin is projected to win the seat vacated by retiring Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. Republican Eric Schmitt is projected to win the seat vacated by retiring Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

Incumbent Sens. John Boozman, R-Ark.; Mike Crapo, R-Idaho; Todd Young, R-Ind.; Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Jerry Moran, R-Kan.; Rand Paul, R-Ky.; John Kennedy, R-La.; John Hoeven, R-N.D.; James Lankford, R-Okla.; Tim Scott, R-S.C.; and John Thune, R-S.D. are all projected to easily win re-election.

Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., is projected to win the seat vacated by retiring Sen. Patrick Leahy.

Sens. Alex Padilla, D-Calif.; Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; Michael Bennet, D-Colo.; Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill.; Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., are all projected to easily win re-election.

Governors:

Democrats have picked up two seats so far from Republicans.

Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is projected to cruise to a re-election victory over Democratic challenger Charlie Crist, the state’s former governor. DeSantis has been widely discussed as a potential 2024 presidential contender and raised over $200 million during his campaign. DeSantis was greeted by supporters at his victory party with chants of “two more years,” an apparent nod to his White House aspirations.

Republican Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the former Trump White House press secretary, is projected to easily win the Arkansas gubernatorial race. Her father, Mike Huckabee, previously served as the state’s governor.

Democrat Wes Moore is projected to defeat MAGA Republican Dan Cox in Maryland, becoming the state’s first Black governor and replacing Republican Larry Hogan.

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey is projected to easily win the state’s gubernatorial race, becoming the first openly lesbian governor elected in the U.S.

Democrat Daniel McKee is projected to easily defeat Republican Ashley Kalus in Rhode Island.

Democrat Josh Shapiro is expected to defeat Republican Doug Mastriano, a Jan. 6 rally attendee. The race has been called by other networks but has not yet been called by the AP.

Republican Govs. Kay Ivey (Ala.), Brad Little (Idaho), Kim Reynolds (Iowa), Chris Sununu (N.H.), Kevin Stitt (Okla.), Mike DeWine (Ohio), Henry McMaster (S.C.), Kristi Noem (S.D.), Bill Lee (Tenn.), Greg Abbott (Texas), Phil Scott (Vt.) and Mark Gordon (Wyo.) are projected to win re-election.

Democratic Govs. Gavin Newsom (Calif.), Jared Polis (Colo.), J.B. Pritzker (Ill.) and Tim Walz (Minn.) are projected to win re-election.

Notable races:

Rep. Virginia Spanberger, D-Va., defeated Republican challenger Yesli Vega in Virginia’s 7th District, a key bellwether race. But Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., a member of the House Jan. 6 committee, lost another key bellwether race in the state, losing 2nd District to Republican Jen Kiggans.

Democrat Maxwell Frost is projected to win Florida’s 10th congressional district, becoming the first Gen Z member to reach the House.

Maryland voted to legalize recreational marijuana.

Voting rights advocates and Democratic lawmakers have spent months warning that democracy is on the ballot in the midterms. More than half of Republican candidates running across the country have denied or questioned the 2020 election results even though former President Donald Trump and fellow conspiracy theorists have offered no evidence to show wide-scale fraud or election rigging that could have influenced the outcome. Some congressional candidates have suggested they would not vote to certify presidential election results. Republicans like Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and secretary of state nominee Mark Finchem have also suggested they may not certify the 2024 election results — and may not concede defeat if they lose. Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Tim Michels, who has even suggested he may try to “decertify” the 2020 results, vowed earlier this month that “Republicans will never lose another election” if he wins.

Republicans launched a barrage of pre-election lawsuits seeking to disqualify some mail-in ballots, particularly targeting diverse Democratic-leaning areas like Philadelphia and Detroit. Some of those suits were already rejected, including a lawsuit by Michigan GOP secretary of state nominee Kristina Karamo seeking to throw out 60,000 ballots in Detroit. But Republicans were successful in a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case that set aside an unknown number of mail-in ballots with missing dates on the outer envelope and the Philadelphia City Commission said that the counting of thousands of ballots would be delayed in response to a right-wing lawsuit.

Republicans have also stoked fears about potential irregularities. Trump and other Republicans pushed conspiracy theories after about 20% of voting locations in Maricopa County reported problems with their tabulators, though all voters were allowed to cast ballots and the issue was fixed later in the day.

“Can this possibly be true when a vast majority of Republicans waited for today to Vote?” Trump wrote on Truth Social, after he and other conspiracy theorists urged supporters to wait until Election Day to vote. “Here we go again?”

Republicans including Lake later filed a lawsuit to extend voting times in Maricopa County by three hours but were rejected by a judge.

“Here we go again”: Trump stokes Arizona conspiracy theories over Maricopa voting machine problems

It may take days for the results to be finalized in certain states, in some cases because Republican lawmakers barred election workers from counting mail ballots until polls open on Election Day. Counting the votes may take several days Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia and Nevada, and late mail-in votes may mean that the California count could take weeks.

about the midterm elections

“Perfect storm”: Arizona could prove pivotal in attempts to subvert the next presidential election

Kari Lake, the former television news anchor running for Arizona governor, has made casting doubt on the results of the 2020 election a recurring campaign theme. Lake says she would not have certified the 2020 election for Joe Biden in spite of the fact that multiple lawsuits and reviews uncovered no evidence of significant voter fraud.

In a state that has been called ground zero for Republicans’ attempts to subvert elections, the prospect of her election and that of the other election deniers running for office in Arizona is causing dread among those who believe U.S. democracy is under siege. So is news of poll watchers monitoring drop boxes, some of them armed and wearing Kevlar vests. But while many Arizona voters are worried by the prospect of a Lake governorship, many who decide elections — swing voters and infrequent ones — are not motivated by the threat to democracy she may pose, say organizers and those who study voting behavior.

“Crazy train. Sounds crackpot,” admitted Ryan, a focus group participant, after viewing footage of Lake repeatedly making false claims about the 2020 election last spring. But Ryan, who was identified only by his first name in the Zoom recording, still planned to vote for her in the August primary. He told the group’s facilitator that he was swayed in part by his “history of watching her for years” on the local Fox affiliate in Phoenix.

“Most of these folks, they’re not getting up in the morning thinking that American democracy is in peril, and that their vote is going to make a difference,” facilitator Rich Thau, president of New York-based Engagious Research, said of the swing voters he studies. Election denialism is just one issue among many that they consider when selecting a candidate.

* * *

The threat to democracy is not top of mind for many of the residents of the working class West Phoenix neighborhood where Maria Madrid, a former lettuce picker and hotel worker, is out canvassing voters. They seem more focused on their day to day challenges — juggling multiple jobs, making rent and paying bills, says Madrid, whose job when she is not canvassing is organizer for UNITE HERE Local 11, the hospitality union. Her pitch to voters focuses on economic issues. At the door, Madrid mentions the pandemic stimulus checks and distributes campaign literature that highlights U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly’s support for the Inflation Reduction Act. A lot of her time is spent just demystifying the process of voting.

Joan Ocampo Reyes, 21, stands outside his house and recites several reasons not to mail in his ballot. For starters, he can’t find it. “I don’t have time to,” he says. Plus he’s not political. Now he’s being schooled gently but firmly by Madrid in her native Spanish, while a paletero truck selling Mexican popsicles makes its rounds in the neighborhood. Reyes, who has a bee-sized tattoo below his eye and a nose ring, nods respectfully. Soon he’s thanking her. He’ll vote or she — or someone from her team — will be back to remind him.

Infrequent voters like Reyes can make a pivotal difference, according to Brendan Walsh, political director for Worker Power, a political organization that works with the local. Worker Power — which focuses on young voters, people of color and swing voters — knocked on 800,000 doors in 2020 and contributed to President Biden’s narrow margin of victory by fewer than 11,000 votes in the state. (Disclosure: UNITE HERE Local 11 is a financial supporter of this website.)

On that same warm October Saturday, Ben, who wanted only his first name used, was shopping with his wife, Rebecca, at a Target in Paradise Valley, a suburb northeast of Phoenix. He sees Lake’s election denialism as a demerit, not a selling point.

Slender and 41, Ben wears a cap and trimmed beard. He says he leans libertarian and holds what have become typical Republican views. He wants less government spending and stronger border security. But what really has his attention are his skyrocketing grocery bills, which he blames on pandemic stimulus spending. “We’ve got six kids that we’ve adopted. Our grocery bill has gone from $1,400 to three grand,” he says, due to inflation and to the children’s growing appetites.

Ben says he’s critical of the party’s populist turn. But he downplays his disapproval of Lake’s stance, calling it the “lesser of two evils.”

Unlike Ben, 15% of Arizonans say threats to democracy are the most pressing issue facing the state, according to a poll by OH Predictive Insights. It’s the leading issue of concern cited by Arizona Democrats: 27% said it was their top issue. Some voters in closely divided Maricopa County are steaming mad.

“I want my vote to count,” says Jennie, an attorney, who worries that one day it might not. A self-described moderate, she’s planning to vote for Democrats all the way down the ticket, including for secretary of state candidate Adrian Fontes, who is running against Mark Finchem, who has been a member of the militia group the Oath Keepers. She’ll also try to keep Abe Hamadeh, the Republican nominee for state attorney general and another election denier, from taking office.

Finchem participated in the Jan. 6 March on the Capitol and has embraced QAnon conspiracy theories, saying that “a whole lot of elected officials” are involved in a pedophile network. As a state legislator, he co-sponsored a bill that would allow state lawmakers to overturn election results.

* * *

The prospect of Lake, Finchem and Hamadeh being put in control of Arizona alarms experts who fear the trio will foment distrust in elections and act to undermine them. “The election denial that is now taking place among a particular segment of the Republican Party undermines public confidence in elections. They will be in a position to advance these claims cloaked with the authority of the state,” said Stefanie Lindquist, professor of law and political science at Arizona State University.

As secretary of state, Finchem would be in charge of drafting the state’s elections procedures manual, a document that outlines the rules for elections. It must be approved by the attorney general and the governor and can have an important impact on how hard it is to vote in the state. Hamadeh would oversee the state’s election integrity unit and be able to prosecute fraud — real and imagined.

Finchem wants to curb early voting and sharply limit the use of mail-in ballots, currently used by 90% of Arizona voters. He and Lake sued to stop the use of electronic vote-counting machines in Arizona and pushed for hand counting of ballots, which experts say is less accurate and more time consuming, especially in large jurisdictions. Such an approach is especially worrying in a climate where conspiracies connected to voting are running rampant, says Jim Barton, an Arizona elections attorney who works for Democrats. In the future, Lake and Finchem could refuse to sign a document certifying the electors in a close presidential election.

Lindquist said the most likely path to overturning a future presidential election runs through the Arizona Legislature, where Republicans hold a single-vote majority in both chambers and election deniers abound. If elected, Lake, Finchem and Hamadeh could have important sway over that body, she said. “That would be a perfect storm if these three election deniers are elected and have control over the election apparatus, and have considerable persuasive power over the Legislature,” she said.

The danger from the Arizona statehouse will worsen if it is granted new powers by the U.S. Supreme Court when the justices consider Moore v. Harper, a North Carolina gerrymandering case this term, legal experts say. That case could give state legislatures almost unchecked power to set rules for federal elections without regard to state constitutions or courts. This year’s midterms will determine control of the Arizona Legislature.

Lindquist warns that, in a worst-case scenario, Arizona legislators could substitute their own presidential preferences over those of the voters in 2024, with the excuse that the election was tainted. Barton said Lake, Finchem and Hamadeh could “sow enough doubt so that they could make it easier for a Trump Supreme Court to affirm a Trump stolen election.”

* * *

It sounds preposterous. But that’s what Trump allies attempted in 2020, with Finchem’s support. They created alternate slates of electors in key swing states, including Arizona, using the rationale that Biden’s victories in those states would be overturned once they could prove their claims of voter fraud.

The overturning of an election in this manner would be “an extreme case,” according to Lindquist. “I would think that the voters in Arizona would be extremely unhappy with that,” she said.

Finchem’s opponent, Adrian Fontes, the former recorder for Maricopa County, has been warning about the dangers of such a scenario. “What it means is, if a Democrat wins Arizona in 2024, and the Electoral College is tied with neither candidate at the 270 [electoral vote] threshold [required to elect a president], Arizona won’t have a certified election, and the entire thing then gets thrown to Congress,” he told MSNBC. “And that’s not how this is supposed to work. Our people are supposed to pick our leaders, not our politicians.”

Finchem, meanwhile, told the Associated Press last month that he would certify the election “as long as all lawful votes are counted and all votes are cast under the law.” But he did not say who would decide if they were lawful or if he would abide by court decisions.

It’s possible to imagine that even voters like Ben, who once voted for establishment Republicans like the late Arizona Sen. John McCain, would come to regret their decision to vote for election deniers if the worst fears of Fontes and election law experts are born out. Then again, they might not.

Ben said he was horrified by the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. His wife, Rebecca, who mostly listened to the conversation as she stood by their shopping cart, chimed in, “I thought it was awful.” Asked if he would vote for Trump if he ran for office again, he said, “God I hope he doesn’t.” Then he paused for a moment. “What are my options?”

How fact-checking Thoreau’s observations at Walden Pond can inform modern research

Henry David Thoreau, the environmental philosopher and author of “Walden”, was a keen observer of seasonal change. In 1862, for example, he wrote in the Atlantic Monthly:

“October is the month of painted leaves. Their rich glow now flashes round the world. As fruits and leaves and the day itself acquire a bright tint just before they fall, so the year near its setting. October is its sunset sky; November the later twilight.”

Over the past 20 years, researchers have used Thoreau’s observations of plant flowering, leaf emergence on trees and shrubs, bird migration and spring ice melt on Walden Pond to study how these events have changed since the 1850s, largely in response to climate change.

Ecologists have also pulled data for modern-day research from museum specimens, journals of hunting guides and bird and butterfly club reports. Comparisons with historical records have provided insights into shifts in the natural world caused by climate change and other human influences. Examples include: coral decline in American Samoa, amphibian losses in Mexico and shifts in birds’ ranges in California’s Sierra Nevada.

Researchers are using a collection of photographs of British landscapes taken between 1910-1935 to analyze current effects of climate change at those locations.

But how do scientists know that this historical data is appropriate to use? How can they tell good data from bad? And how can you know whether records you may have, such as an ancestor’s journals or seashell collection, might be useful for science?

We recently published an article in the journal Bioscience that lays out a three-step approach for assessing the quality of historical observations. Using this approach, we believe that scientists can confidently use historical resources to inform studies reaching back to times and places where formal scientific data is not available.

A three-part test

Not long after Thoreau died, critics questioned the accuracy of his natural history observations. Writing in 1919, John Burroughs, a leading nature essayist of the time, offered perhaps the strongest criticisms.

Burroughs asserted that Thoreau’s “observations are frequently at fault, or wholly wide of the mark.” He questioned whether Thoreau knew basic facts, such as that hickory trees grew in Concord, Mass., and that pine trees had seeds.

To determine whether Burroughs and other critics were right, we propose a straightforward three-step process.

Is the information collected using rigorous methods that are well documented and clearly described? Modern researchers should be able to repeat them — for example, locating sites where past naturalists worked, making observations over the same number of days per week and following other key parts of their methods.
How accurate are the observations, such as species identifications? Were they subject to any biases? Can researchers or naturalists replicate aspects of the observations that would be expected to remain consistent over time?
Does the data have the precision, frequency and rigor that scholars need now? No data is right for all purposes. Modern researchers must decide whether the information can answer the question they are investigating.

In this 2011 video, Boston University biologist Richard Primack explains how he and his research team used Henry David Thoreau’s nature observations from the 1850s to measure the effects of climate change in New England.

Was Thoreau a good naturalist?

When we assessed the rigor, accuracy and utility of Thoreau’s natural history observations, we found that he was indeed a good naturalist.

Thoreau thoroughly documented the dates, locations and descriptions of observations that he made as he walked around Walden Pond and greater Concord. We can read in his journals how often and for how long he made these notes.

We compared Thoreau’s notes to modern observations and found that his observations of seasonal events, such as leaf out, flowering, fruiting and bird arrivals, were highly correlated with modern findings. This told us that Thoreau captured similar patterns.

For example, we can see that the order in which flowers bloom in spring around Concord is nearly the same in Thoreau’s journals as in modern observations. In both data sets, certain species flower early, while other species bloom late in the season.

Thoreau’s historical observations have tremendous utility in research. We and other researchers have used them to learn about the effects of climate change on plants and birds in Concord. Using Thoreau’s findings as a baseline, we have found that spring leaf out and flowering are occurring earlier, but the timing of bird arrivals is not changing much.

Beyond Thoreau and Walden

Researchers can use this approach to evaluate other historical observations. For example, between 1904 and 1969, American field biologist Joseph Grinnell and his colleagues recorded observations of species in California. Their team carefully described most of their methods and collected specimens and photographs to document their work.

However, their sampling methods were sometimes inconsistent, and researchers cannot locate some of their sampling routes. These uncertainties make the Grinnell team’s observations inappropriate to answer questions about changes in the abundance of some species. But their observations are excellent for answering questions about how climate change is altering the ranges of many species, including birds and small mammals like mice, voles and chipmunks that Grinnell’s team observed there in the past and that still occur there.

Museum specimens, such as dried plants, bird nests and animal skins, are another source of historical information. The specimens themselves remove uncertainty around species identification and preserve many physical characteristics that interest researchers.

However, the people who collected the specimens sometimes fail to record precise location information. And some collectors target particular species, locations or seasons, which can bias what they find.

For example, if a collector targeted spring-flowering plants, their collection may be missing plants that flower later in the year. We urge researchers to watch for these biases when using historical data.

It’s not uncommon to find historical data sets with little, if any, documentation about when, where and how the data was collected — for example, observations from someone’s daily walks, collections of photographs or a birder’s reports to an ornithological club. Even in these cases, it may be possible to determine how rigorous and accurate the data is.

For example, the frequency of photographs or observations may hint at how often someone made observations. And even poorly documented data can be useful to address some ecological questions, or could suggest new hypotheses that deserve further study.

Scientists are searching for more historical data. Following careful evaluation, we may be able to use this information to learn about the effects of climate change, land use practices and other environmental issues. People who have records that might be scientifically valuable should consider contacting ecologists, research stations, natural history clubs and the USA National Phenology Network, which collects, stores and shares data on the timing of seasonal events, such as bird migration across the U.S.

Tara K. Miller, PhD Candidate in Biology, Boston University; Abe Miller-Rushing, Science Coordinator, Acadia National Park, National Park Service, and Richard B. Primack, Professor of Biology, Boston University

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

What’s in a name? A lot, Jennifer Lopez proves as she takes Ben Affleck’s

Jennifer Lopez has come a long way in her attitudes about motherhood. The musician and actor, who has teenage twins with singer Marc Anthony and is now the stepmother of three more children, told Vogue her style of parenting is, “I can hold a boundary with you but also be your ally.”

That’s different from the way she says she was raised, and also seems to be in marked contrast to her views of romantic love. Self-actualization is difficult to hold on to when you become a parent, especially a mother, but it can also be rough for a woman to stay herself in the context of marriage. When Lopez married actor Ben Affleck in the summer of 2022, although she is still performing as Lopez, she legally changed her last name to Affleck, something that didn’t sit well with writers at The New York Times and others. The New York Times called the name change the “most notable of all the emerging details” about the nuptials and described it as “one of the most public acts of submission that a person can perform.”

It’s not that she’s taken her husband’s name. It’s that she wouldn’t even consider him taking hers.

We need gender equality to make a rom-com work

In the new Vogue interview, Lopez reaffirmed her decision to change her name to Jennifer Lynn Affleck, saying, “My legal name will be Mrs. Affleck because we’re joined together. We’re husband and wife. I’m proud of that. I don’t think that’s a problem.” Affleck, whom Lopez first met, dated and was engaged to in the early 2000s before the couple broke up, is Lopez’s fourth husband. Lopez was previously married to actor and producer Ojani Noa, dancer and choreographer Cris Judd, and Anthony – and was engaged to former Yankee Alex Rodriguez. Lopez is Affleck’s second wife, after his 2005 marriage to actor Jennifer Garner ended in divorce in 2018, and both Affleck and Lopez have brought children to their marriage together.

It’s a complicated history and perhaps a shared last name might help a blended family feel more unified, but Lopez’s children have their father’s legal last name. This is also the first time Lopez has taken a husband’s name, despite three previous marriages. The New York Times questioned, “What does it mean that on her fourth husband she changes her surname? That this is the real one?” It’s hard not to read some anxiety in the name change, that Mrs. Affleck is like a neon sign (which Lopez actually has in her dressing room) broadcasting the durability of this marriage. It’s difficult to come back from a name change. It takes paperwork and waiting in line.

Why does the woman have to make that public declaration of fidelity and not the man?

Lopez and Affleck were treated terribly by the press during their first attempt at a relationship, especially her, ranging from a vicious caricature on “South Park” to racist jokes told by late night comedians like Conan O’Brien. The name change could be a pronouncement that they came through the fire together, that after a period of years, during which time they each married and divorced other people, they are uber-committed to each other. But why does the woman have to make that public declaration of fidelity and not the man?

When asked if Affleck might consider changing his last name to Lopez instead, Vogue describes Lopez as laughing at the thought: “No! It’s not traditional. It doesn’t have any romance to it.” Romance – it’s a word that encapsulates many fans’ current view of the marriage, as a gauzy, destined fairy tale finally coming true (“Lopez believes in the fairy tale,” Vogue writes pointedly).

What’s romantic about ownership? That’s the origin of a wife changing her surname after all, like a deed of sale: a married woman becoming her husband’s property, stamped with his name, instead of her father’s. But most women still change their last name, out of societal expectation if nothing else, about 70-90% in the U.S., as Refinery29 notes in a piece about married women who regret it: “I felt like I was burying a part of my own identity — and for what? To adopt a surname that was laden with a history to which I had no connection?”

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

Lopez tried to spin it, like a weird kind of feminism, calling it “a power move.”

Affleck has not been asked his thoughts on the manner publicly — if he offered to change his name and Lopez said no, or if he said no, or probably the most likely: the couple never talked about it at all. It’s the inevitability that’s the issue here, the lack of consideration, that Lopez laughed when a reporter even suggested a husband change his name. Lopez tried to spin it, like a weird kind of feminism, calling it “a power move, you know what I mean? I’m very much in control of my own life and destiny and feel empowered as a woman and as a person . . . It still carries tradition and romance to me.”

The most romantic aspect of any relationship is mutual respect and equality, something Lopez has struggled with in the past. Vogue mentions Affleck’s decades of substance abuse and equates Lopez’s battle with what sounds an awfully lot like co-dependency, writing, “If Lopez has had a parallel compulsion, it is in the domain of love, and she has done her work, too,” though what work is not specified.

Lopez described her struggle in past relationships as a battle to maintain self, “I was just like, ‘Yes, do whatever you want! I can take it, I’ll be here, because I’m really strong, and I’ll be fine.’ Little by little it chips away at your self-worth, your self-esteem, your soul.” And yes, it’s just a name, but Affleck’s nickname for Lopez is “Little,” referring, apparently, to her height and hopefully not her place in the world and the world of art, which is just as towering, if not more so, than his.

about relationships

The greatest threat emperor penguins face is climate change

Emperor penguins thrive on Antarctica’s coastlines in icy conditions any human would find extreme. Yet, like Goldilocks, they have a narrow comfort zone: If there’s too much sea ice, trips to bring food from the ocean become long and arduous, and their chicks may starve. With too little sea ice, the chicks are at risk of drowning.

Climate change is now putting that delicate balance and potentially the entire species at risk.

In a recent study, my colleagues and I showed that if current global warming trends and government policies continue, Antarctica’s sea ice will decline at a rate that would dramatically reduce emperor penguin numbers to the point that almost all colonies would become quasi-extinct by 2100, with little chance of recovering.

That’s why the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finalized a rule on Oct. 26, 2022, listing the emperor penguin as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act, effective Nov. 25, 2022. The director of the service said the listing “reflects the growing extinction crisis.”

The greatest threat emperor penguins face is climate change. It will disrupt the sea ice cover they rely on unless governments adopt policies that reduce the greenhouse gases driving global warming.

The U.S. Endangered Species Act has been used before to protect other species that are primarily at risk from climate change, including the polar bear, ringed seal and several species of coral, which are all listed as threatened.

Emperor penguins don’t live on U.S. territory, so some of the Endangered Species Act’s measures meant to protect species’ habitats and prevent hunting them don’t directly apply. Being listed under the Endangered Species Act could still bring benefits, though.

It could provide a way to reduce harm from U.S. fishing fleets that might operate in the region. And, with expected actions from the Biden administration, the listing could eventually pressure U.S. agencies to take actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions. However, the Bureau of Land Management has never acknowledged that emissions from oil and gas extraction on public lands and waters could harm climate-imperiled species. It issued more than 3,500 oil and gas drilling permits in New Mexico and Wyoming on public land during the first 16 months of the Biden administration.

Marching toward extinction

I first saw an emperor penguin when I visited Pointe Géologie, Antarctica, during my Ph.D. studies. As soon as I set foot on the island, before our team unpacked our gear, my colleagues and I went to visit the emperor penguin colony located only a couple of hundred meters from the French research station — the same colony featured in the movie “March of the Penguins.”

We sat far away to observe them through binoculars, but after 15 minutes, a few penguins approached us.

People think that they are awkward, almost comical, with their hobbling gait, but emperors walk with a peaceful and serene grace across the sea ice. I can still feel them tugging on my shoelaces, their eyes flickering with curiosity. I hope my children and future generations have a chance to meet these masters of the frozen world.

Penguin curiosity meets a GoPro camera. Credit: C. Marciau/IPEV/CNRS

Researchers have studied the emperor penguins around Pointe Géologie, in Terre Adélie, since the 1960s. Those decades of data are now helping scientists gauge the effects of anthropogenic climate change on the penguins, their sea ice habitat and their food sources.

The penguins breed on fast ice, which is sea ice attached to land. But they hunt for food within the pack ice — sea ice floes that move with the wind or ocean currents and may merge. Sea ice is also important for resting, during their annual moult and to escape from predators.

The penguin population at Pointe Géologie declined by half in the late 1970s when sea ice declined and more male emperor penguins died, and the population never fully recovered from massive breeding failures — something that has been occurring more frequently.

To assess whether the emperor penguin could qualify for protection under the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service encouraged an international team of scientists, policy experts, climate scientists and ecologists to provide research and projections of the threats posed by climate change to emperor penguins and their future survival.

Every colony will be in decline by 2100

Emperor penguins are adapted to their current environment, but the species has not evolved to survive the rapid effects of climate change that threaten to reshape its world.

Decades of studies by an international team of researchers have been instrumental in establishing the need for protection.

Seminal research I was involved in in 2009 warned that the colony of Pointe Géologie will be marching toward extinction by the end of the century. And it won’t just be that colony. My colleagues and I in 2012 looked at all known emperor penguin colonies identified in images from space and determined that every colony will be declining by the end of the century if greenhouse gases continue their current course. We found that penguin behaviors that might help them adapt to changing environmental conditions couldn’t reverse the anticipated global decline.

Major environmental shifts, such as the late formation and early loss of the sea ice on which colonies are located, are already raising the risk.

A dramatic example is the recent collapse of Halley Bay, the second-largest emperor penguin colony in Antarctica. More than 10,000 chicks died in 2016 when sea ice broke up early. The colony has not yet recovered.

By including those extreme events, we projected that 98% of colonies will be extinct by 2100 if greenhouse gas emissions continue their present course, and the global population will decline by 99% compared with its historical size.

Meeting the Paris goal could save the penguins

The results of the new study showed that if the world meets the Paris climate agreement targets, keeping warming to under 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F) compared with preindustrial temperatures, that could protect sufficient habitat to halt the emperor penguins’ decline.

But the world isn’t on track to meet the Paris Agreement. In a report released Oct. 27, 2022, the United Nations Environment Program said current policies have the world headed for 2.8 C (5 F) of warming by the end of the century, and if countries meet their current pledges to cut emissions, that will still mean warming of at least 2.4 C (4.3 F).

So, it appears that the emperor penguin is the proverbial “canary in the coal mine.” The future of emperor penguins, and much of life on Earth, including humanity, ultimately depends upon the decisions made today.

Marine ecologist Philip Trathan of the British Antarctic Survey contributed to this article.

This updates an article originally published on Aug. 31, 2021.

Stephanie Jenouvrier, Associate Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

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

“Here we go again”: Trump stokes Arizona conspiracy theories over Maricopa voting machine problems

Maricopa County officials said Tuesday that around 20 percent of their 223 voting sites experienced issues with tabulation machines, prompting a surge of false voter fraud claims from former President Donald Trump and fellow Republicans.

“We’ve got about 20 percent of the locations out there where there’s an issue with the tabulator where some of the ballots, after people have voted, they try and run them through the tabulator and they’re not going through,” Bill Gates, the Republican chairman of the Maricopa County board of supervisors, said in a video posted to Twitter.

His team is working to fix the problem as “quickly as possible”, but in the meantime, he added, voters could also place their ballots into a secure box that is affixed to the tabulator. Those ballots will be collected Tuesday night and be counted in a secure location.

In Phoenix, the Burton Barr Library voting location reported it was acting as a ballot drop-off-only site due to tabulation center issues. In this instance, poll workers entered the password incorrectly on the tabulators three times and were locked out as a result, according to Maricopa County officials, ABC News reported.

“This is a security feature designed to protect the vote. We’ve sent a tech to get the tabulators up and running,” officials said. “Voters can still check in and vote their ballot. But in the interim, voters have a few options. They can wait for the tech to bring out a new password and memory cards, they can insert their voted ballots into a secure door in the ballot box and bipartisan poll workers will insert their ballots into the tabulator at the end of the night, or they can choose to vote at another location.”

In an attempt to stop the spread of conspiracy theories, Gates said that the malfunctioning ballot-counting machines do not indicate any instances of “fraud” and assured voters that it was only a technical issue.

“Everyone is still getting to vote,” Gates added. “No one is being disenfranchised. And we have redundancies in place.”

But as soon as news of the tabulator problems gained traction on social media, right-wing commentators and politicians started pushing out falsehoods about widespread voter fraud.

Election deniers are embedded in Michigan canvassing boards — advocates say they’re ready

Arizona GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, who has echoed false claims of a stolen election in 2020, issued a “voter alert” on her Twitter account.

Lake later told reporters she came to the “heart of liberal Phoenix” to vote to ensure they had no issues with their machines.

“They may be trying to slow a red tsunami, but it’s coming,” Lake said, even though Phoenix is located in Maricopa County, whose board of supervisors is 80% Republican.

Trump also weighed in on Truth Social, suggesting that problems at voting sites would disproportionately affect Republicans.

“Can this possibly be true when a vast majority of Republicans waited for today to Vote?” Trump wrote, after he and other conspiracy theorists urged supporters to wait until Election Day to vote. “Here we go again? The people will not stand for it!!!”

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

Other Republican leaders started declaring malfeasance. Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward blamed Republican Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, a Republican, and Democratic Secretary of State and gubernatorial nominee Katie Hobbs over the issue.

“Up to 15 locations reported in Maricopa County with “tabulator malfunctions.” Is this incompetence or malfeasance from @stephen_richer & @MaricopaVote? Or both?” Ward tweeted.

Prominent election denier and Republican Secretary of State nominee Mark Finchem also blamed Hobbs and suggested a “return to hand counting at the precinct level.”

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk also falsely claimed on Twitter that most polling places in Maricopa required at least a two-hour wait.

“No part of the tweet below is accurate. The vast majority of Vote Centers are seeing wait times under 30 minutes, and whether by tabulator or secure ballot box, all voters are being served,” the Maricopa County account responded to his tweet.

Conversations surrounding the tabulation system errors spread rapidly on Twitter, with over 40,000 relevant tweets in just two hours, after rightwing influencers and commentators like Kirk continued to misrepresent the tabulators issue as evidence of fraud, according to the Election Integrity Partnership.

Maricopa County officials later shared they were able to identify the problems with tabulation machines at 60 voting centers and resolved problems with 17 locations. Technicians are working to resolve this issue at the remaining locations.

about the midterms

You oughta know: Why Alanis Morissette dumped her Rock and Roll Hall of Fame performance

A night that was supposed to honor one woman’s contribution to rock and roll was tarnished with allegations of sexism.

Carly Simon’s induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame was supposed to be celebrated during the ceremony Saturday night. Although the singer herself couldn’t attend due to a “personal tragedy,” Sara Bareilles performed Simon’s “Nobody Does It Better” in tribute. That was supposed to be followed by Olivia Rodrigo and Alanis Morissette dueting on “You’re So Vain,” but the Canadian rock-star dropped out.

According to Variety, Morissette had participated in rehearsals on Friday before she dropped out of her grand performance and exited the production without giving a reason at the time. On Monday, Morissette explained her decision in a lengthy statement posted on her Instagram story. She made it clear that her frustrations did not concern Simon, Rodrigo or the other female artists who were honored or featured on the show.

How “Jagged Little Pill” became Alanis Morissette’s legendary breakout

“There are some mis-informed rumblings about my not performing at The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony this past weekend,” Morissette wrote. “Firstly, I have to say how much I adore Carly Simon and Olivia Rodrigo and Dolly Parton and Janet Jackson and Pat Benetar and Sheryl Crow and Pink and Brandi Carlile and Sara Bareilles — and all the amazing people and artists who were there.”

Morissette condemned the Rock Hall’s production team, claiming that her experience with them greatly contrasted the “countless incredible experiences” she’s had “with production teams with all genders throughout my life.”

“I have spent decades in an industry that is rife with an overarching anti-woman sentiment and have tolerated a lot of condescension and disrespectfulness, reduction, dismissiveness, contract-breaching, unsupportiveness, exploitation and psychological violence (and more) throughout my career,” she continued. “I tolerated it because nothing would stop me from connecting with those who I cared about and resonated with. I live to serve and connect with people and so over the years I sucked it up on more occasions than I can count in order to do so. It’s hard not to be affected in any industry around the world, but Hollywood has been notorious for its disrespect of the feminine in all of us.”

Morissette then finished, saying, “Thankfully, I am at a point in my life where there is no need for me to spend time in an environment that reduces women. I have had countless incredible experiences with production teams with all genders throughout my life. So many, and so fun. There is nothing better than a team of diverse people coming together with one mission. I’ll continue to show up in those environments with bells on. :)”

This isn’t the first time Morissette has spoken out about sexism, exploitation and mistreatment in the music industry. In her 2021 HBO documentary “Jagged,” she revealed that she was raped by multiple men when she was 15 years old and struggled to come forward with her story.

“I’m going to need some help because I never talk about this,” Morissette said in the documentary, according to The Washington Post. “It took me years in therapy to even admit there had been any kind of victimization on my part. I would always say I was consenting, and then I’d be reminded like ‘Hey, you were 15, you’re not consenting at 15.’ Now I’m like, ‘Oh yeah, they’re all pedophiles. It’s all statutory rape.'”

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

She added, “You know a lot of people say, ‘Why did that woman wait 30 years? And I’m like f**k off. They don’t wait 30 years. No one was listening or their livelihood was threatened or their family was threatened. The whole ‘Why do women wait’ thing? Women don’t wait. Our culture doesn’t listen.”

Following the documentary’s release, however, Morissette criticized it harshly, asserting in a statement that she was “lulled into a false sense of security, and their salacious agenda became apparent immediately upon my seeing the first cut of the film.”

“While there is beauty and some elements of accuracy in this/my story to be sure — I ultimately won’t be supporting someone else’s reductive take on a story much too nuanced for them to ever grasp or tell,” she concluded.

about Alanis Morissette:

Political violence “must always be an option,” says far-right Catholic outlet

On Tuesday morning, the far-right Catholic media outlet Church Militant published a video editorial suggesting that violence may be necessary, and justified, if the country’s divisions can’t be addressed through political means.

Describing Election Day as a “day of reckoning for the communists who have seized so much control of the country and wreaked so much havoc on America,” Church Militant founder Michael Voris warned that, in the “all-out war going on between the forces of darkness who have complete control of one political party and partial control over the other,” conservatives might have “no choice but to fight back violently if needs be.” That shouldn’t be the first resort, Voris went on to say, but it “must always be an option.”

Now we are in a pitched battle in the political arena — the last remaining line before all-out civil war. If you love peace and you don’t want to see violence, then you better get involved on the political front. And let’s be clear about this, for all the phony or delusional pacifists out there: violence in and of itself is not immoral. It depends on the circumstances and sometimes even, it’s necessary: self defense, the subduing of an aggressor threatening the life of your family, the Son of God in the temple violently whipping the money changers.

The idea that violence must always, at all times, always be avoided is not Catholic. Remember the Crusades? Sometimes violence must be unleashed to protect the innocent. But lethal violence — because of its drastic, you-can-never-come-back-from-it consequences — must never be the first resort. In fact it must always be the last resort, and then not be allowed to turn into an orgy of dominance over the foe. Nonetheless, violence does — must always be an option. Welcome to a fallen world.

Church Militant has castigated the Catholic hierarchy as an “international crime syndicate” or the “lavender mafia,” and billed itself as the home of the “red-pilled laity.”

For years, Church Militant has served as a bombastic firehose of criticism directed at the Catholic church hierarchy and its fellow conservative Catholics, whom the outlet often castigates as milquetoast wimps too cowardly to fight a corrupt church leadership it has described as an “international crime syndicate” or a “lavender mafia.” Amid the bitter 2020 election campaign, Church Militant began to describe itself as the home of “the red-pilled laity” and warned that Catholics who failed to vote for Donald Trump because he was too vulgar couldn’t complain when they were “herded onto the trains headed for the camps” or “gun[ned] down in the streets.”

In 2021, Church Militant welcomed disgraced “alt-lite” commentator Milo Yiannopoulos into the organization, and this April, the outlet scored a long, sit-down interview with far-right Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, in which the congresswoman suggested that Satan was controlling the church, as evidenced by the existence of Catholic charities that help immigrants and refugees. (Since Yiannopoulos had facilitated Greene’s appearance last February at the annual conference of the white nationalist America First/”groyper” movement, and then interned for her this summer, it’s reasonable to speculate that he was involved in brokering her interview with Church Militant.)

Marjorie Taylor Greene to right-wing Catholic site: How come “God hasn’t destroyed” America?

All of this follows the outlet’s longstanding promotion of figures on the far right, including former Trump campaign manager Steve Bannon, Jan. 6 planner Ali Alexander, Gab founder and CEO Andrew Torba, and Joseph Flynn, brother of QAnon hero Michael Flynn.

In a two-part investigation this May, Salon reported that Church Militant also has a web of connections — including direct ties through its staff — to the “groyper” movement, led by the virulently racist, antisemitic and misogynist live-stream celebrity Nick Fuentes. The outlet has praised the groyper movement in interviews, published ads seeking to recruit groyper followers for its activist arm, and last spring made plans to join forces with groypers to counter pro-choice demonstrations.

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

One groyper-aligned figure that Church Militant has elevated, far-right live-streamer John Doyle, helped lead an ugly protest outside an LGBTQ bar in Dallas that was hosting an all-ages drag show for Pride month this June. During the protest, local activists video-recorded Doyle — who has referred to himself as both a “white nationalist” and a “Christian fascist” — suggesting that Texas law enforcement should enter the bar and “put bullets in all their heads,” adding, “They’d be rewarded for it. That’s what the badge is for.”

In May, Voris acknowledged in emailed comments to Salon that “Church Militant might partner with anyone in a particular effort to achieve a limited and shared goal,” such as opposing abortion. He continued, “it should not be surprising that two (or more) organizations that hold GENERAL views of the current cultural crisis would experience SOME crossover of ideas.”

Today’s video-editorial from Voris suggests the crossover of ideas isn’t limited to social issues, but a growing acceptance of political violence as well.

While Voris notes at multiple points in his commentary that politics should function as “a buffer” between political disputes and “a violent melee,” he also repeatedly warns that this buffer might fail. Should conservatives win the midterms, he continued, they must take advantage of the victory to push for a complete, no-exceptions national abortion ban, to fight same-sex marriage and the “polluting” of children’s minds “under the guise of education.” He went on:

For those of you who still think violence is never an option for a follower of Christ when defending the innocent, would you not take up arms yourself against the destruction of a young soul if that was the only option left to you? …

Fallen men will always have people who choose to embrace the darkness and destroy the innocent. That’s why laws are instituted among men. But when the evil ones seize control and exercise raw political power to destroy those laws erected to secure not just rights but God-given rights, then the people have no choice but to fight back, violently if needs be.

on religion and the far right