Nicki Minaj is entitled to her politics, but moral authority requires more than condemning the people you oppose. I’m going to need her to explain why the same scrutiny doesn’t apply to the people she adamantly supports.  

Nicki Minaj is entitled to her politics, but moral authority requires more than condemning the people you oppose. I’m going to need her to explain why the same scrutiny doesn’t apply to the people she adamantly supports.  

The Federal Reserve opted to maintain interest rates between 3.75 percent and 4 percent during its recent meeting, a decision supported by analysis suggesting that recent inflation was primarily driven by energy costs rather than widespread economic pressure.

The Federal Reserve opted to maintain interest rates between 3.75 percent and 4 percent during its recent meeting, a decision supported by analysis suggesting that recent inflation was primarily driven by energy costs rather than widespread economic pressure.

The planned resumption of trilateral negotiations between Ukraine, Russia and the United States in Abu Dhabi in early November is already being presented in several Western capitals as evidence that diplomacy has regained its momentum, but a return to the negotiating table should not be confused with genuine progress toward

Rep. Ro Khanna is positioning himself as a leading figure for progressives ahead of the 2028 Democratic primary by promoting his brand of progressive capitalism and seeking to build broad coalitions across the political spectrum.

Rep. Ro Khanna is positioning himself as a leading figure for progressives ahead of the 2028 Democratic primary by promoting his brand of progressive capitalism and seeking to build broad coalitions across the political spectrum.

You may have heard that Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed is “having a lot of trouble putting [the Democratic] coalition back together,” or that “Democrats [are] struggling to unite behind El-Sayed,” or that “Democrats are still struggling to unite behind El-Sayed,” or that “El-Sayed faces resistance ⁠from some voters who would ordinarily be inclined to support a Democrat,” or that “Democratic divisions could hurt El-Sayed.” It’s a prominent narrative that is driving political discourse in the closing weeks of the tight Michigan Senate race. 

There’s only one problem with this narrative: It has zero empirical basis. It’s a total confection of US media and the pro-Israel lobby that isn’t supported by any data whatsoever. Two recent polls, one from Marist and one from RedBox Research, make it clear that El-Sayed’s support among Democratic voters in Michigan is both extremely high (95%) and the exact same percentage as Republican candidate Mike Rogers’ support with Republicans. And a new poll from Mitchell Research CBS complicates the narrative even further, finding that support for El-Sayed among Democrats is, in fact, 3 points higher than Rogers is among Republicans, at 94% versus 91%, respectively. 

If El-Sayed and Rogers have the exact same percent of party dissent—or, as is the case in the CBS Detroit poll, Rogers has more—then why are there countless stories highlighting, handwringing, and scandalizing the trivially small dissent for only one of the candidates? Where are the breathless profiles of Republicans refusing to vote for Rogers? Where are the NPR and CNN segments focusing on “Republican divisions”? 

There, of course, aren’t any, because this narrative wouldn’t advance an ideological agenda. 

The “Michigan Democrats are divided” narrative has been pushed by local and national media alike, from Bridge Michigan to Reuters to Michigan Advocate to the New York Times, who reported Thursday (again, falsely), “Democrats in Michigan… remain far more divided than party leaders had hoped to be going into the election.” The Bulwark’s Sarah Longwell said on Wednesday that El-Sayed is “having a lot of trouble putting [the Democratic] coalition back together again” after his defeat of Hayley Stevens in the Democratic primary in August. The AP insisted that “Democrats are still struggling to unite behind El-Sayed” which, again, is outright false: El-Sayed has the support of 95%of Democrats. 

An April IMEU poll found that Michigan Democrats think Israel is committing genocide in Gaza 66%to 14%, at a ratio of almost 5-to-1.  Does this seem like an issue Michigan democrats are “divided” over?

For another point of reference, El-Sayed’s support among Democrats of 95% is higher than other high-profile centrist Democrats, including Roy Cooper of North Carolina (94%), Sherrod Brown of Ohio (93%), Kathy Hochul of New York (85%), and even with Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania. El-Sayed is even doing better with top Democrats in his own state, with Michigan gubernatorial candidate Jocelyn Benson winning only 91.8% of Democrats versus El-Sayed’s 93.1%, according to a Michigan State Department of Political Science survey published on Thursday. Yet one is hard pressed to find any “divided Democrats” stories about any of these candidates. 

The theme of “Democratic divisions” in Michigan, like the attendant assertion that Israel is “dividing Demcorats” more broadly, is a wholly concocted media narrative, pushed by the pro-Israel lobby and its media allies to create tensions and the appearance of a meaningful split where none exists. As I noted in the Intercept in June, the percentage of Democrats who have a positive view of Israel, 13%, is lower than the percent of Democrats who believe in young earth creationism or those who back a full abortion ban or Christian prayer in public schools. Yet these traditionally right-wing views are never said to be “dividing Democrats” because, by and large, they clearly are not. 

Just the same, Israel doesn’t really “divide” Michigan Democrats either. An April IMEU poll found that Michigan Democrats think Israel is committing genocide in Gaza 66%to 14%, at a ratio of almost 5-to-1. Does this seem like an issue Michigan democrats are “divided” over? If it is, there are dozens of other traditionally 5-to-1 issues—from marriage equality to climate change to prayer in school—that they are also technically “divided” over, but they are never discussed in these terms because they are fringe opinions among liberals. 

The myth of widespread liberal zionism among Democrats is too big to fail, so it continues in zombie form, propped up by an elite liberal class that simply needs it to exist.

That’s because it’s a playbook––a PR tactic––not an actual reflection of political reality. In this playbook, our media obsesses over a trivially small percent of anti-El-Sayed Democrats in Michigan while never mentioning Republicans disillusioned with Rogers despite their polls being statistically equal. As Michael Arria at Mondowiess notes in his analysis of this manufactured “division,” polls consistently “upend the narrative that Democratic voters are split on El-Sayed.” So why does it persist? 

It persists because the myth of widespread liberal zionism among Democrats is too big to fail, so it continues in zombie form, propped up by an elite liberal class that simply needs it to exist so they can appear humanitarian, worldly, and sophisticated while continuing to back—albeit with the occasional wristslap—a genocidal state currently experiencing political paralysis because their nominal liberal wing is simply too racist to give Arab parties any power whatsoever. 

The rebellion against El-Sayed in Michigan, such as it exists in reality, is largely driven by ideologically motivated donors and party elites, namely those whose primary issue is bipartisan support for Israel. But it’s tacky to point this out, to note that this opposition is largely coming from a small number of actual voters and is being amplified way beyond its objective news value because influential zionist advocacy groups are pushing it to media organizations and their internal allies. This is awkward and uncomfortable to discuss, so, like with the nonexistent “Democratic divisions over Israel,” it has to be reframed as some organic dissent among “voters” or “Democrats” when, in reality, the number of El-Sayed holdouts is statistically trivial. This isn’t to say media cannot focus on issues that matter to a small number of voters. What gives the game away is that this is literally not being done for Rogers, or other high-profile centrist Democrats, despite party dissent for these candidates being greater or roughly the same. 

So where are the articles profiling angry Republicans refusing to vote for Rogers? Where are the countless CNN and PBS segments detailing their grievances and pundits demanding Rogers “reach out” to them? Where are the glib, unsourced throwaway lines in the New York Times about how “Republicans in Michigan remain far more divided than party leaders had hoped to be going into the election”—since, again, this is statistically just as true for the GOP as it is for El-Sayed? There aren’t any, because this angle doesn’t discipline Israel critics and drive up the negatives on a candidate most media elites clearly want to see underperform or, if at all possible, outright lose. 

h/t Brian Tashman for exquisite poll watching.  

American culture has always prized macho heroes who solve problems with their fists. John Wayne didn’t talk down the bad guys. Rocky Balboa settled his troubles in the ring. John Shaft pulled a gun, got the girl and looked good doing it. Sherlock Holmes — literature’s most celebrated thinker who prized his wits over his knuckles — still ended up grappling with Moriarty at Reichenbach Falls. Even America’s premier spaceman, the perfectly coiffed, rule-breaking, heart-taking Captain James T. Kirk of the USS Enterprise, loved a good fist fight.

But Patrick Stewart was the king of the nerds, the hero who didn’t need to out-muscle the room. From “Star Trek: The Next Generation” to “X-Men,” the slim, balding English Shakespearean actor shattered the stereotype that the science fiction — or comic book hero lead — had to be a muscle-flexing, gun-toting, womanizing cad. He could be a futuristic French starship captain, his commanding voice booming, “Make it so.” Or a paralyzed mutant whose penetrating, kindly stare made us believe that, no matter what, things under his watch would be OK.

When Shatner’s Captain Kirk was done, nobody expected Stewart’s Jean-Luc Picard to be the man in the center seat. Reportedly, even the creator of the franchise, Gene Roddenberry, had doubts and had to be talked into hiring the stage actor.

Stewart died Wednesday at his home in Los Angeles at 86, and the world suddenly feels a little less sure of that.

When William Shatner’s Captain Kirk was done, nobody expected Stewart’s Jean-Luc Picard to be the man in the center seat on the Enterprise-D. Reportedly, even the creator of the franchise, Gene Roddenberry, had doubts and had to be talked into hiring the stage actor.

Picard read poetry in a smooth baritone, drank Earl Grey, fed his goldfish and sent the cowboy diplomacy back to the previous generation. When the Enterprise faced a crisis, the question wasn’t who would shoot first. It was who would think hardest, and who would be brave enough to be wrong out loud.

Stewart’s toughest scenes proved the point. In the episode “Chain of Command,” Picard, who’s been captured, is tortured for days and told to say he sees five lights when there are only four. He won’t. Stewart played it with a quiet, shaking defiance, and it remains one of the great portraits of courage in television, with not a phaser in sight.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Stage giant Patrick Stewart, of ‘Star Trek’ and 'X-Men' fame, dies at 86. –

— Phil Lewis (@phillewis.bsky.social) 2026-10-29T19:48:50.486Z

Stewart made us believe in the alpha diplomat who preferred negotiation to confrontation but was no less a hero and icon than Captain Kirk

I’ll confess I never got Kirk’s “Star Trek” and haven’t seen most of those episodes. That was my father’s science fiction. But I have seen every hour of Stewart’s “Next Generation,” and it’s a big reason I’m a science fiction aficionado, comic book fan and author. I go to comic book conventions and book expos now, but I started with Star Trek conventions, and I still order my tea like Captain Picard: “Earl Grey, hot.”

As Professor Charles Xavier in “X-Men,” Stewart gave us a mentor in a wheelchair whose power was based not only on his mind but on his endless patience and hopefulness. The “X-Men” were, at heart, a story about outsiders asking whether the world will make room for them, and Stewart’s Xavier answered with a steady hand and a warm gaze. Opposite his real-life friend Ian McKellen’s Magneto, he helped give comic book movies one of its defining rivalries: two old friends who loved the same persecuted people and disagreed about how to save them. Many fans and critics have long heard echoes of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X in their argument, and Stewart never let Xavier’s patience soften into passivity.

I’ll confess I never got Kirk’s “Star Trek.” That was my father’s science fiction. But I have seen every hour of Stewart’s “Next Generation,” and it’s a big reason I’m a science fiction aficionado, comic book fan and author.

In “Logan,” he gave us a Xavier whose great mind was failing him, a performance that is hard to watch given what we know now about his struggle with Alzheimer’s and Lewy body dementia. In it, the proud, knighted Shakespearean actor is willing to be so raw, so vulnerable, so damaged onscreen, realistically fighting the ravages of age and yet clinging on to what heroism he could. He was ailing, and still giving us the best Professor X he could.

Stewart’s legacy is bigger than his performances. He spoke openly about the abuse he witnessed in his childhood home and was a passionate advocate for survivors of domestic violence. In announcing his death, his family’s statement recalled his work for refugees, veterans’ mental health, human rights and animal welfare, including his cherished foster pit bulls. The gentleness we saw on screen was not an act.

His velvety voice at the beginning of “Star Trek: The Next Generation” telling us that our adventures would take us “where no one” has gone before — not where no “man” has gone — signals a new future where everybody is included: men and women, the bookish, the balding, the thinkers, the disabled, the negotiators, the kindhearted, the patient, the different.

Much of science fiction imagines a humanity that has gotten past its worst instincts, and Stewart’s Picard embodied that promise. His authority came from his character, not conquest. For a generation of readers and writers who wanted to push the genre to imagine something bigger than the old model of heroism, Stewart gave us that permission.

The post Patrick Stewart played the kind of heroes we needed — and still need appeared first on MS NOW.

We can see everything in “You Can See Everything,” but seeing is not the same as knowing. Fielder and Oppenheim’s film is so effective because it knows that too. 

We can see everything in “You Can See Everything,” but seeing is not the same as knowing. Fielder and Oppenheim’s film is so effective because it knows that too. 

París, 30 oct (Prensa Latina) Aún con las críticas del gobierno y el discurso del saqueo como justificación para un despliegue policial este sábado, ¿cómo explicar que el 56 por ciento de los franceses respalde hoy las demandas legítimas de sindicatos y jóvenes?.

The post Francia: frustración futura, tensión del presente first appeared on Noticias Prensa Latina.

That honour goes to the wonderful Lutzy, who ran a café in Exeter. Next came Pedro, a colleague at the charity where I worked in Devon. When he heard I

The post The new Anglo-Portuguese relationship (A letter to my Portuguese friend in the UK) appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Studies have shown that the betting sites can predict races correctly, but their ability to forecast U.S. midterm elections is an important proving ground.

© Hilary Swift for The New York Times

Did Kazakhstan lose influence and domestic stability by voluntarily giving up the world’s fourth-largest nuclear arsenal? The answer, bluntly, is no. Astana inherited more than 1,400 Soviet strategic warheads and other nuclear materials following the collapse of the Soviet Union. It subsequently abandoned its military nuclear status and joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapon state, and transferred all remaining warheads to Russia. Now, Astana continues to play a deci

While celebrating recent political prisoner releases, author Nicole Bibbins Sedaca argues that the United States must use sanctions and diplomatic pressure to challenge the systemic use of imprisonment by autocratic regimes.

While celebrating recent political prisoner releases, author Nicole Bibbins Sedaca argues that the United States must use sanctions and diplomatic pressure to challenge the systemic use of imprisonment by autocratic regimes.

Rather than building systems around individual platforms and asking operators to navigate between them, we should build around the operator.

Rather than building systems around individual platforms and asking operators to navigate between them, we should build around the operator.

Last week, British Typhoon aircraft escorted French Rafale multirole fighters in a first-ever Anglo-French airborne nuclear strike exercise, codenamed Exercise Rummy. My former boss, Donald Rumsfeld, would not have been amused; it did not include American forces. Instead, as London stated, the exercise “mark[ed] a major step forward in UK-France defence cooperation under the [2025] Northwood…