thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--Is Trump Still Contagious? Experts Say It's Impossible To Know

Most people with COVID-19 can stop isolating and be around others about 10 days after they first showed symptoms , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
That ’ s provided their symptoms have improved , they have not had a fever for 24 hours and are no longer on any medication to reduce a high temperature .
But there ’ s no way to know for certain that someone is no longer contagious so soon after falling ill , experts say .
According to Trump ’ s latest medical update , he completed his COVID-19 treatment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well.
” Earlier in the day , Trump said he was still taking dexamethasone , a steroid that can reduce fevers .
In Thursday ’ s update , Dr. Sean Conley , said Saturday was day 10 after Trump ’ s Oct. 1 diagnosis and that he anticipated the president ’ s safe return to public events “ at that time.
” Trump ’ s aides were weighing travel options for the president , including trips for small events next week .
During a telephone interview with Fox Business , Trump said Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better to the point where I ’ d love to do a rally tonight.
” He also said “ I don ’ t think I ’ m contagious at all.
” Since his return to the White House Monday evening , only a few staffers — and no reporters — have laid eyes on the president , who has announced updates to his condition via Twitter and a few online videos .
His doctors haven ’ t held a press conference since Trump left the hospital , only releasing statements with limited information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outside only have intimations , I ’ d even call them hints , ” about Trump ’ s health and when he might not be contagious , said Dr. William Schaffner , an infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center .
Earlier this week , the president ’ s doctors suggested they would work closely with military medical research facilities and other laboratories on “ advanced diagnostic testing ” to determine when the president was no longer contagious , but did not elaborate .
They have not released any details about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last had a negative virus test before he got sick .
“ So , if the president goes 10 days without symptoms , and they do the tests that we were talking about , then you could make the assumption , based on good science , that he is not infected , ” Fauci said Thursday on MSNBC .
Sensitive lab tests — like the PCR test — detect virus in swab samples taken from the nose and throat .
Using these , the president ’ s medical team could hypothetically measure and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over time , said Dr. William Morice , who oversees laboratories at the Mayo Clinic .
“ If they did daily testing , you could watch it go down , ” Morice said .
“ If his viral load is low , the chance he can spread the virus is low as well.
” Another potential strategy : Take the president ’ s samples and try to get the virus to replicate in a cell culture , which would indicate it ’ s still active .
This approach would be less sensitive than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work .
And it wouldn ’ t be scalable , or safe , to use it more widely for other COVID-19 patients .
“ It would take much longer , cost much more and we don ’ t have that many laboratories that can do it , ” Schaffner said .
There is a third possibility : Novel tests available at some research labs that look for minute molecular evidence that the virus is still replicating in cells .
But the technology is still too new to be used to rule out if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ You ’ re not going to get perfection with any of these tests , ” said Gigi Gronvall , of Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security .
“ That ’ s why you need to think about other mechanisms of public health control ” like wearing masks , washing hands , and keeping socially distant to stop the spread of coronavirus .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump said Thursday he doesn’t think he’s contagious anymore, but medical experts say that’s impossible to know a week after his diagnosis with COVID-19.
Most people with COVID-19 can stop isolating and be around others about 10 days after they first showed symptoms, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s provided their symptoms have improved, they have not had a fever for 24 hours and are no longer on any medication to reduce a high temperature. But there’s no way to know for certain that someone is no longer contagious so soon after falling ill, experts say.
Advertisement
“At this point, there’s no diagnostic test that tells you whether a person that’s infected remains infectious,” said Dr. Benjamin Pinsky, who leads Stanford University’s virology labs. “There is absolutely a chain of unknowns.”
According to Trump’s latest medical update, he completed his COVID-19 treatment on Thursday and had responded “extremely well.” Earlier in the day, Trump said he was still taking dexamethasone, a steroid that can reduce fevers. In Thursday’s update, Dr. Sean Conley, said Saturday was day 10 after Trump’s Oct. 1 diagnosis and that he anticipated the president’s safe return to public events “at that time.”
Trump’s aides were weighing travel options for the president, including trips for small events next week. During a telephone interview with Fox Business, Trump said Thursday: “I think I’m better to the point where I’d love to do a rally tonight.” He also said “I don’t think I’m contagious at all.”
Since his return to the White House Monday evening, only a few staffers — and no reporters — have laid eyes on the president, who has announced updates to his condition via Twitter and a few online videos. His doctors haven’t held a press conference since Trump left the hospital, only releasing statements with limited information.
Advertisement
“We who are watching from the outside only have intimations, I’d even call them hints,” about Trump’s health and when he might not be contagious, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
Earlier this week, the president’s doctors suggested they would work closely with military medical research facilities and other laboratories on “advanced diagnostic testing” to determine when the president was no longer contagious, but did not elaborate. They have not released any details about his test results, including when Trump last had a negative virus test before he got sick.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the government’s top infectious disease expert, said two negative PCR lab tests 24 hours apart are a key factor in determining whether someone is still contagious.
“So, if the president goes 10 days without symptoms, and they do the tests that we were talking about, then you could make the assumption, based on good science, that he is not infected,” Fauci said Thursday on MSNBC.
Sensitive lab tests — like the PCR test — detect virus in swab samples taken from the nose and throat. Using these, the president’s medical team could hypothetically measure and track the amount of virus in samples over time, said Dr. William Morice, who oversees laboratories at the Mayo Clinic.
Advertisement
“If they did daily testing, you could watch it go down,” Morice said. “If his viral load is low, the chance he can spread the virus is low as well.”
Another potential strategy: Take the president’s samples and try to get the virus to replicate in a cell culture, which would indicate it’s still active. This approach would be less sensitive than molecular tests and sometimes doesn’t work. And it wouldn’t be scalable, or safe, to use it more widely for other COVID-19 patients.
“It would take much longer, cost much more and we don’t have that many laboratories that can do it,” Schaffner said.
There is a third possibility: Novel tests available at some research labs that look for minute molecular evidence that the virus is still replicating in cells. But the technology is still too new to be used to rule out if someone is infectious, Pinsky said.
“You’re not going to get perfection with any of these tests,” said Gigi Gronvall, of Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. “That’s why you need to think about other mechanisms of public health control” like wearing masks, washing hands, and keeping socially distant to stop the spread of coronavirus.
Advertisement
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--Florida Seniors Are Sending A Warning Sign To Trump

THE VILLAGES, Fla. (AP) — Sara Branscome’s golf cart whizzed down the smooth asphalt path that winds through The Villages, the nation’s largest retirement community, an expanse of beautiful homes, shops and entertainment venues that bills itself as “Florida’s Friendliest Hometown.”
Branscome’s cart was festooned with two American flags that flapped in the warm afternoon breeze. A line of oncoming carts bedecked with balloons and patriotic streamers chugged past while honking. Branscome jabbed her left foot on the horn pedal, then gave a thumbs-up.
“This gets you rejuvenated and ready for the next month or so, so we can do this and win. It gives you hope,” the 60-year-old retiree said.
Advertisement
Then she let out a whoop and two surprising words: “Go Biden!”
It’s not a cry that might be expected to resound in The Villages, and it’s certainly not one that is encouraging to President Donald Trump. Older voters helped propel him to the White House — the Pew Research Center estimates Trump led among voters 65 and older by 9 percentage points in 2016 — and his campaign hoped they would be a bulwark to cement a second term.
They remain a huge chunk of the electorate. Pew estimates that nationwide, nearly 1 in 4 eligible voters will be 65 and older. It’s the highest level on record, going back to 1970.
But there have been warnings that older voters are in play. To be sure, Trump has solid support among older adults, but his campaign has seen a drop-off in its internal research, according to campaign aides, and some public polls suggest Democrat Joe Biden is running ahead or just even with Trump.
Mostly, it seems, older voters have been put off by Trump’s handling of the coronavirus, which affects these voters more acutely than others. They were particularly alarmed by Trump’s performances at daily task force briefings in the spring because his remarks showed an uneven handling of the crisis and inspired little confidence.
Advertisement
The president has tried to shore up his popularity with older adults. He has emphasized themes of law and order, and has warned that Democrats would preside over a sundering of the suburbs. He has promoted his prescription drug policy. And he has kept up steady visits to Florida — after Maine, the state with the oldest population — and advertised heavily there.
But whatever improvement he saw is now in jeopardy. The president’s own COVID-19 infection has refocused attention on the virus and his handling of it. If the 74-year-old Trump can’t safeguard his own health, some wonder, how can he be trusted to protect other older adults who are far more vulnerable?
In few places could any significant drop-off spell doom more profoundly than Florida, a state Trump almost certainly must win. Older adults historically are the most reliable voters, and Florida is infamous for its tight races. So even a modest drop in support could send Trump back to private life.
___
The Villages, where the median age is 66, is built on the American dream of a golden retirement. “We’ve created the backdrop of possibilities for you to write the next chapter in your story,” its website says.
Retirees can enjoy everything from golf to seminars on Mark Twain to drinking a cold beverage in the town square while listening to a “jamgrass” band (progressive bluegrass in the vein of Phish).
Advertisement
Politically, it long has been considered a conservative redoubt, so entrenched that it’s a must-stop for any national or statewide Republican running for office. One clear measure of its importance: Vice President Mike Pence’s scheduled visit Saturday.
The Morse family, which developed the community northwest of Orlando, has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican campaigns over the years. During the 2008 presidential race, GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin drew a stadium-sized crowd with 60,000 residents flocking to see her in one of the community’s town squares.
Last fall, Trump picked The Villages to promote his support for Medicare and its private insurance option.
But on Wednesday, the scene told a markedly different story. An armada of as many as 500 golf carts gathered at the Sea Breeze Recreation Center to caravan to the nearby elections office, so folks could drop off ballots for Biden.
As each cart rolled into the parking lot and slid a ballot into a locked box under the watchful eye of elections supervisors, dozens lined the sidewalk, cheering and clapping every time a vote was cast.
Advertisement
“I think we all came out of the closet for this election,” said Branscome.
It’s not that there weren’t Hillary Clinton supporters in The Villages in 2016, said Chris Stanley, president of the community’s Democratic Club. There were.
But there was also “an overwhelming sense in 2016 of ‘we’ve got this in the bag.’ There was a level of complacency that she’d win,” said Stanley. “Now there’s a heightened sense of urgency, and in many ways, Trump has been our best recruiting tool ever.”
If the slow moving, four-wheel, golf cart show of force is an indication of growing allegiance to the Democrat among the retiree set, it would represent a substantial shift. In Florida, 29% of registered voters are 65 and older. As of Oct. 1, 43% were Republican, 37% were Democrats and 17% were nonpartisan.
Susan MacManus, a University of South Florida distinguished professor of government and international affairs, said The Villages and its powerful voting demographic have become less Republican over the years because of an influx of more liberal people from the Northeast.
She’s seen research that shows a softening in Trump’s older base, both nationally and in Florida — especially with women.
Advertisement
“That’s the group that’s leaving Trump,” she said. “And it’s because of his demeanor, more than his policies. For older women, especially. They went through the battles. They frankly do not appreciate the demeaning of women. More than that, they’re thinking of their children and their grandchildren.”
Indeed, at The Villages, many of the people riding in golf carts are women like Joan Morrill, a 76-year-old former Republican. The pandemic has weighed heavily on her, especially when she considers her four children and seven grandchildren. “We can’t live like this ...” she said. “I want a better world for them.”
Jeff Johnson, the state director for the Florida AARP, believes voters over 65 are more “in play” in this year’s presidential race, largely because of Trump’s handling of the pandemic. In recent weeks, Democrats have seized on this softening of support and have rolled out six ads targeting older voters.
In 2018, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of the American electorate conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for The Associated Press, older Republicans thought immigration was the nation’s most important issue, while older Democrats said health care was. But this year, with the pandemic, concern about health care has become a top issue for both.
The Trump campaign seems to be paying attention. On Thursday, the president released a video of himself standing on the White House lawn in which he called older adults “my favorite people.” Noting that they are vulnerable to the virus, he asserted with no basis in fact that a medicine he said he was given in the hospital would be free to older people.
Advertisement
“The seniors are going to be taken care of,” he said.
That is not how it has played out so far. Not only has Florida been slammed by the virus, but also no other demographic has been affected more than older people. About 93% of Florida’s 15,100 deaths from the virus have been people 55 and older, and many are scared — and enraged.
“The whole virus thing has hit really hard here,” said Branscome, who pointed out that almost everyone in The Villages moved there from somewhere else. “We can’t go see our families because of COVID. I’m not seeing an end to it. There is no plan. Biden has a plan. He wears a mask. It gives us hope.”
In recent weeks, Morrill watched as Trump announced he was infected with COVID-19, left the hospital days later and dramatically removed his mask upon his return to the White House.
She seethed.
“I was angry,” she said, her voice shaking. “He’s showing a bad example. He thinks that nothing’s going to affect him. It feels like one lie after another.”
For the golf cart caravan, she wore a T-shirt that said “Team Fauci,” referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious-disease expert. “I trust the scientists and the doctors. I don’t trust Trump.”
Advertisement
Those sentiments extend well beyond the well-tended streets of The Villages. Ron Hood, 78, a retired college biology professor, lives on the Atlantic coast in Jacksonville. Hood, a Democrat, is voting for Biden. He, too, feels that Trump has left older adults behind.
“I do think there has been an attitude: ‘Well, it’s not that important to keep them alive and well. If we can’t, well, that’s too bad. Nice knowing you, bye,’” he said. “I just try not to dwell on things like that, though.”
___
In rural Alachua County, which Clinton carried easily in 2016, 69-year-old Maxie Hicks is deeply troubled by the country’s direction and Trump’s leadership. Hicks, who is Black, said he’s been thinking a lot about the civil rights movement, when he was a teenager.
“I’ve never seen this type of cold-blooded hate, not even back then,” he said. “This is a Donald Trump funk. I’ve never seen this much hostility.”
The retired state transportation department worker often thinks about how he and Trump are similar in age. “I don’t know how he could come through our generation and be so mean. So heartless. So insensitive. So indecent. So ungentlemanly.”
Advertisement
The hostility that Hicks bemoans has played out even in “the friendliest town,” where Villagers who are Trump enthusiasts have held their own golf cart parades.
In June, a fight broke out between Trump and Biden supporters in front of the Panera Bread shop, and one Trump supporter was captured on video yelling, “White power!”
People still talk about that, and there appear to be some lingering hurt feelings. On Wednesday, during the Biden rally, one woman in her golf cart decked out with Biden signs smiled and said good morning to a man coming from the other direction in a cart with a Trump sign.
“Shove it!” he said.
Judy Wise, a 75-year-old retiree in Plant City, a town east of Tampa on the Interstate 4 corridor, said her niece hasn’t spoken to her in years, since a fight over Trump. Wise is a stalwart supporter, and her niece is not.
“It’s not so much about the man, but the ideology,” Wise explained. She’s convinced that Biden and the Democrats have a “plan to unseat capitalism” and that he will be a “puppet” of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, progressive Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris.
Advertisement
Wise believes in small government and lower taxes, and she’s worried about the summer’s recent nationwide protests, a few of which have turned violent. She recognizes that Trump can be abrasive, but it doesn’t bother her, and she questions media reports that Trump had called servicemen and women “losers.” Trump wouldn’t do that, she said.
Pamela Allen, 72, supported Trump from the time he came down the escalator in Trump Tower in 2015 to announce his candidacy. Every few weeks, she waves Trump flags on the roadside of her Tampa suburb of Holiday with a group of other Republicans.
“I love him. I think he’s doing a great job. He’s addressing the situations of everyday people’s normal everyday concerns,” she said. “He’s keeping his promises, with little to no help from the media or the Democrats. There is no positivity on anything he does.”
As for the pandemic, she does think it’s serious for older people, but “it may be blown out of proportion.”
“I don’t believe the numbers they’re posting about deaths. I wash my hands. I wear my mask. I avoid getting very close to people I don’t know,” she said.
Advertisement
Professor MacManus cautions that while some older voters have gravitated toward Biden, there are many others like Allen and Wise who are firmly in Trump’s corner. But that might not be enough for Trump.
“They’re still probably leaning more towards Trump. But in Florida, you look at margins,” she said. “He won the senior vote in Florida by double digits in 2016. And now we’re showing single digits in polls. ... Any bleeding of any cohort is a red flag for that candidate.”
And in this week’s golf cart caravan, the Biden flags were blue.
___
Associated Press writers Jonathan Lemire, Josh Boak and Michael Schneider contributed to this report.
___
This story has been updated to correct the spelling of Sara Branscom’s last name to Branscome, and to correct two references in the final section of the story from Hood to Hicks.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--Lindsey Graham Says Black People 'Can Go Anywhere' In His State If They're 'Conservative'

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina , who is facing stiff competition from Democratic contender Jamie Harrison , asserted Friday evening that Black people “ can go anywhere in this state ” provided that they are “ conservative , not liberal.
” The remarks came during Graham ’ s discussion of police reform and the anti-racism protests that have swept the country .
At Friday ’ s event , Graham touted his support for a conservative police reform measure proposed by Sen. Tim Scott ― South Carolina ’ s other senator , who is Black ― and argued that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solutions .
He avoided a question asking whether he had met with any Black Lives Matter leaders by saying he had met with “ pastors and people in the African American community.
” “ And here are the facts , ” Graham said .
“ Do I believe our cops are systemically racist ?
No .
Do I believe South Carolina is a racist state ?
No.
” Graham then asserted that Black people can only “ go to the Senate ” if they “ share the values of our state , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2013 .
Graham predicted that Harrison would lose “ not because of race but because he ’ s aligned himself with the most liberal people in the country.
” “ I am asking to every African American out there , look at my record , ” Graham continued , referencing his past bipartisan support for historically Black colleges and universities .
“ I care about everybody .
If you are a young African American , an immigrant , you can go anywhere in this state , you just need to be conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , South Carolina is not a totally conservative state ― as evidenced by the fact that Harrison is neck-and-neck with the sitting senator in recent polls .
Graham was speaking at an event in which both candidates separately answered questions from moderators .
The unusual format replaced a more traditional debate , which was cancelled the day before because Graham refused to take a coronavirus test , which Harrison ’ s campaign had requested .
As the race continues to be unexpectedly close , Graham ’ s refusal to share his health status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high-ranking Republicans have tested positive for COVID-19 in recent days .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is facing stiff competition from Democratic contender Jamie Harrison, asserted Friday evening that Black people “can go anywhere in this state” provided that they are “conservative, not liberal.”
The remarks came during Graham’s discussion of police reform and the anti-racism protests that have swept the country.
Advertisement
At Friday’s event, Graham touted his support for a conservative police reform measure proposed by Sen. Tim Scott ― South Carolina’s other senator, who is Black ― and argued that his opponent was not interested in bipartisan solutions. He avoided a question asking whether he had met with any Black Lives Matter leaders by saying he had met with “pastors and people in the African American community.”
“And here are the facts,” Graham said. “Do I believe our cops are systemically racist? No. Do I believe South Carolina is a racist state? No.”
Graham then asserted that Black people can only “go to the Senate” if they “share the values of our state,” pointing to Scott, who was elected in 2013. Graham predicted that Harrison would lose “not because of race but because he’s aligned himself with the most liberal people in the country.”
“I am asking to every African American out there, look at my record,” Graham continued, referencing his past bipartisan support for historically Black colleges and universities.
Advertisement
“I care about everybody. If you are a young African American, an immigrant, you can go anywhere in this state, you just need to be conservative, not liberal.”
Despite his claim, South Carolina is not a totally conservative state ― as evidenced by the fact that Harrison is neck-and-neck with the sitting senator in recent polls.
Graham was speaking at an event in which both candidates separately answered questions from moderators. The unusual format replaced a more traditional debate, which was cancelled the day before because Graham refused to take a coronavirus test, which Harrison’s campaign had requested.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--After Coronavirus, Trump Aiming To Get Campaign Back On Track

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — President Donald Trump on Saturday made his first public appearance since returning to the White House after being treated for the coronavirus .
The White House has refused to declare that he is no longer contagious , and the gathering of hundreds of people on the South Lawn went ahead despite the guidance of public health officials .
Trump delivered an address on his support for law enforcement from the Blue Room balcony to a friendly crowd .
The president wore a mask as he walked out for the speech but took it off to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enthusiastic response from his supporters .
The White House insisted the event on the South Lawn was an official event and not a campaign rally .
But Trump used the address to make broadsides against the Democratic ticket of former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris .
Before the speech , White House officials said they had no information to release on whether the president was tested for COVID-19 , meaning he made his first public appearance without the White House verifying that he ’ s no longer contagious .
Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the event , which was called a “ peaceful protest for law & order.
” Police and the Secret Service closed surrounding streets to vehicles and shut down Lafayette Square , the park near the White House that has long been a gathering place for public protest .
As questions linger about his health — and Democratic opponent Joe Biden steps up his own campaigning — Trump also planned to leave the Washington area on Monday for the first time since he was hospitalized for a campaign rally in Sanford , Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign events in Iowa and Pennsylvania next week and is increasing his radio and TV appearances with conservative interviewers , hoping to make up for lost time with just over three weeks until Election Day and millions already voting .
Saturday ’ s speech comes two weeks after his Rose Garden event that has been labeled a “ superspreader ” for the virus .
More than two dozen people linked to the White House have contracted COVID-19 since the president ’ s Sept. 26 event announcing Judge Amy Coney Barrett as his nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , all attendees are required to bring masks or will be provided with them , and also will be given temperature checks and asked to fill out a brief questionnaire .
Attendees will be strongly encouraged to follow CDC guidelines , which include mask-wearing and social distancing .
Trump ’ s Monday event in Sanford , Florida , what he ’ s described as a “ BIG RALLY , ” was originally scheduled to be held on Oct. 2 , the day after he tested positive .
Ahead of his Saturday event , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about problems with mail-in ballots in New Jersey , Ohio , and Texas .
Trump has repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims that universal mail-in voting is beset by widespread fraud .
He said of the Barrett event in an interview with The Associated Press , “ I was not surprised to see a superspreader event given the circumstances.
” That means “ crowded , congregate setting , not wearing masks .
It is not surprising to see an outbreak , ” he said .
Confined to the White House as he recovers , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days making the rounds of friendly conservative media , calling in to Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday night and spending two hours live on air with radio host Rush Limbaugh on Friday in what his campaign billed as a “ radio rally.
” Holding court on his reelection battle , his fight against the coronavirus , and revived negotiations with Democrats to pass an economic stimulus bill , Trump made a direct appeal to his base of loyal supporters , whom he needs to turn out to the polls in droves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox ’ s Tucker Carlson ’ s show , Trump was asked if he has been retested for COVID-19 .
“ I have been retested , and I haven ’ t even found out numbers or anything yet .
But I ’ ve been retested , and I know I ’ m at either the bottom of the scale or free , ” he said .
Aides to the president insist that it is safe for Trump to return to his regular activities , including campaigning .
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least 10 days from the onset of symptoms , Fauci noted in the AP interview .
That onset for Trump was Oct. 1 , according to his doctors .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Saturday made his first public appearance since returning to the White House after being treated for the coronavirus. The White House has refused to declare that he is no longer contagious, and the gathering of hundreds of people on the South Lawn went ahead despite the guidance of public health officials.
Trump delivered an address on his support for law enforcement from the Blue Room balcony to a friendly crowd. The president wore a mask as he walked out for the speech but took it off to make his remarks. He received an enthusiastic response from his supporters.
Advertisement
“I’m feeling great,” said Trump, who said he was thankful for their good wishes and prayers as he recovered.
Trump is also priming for a Florida rally on Monday and campaign events in Iowa and Pennsylvania later in the week.
The president addressed the large crowd even as the White House refuses to declare that he is no longer contagious and against the guidance of public health officials.
The White House insisted the event on the South Lawn was an official event and not a campaign rally. But Trump used the address to make broadsides against the Democratic ticket of former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris.
Advertisement
“I think we’re gonna swamp them by so much,” he said.
Trump appeared healthy, though perhaps a little hoarse, during the 18-minute speech that was intended to send the message that he’s back and ready to resume his battle for reelection.
Before the speech, White House officials said they had no information to release on whether the president was tested for COVID-19, meaning he made his first public appearance without the White House verifying that he’s no longer contagious.
Security was stepped up around the White House before the event, which was called a “peaceful protest for law & order.” Police and the Secret Service closed surrounding streets to vehicles and shut down Lafayette Square, the park near the White House that has long been a gathering place for public protest.
As questions linger about his health — and Democratic opponent Joe Biden steps up his own campaigning — Trump also planned to leave the Washington area on Monday for the first time since he was hospitalized for a campaign rally in Sanford, Florida. He is also scheduled to hold campaign events in Iowa and Pennsylvania next week and is increasing his radio and TV appearances with conservative interviewers, hoping to make up for lost time with just over three weeks until Election Day and millions already voting.
Biden’s campaign said he again tested negative on Saturday for COVID-19. Biden was potentially exposed to the coronavirus during his Sept. 29 debate with Trump, who announced his positive diagnosis barely 48 hours after the debate.
Advertisement
The president has not been seen in public — other than in White House-produced videos — since his return five days ago from the military hospital where he received experimental treatments for the coronavirus.
Most in the crowd that gathered for his speech on supporting law enforcement wore masks, but there was little social distancing.
Saturday’s speech comes two weeks after his Rose Garden event that has been labeled a “superspreader” for the virus. More than two dozen people linked to the White House have contracted COVID-19 since the president’s Sept. 26 event announcing Judge Amy Coney Barrett as his nominee to the Supreme Court.
On Saturday, all attendees are required to bring masks or will be provided with them, and also will be given temperature checks and asked to fill out a brief questionnaire. Attendees will be strongly encouraged to follow CDC guidelines, which include mask-wearing and social distancing.
Trump’s Monday event in Sanford, Florida, what he’s described as a “BIG RALLY,” was originally scheduled to be held on Oct. 2, the day after he tested positive. Ahead of his Saturday event, Trump used Twitter to share news articles about problems with mail-in ballots in New Jersey, Ohio, and Texas. Trump has repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims that universal mail-in voting is beset by widespread fraud.
Advertisement
Trump’s return to public activity came as Dr. Anthony Fauci, the government’s top infectious-disease expert, cautioned the White House again to avoid large-scale gatherings of people without masks.
He said of the Barrett event in an interview with The Associated Press, “I was not surprised to see a superspreader event given the circumstances.” That means “crowded, congregate setting, not wearing masks. It is not surprising to see an outbreak,” he said.
District of Columbia virus restrictions prohibit outdoor gatherings larger than 50 people, although that rule has not been strictly enforced. Masks are mandatory outdoors for most people, but the regulations don’t apply on federal land, and the Trump White House has openly flouted them for months.
Confined to the White House as he recovers, Trump spent sizeable chunks of the past few days making the rounds of friendly conservative media, calling in to Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday night and spending two hours live on air with radio host Rush Limbaugh on Friday in what his campaign billed as a “radio rally.”
Holding court on his reelection battle, his fight against the coronavirus, and revived negotiations with Democrats to pass an economic stimulus bill, Trump made a direct appeal to his base of loyal supporters, whom he needs to turn out to the polls in droves.
Advertisement
In a Friday night interview on Fox’s Tucker Carlson’s show, Trump was asked if he has been retested for COVID-19. “I have been retested, and I haven’t even found out numbers or anything yet. But I’ve been retested, and I know I’m at either the bottom of the scale or free,” he said.
White House officials, however, have declined to answer when Trump last tested negative for the virus or release detailed information about lung scans taken while Trump was hospitalized.
Aides to the president insist that it is safe for Trump to return to his regular activities, including campaigning. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines call for the infected to wait at least 10 days from the onset of symptoms, Fauci noted in the AP interview. That onset for Trump was Oct. 1, according to his doctors.
The president’s White House physician, Navy Cmdr. Sean Conley, added that Trump was showing no evidence of his illness progressing or adverse reactions to the aggressive course of therapy he has received.
While reports of reinfection in COVID-19 victims are rare, the CDC recommends that even people who recover from the disease continue to wear masks, stay distanced, and follow other precautions. It was unclear if Trump, who has refused mask-wearing in most settings, would abide by that guidance as he resumes his campaign.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--Amy Coney Barrett Submits Additional Anti-Abortion Docs To Senate After Scrutiny

As part of a last-minute addition to documents she was required to submit for her nomination process , President Donald Trump ’ s Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Bryant revealed on Friday a 2013 newspaper ad she signed condemning the “ infamous ” Roe v. Wade decision that , the ad claimed , “ killed 55 million unborn children.
” The ad came alongside additional material she submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee , which requires judicial nominees to fill out a questionnaire and provide published writings and statements .
The documents followed her initial submission on Sept. 29 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also revealed that she spoke at two events held by anti-abortion student groups at Notre Dame University in 2013 , where she was a law professor at the time .
She did not reveal the content of her talks .
The ad , sponsored by a faculty group to which Barrett belonged , appeared in Notre Dame ’ s student newspaper , she noted in a letter to Judiciary Committee leaders released late Friday .
“ In the 40 years since the Supreme Court ’ s Roe v. Wade decision , over 55 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortions , ” it read .
“ We ... renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law.
” Barrett submitted the new information following criticism from Democrats after a 2006 anti-abortion newspaper ad she signed , which she had not previously disclosed , resurfaced earlier this month .
Barrett claimed in her letter Friday that she was releasing the “ supplemental ” information “ out of an abundance of caution.
” She insisted it “ is not clear ” that the new disclosures were required as part of the questionnaire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been made aware of some items you may have already seen ” — so now she was providing them .
Barrett ’ s omissions raise the possibility that there may be more information she hasn ’ t disclosed .
It ’ s not clear what kind of consequences she may face for not initially revealing the ads and talks .
Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote a letter to the Justice Department earlier this week demanding that officials determine whether Barrett has complied with full disclosure requirements .
Democrats pointed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reveal an open letter from 2006 .
That statement , signed by Barrett and others , blasted what it called the “ barbaric legacy ” of Roe v. Wade and “ explicitly called for overturning ” the decision .
“ The failure to disclose the 2006 letter leads to additional questions about other potentially missing materials , ” the Democrats wrote .
“ The omission also raises concerns that the process of collecting materials responsive to the [ questionnaire ] , like the nomination process itself , has been rushed , for no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made any rulings about abortion as a federal appeals court judge , but her position is clear on Roe v. Wade , which gave American women the right to abortion nearly half a century ago .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As part of a last-minute addition to documents she was required to submit for her nomination process, President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett revealed on Friday a 2013 newspaper ad she signed condemning the “infamous” Roe v. Wade decision that, the ad claimed, “killed 55 million unborn children.”
Disclosure of the ad was part of additional material she submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which requires judicial nominees to fill out a questionnaire and provide published writings and statements. The documents followed her initial submission on Sept. 29.
Advertisement
In the Friday disclosure, Barrett also revealed that she spoke at two events held by anti-abortion student groups at Notre Dame University in 2013, where she was a law professor at the time. She did not reveal the content of her talks.
The ad, sponsored by a faculty group to which Barrett belonged, appeared in Notre Dame’s student newspaper, she noted in a letter to Judiciary Committee leaders released late Friday.
“In the 40 years since the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, over 55 million unborn children have been killed by abortions,” it read. “We ... renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law.”
Barrett submitted the new information revealing the ad and speeches following criticism from Democrats after a 2006 anti-abortion newspaper ad she signed, which she had not previously disclosed, resurfaced earlier this month.
Advertisement
The supplemental materials were released just hours after CNN revealed that Barrett had failed to disclose her talks before the anti-abortion student groups. CNN also reported that video of one of the speeches was removed from YouTube by Notre Dame in 2014.
Barrett’s nomination hearings begin Monday.
Barrett claimed in her letter Friday that she was releasing the “supplemental” information “out of an abundance of caution.” She insisted it “is not clear” that the new disclosures were required as part of the questionnaire. But she noted, “I have been made aware of some items you may have already seen” — so now she was providing them.
Barrett’s omissions raise the possibility that there may be more information she hasn’t disclosed. It’s not clear what kind of consequences she may face for not initially revealing the ads and talks.
Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote a letter to the Justice Department earlier this week demanding that officials determine whether Barrett has complied with full disclosure requirements.
Democrats pointed out that Barrett had earlier failed to reveal an open letter from 2006. That statement, signed by Barrett and others, blasted what it called the “barbaric legacy” of Roe v. Wade and “explicitly called for overturning” the decision.
Advertisement
“The failure to disclose the 2006 letter leads to additional questions about other potentially missing materials,” the Democrats wrote. “The omission also raises concerns that the process of collecting materials responsive to the [questionnaire], like the nomination process itself, has been rushed, for no legitimate reason.”
Barrett hasn’t made any rulings about abortion as a federal appeals court judge, but her position is clear on Roe v. Wade, which gave American women the right to abortion nearly half a century ago.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--New White House Coronavirus Relief Offer Panned By Pelosi, Senate GOP

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) rejected the most generous Trump administration plan to date as “ one step forward , two steps back.
” The Republicans who control the Senate dismissed it as too expensive and a political loser for conservatives .
Pelosi said she is still hopeful that progress can be made toward a deal but it ’ s as clear as ever that GOP conservatives don ’ t want a deal on her terms .
The White House had boosted its offer before Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Pelosi spoke on Friday afternoon .
President Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Election Day , even as his most powerful GOP ally in the Senate said Congress is unlikely to deliver relief by then .
The new offer totals about $ 1.8 trillion , aides familiar with it said , with a key state and local fiscal relief component moving from $ 250 billion to at least $ 300 billion .
The White House says its most recent offer before that was about $ 1.6 trillion .
The aides were not authorized to publicly discuss private negotiations and spoke on condition of anonymity .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , “ This proposal amounted to one step forward , two steps back .
When the president talks about wanting a bigger relief package , his proposal appears to mean that he wants more money at his discretion to grant or withhold.
” She said that while his administration attempted to address some of the Democratic concerns , disagreement remained on many priorities and Democrats are “ awaiting language ” on several provisions .
“ Despite these unaddressed concerns , I remain hopeful that yesterday ’ s developments will move us closer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that addresses the health and economic crisis facing America ’ s families , ” Pelosi ’ s letter said .
Mnuchin ’ s latest offer also got a roasting from GOP senators , who weighed in on a conference call Saturday morning , according to a Republican familiar with the call who was not authorized to discuss the call publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity .
Many conservatives are skeptical of so much deficit-financed aid in the first place , and Pelosi-sought provisions such as expanding eligibility for the Affordable Care Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Sen. Susan Collins , R-Maine , and politically endangered Republicans including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina appear willing to “ go big ” as Trump wants .
But rank-and-file Republicans — Sens .
Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee , Rick Scott of Florida , and John Barrasso of Wyoming , for example — are adamantly opposed to another relief bill that ’ s so generous .
GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell remains skeptical of the chances for an agreement , having told an audience in Kentucky on Friday that he didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before Election Day .
“ I think it ’ s unlikely in the next three weeks , ” McConnell said Friday .
He said later that “ the first item of priority of the Senate is the Supreme Court , ” suggesting there isn ’ t time to process both a relief bill and the high court nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett before the Nov. 3 election .
President Donald Trump has been all over the map , first as one of the forces in favor of a deal , then killing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revive them by weeks ’ end .
On Tuesday , he ordered an end to the weekslong talks after being told that few Republicans in Congress would end up voting for a possible Pelosi-Mnuchin deal .
Now , after a political beating , Trump is pressing hard for a deal , motivated by the prospect of sending $ 1,200 direct payments to voters before November .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — A new White House coronavirus aid offer got bad reviews from both ends of the political spectrum on Saturday.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) rejected the most generous Trump administration plan to date as “one step forward, two steps back.” The Republicans who control the Senate dismissed it as too expensive and a political loser for conservatives.
Advertisement
Pelosi said she is still hopeful that progress can be made toward a deal but it’s as clear as ever that GOP conservatives don’t want a deal on her terms.
The White House had boosted its offer before Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Pelosi spoke on Friday afternoon. President Donald Trump is eager for an agreement before Election Day, even as his most powerful GOP ally in the Senate said Congress is unlikely to deliver relief by then.
“Covid Relief Negotiations are moving along. Go Big!” Trump said Friday on Twitter.
The new offer totals about $1.8 trillion, aides familiar with it said, with a key state and local fiscal relief component moving from $250 billion to at least $300 billion. The White House says its most recent offer before that was about $1.6 trillion. The aides were not authorized to publicly discuss private negotiations and spoke on condition of anonymity.
Pelosi’s most recent public offer was about $2.2 trillion, though that included a business tax increase that Republicans won’t go for.
Advertisement
In a letter Saturday to colleagues, Pelosi said, “This proposal amounted to one step forward, two steps back. When the president talks about wanting a bigger relief package, his proposal appears to mean that he wants more money at his discretion to grant or withhold.”
She said that while his administration attempted to address some of the Democratic concerns, disagreement remained on many priorities and Democrats are “awaiting language” on several provisions.
“Despite these unaddressed concerns, I remain hopeful that yesterday’s developments will move us closer to an agreement on a relief package that addresses the health and economic crisis facing America’s families,” Pelosi’s letter said.
Mnuchin’s latest offer also got a roasting from GOP senators, who weighed in on a conference call Saturday morning, according to a Republican familiar with the call who was not authorized to discuss the call publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. Many conservatives are skeptical of so much deficit-financed aid in the first place, and Pelosi-sought provisions such as expanding eligibility for the Affordable Care Act landed with a thud.
Pragmatists such as Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and politically endangered Republicans including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina appear willing to “go big” as Trump wants. But rank-and-file Republicans — Sens. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Rick Scott of Florida, and John Barrasso of Wyoming, for example — are adamantly opposed to another relief bill that’s so generous.
Advertisement
GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell remains skeptical of the chances for an agreement, having told an audience in Kentucky on Friday that he didn’t see a deal coming together before Election Day.
“I think it’s unlikely in the next three weeks,” McConnell said Friday. He said later that “the first item of priority of the Senate is the Supreme Court,” suggesting there isn’t time to process both a relief bill and the high court nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett before the Nov. 3 election.
President Donald Trump has been all over the map, first as one of the forces in favor of a deal, then killing the talks on Tuesday, only to revive them by weeks’ end.
On Tuesday, he ordered an end to the weekslong talks after being told that few Republicans in Congress would end up voting for a possible Pelosi-Mnuchin deal. Now, after a political beating, Trump is pressing hard for a deal, motivated by the prospect of sending $1,200 direct payments to voters before November.
It’s clear from Saturday’s Senate GOP conference call that the skepticism or outright opposition hasn’t changed.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--Trump Promised A Break With GOP Trickle-Down Economics. He Delivered More Of The Same.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters President Donald Trump addresses a crowd of electrical contractors .
Trump 's celebration of blue-collar workers @ @ @ @ @ his appeal in 2016 , but he has n't governed accordingly .
A New Paradigm @ @ @ @ @ Jobs To Match The conventional GOP was far less wedded to universal coverage than Trump @ @ @ @ @ sought to eliminate federal subsidies for moderate-income individuals to purchase coverage on the ACA ’ @ @ @ @ @ the ACA ’ s successful expansion of Medicaid and undo protections for people with preexisting @ @ @ @ @ vaunted “ replacement ” that Trump had promised would be better than the original law @ @ @ @ @ hard-line bill that came up for a vote in the Republican Senate in July 2017 @ @ @ @ @ 16 million fewer Americans having health insurance .
Among other contradictions , the bill ’ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s campaign promise that he would protect Social Security , Medicare and Medicaid from @ @ @ @ @ repeatedly introduced budgets proposing cuts to Social Security disability benefits ) .

When Donald Trump took the stage in Cleveland to accept the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, he sounded different from the party’s traditional, business-friendly standard-bearers.
“I have visited the laid-off factory workers and the communities crushed by our horrible and unfair trade deals. These are the forgotten men and women of our country. People who work hard but no longer have a voice,” he declared. “I am your voice.”
Advertisement
The rhetorical flourish was the culmination of a campaign in which Trump took pleasure in shredding the tenets of the wealthy-first, trickle-down economics that have dominated the GOP since Ronald Reagan’s presidency.
Trump built his presidential run, first and foremost, on anti-immigrant demagoguery of the kind eschewed by his party’s Chamber of Commerce wing. But he also flouted long-standing conservative economic orthodoxies in ways that angered conservatives and inspired a mixture of ideological intrigue and political fear in some liberals.
He trashed free-trade agreements that have been the bane of the organized labor movement since the early 1990s, promising to shelve an existing accord and renegotiate others in an effort to revive domestic manufacturing. He vowed to defend Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid from any cuts; empower Medicare to negotiate bulk rates on prescription drugs; repeal the Affordable Care Act while providing universal coverage through other means; and pass an infrastructure bill twice the size of what his then-Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was proposing. He mocked the country’s pay-to-play campaign finance system and the low tax rate paid by the “paper pushers” who run hedge funds.
Some of the swing voters Trump needed to win apparently took notice. A lower percentage of voters viewed him as “conservative” than any of his immediate Republican predecessors in the White House.
Advertisement
“Trump became a real Republican at the very worst time ― a time when Republican orthodoxy could not be less wanted by the American people.” - Saagar Enjeti, co-author, "The Populist's Guide to 2020"
As it turned out, the elements of Trump’s candidacy with the narrowest public appeal ― racism, mismanagement, vanity, inattention to policy detail ― came to fruition, while the heterodox policy stances and rhetoric that gave some on the populist left and right the faintest whiff of optimism fell by the wayside.
“During the campaign, his willingness to criticize a lot of neoliberal approaches was something I found very refreshing,” said Julius Krein, founder of the conservative magazine American Affairs and an early intellectual cheerleader for Trump who became an outspoken critic during the first year of his presidency. “As president, there has been a lot more conventional Republican, market fundamentalist policy.”
Within a year, voters had taken notice, characterizing him in polling as far more conservative than they’d thought when he was a candidate.
Trump can thank his inability or unwillingness to challenge traditional Republican ideology for his consistent polling deficit against Democratic nominee Joe Biden during this year’s election cycle, according to Saagar Enjeti, co-author of “The Populist’s Guide to 2020: A New Right and New Left Are Rising.”
Advertisement
Enjeti ― who, like Krein, identifies as a right-wing populist ― believes that pro-corporate, trickle-down economics has been an especially tough sell amid the destruction caused by the coronavirus pandemic and the economic recession that has come with it.
“Trump became a real Republican at the very worst time ― a time when Republican orthodoxy could not be less wanted by the American people,” Enjeti said. “That is why you see such devastation in terms of his public support ― even among people who supported him last time.”
The White House rejects the idea that Trump has failed to deliver on his campaign pledges to help ordinary people.
“President Trump has kept his 2016 promises to the American people and more, pushing ahead policies that put America first,” White House spokesperson Sarah Matthews said in a statement. “No President has accomplished more at this point in his first term than President Trump, including delivering on his promises to cut taxes, renegotiate fair trade deals, rebuild our military, unleash American energy like never before, lower drug costs, stand with our allies, build the wall, and confirm more conservative judges — including two Supreme Court justices and more than 200 judges to our federal courts.”
President Donald Trump signs a revised North American trade agreement alongside Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and then-Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto in 2018. Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
Advertisement
A New Paradigm On Trade — Without The Jobs To Match
Unlike other areas of economic policy where Trump jettisoned promises to break with Republican orthodoxy, he has pursued a more nationalistic approach to trade. He immediately withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation trade agreement negotiated by former President Barack Obama over the objections of labor unions and a host of other liberal groups. Trump also stacked his administration with trade hawks such as Robert Lighthizer, Peter Navarro and Wilbur Ross.
And while Obama promised as a candidate to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement only to ignore the matter as president, Trump actually reopened the accord in an effort to boost U.S. manufacturing. The modified agreement, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement, won the endorsement of the AFL-CIO, the country’s largest federation of labor unions, and House Democrats, who voted to enact the deal in December.
But Trump didn’t just run his campaign on renegotiating trade agreements. He promised that his trade policies would actually revive the American manufacturing job market.
“I am the only candidate in this race who will bring our manufacturing jobs back,” he wrote in a March 2016 op-ed in USA Today.
By that standard, Trump’s presidency has been disappointing. During Trump’s first two years in office, manufacturing jobs grew in line with overall job growth in an economy still climbing its way out of the Great Recession. That rate was not noticeably higher than in the economic recovery years preceding Trump’s presidency.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, the country’s manufacturing capacity ― which determines how many manufacturing jobs the country can sustain ― continued to decline. The United States lost 1,800 factories in 2017 and 2018, according to data compiled by the Economic Policy Institute, a progressive think tank that receives some funding from labor unions. (EPI’s hawkish stances on trade and support for manufacturing policy has given its work bipartisan appeal: Trump cited the organization in his March 2016 op-ed.)
The lack of progress has been especially apparent in the Great Lakes region that helped deliver the presidency to Trump. Even as manufacturing jobs grew modestly in other parts of the country in 2019, employment from that sector declined by 0.5% in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin, according to a September report by the Century Foundation, a liberal think tank.
Part of the problem is that even the elements of Trump’s trade deals that liberals like ― such as boosting labor standards in Mexico ― are not enough to curb the appeal of offshoring to a country with cheaper labor and fewer regulations. To stop that offshoring, the United States needs to invest in economic and infrastructure development in Mexico to bring workers’ earning power much closer to parity with the U.S., according to Robert Scott, EPI’s director of trade and manufacturing research.
To level the playing field with countries such as China, the United States must also, among other things, devalue the dollar to make American exports more competitive in the global marketplace, Scott said. It’s an idea that has developed bipartisan traction in Congress, but one in which Trump has shown little interest.
Trump has even lost his touch for manufacturing-related publicity stunts of the kind that frightened Democratic operatives in the weeks after the 2016 election. His high-profile effort to save jobs at a Carrier air conditioning plant in Indianapolis, Indiana, was a stroke of political genius ― however disappointing its results ended up being.
Advertisement
“Trump had his pulse on something very real,” said Irene Lin, a Cleveland-based Democratic campaign consultant. “Rhetorically and politically, it was brilliant.”
It turned out to be a one-off, replaced by images of the idling of iconic factories like the General Motors plant in Lordstown, Ohio, a region where Trump told voters in July 2017 not to sell their homes because the lost manufacturing jobs were “all coming back.”
“I always knew he was going to be a fraud,” Lin said. “Four years later, that’s been proven.”
Trump celebrates the House's vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act with then-House Speaker Paul Ryan (Wis.), left. The president has never delivered on his promises of universal coverage. Carlos Barria / Reuters
The ‘Paul Ryan Agenda’
Aside from trade, Trump’s policy priorities followed the typical Republican, trickle-down playbook: hostility toward government social programs, regulation of big business and taxes paid by wealthy people and corporations.
Michael Lind, a public policy professor at the University of Texas, Austin, has written sympathetically about the populist impulses behind Trump’s candidacy. He compared Trump to former President Richard Nixon, who likewise outsourced management of much of domestic policy to the reigning Republican establishment.
Advertisement
“The same way Nixon signed off on what was then the liberal domestic agenda, Trump signed off on the Paul Ryan agenda,” said Lind, author of “The New Class War.”
Enjeti blames Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who served as House speaker for the first two years of the Trump presidency, and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) for hijacking Trump’s domestic agenda.
But he faults Trump for effectively letting them do it.
“He has never had a successful strategy for bending Congress to his will,” said Enjeti, who co-hosts “The Realignment,” a podcast about making the GOP a more working class-friendly party. “He didn’t care enough about policy.”
The two biggest legislative initiatives of Trump’s first term ― the attempted repeal of the Affordable Care Act and his massive tax cut bill ― exemplified this deference to the big-business libertarianism of Ryan and McConnell.
As a candidate, Trump promised to replace the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, with “something terrific” that provided universal coverage at a lower cost. And before his time in political life, he spoke glowingly about single-payer health care. But as president, he and his party have pursued policies designed to reduce coverage and shift costs onto patients.
Advertisement
The conventional GOP was far less wedded to universal coverage than Trump claimed to be. It sought to eliminate federal subsidies for moderate-income individuals to purchase coverage on the ACA’s insurance exchanges, defund the ACA’s successful expansion of Medicaid and undo protections for people with preexisting conditions ― all without the vaunted “replacement” that Trump had promised would be better than the original law. Even the slightly less hard-line bill that came up for a vote in the Republican Senate in July 2017 was projected to result in 16 million fewer Americans having health insurance. Among other contradictions, the bill’s Medicaid cuts violate Trump’s campaign promise that he would protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid from cuts (he has also repeatedly introduced budgets proposing cuts to Social Security disability benefits).
“He’s shown very little interest around serious policy discussion about health care.” - Julius Krein, founder of American Affairs magazine
“He’s shown very little interest around serious policy discussion about health care,” Krein said.
In the end, Trump’s disinterest in challenging the Republican consensus on health care saddled him with all the political baggage of repeal and none of its supposed benefits. The opposition of three Republican senators tanked the repeal bill in the Senate, depriving him of a tangible accomplishment even as the negative publicity from his pursuit of repeal contributed to Republicans’ loss of the House in November 2018.
During the presidential debate with Biden on Sept. 29, Trump continued to insist that he had a plan to provide universal coverage, but he offered no evidence to support that claim.
Advertisement
When moderator Chris Wallace asked Trump whether, after four years of promises, he had a plan to provide universal coverage, he did not answer. Instead, he lied about protecting people with pre-existing conditions, when in fact he urged the passage of Republican bills in Congress that would have allowed insurers in some states to charge people more based on their medical history. And Trump’s Department of Justice has written a brief supporting yet another conservative lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the entire ACA, including its safeguards for people with pre-existing conditions.
Trump’s tax bill, which did become law, similarly reflected the traditional Republican philosophy that the best way to boost the economy is to give the wealthiest people in the country more cash. He lowered the top corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, lowered the top income tax rate from 39% to 36%, and expanded the amount of household wealth exempt from the estate tax to $22 million per couple.
While Trump’s bill also lowered income taxes for the average middle-class family, his changes to income tax rates — unlike his changes to corporate tax rates — are due to expire at the end of 2025. And he eschewed proposals that would have made the tax code less tilted toward rich people, such as ending the loophole that allows corporations to defer taxes on profits amassed overseas, expanding the earned income tax credit for families with low incomes and taxing capital gains at the same rates as ordinary income.
Even a proposed border adjustment tax on foreign imports, an idea favored by trade hawks, ended up on the cutting room floor. And because Trump failed to crack down on the financial sector’s greediest practices, corporations used his mammoth tax cuts to engage in a record-breaking spree of stock buybacks instead of using their savings to boost worker pay or reinvest in their companies.
Ed McGinty, a 71-year old retiree from Philadelphia, wears a Biden 2020 hat on July 23. As Trump's popularity plummets among senior citizens, he has scrambled to issue last-minute executive orders aimed at lowering drug prices. BRYAN R. SMITH/Getty Images
Advertisement
Meanwhile, Trump declined to take up a number of bipartisan priorities that he claimed, as a candidate, he would act on. His administration’s periodic rhetorical nods to infrastructure investment have become a Beltway punchline rather than a credible bill.
And contrary to his campaign promise that he would empower Medicare to negotiate bulk rates on drugs, Trump has mostly treated the issue of prescription drug prices as an afterthought. When House Democrats passed a bill in December that would empower the federal government to negotiate lower prices for up to 250 prescription drugs, the White House vowed that Trump would veto the bill.
In the meantime, Senate Republicans have yet to pass an alternative proposal. Trump did embrace a bipartisan Senate bill capping drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries, but the bill has stalled in the Senate and he has shown little interest in trying to revive it.
When Trump finally unveiled a series of executive orders aimed at lowering drug prices in July, health care experts panned the measures as relatively insignificant. For example, an order forcing pharmaceutical companies to give cash rebates to Medicare beneficiaries, rather than the middlemen who negotiate discounts, would likely just increase Medicare premiums and the federal government’s costs.
In September, Trump also announced a plan to send Medicare beneficiaries a $200 card to spend on prescription drugs with out-of-pocket costs. The cards have yet to be distributed because the administration is still working out logistics, such as how to cover the $7 billion price tag.
Advertisement
“He hasn’t been serious about really taking on pharma and providing relief to people with really high drug costs,” said Steve Knievel, an advocate in Public Citizen’s Access to Medicine program.
Food banks, such as the one pictured here in Cumru, Pennsylvania, have experienced unprecedented demand since the start of the coronavirus pandemic. Ben Hasty/Getty Images
Economic Collapse
Prior to the pandemic, Trump’s biggest asset ― and the ultimate populist talking point ― was a roaring economy. As a candidate, Trump promised that Black Americans and “the Hispanics” would love him because of the jobs he created.
Most of the credit for the performance of the economy in Trump’s first term, however, should go to his predecessor, Barack Obama, who brought the economy back from the brink with a massive stimulus bill after the 2008 financial crisis. Obama went on to preside over 75 consecutive months of job growth, handing Trump an economy that was back on its feet and finally had developed enough momentum to soar.
“The reality is when you look at all the trends before he became president, we were in the middle of the longest period of continuous job growth,” said Bill Spriggs, chief economist at the AFL-CIO. “He continued to benefit from the tailwind.”
Advertisement
Official data shows the nationally unemployment rate dropping steadily from the beginning of former President Barack Obama's term until the onset of the pandemic. Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED)/Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Trump also failed to ensure that ordinary workers would share in the economy’s gains by making it easier for workers to unionize, Spriggs said. He filled the National Labor Relations Board with pro-business, Republican appointees and curtailed federal government employees’ collective bargaining rights.
All of that pales in comparison, though, to the way that Trump mishandled the economic fallout from the pandemic, starting in March.
Under the Trump administration’s direction, Republicans in Congress prioritized bailing out massive corporations over helping small businesses and ordinary workers. The Paycheck Protection Program, which distributed loans to small businesses that were trying to keep workers on payroll, ended up being a bureaucratic nightmare. Had Trump followed the lead of many European nations, where governments covered businesses’ payrolls directly, the unemployment rate likely would not have skyrocketed to the degree that it did in the United States.
While unemployment remained relatively stable in Europe and Japan during the pandemic, it skyrocketed in the United States, which is represented by the purple trend line above. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
Advertisement
After several successive relief packages that have failed to prevent a long-term recession from taking hold even as businesses begin to reopen, Trump has still shown little interest in securing an additional bill that would, among other things, provide emergency aid to ailing state governments. He has delegated negotiations to Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and has been more eager to lambaste states and cities run by Democrats than use his bully pulpit to encourage a bipartisan deal that could be one of his last chances at a second term.
Even as the president’s own diagnosis of COVID-19 plunged his reelection campaign into crisis on Oct. 2, Trump sent mixed signals about his desire for an agreement. He announced on Tuesday afternoon that he had “instructed” his negotiators to wait until after the election to resume talks about a coronavirus stimulus package.
By that evening, however, Trump appeared to change his mind. He began tweeting that he would sign individual bills that already have bipartisan support, even if a larger agreement proves elusive.
For left-leaning economists like Scott and Spriggs, the only silver lining of Trump’s presidency is that he has raised the political costs for business-friendly Democrats who are tempted to return to the party’s past support for pro-corporate policies, such as lopsided international trade agreements and excessive budgetary austerity.
“He has shifted the Democratic Party against doing more trade and investment deals,” Scott said.
Spriggs had a similar assessment, saying that although much of Trump’s appeal lies in pandering to voters with racist views, he has “forced Democrats to take restoring the middle class more seriously.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--David Attenborough Calls Out The 'Excesses' Of Capitalism In A World Facing Climate Change

Legendary nature broadcaster David Attenborough elaborated upon the current state of the world in the era of COVID-19 in a recent podcast with the BBC , emphasizing the importance of remaining in tune with nature .
The coronavirus pandemic is a serious “ disaster for all of us , ” but the isolation of lockdown has had the unexpected side effect of forcing people around the world into a less chaotic daily routine , Attenborough told Irish natural history presenter Liz Bonnin on the BBC Radio 5 Live podcast “ What Planet Are We On ?
” “ We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down to the station and getting on the Tube and bashing about , ” Attenborough said .
“ We ’ ve had time to sit down , and suddenly you realize that out there in the park , or ... out there in the garden , there ’ s a bird singing.
” Attenborough argued that this deeper appreciation for nature “ lifts the spirits to an extraordinary degree ” before he turned his argument toward the wealthy nations of the world , now all in the unusual position of facing the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living in these countries , Attenborough said , needs to be challenged in order to protect the Earth from the ongoing threat of climate change , which could potentially dwarf the COVID-19 pandemic .
“ The excesses that the capitalist system has brought us have got to be curbed somehow , ” he said .
“ That doesn ’ t mean to say that capitalism is dead , and I ’ m not an economist , and I don ’ t know .
But I believe that the nations of the world , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ realize that greed does not actually lead to joy.
” Reflecting on the lack of international collaboration at many climate change conferences he has attended , Attenborough added , “ There should be no dominant nation on this planet.
” “ I believe that there ’ s a time when we can begin to realize that the time for squabbling , the time for saying , ‘ I ’ ve got to get the best bargain for my nation , ’ is over , ” the broadcaster said .
“ We ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re living on the same planet , and some of us have been very lucky , and some of us have taken rather a bigger share of the glories and wealth of this planet than we deserve .
And there are many with much , much less .
Well , now we have to sort that out .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Legendary nature broadcaster David Attenborough elaborated upon the current state of the world in the era of COVID-19 in a recent podcast with the BBC, emphasizing the importance of remaining in tune with nature.
The coronavirus pandemic is a serious “disaster for all of us,” but the isolation of lockdown has had the unexpected side effect of forcing people around the world into a less chaotic daily routine, Attenborough told Irish natural history presenter Liz Bonnin on the BBC Radio 5 Live podcast “What Planet Are We On?”
Advertisement
“We’ve given up the busyness of getting down to the station and getting on the Tube and bashing about,” Attenborough said. “We’ve had time to sit down, and suddenly you realize that out there in the park, or ... out there in the garden, there’s a bird singing.”
Attenborough argued that this deeper appreciation for nature “lifts the spirits to an extraordinary degree” before he turned his argument toward the wealthy nations of the world, now all in the unusual position of facing the same global pandemic.
The wasteful standards of living in these countries, Attenborough said, needs to be challenged in order to protect the Earth from the ongoing threat of climate change, which could potentially dwarf the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The excesses that the capitalist system has brought us have got to be curbed somehow,” he said. “That doesn’t mean to say that capitalism is dead, and I’m not an economist, and I don’t know. But I believe that the nations of the world, ordinary people worldwide, are beginning to realize that greed does not actually lead to joy.”
Advertisement
Reflecting on the lack of international collaboration at many climate change conferences he has attended, Attenborough added, “There should be no dominant nation on this planet.”
“I believe that there’s a time when we can begin to realize that the time for squabbling, the time for saying, ‘I’ve got to get the best bargain for my nation,’ is over,” the broadcaster said. “We’ve all got to realize that we’re living on the same planet, and some of us have been very lucky, and some of us have taken rather a bigger share of the glories and wealth of this planet than we deserve. And there are many with much, much less. Well, now we have to sort that out.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--'Slow-Blinking' May Help Humans Bond With Cats, Study Says

A new study about cat-human communication has provided scientific evidence of what many cat lovers already suspected : “ Slow-blinking ” may help people bond with their feline companions .
“ Our results suggest that slow-blink sequences may function as a form of positive emotional communication between cats and humans , ” wrote scientists from the United Kingdom ’ s University of Sussex and University of Portsmouth in the study , published in the journal Scientific Reports on Monday .
Slow-blinking means making eye contact with a cat and then slowly closing and opening your eyes .
Cat behavior experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a human is a sign of trust and comfort .
Numerous experts have suggested for years that humans slow-blink at cats to communicate positive feelings and help make the cats more comfortable .
This new study suggests they were right .
“ It ’ s something that many cat owners had already suspected , so it ’ s exciting to have found evidence for it , ” study author Karen McComb of the University of Sussex said in a news release about the study .
To investigate the slow-blink phenomenon , researchers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involved 21 cats from 14 different households .
Researchers took video of the cats ’ responses when their owners slow-blinked at them in their homes .
They also took video of how the cats behaved when their owners were present in the room but not interacting with them .
The second experiment involved a different set of 24 cats , also from multiple households .
In this one , researchers videotaped how each cat responded to a slow-blink from one of the researchers ― a stranger to the cat ― versus a neutral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reason the neutral expression lacked direct eye contact is because there ’ s evidence cats interpret sustained direct eye contact as a threat . )
After each trial , the researcher extended a hand toward the cat .
The cats were more likely to slow-blink at their owners if the owners slow-blinked at them first .
They were also more likely to slow-blink at a stranger ( the researcher ) if the stranger slow-blinked first .
And when the researcher extended a hand toward the cats , the cats were more likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first .
It ’ s not totally clear why slow-blinking may have this effect .
Cat behaviorists have previously said that cats typically slow-blink to signal that they are content and relaxed .
Similarly , cats close their eyes to indicate that they feel safe with the present company .
“ Understanding positive ways in which cats and humans interact can enhance public understanding of cats , improve feline welfare , and tell us more about the socio-cognitive abilities of this understudied species , ” Humphrey said .
“ It ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have with cats , ” she said .
“ Try narrowing your eyes at them as you would in a relaxed smile , followed by closing your eyes for a couple of seconds .
You ’ ll find they respond in the same way themselves , and you can start a sort of conversation .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A new study about cat-human communication has provided scientific evidence of what many cat lovers already suspected: “Slow-blinking” may help people bond with their feline companions.
“Our results suggest that slow-blink sequences may function as a form of positive emotional communication between cats and humans,” wrote scientists from the United Kingdom’s University of Sussex and University of Portsmouth in the study, published in the journal Scientific Reports on Monday.
Advertisement
Slow-blinking means making eye contact with a cat and then slowly closing and opening your eyes. Cat behavior experts have long suggested that a cat slow-blinking at a human is a sign of trust and comfort.
A relaxed tabby cat sleeps on a blanket. Aleksandr Zubkov via Getty Images
“That’s not ‘I love you’ so much as ‘I trust you,’” cat behaviorist and “My Cat From Hell” host Jackson Galaxy told HuffPost last year. ”‘I trust that you’re not gonna kill me.’”
Numerous experts have suggested for years that humans slow-blink at cats to communicate positive feelings and help make the cats more comfortable. This new study suggests they were right.
Advertisement
“It’s something that many cat owners had already suspected, so it’s exciting to have found evidence for it,” study author Karen McComb of the University of Sussex said in a news release about the study.
To investigate the slow-blink phenomenon, researchers conducted two experiments. The first one involved 21 cats from 14 different households. Researchers took video of the cats’ responses when their owners slow-blinked at them in their homes. They also took video of how the cats behaved when their owners were present in the room but not interacting with them.
The second experiment involved a different set of 24 cats, also from multiple households. In this one, researchers videotaped how each cat responded to a slow-blink from one of the researchers ― a stranger to the cat ― versus a neutral expression without direct eye contact. (The reason the neutral expression lacked direct eye contact is because there’s evidence cats interpret sustained direct eye contact as a threat.) After each trial, the researcher extended a hand toward the cat.
The researchers found multiple things suggesting slow-blinking could be an effective way for humans to communicate with cats.
The cats were more likely to slow-blink at their owners if the owners slow-blinked at them first. They were also more likely to slow-blink at a stranger (the researcher) if the stranger slow-blinked first. And when the researcher extended a hand toward the cats, the cats were more likely to approach if the researcher had slow-blinked first.
Advertisement
It’s not totally clear why slow-blinking may have this effect. Cat behaviorists have previously said that cats typically slow-blink to signal that they are content and relaxed. Similarly, cats close their eyes to indicate that they feel safe with the present company.
Additionally, slow-blinking may simply help disrupt the unbroken stare that cats may see as threatening, lead study author Tasmin Humphrey said in the release.
She added that studying cat-human communication can help improve the experience of cats in environments such as animal shelters and veterinary clinics.
“Understanding positive ways in which cats and humans interact can enhance public understanding of cats, improve feline welfare, and tell us more about the socio-cognitive abilities of this understudied species,” Humphrey said.
McCombs suggested that people try out slow-blinking with their own pets or even with cats they meet casually.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--50 Richest Americans Have More Wealth Than Poorest 165 Million Combined

The 50 richest Americans increased their net worth this year to an amount nearly equal to the combined money and assets of the poorest 165 million Americans , which is half of the U.S. population , according to new data from the first half of the year collected by the Federal Reserve .
The rich got richer this year despite the COVID-19 pandemic — while people struggling financially found themselves in even more dire straits .
COVID-19 , which has killed more than 210,000 Americans , has disproportionally hurt people of color , older people , women and workers in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans — about 165 million people — hold just $ 2.08 trillion of net worth , or 1.9 % of all household wealth , according to Federal Reserve statistics .
More broadly , the top 1 % of Americans currently have a combined net worth of $ 34.2 trillion .
They hold 30.4 % of all U.S. household wealth and more than half of the equity in corporations and in mutual fund shares , according to the data .
The wealthy and corporations were already sailing along thanks to a massive tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump in 2017 .
As a result , the nation racked up a record deficit , which hit an all-time high of $ 3 trillion in the first 11 months of the current budget year .
“ Combined with the disproportionate effects of COVID on communities of color , and the overwhelming burden of child care during quarantine and distance learning , which has fallen mostly on women , the pandemic is further widening divides in wealth and economic mobility , ” Fed Chair Jerome Powell said in a speech earlier this month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Association for Business Economics .
It doesn ’ t look like fortunes for most Americans will improve soon .
“ A long period of unnecessarily slow progress could continue to exacerbate existing disparities in our economy , ” Powell warned .
The nation has been churning toward a historic economic gap for years .
The wealth gap between America ’ s richest and poorest families more than doubled between 1989 and 2016 .
U.S. income inequality in 2018 hit the highest level in half a century .
Powell warned last year that income @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenges in the nation over the next decade .
Income inequality is higher in the U.S. than in any other country of the G-7 nations .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The 50 richest Americans increased their net worth this year to an amount nearly equal to the combined money and assets of the poorest 165 million Americans, which is half of the U.S. population, according to new data from the first half of the year collected by the Federal Reserve.
The rich got richer this year despite the COVID-19 pandemic — while people struggling financially found themselves in even more dire straits. COVID-19, which has killed more than 210,000 Americans, has disproportionally hurt people of color, older people, women and workers in low-paying jobs.
Advertisement
The poorest 50% of Americans — about 165 million people — hold just $2.08 trillion of net worth, or 1.9% of all household wealth, according to Federal Reserve statistics.
The wealthy and corporations were already sailing along thanks to a massive tax cut from the administration of President Donald Trump in 2017. As a result, the nation racked up a record deficit, which hit an all-time high of $3 trillion in the first 11 months of the current budget year.
Advertisement
“Combined with the disproportionate effects of COVID on communities of color, and the overwhelming burden of child care during quarantine and distance learning, which has fallen mostly on women, the pandemic is further widening divides in wealth and economic mobility,” Fed Chair Jerome Powell said in a speech earlier this month at the annual meeting of the National Association for Business Economics.
It doesn’t look like fortunes for most Americans will improve soon. “A long period of unnecessarily slow progress could continue to exacerbate existing disparities in our economy,” Powell warned.
The nation has been churning toward a historic economic gap for years. The wealth gap between America’s richest and poorest families more than doubled between 1989 and 2016.
U.S. income inequality in 2018 hit the highest level in half a century. Powell warned last year that income inequality would be one of the biggest challenges in the nation over the next decade.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-10--COVID-19 Outbreak Kills Nearly 10,000 Minks On Utah Fur Farms

Two U.S. states — Wisconsin and Utah — are battling major COVID-19 outbreaks at mink farms , both of which experts believe stemmed from humans .
Nearly 10,000 minks have died from the virus in Utah , experts confirmed to Yahoo Life Friday , as well as several hundred in Wisconsin .
The outbreaks have occurred on the heels of a similar one this summer in the Netherlands , which forced one of the world ’ s leading exporters of mink to effectively shut down .
Scientists have described the COVID-19 epidemic among minks as spillover from humans or “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of how the virus initially spread ( from an animal to a human ) .
But although officials in both states say the risk to individuals working with the minks is low , an epidemiologist says that the easily transmissible virus could still spread the other direction .
Prior to the mink outbreaks , COVID-19 had only been identified in dogs , cats , lions and tigers .
But Dr. William Schaffner , an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University , says its presence in minks makes it clear that the animals have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a receptor that provides the “ entry point into the cells ” for the coronavirus .
“ Not everybody has it , and children have it less than older persons , but it seems that these mink have the appropriate one , ” says Schaffner .
As a result , he says , mink may be able to spread the virus back to humans .
“ If these animals are infected , they ’ re also shedding the virus , it ’ s a highly communicable virus , ” says Schaffner .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , but now it ’ s spreading among the mink and if it can do that — and you have these workers in close contact with the mink — they could get it back .
I don ’ t see why it couldn ’ t ping pong.
” Officials in the Netherlands have reported a few potential cases in which the virus traveled from minks back to humans , but according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , the overall risk of the virus traveling from animals to humans is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yahoo Life , Utah state veterinarian Dr. Dean Taylor says out of the nine facilities with COVID-19 outbreaks among minks , none have reported any mink-to-human transmission .
“ We ’ re always concerned about transmission because we don ’ t understand everything about the virus , ” says Taylor .
“ But what the research has shown here is that we can not document any transfer from mink to people .
So we still feel like that is extremely remote.
” Taylor pushes back on earlier reports that the mink ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any traces of the virus ” and then made into garments , saying that is “ not happening ” in Utah .
“ All nine [ facilities ] are still under strict quarantine by the state , so that prevents any mink from coming or going from those facilities , including mink product , ” says Taylor .
“ Nothing has left these farms.
” Michael Whelan , executive director of Fur Commission USA , echoes Taylor ’ s comments , saying that “ no animals or animal by-products will be leaving the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are leaning on the CDC to help them make a decision about what will happen to the fur .
“ We ’ re waiting for science to determine with certainty how long the virus is infectious on an inanimate host , ” he says .
PETA did not reply to Yahoo Life ’ s request for comment on the minks , nor did the U.S. Department of Agriculture , but for those concerned about how this may affect other farm animals , Taylor says very minimally .
“ I don ’ t think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about this .
I think the main producers understand that ... they are a susceptible species with a fairly high death loss , ” says Taylor .
“ But as far as surrounding areas , we don ’ t really feel like there is a tremendous risk .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Two U.S. states — Wisconsin and Utah — are battling major COVID-19 outbreaks at mink farms, both of which experts believe stemmed from humans. Nearly 10,000 minks have died from the virus in Utah, experts confirmed to Yahoo Life Friday, as well as several hundred in Wisconsin. The outbreaks have occurred on the heels of a similar one this summer in the Netherlands, which forced one of the world’s leading exporters of mink to effectively shut down.
Scientists have described the COVID-19 epidemic among minks as spillover from humans or “zoonosis in reverse,” the opposite of how the virus initially spread (from an animal to a human). But although officials in both states say the risk to individuals working with the minks is low, an epidemiologist says that the easily transmissible virus could still spread the other direction.
Advertisement
Two minks at a fur farm in northern Denmark in Oct. 2020. HENNING BAGGER/Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images
Prior to the mink outbreaks, COVID-19 had only been identified in dogs, cats, lions and tigers. But Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University, says its presence in minks makes it clear that the animals have what’s called an ACE2 protein, a receptor that provides the “entry point into the cells” for the coronavirus. “Not everybody has it, and children have it less than older persons, but it seems that these mink have the appropriate one,” says Schaffner.
As a result, he says, mink may be able to spread the virus back to humans. “If these animals are infected, they’re also shedding the virus, it’s a highly communicable virus,” says Schaffner. “The mink likely got it from people, but now it’s spreading among the mink and if it can do that — and you have these workers in close contact with the mink — they could get it back. I don’t see why it couldn’t ping pong.” Officials in the Netherlands have reported a few potential cases in which the virus traveled from minks back to humans, but according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the overall risk of the virus traveling from animals to humans is “low.”
In an interview with Yahoo Life, Utah state veterinarian Dr. Dean Taylor says out of the nine facilities with COVID-19 outbreaks among minks, none have reported any mink-to-human transmission. “We’re always concerned about transmission because we don’t understand everything about the virus,” says Taylor. “But what the research has shown here is that we cannot document any transfer from mink to people. So we still feel like that is extremely remote.”
Advertisement
Taylor pushes back on earlier reports that the mink’s fur would be “processed to remove any traces of the virus” and then made into garments, saying that is “not happening” in Utah. “All nine [facilities] are still under strict quarantine by the state, so that prevents any mink from coming or going from those facilities, including mink product,” says Taylor. “Nothing has left these farms.”
Michael Whelan, executive director of Fur Commission USA, echoes Taylor’s comments, saying that “no animals or animal by-products will be leaving the farms.” Whelan said he and others are leaning on the CDC to help them make a decision about what will happen to the fur. “We’re waiting for science to determine with certainty how long the virus is infectious on an inanimate host,” he says.
PETA did not reply to Yahoo Life’s request for comment on the minks, nor did the U.S. Department of Agriculture, but for those concerned about how this may affect other farm animals, Taylor says very minimally. “I don’t think people outside the farms need to worry about this. I think the main producers understand that ... they are a susceptible species with a fairly high death loss,” says Taylor. “But as far as surrounding areas, we don’t really feel like there is a tremendous risk.”
Read more from Yahoo Life