thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-09--Virgin Hyperloop Completes First Human Ride On New High-Speed Transport System

SEATTLE ( Reuters ) ― Richard Branson ’ s Virgin Hyperloop has completed the world ’ s first passenger ride on a super high-speed levitating pod system , the company said on Sunday , a key safety test for technology it hopes will transform human and cargo transportation .
Virgin Hyperloop executives Josh Giegel , its Chief Technology Officer , and Sara Luchian , Director of Passenger Experience , reached speeds of up to 107 miles per hour at the company ’ s DevLoop test site in Las Vegas , Nevada , the company said .
“ I had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my very eyes , ” said Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem , Chairman of Virgin Hyperloop and Group Chairman and Chief Executive of DP World .
Los Angeles-based Hyperloop envisions a future where floating pods packed with passengers and cargo hurtle through vacuum tubes at 600 miles an hour or faster .
In a hyperloop system , which uses magnetic levitation to allow near-silent travel , a trip between New York and Washington would take just 30 minutes .
That would be twice as fast as a commercial jet flight and four times faster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has previously run over 400 tests without human passengers at the Nevada site .
The test comes a month after Reuters first reported that Virgin Hyperloop picked the U.S. state of West Virginia to host a $ 500 million certification center and test track that will serve as a proving ground for its technology .
The company is working toward safety certification by 2025 and commercial operations by 2030 , it has said .
Canada ’ s Transpod and Spain ’ s Zeleros also aim to upend traditional passenger and freight networks with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times , congestion and environmental harm linked with petroleum-fueled machines .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
SEATTLE (Reuters) ― Richard Branson’s Virgin Hyperloop has completed the world’s first passenger ride on a super high-speed levitating pod system, the company said on Sunday, a key safety test for technology it hopes will transform human and cargo transportation.
Virgin Hyperloop executives Josh Giegel, its Chief Technology Officer, and Sara Luchian, Director of Passenger Experience, reached speeds of up to 107 miles per hour at the company’s DevLoop test site in Las Vegas, Nevada, the company said.
Advertisement
“I had the true pleasure of seeing history made before my very eyes,” said Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, Chairman of Virgin Hyperloop and Group Chairman and Chief Executive of DP World.
Los Angeles-based Hyperloop envisions a future where floating pods packed with passengers and cargo hurtle through vacuum tubes at 600 miles an hour or faster.
In a hyperloop system, which uses magnetic levitation to allow near-silent travel, a trip between New York and Washington would take just 30 minutes. That would be twice as fast as a commercial jet flight and four times faster than a high-speed train.
Advertisement
The company has previously run over 400 tests without human passengers at the Nevada site.
The test comes a month after Reuters first reported that Virgin Hyperloop picked the U.S. state of West Virginia to host a $500 million certification center and test track that will serve as a proving ground for its technology.
The company is working toward safety certification by 2025 and commercial operations by 2030, it has said.
Canada’s Transpod and Spain’s Zeleros also aim to upend traditional passenger and freight networks with similar technology they say will slash travel times, congestion and environmental harm linked with petroleum-fueled machines.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--I Had To Have My Entire Nose Removed Or Risk Dying. Here's How It Changed My Life.

Melanoma : a pretty word for a very ugly cancer .
When I was diagnosed with it nine years ago , it didn ’ t seem like that big of a deal .
There were spots on my nose that the doctors thought could be remedied easily .
But over the course of a few months , what began as “ no big deal ” turned into the need for a disfiguring surgery that would significantly change my life .
As the days passed and we prepared for my surgery , it became clear that the cancer wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that I was going to become a freak ― a woman without a nose .
Who ever heard of such a thing ?
I know plenty of people who have lost breasts , lungs , kidneys and even a testicle ― all of which are devastating and scary , to be sure .
But a nose ?
The thing at the center of your face that everyone can see ?
I originally believed , based on what I was told , that it would take four or five months before I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like a very long time .
I am in home improvement sales , a closet designer , and every day I would go to strangers ’ houses .
Without a prosthetic , how was I going to face all those strangers ― let alone sell them a closet ― with a giant hole in my face ?
The solution , of course , was the clear plastic nose the doctor had given me .
It was the thing that was going to get me through the months of healing required before I could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how to attach it to my face using surgical tape and cover it with Band-Aids to give it a flesh color .
Then , because I ’ m weird and like to inject whimsy whenever possible , I used children ’ s stickers of flowers and stars and ladybugs to decorate it !
I was going to be just fine .
That was the theory anyway .
Turned out , taping that thing to my face every day was a complete pain .
It never felt secure .
I was always afraid it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It also had the nasty habit of creating condensation when I breathed , so water would drip out from the bottom edge .
Imagine standing in someone ’ s home with this bizarre thing taped to your face and water dripping down your lip !
Yeah , it was no picnic .
Fortunately , most people were kind .
It was only supposed to be for a few months ... or so I thought .
The reality was quite different .
The four or five months dragged on ... and on ... and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a prosthetic required an additional surgery to implant a device on which to clip the silicone nose and months more of healing after that .
This was actually a good thing .
The alternative to clipping on my prosthetic nose was gluing it on .
And let me tell you , given how time-consuming and awful the daily taping of the temporary thing turned out to be , I could not imagine a lifetime of gluing my nose on each morning .
When I received my cancer diagnosis and knew I had a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ niece helped me set up a page on the Caring Bridge website .
For the uninitiated ( and you are lucky if you don ’ t know what this is ) , the Caring Bridge site is where people going through a medical crisis can post their progress as often as they wish and all those who care about them can go to the site to learn the latest news on their loved one .
It is a brilliant way for people to make their condition known without having to contact a bazillion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latest .
Just put the information in one place and everyone can access it .
Over and over , people told me I had to turn it into a book .
I decided I would do just that once I got to the end of the process .
But the truth was , once I had that horrible year behind me , the last thing I wanted to do was rehash it all to turn it into something readable .
I let it go ― that is , I intended to write @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not “ today.
” Would I go through it all again just to be able to publish my book ?
No , of course not .
But does it make me feel I at least got something important out of having lived through it ?
Yes , indeed !
Lemonade out of lemons in a most significant way .
Finally , there ’ s one other irony I ’ d like to share .
In my book , I talk about how relieved I was that my parents were no longer alive as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
My cancer diagnosis would have terrified them , and it would have killed them to see me struggle through the emotional trauma of losing my nose .
So , as much as I miss them both , I was glad they were not there to suffer through it with me .
Fast forward to today ― when I ’ ve achieved a goal I ’ ve wanted my entire life .
My parents would have been over the moon about the publication of “ Noseworthy.
” My father had a journalism degree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only a short time .
But he was always a wordsmith by nature and a writer at heart .
Now , instead of being glad my parents are not here , I ’ m incredibly sad neither of them is alive to see this happen .

The author with her "temporary" fake nose. Courtesy of Barbara Caplan-Bennett
Melanoma: a pretty word for a very ugly cancer. When I was diagnosed with it nine years ago, it didn’t seem like that big of a deal. There were spots on my nose that the doctors thought could be remedied easily. But over the course of a few months, what began as “no big deal” turned into the need for a disfiguring surgery that would significantly change my life.
Let me first say I’m a lucky woman. I’ve had my share of challenges and losses, as we all have. But I have a wonderful life by most standards ― a loving husband, supportive friends and family, a good job ― and generally speaking (except for the stupid cancer thing), I am in good health.
Advertisement
But when you are sitting in a surgeon’s office and he tells you the best way to ensure you will be alive in five years is to remove your entire nose ― well, the word “shocking” doesn’t begin to cover it.
My husband, Paul, and I were numb as we left the doctor’s office, but when we got outside, we stood holding each other and cried, unaware of people stepping around us on the sidewalk or the traffic on Sunset Boulevard. We didn’t notice. We didn’t care. In that moment, it was the two of us facing a monster ― melanoma.
As the days passed and we prepared for my surgery, it became clear that the cancer wasn’t really what horrified me. It was the fact that I was going to become a freak ― a woman without a nose. Who ever heard of such a thing? I know plenty of people who have lost breasts, lungs, kidneys and even a testicle ― all of which are devastating and scary, to be sure. But a nose? The thing at the center of your face that everyone can see?
I would have to wear a prosthetic and mine was going to be created by the wizards at the UCLA maxillofacial department. Their doctors put soldiers’ faces back together after combat, so they were well-equipped to give me a nose. But getting the nose was neither quick nor simple. Paul and I had a long journey ahead of us.
Advertisement
The author before her nose was removed. The melanoma is visible but was believed to be just freckles. Courtesy of Barbara Caplan-Bennett
My doctor did a terrific job and before bandaging me up, he also crafted a clear plastic form of a nose to serve as the “bump” in the middle of my face as I recovered.
I originally believed, based on what I was told, that it would take four or five months before I would have my prosthetic, which seemed like a very long time. I am in home improvement sales, a closet designer, and every day I would go to strangers’ houses. Without a prosthetic, how was I going to face all those strangers ― let alone sell them a closet ― with a giant hole in my face?
The solution, of course, was the clear plastic nose the doctor had given me. It was the thing that was going to get me through the months of healing required before I could get my actual prosthetic. I learned how to attach it to my face using surgical tape and cover it with Band-Aids to give it a flesh color. Then, because I’m weird and like to inject whimsy whenever possible, I used children’s stickers of flowers and stars and ladybugs to decorate it! I was going to be just fine.
That was the theory anyway. Turned out, taping that thing to my face every day was a complete pain. It never felt secure. I was always afraid it might fall off at any moment. It also had the nasty habit of creating condensation when I breathed, so water would drip out from the bottom edge. Imagine standing in someone’s home with this bizarre thing taped to your face and water dripping down your lip! Yeah, it was no picnic. Fortunately, most people were kind.
Advertisement
It was only supposed to be for a few months ... or so I thought. The reality was quite different. The four or five months dragged on ... and on ... and on. The entire process of getting a prosthetic required an additional surgery to implant a device on which to clip the silicone nose and months more of healing after that. This was actually a good thing. The alternative to clipping on my prosthetic nose was gluing it on. And let me tell you, given how time-consuming and awful the daily taping of the temporary thing turned out to be, I could not imagine a lifetime of gluing my nose on each morning.
But even though I was OK with waiting a little longer for my prosthetic, since it meant I was getting a clip-on nose, I had no idea that a “little” longer meant many more months.
Rome was not built in a day and apparently, prosthetic noses aren’t either. They’re created through a fascinating process that involves sculpting wax, creating a mold for the silicone and ultimately painting it to match the color of your face. Prosthodontics requires great skill and artistry.
More than 10 months after my nose was removed, I finally received my prosthetic nose. My life could return to normal ― well, a new normal, certainly.
The author in "all my noseless glory." Courtesy of Barbara Caplan-Bennett
Advertisement
Of course, I’m leaving out a lot of the details here ― a lot of the trauma and the crying and the emotional pain, and the recovery and the support I received from friends and family. But the point I really want to make is this: The entire experience was one of great irony.
The first, most obviously, is that out of my greatest nightmare came my dream come true.
I am a writer. I have always been a writer. I have a few published pieces and a self-published novel from 20 years ago. Before my cancer, I had stopped writing. I jokingly referred to myself as a “recovering novelist.”
When I received my cancer diagnosis and knew I had a long journey ahead of me, my niece helped me set up a page on the Caring Bridge website. For the uninitiated (and you are lucky if you don’t know what this is), the Caring Bridge site is where people going through a medical crisis can post their progress as often as they wish and all those who care about them can go to the site to learn the latest news on their loved one. It is a brilliant way for people to make their condition known without having to contact a bazillion different people just to let them know the latest. Just put the information in one place and everyone can access it.
Well, I began my Caring Bridge page for just that purpose. But as can happen when you are a writer at heart, it morphed into a daily blog where I put all my thoughts and feelings about what I was going through ― and let me tell you, I had lots of thoughts and feelings!
This was the most difficult thing I had faced in my 57 years, and processing what was happening to me was an incredible experience. And I wrote it all down.
Advertisement
Over and over, people told me I had to turn it into a book. I decided I would do just that once I got to the end of the process. But the truth was, once I had that horrible year behind me, the last thing I wanted to do was rehash it all to turn it into something readable. I let it go ― that is, I intended to write the book “someday,” just not “today.”
Nine years passed and the pandemic of 2020 hit. Suddenly I was home every single bloody day. How could I not use my time to finally turn the blog into a memoir? And so I did.
The author "living the good life with my prosthetic nose." Courtesy of Barbara Caplan-Bennett
“Noseworthy” was just published by Hilltop30 Publishing Group. And so, out of my greatest nightmare, I achieved my greatest dream ― I am officially a published author. And I’m thrilled to say I’ve received the most amazing emails from people who have read it ― which is really, after all, the true realization of the dream: that people read your work and find it meaningful.
Would I go through it all again just to be able to publish my book? No, of course not. But does it make me feel I at least got something important out of having lived through it? Yes, indeed! Lemonade out of lemons in a most significant way.
Advertisement
Finally, there’s one other irony I’d like to share. In my book, I talk about how relieved I was that my parents were no longer alive as I went through such a difficult year. My cancer diagnosis would have terrified them, and it would have killed them to see me struggle through the emotional trauma of losing my nose. So, as much as I miss them both, I was glad they were not there to suffer through it with me.
Fast forward to today ― when I’ve achieved a goal I’ve wanted my entire life. My parents would have been over the moon about the publication of “Noseworthy.” My father had a journalism degree, though he was a journalist for only a short time. But he was always a wordsmith by nature and a writer at heart. Now, instead of being glad my parents are not here, I’m incredibly sad neither of them is alive to see this happen.
So there they are ― two ironies intertwined. My dream come true sprung from my worst nightmare, and my relief that my parents did not have to witness something horrible only to not be able to share my proudest moment with them.
Life is bizarre sometimes. But after what I’ve been through, I’m just happy to be here. Even if it meant giving up my entire nose, I still got the best end of the bargain.
Barbara Caplan-Bennett has a degree in English from the University of Minnesota and a certificate in creative writing from UCLA. In addition to her memoir, “Noseworthy,” she has published essays and articles on a variety of subjects, as well as a novel, “Nothin’ Left to Lose.” Barbara lives in Chatsworth, California, with her husband, Paul, and they are owned by two cats, William and Beckett, and Cally the Wonder Dog. To contact Barbara, email her at noseworthy2020@gmail.com.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Millions Could Lose Health Care At The Supreme Court. Meet 6 Of Them.

Millions more with preexisting conditions could wind up virtually uninsurable , just as they were in the days before the Affordable Care Act .
Others would lose access to the law ’ s guaranteed benefits , which include coverage for hospitalizations and prescription drugs .
And those with the highest health care expenses could once again face annual or lifetime limits on their coverage that would cut them off once their costs reached a certain dollar threshold .
“ I didn ’ t choose to be diabetic , ” Gordon said .
“ Why should I have to suffer because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s so disheartening that there are humans out there who don ’ t understand and think that just because you happened to get unlucky in life , you don ’ t deserve to live , ” said Gordon , who is studying communications at the State University of New York at New Paltz and works at a library and a planetarium .
Both Paul and Shevin , 64 , have beaten the odds before and survived cancer .
Though Paul is hoping the same happens at the Supreme Court , she has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her if the ACA goes away .
“ I still can not believe that they will take insurance away from 20-some million people .
I just can ’ t believe it , ” she said .
That doctor consultation turned out to be the reason the insurance company refused to cover her .
The couple spent the entire time Rice was undergoing major surgery and potent chemotherapy fighting with the insurance company .
“ It was a full-time job , and it was so hard to do through this fog and fatigue and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Rice said .
“ It was just the cruelest thing to make somebody go through .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Affordable Care Act returns to the Supreme Court on Tuesday for the third time as Republicans continue their efforts to get the judiciary to do what the party has failed to do politically: Kill Obamacare.
And for the third time since 2012, millions of Americans wait, terrified, to find out whether they will lose their health coverage. An estimated 21 million people could find themselves uninsured if the Supreme Court rules to eradicate the law, according to the Urban Institute, a New York-based research organization.
Advertisement
But that figure understates the damage a decision against the Affordable Care Act would have on many other Americans.
Those most likely to become uninsured are people with low-to-moderate incomes who qualify for Medicaid or subsidized private insurance under the 2010 health care law.
Millions more with preexisting conditions could wind up virtually uninsurable, just as they were in the days before the Affordable Care Act. Others would lose access to the law’s guaranteed benefits, which include coverage for hospitalizations and prescription drugs. And those with the highest health care expenses could once again face annual or lifetime limits on their coverage that would cut them off once their costs reached a certain dollar threshold.
As Supreme Court justices hear oral arguments on Tuesday and consider how to rule, these six Americans will be watching and worrying.
Advertisement
Tony Gordon, Millbrook, New York
“The thing that really frightens me is the preexisting conditions, because I have multiple,” said Tony Gordon, 25. Gordon has Type 1 diabetes, asthma, hypothyroidism and seasonal allergies that exacerbate the asthma, all of which require medication, supplies, doctor visits and emergency care on a regular basis. These ailments also make Gordon more prone to infections. “A large portion of my life is kind of dedicated to just keeping my body functional.”
“I didn’t choose to be diabetic,” Gordon said. “Why should I have to suffer because my body is fighting me? It’s so disheartening that there are humans out there who don’t understand and think that just because you happened to get unlucky in life, you don’t deserve to live,” said Gordon, who is studying communications at the State University of New York at New Paltz and works at a library and a planetarium.
In addition to worrying about their long-term future in a world where insurance companies can go back to discriminating against people because of their medical histories, Gordon has to worry about the day-to-day costs of staying healthy.
Gordon qualified for Medicaid under the ACA’s expansion of that program to more low-income adults; 38 states and the District of Columbia have participated. “I would be extremely terrified” if the high court were to overturn the ACA, they said. “I am LGBTQ, so I am very unfortunately used to people debating my rights.”
Julie Buckholt, Milwaukee
Myasthenia gravis is an autoimmune disease that causes weakened, fatigued muscles. Julie Buckholt, 58, and her two adult daughters have this condition, which has no cure, and all require regular injections of intravenous immunoglobulin.
Advertisement
Julie Buckholt gets this treatment weekly. Megan Buckholt, 25, and Rachael Gonzalez, 28, need it less often but still rely on it to stay alive.
Those injections would cost $16,000 each if they didn’t have insurance, Julie Buckholt said, an amount beyond the reach of nearly all Americans. As a high-cost patient with a serious chronic illness, she’s among those Americans who have benefited from the ACA’s prohibition against insurance companies setting hard-dollar caps on how many bills they will pay over the course of a year or a lifetime.
“Without this medication, any one of us could die because of the severity of the disease,” she said. Buckholt shared her story at the Democratic National Convention in August.
“Without the Affordable Care Act, I would have reached the lifetime max already of a million dollars. Before the Affordable Care Act, that was a constant strain,” Buckholt said. “We are scared to death as to what’s going to happen with the Supreme Court.”
In addition to anxiety about the ACA disappearing, Buckholt fears for a future in which her daughters’ preexisting conditions make it impossible to get coverage.
Advertisement
“Everything is up in the air. We don’t know what’s going to happen,” she said.
Marcie Paul, West Bloomfield, Michigan
The guarantee of coverage for people with preexisting conditions helped Marcie Paul, 62, and her husband, Stewart Shevin, to start their own business. Job-based health insurance plans usually don’t screen for preexisting conditions, but the insurers routinely denied coverage to people based on their medical histories in the individual market before the ACA. They would be able to do so again if the GOP plaintiffs win the lawsuit.
Both Paul and Shevin, 64, have beaten the odds before and survived cancer. Though Paul is hoping the same happens at the Supreme Court, she has no illusions about what would happen to her if the ACA goes away. “I still cannot believe that they will take insurance away from 20-some million people. I just can’t believe it,” she said.
Paul already has to worry about a recurrence of ovarian cancer. “I mean, one is bad enough hanging over my head. To not have medical coverage for that is pretty unthinkable for me,” she said. Shevin is almost old enough for Medicare, but Paul has a few years left during which she needs health coverage.
“We’d be screwed. We’d be totally screwed,” Paul said. “I would have very few options. At my age, I’m not going to go out and get a job at a big company and get good benefits tomorrow because I got sick ― and then take time off because I need surgery and chemo.”
Andrew Blackshear, Benicia, California
When Andrew Blackshear was a healthy 27-year-old, a freak incident led to a serious heart condition that required two surgeries to correct. Blackshear, now 32, inhaled a Coccidioides fungus that causes Valley fever. “I breathed in a fungus I didn’t even know existed,” he said.
Advertisement
His health insurance company at the time didn’t want to cover his medical bills and relented only in the face of a lawsuit.
“That’s what scares me the most is going back into that realm,” Blackshear said. “To have a company that will battle someone while they’re going through a life-or-death illness and still need care.”
“If I needed another heart procedure all of a sudden and I was on one of those plans again, I’d be very scared,” said Blackshear, who currently is covered by a policy from the ACA’s exchange. Though imperfect, he said, the policy is reliable, and he hasn’t had trouble getting the insurance to cover his annual electrocardiograms, cardiologist visits and blood work.
Since his illness and his brush with the dark side of the American health care system, Blackshear has been an active volunteer with the American Heart Association, testified before Congress and attended this year’s State of the Union address as the guest of Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.).
Blackshear fears dealing with an insurance industry no longer required to abide by the ACA’s protections for people with preexisting conditions.
Advertisement
“I’d be right back where I was but maybe four steps backward, because now I actually have something that I could be discriminated against for,” Blackshear said. “There’s millions of people who are in these situations, watching a television, hoping that people far away will make a decision that will help them in their lives.”
Chelsia Rice, Helena, Montana
Chelsia Rice, 43, survived a rare form of bladder cancer, squamous cell carcinoma, thanks to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota ― and no thanks to the pre-ACA health insurance industry.
Rice was diagnosed in 2012. At the time, her spouse, Charlie Crawford, had job-based health insurance. She sought to join their plan when the company coincidentally opened up its health benefits to spouses and family members a few months after Rice began experiencing symptoms. But, after a year of paperwork, red tape and appeals, the answer was no. Rice’s cancer was a preexisting condition, the insurance company said, and it wouldn’t cover her.
Ironically, cost was a main reason Rice had postponed investigating her symptoms before then, despite suspecting something serious was wrong. The possibility of joining Crawford’s employer-sponsored plan seemed to come along at just the right time. In the meantime, Rice met with a urologist, who encouraged her to wait on treatment until she had health insurance.
That doctor consultation turned out to be the reason the insurance company refused to cover her. The couple spent the entire time Rice was undergoing major surgery and potent chemotherapy fighting with the insurance company. “It was a full-time job, and it was so hard to do through this fog and fatigue and every other symptom that comes up,” Rice said. “It was just the cruelest thing to make somebody go through.”
Advertisement
The Mayo Clinic, charities and fundraisers helped enough that Rice and Crawford could pay down most of her roughly $1 million in medical bills, but the cancer still cost the couple $25,000 out of pocket. Rice still needs ongoing care and supplies that cost about $5,000 a year, and Crawford, 48, requires medication to treat their bipolar disorder.
The couple now has coverage from a policy bought from the ACA’s health insurance exchange, for which they receive financial assistance.
They both realize how vulnerable they are, and how desperate their situation could become, if the Supreme Court invalidates the ACA. “If shit hits the fan, we’ll probably be the first people to not make it,” Rice said. “It’s a frightening time.”
Veronica Daniels-Lewis, Missouri City, Texas
When the coronavirus economy cost Kevin Lewis, 58, his job as a teacher and youth basketball coach, it also meant the loss of the health insurance that covered his family. His wife, Veronica Daniels-Lewis, had to figure out some way to continue her treatments for multiple sclerosis.
“That was something that totally terrified me is how was I going to be able to afford this without insurance coverage,” said Daniels-Lewis, 58. “I’ve been on treatment for almost 24 years, and all of a sudden I’m faced with not having anything.”
Advertisement
Paying full price to stay on his old employer-sponsored plan, through a law known as COBRA, was far too expensive. “I was in a panic, so my only other choice was to reach towards the ACA to find something on the marketplace that was able to fit into our budget,” Daniels-Lewis said. “It saved me. I lose my breath every time I think about what would’ve happened if I wasn’t able to reach for that lifeline.”
Daniels-Lewis has been living with multiple sclerosis since 1996 and with asthma since childhood. In MS patients, the immune system attacks the protective sheath that surrounds the body’s nerve fibers, leading to physical and cognitive disabilities that can range from moderate to severe. Daniels-Lewis experiences spasticity in her muscles that requires the use of a walker or a cane to move around, among other symptoms.
But the solution that enabled Daniels-Lewis to continue her MS treatments may not be there for other people if the Supreme Court rules against the ACA.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Experts Predict What The COVID-19 Pandemic Will Be Like In 2021

Life as we know it will continue to be disrupted , even after a vaccine is widely available A vaccine @ @ @ @ @ available before a vaccine for children We ’ ll get an up-close view of vaccine @ @ @ @ @ messy Housing uncertainty is likely going to be a problem for COVID-19 spread in early @ @ @ @ @ winter 2021 , the public health community may reflect on decisions made throughout the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ masks won ’ t go away If you miss your pre-pandemic life , make appropriate @ @ @ @ @ go into 2021 without heightened rates of spread , infection and death

LOADING ERROR LOADING
There is no denying that 2020 has been a terrible year. The coronavirus pandemic has created new challenges for almost everyone, has halted life as we knew it and has killed more than 235,000 Americans. As we near the end of this year (can you believe it?), we’re met with concerns about 2021 and a pandemic that is showing no signs of slowing down.
“2021 for me is really kind of a mystery,” said Susan Hassig, an associate professor in epidemiology at Tulane University. “Everything is conditional on so many factors.”
Advertisement
Many different scenarios can take place next year depending on what sort of vaccine and treatment options become available, in addition to how seriously the public follows rules set in place by public health officials.
It also depends on what experts learn about the virus as time goes on. Things change every day, and so much of the shape of 2021 is dependent on many moving parts.
But while there are no guarantees, there are some predictions. Below, we spoke with experts across the country about their expectations of what the pandemic will look like next year and what we can do as a society to make 2021 a more positive experience.
Life as we know it will continue to be disrupted, even after a vaccine is widely available
Some promising COVID-19 vaccine news was celebrated this week when Pfizer announced preliminary data from its current trial. The evidence suggests the company’s vaccine could be 90% effective in preventing COVID-19. (The data still needs to be independently reviewed. The trial is also still going on and needs to go through a more rigorous vetting process before being released to the public.)
Advertisement
Realistically, while a vaccine will solve many problems and help people complete their day-to-day responsibilities more safely, it won’t be a total salve right away. Richard Martinello, the medical director for infection prevention at Yale New Haven Health, stressed that it is going to take a significant amount of time to get the entire country vaccinated.
“With most of the vaccines that are being looked at right now, most of them will require a series of two shots and typically those shots are going to be one month apart. So, even if hundreds of millions of doses become available, it is going to take months for the population to get vaccinated,” Martinello said.
Additionally, about 70% to 80% of the population needs to be immune from COVID-19 to impact the virus’s spread within communities. Martinello said that if we have a vaccine that is even 80% effective, which is a very high efficacy rate, we would need 100% of the population to get the vaccine in order to reach 80% immunity.
That’s a tough task. It requires millions and millions of doses of a completed, safe vaccine. It also requires cooperation. With anti-vaccine individuals and vaccine doubters, it is going to be nearly impossible to get the entire population of the United States to get the vaccine at any point, let alone within the next year.
Martin Novak via Getty Images A vaccine for children might be even farther in the future than one for adults.
Advertisement
A vaccine for adults will likely be available before a vaccine for children
While COVID-19 vaccine trials have progressed in the adult population over the past few months, the first vaccine trial in kids ages 12 to 18 just started in late October and there have, understandably, been no trials for kids under 12.
Michael Levy, an associate professor of epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, noted that the virus will not disappear if we only vaccinate the groups that we think, as of right now, are driving the pandemic. He also voiced specific concern about the spread of the coronavirus in schools if a vaccine for children is not chased with the same urgency as a vaccine for adults.
“We need to figure out how to vaccinate kids because I don’t know that this virus is going to disappear just by vaccinating adults or by protecting the elderly and most vulnerable,” Levy said. “I don’t think we’ve figured out how to do schools and I don’t know that vaccination among the adults alone will be sufficient to solve the problem.”
We’ll get an up-close view of vaccine distribution, which may be messy
Since the pandemic began, most of the public has become, whether they like it or not, more familiar with public health measures and scientific processes.
“The American public and the global public has really learned far more about how science works,” Hassig said. “We learn a lot by trial and error in the scientific realm. You ask a question; you try to find an answer to the question and you may not get the answer you wanted — that’s just part of science.”
Advertisement
“I think people outside of science are really frustrated by things like, ‘Oh, this treatment looks promising’ but then it turns out not to be a good treatment,” she said. “That’s normal in science. That happens all the time.”
Hassig said this frustration may likely play out in how the vaccine is distributed, too. The public is going to have an up-close view of vaccine delivery in 2021, which ― like any major project ― comes with routine problems and holdups. For example, vaccines like Pfizer’s will require frozen storage, which many places may not have access to.
She added that she’s concerned about the public’s reaction to any problems that arise during shot delivery ― which is going to be a complicated, major undertaking ― because it may add to vaccine hesitancy.
Housing uncertainty is likely going to be a problem for COVID-19 spread in early 2021
Earlier this fall, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued an eviction moratorium restricting landlords from evicting tenants for nonpayment of rent through Dec. 31 in an effort to reduce further spread of the coronavirus.
There are loopholes that some landlords are finding but, overall, the moratorium protects a large number of renters across the U.S. from being homeless during the pandemic. But, with the moratorium ending on the last day of this year, Levy worries about the impact that evictions could have on the pandemic.
Advertisement
“When I think of Jan. 1, 2021, I think of the eviction moratorium and what happens after that.” - Michael Levy
“The amount of pending evictions that would occur on New Year’s Eve is huge. And, historically, most people have been able to double up when they are evicted — move in with friends or family or whoever can take them — and that makes larger households,” Levy said. “When you get larger households, you get more opportunities for the ingress of the coronavirus into the house and then more spread within the house.”
Levy noted that household contact can be very dangerous. The type of contact within a home can sometimes be more risky than the type of contact that happens outside of a household — contact like hugging your partner or sitting next to your son or daughter on the couch is much riskier than walking by a stranger or coming into contact with a cashier at a grocery store. He stressed that larger households and increased spread within a home could propel an epidemic or rekindle an epidemic that may have been previously suppressed.
“When I think of Jan. 1, 2021, I think of the eviction moratorium and what happens after that,” Levy said.
eggeeggjiew via Getty Images
Advertisement
Once we emerge from winter 2021, the public health community may reflect on decisions made throughout the pandemic
Increased coronavirus cases throughout the country are already our reality as we head into an expectedly bleak winter. Cases are not expected to decrease as we enter the coldest months of the year.
“I think this is going to be our situation for the foreseeable future which, to me, is really through May 2021,” Martinello said. “I think that is going to be a good time for us to reassess our situation as we go from spring into summer.”
He stressed that a reassessment does not mean major changes for pandemic precautions and noted that he does not expect to see huge differences in terms of mask-wearing or physical distancing after any sort of late-spring re-evaluation. Instead, he thinks this could be a good time for the public health community to pause and look at the approach the country has taken over the past season.
“It’s a good time to think about what aspects of our strategy have worked, what aspects have failed, if a vaccine is available and how a vaccine changes our approach,” he said.
Advertisement
So, don’t expect large-scale in-person concerts or huge gatherings to become the norm. Instead, look forward to updates to communications around things like general public health guidance to help people create safer situations, Martinello added.
Safety measures like wearing face masks won’t go away
At this point, we know that mask-wearing and physical distancing majorly reduce the spread of COVID-19, which is crucial if we ever want to contain this virus. As we move into next year, Martinello noted that he does not expect to see major changes in these public health recommendations.
In addition to helping curb the spread of the coronavirus, safety measures like mask-wearing and physical distancing also likely help lessen the spread of flu and other respiratory viruses, Martinello stated.
“If we used masks more, 2021 would look very different from 2020.” - Susan Hassig
“I think there will be some very long-term lessons learned here about how we protect ourselves from getting sick. I think we are going to see some changes that will go well beyond a time when we have an effective vaccine,” along with a shift toward more routine use of masks in public settings, he noted.
Advertisement
“Masking is what will allow 2021 to be a far more open society. It’s not a zero-sum game, it’s not masking or an open economy, it’s masking enabling an open economy,” Hassig added. “And if we used masks more, 2021 would look very different from 2020.”
If you miss your pre-pandemic life, make appropriate holiday plans so we can go into 2021 without heightened rates of spread, infection and death
With a cluster of holidays at the end of the year, Hassig voiced concern about COVID-19 spreading at family gatherings.
“If behaviors don’t change with regard to masking and distancing, we have several major holidays that could launch another huge surge of cases, illness, hospitalization and death,” she said.
And since COVID-19 symptoms can take up to 14 days to appear, Hassig added, people who get unknowingly infected at holiday celebrations will likely return to their normal activities, causing further spread of a virus that we already can’t control. “The virus will move, expand, spread and then erupt,” she said.
Advertisement
She stressed that we need to be more conscious and more mindful as we make day-to-day decisions in the coming months. “Our actions can have substantial consequences,” she added.
The major holidays that occur in the last six weeks of the year could set us up for serious failure as we enter the first days of 2021.
“2021 could be worse, quite honestly ― the pandemic is not just going to stop because it’s Dec. 31 and then Jan, 1,” Hassig said. ”The virus is going to be here until we stomp down, and that’s going to take collective, concerted effort — but it can be done.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--People Really Can't Get Over The Name Of The Newly Approved Coronavirus Drug

Bamlanivimab .
So close to being a palindrome that you have to wonder why they did n't go all the @ @ @ @ @ `` Bamlanivinalmab '' would have nailed it.https : //t.co/Vr6ehVs2L5

Bamlanivimab. So close to being a palindrome that you have to wonder why they didn't go all the way? I'm thinking "Bamlanivinalmab" would have nailed it.https://t.co/Vr6ehVs2L5


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-09--Biden Campaign Considers Legal Action Over Delay In Recognizing Transition

The transition team needs to be recognized to access funds for salaries , consultants and travel , as well as @ @ @ @ @ the official said .
In addition , the team has no access to the State @ @ @ @ @ calls between foreign leaders and the president-elect , the official said .
A senior administration @ @ @ @ @ not approve the start of a formal transition process in 2000 for five weeks while @ @ @ @ @ Democrat Al Gore battled over an election that came down to just hundreds of votes @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WILMINGTON, Del. (Reuters) - President-elect Joe Biden’s transition team is considering legal action over a federal agency’s delay in recognizing the Democrat’s victory over President Donald Trump in last week’s election, a Biden official said on Monday.
The General Services Administration (GSA) normally recognizes a presidential candidate when it becomes clear who has won an election so that a transition of power can begin.
Advertisement
That has not yet happened despite U.S. television and news networks declaring Biden the winner on Saturday after he secured enough electoral votes to secure the presidency.
The law does not clearly spell out when the GSA must act, but Biden transition officials say their victory is clear and a delay is not justified, even as Trump refuses to concede defeat.
Trump has repeatedly claimed, without evidence, that there was widespread voting fraud and has filed a raft of lawsuits to challenge the results.
Election officials across the country say there has been no evidence of significant fraud, and legal experts say Trump’s efforts are unlikely to succeed.
Advertisement
GSA Administrator Emily Murphy, appointed by Trump in 2017, has not yet determined that “a winner is clear,” a spokeswoman said. A source close to Murphy said she was a thorough professional who would take her time making a careful decision.
A Biden transition official told reporters on a call that it was time for the GSA’s administration to grant what is known as an ascertainment recognizing the president-elect, and said the transition team would consider legal action if it was not granted.
“Legal action is certainly a possibility, but there are other options as well that we’re considering,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, declining to outline other options.
The delay is costing the Biden team access to millions of dollars in federal funding and the ability to meet with officials at intelligence agencies and other departments


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Times Of London Trolls Trump With Cartoon Of Oval Office Chaos Biden Inherits

President-elect Joe Biden faces quite the cleanup in a cartoon published by the Times of London on Monday .
Morten @ @ @ @ @ at the Rupert Murdoch-owned British newspaper , depicted the mess that President Donald Trump has @ @ @ @ @ with this image that has since gone viral on Twitter : A Trump Make America @ @ @ @ @ on the floor near bottles of spray tan , golf clubs , a ripped-up copy @ @ @ @ @ cellphone with Twitter ’ s logo on its screen .
There ’ s also a @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s bonkers suggestion during a press briefing in April that injecting disinfectant could @ @ @ @ @ , a hair dryer , soda cans , fast food containers , a Confederate flag @ @ @ @ @ the rug .
Morland marked Trump ’ s 2016 election victory with this cartoon for @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President-elect Joe Biden faces quite the cleanup in a cartoon published by the Times of London on Monday.
Morten Morland, the political cartoonist at the Rupert Murdoch-owned British newspaper, depicted the mess that President Donald Trump has wrought on the Oval Office with this image that has since gone viral on Twitter:
Advertisement
A Trump Make America Great Again cap lies discarded on the floor near bottles of spray tan, golf clubs, a ripped-up copy of the Constitution and a cellphone with Twitter’s logo on its screen.
There’s also a bottle of bleach, referencing Trump’s bonkers suggestion during a press briefing in April that injecting disinfectant could be a cure for COVID-19, a hair dryer, soda cans, fast food containers, a Confederate flag and a large lump under the rug.
Morland marked Trump’s 2016 election victory with this cartoon for right-leaning magazine The Spectator:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-09--Stacey Abrams Has Priceless Reaction To Republican Claims They Won Georgia

Stacey Abrams , the Democratic superstar from Georgia considered the architect of President-elect Joe Biden ’ s surprising lead in her state , has a blunt message for Republicans who think President Donald Trump really won there .
“ We really won , ” she told “ Late Show ” host Stephen Colbert .
“ There ’ s an orange menace of putrescence who will no longer be able to occupy the White House .
That ’ s a big deal.
” Abrams lost a close race for governor in Georgia in 2018 and since then has led the effort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially among people of color and people who had been unlikely voters .
Biden currently holds a lead of at least 11,000 votes in Georgia , which hasn ’ t selected a Democratic presidential candidate since Bill Clinton in 1992 .
The Trump campaign has filed a lawsuit in the state and has named Rep. Doug Collins ( R-Ga. ) to lead its recount effort there , where he also lost a race for a Senate seat .
See more of Abrams ’ s conversation with Colbert below : TONIGHT !
@ staceyabrams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they really won the election .
# LSSC pic.twitter.com/B6cWT3nm0x — A Late Show ( @ colbertlateshow ) November 10 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Stacey Abrams, the Democratic superstar from Georgia considered the architect of President-elect Joe Biden’s surprising lead in her state, has a blunt message for Republicans who think President Donald Trump really won there.
“We really won,” she told “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert. “There’s an orange menace of putrescence who will no longer be able to occupy the White House. That’s a big deal.”
Advertisement
Abrams lost a close race for governor in Georgia in 2018 and since then has led the effort to increase voter registration and turnout, especially among people of color and people who had been unlikely voters.
Biden currently holds a lead of at least 11,000 votes in Georgia, which hasn’t selected a Democratic presidential candidate since Bill Clinton in 1992.
The Trump campaign has filed a lawsuit in the state and has named Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) to lead its recount effort there, where he also lost a race for a Senate seat.
See more of Abrams’s conversation with Colbert below:
TONIGHT! @staceyabrams is here and she reminds Democrats that they really won the election. #LSSC pic.twitter.com/B6cWT3nm0x — A Late Show (@colbertlateshow) November 10, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-09--Watch Fox News Host's Look Of Utter Disdain Over Voter Fraud Claim On Hot Mic

Apparently unaware that she was still live on air , Fox News host Sandra Smith on Monday flashed an incredible look of disdain and expressed astonishment over a Republican lawyer ’ s suggestion of election fraud on Monday .
“ What ?
What is happening ?
” the co-anchor of “ America ’ s Newsroom ” asked as she narrowed her eyes , frowned and shook her head .
“ Trace , we ’ ve called it , ” she told colleague Trace Gallagher , referring to the presidential election .
Smith reacted as Gallagher was interviewing conservative Republican activist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Just because CNN says — or even Fox News says — that somebody ’ s president doesn ’ t make him president.
” Mitchell added : “ Everybody wants to know that this was done properly and legally and we can trust the results .
And I think we have to look into every one of these concerns.
” All major media outlets , including Fox News , have declared Biden the president-elect , based on voting results .
Neither President Donald Trump nor the Trump campaign has presented any evidence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making those allegations .
Mitchell has been organizing for months to challenge mail-in ballots , even before the first vote was cast .
She was the featured speaker at a conference organizing to restrict mail-in ballots in September .
She is priceless .
Please have her with live mike when any the national # FoxNews pundits are on lying !
— MatrixUnloaded ( @ Matrix_Unloaded ) November 9 , 2020 Why are Republicans happy to accept the results of the Senate and the House but not the President 's ... .
Are they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Just asking .
— M. EGBUNIWE ( @ quietpublicity ) November 9 , 2020 Smith could not immediately be reached for comment .
But Mitchell snapped back at her on Twitter .
Sandra Smith thinks FoxNews calling the election means Biden is President .
Forget that pesky Constitution ... happy to be considered a nut job because I believe in the rule of law https : //t.co/yU007yUj9n — Cleta Mitchell ( @ CletaMitchell ) November 9 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Apparently unaware that she was still live on air, Fox News host Sandra Smith on Monday flashed an incredible look of disdain and expressed astonishment over a Republican lawyer’s suggestion of election fraud on Monday.
“What? What is happening?” the co-anchor of “America’s Newsroom” asked as she narrowed her eyes, frowned and shook her head. “Trace, we’ve called it,” she told colleague Trace Gallagher, referring to the presidential election.
Advertisement
Fox News pundit refuses to admit Joe Biden won the election.
The anchor reacts but doesn't realize she's live on air. pic.twitter.com/dCuh5anCku — Strictly Count All The Votes (@christoq) November 9, 2020
Smith reacted as Gallagher was interviewing conservative Republican activist Cleta Mitchell. The attorney insisted: “Just because CNN says — or even Fox News says — that somebody’s president doesn’t make him president.”
Mitchell added: “Everybody wants to know that this was done properly and legally and we can trust the results. And I think we have to look into every one of these concerns.”
All major media outlets, including Fox News, have declared Biden the president-elect, based on voting results. Neither President Donald Trump nor the Trump campaign has presented any evidence of widespread voter or election fraud, despite making those allegations.
Advertisement
Mitchell has been organizing for months to challenge mail-in ballots, even before the first vote was cast. She was the featured speaker at a conference organizing to restrict mail-in ballots in September.
Twitter critics loved Smith’s reaction.
She is all of us today. — Strictly Count All The Votes (@christoq) November 9, 2020
She is priceless. Please have her with live mike when any the national #FoxNews pundits are on lying! — MatrixUnloaded (@Matrix_Unloaded) November 9, 2020
Why are Republicans happy to accept the results of the Senate and the House but not the President's.... Are they not on the same ballot paper?
Just asking. — M. EGBUNIWE (@quietpublicity) November 9, 2020
Smith could not immediately be reached for comment. But Mitchell snapped back at her on Twitter.
“Sandra Smith thinks Fox News calling the election means Biden is president,” Mitchell tweeted. “Forget that pesky Constitution ...”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Chris Hayes Rips Into Trump, Giuliani: ‘No Frickin' Wonder We Are Where We Are’

MSNBC ’ s Chris Hayes couldn ’ t get over the botched “ Four Seasons ” news conference held this weekend by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani , who is the personal attorney to President Donald Trump .
Or as Hayes ’ on-screen graphic described it : “ CLOWN SHOW.
” Trump , who has refused to concede to President-elect Joe Biden , has falsely claimed he won the election .
To back him up , Giuliani spent the news conference peddling unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud with a “ witness ” who was later reported to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to two young girls .
But as Hayes pointed out , the most absurd part of the news conference was the location .
Trump initially tweeted it would be held at the “ Four Seasons , Philadelphia , ” suggesting the high-end hotel chain .
Instead , it took place at Four Seasons Total Landscaping , near a porn shop and a crematorium .
“ At one level , all this stuff is hilarious but at another there ’ s a reason the president ’ s casinos went bankrupt and he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the industrialized world.
” “ These are the people , this is the crew , that ’ s been running our country four years , ” Hayes concluded .
“ No frickin ’ wonder we are where we are .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes couldn’t get over the botched “Four Seasons” news conference held this weekend by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who is the personal attorney to President Donald Trump.
Or as Hayes’ on-screen graphic described it: “CLOWN SHOW.”
Trump, who has refused to concede to President-elect Joe Biden, has falsely claimed he won the election. To back him up, Giuliani spent the news conference peddling unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud with a “witness” who was later reported to be a convicted sex offender charged with exposing himself to two young girls.
Advertisement
But as Hayes pointed out, the most absurd part of the news conference was the location. Trump initially tweeted it would be held at the “Four Seasons, Philadelphia,” suggesting the high-end hotel chain. Instead, it took place at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, near a porn shop and a crematorium.
Hayes observed:
“At one level, all this stuff is hilarious but at another there’s a reason the president’s casinos went bankrupt and he’s overseen one of the worst coronavirus responses in the industrialized world.”
“These are the people, this is the crew, that’s been running our country four years,” Hayes concluded. “No frickin’ wonder we are where we are.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Biden Coronavirus Task Force Member: 'We Are About To Enter COVID Hell’

Renowned infectious disease expert Michael Osterholm on Monday spelled out a dire view of what Americans should expect from the coronavirus pandemic in the next few months .
Osterholm , the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and newly minted member of President-elect Joe Biden ’ s coronavirus advisory team , told CNBC ’ s “ Squawk Alley ” the number of daily new infections is “ going to continue to increase substantially.
” “ We have not even come close to the peak and , as such , our hospitals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , cautioning the pressure on health services will soon become so high that the quality of care will drop .
“ The next three to four months are going to be , by far , the darkest of the pandemic , ” Osterholm continued .
“ I don ’ t think America quite gets this yet , ” he said .
“ This is going to get much worse .
This is not to scare people out of their wits .
This is to scare people into their wits to understand that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can basically limit the contacts we have with people that will dramatically impact our ability of getting this disease.
” The U.S. on Sunday became the first country to surpass 10 million cases of COVID-19 — with an average of 108,000 people being diagnosed every day .
The daily count will soon soar so high that Americans will look back at the 100,000 figure and “ wish to be back there , ” Osterholm added .
A glimmer of hope came Monday when drug giant Pfizer announced early data on its COVID-19 vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Osterholm described the progress as a “ great , great finding , ” but cautioned that more data is needed to understand whether the 90 % figure means to prevent serious illness or just milder symptoms .
“ Until we have those pieces of information , we can ’ t really know how much of a game-changer this really is , ” he said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Renowned infectious disease expert Michael Osterholm on Monday spelled out a dire view of what Americans should expect from the coronavirus pandemic in the next few months.
“We are about to enter COVID hell,” he said.
Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and newly minted member of President-elect Joe Biden’s coronavirus advisory team, told CNBC’s “Squawk Alley” the number of daily new infections is “going to continue to increase substantially.”
Advertisement
“We have not even come close to the peak and, as such, our hospitals are now being overrun,” Osterholm said, cautioning the pressure on health services will soon become so high that the quality of care will drop.
“The next three to four months are going to be, by far, the darkest of the pandemic,” Osterholm continued.
“I don’t think America quite gets this yet,” he said. “This is going to get much worse. This is not to scare people out of their wits. This is to scare people into their wits to understand that because we still have control. We can basically limit the contacts we have with people that will dramatically impact our ability of getting this disease.”
The U.S. on Sunday became the first country to surpass 10 million cases of COVID-19 — with an average of 108,000 people being diagnosed every day. The daily count will soon soar so high that Americans will look back at the 100,000 figure and “wish to be back there,” Osterholm added.
Advertisement
A glimmer of hope came Monday when drug giant Pfizer announced early data on its COVID-19 vaccine showed more than 90% effectiveness.
Osterholm described the progress as a “great, great finding,” but cautioned that more data is needed to understand whether the 90% figure means to prevent serious illness or just milder symptoms.
“Until we have those pieces of information, we can’t really know how much of a game-changer this really is,” he said.
Check out the interview here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Why It Matters That Jill Biden Plans To Teach While Serving As First Lady

AP Photo/Chris O'Meara Jill Biden wants to keep her teaching job , just as the former second lady did during the Obama administration .
“ I like working , ” the 69-year-old Biden explained to Vogue in September .
“ Like so many of your readers , I ’ m a working woman .
[ Teaching is ] my passion .
That ’ s what I love doing .
That has been my career and really a major focus in my life , so I feel like I could handle it and do everything else that first ladies want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to support her husband and to take on causes of a stereotypically feminine nature ― perhaps to do with children , maybe food , fighting disease is good .
She is judged on how she runs the White House , graciously hosts events , and dresses .
Millions of words have been spilled on , say , Melania Trump ’ s outfits , Christmas decorations and landscaping decisions .
“ I ’ m working ... my ass off on the Christmas stuff , that you know .
Who gives a fuck about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to do it , right ?
” the current first lady said in a secretly recorded conversation with one of her advisers , expressing her frustration with the expectations of the role .
Eleanor Roosevelt took heat from members of her husband ’ s Cabinet for her activism .
Nancy Reagan was vilified for her involvement in her husband ’ s administration .
Hillary Clinton was reviled for ... the list is long , but as first lady it was partly for being involved in health care reform ( and that one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disparaged homemakers ) .
Even if the first lady stays in her lane , she can get called out .
High-profile women walk a tightrope and live in a double bind : Be successful but not ambitious .
Beautiful but not showy about it .
Well-spoken but not loud .
Confident but not arrogant .
Michelle Obama faced all of that and more as our first Black first lady , dealing with the pernicious overlay of both racism and sexism .
“ Name a first lady and she has been reprimanded for being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlling or not ambitious enough , ” author Kate Andersen Brower wrote in The New York Times four years ago , pondering what would happen if a man were in that role .
Essentially , the first lady is supposed to embody the perfect woman , she wrote .
These days , the perfect woman typically has a job , in addition to all her other roles .
Even conservatives out there touting a woman ’ s place at home seem to concede this point .
Just last month , Republicans fawned over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a career .
A woman ’ s place is still in the home , their new line of thinking seems to go , but it ’ s fine if you can handle that and hold down a paying job , too .
( And expect no policy help from us . )
Teaching has always been seen as an acceptable job for a woman .
It conforms to stereotypical expectations that women are simply better with kids , more caring , more empathetic and more giving .
Laura Bush , a former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus on education and literacy during her time in the White House .
“ You wouldn ’ t want to have a situation where you had a first lady working in a sort of job that was in conflict for ethical reasons , ” said Betsy Fischer Martin , executive director of the Women & Politics Institute at the American University School of Public Affairs .
“ And certainly teaching only enhances the kind of platform I know she ’ ll want to advocate for , ” Fischer Martin said .
The First @ @ @ @ @ @ @ groundbreaker for gender roles from the start .
In the Democratic race , the possibilities for a presidential spouse were wider than ever before .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren ’ s husband kept his role at Harvard Law School when Warren ran for the nomination .
Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg ’ s husband took time off from his job at a Montessori school during Buttigieg ’ s campaign for the nomination .
“ In this whole cycle , even during the primary , there ’ s been a lot of different examples of what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the fact that there were a couple of potential first gentlemen in the mix for a while , ” said Amanda Hunter , research and communications director at the Barbara Lee Foundation .
Crucially , Biden hopes to keep teaching at a moment of educational crisis amid the COVID-19 pandemic .
Many kids around the country are going to school virtually or are stuck in some kind of “ hybrid ” limbo of both in-person classes and online learning .
State and local governments are facing budget shortfalls that could severely undermine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this break in regular education could be devastating for children .

Jill Biden wants to keep her teaching job, just as the former second lady did during the Obama administration. AP Photo/Chris O'Meara
If everything goes as planned, Jill Biden will become the first first lady with a paying job, as a college professor, outside the White House. She’s been talking about this frequently, her spokesperson told HuffPost on Sunday night.
“I like working,” the 69-year-old Biden explained to Vogue in September. “Like so many of your readers, I’m a working woman. [Teaching is] my passion. That’s what I love doing. That has been my career and really a major focus in my life, so I feel like I could handle it and do everything else that first ladies want to do.”
Advertisement
In one sense, this isn’t much of a surprise. Biden kept teaching at a community college in Northern Virginia when her husband was vice president ― a decision that an aide recently called “insane” because of the grueling workload it entailed.
And it’s hardly revolutionary in 2020 that someone’s wife has a paying job. But in the Upside Down of presidential gender dynamics, it’s a big deal.
A first lady is expected to support her husband and to take on causes of a stereotypically feminine nature ― perhaps to do with children, maybe food, fighting disease is good. She is judged on how she runs the White House, graciously hosts events, and dresses. Millions of words have been spilled on, say, Melania Trump’s outfits, Christmas decorations and landscaping decisions.
“I’m working ... my ass off on the Christmas stuff, that you know. Who gives a fuck about the Christmas stuff and decorations? But I need to do it, right?” the current first lady said in a secretly recorded conversation with one of her advisers, expressing her frustration with the expectations of the role.
Advertisement
Fulfilling the traditional responsibilities of a first lady is definitely a job, demanding hard work with no pay.
But it’s when a first lady steps out of that space ― particularly if she’s seen near real policy ― that she is typically excoriated.
Eleanor Roosevelt took heat from members of her husband’s Cabinet for her activism. Nancy Reagan was vilified for her involvement in her husband’s administration. Hillary Clinton was reviled for ... the list is long, but as first lady it was partly for being involved in health care reform (and that one time during the 1992 campaign when she disparaged homemakers).
Even if the first lady stays in her lane, she can get called out. High-profile women walk a tightrope and live in a double bind: Be successful but not ambitious. Beautiful but not showy about it. Well-spoken but not loud. Confident but not arrogant. Michelle Obama faced all of that and more as our first Black first lady, dealing with the pernicious overlay of both racism and sexism.
“Name a first lady and she has been reprimanded for being too outspoken or too reserved, too controlling or not ambitious enough,” author Kate Andersen Brower wrote in The New York Times four years ago, pondering what would happen if a man were in that role. Essentially, the first lady is supposed to embody the perfect woman, she wrote.
Advertisement
These days, the perfect woman typically has a job, in addition to all her other roles. Even conservatives out there touting a woman’s place at home seem to concede this point. Just last month, Republicans fawned over Amy Coney Barrett for having young children and a career. A woman’s place is still in the home, their new line of thinking seems to go, but it’s fine if you can handle that and hold down a paying job, too. (And expect no policy help from us.)
Possibly, the culture has moved a bit since Hillary Clinton was condemned for continuing her work as a lawyer even as her husband was governor of Arkansas. And for justifying it with her infamous quote about baking cookies.
There are also definitely a lot of caveats at play here. If Jill Biden were still the parent of young children, her choice to keep working would likely receive a lot of criticism. Expectations for women with little kids are different.
And if Biden said she was going back to work at a law firm or a widget factory or something more commercial and less recognizably altruistic than teaching, that would almost certainly still be controversial.
Jill Biden addresses the Democratic National Convention from a classroom during an Aug. 18, 2020, livestream. Democratic National Convention Committee via Getty Images
Advertisement
Teaching has always been seen as an acceptable job for a woman. It conforms to stereotypical expectations that women are simply better with kids, more caring, more empathetic and more giving. Laura Bush, a former teacher, was widely praised for her focus on education and literacy during her time in the White House.
Teaching also complements the work that Biden wants to do in her role as first lady.
“You wouldn’t want to have a situation where you had a first lady working in a sort of job that was in conflict for ethical reasons,” said Betsy Fischer Martin, executive director of the Women & Politics Institute at the American University School of Public Affairs. “And certainly teaching only enhances the kind of platform I know she’ll want to advocate for,” Fischer Martin said.
Still, Biden keeping her outside job is significant, said Jennifer Lawless, a political science professor at the University of Virginia. “It sends a very strong message to women: No matter how accomplished, powerful, or important your husband, you don’t have to abandon your own career or play second fiddle.”
The First Second Gentleman
The 2020 campaign was a groundbreaker for gender roles from the start. In the Democratic race, the possibilities for a presidential spouse were wider than ever before. Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s husband kept his role at Harvard Law School when Warren ran for the nomination. Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s husband took time off from his job at a Montessori school during Buttigieg’s campaign for the nomination.
On social media, candidates were able to showcase their personal lives and their supportive spouses.
Advertisement
So proud of you. ❤❤🇺🇸🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/Orb1ISe0dU — Doug Emhoff (@DouglasEmhoff) November 7, 2020
“In this whole cycle, even during the primary, there’s been a lot of different examples of what a partner looks like when you think of the fact that there were a couple of potential first gentlemen in the mix for a while,” said Amanda Hunter, research and communications director at the Barbara Lee Foundation.
Hunter pointed to another groundbreaking political spouse: Douglas Emhoff, soon to be the nation’s first second gentleman.
Emhoff had taken a leave of absence from the elite law firm DLA Piper to support his wife, Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, during the campaign. He will officially leave the firm by Inauguration Day, a Biden campaign representative said on Tuesday.
It’ll be fascinating to see what Emhoff does with his new position. “It’s nice to have a man as the first for once,” said Fischer Martin.
Advertisement
Having Biden and Emhoff in these roles could open up the possibilities for all spouses.
“Overall we’ve seen so many stereotypes challenged in the 2020 cycle,” Hunter said. “This is one more opportunity for both Doug Emhoff and Dr. Biden to create their own role and not follow the cookie cutter of what previous first and second spouses have done.”
Crucially, Biden hopes to keep teaching at a moment of educational crisis amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Many kids around the country are going to school virtually or are stuck in some kind of “hybrid” limbo of both in-person classes and online learning. State and local governments are facing budget shortfalls that could severely undermine public schools. The long-term consequences of this break in regular education could be devastating for children.
So after four years of an administration that did little on education except push for more charter schools, having a first lady with a direct hand in education and a passion for public schools could prove to be no small matter.
“It demonstrates that education will be front and center in a Biden administration, which is a significant departure from the last four years,” Lawless suggested.
Other than confirming that Biden plans to return to teaching, her spokesperson Michael LaRosa emphasized her other goals right now.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Teen With Stutter Who Spoke At DNC Thrilled About Biden's Victory

A 13-year-old boy with a stutter who met Joe Biden on the campaign trail is thrilled his new pal won the presidential election .
In a video clip that went viral , Biden , who stuttered when he was young , encouraged Brayden Harrington to be brave .
“ Aw man , don ’ t let it define you , ” Biden said during the event in Concord , New Hampshire last February .
“ You are smart as hell .
You can do this.
” “ I see him as a role model , ” Brayden said Monday on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stutters , and he made it , like , this far in life , as a president-elect , and that ’ s really , I would say , brave of him to put himself out there , for the whole country , and to be a leader .
And that ’ s just really great of him , to just push himself.
” “ I have a really strong feeling he ’ s going to be a great president , ” Brayden said .
After their initial meeting , Biden obtained Brayden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tips on battling stuttering and ended up inviting the teen to speak at the Democratic National Convention : “ We actually got to see firsthand what our soon-to-be president of the United States is like as a normal human being , ” she said .
“ He had a huge impact on our family.
” “ I have days where I ’ m like , ‘ Oh , I want to be president , ’ and then I have days where I ’ m like … ’ I won ’ t make it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to CBS .

A 13-year-old boy with a stutter who met Joe Biden on the campaign trail is thrilled his new pal won the presidential election.
In a video clip that went viral, Biden, who stuttered when he was young, encouraged Brayden Harrington to be brave.
Advertisement
“Aw man, don’t let it define you,” Biden said during the event in Concord, New Hampshire last February. “You are smart as hell. You can do this.”
“I see him as a role model,” Brayden said Monday on “CBS This Morning.” “He stutters, and he made it, like, this far in life, as a president-elect, and that’s really, I would say, brave of him to put himself out there, for the whole country, and to be a leader. And that’s just really great of him, to just push himself.”
Brayden also told “Good Morning America” that he was happy for Biden.
“I have a really strong feeling he’s going to be a great president,” Brayden said.
Check it out in the clip above.
After their initial meeting, Biden obtained Brayden’s phone number to share more detailed tips on battling stuttering and ended up inviting the teen to speak at the Democratic National Convention:
Advertisement
Brayden’s mom, Jessica Harrington, said Biden’s victory was “very emotional.” She called meeting the former vice president a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
“We actually got to see firsthand what our soon-to-be president of the United States is like as a normal human being,” she said. “He had a huge impact on our family.”
Is the White House in Brayden’s future now?


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--The Surprising Liberalism Of Some Republican Voters

Last week ’ s election held many surprises .
Here ’ s a head-scratcher : At the same time Florida voters backed President Donald Trump in the presidential election by a roughly 3-percentage-point margin , they overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative to raise the state ’ s minimum wage to $ 15 per hour , by more than 20 percentage points .
President-elect Joe Biden has supported the $ 15 minimum wage .
Trump has not .
It ’ s just one of several economic policies that a sizable number of Republican voters favor even though Republican politicians don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intended to capture the average opinion even of partisans within the party , ” said Vanessa Williamson , a Brookings Institution scholar who has studied Republican voters ’ views for years .
“ Parties make decisions based on the preferences of highly organized groups within the party.
” While Democratic voters generally support progressive economic policies , Republicans are more divided , Williamson has found , with lower-income Republicans more supportive of things like taxing the rich and requiring companies to pay a higher minimum wage .
One out of every five Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic Party than the Republican Party , according to a 2019 analysis of voter survey data that Williamson co-authored with Lee Drutman , a political reform researcher at the New America Foundation think tank , and Felicia Wong , president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute think tank .
When asked for their opinions on new policies or issues , voters often tend to take cues from their parties ’ leaders ― one reason that the partisan divides on topics like free trade or foreign policy have tended to fluctuate wildly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , support among rank-and-file Republicans seems to outpace supportive messaging from GOP officials .
Americans regularly cite the economy as a top election issue , but that concern rarely translates into a cleanly drawn line between voters ’ policy preferences and their eventual voting decisions .
Few people base their votes on a checklist of issues , and even broader views of the economy have become increasingly entangled with political polarization .
Though they won the White House and might take the Senate , Democrats have been disappointed with their performance in congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected to win while failing to expand their House majority .
Some moderates have complained that progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) brought too much attention to progressive policy goals , such as expanding Medicare coverage to everybody .
Ocasio-Cortez countered that every swing-district candidate who co-sponsored a “ Medicare for All ” bill kept their seat .
At the final presidential debate in October , Biden responded to a question by saying he supported a $ 15 minimum wage but quickly pivoted to the importance of bailing out small businesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ higher wage would hurt employers .
“ I think it should be a state option , ” Trump said , essentially endorsing the idea of having no federal minimum at all .
“ Alabama is different than New York .
New York is different from Vermont .
Every state is different .
It should be a state option.
” Trump has occasionally hinted at support for progressive policies but mostly governed as a conventional Republican focused on tax cuts and deregulation .
Exit polls suggested the president fared better than Biden among voters @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Last week’s election held many surprises. Here’s a head-scratcher: At the same time Florida voters backed President Donald Trump in the presidential election by a roughly 3-percentage-point margin, they overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative to raise the state’s minimum wage to $15 per hour, by more than 20 percentage points.
President-elect Joe Biden has supported the $15 minimum wage. Trump has not. It’s just one of several economic policies that a sizable number of Republican voters favor even though Republican politicians don’t.
Advertisement
“Party platforms are not intended to capture the average opinion even of partisans within the party,” said Vanessa Williamson, a Brookings Institution scholar who has studied Republican voters’ views for years. “Parties make decisions based on the preferences of highly organized groups within the party.”
“Rank-and-file Republican voters relatively commonly hold positive attitudes about certain progressive economic policies, particularly the minimum wage but also raising taxes on wealthy people.” - Vanessa Williamson, Brookings Institution
While Democratic voters generally support progressive economic policies, Republicans are more divided, Williamson has found, with lower-income Republicans more supportive of things like taxing the rich and requiring companies to pay a higher minimum wage. One out of every five Republicans has economic views that align better with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party, according to a 2019 analysis of voter survey data that Williamson co-authored with Lee Drutman, a political reform researcher at the New America Foundation think tank, and Felicia Wong, president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute think tank.
“Rank-and-file Republican voters relatively commonly hold positive attitudes about certain progressive economic policies, particularly the minimum wage but also raising taxes on wealthy people,” Williamson said.
Advertisement
When asked for their opinions on new policies or issues, voters often tend to take cues from their parties’ leaders ― one reason that the partisan divides on topics like free trade or foreign policy have tended to fluctuate wildly. On some progressive economic issues, however, support among rank-and-file Republicans seems to outpace supportive messaging from GOP officials.
Minimum wage: Raising the minimum wage is also popular nationally. In a 2019 Pew Research Center survey, two-thirds of Americans, including 43% of Republican and Republican-leaning independents, favored raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour.
Taxing the rich: Last year, Americans said by a roughly 2-to-1 margin, 54% to 26%, that the government should try to reduce the gap between wealthy and less well-off Americans, a HuffPost/YouGov survey found. In that survey, about one-third of Republicans supported the idea.
Paid leave: Three-quarters of Americans favor requiring companies to provide all full-time employees with paid sick days if they or an immediate family member gets sick, a March 2020 HuffPost/YouGov poll found, with two-thirds of Republicans backing the idea.
Unemployment and COVID-19 relief: A slim majority of Americans thought Congress should reauthorize the extra $600 in weekly unemployment benefits that lawmakers allowed to expire at the end of July, with 40% of Republicans favoring the benefits, according to an August 2020 HuffPost/YouGov poll. Republicans in Congress, by contrast, were almost unanimous that the $600 was too much and that no worker should receive more in unemployment than they did from their jobs.
Americans regularly cite the economy as a top election issue, but that concern rarely translates into a cleanly drawn line between voters’ policy preferences and their eventual voting decisions. Few people base their votes on a checklist of issues, and even broader views of the economy have become increasingly entangled with political polarization.
Though they won the White House and might take the Senate, Democrats have been disappointed with their performance in congressional races, having lost Senate races they expected to win while failing to expand their House majority. Some moderates have complained that progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) brought too much attention to progressive policy goals, such as expanding Medicare coverage to everybody. Ocasio-Cortez countered that every swing-district candidate who co-sponsored a “Medicare for All” bill kept their seat.
Advertisement
In general, Democratic candidates, including Biden, focused more on health care and made less noise about taxing the rich or raising the minimum wage.
At the final presidential debate in October, Biden responded to a question by saying he supported a $15 minimum wage but quickly pivoted to the importance of bailing out small businesses. In response, Trump said the higher wage would hurt employers.
“I think it should be a state option,” Trump said, essentially endorsing the idea of having no federal minimum at all. “Alabama is different than New York. New York is different from Vermont. Every state is different. It should be a state option.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Sean Hannity's Diatribe At Victorious Democrats Turns Into Stunning Self-Own

“ We ’ re supposed to forget their vicious , vile attacks over the last four years , ” Hannity @ @ @ @ @ excuse me , I ’ m sorry , that ’ s not how this is @ @ @ @ @ least not in this program , during this hour and other hours of friends of @ @ @ @ @ ’ t and can not ―we can not ― be intimidated into silence .
We @ @ @ @ @ be lectured by the same media frauds and Democrats ― the ones that called us @ @ @ @ @ sexist , racist , Islamaphobe , homophobe , smelly Walmart shoppers .

“We’re supposed to forget their vicious, vile attacks over the last four years,” Hannity said. “Well, excuse me, I’m sorry, that’s not how this is going to work. At least not in this program, during this hour and other hours of friends of ours here. I won’t and cannot ―we cannot ― be intimidated into silence. We’re not gonna be lectured by the same media frauds and Democrats ― the ones that called us chumps, irredeemable deplorables, sexist, racist, Islamaphobe, homophobe, smelly Walmart shoppers.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Seth Meyers Names The 'Most Irritating Thing' About Donald Trump

Seth Meyers admitted Monday that he was stunned “ at just how relieved I am that we don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ four years of Donald Trump.
” “ Even if you put aside everything else about @ @ @ @ @ venality , cruelty , corruption , mendacity , vindictiveness and flagrant disregard for any life @ @ @ @ @ he is still just a world-historically irritating man , ” the host of NBC ’ @ @ @ @ @ continued .
The “ most irritating thing ” about Trump was “ my and many @ @ @ @ @ inability to look away , ” Meyers said .
“ For four years , it @ @ @ @ @ monitor the president 24 hours a day like zoologists staring at two endangered rhinos , @ @ @ @ @ sex , ” he added , before imagining what it would be like to live @ @ @ @ @ Trump spouting conspiracy theories and nonsense on television .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Seth Meyers admitted Monday that he was stunned “at just how relieved I am that we don’t have to suffer through another four years of Donald Trump.”
“Even if you put aside everything else about him — the racism, venality, cruelty, corruption, mendacity, vindictiveness and flagrant disregard for any life other than his own — he is still just a world-historically irritating man,” the host of NBC’s “Late Night” continued.
Advertisement
The “most irritating thing” about Trump was “my and many people’s absolute round-the-clock inability to look away,” Meyers said.
“For four years, it has been genuinely necessary to monitor the president 24 hours a day like zoologists staring at two endangered rhinos, hoping they’ll have sex,” he added, before imagining what it would be like to live through another four years of Trump spouting conspiracy theories and nonsense on television.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Sarah Cooper Shares The Big Fear About Her Lip-Syncing Videos Had Donald Trump Won

Sarah Cooper on Monday revealed her big fear about what would have become of her mocking lip-syncing videos of Donald Trump had the president won re-election .
Cooper , talking with “ Late Night ” host Seth Meyers , said she was “ so happy ” and “ more relieved than anything ” that Democratic nominee Joe Biden had defeated Trump ― but she admitted to being worried on Tuesday , as the election hung in the balance , that her viral clips would cease to be funny .
“ If he was actually able to escape everything that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him , including me with these videos trying to point out to everyone how he was completely incompetent , then these videos would just be sad , ” she explained .
“ But now that he ’ s lost , they ’ re even more hysterical , ” she added .
“ I ’ m very relieved for that.
” Cooper , whose Netflix special “ Everything ’ s Fine ” debuted last month , also recalled why in 2017 , way before she started posting the taunting videos of Trump , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after she tweeted he was “ unfit for office.
” “ It ’ s very sad .
He ’ s very fragile , a very sensitive man , I can ’ t imagine what he ’ s going through right now , ” she joked .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sarah Cooper on Monday revealed her big fear about what would have become of her mocking lip-syncing videos of Donald Trump had the president won reelection.
In an interview with “Late Night” host Seth Meyers, Cooper said she was “so happy” and “more relieved than anything” that Democratic nominee Joe Biden had defeated Trump ― but she admitted to being worried last Tuesday, as the election hung in the balance, that her viral clips would cease to be funny.
Advertisement
“If he was actually able to escape everything that we’ve tried to get rid of him, including me with these videos trying to point out to everyone how he was completely incompetent, then these videos would just be sad,” she said.
“But now that he’s lost, they’re even more hysterical,” added Cooper, whose Netflix special “Everything’s Fine” debuted last month. “I’m very relieved for that.”
She also recalled why, in 2017, way before she started posting the taunting videos of Trump, the president had blocked her on Twitter — after she tweeted that he was “unfit for office.”
“It’s very sad. He’s very fragile, a very sensitive man. I can’t imagine what he’s going through right now,” she joked.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Robert De Niro Issues Warning About The Person Donald Trump May Have Inspired

Actor Robert De Niro , a longtime critic of Donald Trump , expressed his relief at the president ’ s loss in the 2020 election on Monday ’ s broadcast of MSNBC ’ s “ The Beat.
” But the “ Godfather ” franchise star warned of what Trump had set in motion over the last four years , fearing he might have inspired someone smarter than him to wreak even more chaos on the country , but in a more subtle way .
“ There ’ ll be other people like him in the future , maybe not in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ host Ari Melber .
“ Somebody ’ s going to come along who ’ s a lot smarter , more sensitive , more mercurial and not so boorish and will be able to pull the wool over the eyes of the public , ” he continued .
“ And then we will have a more serious , deeper problem , and one that might actually get further than what Trump has done.
” “ He ’ s also set an example , unfortunately , to other young people that this kind of thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s why it ’ s so important after he is out of office that he is held accountable , ” De Niro added .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Actor Robert De Niro, a longtime critic of Donald Trump, expressed his relief at the president’s loss in the 2020 election on Monday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “The Beat.”
But “The Godfather: Part II” star warned of what Trump had set in motion over the last four years, fearing he might have inspired someone smarter than him to wreak even more chaos on the country, but in a more subtle way.
Advertisement
“There’ll be other people like him in the future, maybe not in my lifetime,” De Niro told host Ari Melber.
“Somebody’s going to come along who’s a lot smarter, more sensitive, more mercurial and not so boorish and will be able to pull the wool over the eyes of the public,” he continued. “And then we will have a more serious, deeper problem, and one that might actually get further than what Trump has done.”
“He’s also set an example, unfortunately, to other young people that this kind of thing can be done, and that’s why it’s so important after he is out of office that he is held accountable,” De Niro added.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Donald Trump Mercilessly Fires Himself In Jimmy Fallon's ‘Apprentice’ Mashup

Jimmy Fallon on Monday suggested that the White House had finally found the perfect person to tell President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ .
And that person was ... the outgoing president himself .
“ The Tonight Show @ @ @ @ @ an interview Trump gave as president with a clip from his time hosting “ The @ @ @ @ @ with the then-reality TV show personality uttering his catchphrase ― “ You ’ re fired @ @ @ @ @ future self .

By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-11-10--Kimmel Supercut Shows Wild Difference Between Past Concession Speeches And Trump

Jimmy Kimmel on Monday highlighted the stark difference between the way past presidential candidates have conceded elections and President Donald @ @ @ @ @ accept defeat to Joe Biden .
The “ Jimmy Kimmel Live !
” host aired @ @ @ @ @ candidates — from former President George H.W .
Bush in 1992 to 2016 Democratic nominee @ @ @ @ @ bridge the partisan divide and work with their former rivals for the good of the @ @ @ @ @ footage of Trump baselessly alleging mass voter fraud .
Check out the montage from the @ @ @ @ @ in his monologue , Kimmel suggested how Trump could be removed from the White House @ @ @ @ @ and imagined first lady Melania Trump taking part in the celebrations of President-elect Biden ’ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Jimmy Kimmel on Monday highlighted the stark difference between the way past presidential candidates have conceded elections and President Donald Trump’s refusal to accept defeat to Joe Biden.
The “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” host aired a supercut that showed losing candidates — from former President George H.W. Bush in 1992 to 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton — vowing to bridge the partisan divide and work with their former rivals for the good of the country.
Advertisement
It ended with footage of Trump baselessly alleging mass voter fraud.
Check out the montage from the 7:40 point here: