Tools

Los hoteles con parques acuáticos de Lloret resisten

Es la séptima vez que Frank Vinke visita Lloret de Mar. De joven, este turista holandés acudía con sus amigos en busca de fiesta y música. Ahora le acompaña su familia: la mujer y sus dos hijos, de 5 y 2 años. Asegura que la Covid-19 “no ha supuesto...
Load more
Read full article on: lavanguardia.com
Petri Dishes with Alexandra Petri (Oct. 27)
Humor columnist Alexandra Petri takes your questions on the news and political in(s)anity of the day.
1m
washingtonpost.com
The Number of Early Votes in Florida Has Already Surpassed the Total Number of Ballots Cast for Trump in 2016
With a little over a week left until Election Day, more than 4 million Florida voters have already cast their ballots during early voting.
newsweek.com
NBA is targeting start date of Dec. 22 for the 2020-21 season
With a targeted start date of Dec. 22, the next NBA season would include 72 games and finish before the Tokyo Summer Olympic Games.        
usatoday.com
US sanctions Russian government institution tied to malware
The US Treasury Department on Friday announced sanctions on a Russian government research institution linked to a malware system "designed specifically to target and manipulate industrial safety systems."
edition.cnn.com
First murder hornet nest in US discovered in Washington
The Asian giant hornet home was found in a tree near a house in Whatcom County, Washington, the state’s agriculture department announced Friday.
nypost.com
Coronavirus FAQs: What's Up With Bubble Dining? Should You Hand Out Halloween Candy?
Answers to your COVID-19 questions about how to handle Halloween trick-or-treaters, whether it's safe to eat in a restaurant's outdoor bubble and if you can be infected through your ear canal.
npr.org
David Byrne’s ‘American Utopia’ Offers Optimistic Protest While Mixing New Music And Talking Heads Classics 
It would be easy to be cynical about Byrne's pragmatic optimism and sober protest, but honestly, it comes as a relief.
nypost.com
One Good Thing: Netflix’s The Queen’s Gambit makes chess mesmerizing. Really!
Anya Taylor-Joy is amazing in Netflix’s The Queen’s Gambit. | Phil Bray/Netflix The seven-episode miniseries shows why Anya Taylor-Joy is one of the most exciting actors working today. One Good Thing is Vox’s recommendations series. In each edition, we’ll tell you about something from the world of culture that we think you should check out. Chess shouldn’t be all that interesting to watch on screen, for probably obvious reasons. The game involves a lot of people sitting and staring at a board, moving pieces around in quiet contemplation. And unless you’re a major chess fan, the moves the players make won’t immediately make sense in the way a baseball player hitting a home run does. But something that is interesting to watch onscreen is a great actor playing a compelling character who has a lot going on in their mind. A close-up on the actor’s face as the wheels turn in the character’s head can be gripping because attempting to think your way out of a problem is something we all have experienced. So the smartest choice Scott Frank makes in adapting Walter Tevis’s 1983 novel The Queen’s Gambit into a seven-episode Netflix miniseries is to focus not on the chess but on his actors’ faces, particularly that of his star. As chess prodigy Beth Harmon, Anya Taylor-Joy gives one of my favorite performances in ages. And Frank shows an understated confidence in relying not on fancy camera tricks but on close-ups that watch the star’s slightly too-wide eyes flicker with recognition as she finds the move to trounce yet another challenger. The central conflict of the miniseries isn’t Beth vs. a world that keeps underestimating her, as it seems to be on its face. The central conflict is the viewer vs. Beth, as you try to find your way inside her rapidly whirring brain, and almost do, before she shuts you out again. Beth is an orphan in 1950s Kentucky, who discovers an abiding love of chess almost by accident, thanks to a gruff old janitor (Bill Camp) who works at the orphanage she is sent to after her mother dies in a car accident. (Isla Johnston plays Beth as an orphaned child before Taylor-Joy takes over the role when Beth turns 15.) But when Beth is adopted by a middle-aged couple in the early 1960s and encouraged by her adoptive mother (Marielle Heller) to pursue her chess hobby further, she rapidly starts climbing the ranks of the world’s best players. That’s kind of it, so far as the story goes. The Queen’s Gambit is an underdog narrative —nobody expects a woman to be good at chess! — meshed with a coming-of-age character study. How much of Beth’s motivation stems from the uncertainty of her childhood, of her adoption, of her bouncing from an orphanage to public school as a teenager? And how badly do the addictions that she develops to pills and alcohol, almost as part of her training, hinder her progress? Her traumas and her addictions must drive her on some level, but at no point does she monologue painfully and at length about how losing her mother pushed her to be better. She just has to be better because she has to be better. If she ever stopped and looked too closely at the reasons she behaves the way she does, she might completely fall apart. Taylor-Joy is one of my favorite performers working today, and she’s exceptional here. The best chess players in the world know when they’ve won or lost dozens of moves ahead of the game’s completion. Thus, chess very much is a game of faces, and Taylor-Joy’s cerebral acting meshes perfectly with Beth’s story. She’s an actor of micro-expressions, of flickers of eyes and twitches of lips, and what makes The Queen Gambit such a good fit for her is the way she keeps both the viewer and Beth’s opponents at arm’s length. Competition stories are often a great way to do character studies, especially when the competitions are one-on-one. Weirdly, the story I thought of most often while watching The Queen’s Gambit was Martin Scorsese’s 1980 film Raging Bull. The surface resemblance between the two is faint, but they’re both about self-destructive, preternaturally talented people who wrestle with the gendered expectations of the society they exist in, with top-notch performances from actors at the height of their craft. I spent most of The Queen’s Gambit nervous that the miniseries was going to become a story about Beth having to learn how to be a woman or something because she has turned off so much of herself to focus on being great at chess. But Frank’s scripts focus not on something so clichéd but on Beth stubbornly hammering at her own humanity until it fits the peculiar circumstances of her existence. The series is about how the mere fact of her being a woman causes other players to underestimate her, but only on its margins. By the time she’s credibly competing for the US championship, everybody takes her seriously. The Queen’s Gambit is not a story about a woman overcoming the odds to show the world her girl power; it’s a story about a woman overcoming the odds to understand herself. (And lest I leave the impression the series is all Taylor-Joy, the entire cast of the miniseries is perfect.) It’s also a miniseries about chess, one that slowly but surely teaches you important truths about the game, so that by the time Beth is playing the much-vaunted Soviet chess players, you get the gist of the games, even if you don’t grasp each and every nuance. You’ll understand just why it’s advantageous to play white instead of black, but you’ll also understand how the built-in disadvantage black holds reflects some of the ways Beth sees herself, even if she would never say that. Another movie I thought of while watching The Queen’s Gambit was Mike Leigh’s terrific 2008 comedy Happy-Go-Lucky. What I love about that movie is that its central character — an extraordinarily kind and, well, happy-go-lucky woman — doesn’t undergo some awkward character arc in which she realizes the world is darker and more cynical than she expected. Instead, she forces the world to realize the viability of her point of view. The Queen’s Gambit has flaws. It’s maybe a little too long. Frank is perhaps slightly too enamored of watching his star cavort around in her underwear. And the series’ one major character of color (Beth’s Black best friend Jolene, played wonderfully by Moses Ingram) is a thankless role. But The Queen’s Gambit also has a healthy dose of Happy-Go-Lucky-ness at its core, in a way that almost makes it a mirror image of that film. Beth Harmon forces the world to reckon first with her talent and then with her pain. The world bends around her in turn, without pressuring her to be anything she’s not. Sometimes, that’s enough. The Queen’s Gambit is streaming on Netflix. Will you help keep Vox free for all? The United States is in the middle of one of the most consequential presidential elections of our lifetimes. It’s essential that all Americans are able to access clear, concise information on what the outcome of the election could mean for their lives, and the lives of their families and communities. That is our mission at Vox. But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work. If you have already contributed, thank you. If you haven’t, please consider helping everyone understand this presidential election: Contribute today from as little as $3.
vox.com
Drew Barrymore reprises ‘Scream’ role to see if Casey Becker would survive in 2020
Would Casey Becker of "Scream" survive in modern times?
foxnews.com
Analysis: Why Trump resonates with some Black men
It's one of those seemingly hard-to-explain things: President Donald Trump holds an allure for some Black men, despite his history of denigrating Black Americans and his refusal to explicitly acknowledge systemic racism.
edition.cnn.com
CNN's Daniel Dale offers rare fact-checks of Biden, admits Trump 'correct' on Dem's anti-fracking stance
CNN's star fact-checker Daniel Dale broke with precedent by offering multiple rulings against Joe Biden over claims the former vice president made during Thursday's final presidential debate. 
foxnews.com
De Blasio deploying poll monitors claiming Trump can ‘intimidate voters’
Mayor de Blasio is sending hundreds of volunteers to poll sites in poor and immigrant neighborhoods on Election Day claiming he needs to protect against a push to “intimidate voters” that he pinned on President Trump — despite little to no evidence of suppression efforts in the five boroughs. “The president has made very clear...
nypost.com
Iran Says It's 'Not Interested' in Debate After Biden Warns It 'Will Pay A Price'
"We have repeatedly stated that Iran does not interfere in other countries' elections," Iranian mission to the United Nations spokesperson Alireza Miryousefi told Newsweek.
newsweek.com
End Minority Rule
Either we become a truly multiracial democracy or we cease to be a democracy at all.
nytimes.com
COVID-19 ‘cluster’ linked to live music event at Virginia restaurant
A live music event at a restaurant in Henrico, Va., is linked to a “cluster” of cases of the novel coronavirus, local health officials said this week when encouraging residents who may have been exposed to self-quarantine and monitor themselves for symptoms of COVID-19 over the next 14 days. Anyone who attended the live music...
nypost.com
CDC calls for stronger coronavirus-mitigation measures at the polls
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Friday called for stronger coronavirus mitigation measures at the polls. 
foxnews.com
Trump campaign asks Nevada court to stop counting early votes
The Trump campaign is accusing election officials of mishandling mail-in ballots and refusing to accommodate observers.
cbsnews.com
Dodgers' World Series Game 3 lineup: Austin Barnes is again behind the plate
Austin Barnes will catch Walker Buehler for his second straight start; Barnes was also behind the plate for Buehler in Game 6 of the NLCS.
latimes.com
What poll watchers actually do, and Trump’s troubling rhetoric about them, explained
Voters wait in line at the Franconia Governmental Center on October 22, 2020, in Alexandria, Virginia. | Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images Some concerns around poll watching don’t have to do with the people designated to be inside voting sites. “I’m urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully because that’s what has to happen,” President Donald Trump said during the first presidential debate last month. “I am urging them to do it.” To facilitate that, the Trump campaign has launched Army for Trump, an effort to mobilize tens of thousands of volunteers for get-out-the-vote efforts, including poll watching. A Trump campaign spokesperson told Vox that it hopes to fill 40,000 poll-watching shifts, and expects to exceed their goal of recruiting 50,000 volunteer poll watchers. This isn’t unique to the Trump campaign; the Biden campaign is also recruiting tens of thousands of poll observers. Laws governing what, exactly, observers can do at polling stations, and who can serve as one, vary by state. Unlike poll workers, who assist and engage with voters, partisan poll watchers are mostly just that — the eyes and ears of the political parties, looking for or documenting potential irregularities that may affect the outcome for their party, candidate, or ballot initiative. Poll watching is part of the democratic process, but it has gotten even more attention in 2020 because of the rhetoric around the election. The president has repeatedly made unfounded allegations of widespread voter fraud. Trump’s ire is mostly directed toward mail-in voting, but his claims that the election may be stolen from him and calls for people to keep an eye on polls (if not exactly new) have whipped up political tensions even more and increased fears of possible voter intimidation at the polls. Designated poll watchers — which, again, both parties have — usually have to be officially selected by aparty or candidate, and often have to be registered voters, or even registered in the voting precinct they’re assigned to watch. In many cases, they are restricted from interacting with voters, but depending on the jurisdiction, they can potentially challenge the eligibility of other voters. Those kinds of objections can slow down the voting process for everyone, when some voters already face long waits at the polls. But Trump’s rhetoric has raised concerns that partisan poll-watching activities will extend beyond these legitimate, designated poll watchers, with private citizens or even armed militia groups taking it upon themselves to police the polls. Voter intimidation is illegal, and states have strict buffer zones around voting sites. But, as Nicolas Riley, senior counsel at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) at Georgetown University Law School, told me, “Simply by virtue of the fact that the more people you put in and around the polls on Election Day, the more likely you are to have chaos and other types of shenanigans that lead to all kinds of problems.” More than 50 million people have already cast their ballots in early voting for the 2020 election. There have been a few incidents of possible voter intimidation, most notably a report in the New York Times that said the Trump campaign was videotaping voters bringing ballots to drop-off boxes. But for the most part, Americans are successfully casting their ballots, and that’s a reassuring sign ahead of Election Day. But there’s still a chance we could see some, well, “shenanigans.” So with that, it’s worth it to understand what poll watchers are — and aren’t — legally allowed to do. Here’s everything you need to know. Why America even has poll watchers Poll watchers, in the best of circumstances, are there to guarantee openness and transparency in the democratic process. In America’s early days, elections were kind of free-for-alls, sometimes literally drunken parties, where people got together and cast their ballots in public. It was all done out in the open, which meant everyone could see or hear who their fellow citizens (then, white men) voted for. Even when paper ballots came into fashion, political parties handed them out — basically, you take the party ballot you want, put it in their box, and that was that. But that began to change in America in the decades after the Civil War, when voting became much more professionalized. A big part of this was the adoption, in the 1880s and 1890s, of what’s known as the “Australian ballot” — or secrecy ballot — which basically scrapped the old system for something similar to what voters are used to today. Instead of political parties running the show, state officials designate polling areas and distribute ballots with all the candidates. And, most importantly, the voter marks it in secret. This is obviously the condensed version, but as experts told me, this is where you start to see all the different kinds of rules governing polling stations, including who can be there and who can’t. So the role of poll watchers evolved from here. Before voter registration systems were adopted, they might ID voters and, after, check their names on a list. There was also a dark side to this: As Riley told me, some of these laws that allow voters to challenge the voting eligibility of fellow citizens came about as a result of Jim Crow-era policies, and were specifically designed to target Black voters. But broadly, when it came to partisan poll watchers, the thinking behind it was largely that parties or candidates wanted a guarantee against any funny business that might disadvantage their candidate. Having representatives for different parties also helped ensure legitimacy — if everyone agrees on the outcome, and any potential disputes are resolved, well, that bolsters faith in electoral outcomes. “Even though we take for granted that our elections are run according to the rules,” Larry Garber, an international elections expert and consultant at the Carter Center, told me, “I think there is still lingering concern that if no one’s watching, someone can stuff ballots or prevent people from voting or whatever. And therefore, you need to have your representatives present to prevent that kind of chicanery.” Beyond possible chicanery, problems do happen at voting sites. Maybe the printed ballots misspell the name of a candidate; if voters are confused, the campaign in question may want to know that. Maybe a polling place runs out of ballots for a few hours; poll watchers can document how long that lasted and how many voters might have been turned away. And they can communicate with party officials and campaign lawyers. For example, maybe the polling station was out of ballots long enough that parties might sue to keep the polling place open a little later. Or, say some votes are discarded because a voting machine can’t read them; poll watchers might be able to note that, actually, you can clearly see what the voter marked and thus the ballots should be counted. Or if a candidate loses in a close race, they can potentially use poll watchers’ testimonies for grounds to challenge the results, and maybe demand a recount. You get the picture. Political campaigns and parties can’t keep track of every voting precinct, so partisan poll watchers are kind of like an on-the-ground liaison for anything that might go awry. Who is allowed to watch the polls, and what they are (and aren’t) allowed to do Poll watchers can be nonpartisan, such as members of civic groups, or partisan. Partisan poll watchers usually represent political parties, candidates, or even ballot initiatives. Some states also allow for private citizens to observe polling places and other election processes such as testing voting equipment and examining absentee ballots. (The US allows for international poll observers, too.) Each state has its own laws governing who can and cannot be at polling stations. When it comes to partisan poll observers, states have rules about who can be appointed. For example, many require poll watchers to be registered voters themselves, sometimes in the jurisdiction where they’re serving, or at least in the state. Some states limit the number of partisan poll watchers, such as restricting them to one observer per party/candidate, per precinct. States usually require that observers clearly identify themselves and whom they’re representing, and no campaign swag is allowed. States also have guidelines for which parts of the election process watchers can observe and exactly what poll watchers can do during voting. Some states may allow poll observers to watch over poll workers’ shoulders as they check IDs; others may designate locations for observers to stand close by but out of the way of the action. Most of the time, poll watchers are not permitted to interact directly with voters, or even election officials, unless they have a specific complaint or challenge — and states all have rules on how any challenge can be made. Poll watchers, of course, can never follow someone into a voting booth. Some states bar observers from taking photos or videos. This year, some states have also added guidelines related to the pandemic, such as asking poll watchers to wear face masks or stand 6 feet away from others. Some states also allow private citizens to observe stages of the voting process, sometimes under similar guidelines as partisan observers, other times with slightly different restrictions. In many states, both designated poll watchers and regular citizens can challenge the eligibility of voters. States have laws governing these types of challenges. For example, sometimes the challenger also has to be a registered voter in the precinct, or submit their request in writing. But you get the gist: different states, different rules. Overzealous poll watchers are a concern, but probably not a huge one There are downsides to this kind of voting transparency. Overzealous poll workers do have the potential to slow down the voting process at precincts if they’re being overly aggressive or, as is allowed in some states, challenging the eligibility of voters. And in an election year where turnout is expected to be much higher than usual, and where polling places are seeing hours-long waits for early voting, this can just jam things up. “You can’t object for bogus reasons, but it’s pretty easy to claim that you’re objecting for a legitimate reason, right?” Garber told me. “And that gums up the process, causes delays, creates lines, creates frustration, makes people feel like the process is somehow not working.” Garber emphasized that polling officials who are running these sites have the power to intervene if a poll watcher is really overstepping their role or mounting frivolous challenges. “State law varies across the country as to what level of proof the poll watcher would have to have in order to challenge the person who’s getting ready to cast their ballot,” Julie Houk, managing counsel of election protection at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, told me. “Some states have criminal penalties associated with making invalid or intentionally false challenges to harass or intimidate voters. But, again, that depends on the state law.” Such challenges can potentially disenfranchise individual voters. If, say, a voter waits in line for hours only to find out they’re being challenged, they may not be able to gather the evidence they need to refute the claims, which sometimes involves providing additional identification or witness testimony. The concern is that the voter may just give up, said Houk, though she pointed out that organizations like hers are there to intervene if that happens on Election Day, to protect voters’ rights. Some voting rights groups are also concerned that partisan poll watchers could single out certain voters for additional scrutiny, something that could be intimidating for voters, especially if a poll watcher is singling out minorities or non-English-speaking voters as ineligible. Vincent Hutchings, a political science and Afro-American and African studies professor at the University of Michigan, told me this is especially problematic given the geographic and racial divides between the parties. “In such a world where you can visually identify — typically — someone’s racial or ethnic background, and when there’s such a high correlation between race and ethnicity and partisanship, then that is a recipe for potential disaster,” he said. But the biggest worries over poll watchers in 2020 have less to do with the legitimate ones dispatched to voting places by their party or candidate, and more to do with, well, everyone else. Trump’s calls to watch the polls are what people are really worried about In September, during early voting in Virginia, a group of Trump supporters stood outside a polling place in Fairfax, shouting “four more years” as voters entered the polling station. The laws differ state by state, but all voting sites have buffer zones around them in which people who are not in line to actually vote aren’t allowed to stand. Beyond the buffer zone, however, people can more openly electioneer — wave a Trump flag, hand out pamphlets for a Democratic candidate, etc. In Virginia, that buffer zone is 40 feet, meaning that During the times the polls are open and ballots are being counted, it is unlawful for any person (i) to loiter or congregate within 40 feet of any entrance of any polling place; (ii) within such distance to give, tender, or exhibit any ballot, ticket, or other campaign material to any person or to solicit or in any manner attempt to influence any person in casting his vote; or (iii) to hinder or delay a qualified voter in entering or leaving a polling place. Election officials said the Trump supporters in Fairfax were about 100 feet from the building, so outside the buffer zone. But officials still had to open up another portion of the building so voters could wait inside, just to prevent anyone from feeling as if they were being harassed. To some, this incident looked like a potential first act in a tense and highly polarized election year, with a potential for a wave of private citizens intimidating voters at polling stations under the guise of poll watching. Trump’s general reluctance to condemn white supremacy, as well as his comments that the far-right Proud Boys group should “stand back and stand by” on Election Day, has forced election officials and law enforcement to prepare for possible voter intimidation at the polls. (Trump later said he meant to say “stand down.”) And some militia groups, such as the Oath Keepers, have already said they will patrol polling sites on Election Day. The fear over this “army” of poll watchers Trump is recruiting, then, might be that there will be a blurring of the lines for poll watchers, or that it might attract regular citizens or militia groups who feel called to patrol or police voting precincts for voter fraud, particularly in majority Black or brown or Democratic neighborhoods. “And that’s the concern,” Houk told me, “where they’ve been sort of encouraged to go out and watch the polls but they don’t know what they’re watching for, because they don’t know what the law says.” “There is a role for poll observers to observe what’s going on, and to make sure that elections are proceeding fairly,” Kathleen Roblez, a staff attorney at Forward Justice, a nonpartisan racial, social, and economic organization justice organization in the US South, told me. “But,” she added, “I think that some of the concern of the real intimidation will come from people who are outside of the polling places, who have little bit more power and are less regulated.” When it comes to carrying weapons, some states bar people from bringing firearms into polling stations, but it varies by state. However, it is always illegal for an individual to use a firearm to intimidate a voter. “Even if one leaves aside the inflammatory rhetoric of the president — because, of course, it didn’t begin with him — this process of sending poll watchers, oftentimes to Democratic neighborhoods, which of course are minority neighborhoods, in many instances, is an opportunity to engage in some of the most egregious violations of people’s civil rights,” Hutchings said. “It leaves open the possibility that this could occur because indeed it has occurred before, and it’s occurred before in my lifetime, not 100 years ago.” There are a few egregious examples in recent history, but maybe none more relevant to 2020 than what happened during a New Jersey gubernatorial race in 1981. On Election Day, about 200 armed men, including many off-duty police, patrolled primarily minority and Democratic-voting neighborhoods like Newark and Trenton. They wore armbands and identified themselves as part of the “National Ballot Security Task Force”; some also wore Republican Party branding, according to news reports from the time. And they were the creation of, and very much linked to, the Republican Party. “WARNING,” one of their posters read. “This area is being patrolled by the National Ballot Security Task Force. It is a crime to falsify a ballot or to violate election laws.” The posters reportedly offered rewards to people who turned in improperly registered voters. In court documents, one of the plaintiffs, a Black woman from Trenton, said she had been asked to show her voter registration card and told by someone from the task force that she could not vote without it. The NBSTF also actively tried to drive voters from the polls, including, in one instance, chasing voters away from the polls in Newark. That election was extraordinarily close. The Republican candidate, Thomas H. Kean, led his Democratic opponent, James Florio, by fewer than about 1,750 votes initially. A recount still put Kean in the lead, by fewer than 1,800 votes, and Florio conceded. But even though Democrats didn’t challenge the final result, they ultimately did take Republicans, specifically the Republican Party in New Jersey and the Republican National Committee,to court for voter intimidation.Plus, before the actual intimidation at the polls, Republicans had been engaged in what’s known as “voter caging,” where they send mail to registered voters, keep track of what mail is undeliverable, and try to purge those voters from the rolls. Ahead of the 1981 election, they did this to thousands of voters in primarily Black and brown neighborhoods in New Jersey. So civil rights activists helped gather testimony and affidavits about the NBSTF’s tactics, and the Democratic National Committee sued the GOP for voter intimidation and illegal harassment under the Voting Rights Act. In 1982, the two sides settled, and the RNC entered into a consent decree that barred the committee from engaging in any ballot security measures that might deter qualified voters from voting. In practice, this prevented the RNC from coordinating ballot security activities nationally; the consent decree could be enforced in court if any groups engaged in any such intimidation or harassment and the RNC was found to be behind it. It was extended in 1987 and again in 2009. But at the start of 2018, the consent decree expired, despite Democrats’ attempts to extend it. Which means that, for the first time in decades, the RNC is not restrained by the limits of consent decree, including getting prior approval for any poll-watching activities. “The expiration of the consent decree looms large in this election,” Angelo J. Genova, chair and managing partner of Genova Burns and one of the attorneys who represented Democrats in the litigation, told me. The expiration of the decree meant that an incredibly powerful check on potential voter suppression was now gone.“For decades, the consent decree effectively checked the RNC and its agents from engaging in purported ballot security measures whose purpose or effect was to suppress minority voters from exercising their right to vote. This consent decree was made for this moment,” Genova said, “a moment one would think was long gone.” For Republicans, though, the expiration meant they were finally back on equal footing with the Democrats, as they didn’t have to follow additional restrictions to their campaign activities and the RNC can coordinate nationally, something the consent decree really hindered. But as election expert Rick Hasen told NPR in 2018, there was a reason for the unequal footing. In recent years, Republicans, not Democrats, have a documented history of trying to make it harder for minority voters to vote. Mark Krasovic, an expert in US and New Jersey history at Rutgers University, told me that beyond the threat of direct voter intimidation, the concern is that partisan election monitoring activities will be usedto just slow down the process — “to gum up the works as much as you can” — and to delegitimize the electoral process. “That was something that people were saying in ’81: It’s not necessarily that they turned people away, but they slowed things down, and people didn’t get to cast their votes,” he said. “And then just to delegitimize the entire process — to raise questions about it, to promote skepticism of the process.” Despite concerns, voters should feel confident about going to the polls Delegitimizing the voting process, as Krasovic said, is not a small thing. That’s partly why Trump’s rhetoric is so dangerous. It’s not just about rallying a few die-hards to the polls; it creates the specter of intimidation. If voters are nervous or fearful about voting, they may be dissuaded from doing so altogether. That, in itself, can suppress the vote. There are very real concerns about what might happen outside polling stations, experts said, but it’s important to recognize that despite a few tense incidents so far in 2020, the worst-case predictions are not actually happening right now. A Trump campaign spokesperson said its “poll watchers provide confidence in an election when they can say that all rules and laws were applied equally,” and added that they’re all trained in the proper conduct of a polling location or other election facility. And though not all states require trainings, the Trump campaign is providing training for everyone. CNN reviewed 17 poll watcher training videos posted by the Trump campaign, and the instructions did not match the rhetoric of the president. “Simply because someone has out-of-state plates or they don’t speak English, those are not reasons for a challenge,” the narrator says in the Colorado video, according to CNN. Another says to be nice to everyone, and makes clear the job isn’t to stop legitimate voters from voting. Although a video of a training in Nevada had a Trump campaign lawyer telling the group that the “the main goal is electing the boss,” he also said watchers shouldn’t interfere with voters, and should kick any issues up to the lawyers. And in any election, there are going to be cadres of lawyers on the lookout for both sides. The Biden team is also recruiting poll watchers, and there will be tens of thousands of poll observers associated with the campaign deployed across the country, both as designated partisan poll watchers inside precincts and as volunteers outside the buffer zone, who can answer voter questions. “We’re making sure that everybody that shows up and wants to cast their vote in person that’s eligible is able to do so, and that vote counts. We do that everywhere and anywhere we can,” Rachana Desai Martin, director of voter protection and senior counsel for the Biden campaign, told me. In that sense, 2020 is just like any other election year. But, of course, it isn’t in a lot of ways — the biggest aberration of course being that one of the two candidates at the top of the ticket (along with many of his allies) is trying anything and everything in his power to undercut the voting process. And, again, that includes rhetoric around poll watchers. In September, unauthorized poll watchers associated with the Trump campaign showed up at satellite offices in Philadelphia, where voters could register or drop off mail-in ballots. Election officials asked them to leave, because the satellite offices were not official polling locations but were just providing voter services. But Trump allies, and the president, tried to gin up suspicions around the Philadelphia election officials asking the unauthorized poll watchers to leave. Wow. Won’t let Poll Watchers & Security into Philadelphia Voting Places. There is only one reason why. Corruption!!! Must have a fair Election.— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 29, 2020 Trump repeated that claim during his debate with Biden in September, saying “bad things happen in Philadelphia.” The Trump campaign also sued, but a state judge sided with the Philadelphia officials, and just this week, a higher court affirmed that ruling. But the damage was sort of done: Right-wing circles had picked up on this idea that somehow Trump campaign observers were being barred from election sites. The poll watchers aren’t really the problem, then. It’s the misinformation and rhetoric around them. And that, more than anything, may be the most potent force in undermining the vote this year. Will you help keep Vox free for all? The United States is in the middle of one of the most consequential presidential elections of our lifetimes. It’s essential that all Americans are able to access clear, concise information on what the outcome of the election could mean for their lives, and the lives of their families and communities. That is our mission at Vox. But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work. If you have already contributed, thank you. If you haven’t, please consider helping everyone understand this presidential election: Contribute today from as little as $3.
vox.com
This website checks whether ice cream machine at local McDonald's is broken
Want to avoid visiting a McDonald's with a broken ice cream machine? There's a website that tracks the fast food chain's locations.      
usatoday.com
McEnany: Trump hasn't asked DOJ to investigate Bidens
President Trump has not asked Attorney General Bill Barr to open an investigation into the Bidens, according to White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany.
foxnews.com
In hard-hit Peru, worry mounts over both COVID-19 and dengue
PUCALLPA, Peru — Two of Lidia Choque’s close family members had already gotten sick with the new coronavirus when the mosquitos arrived. The 53-year-old woman lives in a wooden house near the airport of a Peruvian city in the Amazon rainforest. City fumigators usually visit several times during the rainy season to eliminate the pests,...
nypost.com
'Fortnitemares': What you need to know about 'Fortnite' Halloween event
On Wednesday, the hit online game Fortnite launched its annual Fortnitemares, a special Halloween event offering special skins and gear.        
usatoday.com
Biden's claim Americans didn't lose private health insurance under ObamaCare debunked by fact-checkers
Fact-checkers described Biden's debate remarks “a variation of a claim that earned President Barack Obama our Lie of the Year in 2013.”
foxnews.com
We tested multiple chargers to find the best to fast-charge an iPhone 12
News flash: The iPhone 12 does not come with a wall plug in the box. And that extends to all four models: the 12 Mini, 12, 12 Pro and 12 Pro Max.
edition.cnn.com
Mayor de Blasio disses Manhattan: Midtown is ‘not center of universe’
It may contain the “Crossroads of the World” but Mayor Bill de Blasio said Friday that Manhattan is “not the center of our universe.” De Blasio made the seemingly out-of-touch comments during his weekly appearance on WNYC radio’s “The Brian Lehrer Show” when asked by the host about how Manhattan office employees are reportedly returning...
nypost.com
McConnell moves to shut down debate on Barrett nomination, setting up final vote just days before election
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, brushing aside Democratic concerns over the expedited timeframe for confirming Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, moved on Friday to cut off debate and set up a final confirmation vote eight days before the election.
edition.cnn.com
Social media says Trump, Biden debate was less negative and declared Biden the winner
Fewer people watched and tweeted than the first time around, and thus were less engaged, with fewer negative tweets, say researchers.       
usatoday.com
Caribbean disturbance could become Tropical Storm Zeta
Computer models are struggling to handle the system, making for a tricky forecast.
washingtonpost.com
Miranda Maverick: Liana Jojua made 'big mistake' with UFC 254 faceoff threat
Miranda Maverick is not fond of Liana Jojua's behavior during their faceoff ahead of UFC 254.        Related StoriesFight Game on the 'Gram: Justin Gaethje's best posts before UFC 254Fight Game on the 'Gram: Khabib Nurmagomedov's best posts before UFC 254UFC 254 'Embedded,' No. 5: Khabib Nurmagomedov's weight cut amplifies 
usatoday.com
Trump’s Climate Denial Is a Rapidly Losing Battle—Even With Fossil Fuel Workers
The argument the president made at the final presidential debate is not nearly as popular as he thinks.
slate.com
No, Biden did not call Black people “superpredators”
President Donald Trump speaks during the final presidential debate on October 22 at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee. | Julio Cortez/AP A theory about juvenile criminals has been debunked for years, but it keeps coming up in presidential debates. President Trump has been pushing the lie that his opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, called Black people “superpredators”— but there’s no record of him doing so. During the final presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, Trump repeated this accusation in response to a question about Black Americans having to have “The Talk” with their children about how to safely interact with police. Trump skipped over answering the actual question and went straight to a critique of Biden’s record: “[Biden has] been in government 47 years. He never did a thing. Except in 1994, when he did such harm to the Black community and they were called, and he called them, ‘superpredators’ and he said that, he said it, ‘superpredators,’” Trump said. It’s an accusation Trump has been drumming up in the final weeks of the campaign. Biden made another big mistake. He totally mixed up two Crime Bills. Didn’t have a clue (as usual!). Also, he freely used the term SUPER PREDATOR!!!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 16, 2020 Trump world and conservatives have been circulating 1993 remarks given by Biden on the Senate floor, uncovered by CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski in 2019. In his speech, Biden referred to “predators on our streets that society has in fact, in part because of its neglect, created.” As Kaczynski pointed out last night and this morning, however, the only reported time Biden has used the term “superpredator” is in a 1997 hearing when he said most youth weren’t “the so-called ‘superpredators.’” ...but the instance was Biden arguing *against* putting youth in adult prisons in a 1997 hearing where he said that most youth *weren't* "the so called 'super predators'." https://t.co/dkFxe4BOMG pic.twitter.com/nOWS9EqdSz— andrew kaczynski (@KFILE) October 23, 2020 A confusing part of the story is what “superpredator” even means, or how it’s different from “predator.” The term was deployed in a specific context of the late 20th-century juvenile crime wave. And on some level, resurfacing “superpredator” is just Trump trying to recapture the success of his attacks against his previous opponent, Hillary Clinton, who did use the term. The term “superpredator” and its fraught history, briefly explained Though crime has been at historic lows, excluding the complicated data coming out this year,juvenile violent crime was very high in the 1980s and ’90s. At the time it was considered to be a national emergency. Violent crimes committed by juveniles rose a precipitous 64 percent from 1980 to 1994 according to a March 2002 study by the Urban Institute’s Jeffrey Butts and Jeremy Travis. This figure includes forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, but to underscore the horror of this era, arrests for murder alone “jumped 99 percent during that time.” Betts and Travis write that terms “such as ‘juvenile super predator,’ ‘coming blood bath,’ and ‘crime time bomb’” flooded the airwaves as the media, state and local governments, and every day people feared that the crime wave would continue to rise until there was an “unavoidable collision with a growing generation of violent youth.” But the term “superpredator” is not just the word predator with super- affixed to the front to make it sound worse; it is a now-debunked theory of juvenile violent crime popularized beginning in 1995 by John DiIulio, then a political science professor at Princeton University. DiIulio’s article describes offenders as with inhuman imagery, writing he “foreswore research inside juvenile lock-ups. The buzz of impulsive violence, the vacant stares and smiles, and the remorseless eyes were at once too frightening and too depressing.” He warns America: On the horizon, therefore, are tens of thousands of severely morally impoverished juvenile super-predators. They are perfectly capable of committing the most heinous acts of physical violence for the most trivial reasons (for example, a perception of slight disrespect or the accident of being in their path). They fear neither the stigma of arrest nor the pain of imprisonment. They live by the meanest code of the meanest streets, a code that reinforces rather than restrains their violent, hair-trigger mentality. In prison or out, the things that super-predators get by their criminal behavior — sex, drugs, money — are their own immediate rewards. Nothing else matters to them. So for as long as their youthful energies hold out, they will do what comes “naturally”: murder, rape, rob, assault, burglarize, deal deadly drugs, and get high. He was wrong, of course. As Butts & Travis report, “violent crime in America fell for six straight years from 1994 to 2000. According to the newest crime data ... the rate of juvenile violent crime in 2000 was lower than at any time in the previous two decades.” According to a 2015 article from the Juvenile Justice Information Exchange “juvenile arrests for violent crime have dropped to a 30-year low.” But at the time, the superpredator theory resonated powerfully. As Kevin Drum writes for Mother Jones, DiIulio was invited by then-President Bill Clinton “to attend a working dinner on juvenile crime” at the White House. Hillary Clinton’s remarks a few months after that dinner make clear that his ideas had resonated. In her remarks at Keene State College in New Hampshire, she talked about “the kinds of kids that are called ‘superpredators’ — no conscience, no empathy.” My colleague, German Lopez, has reported on how wrong this theory is, pointing out simply that: “Superpredators didn’t exist. The type of criminal Clinton was describing came from faulty research that’s been repeatedly debunked — and even the biggest proponent of the superpredators myth has since apologized for spreading the idea.” The theory was so harmful because if you accept the premise that the juvenile crime wave was due to dehumanized kids predisposed to the most violent acts without any remorse, you likely wouldn’t turn to rehabilitation for a solution. As Lopez writes, “the myth was used to push tough-on-crime policies that helped lead to a rise in incarceration.” Trump probably doesn’t know — or care — about the social science and is just trying to make Black voters less enthusiastic about turning out for Biden Returning to Trump’s attack on Biden: Biden used the term predator in 1993, two years before DeIulio began pushing the “superpredator” theory. So unless he has a time machine, Biden was not referencing the now-debunked theory. But there’s a reason Trump keeps pushing this attack. During the 2016 campaign, a 1996video of Hillary Clinton using the term “superpredators” circulated widely online. There’s no way to tell if that video had a depressing effect on Black voter turnout, but it was clear that Black voter turnout was worse for Clinton than it was for President Barack Obama. Trump seems to be hoping pinning Biden with the term will have a similar effect; according to FiveThirtyEight, Trump is “gaining ground” somewhat with Black voters, especially younger Black men. This all is not to exonerate Biden for his role in mass incarceration; he has said that he regrets his support for parts of the 1994 crime bill, calling crack sentencing guidelines that disproportionately punished Black Americans a “big mistake.” But to have cogent policy conversations we need to be specific about the criticism that are legitimate and ones that are not. Biden, and almost every politician active in the 1990s, ascribed to a tough-on-crime approach that is now widely-criticized across the political spectrum. It’s a testament to the rapid change in our criminal justice reform politics and likely a testament to the low rates of juvenile violent crime that have defined the last couple of decades. Will you help keep Vox free for all? The United States is in the middle of one of the most consequential presidential elections of our lifetimes. It’s essential that all Americans are able to access clear, concise information on what the outcome of the election could mean for their lives, and the lives of their families and communities. That is our mission at Vox. But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work. If you have already contributed, thank you. If you haven’t, please consider helping everyone understand this presidential election: Contribute today from as little as $3.
vox.com
AstraZeneca to resume its Covid-19 vaccine trial in US
Drugmaker AstraZeneca will resume the trial of its experimental coronavirus vaccine in the United States, which has been on hold since September.
edition.cnn.com
Video shows red Jeep tumbling down side of Colorado mountain
A dashboard camera captured shocking video of a red Jeep Wrangler tumbling down several switchbacks on the side of a mountain in Colorado Saturday, Oct. 10.
foxnews.com
Minneapolis residents ask city council to reduce gun violence
Minneapolis residents on Thursday gathered to discuss ways the city council and community can end gun violence that has spiked in the city.
foxnews.com
Presidential election in Florida may come down to Latino voters
Florida's Hispanic population features a diverse electorate, with many Cuban American voters who tend to back Republicans while most other Latino groups back Democrats. Stephanie Valencia of Equis Research joined CBSN with more on the state's Latino voters.
cbsnews.com
Where’s the slot? With some voters confused, Md. officials detail how ballot dropboxes work.
Plastic rain flaps over the slots of ballot drop boxes have confused some voters
washingtonpost.com
Nest of 'murder hornets' in Washington state 1st in US: Officials
Washington state entomologists discovered the first Asian giant hornet nest in the United States this week, officials said.
abcnews.go.com
Minneapolis Residents Sue City Over Alleged Police Department Rollbacks
A group of eight Minneapolis residents now await a judge’s ruling after filing a lawsuit against the city for allegedly scaling back the police presence in their neighborhood in the months after the police killing of George Floyd and the unrest that followed. Residents believe that, after the city council announced that they were disbanding…
time.com
Put your best foot forward on Zoom with this Logitech professional webcam
Nowadays, your most important moments are taking place over video calls, from family reunions and game nights to meetings with clients and job interviews. But do you have the tools you need in order to put your best foot forward? Meet The Logitech C922x Pro Stream Webcam, an amazing option that works for just about...
nypost.com
Listen to Episode 46 of ‘Blue Rush’: Another Heartbreaking Giants Loss in Philly feat. Bruce Beck
Thursday night was as heartbreaking of a defeat as it gets for the Giants, somehow losing 22-21 to the Eagles. It is now seven years without a win in Philadelphia. The Giants blew a 21-10 lead in the final five minutes, dropping to 1-6 and last place in the miserable NFC East. To break down...
nypost.com
Nearly 130K lives could be saved if everyone wears masks: study
Universal mask-wearing could save almost 130,000 American lives from the COVID-19 pandemic through February 2021, according to scientists. A study, published Friday in the journal Nature Medicine, models a series of scenarios that could happen during the fall and winter in the US if states double down on safety measures like social distancing and face-covering...
nypost.com
2 good Samaritans stopped man raping 60-year-old woman in public, deputies say
Two good Samaritans interrupted a man committing a rape in a New Orleans suburb last week and stopped the act, authorities said. 
foxnews.com
Dodgers vs. Rays prediction: Under will hit for first time
The World Series is tied 1-1 and on Friday, that deadlock will be broken by a pair of pitchers who have not gone very deep into starts, but have been solid at keeping the ball in the yard. The Tampa Bay Rays’ Charlie Morton has pitched a combined 15²/₃ innings in his three starts this...
nypost.com
Cauliflower: A culinary blank canvas
Its neutral taste, texture and color make it perfect for exploring different flavors and cooking techniques.
latimes.com
Stream It Or Skip It: ‘Over the Moon’ on Netflix, an Animated Extravaganza That Aims for the Stars
...but doesn't quite reach them.
nypost.com
Grant Imahara's legacy lives on through foundation named after 'MythBusters' star
The Grant Imahara STEAM Foundation, named after the late "MythBusters" engineer, will support students involved in science, tech, engineering, art and math.
latimes.com