What Does It Mean To Have a Child? We Should Be Taking That Question Seriously.

The question of begetting—that is, to bring (a child) into existence by the process of reproduction—is one that we routinely ask each other. It is also a question that young people are asking themselves with increasing urgency, as many wonder if, in an age of climate crisis and existential uncertainty, it’s still OK to have kids. What does it mean to create another person, not knowing what their life will be like?

In response, every so often an article or essay is published to the extent that having children is an intrinsically hopeful act; that not to have them is to give in to despair; that this is how we express gratitude for existence; that “the meaning of life is to pass it on.”

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

This is interesting—not just for what it suggests about begetting (that this is a question not up for consideration), but for what it suggests about hope and meaning; about our lives, and what it would mean for them to have purpose. We tend to speak in binaries such as light/dark, optimism/pessimism, hope/despair. Presenting the problem in this manner—where to beget is to be hopeful, while anything else is automatically the opposite—is to suggest a stark choice: either you are on the side of life, or you have already given up.

But is reality truly colored in such stark tones? Are our lives, our hearts, our motives?

Consider a person living through the through the atrocities of a global war, and yet expressing an indomitable gratitude “for everything.” Consider another, convinced that life is bad and non-existence preferable, who nevertheless comes to long for a child and does not keep themselves from creating it. Consider a third who, deeply in love with life, nevertheless believesit would be wrong to bring another person into it—a person liable to suffering; a person who has not asked to be created.

These examples are all real and point towards a simple truth: that the dichotomy is a false one. There are ways to be grateful for life that are compatible with not begetting; just as there are modes of grief and even despair of which begetting is the consequence. So, too, there are ways of being that command obedience to a calling—and it is intrinsic to the nature of a calling that one does not know in advance what one is called to do. The call may lead to begetting, but also, it may lead away from it.

Read More: Why So Many Women Are Waiting Longer to Have Kids

But more important than all these things is the simple fact that, as the late writer Hilary Mantel once posited in her memoir Giving Up the Ghost, “motives are seldom simple and never pure.” The person who found her belief in the immorality of procreation superseded by the longing to beget; the person who lived through dark times yet loved life; the person who loved life yet refused to beget—what does this prove, except that life is complicated and begetting is also?

If anything, what these examples show is that there are these tangles and complications that we are not seeing—there are ways of grounding hope and meaning to which our minds and hearts are closed.

Perhaps one loves the world while seeing, with open eyes, the shadows clinging to even the most privileged corners of creation. Perhaps one shudders to bring a frail thing into the reaches of such shadows. Perhaps one fears the world but feels a calling that cannot be answered except by an act of creation. Perhaps the calling leads elsewhere.

Read More: The Parents Who Regret Having Children

What I want to resist is the automatic assumption that one path and not another is called “hopeful,” that one path and not another is an expression of commitment and moral fervor—even, of gratitude. What I want to ask is: what would it mean for hope and meaning not to be inflected with optimism or with the strain of “positive thinking” that has cast so powerful a spell on modern culture? What would it mean to envision different grounds for perseverance, for activism even, and for hope itself—for it to be rooted not in positive expectations about the future, but in a commitment to value and justice? What would it mean to recognize creation for what it is, a golden shadowed thing, and form our hopes accordingly?

When I speak of shadows, some may think this goes without saying; surely we all know, have always known, that all of existence is like this?

But in truth they are all too easily disregarded. In an age when entrepreneurs are preparing to make “space babies,” for the sake of proving that procreation is possible outside of earth’s atmosphere—there, in the cold and dark of distant space, with no knowledge whatsoever of the risks in zero gravity to either mother or child—because humanity must be propagated, this forgetfulness can take terrifying forms. Is that then hope? To create, because creating is always the better road? Is that then meaning?

There is more to say about this, and more to think about, for all of us. But we can begin by resisting the temptation of painting the decision to beget along the lines of hope vs despair, which fails to do justice to the richness and complexity of our moral lives. We can begin by recognizing that people asking the question of begetting do so not out of shortsightedness but out of a deep sense that there is something worth asking here, something that is owed. The least we can do is take their question seriously. What does it mean to create a child?

source https://time.com/6972329/having-a-child-question-essay/

Judge Holds Trump in Contempt and Fines Him $9,000 for Violating Gag Order

NEW YORK — Donald Trump was held in contempt of court Tuesday and fined $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order that barred him from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and some others connected to his New York hush money case. If he does it again, the judge warned, he could be jailed.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Prosecutors had alleged 10 violations, but New York Judge Juan M. Merchan found there were nine. The ruling was a stinging rebuke for the Republican former president, who had insisted he was exercising his free speech rights.

Merchan wrote that Trump “is hereby warned that the Court will not tolerate continued willful violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment.”

Trump stared down at the table in front of him as the judge read the ruling, frowning slightly.

The ruling came at the start of the second week of testimony in the historic case. Manhattan prosecutors say Trump and his associates took part in an illegal scheme to influence the 2016 presidential campaign by burying negative stories. He has pleaded not guilty.

Trump must pay the fine by the close of business on Friday, Merchan said in a written ruling. He must remove seven offending posts from his Truth Social account and two from his campaign website by 2:15 p.m. EDT, Tuesday, Merchan said.

Merchan is also weighing other alleged gag order violations by Trump and will hear arguments Thursday.

Court was resuming Tuesday with Gary Farro, a banker who helped Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen open accounts, including one that Cohen used to buy the silence of porn performer Stormy Daniels. She alleged a 2006 sexual encounter with Trump, which he denies.

For his part, the former president and presumptive Republican nominee has been campaigning in his off-hours, but is required to be in court when it is in session, four days a week. Outside the courtroom, Trump criticized prosecutors again.

“This is a case that should have never been brought,” he said.

Jurors so far have heard from two other witnesses. Trump’s former longtime executive assistant, Rhona Graff, recounted that she recalled once seeing Daniels at Trump’s office suite in Trump Tower and figured the performer was a potential contestant for one of Trump’s “Apprentice”-brand shows. Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker laid out how he agreed to serve as the Trump campaign’s “eyes and ears” by helping to squelch unflattering rumors and claims about Trump and women.

Through detailed testimony on email exchanges, business transactions and bank accounts, prosecutors are forming the foundation of their argument that Trump is guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with the hush money payments. The prosecution is leading up to crucial testimony from Cohen himself, who went to federal prison after pleading guilty to campaign finance violations and other crimes. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty.

It’s unclear when Cohen will take the stand; the trial is expected to go on another month or more. And with every moment Trump is in court as the first of his four criminal trials plays out, he’s growing increasingly frustrated while the November election moves ever closer.

“Our country’s going to hell and we sit here day after day after day, which is their plan, because they think they might be able to eke out an election,” Trump declared last week in the courthouse hallway.

Also this week, Judge Juan M. Merchan may decide on prosecutors’ request to fine Trump for what they say were violations of a gag order that bars him from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and some others connected to the case. The judge also has set a hearing Thursday on another batch of alleged gag order violations.

Prosecutors used Pecker, Trump’s longtime friend, to detail a “catch and kill” arrangement in which he collected seamy stories about the candidate so the National Enquirer or Trump’s associates could buy and bury the claims. Pecker described how he paid $180,000 to scoop up and sit on stories from a doorman and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. He didn’t involve himself in the Daniels payout, he said. He testified for parts of four days.

Trump says all the stories were false. His attorneys used cross-examination to suggest Trump was really engaged in an effort to protect his name and his family — not to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

Farro first took the stand Friday. While a senior managing director at First Republic Bank, he was assigned to work with Trump’s lawyer for about three years, in part because of his “ability to handle individuals who may be a little challenging,” Farro said, adding that he didn’t find Cohen difficult.

Farro detailed to jurors the process of helping Cohen create accounts for two limited liability companies — corporate-speak for a business account that protects the person behind the account from liability, debt and other issues. Farro testified that Cohen indicated the companies, Resolution Consultants LLC and Essential Consultants LLC, would be involved in real estate consulting.

Prosecutors showed jurors emails in which Cohen describes the opening of the Resolution Consultants account as an “important matter.”

Cohen acknowledged when he pleaded guilty to federal charges in 2018 that it had been formed to send money to American Media, Inc., the Enquirer publisher. It was meant as a payback for their purchase of McDougal’s story. But the deal never went through.

Farro said that since the account was never funded, it was never technically opened. Instead, Cohen pivoted to starting up the Essential Consultants account, which he later used to pay Daniels $130,000.

When asked whether Cohen seemed anxious to get the bank accounts set up, Farro testified: “Every time Michael Cohen spoke to me, he gave a sense of urgency.”

Farro told the 12-person panel that the bank’s policy prohibited doing business with entities tied to “adult entertainment,” including pornography and strip clubs. Trump’s lawyers have not yet had a chance to cross-examine Farro.

source https://time.com/6972680/trump-contempt-fines-9000/

Hell’s Kitchen and Stereophonic Lead 2024 Tony Award Nominations

Two Broadway shows celebrating the origins of sonic creativity — the musical “Hell’s Kitchen” fueled by Alicia Keys songs, and the play “Stereophonic” about a ’70s rock band at the edge of stardom — each earned a leading 13 Tony Award nominations Tuesday, a list that also saw a record number of women nominated for best director.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

A total of 28 shows earned a Tony nod or more, with the musical “The Outsiders,” an adaptation of the beloved S. E. Hinton novel and the Francis Ford Coppola film, earning 12 nominations; a starry revival of “Cabaret” starring Eddie Redmayne, nabbing nine; and “Appropriate,” Branden Jacobs-Jenkins’ searing play about a family reunion in Arkansas where everyone has competing motivations and grievances, grabbing eight.

Rachel McAdams, making her Broadway debut in “Mary Jane,” earned a best actress in a play nomination, while “Succession” star Jeremy Strong, got his first ever nomination, for a revival of “An Enemy of the People.” Jessica Lange in “Mother Play,” Sarah Paulson in “Appropriate” and Amy Ryan, who stepped in at the last minute for a revival of “Doubt,” also earned nominations in the best actress in a play category. “The Big Bang Theory” star Jim Parsons earned a supporting nod for “Mother Play,” and Daniel Radcliffe on his fifth Broadway show, a revival of Stephen Sondheim’s “Merrily We Roll Along,” won his first nomination. Redmayne in his second show on Broadway got a nod as best lead actor in a musical, as did Brian d’Arcy James for “Days of Wine and Roses,” Brody Grant in “The Outsiders,” Jonathan Groff in “Merrily We Roll Along” and 73-year-old Dorian Harewood in “The Notebook,” the adaptation of Nicholas Sparks romantic tearjerker.

Harewood, in his first Broadway show in 46 years, landed his first Tony nomination. Redmayne’s “Cabaret” co-star Gayle Rankin earned a nomination for best actress in a musical, as did Eden Espinosa in “Lempicka,” Maleah Joi Moon in “Hell’s Kitchen,” Kelli O’Hara in “Days of Wine and Roses” and 71-year-old Maryann Plunkett, who plays the elderly wife at the heart of “The Notebook.” Steve Carell in his Broadway debut in a poorly received revival of the classic play “Uncle Vanya” failed to secure a nod, but starry producers who earned Tony nods include Keys, Angelina Jolie (for “The Outsiders”) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (for “Suffs”).

The best new musical crown will be a battle between “Hell’s Kitchen,” “The Outsiders,” the dance-heavy, dialogue-less stage adaptation of Sufjan Stevens’s 2005 album “Illinois,” “Suffs,” based on the American suffragists of the early 20th century, and “Water for Elephants,” which combines Sara Green’s 2006 bestseller with circus elements.

The best new play Tony will pit “Stereophonic” against “Mother Play,” Paula Vogel’s play about a mother and her kids spanning 1964 to the 21st century; “Mary Jane,” Amy Herzog’s humanistic portrait of a divorced mother of a young boy with health issues; “Prayer for the French Republic,” Joshua Harmon’s sprawling family comedy-drama that deals with Zionism, religious fervency and antisemitism; and “Jaja’s African Hair Braiding,” Jocelyn Bioh’s comedy about the lives of West African women working at a salon.

The nominations marked a smashing of the Tony record for most women named in a single season. The 2022 Tony Awards had held the record for most female directing nominees, with four total across the two races — musical and play. Only 10 women have gone on to win a directing crown. This year, three women were nominated for best play direction — Lila Neugebauer (“Appropriate”), Anne Kauffman (“Mary Jane”) and Whitney White (“Jaja’s African Hair Braiding”) — while four were nominated in the musical category — Maria Friedman (“Merrily We Roll Along”), Leigh Silverman (“Suffs”) Jessica Stone (“Water for Elephants”) and Danya Taymor (“The Outsiders”). A spring barrage of new shows — 14 shows opened in an 11-day span this year — is not unusual these days as producers hope their work will be fresh in the mind of voters ahead of the Tony Awards ceremony on June 16.

There were some firsts this season, including “Here Lies Love” with Broadway’s first all-Filipino cast, which earned four nominations, including best original score for David Byrne and Fat Boy Slim. And seven openly autistic actors starred in “How to Dance in Ohio,” a first for Broadway but which got no Tony love. Academy Award winner and Tony Award-nominee Ariana DeBose, who hosted both the 2023 and 2022 ceremonies, will be back this year and will produce and choreograph the opening number.

This year’s location — the David H. Koch Theater — is the home of New York City Ballet and in the same sprawling building complex as Lincoln Square Theater, which houses the Broadway venue Beaumont Theater. Like last year, the three-hour main telecast will air on CBS and stream on Paramount+ from 8 p.m.-11 p.m. EDT/5 p.m.-8 p.m. PDT with a pre-show on Pluto TV, and some Tony Awards handed out there. This season’s Broadway numbers — about $1.4 billion in grosses and 11.1 million tickets — is running slightly less than the 2022-23 season, off about 4% in grosses and down 1% in tickets.

source https://time.com/6972672/tony-nominations-2024/

Walmart Launches Store-Label Food Brand to Appeal to Younger Shoppers

NEW YORK — Walmart said Tuesday it is launching its biggest store-label food brand in 20 years in terms of its breadth of items, as it seeks to appeal to younger customers who are not brand loyal and want chef-inspired foods that are more affordably priced.

The brand, called Bettergoods, is just hitting Walmart stores and online. By this fall, there will be 300 products, spanning frozen, dairy, snacks, beverages, pasta, soups, coffee, chocolate among others, the retailer said. The prices range from under $2 to under $15, with most products available for under $5.

The launch from the country’s largest retailer comes as inflation has driven shoppers to seek less-expensive alternatives, lifting the popularity of private-label brands. Private brands in food and beverage accounted for nearly 26% of the overall market share in the number of units in that category sold last year, up from 24.7% during the previous year, according to market research firm Circana. That compares with 74.5% for national brands last year, down from 75.3% in 2022.

Walmart’s rivals, including Target, have also been expanding their store labels in food.

”As an industry, we’re seeing younger customers be more brand agnostic, prioritizing quality and value, and driving increased interest in private brands,” said Scott Morris, Walmart’s senior vice president of private brands, food and consumables.

source https://time.com/6972668/walmart-new-food-brand/

Why Your Breakfast Should Start with a Vegetable

Before the pandemic, Barbara Senich, a retiree from Chapel Hill, N.C., was diagnosed with prediabetes, meaning the sugar levels in her blood put her at risk for developing Type 2 diabetes. The source of that blood sugar was sweet foods, grains, and other carbohydrates. She says she thought about them every 30 seconds, leading to constant snacking.

Today, she’s cut her cravings and blood sugar partly by changing how she eats. But Senich didn’t ditch the carbs. She changed the order in which she has them.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Researchers have recently found that eating certain foods like non-starchy vegetables before carbs may result in lower, healthier blood sugar, compared to having carbs first. Especially at breakfast, these veggie starters also suppress hormones that cause hunger throughout the day.

Carbs aren’t inherently bad. They’re the main energy source for the nervous system and provide fiber that helps with digestion and lowering cholesterol levels. Although carbs are found in some unhealthy foods (think French fries), they’re also plentiful in wholesome options like unprocessed fruits, lentils, and beans that fuel the brain and muscles. With some high-carb foods, though, blood sugar levels, also known as glucose, can climb higher than the ideal range especially if eaten on their own and in excess. If these spikes occur often over the years, our cells stop responding to insulin, the hormone that normally signals the cells to take in glucose for energy use. This problem, called insulin resistance, causes sugar to build up in the blood—a defining feature of diabetes.

About 1 in 3 Americans, or 98 million, have prediabetes—and more than 80% aren’t aware of it. Many will develop Type 2 diabetes, resulting potentially in nerve damage, vision loss, and shorter lives.

But by changing the order in which you eat food, it’s possible to eat your carbs and have your healthy blood sugar, too. It’s free and “doesn’t require superhuman willpower,” Senich says.

Why it works

When we have veggies first, their fiber sets up a filter in the intestines. Once the carbs arrive on the scene, the filter slows them down, like sand catching floodwater, so the glucose enters the bloodstream at a mere trickle instead of a gush. Less insulin is needed for our cells to absorb these drips, putting less strain on the pancreas. “The totality of the research strongly supports the notion that food sequencing does reduce glucose spikes after a meal,” says Dr. Alpana Shukla, an associate professor of research at Weill Cornell Medicine who studies food order.

The strategy could have the biggest payoff in people with prediabetes and diabetes simply because they have higher glucose levels to begin with. But those with normal blood sugar see benefits as well. In one study, when healthy people saved rice for last, their glucose peaks were significantly lower than when they ate rice before meat and vegetables. Over time, more stable glucose could help prevent serious illnesses.

Read More: Your Diet Needs More Fermented Pickles

Another plus for everyone is that when you eat vegetables first, you tend to eat more of them, compared to filling up on carbs before having greens. Many Americans are vitamin-deficient and, on average, we get 10 to 15 grams of fiber per day, whereas our ancestors enjoyed about 100 grams. Switching up the order “tends to favor more nutrient dense foods,” Shukla says, “which is good whether you have health issues or want to prevent them.”

How to have veggie starters

Aim to eat a vegetable 10 minutes before you eat your carbs, though you’ll still see some benefit without taking any break before the carbs, Shukla says. Noosheen Hashemi, founder and CEO of the health-tracking company January AI, keeps her blood sugar levels healthy by bringing vegetables like broccoli, fennel, or peppers to restaurants in her purse, anticipating high-carb dishes. “I carry vegetables,” she says. (TIME’s owner, Marc Benioff, is an investor in January AI.)

It’s not necessary to eat the vegetables by themselves to get the benefits. Combining veggies and protein before carbs results in 46% lower glucose peaks, compared to carbs-first, in people with prediabetes. This combo may work slightly better than veggies alone, according to Shukla.

Another benefit: feeling full for three hours after a meal, because starters with veggies and protein suppress a hormone called ghrelin that causes hunger. We may consume fewer calories as a result. When people have the same meal in the reverse order, with carbs first, this ghrelin hormone rebounds much higher at the three-hour mark.

Read More: Why Is It So Bad to Pop a Pimple?

Eating carbs last turns up another hormone, GLP-1, that slows the rate at which your stomach sends food to the intestines, further easing the burden on our insulin systems. This effect of GLP-1 forms the basis for the blockbuster weight-loss drugs, like Ozempic, that are surging in popularity. “You can harness your own GLP-1 and boost it through this intervention,” Shukla says.

Food order may be particularly useful at breakfast. After not eating overnight, your mealtime glucose could rise higher than at lunch or dinner, Shukla says. Start breakfast with a veggie omelet, she suggests. Mix lots of vegetables with the egg protein before finishing with your carb, one piece of multigrain toast.

“We know that meal ordering across the day has an impact,” says Sarah Berry, associate professor of nutritional sciences at King’s College London and chief scientist at the science and personalized nutrition company ZOE. Unhealthy glucose levels after lunch are partly shaped by whether glucose spiked at breakfast, Berry has found, and carb-heavy cereals and bagels dominate our personal breakfast menus.

For the best results, visualize half your plate covered by vegetables, 25% by protein and, 25% carbs, Shukla says. But a smaller starter can help regulate blood sugar, too, she adds.

“It’s not all or nothing,” says Senich, the North Carolinian. She makes sure baby carrots are always within reach, knowing if she has about ten of them, that’s better than eating carbs only.

As always, it’s good to aim for carbs that are unprocessed, complex, and high-fiber.

Try a protein appetizer

Another option shown to flatten out glucose spikes: a protein primer without vegetables. Getting protein on its own, prior to carbs, can prevent glucose spikes and increase fullness. Before oatmeal, Senich makes sure to have sugar-free Greek yogurt or nuts, both good protein sources. An “almond appetizer” reduces post-meal glucose by 15%.

Joe Sapone, the founder of a consulting business from Atlantic Highlands, N.J., says food sequencing has helped him lose 120 pounds, along with medications. “I’ve gotten in the habit of eating protein first,” he says. He’s a fan of whey protein shakes. “I’m Italian, so food is religion,” Sapone says. “I totally want pasta and bread.” After the shakes, though, less hunger translates into smaller portions.

“Whey is king,” says Daniel West, a Newcastle University professor focusing on nutrition and insulin, because it’s loaded with amino acids that “prime the system” for carbs. Just 15 grams of whey before a meal can improve daily glucose by 10%. Other research shows sustained benefits over 12 weeks.

Hashemi prefers pea protein shakes, another evidence-backed option, West says.

Fruit with relatively low sugar could have some benefit as a preload as well. Because of the high fiber in some whole fruits like strawberries, eating them first, before other types of carbs, may increase the GLP-1 hormone and help to suppress appetite, compared to having the whole fruit last, some studies have found. This effect could support weight loss, but research is mixed on whether consuming fruit first helps to control blood glucose levels. “Preloading with non-starchy vegetables or protein-rich foods is better because they have very little sugar or carbs,” Shukla says.

Prepare for success

If you’re busy, keep veggie starters at your fingertips. Preparation is key. “At the store, I make sure to buy those easy-to-grab vegetables” like cucumbers, Senich says. While cooking carbs, she snacks on chopped-up peppers.

Sapone, who has Type 2 diabetes, prepares almost a week’s worth of healthy foods ahead of time, placing them at eye-level in his refrigerator. He preloads with carrots at his beach club in case the pretzels tempt him. “I’m not a very regimented person,” he says, but he’s “happy” with food order. He’s not alone in that. “Patients swear by food order to support their obesity care,” says Dr. Katherine Saunders, an obesity medicine physician at Weill Cornell Medicine and co-founder of Intellihealth, partly because they can still have carbs. “The best diet is one that doesn’t feel like a diet.”

Read More: Why Walking Isn’t Enough When It Comes to Exercise

Sapone’s enthusiasm was reinforced by his own data. He likes using a continuous glucose monitor to track how carbs on their own spike his glucose numbers, and how preloads help. In addition to dropping his weight and average blood glucose, his cholesterol is down.

Through tech companies like January AI, people can monitor how food order and other factors affect glucose even without using a continuous glucose monitor. Take a photo of your meal, and January AI’s algorithm predicts its post-meal effect based on demographics like your age, body mass index, and disease state.

Food sequencing isn’t a panacea. For obesity and diabetes, it’s most effective when patients also take medications supervised by specialists, as in Sapone’s and Senich’s cases. Further improvements in glucose management come with good sleep, slower eating and regular exercise.

And keep in mind that most studies on veggie starters focus on their immediate effects. More research is needed on long-term outcomes. “We have so many tools in the toolbox,” Berry says. “Meal ordering is just one of those tools.”

source https://time.com/6972041/healthy-breakfast-vegetable/

Biden’s Overlooked Advantage

In recent months we have heard much about President Biden’s low poll numbers and Americans’ negative views of the economy. It is therefore not surprising that numerous media pundits have rushed to entertain the idea of a Trump victory in 2024.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Let’s first start with some obvious caveats to keep in mind.

First, a substantial amount of Biden’s lagging approval is coming from his own party: since 2022, between 15 and 22 percent of Democrats have neglected to voice approval for Biden. The present crisis in the Middle East, which has put President Biden at odds with many in the Democratic base, has likely allowed this disapproval to harden even further. But on Election Day, these dissatisfied Democrats—and many Independents as well—will likely look at Biden a little differently when the prospect of another Trump presidency is looming large.

A second fairly obvious caveat is that, with inflation having cooled off a great deal over the past 2 years, Americans’ sentiments about the economy have improved quite dramatically, which can only help Biden’s chances going forward.

But an even more fundamental caveat exists, and it is one that is surprisingly overlooked. Put simply, the fact that Biden has been in office for one term matters.  A lot.

History Repeating? The Case of 2012

In September of 2011, then-President Barack Obama was struggling.  His approval was virtually identical to Biden’s current approval, hovering around 40%. Views of the economy were overwhelmingly negative and polls found Obama losing to one of the then-front-running Republican contenders, Mitt Romney. On the eve of the 2012 election, at least one respected poll had Romney narrowly leading Obama. 

It seemed clear that Americans were ready for a change.

But change is not what happened. Obama handily won the two-party vote share (that is, the total number of votes won by the Democratic and Republican Party candidates) by about 4 percentage points.

Given political scientists’ research on U.S. presidential elections, no one should have been surprised by this outcome. Why? Because in November of 2012 Obama was the incumbent president, just as Biden will be in November of 2024.

The Power of Incumbency

Every presidential election seems unique, but the data don’t lie.  My recent research, conditionally accepted at the peer-reviewed journal, Political Science Research & Methods, looks at all presidential elections since 1952. Despite all the different candidates, national priorities, international challenges, economic conditions, etc. over the past 72 years, incumbent candidates have won the popular vote a remarkable 78% of the time.

These incumbent candidates have averaged 54.5% of the two-party vote share—a massive 9 percentage-point average advantage over their non-incumbent challengers. 

Even if we go back to the first election following the end of the Civil War (1868), the results tell us the same story:  incumbent presidents average well over 50% of the two-party vote share.

This is not to say that incumbency is the only thing that matters.  After all, 2020 saw the incumbent lose the popular vote by 4 percentage points. But given the historic unusualness of that election (the Covid-19 pandemic, skyrocketing unemployment, unprecedented controversies surrounding Trump, etc.), 2020 may be better viewed as an exception that proves the rule.

Indeed, the 2020 and 1980 elections are the only two exceptions to the rule of incumbent victory since 1952 (excluding Bush Sr. in 1992 which, though only his first term, was the Republican Party’s third term in office).  The lesson is clear:  while it is not quite a “guarantee,” incumbency confers an unequivocal advantage.

Isolating Incumbency’s Effect

Political scientists have long known about the power of incumbency when using statistical analyses to forecast election results.  Indeed, aside from the economy, it is one of the most consistently powerful predictors of election outcomes.

But why should it matter?

There are many potential reasons, but my research—which also employed an online experiment featuring several thousand participants—shows that a majority of citizens (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike) simply believe that incumbents should generally be elected for a second term.  In short, a president serving only one term (when legally allowed to serve two) just doesn’t seem to sit right with many Americans.

Existence of such a norm in U.S. politics has a huge implication:  simply knowing that a candidate is an incumbent should be enough to nudge a substantial share of voters toward voting for that candidate. 

Indeed, by isolating candidates’ incumbency status from all other considerations (name recognition, the economy, etc.), this is precisely what my experiment finds. Compared to when their incumbency status is not specified, candidates who are identified as the sitting president—whether Democratic or Republican—see an increase of 5.6 percentage-points in vote share. By the standards of modern presidential elections, that is an absolutely game-changing bump.

The Months Ahead

Of course, each election comes with unique features.  The popularity of third-party candidate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., for example, may disproportionately erode some of Biden’s vote share. Trump’s criminal trial, the widening crisis in the Middle East, whether the Electoral College result will correspond with the popular vote result, and the likelihood that interest rates will remain high to curb inflationary pressures, for example, all introduce a healthy amount of uncertainty into what will happen in November. 

It is also worth noting that Trump is a (former) president who served only one term, meaning that some share of voters may feel he therefore deserves a second term. In short, might some voters see Trump, rather than Biden, as the real incumbent in 2024? 

While this is of course possible, we simply don’t have enough evidence to assume that many voters will think this way come November (the last time sitting president lost reelection and then ran again (and won) was 1892). 

Thus, to the extent voters see Biden as the true incumbent, he is likely to benefit from incumbency advantage. Indeed, a poll from this week finds that Trump’s polling advantage over Biden—an advantage we have heard so much about in recent months—is now gone.  Other recent polling now shows a small, but growing, Biden advantage.

Again, this is not at all to say that Biden’s incumbency guarantees a 2024 win. (There are no such guarantees in U.S. politics.) Rather, it is to say that, statistically, a Biden loss in 2024 would be very strange. Thus, absent some very strange circumstances (for example, as there were during the 2020 election), history implies a clear advantage for Biden.

In sum, presidential elections do not ask voters whether they like the sitting president.  Instead, they ask voters whether they prefer the sitting president over the president’s opponent. Failure to appreciate this difference leads pundits to regularly predict incumbents’ political doom, despite how often incumbent presidents have won reelection over the past 150 years, and despite the intrinsic power that incumbency appears to hold.

To be sure, Biden has weaknesses. So did Obama in 2012. But the asset they shared—incumbency—should not be overlooked. Media’s focus on Biden’s weaknesses might be good for getting clicks, but it ignores his crucial strength.

source https://time.com/6972045/joe-bidens-overlooked-advantage/

Scotland’s First Minister Humza Yousaf Is Reportedly Set to Resign

Scotland First Minister Humza Yousaf is preparing to quit on Monday after he decided he wouldn’t survive a confidence vote, The Sunday Times reported.

Senior Scottish National Party members were informed of Yousaf’s decision, made over the weekend, the newspaper said. John Swinney has been approached to become interim first minister in the event of Yousaf’s departure, though the former SNP leader is reluctant to step up because of personal reasons, the Times said.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Yousaf’s position had become increasingly tenuous after he decided to end his party’s power-sharing deal with the Greens last Thursday, saying the cooperation agreement reached after the SNP fell one seat short of a majority in the 2021 election had “served its purpose.”

Read More: Exclusive: Meet the New Face of Scotland

While Yousaf made clear he intends to continue to run Scotland as a minority government, the opposition Conservatives lodged a vote of no-confidence in him that was set to take place this week. The motion was supported also by the opposition Labour and Liberal Democrat parties.

Ahead of a U.K.-wide election expected in the second half of the year, Yousaf had been trying to rebuild the SNP’s image around stable government following a year of turmoil after long-time leader Nicola Sturgeon stepped down. But tensions with the Greens came to a head last week when the government scrapped a plan to cut carbon emissions by 75% by 2030 after concluding it was unachievable.

source https://time.com/6971930/scotland-first-minister-yousaf-resignation/

Biden Speaks With Netanyahu Amid Pressure Over Rafah Invasion and Cease-Fire Talks

TEL AVIV, Israel — The White House on Sunday said U.S. President Joe Biden had again spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as pressure builds on Israel and Hamas to reach a deal that would free some Israeli hostages and bring a cease-fire in the nearly seven-month-long war in Gaza.

The White House said that Biden reiterated his “clear position” as Israel plans to invade Gaza’s southernmost city of Rafah despite global concern for more than 1 million Palestinians sheltering there. The U.S. opposes the invasion on humanitarian grounds, straining relations between the allies. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is returning to the Middle East on Monday.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Biden also stressed that progress in delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza be “sustained and enhanced,” according to the statement. It was less stark than their previous call this month in which Biden warned that future U.S. support for Israel in the war depends on swift implementation of new steps to protect civilians and aid workers. There was no comment from Netanyahu’s office on the latest call.

A senior official from key intermediary Qatar, meanwhile, urged Israel and Hamas to show “more commitment and more seriousness” in negotiations. Qatar, which hosts Hamas’ headquarters in Doha, was instrumental along with the U.S. and Egypt in helping negotiate a brief halt to the fighting in November that led to the release of dozens of hostages. But in a sign of frustration, Qatar this month said that it was reassessing its role.

An Israeli delegation is expected in Egypt in the coming days to discuss the latest proposals in negotiations, and senior Hamas official Basem Naim said in a message to The Associated Press that a delegation from the militant group will also head to Cairo. Egypt’s state-owned Al Qahera News satellite television channel said that the delegation would arrive on Monday.

The comments by Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Majed al-Ansari in interviews with the liberal daily Haaretz and Israeli public broadcaster Kan were published and aired Saturday evening.

Al-Ansari expressed disappointment with Hamas and Israel, saying each side has made decisions based on political interests and not with civilians’ welfare in mind. He didn’t reveal details on the talks other than to say they have “effectively stopped,” with “both sides entrenched in their positions.”

Al-Ansari’s remarks came after an Egyptian delegation discussed with Israeli officials a “new vision” for a prolonged cease-fire in Gaza, according to an Egyptian official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to freely discuss developments.

The Egyptian official said that Israeli officials are open to discussing establishing a permanent cease-fire in Gaza as part of the second phase of a deal. Israel has refused to end the war until it defeats Hamas.

The second phase would start after the release of civilian and sick hostages, and would include negotiating the release of soldiers, the official added. Senior Palestinian prisoners would be released and a reconstruction process launched.

Negotiations earlier this month centered on a six-week cease-fire proposal and the release of 40 civilian and sick hostages held by Hamas in exchange for freeing hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

A letter written by Biden and 17 other world leaders urged Hamas to release their citizens immediately. In recent days, Hamas has released new videos of three hostages, an apparent push for Israel to make concessions.

The growing pressure for Hamas and Israel to reach a cease-fire deal is also meant to avert an Israeli attack on Rafah, the city on the border with Egypt where more than half of Gaza’s 2.3 million population is seeking shelter. Israel has massed dozens of tanks and armored vehicles. The planned incursion has raised global alarm.

“Only a small strike is all it takes to force everyone to leave Palestine,” Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas asserted to the opening session of the World Economic Forum in Saudi Arabia, adding that he believed an invasion would happen within days.

But White House national security spokesman John Kirby told ABC that Israel “assured us they won’t go into Rafah until we’ve had a chance to really share our perspectives and concerns with them. So, we’ll see where that goes.”

The Israeli troop buildup may also be a pressure tactic on Hamas in talks. Israel sees Rafah as Hamas’ last major stronghold. It vows to destroy the group’s military and governing capabilities.

Aid groups have warned that an invasion of Rafah would worsen the already desperate humanitarian situation in Gaza, where hunger is widespread. About 400 tons of aid arrived Sunday at the Israeli port of Ashdod — the largest shipment yet by sea via Cyprus — according to the United Arab Emirates. It wasn’t immediately clear how or when it would be delivered into Gaza.

Also on Sunday, World Central Kitchen said that it would resume operations in Gaza on Monday, ending a four-week suspension after Israeli military drones killed seven of its aid workers. The organization has 276 trucks ready to enter through the Rafah crossing and will also send trucks into Gaza from Jordan, a statement said. It’s also examining if the Ashdod port can be used to offload supplies.

The war was sparked by Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7 into southern Israel, which killed 1,200 people, mostly civilians, according to Israeli authorities, who say another 250 people were taken hostage. Hamas and other groups are holding about 130 people, including the remains of about 30, Israeli authorities say.

Israel’s retaliatory assault on Hamas has killed more than 34,000 people, most of them women and children, according to health authorities in Gaza, who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants in their tally.

The Israeli military blames Hamas for civilian casualties, accusing it of embedding in residential and public areas. It says it has killed at least 12,000 militants, without providing evidence.

source https://time.com/6971906/biden-netanyahu-speak-ceasefire-rafah-israel-hamas-war/

Lyft’s CEO on Layoffs, Leading With Purpose and the Future of Ride-Sharing

When David Risher took over as CEO of Lyft about a year ago, the company was losing market share and struggling with morale. Its stock price was approaching an all-time low, down nearly 90% from its IPO high of 2019. One of Risher’s first moves was to cut staff by 26%, affecting hundreds of employees.

Risher, a one time Lyft board member and former Amazon executive, is the first non-founder to lead Lyft. Still, he’s put his own stamp on the company, cutting prices for riders, introducing Women+ Connect, a feature that lets women and nonbinary riders choose drivers who are also women or nonbinary, and launching a guarantee that drivers would earn 70% of rider payments every week after external fees like tolls and insurance. He’s also not afraid to roll up his sleeves and occasionally drives for Lyft to see what contractors experience.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Since he took over as CEO on April 17, 2023, the company’s share price has risen and analysts are speaking more optimistically about the company. Still, Risher has a tough road ahead. Lyft says it has around 30% of the rideshare marketplace, and does not offer food delivery services or other extras that could help it bring in more money. Risher talked with TIME about his first year and his vision for the future.

This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.

For a long time Lyft has been the underdog, with the smaller market share and a presence in fewer countries. What is your vision for Lyft in the next 10 years in the rideshare marketplace?

We’re the ones who are going to be customer obsessed. Being number two is an enormous superpower if you use it the right way. It allows you to wake up every morning and think about just one thing—ridesharing. I don’t have to think about 50 different countries. I don’t have to think about rental cars and food delivery. I just have to think about rideshare. I’m just trying to focus on riders and drivers—and bikes as well.

Are you trying to focus on bikes? Or trying to unload that?

We’re actually focusing on bikes. The unloading thing was always sort of like, is there a way for someone else to help with a certain capital structure? Because they’re expensive. But they’ll always be part of our system, for sure. And we’re actually putting a huge amount of energy into it.

What do you think you’ve accomplished in your first year?

When I started, the first order of business was that we’d been experimenting in so many different ways, trying so many different things, it was really time to focus on what works the best and just doing that over and over again. A big part of that was right at the beginning, lowering the prices, raising driver pay. Just basic things, if we didn’t do it, we were going to be like you know, like 25% market share to 24% to 23%. It was just going to go the wrong direction. So that was sort of number one.

And then number two, as we start to operate with more excellence, as our pickup times get faster, what can we layer on top of that to create real differentiation? For example, we launched Women+ Connect, and it’s been really successful. If you look at the percentage of women drivers who are now applying versus a couple of months ago—23% of our driver population is women, but 30% of our new applicants are women.

What’s the advantage of Women+ Connect for Lyft?

At a very basic level, it’s that more women riders and drivers have better experiences, full stop. On the macro level, we get more drivers. And every time we’re getting a new driver on the platform, it means faster pickup times, which is a better experience for everyone. And on a societal level, all of a sudden, more women can actually participate in the workforce.

So the strategy is sort of do the basics and then start to layer on things like driver pay guarantee and Women+ Connect. So you can really give people a real reason to make the choice for Lyft, instead of just saying I’ll take an Uber.

You had to make some big layoffs when you came in. How has that affected morale?

I’ll make the problem even harder—not only did we have to do that, but I said to people, you know what, guys? I’m sorry, but we’re coming into the office three days a week. And I’m sorry, but we are going to reduce equity compensation—new grants are going to be smaller.

I try not to sound cliché, but its true. I lead with purpose. We want to be a customer-focused company. We want to be a company that brings people together— literally. I’m sure you’ve heard about the epic loneliness thing we’ve gone through. And we’re in a position literally, we’re like almost a physical interface between [our smartphones] and the real world.

In order for us to do that, we’re having to make some really difficult choices.

What does leading with purpose mean, exactly?

Leading with purpose is saying ”let’s just look at one social problem.” Vivek Murthy, the U.S. Surgeon General, has written pages about the epic problem of loneliness in the United States and how the societal bonds that used to hold us together are broken. If you self-identify as lonely, it’s like smoking two packs of cigarettes a day. So it’s like, OK what do we do? We bring people together, we bring them to the restaurant, to the concert. So how can we figure out a way to do that better?

So leading with purpose is: we started with a big societal issue like loneliness, and saying how can we help people, at least if not exactly 100% overcome it—we’re not going to be the whole solution—at least be a force in the right direction.

Has that worked for you?

We do an employee survey every quarter, and one question was: do you trust senior management to be doing the right thing? It went from less than half of people saying yes last year to 67% this year.

Another really interesting thing is how many people participate in a survey like that. When I started, 65% were participating. This year, it was 85%. That tells me that as painful as it was, as difficult as it was, really focusing on really helping people clear away some of the noise and get things done is super satisfying.

In a post-pandemic era, though, people are less engaged with their jobs. I’d think they’d really push back about a return to office mandate.

To be philosophical, people—myself included—want a sense of meaning and connection to work. Just to be clear, I didn’t say we’re gonna roll the clock back to 2019. I didn’t say we’d come in five days a week.

I actually think people are best when they’re kind of together and popping in and sharing ideas and having dinner together and lunch or whatever it is, coming up with fun things for the whiteboard. That’s part of what forms a connection to a company, if the company has a sense of purpose beyond just maximizing value for shareholders.

We have to understand that the world is complicated and people have kids, or whatever it is. It sounds maybe a little bit utopian, but I think this is the best of all worlds that we got to.

You have full-time employees and then you have a bunch of gig workers. How do you make them feel part of the company and want them to come back to Lyft rather than Uber?

We have 4,000 employees. And then we have 1 million plus people who drive on the Lyft app, and they are all independent contractors. They are all deciding literally every single day whether to drive or not. How do you make them feel part of something?

You start with the basics. If you don’t feel fairly paid and recognized, nothing else is gonna work. So we decided to do this 70% earnings guarantee. And it literally is a guarantee. What I mean by that is, it’s a floor. Take what a rider pays, and after we take insurance and tolls—those fixed costs that we can’t do anything about—you will never get less than 70%. And if you do, you’ll get a check. And then you go from there. What are all the other things we can do for our drivers that are going to make a better experience?

Can you do that and be profitable?

We have to.

But you’re talking about paying people more when, arguably, the rideshare model doesn’t work because it’s just too expensive. Does paying drivers more mean riders will pay more too?

It’s just a question of how many riders can you convince that this is a good deal for them? It’s better than taking the subway, it’s better than taking their own private car. It’s less expensive than parking.

And just on the economic side—I’ll make these numbers up, because we haven’t revealed exactly—if we did 800 million rides this year, and every one of those rides on average gives us $1, that means as long as our fixed costs are lower than 800 million dollars a year, we are going to make money. And that literally is the business model. That’s why we were free cash flow positive last quarter. We’ve gotten our ride volume to the point where one covers the cost of the other. In a sense, it’s the simplest model in the world.

But that doesn’t account for equity compensation, right?

No, it doesn’t. The thing that we have to do, of course, is we have to make sure that both riders are taking more rides but also the drivers are driving on our platform more. And we have more driver hours now than we’ve ever had in the company’s history. Drivers are responding to the things we’re doing.

It seems like being customer obsessed and being employee obsessed can sometimes be at odds. How do you walk that line of putting the customer first while still making Lyft a good place to work?

That literally is what I do every day. I worked at Amazon for a long time, but I also ran a nonprofit for many years. In the nonprofit space, if you don’t lead with purpose, if you don’t make your employees feel super engaged, you will fail. It is that simple. Because these very same talented people can go across the street and make twice as much. And by the way, there is no equity compensation. There’s no such thing. So I think this is an area where I think to the surprise of the world, if you have to run a nonprofit for 13 to 14 years, the leading with purpose part and the trying to get employees to get to be engaged comes naturally. You do that and you do customer obsession, that’s what I hope differentiates Lyft.

There have been some efforts in some cities to mandate a minimum wage for drivers. What are your thoughts on that policy?

The short answer is, I am fine with the policy in theory. The only problem it really can cause is that drivers will make less money. This is what’s happening in Minneapolis. A well-meaning city council sets a minimum wage at $20 an hour, when drivers are making about $15 now. The problem then becomes, we can increase our rates to drivers but if riders take fewer rides, that drivers will make less money. We know every day, based on millions of data points, when you raise rates by $1, demand goes down. I’m anti-drivers making less.

I think it just relates to this existential fear of economies moving to gig work and how we can weather that. You’re probably in a really good position to see where we are in that transition. A couple of years ago, people thought that everything was going to be gig. Where do you think we are now? Are we at equilibrium or are more things transitioning?

I’ll say, the chance of everything moving to gig is 0%. On the individual level. Why do people choose gig? It really is a choice for many people. Maybe you lost your job and are looking for another full-time job, but in the meantime need money. Or you have other obligations in life and you drive in the time around them. Then there’s retirees who want money and to get out of the house.

Then there’s the full-time person—only like 6% treat this as a full-time job. Often by the way, they are immigrants. They don’t have a lot of options when it comes to jobs. Maybe their level of English isn’t super, but they’ve got something they can do.

The thing about the gig economy is it allows them to do it on their terms. Is that a good thing? I think it absolutely is, and there’s a reason why millions of people are doing it. Sometimes it’s the best choice they’ve got. If you talk to labor economists, they will tell you that from a macroeconomic perspective, it’s actually super healthy, because it allows people to dip in and out of the labor market.

The problem of course, and I understand people’s concern about this as well—if everything becomes gig, then people feel like they don’t have any protections. They’re always hustling. Let’s just say I don’t see a lot of evidence that that’s actually happening.

Analysts say that the ride-share market is a lot stronger than people anticipated it would be right now. How will a downturn in the economy affect Lyft?

The thing about these kind of marketplaces—two sided marketplaces—is that they’re flexible. If the economy gets a little bit worse here, maybe we will want to drop prices a little bit to drive additional volume. Maybe there will actually be more money made by drivers, because we will drop prices such that there’s actually more buying. That would be our goal.

I know the cost of insurance has gone up a lot and it keeps going up. Do you have a long-term plan for what you can do to offset that?

It’s a real issue. And it’s not just a ride-share issue. The most recent number I’ve seen is 18% year-on-year insurance inflation.

What is possible is we can give more and more data to drivers to help them make safer choices about how they drive. For example, giving feedback on harsh braking. That’s an indication that you’re probably driving too aggressively.

The Lyft Maps is a very sophisticated mapping system. And we can say, this is the route where you’re least likely to get in an accident because we’re going to avoid this intersection that tends to be high accident.

What are some ways you want to re-engage drivers and get more of them to drive for Lyft?

There is a huge opportunity for AI to make drivers’ lives better. So I drive for Lyft and I’ve been driving long enough to see it’s more complicated than you might think. Because you have things you have to do. You’ve chosen the gig economy because you want that flexibility. But you also have financial goals for yourself. You can do the math, you can say well, I’m gonna work here or here. But you know who else could do that? AI. You can say to AI, “here’s some parameters in my life, help me make some choices that are going to increase the likelihood that I meet my financial goals.”

Then there’s Women+ Connect. I think it’s going to be brand-defining over time and we continue to invest in it. We continue to recruit more and more women, our metrics go higher, higher, higher, and we keep getting feedback. And by the way, it turns out that women don’t tend to bug each other. So that’s really important for safety as well.

That’s the sort of stuff that, when other people start to say, “I love the fact you’re doing this and I kind of want to be part of it,” that’s a good sign, and same with important employees wanting to work on that feature.

source https://time.com/6971614/lyft-david-risher-interview/

Harvey Weinstein Hospitalized After His Return to New York City From Upstate Prison

NEW YORK — Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer said Saturday that the onetime movie mogul has been hospitalized for a battery of tests after his return to New York City following an appeals court ruling nullifying his 2020 rape conviction.

Attorney Arthur Aidala said Weinstein was moved to Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan after his arrival on Friday to city jails.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

“They examined him and sent him to Bellevue. It seems like he needs a lot of help, physically. He’s got a lot of problems. He’s getting all kinds of tests. He’s somewhat of a train wreck health wise,” Aidala said.

A message left with the hospital was not immediately returned Saturday.

Frank Dwyer, a spokesperson with the New York City Department of Correction, said only that Weinstein remains in custody at Bellevue. Thomas Mailey, a spokesperson for the state Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, said Weinstein was turned over to the city’s Department of Correction pursuant to the appeals ruling. Weinstein had been housed at the Mohawk Correctional Facility, about 100 miles (160 kilometers) northwest of Albany.

On Thursday, the New York Court of Appeals vacated his conviction after concluding that a trial judge permitted jurors to see and hear too much evidence not directly related to the charges he faced. It also erased his 23-year prison sentence and ordered a retrial.

Prosecutors said they intend to retry him on charges that he forcibly performed oral sex on a TV and film production assistant in 2006 and raped an aspiring actor in 2013.

Weinstein remained in custody after the appeals ruling because he was convicted in Los Angeles in 2022 of another rape and was sentenced to 16 years in prison.

For some time, Weinstein has been ailing with a variety of afflictions, including cardiac issues, diabetes, sleep apnea and eye problems.

Aidala said he spoke to Weinstein on Friday afternoon after he was in transit to New York City from an upstate jail less than 24 hours after the appeals ruling, which was released Thursday morning.

He said his client’s ailments are physical, adding that mentally he is “sharp as a tack. Feet are firmly planted on the ground.”

The lawyer said it usually takes state corrections and prisons officials a week or two to arrange to transport a prisoner.

“He was not treated well. They refused to give him even a sip of water, no food, no bathroom break,” Aidala said. “He’s a 72-year-old sickly man.”

Mailey, the state corrections spokesperson, had no comment when Aidala’s remarks about Weinstein’s treatment were read to him over the phone.

Aidala said he was told that Bellevue doctors planned to run a lot of tests on Weinstein before he can be returned to the Rikers Island jail complex.

The lawyer said he’s scheduled to meet with Weinstein on Monday. He added that he plans to tell a judge when Weinstein goes to court on Wednesday in Manhattan that a retrial should occur after Labor Day.

source https://time.com/6971812/harvey-weinstein-hospitalized-new-york-city-jail-return/

Iraqi Authorities Investigate Killing of TikTok Star Shot Dead Outside Her Baghdad Home

BAGHDAD — Iraqi authorities on Saturday were investigating the killing of a well-known social media influencer, who was shot by an armed motorcyclist in front of her home in central Baghdad.

Ghufran Mahdi Sawadi, known as Um Fahad or “mother of Fahad,” was popular on the social media sites TikTok and Instagram, where she posted videos of herself dancing to music and was followed by tens of thousands of users.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

An Iraqi security official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak to the media, said that the assailant opened fire as Sawadi parked her Cadillac in front of her house on Friday, killing her, then took her phone and fled the scene.

The killing took place in Zayoona, the same neighborhood where a prominent Iraqi researcher and security expert Hisham al-Hashimi was gunned down in 2020. Before the U.S. invasion of 2003, the neighborhood was home to military leaders and considered a prestigious area in Baghdad. In recent years, many militia leaders have taken up residence there.

Sawadi isn’t the first prominent social media figure to be gunned down in central Baghdad. Last year, Noor Alsaffar or “Noor BM,” a transgender person with a large social media following, was also fatally shot in the city.

A neighbor of Sawadi who identified himself only by his nickname, Abu Adam or “father of Adam,” said he came out to the street after hearing two shots fired and saw “the car’s door open and she was lying on the steering wheel.”

“The woman who was with her (in the car) escaped, and security forces came and sealed off the entire area, and they took the victim’s body and towed her car,” he said.

In Iraq, the role of social media influencers has broadened from promoting beauty products and clothing to government projects and programs. Official government invitations classify these influencers as key business figures at sports, security and cultural gatherings.

Videos featuring a prominent influencer during the 93rd anniversary on Thursday of the Iraqi air force’s founding sparked a backlash, with many criticizing the Ministry of Defense for allowing them to record and publish videos from sensitive military sites. The ministry defended itself, saying that in the era of social media, like defense ministries worldwide, it uses influencers alongside traditional media to communicate with the public.

Last year, an Iraqi court sentenced Sawadi to six months in prison for posting several films and videos containing obscene statements and indecent public behavior on social media as part of a recent push by the Iraqi government to police morals.

Separately on Saturday, the Iraqi parliament passed an amendment to the country’s prostitution law — widely criticized by human rights groups — that would punish same-sex relations with a prison term ranging from 10 to 15 years. A previous version of the law would have imposed the death penalty.

The law also bans any organization that promotes “sexual deviancy,” imposing a sentence of at least seven years and a fine of no less than 10 million dinars (about $7,600).

The acting parliamentary speaker, Mohsen Al-Mandalawi, said in a statement that the vote was “a necessary step to protect the value structure of society” and to “protect our children from calls for moral depravity and homosexuality.”

Rasha Younes, a senior researcher with the LGBT Rights Program at Human Rights Watch, said the law’s passage “rubber-stamps Iraq’s appalling record of rights violations against LGBT people and is a serious blow to fundamental human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and association, privacy, equality, and nondiscrimination.”

A report released by the organization in 2022 accused armed groups in Iraq of abducting, raping, torturing, and killing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people with impunity and the Iraqi government of failing to hold perpetrators accountable.

source https://time.com/6971797/iraqi-authorities-investigate-tiktok-star-om-fahad-killing/

Trump VP Contender Kristi Noem Faces Backlash After Admitting to Killing Her Dog

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, a Republican and reported contender for Donald Trump’s Vice President pick in the 2024 election, has received pushback after admitting to killing her dog in her new memoir.

After obtaining a copy of No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward ahead of its publication next month, the Guardian reported that Noem wrote she shot dead Cricket, a 14-month-old dog she had intended to train for hunting pheasant, after the canine ruined a hunt, killed another family’s chickens, and moved to bite her.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Noem said Cricket had an “aggressive personality” and was “untrainable,” per the Guardian’s report. Noem took Cricket on a pheasant hunt with older dogs to try to teach the canine, but Cricket went “out of her mind with excitement, chasing all those birds and having the time of her life.” 

She said she called Cricket, then used an electronic collar to try to control the dog. On the way home, Cricket escaped Noem’s truck and killed the chickens of a local family, who Noem compensated. The dog then “whipped around to bite me,” the politician wrote. 

After that, Noem said, “I realized I had to put her down.” She led Cricket to a gravel pit and shot and killed the dog. 

Noem also killed a male goat that she said was “nasty and mean,” smelled “disgusting, musky, rancid,” and “loved to chase” her children, knocking them down and ruining their clothes. She also killed the goat in the gravel pit, although it reportedly took two shots.

Noem said she told the story about Cricket to show that in politics and life, she was willing to do what was “difficult, messy, and ugly” if it was necessary.

The backlash from Democrats and conservatives alike has been swift. Rick Wilson, who co-founded the anti-Trump PAC The Lincoln Project, criticized on X, formerly Twitter, that Noem “killed a puppy because she was lazy at training bird dogs, not because it was a bad dog.” The Lincoln Project released an ad that said when tough moments come with pets, “shooting your dog in the face is not an option.”

Noem responded to the backlash on Friday in a post on X: “We love animals, but tough decisions like this happen all the time on a farm. Sadly, we just had to put down 3 horses a few weeks ago that had been in our family for 25 years.”

“If you want more real, honest, and politically INcorrect stories that’ll have the media gasping, preorder No Going Back,” she concluded, with a link to her book. 

With interest in Noem at an all-time high, here’s what you need to know about the U.S. politician. 

Who is Kristi Noem? 

Noem is the 33rd—and first female—governor of South Dakota, whose motto is “Under God, the People Rule.”

The 52-year-old was born in Watertown, S.D. She’s spoken about how she took on more responsibilities on her family’s farm after her father died in a farming accident. She attended Mount Marty College and Northern State University. She later graduated with a bachelor’s degree in political science from South Dakota State University in 2011, according to VoteSmart.

Noem is a rancher, farmer, small business owner, and published author, according to her official biography. She joined the South Dakota House of Representatives in 2007, where she served as assistant majority leader, and then the U.S. House of Representatives in 2011. She was elected as governor in 2018 and re-elected in 2022.

Kristi Noem’s husband, children, and grandchildren  

Noem is married to Bryon. His First Gentleman biography says he grew up on a farm near Bryant, S.D., graduated from Northern State University with a degree in business and finance, has operated an insurance agency, and coached basketball. The couple went to high school together and have jointly run a farm and ranch, opened an ice cream shop, and helped manage a family restaurant, according to their biographies.

They have three children—Kassidy, Kennedy, and Booker. Kassidy Peters is married and has two children, according to her X profile. Peters was a real estate appraiser, but turned in her license and dissolved her business in 2021, according to a letter she wrote. A report approved by South Dakota lawmakers in 2022 found that Peters got preferential treatment in her application to get the license, the Associated Press reported.

Her husband, Kyle Peters, is in local politics and was elected to the City Council of Watertown, S.D. last year. He previously worked for his mother-in-law in the Governor’s Office of Economic Development from 2019 to 2021, according to his LinkedIn and news reports.

Kennedy Frick is also married and works as an account executive for an oil and gas consulting firm, according to her LinkedIn. Frick worked for her mother in the Governor’s office from Jan. 2019 to Aug. 2020, when she left to get her masters in business administration, according to her LinkedIn and news reports.

Booker is currently listed on the website of Collision Ministries, a Christian student organization, as the Watertown Area Director. His biography says he previously attended a Christian training school in Hawaii and worked in a ministry in San Francisco.

What is Kristi Noem’s net worth? 

Noem’s precise net worth is unknown. OpenSecrets estimated her net worth at $2.3 million in 2017. ExactNetWorth.com pegged it at around $4.5 million in 2021.

source https://time.com/6971773/kristi-noem-memoir-dog-kill-children-net-worth/

Puerto Rico Is Voting for Its Future

Puerto Rico is participating in the U.S. presidential primaries in late April: Republicans selected delegates for the Republican National Convention (RNC) on April 21, and Democrats hold their primaries a week later. While Puerto Ricans cannot vote in the general election despite being U.S. citizens, they do have the power to shape presidential contests. Puerto Rico will send 23 delegates to the RNC, while Democrats will have 56 delegates from Puerto Rico at the Democratic National Convention. This is more delegates than many states have at party conventions.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

This contest won’t affect the outcome of the primary—Donald Trump and Joe Biden will go head-to-head in November 2024. But voters will also have a chance this year to shake up the local political landscape in Puerto Rico—and its relationship to the United States. To understand what is shifting in Puerto Rico in the 2024 elections, we have to better understand the country’s history and its colonial relationship to the United States.   

Often referred as the world’s oldest colony, Puerto Rico’s history is marked by five centuries of colonialism, stretching to the Spanish conquest in 1493. The Spanish colonial system was sustained by labor exploitation, enslaved-labor, and fiscal policies that were detrimental to those living in Puerto Rico. After the Spanish-American War, the United States colonized Puerto Rico in 1898. The archipelago went from one imperial power to another.

Read More: How to Fix America’s Shambolic Elections

Following the U.S. occupation in Puerto Rico, there were debates among U.S. intellectuals, elected politicians, and journalists about the nature of Puerto Ricans, and whether they could ever be considered “Americans.” With much attention paid to the non-Anglo nature of the archipelago’s inhabitants, Puerto Ricans were characterized as inferior, alien, and too savage for self-government or annexation.  

After years of advocacy by different groups in Washington and the archipelago, the U.S. Congress passed the Jones-Shafroth Act in 1917, granting U.S. citizenship to Puerto Ricans, which gave them freedom of movement within the United States. Despite being U.S. citizens, however, Puerto Ricans in the archipelago were and remain unable to participate in presidential elections, underscoring the second-class nature of their citizenship.

At the dawn of America’s Cold War after World War II, Puerto Rico was put in a glass case to display the wonders of U.S. capitalism to nations across the globe that were pushed to pledge allegiance to either the Soviet Union or the United States. Meanwhile, Puerto Rican nationalists challenged U.S. colonialism through armed rebellion. Some, for example, organized an insurrection in the inland town of Jayuya in 1950, while two nationalists unsuccessfully attacked the Blair House in Washington, D.C.

With the push for decolonization in the recently-created United Nations as its backdrop, in 1952, after a Constitutional Assembly, Puerto Rico became a commonwealth of the United States and adopted its own constitution. Afterwards, the Partido Popular Democrático (Popular Democratic Party, or PPD) won every single election until 1968, when a new political party, the Partido Nuevo Progresista (New Progressive Party, or PNP), broke the electoral streak. These two parties have alternated power ever since, with the Partido Independentista Puertorriqueño (Pro-Independence Party, or PIP) acting as a minority party.

Read More: House Passes Bill That Would Allow Puerto Rico to Vote on Its Statehood or Independence

Since the establishment of the commonwealth, Puerto Ricans have continued to debate their relationship to the United States: Should they retain their status as a commonwealth, petition for inclusion as a U.S. state, or call for independence altogether? These questions came down to party lines as the PPD championed the commonwealth status and the PNP advocated for statehood.

Over the years, voters have gone to the polls for six plebiscites, or referendums, on the future of Puerto Rico and its relationship to the United States. These were all non-binding consultations as the U.S. Congress holds plenary power over Puerto Rico. The first plebiscite took place in 1967; five others followed in 1993, 1998, 2012, 2017, and 2020.

While voters affirmed some version of “commonwealth” status in the first four referendums, in 2017 voters chose statehood, although voter turnout was extremely low. Only 27% of eligible voters cast ballots, and this trend continued in the most recent plebiscite, which took place in 2020. While statehood clearly won the ballot, it did so with only 55% of eligible voters participating.

For many Puerto Ricans, these non-binding referendums are a seen as a waste of government resources. Congress is not required to act upon its results. Nothing has changed as a result of these six different consultations, and many people have abstained from voting in these symbolic exercises.

But recent events have prompted important changes in Puerto Rico’s political landscape. In the summer of 2019, mass protests arose when a Telegram Chat from Governor Ricardo Rosselló and his inner circle was leaked. The chat documented how the governor and his friends, whom he called “los brothers,” made homophobic, sexist, and racist jokes—even mocking those who died after 2017’s Hurricane María. The protests in the summer 2019 even led to Rosselló’s resignation.

Read More: How Puerto Rico Achieved the Highest Vaccination Rate in the U.S.—Without a Political Fight

Many people, including a younger generation that took part in the massive 2019 protests, feel that traditional political parties do not represent them. More importantly, some feel that traditional parties are directly responsible for creating the dire social and fiscal situation that Puerto Ricans have faced in the last two decades.  

In 2019, a coalition of progressive groups created a new political party known as the Movimiento Victoria Ciudadana (Citizens’ Victory Movement, or MVC). Unlike traditional parties, the MVC does not center Puerto Rico’s relationship to the U.S. and status as its main platform point. The MVC is composed of supporters of statehood, the commonwealth, and independence, transcending older dividing lines. Instead, the party focuses on fiscal reforms, social justice, and equity.

The MVC surprised many people in the 2020 elections after earning 14% of the vote and electing two senators and two representatives to the Puerto Rican legislature. Similarly, the Pro-Independence Party, which has always struggled to garner votes, attained 14% as well. The popularity of MVC and the re-emergence of the PIP—like the rise of a far-right religious fundamentalist party Proyecto Dignidad (Dignity Project)—indicates that Puerto Ricans are looking for new alternatives not found in the traditional political parties.

The MVC recently announced an electoral alliance with the Pro-Independence Party (PIP) for the 2024 elections. If successful, they would end the PNP and the PPD’s seven decades of bipartisanship.  

The traditional parties have overlooked their differences to challenge the MVC-PIP alliance, taking legal action to seek to delegitimize and exclude the alliance’s candidates from the electoral process. They succeeded in decertifying some key MVC candidates like Senator Ana Irma Rivera Lassen, who is running for the position of Resident Commissioner in Washington, D.C.

Yet the MVC-PIP’s messages have enduring appeal. In recent years Puerto Ricans have faced a fiscal crisis that affected salaries and the price of goods, and stagnated the economy. There are electrical outages on an almost daily basis. Soaring poverty—particularly affecting children—makes life in Puerto Rico difficult, triggering the migration of Puerto Ricans to the United States and abroad.

Many attribute these challenges to the relationship between Puerto Rico and the U.S. One of MVC’s most important platform points involves the creation of a new constitutional assembly, which could redefine the future of Puerto Rico’s political status and bring an end to more than five centuries of colonialism. Such an assembly would provide Puerto Ricans with the opportunity to decide for themselves what the future of Puerto Rico looks like, freed from the constraints of the visions advanced by the traditional political parties.

If the MVC-PIP alliance increases its vote share in the 2024 elections, changes may be on the horizon. Perhaps they are already here; as these electoral processes take place, Puerto Ricans are not passively standing by. There are countless grassroots groups that are already enacting, imagining, and living the future they so desire in the present. They are also working towards the decolonization of the country. Many groups, such as La Colectiva Feminista en Construcción, Urbe a Pie, and La Sombrilla Cuir predate the protest movement and do not focus on electoral politics. They have instead concentrated on transforming the conditions and everyday lives of Puerto Ricans. It was grassroots organizing that amplified the 2019 protests and that have provided the energy for the creation of these new political parties.

Regardless of what route is chosen, the future of Puerto Rico must be decided by those in the archipelago in conversation with members of the Puerto Rican diaspora. Perhaps a constitutional assembly could provide that path.

Jorell Meléndez-Badillo is Assistant Professor of Latin American and Caribbean History at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and his most recent book is Puerto Rico: A National History (Princeton University Press, 2024), also published in Spanish as Puerto Rico: Historia de una nación by Grupo Planeta USA.

Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.

source https://time.com/6969980/puerto-rico-voting-future/