Hilary Clinton OK'd plan to link Trump to Russia
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
10 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
4 Ways Trump's Policies Harm Americans, Per Buttigieg
Former secretary of transportation Pete Buttigieg is being applauded online for his recent, simple breakdown on all the ways Donald Trump's chosen cabinet is negatively impacting Americans' lives. While sitting down for NPR's Morning Edition, Pete insisted that Democrats need to change their approach if they want to reach voters. "We do have to look at what we're doing that makes it hard to hear what we have to say," he told host Steve Inskeep. "Too often we talk in terms that are academic. When we're talking about deeply important things, like freedom and democracy, we still have to have a way of talking about it that relates to how everyday life is different." As an example, Pete shared ways our "everyday life is different and worse" under Trump's presidency, because, as he said, "When you have an autocrat in power, he can get away with appointing incompetent people over very important things in our lives." To start, he said, "Right now we have the secretary of defense — in charge of defending the American people — who was accidentally texting military strike information to journalists." "We have the person in charge of American public health, who is a quack who doesn't believe in medicine, and now measles is on the rise in America," he continued. "We have a secretary of education — in charge of your kid's educational well-being — who has spoken about the importance of 'A1,' which means she does not understand that the acronym is AI, which means she does not understand the most important development affecting education in our lifetimes." Pete continued, "We have a secretary of homeland security who sat on funding and did not allow it to go to Texas during the floods for at least two days for no good reason." "So these things do affect you," Pete concluded. "Not for academic reasons, but because of what happens when you have a loss of accountability. Those are the kinds of things I think we need to talk about before anybody can hear us." A clip of Pete's simple yet effective explanation was shared to X, formerly known as Twitter, where it garnered over 1.7 million views and over 1,000 comments. By and large, people are calling Pete's breakdown "brilliant." One person said, "This breakdown of the incompetence of the administration is simple yet brilliant. And the reality of how they're affecting peoples' REAL lives is heartbreaking and infuriating." "Last thirty seconds should be mandatory listening," another agreed. "The loss of accountability over trumps horrible yes men stooge picks for cabinet undeniably makes your life worse as an American. It isn't up for debate." Others called Pete "the best communicator in US politics"... ...and insisted, "This is who We The People employ!!!" Talks like this have made Pete a favorite amongst voters looking to the future of the Democratic Party. And even some abroad. What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments.
The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump, Vance blast ‘fake news' Epstein meeting
President Trump and Vice President Vance blasted reports on Wednesday that said a group of top administration officials were gathering to discuss whether to publish audio and a transcript of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche's meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell. Trump was asked if Vance was hosting a gathering to discuss the Epstein situation, after CNN first reported that the meeting at the vice resident's residence was taking place that evening. 'I don't know, I could ask you that question,' Trump said, looking at his vice president. 'I don't know of it, but I think, here's the man right here.' Vance then chimed in, bashing the journalists who reported it. 'I saw it reported today, and it's completely fake news. We're not meeting to talk about the Epstein situation, and I think the reporter who reported it needs to get better sources,' Vance said. The president added, 'look, the whole thing is a hoax. It's put on by the Democrats.' He added that the reporting is a 'way of trying to divert attention to something that is total bulls—.' The vice president's office earlier Wednesday also criticized the reporting. 'The CNN story is pure fiction. There was never a supposed meeting scheduled at the Vice President's residence to discuss Epstein strategy,' said William Martin, communications director to Vance. The meeting was reportedly expected to include Vance, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI director Kash Patel and Blanche. The FBI didn't respond to a request for comment from The Hill. Blanche recently met twice with Maxwell, a longtime associate of deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein, as the administration faces increasing pressure to release more information from the Epstein files. Trump on Wednesday also said he hasn't been briefed on what Maxwell told Blanche. He said earlier this week that he wasn't aware of the decision to move Maxwell from a federal prison in Florida to a federal prison in Texas. 'I didn't know about it at all,' Trump said. 'It's not a very uncommon thing.' The move to Texas comes as Maxwell, who was convicted of sex trafficking and is serving a 20-year prison sentence, and her legal team are appealing her case to the Supreme Court in hopes of having her conviction overturned.
NBC News
11 minutes ago
- NBC News
Why redistricting is so important, in 3 charts
Texas Republicans' move to redraw their congressional map mid-decade and Democrats' retaliatory redistricting efforts have captured national attention for a very simple reason: How House districts are drawn can shape American politics for years. Gerrymandering generally reduces the number of competitive races, and it can lock in nearly immovable advantages for one party or another. Under the new map proposed in Texas, no seat's presidential vote would have been decided by single digits in 2024, and Republicans would have a path to pad their narrow congressional majority in the 2026 midterm elections. This means more people could reside in congressional districts under solid control of one party. NBC News analyzed how the question of who draws the maps — and how they do it — can shape elections for years afterward. The difference between safe seats and competitive districts Who draws district lines can make the difference between contested general elections in a state in November and elections that are barely more than formalities. NBC News analyzed every House race in the country from 2012 to 2020, the last full 10-year redistricting cycle, based on how each district was drawn. In states where state legislators drew the maps, single-digit races (elections in which the winners won by less than 10 percentage points) were rarest. Only 10.7% of House races fell into that competitive category. There are plenty of reasons that don't involve gerrymandering. For one thing, voters of both parties have increasingly clustered in recent years, leaving fewer places around the country that are politically divided. Still, gerrymandering does play a significant role. When commissions or state or federal courts drew the lines last decade, the rate of competitive elections jumped, though safe seats are still overwhelmingly likely. Competitive elections were especially prevalent in states with court-drawn districts: 18.1% of races in those states had single-digit margins from 2012 through 2020. A look at Pennsylvania, whose legislative-drawn map was thrown out and replaced in 2018 by the state Supreme Court, illustrates the dramatic change that can come based on who draws congressional lines. The same state with the same voters living in the same places suddenly had many more competitive elections. From 2012 through 2016, just three of Pennsylvania's 54 House general elections under the initial map had single-digit margins. After the state Supreme Court threw out the map and imposed a new one, the number of battleground races bumped up. Eight of 36 House races had single-digit margins in 2018 and 2020. Meanwhile, ahead of the 2026 midterms, The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter rates 40 House districts as toss-ups or slightly leaning toward one party. More than half (23) of those 40 competitive districts are in states where commissions or courts drew the maps. How a state's partisanship compares with whom it sends to Congress The power of the redistricting process can bend a state's representation in Congress away from its overall partisanship, with wide differences between the statewide vote in some states and the makeup of their House delegations. Take Illinois, for example, where Donald Trump got 44% of the vote in 2024. Republicans hold only three of the state's 17 seats in Congress, or 18%. (NBC News is looking at presidential data instead of House data here because some races are uncontested.) And even though Trump got 38% of the vote in California last year, Republicans hold only 17% — that's nine seats — of the state's 52 congressional districts. On the other side of the ledger, Trump got 58% support in South Carolina last year, and 86% of the state's House delegation is Republican. In North Carolina, 51% voted for Trump last year, and Republicans have 71% of the delegation. The comparison between House seats and presidential election performance isn't perfect. But it demonstrates that how district lines are drawn can generate different results from what statewide results might suggest. Right in the middle of the chart is Virginia. Its 11 congressional districts split 6-5 for Democrats, meaning Republicans hold nearly 46% of the state's seats in Congress, and Trump won 46% of the vote in Virginia last year. Also, just because a state's maps favor one party compared with the statewide results after one election doesn't mean the redistricting process was biased. Tightly divided Pennsylvania has seven Democrats and 10 Republicans in Congress, and three GOP-held districts are rated as toss-up or lean-Republican races in 2026, according to the Cook Political Report. Each state charts its own course Since each state is responsible for handling its own redistricting, the process is different depending on where you look, giving immense power to different institutions state by state. In 27 states, legislatures approved the maps. In seven, independent commissions approved them, seven had court-approved maps, two had political commissions, and one state's maps were approved by a backup commission, according to data from Loyola Law School. (The six states that elect only one person to the House don't draw new congressional maps.) Loyola Law School's " All About Redistricting" website defines politician commissions as panels elected officials can serve on as members. The website defines backup commissions as backup procedures if legislatures can't agree on new lines.
