US news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump surgeon general pick involved in gun accident that killed her father at age 13

      by

      Donald Trump’s nominee for US surgeon general – Dr Janette Nesheiwat – accidentally knocked over a gun when she was 13 years old, causing it to fire and fatally shoot her father in the head.The death of Nesheiwat’s father occurred in February 1990 at her family home in Umatilla, Florida, as reported on Friday by the New York Times.“I was in Father’s bedroom at about 7.15am getting some scissors” out of a fishing tackle box on a shelf above her dad’s bed, she said, according to a police report reviewed by the New York Times. “I opened the … box and the whole thing tipped over”, causing a handgun to fall from inside, discharge and strike her father in the head as he slept in the bed.Nesheiwat’s father, who immigrated from Jordan, died in a hospital the following day.While avoiding discussing her role in the case, she has said her father’s death inspired her to become a doctor. Nesheiwat has spent the past 15 years as an urgent care doctor for CityMD, a for-profit chain of clinics around New York City.At the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, she began appearing regularly on Fox News as a medical contributor.Nesheiwat would replace Dr Vivek Murthy if her nomination is confirmed after Trump begins his second presidency.Murthy was the first US surgeon general to declare gun violence as a public health crisis. In an advisory, he cited that firearms are now the leading cause of death in the US among children and adolescents.A graphic accompanying the advisory explained how many of those deaths were unintentional, resulting from firearms that were stored loaded as well as unlocked.To address the crisis, Murthy called on the US to ban automatic rifles, introduce universal background checks for purchasing guns, regulate the industry, pass laws that would restrict use in public spaces and penalize individuals who fail to safely store their weapons.Republicans have opposed efforts to treat gun violence as a public health issue, with House Republicans voting in 2023 to ban the Center for Disease Control from researching gun violence. Republicans have also pushed to prevent public health agencies from citing public health emergencies to pass gun control measures and has attempted to defund programs aimed at gun violence reduction.Murthy was dismissed from his role as US surgeon general by Trump during his first presidency in 2017 before outgoing Joe Biden appointed him to the position again in 2021.The New York Times reported that a Nesheiwat memoir being published later in December mentions her father’s death in the first sentence.“When I was 13 years old, I helplessly watched my dear father dying from an accident as blood was spurting everywhere,” she writes in Beyond the Stethoscope: Miracles in Medicine. “I couldn’t save his life.“This was the start of my personal journey in life to become a physician and enter the world of healing arts.”But, according to the New York Times, nowhere in the next 260 pages of the book does she detail how her father died or say that he was shot.The Orlando Sentinel provided more detail in 1990, describing in a news item how a bullet hit Ziad “Ben” Nesheiwat in the head and killed him after his 13-year-old daughter knocked over a tackle box, causing a gun to fall out and fire.“As she says in her book, she became a physician because of her dad’s tragic accidental death,” a spokesman for Trump’s transition team, Brian Hughes, said in a statement to the New York Times after Nesheiwat did not respond for comment. “She became a physician to save lives, and that dedication to the lives of her fellow Americans is why president Trump nominated Dr Nesheiwat to be our next surgeon general.“She and her family miss their father, and hope he’s proud of them.” More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump promises to pardon January 6 rioters on ‘day one’

      by

      In his first sit-down television news interview since winning a second presidency in November’s election, Donald Trump renewed promises to pardon his supporters involved in the attack on the US Capitol in early 2021.He also doubled down on promises of mass deportations and tariffs in the conversation with NBC’s Meet the Press host Kristen Welker – the latter of which he acknowledged could cause Americans to pay more after riding voters’ complaints about higher prices back to the White House at the expense of Vice-President Kamala Harris.“I’m going to be acting very quickly. First day,” Trump said in the interview, claiming convicted Capitol attackers had been put through a “very nasty system”.“I know the system,” said Trump, himself convicted in May by New York state prosecutors of criminally falsifying business records to conceal hush-money payments to adult film actor Stormy Daniels. “The system’s a very corrupt system.”Trump said there may be some exceptions to his pardons over an attack on the Capitol that was meant to keep him in the Oval Office after losing the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden – and which was linked to multiple deaths, including the suicides of traumatized law enforcement officers. He referenced previously debunked claims of anti-Trump law enforcement infiltrating his supporters’ ranks and agitating the attack.When Trump was asked about Capitol attackers who assaulted police officers he said that “they had no choice”. He also claimed individuals were pressured into accepting guilty pleas.“Their whole lives have been destroyed,” said Trump, who criticized the outgoing president’s recent pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, on convictions of lying on gun ownership application forms as well as tax evasion. “They’ve been destroyed.”Trump denied he would direct his second administration’s appointees to arrest elected officials involved in the investigation of the attack on the US Capitol, which led to federal criminal charges against him that have been dismissed. But he made it a point to tell Welker: “Honestly, they should go to jail.”More than 1,250 people have been convicted or pleaded guilty in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. And at least 645 people have been sentenced to serve some time in prison, ranging from a few days to 22 years.During his sentencing Friday, Philip Sean Grillo of New York City, one of the Capitol attackers, tauntingly told the federal judge presiding over his case, “Trump’s gonna pardon me anyways.” Grillo received a one-year prison sentenced and was ordered to be taken into custody immediately.Another of the convicted attackers, Edward Kelley of Tennessee, was found guilty at trial in November of conspiracy to murder federal employees. Jurors determined he had developed a list of officials he wanted to kill for investigating him in connection with the Capitol attack.In other parts of Sunday’s interview, Trump reaffirmed his plans to enact tariffs on imports from some of the US’s biggest trading partners. He said he could not guarantee US families would not pay more as a result of his plan.He also doubled down on refusing to admit Biden fairly defeated him in the 2020 election, claiming he won in November against Harris because the race “was too big to rig”.On his plans of mass deportations, Welker asked Trump about families with mixed immigration statuses. Trump suggested immigrants living in the US legally were at risk if they had family members living in the country without permission.“I don’t want to be breaking up families, so the only way you don’t break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back,” Trump said.He did claim to have some support for working with Democrats to protect Dreamers, or people who have lived in the US for years after being brought to the country as undocumented children. But, as he has done before, he promised to work to end birthright citizenship and said he would consider pushing to amend the US constitution to do so.“We have to end it,” Trump said.Welker also asked Trump if he had fully developed a plan to overhaul healthcare after saying he had “concepts” of one during his lone debate with Harris.“We have concepts of a plan that would be better,” Trump replied, in part. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Arab Americans become prominent voices in US politics – via Trump

      by

      While many appearing on stage during president-elect Donald Trump’s victory speech in the early hours of 6 November were familiar faces, one man, standing next to Tiffany Trump, was not.Michael Boulos, the son of Lebanese billionaire and Trump’s new senior adviser on Middle Eastern affairs, Massad Boulos, and the husband of Trump’s youngest daughter, stood cautiously to the president-elect’s right as America looked on.While Boulos’ presence – part of Trump’s successful coalition-building effort – may have gone largely unnoticed by many viewers, for Arab Americans such as Yahya Basha, a Syrian American doctor who runs several medical facilities in Detroit, it served as a breakthrough moment.In September, Basha met Trump and Boulos during one of the president-elect’s many campaign trips to Michigan.“I felt that they were serious and wanted to do business and communicate and partner on the issues,” says Basha of his engagement with Trump and Boulos. “If you are out, you don’t count. You have to stay in the battle.”Twenty years after the spike in animosity and prejudice in the aftermath of 9/11, Arab Americans are now finding themselves incorporated into US politics like never before and – ironically given his nationalism – the process is getting a boost from Trump.On 22 November, Trump nominated Janette Nesheiwat, the daughter of Jordanian Christian immigrants and a Fox News contributor, to the post of US surgeon general, and Marty Makary, a British American doctor with Lebanese heritage who also contributes to Fox News, to commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration.Alina Habba, Trump’s Iraqi American lawyer and adviser, is another prominent face in Trump’s entourage. During his previous administration Mark Esper and Alex Azar, both who have Lebanese heritage, served in senior positions.View image in fullscreenMany Arab Americans, particularly older generations who fled dictatorships in the Middle East, feel this is the first time that such prominent voices have been heard in a political context – despite Trump’s threats and a track record that has seen him ban travel from a host of Muslim-majority countries during his previous administration.While many Arab Americans say they are forced to look past Trump’s previous actions given the failure of the Biden administration to stop Israel’s wars in Gaza and Lebanon, others believe the president-elect’s overtures to figures in their community is genuine.While the Democrats declined to allow a Palestinian American speaker at their August convention, a month earlier, at the Republican’s equivalent event, Habba was strategically given a place in the coveted Thursday night session, where she spoke of being a “proud first-generation Arab American woman”.Part of Trump’s outreach to Arab Americans has focused on connecting with Christian elements within the wider community, rather than Muslim ones.Boulos, Habba, Azar and Esper are either Maronite, Chaldean or Greek Orthodox Christians.“[The Arab American and Chaldean communities] needed one of their own – someone that is of their own and is in politics,” says Casey Askar, a Chaldean businessman who was recruited by Trump as far back as July 2023 to engage with Chaldeans in Michigan. Askar believes 80% of the Chaldean voters in Michigan – many of whom don’t identify as ethnically Arab but celebrate their own distinct heritage within the Arab world – backed Trump in last month’s election.“Because Chaldeans didn’t come from a democratic world or have opportunities for democracy or freedom of speech, they didn’t engage in politics,” he says.“But in 2016, Chaldeans really came out to vote. And they generally voted for Trump and Republican candidates.” He says that since a majority of Chaldean households in south-east Michigan, where the community is thought to number almost 200,000 people, own or run their own businesses, there’s an attraction to Trump and the Republicans.After a fall off in 2020, he says the Chaldean vote helped Trump win Michigan last month, where he beat Kamala Harris by 80,000 votes.“Historically, the Democratic party was the party of immigrants and minorities. I know that because when my family came, I believe they were more Democrat-leaning. If you look at the Catholic vote as a whole, it was predominantly Democrat,” he says.“But the party has changed. There’s so much hypocrisy. They pushed too far with wokeness, and that alienated a lot of people.”It’s a view shared by Basha, who is not Christian and who donated to Democrats’ election campaigns including Joe Biden, the governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, and others running against Israel lobby-backed candidates.“I had an excellent relationship with [Democrats]; I went to the White House many times,” he says.But last year, he says he felt slighted during a call with Michigan donors hosted by the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I wasn’t allowed to speak during the call. I raised my hand but wasn’t given the floor to speak when others were,” he says. “The Democrats became so complacent. I think the Arab-Americans were treated in the Democratic party as insignificant partners, from the Obama administration onward.”Though he donated thousands of dollars to Trump’s first opponent, Hillary Clinton, in 2016, he says that this time around when Harris’ campaign approached him for a donation, he refused.“I told them: I’m committed to Trump.”Trump’s efforts to build a coalition from within elements of the Arab American community has in part prompted many to run – and win as Republicans – at various political levels across the US.Amer Ghalib, the Democratic Yemeni American mayor of the Muslim-majority city of Hamtramck in Michigan, attracted headlines by endorsing and campaigning with Trump in October.Nor is the move to the Republican party confined to Michigan.Last month, Abe Hamadeh, a 33-year-old lawyer and former army reservist with little political experience, was elected to Arizona’s eighth congressional district, defeating a Democrat in an open race. Endorsed by Trump and Arizona firebrand Kari Lake, and the son of Syrian immigrants, Hamadeh’s campaign website photos see him leaning into his military and Middle Eastern background.For many Arab Americans, the messages espoused by Republicans resonate.Samra’a Luqman, a Yemeni American from Dearborn, Michigan, campaigned on behalf of and voted for Trump because “you cannot reward genocide with a second term”, referring to the Biden administration’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza, where more than 44,000 people have been killed.But a second reason for abandoning the Democratic party related to her and others more conservative social values.Luqman, who still considers herself a Democrat, was among parents who railed against sexually-explicate content in schoolbooks in Dearborn in 2022.“The story of this election does not start with 7 October [when Hamas attacked Israel]. It started in 2022, and the community felt betrayed by their own [Democratic] party,” she says.“It’s unfortunate, but the minute the [Arab American] community disagreed with the policies espoused by the Democratic party, they became ostracized and painted in a negative light. That betrayal started the shift to the Republican party.”Basha says he is fully aware of the dangers the second Trump administration may incur on the Arab world, not least to Palestinians suffering horrendous conditions as Israel continues to attack Gaza. Trump – and many of his cabinet picks – are vociferous supporters of Israel and its army’s actions. Trump has also promised to bring back travel bans on Muslim-majority countries which he says is “definitely a concern”.“It’s better to be at the table than outside the door,” he says.“I want to see what we can be a part of and establish a positive view of [Arab Americans] and negotiate on local, national and international issues.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump dominates Washington’s agenda – weeks before he takes the oath of office

      by

      The grand reopening of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris on Saturday was expected to be attended by around 50 heads of state and government. Joe Biden was not there to admire the magnificent splendour of the 850-year-old place of worship. But Donald Trump was.The role reversal neatly symbolises how power is draining from one man to the other. Biden, now a lame duck, appears to be in decline both physically and politically, fading from America’s national stage and tarnishing his legacy with a pardon for his errant son.Trump, however, is already dominating the Washington agenda more than 40 days before he takes the oath of office. He has grabbed attention with incendiary cabinet selections and policy pronouncements. He has begun flexing his muscles with world leaders. To many Americans, it feels like he is president again already.“Biden’s presidency is ending with a series of whimpers rather than a bang and it feels like he’s shrinking into irrelevance as Trump is asserting himself,” said Charlie Sykes, a conservative author and broadcaster. “If you’re a foreign leader, you may talk to Biden out of politeness but you’re going to listen to Trump out of naked self-interest.”Traditionally, the US has only one president at a time in both practice and spirit. But since defeating Biden’s vice-president, Kamala Harris, in last month’s election, Trump has effectively set up a shadow presidency at Mar-a-Lago, his club in Florida long dubbed his “winter White House”.He’s already engaging with foreign leaders. His threat of 25% tariffs – taxes on foreign imports – led Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau to rush to Mar-a-Lago with a promise of increased border-security measures. Trump also said Mexico had agreed to close its border, a claim contradicted by the Mexican president, Claudia Sheinbaum.Just as in his first term, Trump can shape affairs and move markets with a single social media post. He sent shares of US Steel down by writing on Truth Social that he would block its proposed acquisition by Japanese-owned Nippon Steel.View image in fullscreenMike Waltz, Trump’s pick for national security adviser, has credited Trump with bringing Israel and Lebanon to the negotiating table, although some political analysts have said there is no evidence that Trump had any direct involvement. The president-elect vowed “ALL HELL TO PAY in the Middle East” if Gaza hostages were not released before his inauguration.Meanwhile, he is capitalising on the strong stock market, claiming it as a victory for his policies, and taking credit for the the reversal of diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at companies such as Walmart.On Monday, the Trump transition team issued a press release headlined: “Promises Kept – And President Trump Hasn’t Even Been Inaugurated Yet.” It argued that Trump, who still has no official powers, is already securing the border, working towards international peace, propelling economic growth and dismantling “divisive, unchecked DEI”.Critics point out that economic indicators – including the stock market – have been trending in the right direction for a long time, while recent dramas in South Korea, Syria and Ukraine cast doubt on the notion that Trump’s “peace through strength” mantra is already paying dividends.Even so, Trump and his team are once again proving they can sell a narrative that suits them. Reed Galen, president of JoinTheUnion.us, a pro-democracy coalition, said: “It’s a combination of Trumpian bravado, further or final dismantling of whatever processes we took for granted for too long and their instinctual and maybe even unconscious ability to occupy a vacuum when they feel one.”He added: “If Biden’s going to spend most of his time overseas and do very little in the way of pushing back on this stuff, they’re going to take all the ground that’s ceded to them. Call it Maga, call it the 21st-century Republican party – if they see an opportunity, they take it.“They don’t worry about the outcome. They don’t worry about the consequences. They don’t worry about somebody saying, you can’t do that, you shouldn’t do that. They’re like, we’re going to go do it and good luck trying to stop us. Clearly, it spooked Trudeau enough to go flying to Mar-a-Lago.”In theory, Trump’s conversations with world leaders could violate the Logan Act, a federal statute prohibiting unauthorised private diplomacy with foreign nations. But only one person has ever been indicted for breaching it – that was in 1803 and did not lead to a prosecution. Legal experts do not expect Trump to fall foul of it now.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHis actions do represent a break from past norms, however. Presidents-elect tend to maintain a respectful distance from the incumbent until it is their turn to occupy the White House. Franklin Roosevelt firmly rebuffed an invitation from the man he beat, Herbert Hoover, to take part a joint effort to pull the economy out of the Great Depression.Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said: “I’m old enough to remember when presidents-elect disappeared. I don’t think we saw Kennedy three times except going to church back in the late fall of 1960.“Reagan appeared once in public after the election; they caught him going into a store for supplies or something. That’s what was expected. You didn’t interfere with your predecessor because he was still president.”But perception of Trump’s authority has been accelerated by Biden’s shrivelling influence. This week, Biden became the first sitting US president to visit Angola and the first since Barack Obama in 2015 to set foot in Africa. His speech received little coverage and has fewer than 2,000 views on the White House’s official YouTube channel.Biden, 82, is also facing fierce criticism from fellow Democrats for pardoning his son Hunter over federal crimes after previously pledging that he would not. Some regard it as a vote of no confidence in the justice system that Biden vowed to protect – and a gift to Trump in his ongoing efforts to undermine democratic institutions.The Axios website reported: “A Biden friend said the president seems older by the day — slower in walk, more halting in talk. To some Biden loyalists, his decline is a sad metaphor for his presidency: He started strong but will finish diminished.”By contrast, Trump, 78, is once again dominating headlines with a frenzy of round-the-clock social media posts and controversies. One cabinet pick had to withdraw due to sexual misconduct allegations; another is teetering because of claims he assaulted women and abused alcohol; a third presents grave concerns to intelligence experts because of her willingness to believe conspiracy theories. The growing prominence of Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, also has nerves jangling.For Washington, there is a sense that the circus is back in town – or perhaps it never went away. Sykes, author of How the Right Lost Its Mind, said: “It feels like a continuation of the last four years where, even though Joe Biden has been the president, Donald Trump has felt like he was a politically dominating force for so long.“Unfortunately, when people look back on the Biden presidency, they’re going to comment on how low-profile and low-key Biden was in comparison to the man that he defeated. I’m not sure that there’s any historical parallel for that. The Trump show has been ongoing and sucking up all the oxygen for nearly a decade now.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Why I’m voting against the military budget | Bernie Sanders

      by

      Today in America, 60% of our people live paycheck to paycheck, 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and 21.5 million households are paying more than 50% of their income on housing. We have one of the highest rates of childhood poverty of almost any developed country on Earth, and 25% of older adults are trying to survive on $15,000 a year or less. In other words, the United States has fallen far behind other major countries in protecting the most vulnerable, and our government has failed millions of working families.But while so many Americans are struggling to get by, the United States is spending record-breaking amounts of money on the military. In the coming days, with relatively little debate, Congress will overwhelmingly pass the National Defense Authorization Act, approving close to $900bn for the Department of Defense (DoD). When spending on nuclear weapons and “emergency” defense spending is included, the total will approach $1tn. We now spend more than the next nine countries combined.I don’t often agree with Elon Musk, but he is right when he says the Pentagon “has little idea how its annual budget of more than $800bn is spent.” The Department of Defense is the only government agency that has been unable to pass an independent audit. It recently failed its seventh attempt in a row and could not fully account for huge portions of its $4.126tn in assets.Very few people who have researched the military-industrial complex doubt that there is massive fraud, waste and cost over-runs in the system. Defense contractors routinely overcharge the Pentagon by 40% – and sometimes more than 4,000%. For example, in October, RTX (formerly Raytheon) was fined $950m for inflating bills to the DoD, lying about labor and material costs, and paying bribes to secure foreign business. In June, Lockheed Martin was fined $70m for overcharging the navy for aircraft parts, the latest in a long line of similar abuses. The F-35, the most expensive weapon system in history, has run up hundreds of billions in cost overruns.Today, as a result of massive consolidation in the industry, a large portion of the Pentagon budget now goes to a handful of huge defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, RTX, General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman. That consolidation has been extremely profitable for the industry: since 2022, these four contractors have brought in $609bn in revenues, including $353bn in US taxpayer funds, and recorded $57bn in profits. During that same period, they have spent $61bn on dividends and stock buybacks to make their wealthy stockholders even richer.These defense contractors also provide their CEOs with exorbitant compensation packages. In the last three years for which information is available, these companies paid their CEOs more than $257m combined – with annual salaries that are about 100 times more than the secretary of defense and 500 times more than the average newly enlisted service member.How does this happen? How do we keep handing huge amounts of money to companies that routinely overcharge the American taxpayer and often engage in fraud? The answer is not complicated. These companies – like the drug companies, insurance companies, Wall Street and the fossil fuel industry – spend millions on campaign contributions and lobbying. In the recent election cycle, defense contractors spent nearly $251m on lobbying and contributed almost $37m to political candidates. Surprise, surprise! Most members of Congress vote for greatly inflated military budgets with few questions asked.The lack of accountability at the Department of Defense is not just costing American taxpayer dollars. It’s costing lives. The United States is providing many billions of dollars to help defend Ukraine from Putin’s invasion. When defense contractors said they couldn’t ramp up production without more taxpayer support, Congress repeatedly appropriated emergency funding, with roughly $78.5bn going to buy equipment and services from the major defense contractors.How did those “patriotic” companies respond? They jacked up prices. RTX increased prices for Stinger missiles from $25,000 in the 1990s to $400,000 in 2023. Lockheed Martin and RTX raised the price of the Javelin missile system from about $263,000 per unit just before the war to $350,700 this year. Similar price hikes took place for Patriot missiles and other weapons. And make no mistake: every time a contractor pads its profit margins, fewer weapons reach the frontlines. The greed of these defense contractors is not just costing American taxpayers; it’s killing Ukrainians.The United States needs a strong military, but we do not need a defense system that is designed to make huge profits for a handful of giant defense contractors. We do not need to spend almost a trillion dollars on the military, while half a million Americans are homeless and children go hungry.In this moment in history, it would be wise for us to remember what Dwight D Eisenhower, a former five-star general, said in his farewell address in 1961: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” What Eisenhower said was true in 1961. It is even more true today.I will be voting against the military budget. More

    • 225 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      On wokeness, patriotism and change, Kamala Harris’s defeat has lessons for Starmer | Deborah Mattinson and Claire Ainsley

      by

      Given how events unfolded, it was never going to be easy for Kamala Harris. Many Democrats are ­convinced her ­campaign saved the party from an even worse result. To be fair, it achieved some real highs: she won the debate. But she never won the argument, at least not with the ­voters who mattered most.The US election triggered a scary deja vu moment for those of us who had watched the 2019 UK ­general ­election from behind our sofas, hands over our eyes. The Democrats lost votes with almost everyone, almost everywhere, but, like Labour in the “red wall”, most ­dramatically with traditional heartland ­voters: working-class, low-paid, non-­graduates. And, like Labour back in 2019, that lost connection with core voters had not happened overnight.Working with the DC-based Progressive Policy Institute, we ­conducted post-election polling and focus groups with past Democrat voters who voted for Trump on 5 November. The work laid bare an anxious nation desperate for change. Be in no doubt, this was a change election: any candidate failing to offer the change the electorate craved had become a risky choice. Asking how voters felt about the results on 6 November, “relieved” was the word we heard most often.Overwhelmingly, change focused on two issues: inflation and ­immigration. Trump enjoyed a clear lead on both. Sure, Harris had some popular policies (anti price-­gouging, tax cuts, help for first-time ­buyers and small businesses), but these seemed sidelined in an overcrowded campaign, with voters concluding that she was not on their side and was too focused on “woke” issues.Among working-class ­voters, 53% agreed the Dems had gone “too far in pushing a woke ­ideology”. They’ve “gone in a weird ­direction”, said one, “lost touch with our ­priorities”, said another. Worse still was the sense that any voter who disagreed with them was “a bad person”.American liberals were out of step with these voters’ views – most importantly, on loving their country. As many as 66% of Americans say theirs is the greatest country in the world, rising to 71% of working-class voters. Liberals were the only group who disagreed. What this patriotism means matters. Voters expressed it in terms of putting US interests ahead of others – it also meant recognising that change is needed and being prepared to act. As one voter put it: “If you’re not championing change, you’re not patriotic.”Hungry for that change, voters yearned for a shake-up in the way that both government and the economy operates. Just 2% said the system needed no change, while 70% believed the country was heading in the wrong direction. The Democrats did not seem to hear this – some even interpreted Harris’ pledge to “protect democracy” as “protecting the status quo”. By contrast, Trump’s appetite for disruption, coupled with his contempt for Capitol Hill sacred cows, seemed to promise change that for once might actually deliver for working class voters.Are there things the Harris campaign could have done ­differently? Of course. Joyful celebrities seemed tin-eared to an ­electorate feeling worried, ­pessimistic, even scared. But what should really ­trouble the Democrats now is the sense that the party – not just the candidate or the campaign – has, since 2020, parted company with the voters that its electoral success depended on: millions of Americans who work hard, pay their taxes, do the right thing and now feel they are not ­getting a fair deal. The Democrats can only win by putting those “hero voters” back at the centre of their politics. The same was true for Labour in 2024 and is true for ­centre-left parties elsewhere. That requires a course correction which needs to start now.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAs Democrats absorb the result, without an immediate leadership contest to ­provide direction, local leaders must be prepared to step up, flex their muscles and challenge Trump. Change demands strong leadership – all the more so when voters feel vulnerable. Polling gave Trump a 28% lead on strength. Described as a “powerhouse”, he was likened to “neat whisky – gives it to you straight” while Harris was a “watered down cocktail”. Imagined as a car, he was a “sturdy dump truck owning the road, not to be argued with” while she was a “flimsy Kia”. The grit that took a mixed race woman tantalisingly close to the top job in world politics was just not evident to voters. Having absolute ­clarity of conviction is a must for tomorrow’s aspiring candidates – and showcasing that must start today.This is eerily familiar ground to those of us who worked hard to ­distance Labour from what led to catastrophic loss in 2019. It remains to be seen if the Democrats embrace the change their party needs as ­courageously as Keir Starmer did over the past four years.But there is food for thought for the new Labour administration, too. Labour must continue to channel its powerful change message in ­government, reflecting the anti-establishment mood that now exists both sides of the Atlantic. It must be prepared – enthusiastic even – about disrupting rather than defending old, tired institutions. It needs a strong overarching narrative and a plan to reform government and the economy so it can truly deliver back to the hero voters that delivered its electoral success in July. That work started last week with the launch of Starmer’s Plan for Change with its powerful emphasis on working people being better off, but there remains much to do.Deborah Mattinson is Keir Starmer’s former director of strategy. Claire Ainsley was Labour’s executive director of policy from 2020-2022 More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US Food and Drug Administration moves to ban red food dye

      by

      A red food dye that is ubiquitous in American drinks, snacks, candies and cereals may finally be banned by the federal government after years of concern that it has adverse health impacts, particularly upon children.The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said that it could soon act to crack down upon the additive known as red 3, derived from petroleum and used to provide a cherry-red coloring to an array of foods.“With red 3, we have a petition in front of us to revoke the authorization board, and we’re hopeful that in the next few weeks we’ll be acting on that petition,” Jim Jones, the FDA’s deputy commissioner for human foods, told a US Senate health committee on Thursday.Red 3 is used in nearly 3,000 food products, according to a database by one environmental health group, including Pez, Peeps, Betty Crocker’s products and Dubble Bubble chewing gum. Like other food dyes, it adds nothing of nutritional value and is used instead to add color to foods for marketing purposes.While the FDA said that this food dye, like other such approved additives, is safe to consume if done so correctly, red 3 has been found to be carcinogenic in animals and has been banned for use in cosmetics since 1990. Public health groups have also linked it to behavioral problems in children.Pressure is now building upon the FDA to ban the food dye, along with others that are routinely provided warning labels or are banned in the European Union – yet allowed freely in the US.Last year, California banned four food dyes, including red 3. Robert F Kennedy Jr, Donald Trump’s pick to be the next health secretary during his second presidency, has linked such food dyes to cancer and has been critical of the FDA for allowing certain substances in foods.“There is simply no reason for this chemical to be in our food except to entice and mislead consumers by changing the color of their food so it looks more appealing,” Frank Pallone, a Democrat who is a ranking member on the US House energy committee, wrote to the FDA about red 3 recently.“With the holiday season in full swing where sweet treats are abundant, it is frightening that this chemical remains hidden in these foods that we and our children are eating.” More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s ‘migrant crime’ idea is vicious and legal immigrants could suffer

      by

      On the campaign trail, president-elect Donald Trump promoted a rallying cry demanding mass deportations of as many as 20 million people – a hyper-inflated statistic that exceeds the estimated total of undocumented population in the US by millions, suggesting he might go so far as to round up immigrants in the country who have legal protections, too.But despite the US already having the largest immigration detention system worldwide, mass deportations on that scale would require an enforcement regime that doesn’t yet exist. Case in point: in Trump’s first term, authorities removed about 1.5 million people over four years, leveling a devastating toll on the families involved but falling far short of the mass repatriations Trump had aspired to back then.To multiply that number exponentially this time around would require resources, personnel and funding that are absent from the current immigration system. Alternatively, taking a more incremental approach to deport even a million people a year would cost taxpayers somewhere around $88bn annually – or nearly $1tn over more than a decade.So, as stump speeches evolve into more concrete plans during the presidential transition, Trump and his team have coalesced around several demographics to focus on detaining and deporting first (although if your grandmother gets swept up as collateral damage, Trump’s incoming border czar doesn’t seem to mind). One of their highest stated priority demographics: “criminal” immigrants.It’s true that some immigrants commit crimes, and that a handful of particularly heinous attacks in recent memory have made that front-of-mind. But Trump’s fixation on what he’s labeled “migrant crime” supposedly overtaking the nation is not only untrue but it belies the fact that, historically, immigrants commit offenses at lower rates than native-born Americans. For immigrants who have yet to earn US citizenship, there’s a clear and at times existential incentive to remain on the right side of the law: deportation could mean returning to a country where their lives or livelihoods might be at risk.Yet after Trump and his surrogates have so often used “criminals” as the example of their immigration enforcement priorities – especially when persuading non-base audiences, their argument has proved persuasive to many, and even to a subset of immigrants.Some want to believe that the vast majority of non-citizens who have worked hard, paid taxes and otherwise led upstanding lives in the US have little to fear. That the people who will be deported aren’t friends, neighbors, family members, co-workers or even themselves, but dangerous others who somehow “deserve” it.Instead, as soon as day one of Trump’s second term, the administration is expected to reverse current policy that prioritizes people who pose threats to national security, border security and public safety for immigration enforcement. That could potentially force officials to revert to the chaotic situation under Trump’s first term, when undocumented immigrants were broadly targeted and the country’s finite law enforcement resources were diverted away from real risks.Then, if Trump wants to make good on his campaign promise quickly, his earliest mass deportations may at least in part involve those most easy to locate – such as immigrants already in federal detention facilities, about 60% of whom have no criminal record (while many more detainees only have minor infractions).Other low-hanging fruit to pick up, detain and deport include people who report to their immigration check-ins, change their home addresses in government databases when they move and go into work before getting caught up in a raid – in short, people playing by the rules and trying to make a living, some of whom may have been in the US for decades and buoy up the economy.Even the “criminals” Trump has in mind for his mass deportations may not be who most Americans are envisioning. During the election, Trump made unsubstantiated and bizarre remarks about the US being a “dumping ground for the whole world to put their criminals into”. He claimed with no evidence that the newcomers arriving today, the overwhelming majority of whom are seeking protection or a better life, are actually coming from prisons and mental institutions in their home countries. And, late in the race, his campaign homed in on two cities roughly 1,200 miles apart – Aurora, Colorado, and Springfield, Ohio – to constantly portray migrants, and in particular migrants of color, as threats to Americans’ safety.For Aurora, Trump used about a dozen arrests of Venezuelans allegedly linked to a transnational gang to declare the city a “war zone” and announce an impending deportation operation named after the Colorado suburb. With a fifth of Aurora’s residents foreign-born, mothers are now crying every day after they drop off their kids at school, unsure of what Trump’s return to the presidency will mean for their family. Latinos in the community are even expressing concerns about gathering together in groups, in case of a raid.In Springfield, Trump’s vice-presidential pick, JD Vance, insistently connected the city’s large Haitian immigrant population with an uptick in the murder rate – never mind that the local county’s Republican top prosecutor said that in his 21-year career, not a single Haitian had been involved in a murder case there.After Trump and Vance used their national platform to disparage Springfield and its immigrant residents, the city received bomb threats explicitly based in anti-immigrant hate. Now, members of Springfield’s Haitian community – many of whom are in the US legally – are moving elsewhere, afraid that staying put will mean deportation come January.In Aurora, Springfield and the rest of the country, Trump’s “criminals” are whoever he wants them to be.And while he may not have the infrastructure needed to repatriate as many millions of people as he would hope, Trump has already unleashed a world of panic and pain through his looming threat of mass deportations and family separations against any immigrant – legal or undocumented – who he decides doesn’t belong in his America. More