Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Why TV Meteorologist John Morales’s Hurricane Plea Went Viral

      by

      A TV forecaster said he was not confident he could predict the paths of storms this year, touching a nerve amid concerns about how federal cuts could affect hurricane season.A meteorologist who has spent his career warning South Florida about hurricanes had a new warning for viewers last week: He’s not sure he can do it this year.John Morales of WTVJ in Miami said the Trump administration’s recent cuts to the National Weather Service could leave television forecasters like him “flying blind” this hurricane season. “We may not exactly know how strong a hurricane is before it reaches the coastline,” he warned.Clips of Mr. Morales’s comments have spread widely: one posted on MSNBC’s TikTok account has nearly 4,500 comments, and news outlets around the world have written articles about what he said. (This isn’t the first time Mr. Morales has been the subject of viral attention: In the fall, his emotional reaction to Hurricane Milton’s rapid intensification also hit a nerve.)Here’s what Mr. Morales had to say and more about what is going on with the Weather Service.He warned of less accurate forecasts.Mr. Morales’s presentation on Monday began with a clip of himself following the Category 5 Hurricane Dorian in 2019 as it moved over the Bahamas. He reassured his Florida viewers that the powerful storm would turn north before it reached their coastline. And it did, exactly when Mr. Morales assured anxious viewers it would.The clip cuts to him in present day, slightly older and now wearing glasses. He recalled the confidence he used to have in delivering an accurate forecast to his viewers.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Are Millennials ‘Childless’ or ‘Child Free’?

      by

      More from our inbox:America, a Beacon No More? Dadu ShinTo the Editor:“Why Do Millennials Dread Having Babies?,” by Michal Leibowitz (Opinion guest essay, June 1), left me sad, impatient and energetically questioning her conclusion.Sad to read that she and others in their 20s and 30s are so fearful of having children. Impatient with her portrait of a mental health culture that seems to her to encourage people to live in a world limited by parental abuse and inadequacy. And energetically questioning her conclusion that such a culture is causing childlessness.Young people I know are indeed hesitant about having children, but almost exclusively for the reasons Ms. Leibowitz touches on in the beginning of her piece, but does not return to in her analysis. Some worry about their ability to support children financially, and many are deeply concerned about our country’s appetite for authoritarianism and the kind of future that climate change will bring.It is critical to the psychotherapeutic enterprise to recognize the influences — especially the traumas — that have shaped our feelings and behavior. But responsible therapists also do everything possible to help patients and clients loosen the hold of damaging childhood experience, and wrest from its pain the strength and wisdom to live mindfully and hopefully in the present.Most of the people I’ve worked with on this issue over 50 years — including women who as children suffered horrendous physical abuse — have said that their therapeutic experience made them far more comfortable with having children. Friends who have worked with other therapists say the same. Some do worry whether they will do a better job than their parents, but just about all welcome the opportunity and the challenge.James S. GordonWashingtonThe writer is a psychiatrist and the author of “Transforming Trauma: The Path to Hope and Healing.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Turned the Oval Office Into “Watch What Happens Live”

      by

      On Thursday, right around the time of the online breakout of a feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump that resembled a “Real Housewives” reunion show, we were treated to another episode of what has become the president’s favorite reality TV reboot. Call it “The Apprentice: World Leaders,” and in this latest installment, the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, appeared alongside Mr. Trump, displaying a sophisticated instinct to hold his ground and emerge unscathed during his visit to the gilded zoo of the Oval Office.We’re becoming all too used to watching this new kind of presidential meet-and-greet. What traditionally had been a low-stakes and highly choreographed government function has this year been reinvented by Mr. Trump as “Watch What Happens Live” set in the Oval Office (with JD Vance on hand to play the supporting role of the bartender).For many of us, watching these affairs offers the same queasy experience as the most car-crash-reminiscent reality shows, but with geopolitical consequences. We brace ourselves for the inevitable moments of skirmish and bluster, of braying rudeness and the possible surprise reveal straight out of “Punk’d” or “Jerry Springer.” We grimace in preparation for the next big cringe moment before the show goes to commercial. We watch — often through eyes shielded in dismay — as the president falls just short of resorting to his favorite catchphrase: “You’re fired!”It’s natural to conflate these moments with the worst — and most addictive — elements of reality TV. Maybe it’s a remnant of my early career writing public-television program guide listings, or perhaps my childhood spent within reach of the Bronx Zoo, but I have come to understand, or at least to tolerate, these diplomacy-shattering displays of ginned-up drama as more like episodes of classic nature programs.For me, they often recall “The Living Planet,” that grand adventure in BBC travel-budget largess, narrated by David Attenborough, from the 1980s — right around the time a self-styled real estate developer from Queens was buying up New Jersey casinos that would go bankrupt.Admittedly, I might be overly influenced by the news that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a recent most-favored autocracy, will be sending two rare Arabian leopards to the Smithsonian’s National Zoo in Washington. Brandie Smith, the director of the zoo, said that Mr. Trump was most interested in learning about the leopards’ “personality.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 38 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      An Immigration Clash

      by

      President Trump orders the National Guard to Southern California. President Trump ordered at least 2,000 National Guard members to Los Angeles County. For two days, hundreds of demonstrators have faced off with immigration agents in riot gear. More protests are expected today, and a Trump official said that troops would arrive in L.A. within 24 hours. Here’s what we know:Protests: Some of the most active demonstrations took place in Compton and in Paramount, a majority Hispanic area about 25 miles southeast of the Hollywood sign. Agents used flash-bang grenades, tear gas and rubber bullets on crowds of protesters. Some demonstrators threw fireworks and rocks at police officers. The L.A.P.D. detained a number of protesters but also said that demonstrations in the city of L.A. were peaceful.Deployment: Trump’s order is the first time that a president has activated a state’s National Guard without a request from that state’s governor since 1965, an expert said. Then, Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators. Trump said he considered efforts to block ICE agents a “form of rebellion.”Context: Protests broke out on Friday as federal agents rolled through L.A.’s garment district in search of undocumented migrant workers. The raids signaled a new phase of Trump’s immigration crackdown focused on workplaces, Lydia DePillis and Ernesto Londoño wrote.Response: California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, described Trump’s order as “purposefully inflammatory,” saying that federal officials “want a spectacle.” Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles, said the presence of the troops would “not be helpful.”Follow live updates.Camp outTatsiana Volkava/Getty ImagesThe trope of the overscheduled child doesn’t go away just because the school year ends. Type A parents, panicked about falling behind, increasingly use summer camp to build our kids’ skills and pad their résumés. We stress about the best offerings and rush to reserve spots as soon as admissions open up. I registered my middle child for his Pennsylvania sleepaway camp all the way back in August. Yes, I recognize that’s absurd.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Justice Jackson Just Helped Reset the D.E.I. Debate

      by

      At the heart of the debate over diversity, equity and inclusion is a question: How much should the law treat a person as an individual rather than as a member of a group?For a very long time, American law and American institutions answered that question unequivocally. People were defined primarily by the group they belonged to, and if they happened to be Black or Native American or a woman, they were going to enjoy fewer rights, fewer privileges and fewer opportunities than the people who belonged to the categories white and male.That was — and remains — a grievous injustice. At a minimum, justice demands that a nation and its institutions cease and desist from malicious discrimination. But doesn’t justice demand more? Doesn’t it also require that a nation and its institutions actually try to provide assistance to targeted groups to help increase diversity in employment and education and help targeted groups overcome the systemic effects of centuries of discrimination?On Thursday, the Supreme Court unanimously decided a case that was directly relevant to the latter question, and while the outcome wasn’t surprising, the court’s unanimity — and the identity of the author of the court’s opinion — certainly was.The facts of the case, Ames v. Ohio, are simple. In 2004, the Ohio Department of Youth Services hired a heterosexual woman named Marlean Ames to work as an executive secretary. By 2019, she’d worked her way up to program administrator and set her sights higher — applying for a management position in the agency’s Office of Quality and Improvement.The department interviewed Ames for the job but decided to hire someone else, a lesbian. The department then demoted Ames and replaced her with a gay man. Believing she’d been discriminated against on the basis of her sexual orientation, she filed suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      The Abundance Agenda Has Its Own Theory of Power

      by

      I have had a fascinating few months. “Abundance,” the book I wrote with Derek Thompson, is either going to save the Democratic Party or destroy it. You think I’m kidding. Here’s The Wall Street Journal’s headline: “Can the ‘Abundance Agenda’ Save the Democrats?” Here’s The Nation: “Why the ‘Abundance Agenda’ Could Sink the Democratic Party.” The Atlantic placed the book at the center of “the coming Democratic civil war.”Before “Abundance” came out, I worried that its argument would be too agreeable to generate much debate. I didn’t foresee Ragnarok.But I was wrong about who would perceive it as a threat. The book is largely a critique of how Democrats have governed in the places where they’ve held power. But the obvious targets of that critique — blue-state governors like Gavin Newsom and Kathy Hochul and top Obama and Biden administration officials — have largely embraced it. Maura Healy, the governor of Massachusetts, laid out a plan for “housing abundance.” More than one top Democrat I expected to react defensively to the argument told me that they felt that they could have written it.This is, for Democrats, a liquid moment. The party is reimagining itself after its crushing loss in 2024, and a lot is riding on which critiques are woven into its renewal. And so the backlash to the book has come from a faction of the party that saw itself rising within the wreckage and worries that “Abundance” will derail its ascendance: the anti-corporate populists.“Abundance” is an effort to focus more of American politics on a surprisingly neglected question: What do we need more of, and what is stopping us from getting it? It is that focus that some of my friends on the populist left object to. Zephyr Teachout, a Fordham law professor who’s a central figure on the anti-monopolist left, told me that her problem with “Abundance” wasn’t the policies but the central question: “We should be focusing Democratic politics and politics in general on the problem of concentrated power and the way in which concentrated power is making it impossible to do things.”Demand Progress, a leftist advocacy group, went so far as to commission a poll to see which message appealed to more voters. Voters were asked to choose between the two framings of “the big problem” in American life: Was it “‘bottlenecks’ that make it harder to produce housing, expand energy production or build new roads and bridges” or rather that “big corporations have way too much power over our economy and our government.” Unsurprisingly, the latter won.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Jesus Has ‘More to Say Than Any Human Language Can Carry’: A Q&A With Rowan Williams

      by

      Rowan Williams is among the most important religious thinkers in the world. A theologian, poet, playwright and literary critic, he served as the archbishop of Canterbury from 2002 to 2012. I spoke to Dr. Williams about his journey of faith and doubt, why God allows the innocent to suffer and how to interpret the Bible (and how not to). He talked about the New Atheists and the influence on his theology of Fyodor Dostoyevsky, what makes Jesus such a compelling figure and what it means to pastor people through grief. Dr. Williams also talked about how, for him, the Christian faith is “the perspective that enriches.” Our conversation, which has been lightly edited, is the third in a series of interviews I am doing that explores the world of faith.1. Dostoyevsky Led the WayPeter Wehner: Let me start out by asking you to describe your journey of faith. As a young adult, what was the pull toward Christianity for you? Was it primarily intellectual or aesthetic or an appeal to the imagination or some combination of those? Did you experience what C.S. Lewis called “Sehnsucht,” an intense longing and divine spark for something that’s unattainable in this material world?Rowan Williams: I’d grown up in a Christian environment but not a very intense one. It was really when I was a teenager that it began to speak to me, and it did so largely, to pick up your categories, at the imaginative level. It felt like a larger world to inhabit and at a time when I was discovering more and more about the literary world, about philosophical questioning, about the historical roots of our culture.All of that seemed to me, as a student, enriching and exciting. But it was also brought alive — and here was my good fortune — through particular people who were very important to me at the time, especially my parish priest, who was a huge influence — encouraging, supportive, giving me the message all the time that there’s room for all that in the life of faith.When I started as a university student — coming into contact with an awareness of human need and human suffering that I hadn’t quite registered before, meeting homeless people when I was a student in Cambridge, the sense that you needed to have quite a capacious picture of human nature in order to see the dignity and the need — that reinforced my feeling that the faith I’d grown into was something which actually allowed you to engage at depth with people.Wehner: Is the draw of faith for you now essentially what it was when you were younger?Williams: It’s probably pretty much what I grew up in, in many ways, which is not to say it’s not changed or developed. It’s certainly been battered and tested in various ways. But when I go back to what I was learning at that time, it’s still that same sense that this is the perspective that enriches. This is the perspective that enlarges.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Today’s Wordle Hints for June 9, 2025

      by

      Scroll down for hints and conversation about the puzzle for Monday, June 9, 2025.Welcome to The Wordle Review. Be warned: This page contains spoilers for today’s puzzle. Solve Wordle first, or scroll at your own risk.Wordle is released at midnight in your time zone. In order to accommodate all time zones, there will be two Wordle Reviews live every day, dated based on Eastern Standard Time. If you find yourself on the wrong review, check the number of your puzzle and go to this page to find the corresponding review.Need a Hint?Give me a consonantRGive me a vowelOOpen the comments section for more hints, scores and conversation from the Wordle community.Today’s DifficultyOur testers let us know how many guesses out of 6 it took them to solve the puzzle. If they miss the word, we count it as 7 guesses. They are paid to solve each puzzle in advance. Learn more about what they do.Today’s average difficulty is 4.5 guesses out of 6, or moderately challenging.Your own rating may be different. For a deeper and more personalized analysis of puzzle difficulty, please visit Wordle Bot.Today’s WordClick to revealToday’s word is BOARD, a noun. According to Webster’s New World College Dictionary, it means “a long, broad, flat piece of sawed wood ready for use; thin plank.”Our Featured ArtistAlex Ram is an illustrator based in London. He has a playful and informative approach to his work, often focusing on themes such as communities, mindfulness and a balanced lifestyle. He takes inspiration from both everyday life and current events to depict a range of characters in relatable scenarios.Further ReadingSee the archive for past and future posts.If you solved for a word different from what was featured today, please refresh your page.Join the conversation on social media. Use the hashtag #wordlereview to chat with other solvers.Leave any thoughts you have in the comments! Please follow community guidelines:Be kind. Comments are moderated for civility.Having a technical issue? Use the help button in the settings menu of the Games app.See the Wordle Glossary for information on how to talk about Wordle.Want to talk about Spelling Bee? Check out our Spelling Bee Forum.Want to talk about Connections? Check out our Connections Companion.Trying to go back to the puzzle?Follow the New York Times Games on Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads. More