The US Democratic Party is in need of a rebuild. Their first problem is Bernie Sanders
As the US Democratic Party tries to rebuild following a series of devastating election defeats, they find themselves with a dilemma. His name is Bernie Sanders, and he's shouting himself hoarse on a stage in Pennsylvania.
The Vermont senator, now 83 years old, refuses to go away — no matter how much party bosses might want him to.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
2 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Intel needs Ireland: Why US stake could help Leixlip, not harm it
The US Government's plan to take a 10% stake in Intel poses big questions for the future of the embattled chipmaker and its global operations. Having largely missed out on the recent boom in chips to power AI, the California-based giant is struggling to catch up with rivals Nvidia and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), which have both benefited from the soaring demand for generative AI. Intel's operational lapses are reflected in its latest earnings, with its most recent quarterly profit from the end of June of €3.5bn lagging significantly behind Nvidia's €26.7bn and TSMC's €17.6bn. The White House's potential deal aims to help Intel strengthen its US operations, serving as another means for President Donald Trump to fulfil his promise to grow domestic business and bring US companies home. The significant investment, which the Trump administration is also justifying on national security grounds, will likely carry a list of terms and conditions, if similar previous deals are anything to go by. Last year, the US government took an ownership stake in US Steel as part of a merger agreement with Japan-based Nippon Steel, enabling the controversial takeover while maintaining veto power over certain investment decisions in the interest of national security. These included strategic decisions such as plant closures, import levels and technology transfers - powers that would help the government protect US jobs and safeguard domestic production. At the outset, it seems a similar deal between the White House and struggling chipmaker Intel could have significant ramifications for Ireland, where its Leixlip hub serves as the key gateway to the European market. But should its Leixlip operations, Intel's second-largest base after the US, employing almost 5,000 people, really be worried about this potential new partnership? Since 1989, Intel has invested more than €30bn in its Irish operations, the majority of which has been injected in the last few years. In 2023, the chipmaker opened its €17bn Fab 34 facility, the largest construction project ever undertaken in Ireland, according to Intel, doubling the chipmaker's manufacturing space at its Leixlip hub. In June last year, asset management firm Apollo Global committed €10bn to Intel for a 49% stake in the Fab 34 facility, which allowed the chipmaker to retain majority ownership while gaining access to additional funding for future expansions. Leixlip's "critical role" The Leixlip campus is also poised to produce the majority of its Intel 4 technology, which includes the company's extreme ultraviolet (EUV) chips, the most advanced semiconductor manufacturing technology on the market. According to Intel, EUVs play a 'critical role' in driving the company towards its goals of delivering five nodes in four years and regaining leadership in process technology by 2025. Intel's Irish base also seems to have escaped the worst of global restructuring measures brought in by CEO Lip-Bu Tan to cut its workforce by 20%, with the expected job losses from its current round of layoffs far less than what would be considered proportionate. Intel's European operations are extremely intertwined, and the Leixlip facility is the epicentre. The Fab 34 facility in Leixlip is also part of what the company calls a 'first-of-its-kind end-to-end leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing value chain in Europe,' with the site being combined with a wafer fabrication facility in Germany and an assembly and test facility in Poland. EU chip production The company is also nicely positioned to benefit from the EU's goal to increase its global share of chip production to 20% by 2030 as the bloc seeks to enhance competitiveness on the back of the eye-opening Draghi report published last year. The EU is ready to give away billions to enable domestic semiconductor and chip manufacturing. If Intel moves its operations back to the US, it risks losing out on significant gains that it cannot afford to miss. While a government stake may help its financial woes, Intel's biggest problem is its lack of paying customers, a problem that President Trump could actually help fix by putting pressure on other US companies with large European operations to switch to Intel for their manufacturing needs. The US wants Intel to be a leader in chipmaking. For that to happen, Intel also needs to lead in Europe, for which a European hub is critical to prepare for a growing semiconductor market with ample money to spend. If it plays its cards right, Intel can simultaneously increase its customer base and benefit from the EU's push to strengthen its semiconductor industry. This will require a skilled workforce and a state-of-the-art manufacturing facility with a strong gateway to Europe. As much as Ireland needs Intel, Intel needs Ireland.
Irish Examiner
4 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Why are there so many conspiracy theories around wind farms?
When Donald Trump recently claimed, during what was supposed to be a press conference about an EU trade deal, that wind turbines were a 'con job' that 'drive whales loco', kill birds and even people, he wasn't just repeating old myths. He was tapping into a global pattern of conspiracy theories around renewable energy — particularly wind farms. (Trump calls them 'windmills' — a climate denier trope.) The idea fossil companies would delay access to renewable energy was nicely illustrated in a classic episode of 'The Simpsons', when Mr Burns builds a tower to blot out the sun over Springfield, forcing people to buy his nuclear power. Like 19th-century fears telephones would spread diseases, wind farm conspiracy theories reflect deeper anxieties about change. They combine distrust of government, nostalgia for the fossil fuel era, and a resistance to confronting the complexities of the modern world. And research shows that, once these fears are embedded in someone's worldview, no amount of fact checking is likely to shift them. Although we've known about climate change from carbon dioxide as probable and relatively imminent since at least the 1950s, early arguments for renewables tended to be seen more as a way of breaking the stranglehold of large fossil-fuel companies. The idea fossil companies would delay access to renewable energy was nicely illustrated in a classic episode of The Simpsons, when Mr Burns builds a tower to blot out the sun over Springfield, forcing people to buy his nuclear power. Back in the real world, similar dynamics were at play. In 2004, Australian prime minister John Howard gathered fossil fuel CEOs help him slow the growth of renewables, under the auspices of a Low Emissions Technology Advisory Group. Meanwhile, advocates of renewables — especially wind — often found it difficult to build public support, in part because the existing power providers (mines, oil fields, nuclear) tend to be out of sight and out of mind. Public opposition has also been fed by health scares, such as 'wind turbine syndrome'. Labelled a 'non-disease' and non-existent by medical experts, it continued to circulate for years. Academic work on the question of anti-wind farm activism is revealing a pattern: conspiracy thinking is a stronger predictor of opposition than age, gender, education or political leaning. In Germany, the academic Kevin Winter and colleagues found belief in conspiracies had many times more influence on wind opposition than any demographic factor. Worryingly, presenting opponents with facts was not particularly successful. If you think climate change is a hoax or a beat-up by hysterical eco-doomers, you're going to be easily persuaded that wind turbines are poisoning groundwater, causing blackouts or, in Trump's words, 'driving the whales loco'. In a more recent article, based on surveys in the US, UK and Australia which looked at people's propensity to give credence to conspiracy theories, Winter and colleagues argued opposition was 'rooted in people's worldviews'. If you think climate change is a hoax or a beat-up by hysterical eco-doomers, you're going to be easily persuaded that wind turbines are poisoning groundwater, causing blackouts or, in Trump's words, 'driving the whales loco'. Wind farms are fertile ground for such theories. They are highly visible symbols of climate policy, and complex enough to be mysterious to non-specialists. A row of wind turbines can become a target for fears about modernity, energy security, or government control. This, say Winter and colleagues, 'poses a challenge for communicators and institutions committed to accelerating the energy transition'. It's harder to take on an entire worldview than to correct a few made-up talking points. What is it all about? Beneath the misinformation, often driven by money or political power, there's a deeper issue. Some people — perhaps Trump among them — do not want to deal with the fact fossil technologies, which brought prosperity and a sense of control, are also causing environmental crises. And these are problems which are not solved with the addition of more technology. It offends their sense of invulnerability, of dominance. This 'anti-reflexivity', as some academics call it, is a refusal to reflect on the costs of past successes. It is also bound up with identity. In some corners of the online 'manosphere', concerns over climate change are being painted as effeminate. Many boomers, especially white heterosexual men like Trump, have felt disorientated as their world has shifted and changed around them. The clean energy transition symbolises part of this change. Perhaps this is a good way to understand why Trump is lashing out at 'windmills'. Marc Hudson is a visiting fellow at the University of Sussex Business School, University of Sussex
Irish Independent
7 hours ago
- Irish Independent
Nato defence chiefs hold virtual meeting on Ukraine security guarantees
Italian admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, chair of Nato's Military Committee, said that 32 defence chiefs from across the alliance would hold a video conference as a US-led diplomatic push seeks to end the fighting. US general Alexus Grynkewich, Nato's supreme allied commander in Europe, will take part in the talks, Mr Dragone said on social platform X. US president Donald Trump met last Friday with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska, and on Monday hosted Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and prominent European leaders at the White House. Neither meeting delivered concrete progress. Mr Trump is trying to steer Mr Putin and Mr Zelensky towards a settlement more than three years after Russia invaded its neighbour, but there are major obstacles. They include Ukraine's demands for Western-backed military assurances to ensure Russia will not mount another invasion in coming years. "We need strong security guarantees to ensure a truly secure and lasting peace," Mr Zelensky said in a Telegram post on Wednesday after Russian missile and drone strikes hit six regions of Ukraine overnight. Kyiv's European allies are looking to set up a force that could backstop any peace agreement, and a coalition of 30 countries, including European nations, Japan and Australia, have signed up to support the initiative. Military chiefs are figuring out how that security force might work. The role that the US might play in is unclear. Mr Trump has ruled out sending US troops to help defend Ukraine against Russia. Russia has repeatedly said that it would not accept Nato troops in Ukraine. Attacks on civilian areas in Sumy and Odesa overnight into Wednesday injured 15 people, including a family with three small children, Ukrainian authorities said. Mr Zelensky said the strikes "only confirm the need for pressure on Moscow, the need to introduce new sanctions and tariffs until diplomacy works to its full potential".
