thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Is The Sky Blue? Amy Coney Barrett Still Won't Answer Really Obvious Questions.

Supreme Court nominees don ’ t like to answer questions about how they feel about one issue or another .
They want to at least appear impartial and convey that they will decide cases based entirely on the law .
But Amy Coney Barrett ’ s stunning refusal in her Senate confirmation hearing to answer basic questions ― ones that have obvious , fact-based answers ― is also on display in her written responses to senators ’ follow-up questions .
Late Tuesday , the Senate Judiciary Committee released all 184 pages of Barrett ’ s responses to follow-up questions from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again , President Donald Trump ’ s Supreme Court pick dodged the same basic questions that don ’ t require a biased opinion to answer , just an acceptance of science and data .
Barrett , who is currently a U.S. appeals court judge , raised eyebrows in her hearing when she refused to say whether climate change is real .
Pressed on it by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse ( D-R.I. ) in his follow-up questions , Barrett said the Supreme Court has said climate change is “ controversial ” so she can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change is not controversial .
As spelled out on NASA ’ s climate website for children , climate change is very real , and the primary cause of it is greenhouse gas emissions from cars , power plants and other human-made sources .
A group of 1,300 scientific experts has concluded that a more than 95 % probability exists that human activities over the past 50 years have contributed to the planet ’ s warming .
Barrett also refused to say in her follow-up answers whether voter fraud is a widespread problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) and whether restrictive voter ID laws suppress the vote in poor and minority communities ( they do ) .
Both questions are easy to answer and backed by substantial evidence .
But Barrett said she wouldn ’ t answer them because it ’ s possible those issues could be the subject of litigation that comes before her as a judge ― a standard that could apply to almost anything .
( Is the sky blue ?
Litigable ! )
Sen. Mazie Hirono ( D-Hawaii ) pressed Barrett on why she had said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but had refused to say whether systemic racism exists .
At the time , Barrett said she wouldn ’ t talk about systemic racism because that is “ a policy question.
” “ As a sitting judge and as a judicial nominee , it would not be appropriate for me to offer an opinion on abstract legal issues or hypotheticals .
Nor would it be appropriate for me to opine on the statements of any political figure or on any subject of political controversy , ” Barrett wrote , indirectly referencing Trump and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ As a candidate in 2016 , President Trump said that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel , who was born in Indiana to parents who had immigrated from Mexico , had an ‘ absolute conflict ’ in presiding over civil fraud lawsuits against Trump University because he was ‘ of Mexican heritage.
’ Do you agree with President Trump ’ s view that a judge ’ s race or ethnicity can be a basis for recusal or disqualification ?
” Kathryn David , Trump ’ s former nominee to the U.S. Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question by saying , “ If confirmed , I will determine on a case-by-case basis whether I must or should be recused from a matter consistent with the Code of Conduct for United States Judges , 28 U.S.C .
455 , and all other laws , rules and court practices governing the situation .
Under that statute , a judge ’ s race or ethnicity is not listed as a basis for recusal.
” Contrast those responses with Barrett ’ s : “ It would be inappropriate for me , as a sitting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to opine on the statements of any political figure or on any subject of political controversy , ” she wrote .
Of course , during her hearing , Barrett avoided plenty of other questions from Democrats on the issues they ’ re most concerned about if she is confirmed .
She refused to distance herself from her past criticism of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts for upholding the Affordable Care Act .
She wouldn ’ t say if NFIB v. Sebelius or King v. Burwell ― two cases that are central to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are settled law .
She wouldn ’ t say if Roe v. Wade was correctly decided , and she wouldn ’ t distance herself from previous criticisms of Obergefell v. Hodges , the landmark marriage equality case .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Supreme Court nominees don’t like to answer questions about how they feel about one issue or another. They want to at least appear impartial and convey that they will decide cases based entirely on the law. But Amy Coney Barrett’s stunning refusal in her Senate confirmation hearing to answer basic questions ― ones that have obvious, fact-based answers ― is also on display in her written responses to senators’ follow-up questions.
Late Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee released all 184 pages of Barrett’s responses to follow-up questions from senators on the panel. Again and again, President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court pick dodged the same basic questions that don’t require a biased opinion to answer, just an acceptance of science and data.
Advertisement
Barrett, who is currently a U.S. appeals court judge, raised eyebrows in her hearing when she refused to say whether climate change is real. Pressed on it by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) in his follow-up questions, Barrett said the Supreme Court has said climate change is “controversial” so she can’t discuss it.
Amy Coney Barrett cited climate change as a "controversial subject" and "sensitive political topic" in her refusal to say whether it exists. Senate Judiciary Committee
The science behind climate change is not controversial. As spelled out on NASA’s climate website for children, climate change is very real, and the primary cause of it is greenhouse gas emissions from cars, power plants and other human-made sources. A group of 1,300 scientific experts has concluded that a more than 95% probability exists that human activities over the past 50 years have contributed to the planet’s warming.
Barrett also refused to say in her follow-up answers whether voter fraud is a widespread problem in U.S. elections (it is not) and whether restrictive voter ID laws suppress the vote in poor and minority communities (they do). Both questions are easy to answer and backed by substantial evidence. But Barrett said she wouldn’t answer them because it’s possible those issues could be the subject of litigation that comes before her as a judge ― a standard that could apply to almost anything. (Is the sky blue? Litigable!)
Advertisement
Barrett said it "it would not be appropriate for me to offer an opinion" on whether in-person voter fraud is rare, as studies have shown. Senate Judiciary Committee
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) pressed Barrett on why she had said in her hearing that racism exists, but had refused to say whether systemic racism exists. At the time, Barrett said she wouldn’t talk about systemic racism because that is “a policy question.”
So in her follow-up questions, Hirono asked Barrett to define a “policy question” versus a “question of fact.”
She refused to answer that, too.
Barrett said the existence of systemic racism is "a public policy question of substantial controversy" rather than affirming that it exists. Senate Judiciary Committee
Trump’s Supreme Court pick wouldn’t even answer follow-up questions about whether things that are illegal are illegal.
Advertisement
“According to federal law, is it legal to vote twice in a single federal election?” asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
“As a sitting judge and as a judicial nominee, it would not be appropriate for me to offer an opinion on abstract legal issues or hypotheticals. Nor would it be appropriate for me to opine on the statements of any political figure or on any subject of political controversy,” Barrett wrote, indirectly referencing Trump and his suggestions that Americans should vote twice.
Voting twice in a federal election is illegal under federal law, considered fraud, and a felony in many states. Penalties include being fined $10,000 and going to jail for five years.
Barrett also refused to answer questions that other judicial nominees routinely answer. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, regularly asks judicial nominees this same question, word for word, in his follow-up questions:
“As a candidate in 2016, President Trump said that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was born in Indiana to parents who had immigrated from Mexico, had an ‘absolute conflict’ in presiding over civil fraud lawsuits against Trump University because he was ‘of Mexican heritage.’ Do you agree with President Trump’s view that a judge’s race or ethnicity can be a basis for recusal or disqualification?”
Advertisement
When Booker posed this question to U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke in his follow-up questions to him, VanDyke said, “I do not believe a judge’s race or ethnicity is a basis for recusal.”
Kathryn David, Trump’s former nominee to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, responded to the question by saying, “If confirmed, I will determine on a case-by-case basis whether I must or should be recused from a matter consistent with the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, 28 U.S.C. 455, and all other laws, rules and court practices governing the situation. Under that statute, a judge’s race or ethnicity is not listed as a basis for recusal.”
And here’s U.S. District Judge John Gallagher in response to Booker’s question: “I cannot foresee any circumstances under which recusal of a judge from a case would be based on race or ethnicity.”
Contrast those responses with Barrett’s: “It would be inappropriate for me, as a sitting judge and as a judicial nominee, to opine on the statements of any political figure or on any subject of political controversy,” she wrote.
Of course, during her hearing, Barrett avoided plenty of other questions from Democrats on the issues they’re most concerned about if she is confirmed. She refused to distance herself from her past criticism of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts for upholding the Affordable Care Act. She wouldn’t say if NFIB v. Sebelius or King v. Burwell ― two cases that are central to the Affordable Care Act’s constitutionality ― are settled law. She wouldn’t say if Roe v. Wade was correctly decided, and she wouldn’t distance herself from previous criticisms of Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark marriage equality case.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Mary Trump: Don't Expect Donald Trump To Be Civil In Final Debate Against Biden

President Donald Trump ’ s niece Mary Trump has advice for all those anticipating his final debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden : Don ’ t expect the commander in chief to be “ normal ” in any sense of the word .
“ People need to stop treating Donald like he ’ s normal , that he ’ s going to abide by the rules or care at all about behaving decently , ” she told MSNBC anchor Ari Melber on Tuesday .
“ He doesn ’ t .
We can not treat him like a normal candidate on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ niece ― who wrote a tell-all book about her uncle , “ Too Much and Never Enough : How My Family Created the World ’ s Most Dangerous Man ” ― speculated that the president was “ desperate ” in his bid to win reelection .
She suggested that he went into debates and town hall events intending to argue and interrupt “ because he knows that getting into a substantive policy discussion is disastrous for him.
” “ His entire administration has been a failure from beginning to end , ” Mary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibly say about the policy that will be to his benefit ?
Nothing , as far as I can see .
So he needs to interrupt .
He needs to be rude .
He needs to talk over other people .
And he needs to change the subject , no matter how irrelevantly he does it.
” The final presidential debate between Trump and Biden will take place in Nashville , Tennessee , on Thursday , with a new twist arranged by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates : Each candidate ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delivers a two-minute opening answer on each debate topic .
The restriction was enacted after the chaotic first debate between Trump and Biden in Cleveland on Sept. 29 when the president frequently interrupted his opponent ’ s answers and butted heads with moderator Chris Wallace .
The Trump campaign has agreed to the new debate restrictions but , in a statement attributed to campaign manager Bill Stepien , also lambasted them as “ last minute rule changes from the biased commission in their latest attempt to provide advantage to their favored candidate.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s debate strategy may be to push recent efforts to smear Biden : “ This was supposed to be the foreign policy debate , so the President still looks forward to forcing Biden to answer the number one relevant question of whether he ’ s been compromised by the Communist Party of China .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump’s niece Mary Trump has advice for all those anticipating his final debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden: Don’t expect the commander in chief to be “normal” in any sense of the word.
“People need to stop treating Donald like he’s normal, that he’s going to abide by the rules or care at all about behaving decently,” she told MSNBC anchor Ari Melber on Tuesday. “He doesn’t. We cannot treat him like a normal candidate on a debate stage.”
Advertisement
Trump’s niece ― who wrote a tell-all book about her uncle, “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man” ― speculated that the president was “desperate” in his bid to win reelection. She suggested that he went into debates and town hall events intending to argue and interrupt “because he knows that getting into a substantive policy discussion is disastrous for him.”
“His entire administration has been a failure from beginning to end,” Mary Trump said. “What could he possibly say about the policy that will be to his benefit? Nothing, as far as I can see. So he needs to interrupt. He needs to be rude. He needs to talk over other people. And he needs to change the subject, no matter how irrelevantly he does it.”
The final presidential debate between Trump and Biden will take place in Nashville, Tennessee, on Thursday, with a new twist arranged by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates: Each candidate’s microphone will be muted while their rival delivers a two-minute opening answer on each debate topic.
The restriction was enacted after the chaotic first debate between Trump and Biden in Cleveland on Sept. 29 when the president frequently interrupted his opponent’s answers and butted heads with moderator Chris Wallace.
Advertisement
The Trump campaign has agreed to the new debate restrictions but, in a statement attributed to campaign manager Bill Stepien, also lambasted them as “last minute rule changes from the biased commission in their latest attempt to provide advantage to their favored candidate.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Iran And Russia Are Interfering In The 2020 Election, Federal Officials Say

With less than two weeks to go until Election Day , top national security officials warned that Iran and Russia have taken specific actions to influence the 2020 election .
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said at a last-minute press conference on Wednesday that both Iran and Russia “ had taken specific actions to influence public opinion relating to our elections.
” Ratcliffe , a controversial former Republican member of Congress , claimed that Iran sent emails to “ damage ” President Donald Trump but didn ’ t specify that Russia was targeting Vice President Joe Biden .
Ratcliffe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information , just as it had in 2016 .
The press conference came after The Washington Post reported that the U.S. government believed Iran was behind threatening emails sent to Democratic voters that purported to be from the Proud Boys , a far-right , neo-fascist organization that has been supportive of Trump .
The FBI joined in the alert about election interference , but the FBI director said to be `` confident that your vote counts . ''
FBI Director Christopher Wray didn ’ t specify which candidates were being targeted by which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek information from reliable sources and be “ thoughtful ” consumers of online information .
“ You should be confident that your vote counts .
Early , unverified claims to the contrary should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism , ” Wray said .
“ We are not going to let our guard down , ” Wray said .
We want to know what you ’ re hearing on the ground from the candidates .
If you get any interesting ― or suspicious !
― campaign mailers , robocalls or hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about , email us at scoops @ huffpost.com .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
With less than two weeks to go until Election Day, top national security officials warned that Iran and Russia have taken specific actions to influence the 2020 election.
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said at a last-minute press conference on Wednesday that both Iran and Russia “had taken specific actions to influence public opinion relating to our elections.”
Advertisement
Ratcliffe, a controversial former Republican member of Congress, claimed that Iran sent emails to “damage” President Donald Trump but didn’t specify that Russia was targeting Vice President Joe Biden. Ratcliffe did say that Russia had obtained voter information, just as it had in 2016.
“We will not tolerate foreign interference in our elections,” Ratcliffe said.
The press conference came after The Washington Post reported that the U.S. government believed Iran was behind threatening emails sent to Democratic voters that purported to be from the Proud Boys, a far-right, neo-fascist organization that has been supportive of Trump.
The FBI joined in the alert about election interference, but the FBI director said to be "confident that your vote counts." Mary F. Calvert/Reuters
FBI Director Christopher Wray didn’t specify which candidates were being targeted by which countries, but he encouraged Americans to seek information from reliable sources and be “thoughtful” consumers of online information.
Advertisement
“You should be confident that your vote counts. Early, unverified claims to the contrary should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism,” Wray said.
“We are not going to let our guard down,” Wray said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Amy Coney Barrett Won't Discuss Ties To The Country’s Biggest Oil Lobby

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly dodged questions about the scientific reality of climate change during her Senate confirmation hearing last week , and questions asked away from live cameras offered little more clarity .
In written responses submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee and released Tuesday night , Barrett , 48 , refused to answer questions about her father ’ s ties to the American Petroleum Institute , the nation ’ s largest and most powerful oil and gas lobby .
Barrett ’ s father , Mike Coney , is a Catholic deacon and attorney who worked for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 20 years , he was also an “ active member of The American Petroleum Institute Subcommittee of Exploration and Production Law ” and twice served as its chairman , according to a biography on his law firm website .
A recusal list Barrett submitted as part of her job on the bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit mentions Shell seven times ; however , it does not list API , which spent more than $ 6.6 million lobbying last year alone .
Sen. Dick Durbin ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her father ’ s leadership role at API required her to recuse herself from cases involving the trade group .
Barrett referred Durbin to her answer to a previous question about whether there are any other energy companies she must recuse herself from .
“ The question of recusal is a threshold question of law that must be addressed in the context of the facts of each case , ” Barrett wrote in her response .
“ As Justice Ginsburg described the process that Supreme Court justices go through in deciding whether to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , reviewing precedents , and consulting with colleagues .
As a sitting judge and as a judicial nominee , it would not be appropriate for me to offer an opinion on abstract legal issues or hypotheticals .
Such questions can only be answered through the judicial process.
” “ My father worked at Shell Oil Company for many years , and while on the Seventh Circuit , in an abundance of caution , I have recused myself from cases involving those Shell entities with which he was involved , ” she wrote .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal and state level and markets the industry directly to consumers .
Earlier this month , the group released a series of new TV ads that paint a misleading picture of the most recent science on emissions from natural gas .
The organization has been peddling climate misinformation for decades .
In 1998 , API hatched plans for a multiyear , multimillion dollar campaign to sow doubt about the threat of climate change , including developing a media kit with research papers that “ undercut the ‘ conventional wisdom ’ on climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new infamous memo .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly dodged questions about the scientific reality of climate change during her Senate confirmation hearing last week, and questions asked away from live cameras offered little more clarity.
In written responses submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee and released Tuesday night, Barrett, 48, refused to answer questions about her father’s ties to the American Petroleum Institute, the nation’s largest and most powerful oil and gas lobby.
Advertisement
Barrett’s father, Mike Coney, is a Catholic deacon and attorney who worked for Royal Dutch Shell for decades. For more than 20 years, he was also an “active member of The American Petroleum Institute Subcommittee of Exploration and Production Law” and twice served as its chairman, according to a biography on his law firm website.
A recusal list Barrett submitted as part of her job on the bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit mentions Shell seven times; however, it does not list API, which spent more than $6.6 million lobbying last year alone.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) asked Barrett in writing if her father’s leadership role at API required her to recuse herself from cases involving the trade group. Barrett referred Durbin to her answer to a previous question about whether there are any other energy companies she must recuse herself from.
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump's nominee for Supreme Court, is staying silent on her familial ties to the American Petroleum Institute. STEFANI REYNOLDS via Getty Images
Advertisement
“The question of recusal is a threshold question of law that must be addressed in the context of the facts of each case,” Barrett wrote in her response. “As Justice Ginsburg described the process that Supreme Court justices go through in deciding whether to recuse, it involves reading the statute, reviewing precedents, and consulting with colleagues. As a sitting judge and as a judicial nominee, it would not be appropriate for me to offer an opinion on abstract legal issues or hypotheticals. Such questions can only be answered through the judicial process.”
That answer stands in contrast to her written response about cases involving Shell and its affiliates.
“My father worked at Shell Oil Company for many years, and while on the Seventh Circuit, in an abundance of caution, I have recused myself from cases involving those Shell entities with which he was involved,” she wrote.
API wields tremendous influence over policymaking at the federal and state level and markets the industry directly to consumers. Earlier this month, the group released a series of new TV ads that paint a misleading picture of the most recent science on emissions from natural gas.
The organization has been peddling climate misinformation for decades. In 1998, API hatched plans for a multiyear, multimillion dollar campaign to sow doubt about the threat of climate change, including developing a media kit with research papers that “undercut the ‘conventional wisdom’ on climate science,” as detailed in a new infamous memo.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--GOP Super PAC Fundraising Alarms Senate Democrats

Xinhua News Agency via Getty Images Heavy spending from a super PAC controlled by allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) could help the GOP maintain its Senate majority .
A gigantic fundraising haul and outsized spending by a super PAC led by close allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) have alarmed Senate Democrats , who fear their candidates may be outspent down the stretch of the election despite record grassroots fundraising .
Senate Leadership Fund , the super political action committee controlled by McConnell allies , raised $ 92 million in September @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 103 million in the bank , according to a Federal Election Commission report filed Tuesday afternoon .
Those huge sums , collected mostly from checks of donors who gave more than $ 1 million and in some cases have not revealed themselves , have helped Senate Republicans gain a financial edge in several key races .
Over the final days of the election , according to the Democrats tracking media buys , Republicans are set to outspend Democrats on TV in four key Senate races : Michigan , where Democrats are hopeful Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican John James ; Georgia , where Democrat Jon Ossoff is looking to knock off GOP Sen. David Perdue ; Kansas , where Democratic state Sen. Barbara Bollier is battling Rep. Roger Marshall for an open seat ; and in South Carolina , where Democrat Jaime Harrison is putting a scare into GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham .
Republicans hold a 53-47 edge in the Senate .
Record fundraising has helped Democratic challengers put Republican incumbents into a defensive posture in several states ― stretching from Maine to Iowa , Colorado , Arizona and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a several-seat Democratic Senate majority in 2021 .
But Democratic officials are openly worried massive GOP spending could blunt those gains or deny them the majority entirely .
“ Mitch McConnell ’ s mega-donor allies are going all out to hold the Senate by cutting massive checks that are immediately funneled into Senate battlegrounds , ” said Scott Fairchild , executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee .
“ Without our grassroots supporters we won ’ t be able to flip Republican-held seats , and we still need their help to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” On a Zoom call with the progressive group NextGen America on Tuesday night , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) pleaded with activists to stay focused on winning control of the Senate , suggesting Democrats were likely to win in Colorado and Arizona and could pick up as many as nine other seats .
“ If we win the presidency and McConnell is still leader of the Senate , he will just blank everything , ” Schumer said .
“ Hard-right Republicans are pouring money into McConnell since they know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop progress on climate , on college , on criminal justice reform , on economic reform .
We need people to go all-out these last two weeks.
” Senate Democrats saw record fundraising totals after the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in late September .
Three of the party ’ s candidates ― former astronaut Mark Kelly in Arizona , state House Speaker Sara Gideon in Maine and Jaime Harrison in South Carolina ― all broke the all-time Senate record for quarterly fundraising .
Three other Democratic candidates raised more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are so far dominating the battle between the two parties ’ super PACs , which can raise and spend unlimited sums provided they don ’ t directly coordinate with campaigns .
The Senate Majority PAC , controlled by Schumer , raised $ 46 million in September and had just $ 55 million on hand at the end of the month ― roughly half of Senate Leadership Fund ’ s total .
A huge portion of the Senate Leadership Fund ’ s haul came from a small number of billionaires .
Nevada-based casino magnate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , donated an additional $ 10 million in September , bringing their total donations to the group this cycle to $ 60 million .
Hedge fund manager Ken Griffin donated $ 20 million , and a trio of executives of Reyes Holdings , a large food wholesaler , donated a combined $ 16 million .
The group also received $ 27.5 million from One Nation , an affiliated nonprofit that does not have to disclose its donors .
Since candidates are sold advertising space at the lowest possible race under federal law , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their buck than Senate Leadership Fund .
But Republicans have more gross rating points -- which measure advertising impact -- booked in Georgia and South Carolina .
In both states , the two parties have booked more than 200,000 GRP in the final three weeks of the election .
And Democrats are likely to seize an advantage in outside spending in Texas , where Senate Majority PAC is teaming up with another super PAC , Future Forward , to launch an advertising blitz that could total more than $ 20 million , Re/Code @ @ @

Heavy spending from a super PAC controlled by allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) could help the GOP maintain its Senate majority. Xinhua News Agency via Getty Images
A gigantic fundraising haul and outsized spending by a super PAC led by close allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have alarmed Senate Democrats, who fear their candidates may be outspent down the stretch of the election despite record grassroots fundraising.
Senate Leadership Fund, the super political action committee controlled by McConnell allies, raised $92 million in September and began October with more than $103 million in the bank, according to a Federal Election Commission report filed Tuesday afternoon. Those huge sums, collected mostly from checks of donors who gave more than $1 million and in some cases have not revealed themselves, have helped Senate Republicans gain a financial edge in several key races.
Advertisement
Over the final days of the election, according to the Democrats tracking media buys, Republicans are set to outspend Democrats on TV in four key Senate races: Michigan, where Democrats are hopeful Sen. Gary Peters can defend his seat against Republican John James; Georgia, where Democrat Jon Ossoff is looking to knock off GOP Sen. David Perdue; Kansas, where Democratic state Sen. Barbara Bollier is battling Rep. Roger Marshall for an open seat; and in South Carolina, where Democrat Jaime Harrison is putting a scare into GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham.
Republicans hold a 53-47 edge in the Senate. Record fundraising has helped Democratic challengers put Republican incumbents into a defensive posture in several states ― stretching from Maine to Iowa, Colorado, Arizona and Alaska ― and created the possibility of a several-seat Democratic Senate majority in 2021. But Democratic officials are openly worried massive GOP spending could blunt those gains or deny them the majority entirely.
“Mitch McConnell’s mega-donor allies are going all out to hold the Senate by cutting massive checks that are immediately funneled into Senate battlegrounds,” said Scott Fairchild, executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “Without our grassroots supporters we won’t be able to flip Republican-held seats, and we still need their help to make sure Democrats have the resources to win.”
On a Zoom call with the progressive group NextGen America on Tuesday night, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) pleaded with activists to stay focused on winning control of the Senate, suggesting Democrats were likely to win in Colorado and Arizona and could pick up as many as nine other seats.
Advertisement
“If we win the presidency and McConnell is still leader of the Senate, he will just blank everything,” Schumer said. “Hard-right Republicans are pouring money into McConnell since they know that’s the only way to stop progress on climate, on college, on criminal justice reform, on economic reform. We need people to go all-out these last two weeks.”
“This is a last-minute play from a few Republican billionaire donors trying to put their finger on the scale to save Mitch McConnell’s Senate majority.” - J.B. Poersch, the president of Democratic Senate Majority PAC.
Senate Democrats saw record fundraising totals after the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in late September. Three of the party’s candidates ― former astronaut Mark Kelly in Arizona, state House Speaker Sara Gideon in Maine and Jaime Harrison in South Carolina ― all broke the all-time Senate record for quarterly fundraising. Three other Democratic candidates raised more than $20 million.
But Republicans are so far dominating the battle between the two parties’ super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited sums provided they don’t directly coordinate with campaigns. The Senate Majority PAC, controlled by Schumer, raised $46 million in September and had just $55 million on hand at the end of the month ― roughly half of Senate Leadership Fund’s total.
“We’re flooding the zone to keep Republicans in the game even where they’ve been massively outraised by Democrats,” said Jack Pandol, the communications director for Senate Leadership Fund.
Advertisement
A huge portion of the Senate Leadership Fund’s haul came from a small number of billionaires. Nevada-based casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and his wife, Miriam, donated an additional $10 million in September, bringing their total donations to the group this cycle to $60 million.
Hedge fund manager Ken Griffin donated $20 million, and a trio of executives of Reyes Holdings, a large food wholesaler, donated a combined $16 million. The group also received $27.5 million from One Nation, an affiliated nonprofit that does not have to disclose its donors.
“This is a last-minute play from a few Republican billionaire donors trying to put their finger on the scale to save Mitch McConnell’s Senate majority,” said J.B. Poersch, the president of Senate Majority PAC.
Since candidates are sold advertising space at the lowest possible race under federal law, Democratic candidates typically get more bang for their buck than Senate Leadership Fund. But Republicans have more gross rating points -- which measure advertising impact -- booked in Georgia and South Carolina. In both states, the two parties have booked more than 200,000 GRP in the final three weeks of the election.
McConnell’s political network has also continued to add additional spending, booking $22.5 million of additional airtime across eight states last week and putting an additional $4.3 million into Iowa’s heavily contested race between Democrat Theresa Greenfield and Republican Sen. Joni Ernst.
Advertisement
There are ways Democrats can quickly raise their own cash totals -- Senate Majority PAC is likely to receive a substantial transfer from its related nonprofit, Majority Forward.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Poll: Voters Lean Toward Supporting Confirmation Of Amy Coney Barrett

They approve of President Donald Trump ’ s decision to nominate Barrett to fill the vacancy caused by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s death by a slightly lesser margin ― 49 % to 42 % .
But by 47 % to 38 % , they say they ’ d like to see their senators vote to confirm Barrett .
In a previous HuffPost/YouGov survey , conducted in late September and early October , voters favored her confirmation by a 5-point margin .
Several other polls similarly find support for Barrett ’ s confirmation , though by varying margins .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , 51 % to 46 % , that they would like to see the Senate vote in favor of Barrett , with her nomination receiving both record-high opposition from Democrats and record-high support from Republicans .
A new Politico/Morning Consult poll of registered voters found 51 % supporting her confirmation , with 28 % opposed , representing an uptick in support since she was named .
By contrast , an Economist/YouGov poll released this week found voters closely split , with 45 % saying the Senate should confirm Barrett and 43 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll , 38 % thought Ginsburg ’ s replacement should be confirmed before the election , 7 % said it should happen post-election but before new lawmakers are sworn in , and 44 % said after new lawmakers are sworn in this coming January .
A Washington Post/ABC poll conducted prior to the start of Barrett ’ s hearings also found voters saying , 52 % to 44 % , that the Senate should have waited until after the election to allow the presidential winner to fill the seat .
In the latest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the issue than Democrats are .
A 91 % majority of Republican and Republican-leaning voters say they ’ d like their senators to vote in favor of confirming Barrett , while a less-overwhelming 74 % of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters want their senators to oppose her confirmation .
Voters who don ’ t have a preference for either party ― a small fraction of the electorate ― also lean in favor of Barrett ’ s confirmation .
Voters are more evenly divided on the timing of judicial replacements : 45 % say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last year of a term should immediately nominate Supreme Court justices if a vacancy occurs , while 42 % say presidents should wait until after the election to handle any Supreme Court vacancies .
From a list of 15 issues , the Supreme Court ranked among the top three for 22 % of voters , putting it behind health care ( 49 % ) , the economy ( 44 % ) and the coronavirus outbreak ( 34 % ) ― a showing that suggests there ’ s been little change in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beginning of October .
Republican and Republican-leaning voters are currently 11 points likelier than Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters to say the Supreme Court is among their top three election issues .
Voters are about evenly divided on which of the presidential candidates would do a better job of choosing Supreme Court nominees , with 46 % saying Joe Biden would and 45 % saying Trump would .
Just 27 % of voters are in favor of increasing the number of Supreme Court justices , an idea supported by some progressive Democrats .
Another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 10 unsure .
Only 9 % strongly support the idea , with 31 % strongly opposed .
A two-thirds majority of Republican and Republican-leaning voters oppose adding more justices .
Among Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters , a 43 % plurality support the idea , with 20 % opposed and 37 % unsure .
Democratic opinions could shift if those voters are given more definitive cues from their party leaders .
Biden has not taken a definitive stance on the issue .
He said last week that he has “ not been a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he will lay out his position prior to the election .
Use the widget below to further explore the results of the HuffPost/YouGov survey , using the menu at the top to select survey questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroups : The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted Oct. 13-18 among U.S. registered voters , using a sample selected from YouGov ’ s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the population .

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett delivers her opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington on Oct. 12, 2020. Leah Millis/Reuters
Voters favor the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett by a 9-point margin, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds.
They approve of President Donald Trump’s decision to nominate Barrett to fill the vacancy caused by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death by a slightly lesser margin ― 49% to 42%. But by 47% to 38%, they say they’d like to see their senators vote to confirm Barrett. In a previous HuffPost/YouGov survey, conducted in late September and early October, voters favored her confirmation by a 5-point margin.
Advertisement
Several other polls similarly find support for Barrett’s confirmation, though by varying margins. In a recent Gallup poll, Americans said, 51% to 46%, that they would like to see the Senate vote in favor of Barrett, with her nomination receiving both record-high opposition from Democrats and record-high support from Republicans. A new Politico/Morning Consult poll of registered voters found 51% supporting her confirmation, with 28% opposed, representing an uptick in support since she was named.
By contrast, an Economist/YouGov poll released this week found voters closely split, with 45% saying the Senate should confirm Barrett and 43% saying it should not. In that poll, 38% thought Ginsburg’s replacement should be confirmed before the election, 7% said it should happen post-election but before new lawmakers are sworn in, and 44% said after new lawmakers are sworn in this coming January. A Washington Post/ABC poll conducted prior to the start of Barrett’s hearings also found voters saying, 52% to 44%, that the Senate should have waited until after the election to allow the presidential winner to fill the seat.
In the latest HuffPost/YouGov survey, Republicans are more united on the issue than Democrats are. A 91% majority of Republican and Republican-leaning voters say they’d like their senators to vote in favor of confirming Barrett, while a less-overwhelming 74% of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters want their senators to oppose her confirmation. Voters who don’t have a preference for either party ― a small fraction of the electorate ― also lean in favor of Barrett’s confirmation.
Voters are more evenly divided on the timing of judicial replacements: 45% say that, in general, presidents serving the last year of a term should immediately nominate Supreme Court justices if a vacancy occurs, while 42% say presidents should wait until after the election to handle any Supreme Court vacancies.
Advertisement
From a list of 15 issues, the Supreme Court ranked among the top three for 22% of voters, putting it behind health care (49%), the economy (44%) and the coronavirus outbreak (34%) ― a showing that suggests there’s been little change in the Supreme Court’s salience since the beginning of October. Republican and Republican-leaning voters are currently 11 points likelier than Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters to say the Supreme Court is among their top three election issues.
Voters are about evenly divided on which of the presidential candidates would do a better job of choosing Supreme Court nominees, with 46% saying Joe Biden would and 45% saying Trump would.
Just 27% of voters are in favor of increasing the number of Supreme Court justices, an idea supported by some progressive Democrats. Another 43% are opposed, with 3 in 10 unsure. Only 9% strongly support the idea, with 31% strongly opposed.
A two-thirds majority of Republican and Republican-leaning voters oppose adding more justices. Among Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, a 43% plurality support the idea, with 20% opposed and 37% unsure. Democratic opinions could shift if those voters are given more definitive cues from their party leaders. Biden has not taken a definitive stance on the issue. He said last week that he has “not been a fan of court-packing,” but that he will lay out his position prior to the election.
Use the widget below to further explore the results of the HuffPost/YouGov survey, using the menu at the top to select survey questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroups:
Advertisement
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted Oct. 13-18 among U.S. registered voters, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology are available here.
Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors. YouGov’s reports include a model-based margin of error, which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling. If these assumptions are wrong, the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Trump Is The Biggest 'Superspreader' Of Anti-Asian Racism, Advocates And Scholars Warn

Throughout this year , Trump has routinely used racist slurs and epithets to refer to COVID-19 .
He also frequently blames China , placing an outsized focus on where the virus originated , in order to deflect from his own catastrophic response to the pandemic .
In a new report , University of Michigan professor Melissa Borja and a team of researchers analyzed tweets from all of this year ’ s presidential , vice presidential and U.S. Senate candidates that mentioned the pandemic or Asian Americans , from January through the end of August .
Trump is by far the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stigmatizes Asian and Asian American people , ” Borja said during a press briefing , referring to both the frequency of his tweets and their reach and engagement .
The advocates and researchers stressed that while both parties have criticized the Chinese government and Chinese leaders ’ initial handling of COVID-19 , only Trump and Republicans have actively used scapegoating language , which leads to racism and xenophobia against Chinese Americans and anyone of Chinese or East Asian descent .
The analysis of the tweets found that Democrats did not use such stigmatizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeting support for Asian Americans facing racism during the pandemic , all but one of the tweets came from Democrats .
But what lawmakers thought would be a bipartisan issue , especially given that the resolution was nonbinding and largely symbolic , became a divisive one .
The vote was largely along party lines , and instead of quickly moving to pass the resolution , lawmakers spent more than two hours debating it on the House floor .
Republicans repeatedly dismissed the magnitude of the issue and claimed the legislation was simply meant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the stories from Asian Americans tell otherwise .
At Wednesday ’ s press briefing , STOP AAPI HATE ’ s founders said that since March , they have received reports of more than 2,700 racist incidents from 47 states and Washington , D.C .
The number is likely an undercount because the data is self-reported and voluntary .
The racist rhetoric has many other political and economic effects .
Jose Ng , the immigrant rights program manager at Chinese for Affirmative Action , said that many of the Chinese immigrants his organization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assistance during the pandemic — not just from the government , but from community organizations like his .
Connie Chan , who is running for a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors , recounted incidents of racism she has faced during her campaign — noting that even in a progressive city like San Francisco , which has a robust Asian American community and many Asian American elected officials , she feels that racism is “ absolutely increasing today.
” At the same time , STOP AAPI HATE ’ s founders hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans to speak out and take action .
For those eligible to vote , voting in this year ’ s election is crucial , they said .
In addition , Asian Americans should also get involved in organizations advocating for immigrant rights and working to dismantle structural racism across all communities of color .
“ As it ’ s been said over and over again , COVID has exposed the preexisting conditions of structural racism that ’ s always just below the surface , ” Cynthia Choi , the co-executive director of Chinese @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For Asian Americans , it is a constant reminder of our conditional status .
So just as then and now , we have used , as a community , every means available to us to fight back and to use our voice .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Since March, a coalition of Asian American advocacy groups and scholars has been collecting and documenting the alarming surge in anti-Asian racism related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The thousands of incidents, from respondents across the country, have ranged from being called racial slurs, being spat on and/or physically assaulted, as well as being denied services, experiencing workplace discrimination and other potential civil rights violations.
Advertisement
On Wednesday, the group, STOP AAPI HATE, laid the blame right at the feet of President Donald Trump, unveiling research that concludes Trump is by far the most influential “superspreader” of anti-Asian racism.
Throughout this year, Trump has routinely used racist slurs and epithets to refer to COVID-19. He also frequently blames China, placing an outsized focus on where the virus originated, in order to deflect from his own catastrophic response to the pandemic.
In a new report, University of Michigan professor Melissa Borja and a team of researchers analyzed tweets from all of this year’s presidential, vice presidential and U.S. Senate candidates that mentioned the pandemic or Asian Americans, from January through the end of August.
Trump is by far the “main source of the rhetoric that stigmatizes Asian and Asian American people,” Borja said during a press briefing, referring to both the frequency of his tweets and their reach and engagement.
Advertisement
The advocates and researchers stressed that while both parties have criticized the Chinese government and Chinese leaders’ initial handling of COVID-19, only Trump and Republicans have actively used scapegoating language, which leads to racism and xenophobia against Chinese Americans and anyone of Chinese or East Asian descent.
For example, 136 of the tweets used or defended racist terms like “Chinese virus.” All of them came from Republicans.
Members of the Asian American Commission hold a press conference on the steps of the Massachusetts State House to condemn racism toward the Asian American community because of coronavirus on March 12 in Boston. John Tlumacki/The Boston Globe via Getty Images
The analysis of the tweets found that Democrats did not use such stigmatizing rhetoric. And as for any politicians tweeting support for Asian Americans facing racism during the pandemic, all but one of the tweets came from Democrats.
In September, the House passed legislation to condemn and denounce “any and all anti-Asian sentiment in any form,” and to urge federal, state and local officials to document, investigate and collect data on any reports of anti-Asian hate incidents.
Advertisement
But what lawmakers thought would be a bipartisan issue, especially given that the resolution was nonbinding and largely symbolic, became a divisive one. The vote was largely along party lines, and instead of quickly moving to pass the resolution, lawmakers spent more than two hours debating it on the House floor. Republicans repeatedly dismissed the magnitude of the issue and claimed the legislation was simply meant to attack Trump.
Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) claimed the bill wasn’t “really about” racism, but “Democrats ignoring the real issues plaguing Americans just for the opportunity to criticize President Trump.”
And House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) claimed “there is no kitchen in America that thinks this is the priority.”
But the numbers and the stories from Asian Americans tell otherwise. At Wednesday’s press briefing, STOP AAPI HATE’s founders said that since March, they have received reports of more than 2,700 racist incidents from 47 states and Washington, D.C. The number is likely an undercount because the data is self-reported and voluntary.
Many of those incidents involved the assailants using racist rhetoric like Trump’s. And in 46 incidents, they actively invoked Trump, according to San Francisco State University professor Russell Jeung, who read off some of the reported incidents.
Advertisement
“I agree with Trump. Fuck China!” one incident report said. “It’s because of you, the Chinese, that we have to wear a mask.”
Another incident report read: “A man sitting on the corner shouted: ‘Go back to your fucking country! Go Trump!’”
The racist rhetoric has many other political and economic effects. Jose Ng, the immigrant rights program manager at Chinese for Affirmative Action, said that many of the Chinese immigrants his organization serves have been fearful of seeking economic assistance during the pandemic — not just from the government, but from community organizations like his.
For example, he said they have provided gift cards to help immigrants facing economic hardship to pay for their groceries and other needs.
“Our team had to explain to them that receiving the gift card would not jeopardize their immigration status,” Ng said.
Advertisement
Connie Chan, who is running for a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, recounted incidents of racism she has faced during her campaign — noting that even in a progressive city like San Francisco, which has a robust Asian American community and many Asian American elected officials, she feels that racism is “absolutely increasing today.”
She also worries that racism against elected officials and community leaders like her could discourage everyday Asian Americans from civic engagement.
“They’re thinking: ‘How can I voice my support ... when I could be under the same attack?’” Chan said. “That’s an attack on our democracy.”
At the same time, STOP AAPI HATE’s founders hope the wave of racism will galvanize Asian Americans to speak out and take action. For those eligible to vote, voting in this year’s election is crucial, they said. In addition, Asian Americans should also get involved in organizations advocating for immigrant rights and working to dismantle structural racism across all communities of color.
“As it’s been said over and over again, COVID has exposed the preexisting conditions of structural racism that’s always just below the surface,” Cynthia Choi, the co-executive director of Chinese for Affirmative Action, said. “For Asian Americans, it is a constant reminder of our conditional status. So just as then and now, we have used, as a community, every means available to us to fight back and to use our voice.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Parents Of Color Speak Out After Sen. Kamala Harris’ Name Is Mocked

HuffPost spoke to several Americans about their journeys with their own names and how it influenced how they named their @ @ @ @ @ the importance of upholding traditions .
Others talked about the weight of their names and @ @ @ @ @ how likely someone was to be profiled at an airport or overlooked for a job @ @ @ @ @ moment when they faced their own Perdue , when they were dismissed or taunted because @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
After Republican Sen. David Perdue of Georgia butchered and mocked Sen. Kamala Harris’ name at one of President Donald Trump’s campaign rallies last week, people of color recoiled in unpleasant familiarity.
“Ka-MA-la, KA-ma-la, Kamala-mala-mala. I don’t know, whatever,” Perdue said of the Democratic vice presidential nominee at Friday evening’s rally in Macon, Georgia, drawing laughs from the crowd.
Advertisement
Democrats, including Harris’ spokesperson, responded to Perdue’s remarks as “incredibly racist,” noting that Perdue had worked with Harris for more than three years in the Senate. Perdue’s spokesperson John Burke tweeted that the senator “simply mispronounced” Harris’ name and “didn’t mean anything by it.”
The incident sparked an online movement, which included Democratic lawmakers and celebrities, sharing the origins and meaning behind their names with the #MyNameIs hashtag.
For parents, in particular, many shared the tug of war they experienced when it came to naming their children ― on the one hand, wanting to honor their racial and ethnic background and, on the other, facing the worry that their children would be mocked like Harris if their names were deemed difficult to pronounce, even in the slightest way.
“Monolingualism, in general in the United States, is taken as a given, and anything that’s outside of that is deemed ‘ethnic.’ This really shows how myopic this awareness is in the U.S.,” said Mariam Durrani, an assistant professor of anthropology at Hamilton College in Clinton, New York.
Advertisement
Durrani, who gave birth to her daughter in 2009, said she was aware of how her Muslim daughter with Pakistani roots would be perceived in the U.S., so it was important for her to find a name that was both meaningful and easy to pronounce. She settled on Nadine Noor, a harmonious alliteration that translates to hope and light, respectively.
HuffPost spoke to several Americans about their journeys with their own names and how it influenced how they named their children. Some spoke about the importance of upholding traditions. Others talked about the weight of their names and its ties to slavery or how likely someone was to be profiled at an airport or overlooked for a job. Nearly everyone recalled a moment when they faced their own Perdue, when they were dismissed or taunted because of their names.
These interviews were condensed and edited for clarity.
Dieu Tran, 35, Washington, D.C., Consultant
Daughter: Lê Valkyrie, 2
When Tran was picking out names for her baby, she would write down options on a sheet of paper and pass it to her husband, a white American, to pronounce. It was her way of gauging how her child’s name would be said by non-Vietnamese people.
“It was really important to me that the baby would have a Vietnamese name. But I understand that Vietnamese is such a tonal language, like the inflection up and down, and it would be really difficult for a Western tongue to pronounce,” Tran told HuffPost.
Accents are used to denote six distinctive tones in the Vietnamese language, which often gets lost when written in English ― like Tran’s name, which she has since adapted without the accents. Still, Tran wanted to make sure her child represented her Vietnamese side in some way. The parents settled on a Vietnamese first name, Lê, (pronounced LAY) and a Nordic middle name, Valkyrie.
Advertisement
Naming your child “is very personal and very powerful because it is who you are. And I had my share of horrible names stories too after moving here,” she said, adding that she felt triggered by Perdue’s mocking of Harris’ name and doesn’t believe that he just misspoke.
Dieu Tran with her husband and 2 year-old daughter, Lé Valkyrie. Photo provided by Dieu Tran
Denny Vrandečić, 42, California, Technology
Daughter: Leyla, 6
Neither Vrandečić nor his wife uses their real name. It wasn’t much of a choice. Vrandečić, who is Croatian and was born and raised in Germany, was born Zdenko, and his wife, who is from Uzbekistan and goes by Kamara, was born Qamarniso. After they moved to the U.S., they found it nearly impossible to navigate their lives with real names. So their nicknames stuck.
When they had their daughter in 2014, they didn’t want her to go through what they went through and were forced to adopt a nickname.
“Who knows where Leyla will be [when she grows up]. We didn’t want a name that only works in the U.S., that only works in Germany or that only works in Uzbekistan. We wanted something that would work in all of those cultures and is pronounced the same in all those different languages,” said Vrandečić.
Advertisement
Umaima Jafri, 37, Ohio, Mom
Daughters: Hafsah, 13, And Sumayyah, 9
Sons: Sauleh, 11, And Shuayb, 7
Umaima Jafri remembers when her husband wrote about 50 names on the whiteboard in the delivery room and asked each nurse to vote on the names. Jafri vehemently was against it. She didn’t have the easiest name herself, and she was often taunted by other children calling her “yo mama.”
Jafri wanted to make sure her children had meaningful names that stemmed from the Islamic faith, even if it meant working with letters that didn’t exist in the English language. She said her sons had more trouble than her daughters, with most struggling to pronounce the h in Sauleh and the vowels in Shuayb (pronounced shoe-abe.)
Umaima Jafri, a 37-year-old mother, with her four children. Photo provided by Umaima Jafri
“It’s a tug of war that you have internally with yourself, like, should I just shorten it for somebody and make it easy on them, or should I actually teach everybody consciously, every single person you meet?” Jafri said. She said she still feels guilty that she sometimes gives a different name when she goes to Starbucks.
Still, she hopes she’s able to instill the confidence in her children ― and in herself ― to be proud of their names wherever they go.
Advertisement
Manoucheka Williams, 42, Texas, Mom
Sons: Jaylen, 15, Kevin, 14, Jonathan, 11, And Cameron, 7
Manoucheka Williams never forgot the pauses teachers took before attempting to pronounce her name. It was a silence that causes her anxiety until this day. She remembers classmates turning around and staring at her. It was a routine that happened at the beginning of each school year.
“My name has always been one of anxiety for me. It was like I couldn’t sleep the night before the first day of school because I dreaded the teachers having to call my name,” Williams told HuffPost.
After she graduated from high school and from Florida State with a degree in mechanical engineering, the problem didn’t stop. A recruiter once told her that they skipped her résumé the first time around because the individual couldn’t figure out how to pronounce her name correctly.
“I always loved my name, but I just always felt like people used it to devalue me because some people wouldn’t even attempt it or if they said it wrong and I would correct them they wouldn’t even respond or try to make a correction,” she said.
Manoucheka Williams and her husband and sons. Photo provided by Manoucheka Williams
Advertisement
As a young Black woman in engineering surrounded by older white men, she was constantly asked if she had a nickname or an abbreviation they could use instead.
“I wanted my kids to have normal American names. No crazy spellings. I wanted people to be able to see their name and, number one, not form any judgments or any stereotypes about them,” she said.
“We are going to be adding little Black boys who will grow up to be Black men in this country that we are living in, and we were never blind to the plight of the Black man in this country. So I felt like giving them a name that removes any kind of stigma was already giving them a step up,” she added.
Shireen Soliman, 50, New York, Educator And Artist
Daughter: Daleelah, 19
Son: Yaseen, 17
Despite the fact that Shireen Soliman gave careful thought to spelling her daughter’s name with two ee’s, people still pronounce it “Delilah.” But that’s not her name. Daleelah, which emphasizes the long “e” sound, translates to a guide in Arabic and that’s what she wanted her daughter to grow up to be: a leader and a guide.
A New York-based educator who meets and teaches a wide range of people, she always makes it a point to call students by their names the right way. She’s frustrated when others don’t give her or her kids the same courtesy.
Advertisement
Shireen Soliman, a New York educator, with her two children. Photo provided by Shireen Soliman
“It’s like they’re adapting your name to what makes them more comfortable. So it’s a little bit of this small way that you move in the world is kind of an act of revolt or revolution or resistance to say, ‘No, this is my name.’” Soliman told HuffPost.
“It’s that colonial mindset or that imperialist mindset that says, ’You will adapt to my superior culture, my superior name, my superior language. You will be the one to adapt, rather than a mutual honor and respect,” she added.
Jamilah Thompkins-Bigelow, 37, Pennsylvania, Author
Sons: Issa, 11, And Adam, 6
Jamilah Thompkins-Bigelow remembers when she was a grade-school teacher and some students mocked other students’ names or teachers forced nicknames onto students whose names they couldn’t pronounce.
“A child’s name is sacred in some ways. It’s precious to them, and it’s important for them, and so we should value them and make an effort as educators to say their names to learn them and to honor them,” Thompkins-Bigelow said.
Advertisement
As a Black American, Thompkins-Bigelow recognizes that for many people, including members of her own family who were descendants of enslaved people, they were stripped of their names.
Which is why she published “Your Name Is a Song,” a children’s book dedicated to honoring African American names, Latino names, Middle Eastern names and other cultural names from people of color.
“When we diminish aspects of people’s culture or people’s identity, then we’re diminishing them,” said Thompkins-Bigelow. “We think those kinds of things are small, but they end up adding up and becoming huge things.
Yasmine Badaoui, 27, Michigan, Writer And Poet
Sons: Hasan Wolfgang, 6, And Mehdi Aristotle, 4
A few things stuck out during Yasmine Badaoui’s pregnancy. Like when she was pregnant with her first child and realized that her baby moved the most when they listened to Mozart. For her second child, she realized that she enjoyed reading a lot of philosophy, both Arab and non-Arab philosophers.
“I always knew my children would have Arabic names so they’ll always know where they come from regardless of people if they’re able to pronounce them or not,” Badaoui said.
Advertisement
Yasmine Badaoui and her two sons, Hasan Wolfgang and Mehdi Aristotle. Photo provided by Yasmine Badaoui
Incorporating two of those themes, Badaoui named her first son Hasan Wolfgang and her second son Mehdi Aristotle. She says it couldn’t be more perfect.
Her sons have already come home and asked her why people don’t say their names the way she does, and Badaoui has tried to explain to them that even when people don’t get it right, their name is their own.
“Right now, they don’t see themselves as ‘other.’ It’s just unfortunate, and when they grow older, other people are going to make them feel like they’re not a part of this country. But they’re going to have the tools to be able to tell them otherwise,” she said.
Deanna Othman, 38, Illinois, Freelance Journalist And Teacher
Daughters: Sumaya, 16, And Asmaa, 15
Sons: Yousuf, 10, And Hamza, 4
When Deanna Othman was pregnant, she knew that no matter what she named her kids, people were going to give them a hard time as Palestinian Muslim Americans. It’s why she decided right away that she was going to name them whatever she wanted.
Advertisement
“I believe that regardless of how easy it is for people to pronounce a name, if they see it as foreign, they still will not even make an effort to pronounce it,” Othman told HuffPost. She said her name is a case in point. Despite how it’s spelled, people still call her Diana or Dina.
Still, she said she was upset when she heard Harris’ name ridiculed without any consequence. Especially when a person’s name, with all its characteristics and challenges, with it being a source of inspiration and pride, is callously brushed off as a joke on a national platform.
Deanna Othman and her family during Eid in 2019. Photo provided by Deanna Othman
Yasmine Ederer, 34, North Carolina, Mom And Student
Sons: Majeed, 14, Rasheed, 11, And Justice, 5
There wasn’t too much Yasmine Ederer wanted in her children’s names. She wanted them to be influenced by the Islamic faith and she wanted them to be easy to say.
Ederer and her four siblings have rhyming names, and she started off doing the same with her first two sons. But when pregnant with her third son, she couldn’t find a rhyming name that she liked, let alone one in Arabic that would be easy for those who didn’t speak the language.
Advertisement
Then it dawned on her that a Muslim-influenced name didn’t have to be in Arabic. After all, “justice” was a concept emphasized in the Islamic faith and understandable to English speakers as well.
“Everybody can easily understand what it is and how it’s spelled and what it means,” she said, making it all the more fitting for an American Muslim son. Still, she says some Arab Muslims try to translate his name into Arabic while non-Muslims expect her to have given a ‘foreign’ name to her sons.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Badly Outraised, Trump Hosting Quarter-Million-A-Couple Fundraiser Just Before Debate

AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar Supporters cheer as President Donald Trump moves to the song `` YMCA '' at the end of a campaign rally in Erie , Pennsylvania , on Oct. 20 .
Outraised in the closing months by Democratic challenger Joe Biden , President Donald Trump is holding yet another high-dollar fundraiser , this one just hours before Thursday night ’ s final debate in Nashville , Tennessee , with ticket prices as high as $ 250,000 per couple .
Presidential candidates ― particularly incumbents , who have the prestige of the White House behind them ― generally do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a campaign ’ s final days .
Trump , who held a $ 12 million fundraiser in Newport Beach , California , on Sunday that also brought in $ 8 million for allied super PACs , is proving to be the exception .
“ Why are we doing a fucking fundraiser in Nashville ?
” wondered one top Republican close to the White House who spoke on condition of anonymity .
“ It just seems late for doing that .
...
I guess they must need the money.
” From the time he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump , his campaign and the Republican National Committee have boasted of his ability to raise small-dollar donations ― less than $ 200 each , but often just $ 5 or $ 10 at a time ― from his loving fan base .
But in the crucial final months of the campaign , Trump watched as Biden blew past him in that category on the Democrat ’ s way to grabbing a mammoth fundraising advantage heading into the final 34 days of the race .
Biden , the Democratic National Committee and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in donations smaller than $ 200 each from July 1 through Sept. 30 , according to a HuffPost analysis of Federal Election Commission filings .
Trump , the Republican National Committee and their joint committees raised $ 216,163,379 ― nearly $ 64 million less ― in small-dollar donations over the same period .
What ’ s more , the Trump Make America Great Again Committee ― which actively solicits small donations through emails and text messages ― wound up spending far more for every dollar raised in the last three months than it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ July , August and September , Trump MAGA spent $ 181 million to bring in $ 236 million ― meaning it was spending 77 cents for every dollar raised .
Over the April , May and June period , the committee had spent $ 59 million to bring in $ 125 million ― a ratio of 47 cents for every dollar .
Both of the campaigns and parties filed reports with the FEC detailing their September contributions and expenditures late Tuesday .
Taken together , they show that Biden and the Democratic Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heading into October , while Trump and the Republican Party had $ 252 million .
The GOP source said that a quarter billion was generally considered plenty for just 34 days , but acknowledged that Biden ’ s $ 163 million advantage was significant , allowing him to run television ads just about everywhere while Trump ’ s campaign had to pick and choose .
The president ’ s campaign has spent lavishly on salaries and fees for its top officials and consultants .
It has also funneled a total of $ 8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ businesses and has been secretly paying the girlfriend of one Trump son and the wife of another $ 15,000 a month , keeping those payments out of FEC records where they could be seen by donors and the public .
We want to know what you ’ re hearing on the ground from the candidates .
If you get any interesting ― or suspicious !
― campaign mailers , robocalls or hear anything else you think we should know about , email us at scoops @ huffpost.com .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Outraised in the closing months by Democratic challenger Joe Biden, President Donald Trump is holding yet another high-dollar fundraiser, this one just hours before Thursday night’s final debate in Nashville, Tennessee, with ticket prices as high as $250,000 per couple.
Presidential candidates ― particularly incumbents, who have the prestige of the White House behind them ― generally do not spend valuable time raising money in a campaign’s final days. Trump, who held a $12 million fundraiser in Newport Beach, California, on Sunday that also brought in $8 million for allied super PACs, is proving to be the exception.
Advertisement
“Why are we doing a fucking fundraiser in Nashville?” wondered one top Republican close to the White House who spoke on condition of anonymity. “It just seems late for doing that. ... I guess they must need the money.”
From the time he became the GOP nominee in 2016, Trump, his campaign and the Republican National Committee have boasted of his ability to raise small-dollar donations ― less than $200 each, but often just $5 or $10 at a time ― from his loving fan base.
But in the crucial final months of the campaign, Trump watched as Biden blew past him in that category on the Democrat’s way to grabbing a mammoth fundraising advantage heading into the final 34 days of the race.
Supporters cheer as President Donald Trump moves to the song "YMCA" at the end of a campaign rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, on Oct. 20. AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar
Advertisement
Biden, the Democratic National Committee and their joint fundraising committee pulled in $279,793,003 in donations smaller than $200 each from July 1 through Sept. 30, according to a HuffPost analysis of Federal Election Commission filings. Trump, the Republican National Committee and their joint committees raised $216,163,379 ― nearly $64 million less ― in small-dollar donations over the same period.
What’s more, the Trump Make America Great Again Committee ― which actively solicits small donations through emails and text messages ― wound up spending far more for every dollar raised in the last three months than it had in the previous three.
In July, August and September, Trump MAGA spent $181 million to bring in $236 million ― meaning it was spending 77 cents for every dollar raised. Over the April, May and June period, the committee had spent $59 million to bring in $125 million ― a ratio of 47 cents for every dollar.
Both of the campaigns and parties filed reports with the FEC detailing their September contributions and expenditures late Tuesday. Taken together, they show that Biden and the Democratic Party had $415 million in the bank heading into October, while Trump and the Republican Party had $252 million.
The GOP source said that a quarter billion was generally considered plenty for just 34 days, but acknowledged that Biden’s $163 million advantage was significant, allowing him to run television ads just about everywhere while Trump’s campaign had to pick and choose.
Advertisement
The president’s campaign has spent lavishly on salaries and fees for its top officials and consultants. It has also funneled a total of $8 million back to Trump’s various businesses and has been secretly paying the girlfriend of one Trump son and the wife of another $15,000 a month, keeping those payments out of FEC records where they could be seen by donors and the public.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Joe Biden Urges Nigerian Leadership To 'Cease The Violent Crackdown On Protesters'

The Democratic presidential nominee called on the U.S. to stand with Nigerians who have for the past two weeks led peaceful demonstrations to protest against a police unit , the Special Anti-Robbery Squad ( SARS ) , which has long been accused of having a reputation of abuse that includes extortion , rape , torture and extrajudicial killings , according to Amnesty International .
Recent protests against SARS emerged after a video circulated online earlier this month allegedly showing officers of the unit shooting a man in the country ’ s southern Delta state , Reuters reported .
Police have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ # EndSARS began trending internationally on Twitter this week in support of the movement to end police brutality .
“ The United States must stand with Nigerians who are peacefully demonstrating for police reform and seeking an end to corruption in their democracy , ” Biden said in his statement .
“ I encourage the government to engage in a good-faith dialogue with civil society to address these long-standing grievances and work together for a more just and inclusive Nigeria.
” Last week , Buhari announced the government ’ s decision to disband @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in response to widespread protests led by Nigerians in the nation and Nigerian diaspora communities across the world .
The move was met with skepticism , though , since the government has made promises to reform the unit a number of times in previous years to no avail .
Furthermore , Nigerian citizens feared that SARS officers would be redeployed to other units .
Our leaders are trying to set confusion in our midst , Dear Youths please let ’ s not fall for this .
Everyone has said their mind , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most important thing which is # SARSMUSTENDNOW We must not be distracted , don ’ t let these Leaders win .
Focus !
!
!
# EndSWAT — Sally Suleiman ( @ is_salsu ) October 14 , 2020 On Tuesday night , after Governor of Lagos State Babajide Sanwo-Olu had imposed a 24-hour curfew which began at 4 p.m. local time , witnesses at a demonstration reported seeing shots fired at the Lekki Toll Gate located in Lagos , Nigeria .
Protesters accused soldiers of the Nigerian army of firing into the crowd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ videos posted on Twitter by protesters who said they were filming from the Lekki Toll Gate area on Tuesday night .
In some videos , demonstrators can be heard singing Nigeria ’ s national anthem amid sounds of gunfire .
Amnesty International tweeted on Tuesday that it had “ received credible but disturbing evidence of excessive use of force occasioning deaths of protesters at Lekki toll gate in Lagos.
” On Wednesday , the group said that it had learned through its own investigation that at least 12 peaceful protesters were allegedly killed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ location in Lagos called Alausa on Tuesday night .
The Nigerian army has responded to allegations of involvement via its official Twitter account by tweeting media reports covering the violence against protesters with the words “ Fake News ” printed in red .
In one tweet , the army claimed , “ No soldiers were at the scene.
” Sanwo-Olu released a series of statements on Twitter Wednesday , writing , in part , “ For clarity , it is imperative to explain that no governor controls the rules of engagement of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an investigation into the ordered and the adopted rules of engagement employed by the men of the Nigerian Army deployed to the Lekki Toll Gate , ” he continued .
The governor later noted that he was “ taking this up ” with the high command of the Nigerian army and that he would be seeking Buhari ’ s intervention to “ unravel the sequence of events that happened yesterday.
” “ As wayward leaders run to western lands , Nigerians in the diaspora will be here to welcome you , ” Boyega @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actor tweeted Wednesday .
“ You will not get comfort here .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Joe Biden has urged Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari and the Nigerian military to “cease the violent crackdown on protesters” in the country amid weeks of peaceful nationwide protests against police brutality.
The Democratic presidential nominee called on the U.S. to stand with Nigerians who have for the past two weeks led peaceful demonstrations to protest against a police unit, the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS), which has long been accused of having a reputation of abuse that includes extortion, rape, torture and extrajudicial killings, according to Amnesty International.
Advertisement
Recent protests against SARS emerged after a video circulated online earlier this month allegedly showing officers of the unit shooting a man in the country’s southern Delta state, Reuters reported. Police have reportedly denied the shooting. The hashtag #EndSARS began trending internationally on Twitter this week in support of the movement to end police brutality.
“The United States must stand with Nigerians who are peacefully demonstrating for police reform and seeking an end to corruption in their democracy,” Biden said in his statement. “I encourage the government to engage in a good-faith dialogue with civil society to address these long-standing grievances and work together for a more just and inclusive Nigeria.”
Protesters march at Alausa Secretariat in Ikeja, Lagos State, during a peaceful demonstration against police brutality in Nigeria on Oct. 20. Photo by Olukayode Jaiyeola/NurPhoto via Getty Images
Last week, Buhari announced the government’s decision to disband SARS among other promises of police reforms, in response to widespread protests led by Nigerians in the nation and Nigerian diaspora communities across the world.
Advertisement
The move was met with skepticism, though, since the government has made promises to reform the unit a number of times in previous years to no avail. Furthermore, Nigerian citizens feared that SARS officers would be redeployed to other units.
Our leaders are trying to set confusion in our midst, Dear Youths please let’s not fall for this. Everyone has said their mind, let’s move on to the most important thing which is #SARSMUSTENDNOW We must not be distracted, don’t let these Leaders win. Focus!!! #EndSWAT — Sally Suleiman (@is_salsu) October 14, 2020
#EndSARS
2015—SARS will be reformed
2016—SARS will be restructured
2017—SARS will be reorganized
2018—SARS will be reformed
2019—SARS will be disbanded
2020—SARS killed more Nigerians. — Amnesty International Nigeria (@AmnestyNigeria) October 20, 2020
On Tuesday night, after Governor of Lagos State Babajide Sanwo-Olu had imposed a 24-hour curfew which began at 4 p.m. local time, witnesses at a demonstration reported seeing shots fired at the Lekki Toll Gate located in Lagos, Nigeria. Protesters accused soldiers of the Nigerian army of firing into the crowd.
Gunshots could be heard in disturbing videos posted on Twitter by protesters who said they were filming from the Lekki Toll Gate area on Tuesday night. In some videos, demonstrators can be heard singing Nigeria’s national anthem amid sounds of gunfire.
Advertisement
Lagos turned off the lights & removed cameras. Military showed up & opened fire on peaceful protesters. Today the Army denies it, the Governor says it was "forces beyond our direct control", the IG & Security Chiefs still have jobs, and the President is silent. What a disgrace. — Banky Wellington (@BankyW) October 21, 2020
Amnesty International tweeted on Tuesday that it had “received credible but disturbing evidence of excessive use of force occasioning deaths of protesters at Lekki toll gate in Lagos.”
On Wednesday, the group said that it had learned through its own investigation that at least 12 peaceful protesters were allegedly killed at Lekki Toll Gate and at another location in Lagos called Alausa on Tuesday night.
The Nigerian army has responded to allegations of involvement via its official Twitter account by tweeting media reports covering the violence against protesters with the words “Fake News” printed in red. In one tweet, the army claimed, “No soldiers were at the scene.”
Sanwo-Olu released a series of statements on Twitter Wednesday, writing, in part, “For clarity, it is imperative to explain that no governor controls the rules of engagement of the army.”
Advertisement
“I have nevertheless instructed an investigation into the ordered and the adopted rules of engagement employed by the men of the Nigerian Army deployed to the Lekki Toll Gate,” he continued.
The governor later noted that he was “taking this up” with the high command of the Nigerian army and that he would be seeking Buhari’s intervention to “unravel the sequence of events that happened yesterday.”
Other political figures and celebrities have used their platforms to bring awareness to the brutality taking place in Nigeria.
Nigerian music artists and actors, including Tiwa Savage, Burna Boy and John Boyega, have continued to tweet about the #EndSars protests.
“As wayward leaders run to western lands, Nigerians in the diaspora will be here to welcome you,” Boyega, the British-Nigerian “Star Wars” actor tweeted Wednesday. “You will not get comfort here.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Scientists Think Beetle's Armor Could Provide Clues To Stronger Buildings

NEW YORK ( AP ) — It ’ s a beetle that can withstand bird pecks , animal stomps and even being rolled over by a Toyota Camry .
Now scientists are studying what the bug ’ s crush-resistant shell could teach them about designing stronger planes and buildings .
“ This beetle is super tough , ” said Purdue University civil engineer Pablo Zavattieri , who was among a group of researchers that ran over the insect with a car as part of a new study .
So , how does the seemingly indestructible insect do it ?
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — owes its might to an unusual armor that is layered and pieced together like a jigsaw , according to the study by Zavattieri and his colleagues published in Nature on Wednesday .
And its design , they say , could help inspire more durable structures and vehicles .
To understand what gives the inch-long beetle its strength , researchers first tested how much squishing it could take .
The species , which can be found in Southern California ’ s woodlands , withstood compression of about 39,000 times its own weight .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ beetles , the species ’ elytra — a protective case that normally sheaths wings — had strengthened and toughened over time .
Up close , scientists realized this cover also benefited from special , jigsaw-like bindings and a layered architecture .
It could also be useful for engineers who design aircraft and other vehicles with a variety of materials such as steel , plastic and plaster .
Currently , engineers rely on pins , bolts , welding and adhesives to hold everything together .
But those techniques can be prone to degrading .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ gradual and predictable way , cracks could be more reliably inspected for safety , said Po-Yu Chen , an engineer at Taiwan ’ s National Tsing Hua University not involved in the research .
The beetle study is part of an $ 8 million project funded by the U.S. Air Force to explore how the biology of creatures such as mantis shrimp and bighorn sheep could help develop impact-resistant materials .
“ We ’ re trying to go beyond what nature has done , ” said study co-author David Kisailus , a materials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California , Irvine .
The research is the latest effort to borrow from the natural world to solve human problems , said Brown University evolutionary biologist Colin Donihue , who was not involved in the study .
Velcro , for example , was inspired by the hook-like structure of plant burrs .
Artificial adhesives took a page from super-clingy gecko feet .
Jesus Rivera , Kisailus Biomimetics and Nanostructured Materials Lab , University of California Irvine via AP ) The diabolical ironclad beetle can withstand being crushed by forces almost 40,000 times its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ habitats in Southern California .
Scientists say the armor of the seemingly indestructible beetle could offer clues for designing stronger planes and buildings .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK (AP) — It’s a beetle that can withstand bird pecks, animal stomps and even being rolled over by a Toyota Camry. Now scientists are studying what the bug’s crush-resistant shell could teach them about designing stronger planes and buildings.
“This beetle is super tough,” said Purdue University civil engineer Pablo Zavattieri, who was among a group of researchers that ran over the insect with a car as part of a new study.
Advertisement
So, how does the seemingly indestructible insect do it? The species — aptly named diabolical ironclad beetle — owes its might to an unusual armor that is layered and pieced together like a jigsaw, according to the study by Zavattieri and his colleagues published in Nature on Wednesday. And its design, they say, could help inspire more durable structures and vehicles.
To understand what gives the inch-long beetle its strength, researchers first tested how much squishing it could take. The species, which can be found in Southern California’s woodlands, withstood compression of about 39,000 times its own weight.
For a 200-pound man, that would be like surviving a 7.8-million-pound crush.
Other local beetle species shattered under one-third as much pressure.
Researchers then used electron microscopes and CT scans to examine the beetle’s exoskeleton and figure out what made it so strong.
As is often the case for flightless beetles, the species’ elytra — a protective case that normally sheaths wings — had strengthened and toughened over time. Up close , scientists realized this cover also benefited from special, jigsaw-like bindings and a layered architecture.
Advertisement
When compressed, they found the structure fractured slowly instead of snapping all at once.
“When you pull them apart,” Zavattieri said, “it doesn’t break catastrophically. It just deforms a little bit. That’s crucial for the beetle.”
It could also be useful for engineers who design aircraft and other vehicles with a variety of materials such as steel, plastic and plaster. Currently, engineers rely on pins, bolts, welding and adhesives to hold everything together. But those techniques can be prone to degrading.
In the structure of the beetle’s shell, nature offers an “interesting and elegant” alternative, Zavattieri said.
Because the beetle-inspired design fractures in a gradual and predictable way, cracks could be more reliably inspected for safety, said Po-Yu Chen, an engineer at Taiwan’s National Tsing Hua University not involved in the research.
The beetle study is part of an $8 million project funded by the U.S. Air Force to explore how the biology of creatures such as mantis shrimp and bighorn sheep could help develop impact-resistant materials.
Advertisement
“We’re trying to go beyond what nature has done,” said study co-author David Kisailus, a materials scientist and engineer at the University of California, Irvine.
The research is the latest effort to borrow from the natural world to solve human problems, said Brown University evolutionary biologist Colin Donihue, who was not involved in the study. Velcro, for example, was inspired by the hook-like structure of plant burrs. Artificial adhesives took a page from super-clingy gecko feet.
Donihue said endless other traits found in nature could offer insight: “These are adaptations that have evolved over millennia.”
___
Follow Marion Renault on Twitter: @MarionRenault
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.