huffpost--2020-03-26--New Zealand Mosque Gunman Unexpectedly Pleads Guilty To Murder, Terrorism

The attacks targeting people praying at the mosques a year ago shocked the nation and prompted new laws banning the deadliest types of semi-automatic weapons .
It also prompted global changes to social media protocols after the gunman livestreamed his attack on Facebook , where it was viewed by hundreds of thousands of people .
The sudden turn in the case took survivors and relatives by surprise , and brought relief to people across New Zealand .
Many had feared Australian white supremacist Brenton Harrison Tarrant would try to use his trial as a platform to promote his views .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 74-page manifesto he published online shortly before the attacks .
Tarrant , 29 , pleaded guilty to 51 counts of murder , 40 counts of attempted murder and one count of terrorism at the Christchurch High Court .
He had previously pleaded not guilty to all charges and his trial had been scheduled to start in June .
She said that on the one hand , she had wanted to find out more details about what happened at the trial but on the other hand was feeling relieved about not having to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Temel Atacocugu , who survived being shot nine times during the attack at Al Noor , said he was surprised by the turn of events and hoped the judge would set an example at the sentencing by imposing the harshest punishment in the country ’ s history and helping ensure nothing like it would happen again .
The change in plea came at a hastily arranged court hearing at a time that New Zealand was beginning a four-week lockdown to try and combat the new coronavirus .
The lockdown meant Tarrant appeared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his jail cell in Auckland and only a handful of people were allowed inside the courtroom , including the imams from the two mosques that were attacked .
Mander said it was unfortunate the lockdown prevented victims and family members from being able to attend the hearing but the imams were helping to represent them .
He said he wanted to quickly move ahead with the hearing , especially with the COVID-19 response threatening delays to the court schedule .
Tarrant , who was wearing a gray prison sweater , showed little emotion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t indicate why he had changed his pleas , and his lawyer could not immediately be reached for comment .
New Zealand ’ s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern , who was praised around the world for her empathetic response to the Muslim community after the attacks , said it was “ deeply disappointing ” the victims didn ’ t get to attend the hearing .
But she said there was “ a certain sense of relief that the whole nation , but particularly our Muslim community , are being spared from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a platform.
” Tarrant moved to New Zealand in 2017 and kept a low profile in the university city of Dunedin .
He frequented a gym , practiced shooting at a rifle club range and built up an arsenal of weapons .
He didn ’ t appear to be employed , and said in some online posts that he ’ d inherited a significant amount of money when his father died .
Tarrant appeared to have a fascination with religious conflicts in Europe and the Balkans , and visited a number of sites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he committed the massacre .
After his attack at the second mosque , Tarrant was driving , possibly to carry out a shooting at a third mosque , when two police officers rammed his car off the road , dragged him out and arrested him .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — The man who committed the worst atrocity in New Zealand’s modern history when he slaughtered 51 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques unexpectedly pleaded guilty to all charges Thursday.
The attacks targeting people praying at the mosques a year ago shocked the nation and prompted new laws banning the deadliest types of semi-automatic weapons. It also prompted global changes to social media protocols after the gunman livestreamed his attack on Facebook, where it was viewed by hundreds of thousands of people.
Advertisement
One year after killing 51 worshipers at two Christchurch mosques, Australian white supremacist Brenton Harrison Tarrant has changed his plea to guilty. ASSOCIATED PRESS
The sudden turn in the case took survivors and relatives by surprise, and brought relief to people across New Zealand. Many had feared Australian white supremacist Brenton Harrison Tarrant would try to use his trial as a platform to promote his views. He’d outlined those views in a 74-page manifesto he published online shortly before the attacks.
Tarrant, 29, pleaded guilty to 51 counts of murder, 40 counts of attempted murder and one count of terrorism at the Christchurch High Court. He had previously pleaded not guilty to all charges and his trial had been scheduled to start in June.
Tarrant is the first person to be found guilty of terrorism in New Zealand under laws passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the U.S.
Advertisement
The change in plea came less than two weeks after New Zealanders commemorated those who died on the anniversary of the March 15, 2019, attacks.
“Honestly, I’m still trying to process what just happened,” said Aya Al-Umari, whose brother Hussein was killed in the attack on the Al Noor mosque. “I feel conflicted.”
She said that on the one hand, she had wanted to find out more details about what happened at the trial but on the other hand was feeling relieved about not having to face the trauma of sitting through it.
Temel Atacocugu, who survived being shot nine times during the attack at Al Noor, said he was surprised by the turn of events and hoped the judge would set an example at the sentencing by imposing the harshest punishment in the country’s history and helping ensure nothing like it would happen again.
“I’m happy that he has accepted that he is guilty,” Atacocugu said.
Advertisement
Judge Cameron Mander has not yet set a sentencing date. Tarrant faces life imprisonment, with the judge having some discretion in deciding the minimum number of years Tarrant must serve before becoming eligible for parole.
The change in plea came at a hastily arranged court hearing at a time that New Zealand was beginning a four-week lockdown to try and combat the new coronavirus. The lockdown meant Tarrant appeared in the court via video link from his jail cell in Auckland and only a handful of people were allowed inside the courtroom, including the imams from the two mosques that were attacked.
Mander said it was unfortunate the lockdown prevented victims and family members from being able to attend the hearing but the imams were helping to represent them. He said he wanted to quickly move ahead with the hearing, especially with the COVID-19 response threatening delays to the court schedule.
Tarrant, who was wearing a gray prison sweater, showed little emotion as he pleaded guilty. He didn’t indicate why he had changed his pleas, and his lawyer could not immediately be reached for comment.
New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who was praised around the world for her empathetic response to the Muslim community after the attacks, said it was “deeply disappointing” the victims didn’t get to attend the hearing.
Advertisement
But she said there was “a certain sense of relief that the whole nation, but particularly our Muslim community, are being spared from a trial that could have otherwise acted as a platform.”
Tarrant moved to New Zealand in 2017 and kept a low profile in the university city of Dunedin. He frequented a gym, practiced shooting at a rifle club range and built up an arsenal of weapons. He didn’t appear to be employed, and said in some online posts that he’d inherited a significant amount of money when his father died.


huffpost--2020-03-07--How Elizabeth Warren Lost

How Elizabeth Warren Lost

The New York Times , AOC and Pete Buttigieg

It was Memorial Day weekend, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren was telling a crowd in Ottumwa, Iowa, that the Democratic Party had a choice.
She said the party could nominate a Democratic candidate who would “scoop up all the money in the world and hold it there to run a bunch of television ads right at the end.”
Advertisement
“But that candidate sure isn’t going to help the team,” she said, referring to the Democratic Party.
There was another option, though: “You could spend the time right now building the grassroots operation. You can spend it on the face-to-face, person-to-person, neighbor-to-neighbor reaching out to people.”
She said such an operation would make a campaign resilient, able to weather nearly any storm the media or Republicans could throw at it.
“Every time the crazy news comes in, every time there’s some big dust-up that’s not true, we’ve got our grassroots operation already in place,” she told a crowd of 200 in the ballroom of the Hotel Ottumwa.
Advertisement
More than any other time, on that day in Ottumwa, Warren got explicit about her plan to win the Democratic nomination and the presidency by running what her aides often called a campaign they could be proud of.
That meant shunning traditional media consultants and pollsters, whose high fees had often drawn scorn from the leftists who doubted their effectiveness. It meant forgoing traditional fundraisers and big-money politics in favor of collecting millions of dollars from small donors online. It meant building a massive, unionized organizing operation to knock on doors and make personal connections with voters. It meant winning earned media by focusing on her policy plans, not on campaign tactics or the up-and-down of the polls.
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren speaks at a town hall in Ottumwa, Iowa. It was the most explicit Warren ever got regarding her plans to win the Democratic nomination. Rachel Mummey / Reuters
Parts of this plan were successful, even wildly so: Warren’s core promise to combat corruption connected with voters, and she steadily climbed in the polls throughout the summer, becoming one of the leading candidates for the Democratic nomination in the early fall and peaking in October. And her decision to stop attending big-money fundraisers didn’t harm her campaign’s ability to rake in cash. She raised more than any candidate except two billionaire self-funders and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who also forgoes high-dollar fundraising.
Some elements of her plan, however, ended up being more fashionable than effective, or simply ill-suited for a fast-moving, chaotic primary in which undecided voters were jumping from candidate to candidate, often at the last minute. The high costs of Warren’s field operation ate into the budget for paid media. Her campaign’s desire for discipline sometimes meant missing a chance to win a news cycle. And a lack of polling meant the campaign seemed to see-saw from message to message during the final portion of the campaign in search of something that would stick, with messages that sometimes drifted away from Warren’s core image as a fighter.
Advertisement
And, as a candidate who could have been designed in a lab to set off alarm bells about electability — she was a woman like Hillary Clinton, a liberal like George McGovern, an intellectual like Adlai Stevenson, from Massachusetts like Michael Dukakis — Warren and her campaign struggled to pivot from talking about her ideas to proving she was Democrats’ best hope to tame and defeat Trump.
“I think that both [the] campaign and [Warren] put together a plan and a strategy that in almost any other election cycle would’ve been a winning strategy,” said Doug Rubin, a top official on billionaire Tom Steyer’s presidential campaign who helped lead Warren’s Senate bid in 2012. “The X factor in all of this is Donald Trump. What they didn’t take into account is the intense, overwhelming desire of Democrats, above anything else, to beat Donald Trump in 2020.”
“Warren and her campaign struggled to pivot from talking about her ideas to proving she was Democrats’ best hope to tame and defeat Trump.”
Warren’s campaign confronted many variables far outside its control. Both a former vice president and the runner-up for the last presidential nomination joined a crowded field, instantly laying claim to large chunks of the vote. The electability obsession created even more barriers for a female candidate than usual, and Warren’s campaign rarely felt comfortable letting her go on the attack, fearing a sexist backlash. Her focus on plans meant she had to supply a level of policy detail the other candidates did not. A slump in the latter part of 2019 hurt her fundraising at a crucial point, and an impeachment trial froze the race and limited possibilities for a comeback.
This cycle, more than 20 campaigns tried to lift someone to the Democratic presidential nomination. All but one of them will lose, and Warren’s campaign was one of a handful that gave its candidate a true chance at victory. Interviews with more than a dozen Democratic operatives and elected officials nationally and in the early states, along with Warren allies and staffers, reveal how the senator’s most important plan came excruciatingly close to working, then heart-breakingly fell apart.
Advertisement
Putting Together The Plans
Elizabeth Warren’s performance at the She The People Forum in Houston in April was considered a key moment in her rise to the top tier of the race. Loren Elliott / Reuters
Warren was the first major candidate to enter the Democratic race, sending out a video to supporters and announcing an exploratory committee on New Year’s Eve 2018. For the first few months of the race, her campaign teetered. Her decision to release a DNA test aiming to prove she had Native American heritage went poorly, with her poll numbers sinking as Democrats wondered if she could bat away Trump’s “Pocahontas” attacks.
She quickly began building a large field staff in both Iowa and New Hampshire, hiring dozens of operatives and organizers in the first two states to vote. The cost of the campaign quickly grew, but her online fundraising did not, at least initially. Operatives chattered that she would run out of money and be forced to drop out in the summer.
Warren raised just $500,000 on the first day of her campaign, one-third of what California Sen. Kamala Harris brought in on the day of her campaign’s launch, and one-twelfth of what former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke raised. She raised just $6 million in the first quarter of the year while spending over $5 million.
Warren changed this by talking about policy, incessantly. Her plans ― to wipe out most (but not all) student debt, to impose a wealth tax on fortunes over $50 million, to break up major tech companies, to limit the influence of lobbyists ― drove the news cycle for months, leaving candidates with less of a policy focus grasping for ways to butt in.
Advertisement
Her team emphasized the plans were all based on a single idea. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Warren said in her launch video ― and those attacks were coming from corporations and the lobbyists who guaranteed their power in Washington.
The strategy worked. Voters, especially the college-educated, slowly moved to Warren, providing her with both their support in polling and their small-dollar donations. In the second quarter of the year, she banked $19 million, enough to expand her already expansive campaign. Slowly and steadily, she surpassed Harris, O’Rourke and even Sanders in polling, prompting her supporters to put turtle emojis into their Twitter handles. Warren drew jaw-dropping crowds in urban hubs ― 20,000 people in New York City, 12,000 in Minneapolis, and 5,000 in Austin.
“For the first 10 months, they ran the most disciplined communications operation I’ve ever seen,” said Rebecca Katz, a progressive Democratic strategist.
Warren’s position peaked with a late October Quinnipiac University survey showing her with the type of coalition necessary to win the nomination. She had 28% of the vote, seven percentage points ahead of former Vice President Joe Biden and 13 points ahead of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, her fellow progressive. She won a near-majority of very liberal voters, was even with Sanders with voters under the age of 35 and had double the support of any other candidate among white voters with a college degree, and even led among white voters without one. (One weakness, which would later severely restrict her hopes of a comeback: She was in second place among Black voters, 22 points behind Biden.)
Advertisement
The New York Times, AOC and Pete Buttigieg
Buttigieg’s attacks on Warren over health care at the October debate damaged her standing in the race. Andrew Yang did not play a role. Shannon Stapleton / Reuters
There is considerable debate about exactly how and precisely when things turned sour for Warren. But most of her allies and outside observers point to some combination of two people and one newspaper: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Pete Buttigieg and The New York Times.
Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, was competing with Warren for white college-educated voters, and smartly took advantage of Warren’s weaknesses. While she had released plans on relatively obscure topics like limiting the influence of military contractors on the Pentagon and revitalizing the diplomatic corps, she had been vague on the most important issue for both Democratic primary voters and general election voters: health care.
Warren had tried to split the baby on the issue, saying she preferred Sanders’ “Medicare for All” plan but was open to other ideas on health care. “I support a lot of plans,” she said after the debate in September, a position that directly contrasted the specificity of her ideas on seemingly every other topic.
“Your signature is to have a plan for everything, except this,” Buttigieg said on the debate stage in Westerville, Ohio, an attack echoed by Biden and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar.
Advertisement
Warren’s team had actually been working on a detailed health care plan since early in the summer but had been unable to reach a consensus on the best ideas. Warren adjusted and then readjusted in the weeks after, first releasing a detailed plan on how to pay for Medicare for All, then releasing a plan to focus on more popular health reforms first and push for Medicare for All later in her first term.
But Buttigieg and Biden, buoyed by extensive health insurance industry advertising in Iowa, managed to convince moderate voters a candidate who backed a Medicare for All plan that banned private insurance could not win. (After the attacks, public polling showed voters continued to trust Warren on health care issues but thought she was less likely to beat Trump.)
The same night, The Washington Post reported that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, an icon for younger progressives, was backing Sanders. Warren’s team had hoped to sway the 30-year-old Ocasio-Cortez, who had volunteered for Sanders in 2016, or at least persuade her to keep neutral. But Ocasio-Cortez, inspired by Sanders’ recovery from a heart attack, endorsed him at a massive rally in New York City the next weekend.
“There is considerable debate about exactly how and precisely when things turned sour for Warren. But most of her allies and outside observers point to some combination of two people and one newspaper: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Pete Buttigieg and The New York Times.”
Around the same time, Buttigieg and Sanders both began airing television ads in Iowa, which helped inflate their poll numbers even further, quickly creating a narrative that they were ascendent.
Advertisement
The Warren team, with much of its money tied up in a large staff and skeptical of the final impact of television ads months out from the election date, stuck to its plan and didn’t respond with ads of its own.
The combined effect was to eat away at the two key portions of Warren’s base: Buttigieg began pulling away white college-educated voters, while Sanders started consolidating the party’s left wing, especially among young voters.
A survey of college students conducted by the textbook rental company Chegg showed Warren’s support peaked Oct. 15 with 30% of the vote, just ahead of Sanders. By the time of the Iowa caucuses, Sanders was winning a majority.
A few weeks later, The Times released a poll showing Warren performing worse than Sanders or Biden in the three Midwestern states key to an Electoral College win over Trump. It didn’t matter that the results in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania were within the margin of error or that the result in Michigan was an outlier. The survey — and questions about Warren’s electability — dominated discussion on cable news and Twitter, two sources frequented by the highly informed, highly educated voters Warren did well with.
That meant the conversation was shifting to one of Warren’s least favorite topics: polls.
‘I Don’t Do Polls’
Elizabeth Warren speaks to reporters following a town hall in Keene, New Hampshire, in the run-up to the state’s primary. Warren spoke to reporters nearly every day she was on the campaign trail, but did not answer their questions about polls. Chip Somodevilla via Getty Images
Advertisement
Warren and her team avoided poll conversations like a single mention of crosstabs would give them coronavirus. This was meant to insulate them from having to discuss the up-and-down, day-to-day swings of a primary. They didn’t talk about polling when they were winning; they didn’t talk about polling when they were losing.
One of the few times Warren did talk about polls was to swear them off. On that Memorial Day weekend in Ottumwa, Warren proudly told the crowd she hadn’t conducted a single national survey since starting her presidential run.
“I don’t do polls. You want to know how many polls I did before I ran for president?” Warren, who had used a polling firm during her two runs for Senate, asked rhetorically. “You want to know how many polls I’ve done since I started running for president? I know what I believe in, what I’m going to fight for.”
Warren’s position was an odd one, especially for an academic who used data to determine what was wrong in the American economy and how to fix it. Politicians in both parties rarely actually use polls to determine their stances on issues. Instead, they use surveys to figure out the best way to pitch their policy preferences to the electorate, how to persuade voters, and where to invest their campaign’s time and money.
“She was saying the right stuff, and if you ran a poll, the polling would confirm that,” said Matt Canter, a pollster at Global Strategy Group who worked at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee when Warren first ran in 2012. “But polling would’ve helped answer a lot of the questions around her campaign, including why voters didn’t close ranks around her when she was driving the conversation.”
Advertisement
Instead of an outside polling firm, Warren had an eight-person in-house data and analytics team, some of whom had previously worked for prominent polling companies. And the campaign did conduct phone surveys ― just not through a polling firm. The surveys measured Warren’s favorability, standing in the race and the popularity of her various plans ― but only after those plans were released.
Still, the campaign sometimes seemed slow to react to bad political news. Even though Buttigieg’s health care onslaught against her began in October, it took her until December to actually fight back. She called on Buttigieg to release his bundlers, immediately putting him on the defensive about his donors.
The Electability Question
Warren’s team quickly recognized concerns about her ability to beat Trump and tried to address them early on, releasing a memo highlighting her triumph over GOP Sen. Scott Brown in May and working to weave arguments for her ability to beat Trump into her day-to-day message. But her campaign didn’t address the concerns in a broad way with paid media until a week before the Iowa caucuses, when they released a television ad featuring talking heads on MSNBC and CNN discussing the Trump campaign’s fear of running against Warren.
“He’s done everything he can for the wealthy and well-connected,” Warren said of Trump at the end of the ad. “I’m Elizabeth Warren and I approved this message because I’m going to beat him.”
Advertisement
That ad aired just 942 times on broadcast television in Iowa, according to a Democrat tracking media buys. Another ad, narrated by the author Roxanne Gay and contrasting Warren and Trump’s life stories, aired just 517 times.
Meanwhile, an ad about how Warren would refuse to hand ambassadorships over to wealthy donors aired more than 2,000 times. The ad, meant to highlight how EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland had enabled Trump’s corruption in the Ukraine scandal, baffled the other campaigns, which believed it raised issues far removed from voters’ daily lives. The Warren campaign, however, believed it was the only ad in the race that spoke to a news cycle dominated by talk of impeachment.
Many Democratic operatives think Warren needed a heavier focus on her biography, including her upbringing in Oklahoma and how anger at the treatment of American families drove her switch from academic to politician.
“She was one of the only candidates who hadn’t been running for president since they were in kindergarten, and she clearly came to this decision much more recently,” Canter said. “I think illuminating that decision, and what led up to it, would’ve been very compelling to voters.”
Advertisement
In general, Warren spent a far smaller portion of her budget on paid media than the other campaigns. Of her television spending, the campaign says more than half went toward highlighting her biography, and a fifth went toward pushing her corruption message. Just 1% went toward arguing she could defeat Trump.
And though her team was open about its skepticism toward television ads, it didn’t make up the gap with digital ads.
In the two-month run-up to Iowa, Warren spent $185,000 on digital ads in the state, according to a Bully Pulpit Interactive tracker, compared to $200,000 from Buttigieg and $430,000 from Sanders. In New Hampshire, she spent even less, just $80,000 against Buttigieg’s $115,000 and Sanders’ $151,000.
Though the Warren campaign insists it did not have to deviate from its Iowa plan, it blamed a six-week fundraising downturn following the October debate for restricting plans to spend more in the remaining early states and Super Tuesday. Before Warren’s donors responded to a last-second plea for funds before the New Year, her top aides were fearful she would raise just $17 million in the fourth quarter. (She ended up raising $21 million.)
And team Warren stuck to its approach of exclusively discussing the candidate’s plan and message, which contrasted sharply with the Biden and Sanders campaigns. Biden talked at nearly every event about how well-positioned he was in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and about how polls showed him defeating Trump. The Sanders campaign seemed obsessed with metrics ― number of donors, number of video views, polling ― proving how popular the Vermonter was.
Advertisement
While Warren’s team eventually highlighted the Trump campaign’s worries, it did little to promote the idea that the president feared Warren’s populism when the first reports on the topic popped up in July.
And when the chair of the Democratic Party in Michigan’s Macomb County ― arguably the quintessential swing county in American politics ― endorsed Warren less than two weeks before the caucuses, the campaign never even sent out a release about it.
“Many Democratic operatives think Warren needed a heavier focus on her biography, including her upbringing in Oklahoma and how anger at the treatment of American families drove her switch from academic to politician.”
The Warren campaign had planned to address the electability question once and for all with a rally in Madison, Wisconsin, in the run-up to the caucuses. Other campaigns had used similar visits to swing states to show they could generate the excitement needed to beat Trump, but Warren had mostly ignored the Blue Wall states in favor of visiting key Super Tuesday states like Texas and California.
But the impeachment trial intervened, consuming a majority of Warren’s time and forcing the campaign to abandon plans for the rally.
Advertisement
The campaign’s electability pitches would get more explicit — by the end, Warren would open her rallies by pledging to defeat Trump — but it was clear in the run-up to Iowa that she had not completed the sale.
“That’s the big elephant in the room,” said Patrick Peacock, a Davenport city council member who is Black and endorsed Warren a week before the caucuses. “I’m going to be honest with you: The question is whether or not white men will vote for her. Will white men cross over and vote for a white woman?”
Unity And Disunity
Former presidential candidate Julián Castro’s endorsement of Warren set off the campaign’s “unity candidate” push. Warren hoped but failed to secure the backing of Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, also a former candidate. Carlo Allegri / Reuters
The final weeks before Iowa saw Warren try a mishmash of messages in order to regain the footing she had lost. At one point in December, she delivered three different major campaign speeches in as many weeks, eventually settling on a pitch as a “unity candidate” who could bridge the divide between Sanders and Biden backers.
An endorsement from former candidate Julián Castro helped drive home the message, and Warren began playing up the fact that she had adopted ideas and hired staffers from the defeated campaigns of Harris, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and others.
Advertisement
Warren aides were confident they would eventually secure the endorsement of Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee to give the pitch additional heft. But Inslee, wary of looking like he had his eyes on a gig in the other Washington as he ran for reelection as governor, ultimately never offered it.
A portion of Warren allies disliked the “unity candidate” message, which they felt downplayed Warren’s history as a fighter who was willing to hold even her own party accountable.
And soon after, the campaign would be faced with a fight it swears it did not want. CNN reported that Sanders had told Warren in a private meeting late in 2018 that a woman could not win the presidency in 2020. The next night on the debate stage, Sanders denied saying it, and Warren confronted him afterward.
“I think you just called me a liar on national TV,” Warren told her ideological ally in a curt exchange picked up by the network’s microphones.
While operatives in both campaigns and unaligned progressives pushed to downplay the fight, tensions had been escalating for months before. Warren staffers eventually assembled a more than 40-page research document chronicling what they saw as unfair attacks on the senator from Sanders staffers and surrogates.
Advertisement
“I was told at the beginning of this whole undertaking that there are two lanes: a progressive lane that Bernie Sanders is the incumbent for and a moderate lane that Joe Biden is the incumbent for and there is no room for anyone else in this,” Warren said after the end of the campaign. “I thought it was possible that that wasn’t the case, that there was more room, and more room to run another kind of campaign. But evidently that wasn’t the case.”
The showdown between Sanders and Warren was one of the last stories to break through before the three-week impeachment trial began dominating the news cycle, leaving little chance for any campaign to change the narrative before voting began in Iowa.
Early Decisions and Late Deciders
A young supporter at the final event of Elizabeth Warren’s campaign, in Detroit on Super Tuesday. Brian Snyder / Reuters
In late January, the Warren campaign’s earliest decisions were finally put to the test. It had hired more than 1,000 staffers across 31 states, some of which aren’t scheduled to vote until mid-March, with 80% of the staffers dedicated to field organizing. Warren spent as much on payroll every five days as Klobuchar spent every month, according to FEC records. The campaign paid out biweekly, and with three paydays in January, needed to take out a line of credit at the end of the month.
The biggest operation was in Iowa, where polls showed Warren with a chance at victory.
But the plan had a problem. The point of field organizations is to identify committed supporters and bring them out to polls and caucus sites on Election Day. But a large portion of voters, especially the educated voters who had made up Warren’s base, were still undecided.
Advertisement
The entrance polls showed 36% of Iowa voters made up their minds in the final days of the election, compared to 16% in the 2016 race and 20% in the 2008 race.
“In a world where 50% of people are waffling on their decision until the day before an election, field organizations are less effective,” said Addisu Demissie, a Democratic operative who built a similarly large Iowa field operation as the campaign manager for New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker’s presidential bid.
The trend continued in New Hampshire, where 51% of primary voters decided in the final days.
Warren won 19% of the raw vote and finished third in Iowa, but struggled mightily in New Hampshire, turning in a middling debate performance and failing to net delegates.
Those two states were critical for Warren ― her campaign operations there were considered top-notch, and her brand of progressive politics was thought to be a good fit for both. And her struggles with voters of color meant she was likely to underperform in both Nevada and South Carolina, the next two states to vote.
“In a world where 50% of people are waffling on their decision until the day before an election, field organizations are less effective.” - Addisu Demissie, Democratic operative
Advertisement
Warren, a senator for a state that is more than 80% white, tried to reach out to voters of color by centering racial inequality in her plans and engaging activists, many of whom gushed about her to reporters with regularity. But it never translated to votes.
When Warren was at her peak, her campaign began discussing spending more time in South Carolina, wooing Black voters. But her standing in Iowa and New Hampshire grew worse, and the pivot never happened. It’s not clear it would’ve helped, considering Biden’s decades worth of ties to South Carolina.
“One campaign’s worth of outreach is not going to be able to overcome 40 years’ worth of relationships,” Demissie said. “Booker and Harris dealt with the same thing, even as African Americans.”
A brief ray of hope appeared in Las Vegas, where Warren essentially dismantled Michael Bloomberg and his $600 million campaign over the course of a two-hour debate. It also enabled her to aim more attacks at other candidates, with Warren strategists believing voters wouldn’t mind body blows to Klobuchar and Buttigieg as long as Bloomberg had a black eye at the end of the night. It energized Warren’s campaign and delighted her donors, helping her raise nearly $30 million in February.
“That was the final puzzle piece in terms of proving that she could take on Trump, and allowing people to really see what it would look like,” said Meredith Kelly, a Democratic strategist who had worked as communications director for Gillibrand’s campaign. “But it came too late.”
Advertisement
And so, after a disappointing Super Tuesday, Warren appeared before a swarm of cameras outside her home in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and ended her bid. Having ignored clarion calls to run for president in 2016 and insisted throughout the 2020 campaign she didn’t need to be president, she betrayed no regrets about her campaign’s tactics or strategy.
“I’m not sorry for one nickel I spent on field,” she told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Thursday night, mere hours after she left the race. “If anyone does the woulda, shoulda, coulda, I [would] probably spent less money on television advertising and put more money into field because field is the person-to-person. It is the part about rebuilding our democracy.”
Her field offices, Warren explained, are where volunteers would come in, could eventually learn and get entry-level staff jobs, or start talking to each other about local issues like education funding or the city council.
“How about we get together and we repair this little bit of democracy?” Warren said, imagining a conversation between two volunteers.
It seemed like the kind of thing she could be proud of.


huffpost--2020-03-06--14 Amazing Photos You Missed This Week

14 Amazing Photos You Missed This Week

We ’ re highlighting exceptional photos from around the world for the week of Feb. 29 to March 6 .
@ @ @ @ @ ABOVE : A couple wears face masks during the evening rush hour amid concerns about @ @ @ @ @ Kong on March 4 , 2020 .
( Credit : Vivek Prakash/AFP/Getty Images )

We’re highlighting exceptional photos from around the world for the week of Feb. 29 to March 6. Check them out below.
ABOVE: A couple wears face masks during the evening rush hour amid concerns about the coronavirus outbreak in Hong Kong on March 4, 2020. (Credit: Vivek Prakash/AFP/Getty Images)


huffpost--2020-03-07--Chinese Hotel Collapses While Being Used To Observe Coronavirus Contacts

BEIJING ( AP ) — A hotel used for medical observation of people who had contact with coronavirus patients collapsed in southeastern China on Saturday , trapping some 70 people , state media reported .
There were no immediate reports of deaths .
At least 23 people were rescued from the wreckage of the Xinjia Express Hotel in Quanzhou , a city in Fujian province , the Communist Party newspaper People ’ s Daily and other outlets reported .
The 80-room hotel had been converted by the city government for observation of people who had contact with virus patients , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The hotel collapsed at about 7:30 p.m. , news reports said , citing the city government .
Rescuers search for survivors in the rubble of a collapsed hotel in Quanzhou , in China 's eastern Fujian province on March 7 , 2020 .
- Around 70 people were trapped after the Xinjia Hotel collapsed on March 7 evening , officials said .
( Photo by STR / AFP ) / China OUT ( Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images ) Photos on news websites showed rescue workers with flashlights climbing over the debris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ front of the building .
The hotel opened in June 2018 , with rooms on the fourth to seventh floors of the building , the newspaper Beijing Youth Daily said .
An unidentified hotel employee cited by the Beijing Youth Daily said the owner carried out ” foundation-related construction ” before the disaster .
It gave no details .
China , where the virus first emerged in December , has confirmed more than 80,000 cases , by far the most in the world .
It reported 99 new cases on Saturday , its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since Jan. 20 .
The government also reported 28 new fatalities , raising the mainland ’ s death toll to 3,070 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
BEIJING (AP) — A hotel used for medical observation of people who had contact with coronavirus patients collapsed in southeastern China on Saturday, trapping some 70 people, state media reported. There were no immediate reports of deaths.
At least 23 people were rescued from the wreckage of the Xinjia Express Hotel in Quanzhou, a city in Fujian province, the Communist Party newspaper People’s Daily and other outlets reported.
Advertisement
The 80-room hotel had been converted by the city government for observation of people who had contact with virus patients, according to People’s Daily.
The hotel collapsed at about 7:30 p.m., news reports said, citing the city government.
Rescuers search for survivors in the rubble of a collapsed hotel in Quanzhou, in China's eastern Fujian province on March 7, 2020. - Around 70 people were trapped after the Xinjia Hotel collapsed on March 7 evening, officials said. (Photo by STR / AFP) / China OUT (Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images) STR via Getty Images
Photos on news websites showed rescue workers with flashlights climbing over the debris. Rubble was piled on cars in front of the building.
The hotel opened in June 2018, with rooms on the fourth to seventh floors of the building, the newspaper Beijing Youth Daily said.
Advertisement
An unidentified hotel employee cited by the Beijing Youth Daily said the owner carried out ”foundation-related construction” before the disaster. It gave no details.


huffpost--2020-03-06--About Half Of Working Americans Say They Went To Work Sick In The Last Year

Forty-seven percent of Americans who work part- or full-time say they ’ ve gone to work sick in the last year because they couldn ’ t take time off or because they felt they shouldn ’ t do so , according to the poll .
That could be a particular cause for concern now , with health officials urging sick Americans to stay home as a measure to prevent the spread of the coronavirus .
There is no federal paid sick leave law in the United States , though a few states and cities have their own mandatory minimums .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hardest : 70 % of the lowest paid workers in the U.S. do not have access to sick leave .
It ’ s a particularly troubling datapoint as the U.S. struggles to contain a communicative disease : Those low-income workers are more likely to work in service industries where they regularly come in contact with consumers .
“ When you ’ re talking about paid leave and who should stay home , it ’ s the ones who need it most that don ’ t have access to it , the ones showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , touching your bags , coming into everyday contact with your direct life , ” Kris Garcia , an airport worker in Denver , told The New York Times .
Workers with more stringent sick leave policies are far more likely to feel pressured to go to work while sick , the HuffPost/YouGov survey finds : 66 % of workers whose jobs offer five or fewer paid sick days say they ’ ve felt compelled to go into work while sick , compared to 36 % of those who have more generous policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ popular .
Three-quarters of Americans favor requiring companies to provide all full-time employees with paid sick days if they or an immediate family member gets sick , with just 11 % opposed .
The idea is supported by two-thirds of Republicans and more than eight in 10 Democrats .
Congressional Republicans have never cottoned on to the idea .
On Friday , House Democrats proposed an emergency paid sick leave law to deal with the coronavirus , but its chances of making it through the Republican-majority Senate are slim .
Even if Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of health care create another roadblock .
Twenty-seven percent of Americans say that , in the last year , they ’ ve avoided going to the doctor when they were ill because they couldn ’ t afford to do so .
There ’ s also the issue of even getting an appointment with a health care provider .
While 63 % of Americans say that last time they needed medical attention , they were able to get an appointment in three days or less , 8 % had to wait between four and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a week or more with 3 % reporting they were never able to get an appointment .
Once again , lower-income Americans are harder hit : 35 % of those in households making under $ 50,000 have put off a doctor ’ s visit for financial reasons , compared to 20 % of those in households making $ 100,000 or more .
Fifty-six percent in the lowest household income bracket were able to get medical attention within three days , compared to 77 % in the highest one .
Use the widget below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ HuffPost/YouGov survey , using the menu at the top to select questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroup : The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 interviews conducted between March 3 and 5 among U.S. adults , using a sample selected from YouGov ’ s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population .
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls .
You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov ’ s nationally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the polls ’ methodology is available here .
Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors .
YouGov ’ s reports include a model-based margin of error , which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling .
If these assumptions are wrong , the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate .
Click here for a more detailed explanation of the model-based margin of error .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Roughly half of working Americans say they’ve gone to work sick within the past 12 months, a new HuffPost/YouGov survey finds.
Forty-seven percent of Americans who work part- or full-time say they’ve gone to work sick in the last year because they couldn’t take time off or because they felt they shouldn’t do so, according to the poll. That could be a particular cause for concern now, with health officials urging sick Americans to stay home as a measure to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.
Advertisement
There is no federal paid sick leave law in the United States, though a few states and cities have their own mandatory minimums. This policy failing hits low-income workers the hardest: 70% of the lowest paid workers in the U.S. do not have access to sick leave.
It’s a particularly troubling datapoint as the U.S. struggles to contain a communicative disease: Those low-income workers are more likely to work in service industries where they regularly come in contact with consumers.
“When you’re talking about paid leave and who should stay home, it’s the ones who need it most that don’t have access to it, the ones showing up at work sick touching your food, touching your bags, coming into everyday contact with your direct life,” Kris Garcia, an airport worker in Denver, told The New York Times.
Workers with more stringent sick leave policies are far more likely to feel pressured to go to work while sick, the HuffPost/YouGov survey finds: 66% of workers whose jobs offer five or fewer paid sick days say they’ve felt compelled to go into work while sick, compared to 36% of those who have more generous policies.
Advertisement
Paid sick leave laws are extremely popular. Three-quarters of Americans favor requiring companies to provide all full-time employees with paid sick days if they or an immediate family member gets sick, with just 11% opposed. The idea is supported by two-thirds of Republicans and more than eight in 10 Democrats.
Congressional Republicans have never cottoned on to the idea. On Friday, House Democrats proposed an emergency paid sick leave law to deal with the coronavirus, but its chances of making it through the Republican-majority Senate are slim.
Even if Americans have sick leave, the high costs of health care create another roadblock. Twenty-seven percent of Americans say that, in the last year, they’ve avoided going to the doctor when they were ill because they couldn’t afford to do so.
There’s also the issue of even getting an appointment with a health care provider. While 63% of Americans say that last time they needed medical attention, they were able to get an appointment in three days or less, 8% had to wait between four and six days. And 10% waited a week or more with 3% reporting they were never able to get an appointment.
Once again, lower-income Americans are harder hit: 35% of those in households making under $50,000 have put off a doctor’s visit for financial reasons, compared to 20% of those in households making $100,000 or more. Fifty-six percent in the lowest household income bracket were able to get medical attention within three days, compared to 77% in the highest one.
Advertisement
Use the widget below to further explore the results of the HuffPost/YouGov survey, using the menu at the top to select questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroup:
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 interviews conducted between March 3 and 5 among U.S. adults, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology is available here.
Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors. YouGov’s reports include a model-based margin of error, which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling. If these assumptions are wrong, the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate. Click here for a more detailed explanation of the model-based margin of error.


huffpost--2020-03-07--As Americans Continue To Get Coronavirus, Trump Shows He Doesn't Really Care

“ It ’ s going to disappear , ” Trump said of the coronavirus last month .
“ One day it ’ s like a miracle , it will disappear.
” The virus , of course , has not just disappeared .
And Trump ’ s pick of Vice President Mike Pence to lead the administration ’ s response to the health crisis isn ’ t exactly instilling confidence in the American public .
Pence ’ s record on public health is best represented by the role he played in an HIV outbreak while he was governor of Indiana .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ office slashing the budgets of government agencies responsible for responding to the exact problem the country now faces .
Congress finally stepped in this week when the Senate approved an $ 8.3 billion emergency funding bill to combat the virus , a day after it passed the House .
But Trump seemed less impressed with the bipartisan passage and more impressed with television ratings .
“ As of the time I left the plane with you we had 240 cases , that ’ s at least what was on a very fine network @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t you love it ?
” he said to a Fox News reporter during his meeting with CDC officials .
“ That ’ s what I happened to be watching , and how was the show last night ?
Did it get good ratings by the way ?
” “ Oh , really , I heard it broke all ratings records , but maybe that ’ s wrong , ” Trump said .
Lives are on the line .
Americans are getting sick and some are dying .
And the president continues to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really care .

“I think the 3.4% is really a false number,” Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Wednesday. “Now, and this is just my hunch, and — but based on a lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this.”
In a meeting with health experts on Monday, Trump asked why doctors don’t just administer the flu vaccine to combat the virus.


huffpost--2020-03-07--Cruise Ship Circles Off California Coast After 21 Test Positive For Coronavirus

The Grand Princess was forbidden to dock in San Francisco amid evidence that the vessel had been the breeding ground for a cluster of more than 10 cases that resulted in at least one death after its previous voyage .
Meanwhile , Florida reported two coronavirus deaths — the first outside the West Coast .
Health officials said the people in their 70s died in Santa Rosa County in Florida ’ s Panhandle and in the Fort Myers area after traveling overseas .
Florida also raised the number of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 — the disease caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seven .
The U.S. death toll from the virus climbed to 16 , with all but three victims in Washington state .
The number of infections swelled to more than 200 , scattered across about half of the U.S. states .
Pennsylvania , Indiana , Minnesota and Nebraska have reported their first cases .
In California , state authorities were working with federal officials around-the-clock to bring the Grand Princess cruise ship to a non-commercial port over the weekend and test everyone for the virus .
There was no immediate word on where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the ship said Friday night that the captain has notified them that they were moving to a location 20 miles off the coast for easier delivery of supplies .
The captain said a guest required medical attention and might be airlifted out , the passengers said .
In this Thursday , March 5 , 2020 , photo , released by the California National Guard , Guardian Angels , a group of medical personnel with the 129th Rescue Wing , working alongside individuals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Grand Princess cruise ship off the coast of California .
While health officials said about 1,100 crew members will remain aboard , passengers could be disembarked to face quarantine , possibly at U.S. military bases or other sites .
That ’ s what happened to hundreds of passengers who were exposed to the virus on another cruise ship in January .
“ Those that will need to be quarantined will be quarantined .
Those who will require medical help will receive it , ” Vice President Michael Pence said Friday as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two passengers had tested positive for COVID-19 .
President Donald Trump , speaking Friday at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta , said he would prefer not to allow the passengers onto American soil but will defer to the recommendations of medical experts .
“ I don ’ t need to have the numbers ( of U.S. cases ) double because of one ship that wasn ’ t our fault , ” Trump said while touring the CDC in Atlanta .
“ And it wasn ’ t the fault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Okay ?
It wasn ’ t their fault either .
And they are mostly American , so I can live either way with it.
” Passengers aboard the Grand Princess remained holed up in their rooms as they awaited word about the fate of the ship .
Some said ship officials only informed them of the confirmed coronavirus cases after they first learned about it from news reports .
The ship was heading from Hawaii to San Francisco when it was held off the California coast Wednesday so 46 people with possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thursday , a military helicopter crew lowered test kits onto the 951-foot ( 290-meter ) ship by rope and later flew them for analysis at a state lab .
Health officials undertook the testing after reporting that a 71-year-old man who had been on a February voyage of the same ship to Mexico contracted the virus and died this week at a hospital in Placer County in Northern California .
Others who were on that voyage also have tested positive in Northern California , Minnesota , Illinois , Hawaii , Utah and Canada @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was self-isolating at home in Nevada , health officials there said .
Another Princess ship , the Diamond Princess , was quarantined for two weeks in Yokohama , Japan , last month because of the virus .
Ultimately , about 700 of the 3,700 people aboard became infected in what experts pronounced a public-health failure , with the vessel essentially becoming a floating germ factory .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Thousands of people were confined Saturday to a cruise ship circling in international waters off the San Francisco Bay Area, after 21 passengers and crew members tested positive for the new coronavirus.
The Grand Princess was forbidden to dock in San Francisco amid evidence that the vessel had been the breeding ground for a cluster of more than 10 cases that resulted in at least one death after its previous voyage.
Advertisement
In this image from video, provided by the California National Guard, a helicopter carrying airmen with the 129th Rescue Wing flies over the Grand Princess cruise ship off the coast of California Thursday, March 5, 2020. (California National Guard via AP
Meanwhile, Florida reported two coronavirus deaths — the first outside the West Coast. Health officials said the people in their 70s died in Santa Rosa County in Florida’s Panhandle and in the Fort Myers area after traveling overseas. Florida also raised the number of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 — the disease caused by the coronavirus — from four to seven.
The U.S. death toll from the virus climbed to 16, with all but three victims in Washington state. The number of infections swelled to more than 200, scattered across about half of the U.S. states. Pennsylvania, Indiana, Minnesota and Nebraska have reported their first cases.
In California, state authorities were working with federal officials around-the-clock to bring the Grand Princess cruise ship to a non-commercial port over the weekend and test everyone for the virus. There was no immediate word on where the vessel will dock.
Advertisement
Two passengers on the ship said Friday night that the captain has notified them that they were moving to a location 20 miles off the coast for easier delivery of supplies. The captain said a guest required medical attention and might be airlifted out, the passengers said.
In this Thursday, March 5, 2020, photo, released by the California National Guard, Guardian Angels, a group of medical personnel with the 129th Rescue Wing, working alongside individuals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, don protective equipment after delivering virus testing kits to the Grand Princess cruise ship off the coast of California. Chief Master Sgt. Seth Zweben/California National Guard via AP
While health officials said about 1,100 crew members will remain aboard, passengers could be disembarked to face quarantine, possibly at U.S. military bases or other sites. That’s what happened to hundreds of passengers who were exposed to the virus on another cruise ship in January.
“Those that will need to be quarantined will be quarantined. Those who will require medical help will receive it,” Vice President Michael Pence said Friday as he announced that 19 crew members and two passengers had tested positive for COVID-19.
President Donald Trump, speaking Friday at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said he would prefer not to allow the passengers onto American soil but will defer to the recommendations of medical experts.
Advertisement
“They would like to have the people come off. I’d rather have the people stay but ... I told them to make the final decision,” the president said.
“I don’t need to have the numbers (of U.S. cases) double because of one ship that wasn’t our fault,” Trump said while touring the CDC in Atlanta. “And it wasn’t the fault of the people on the ship either. Okay? It wasn’t their fault either. And they are mostly American, so I can live either way with it.”
Passengers aboard the Grand Princess remained holed up in their rooms as they awaited word about the fate of the ship. Some said ship officials only informed them of the confirmed coronavirus cases after they first learned about it from news reports.
Steven Smith and his wife, Michele, of Paradise, California, went on the cruise to celebrate their wedding anniversary.
The Smiths said they were a bit worried but felt safe in their room, which they had left just once since Thursday to video chat with their children.
Advertisement
Crew members wearing masks and gloves delivered trays with their food in covered plates and left them outside their door.
To pass the time they have been watching television, reading and looking out the window.
“Thank God, we have a window!” Steven said.
The ship was heading from Hawaii to San Francisco when it was held off the California coast Wednesday so 46 people with possible coronavirus symptoms could be tested. On Thursday, a military helicopter crew lowered test kits onto the 951-foot (290-meter) ship by rope and later flew them for analysis at a state lab.
Health officials undertook the testing after reporting that a 71-year-old man who had been on a February voyage of the same ship to Mexico contracted the virus and died this week at a hospital in Placer County in Northern California. Others who were on that voyage also have tested positive in Northern California, Minnesota, Illinois, Hawaii, Utah and Canada. A “presumed positive” patient was self-isolating at home in Nevada, health officials there said.
Health officials confirmed another case in California on Saturday involving a Madera County resident who developed symptons after returning from a Princess cruise.
Some passengers who had been on the Mexico trip stayed aboard for the current voyage — increasing crew members’ exposure to the virus.
Advertisement
Another Princess ship, the Diamond Princess, was quarantined for two weeks in Yokohama, Japan, last month because of the virus. Ultimately, about 700 of the 3,700 people aboard became infected in what experts pronounced a public-health failure, with the vessel essentially becoming a floating germ factory.
Hundreds of Americans aboard that ship were flown to military bases in California and other states for two-week quarantines. Some later were hospitalized with symptoms.
An epidemiologist who studies the spread of virus particles said the recirculated air from a cruise ship’s ventilation system, plus the close quarters and communal settings, make passengers and crew vulnerable to infectious diseases.
“They’re not designed as quarantine facilities, to put it mildly,” said Don Milton of the University of Maryland.
Worldwide, the virus has infected more than 100,000 people and killed over 3,400, the vast majority of them in China. Most cases have been mild, and more than half of those infected have recovered.
Advertisement
___
A previous version of this story incorrectly reported President Trump made his comments about the cruise ship in an interview with Fox News. He said it during a tour of the CDC in Atlanta.
___
Associated Press writers Janie Har and Daisy Nguyen in San Francisco; Gene Johnson, Martha Bellisle and Carla K. Johnson in Seattle; Adriana Gomez Licon in Miami ; Rachel La Corte in Olympia, Washington; and AP researcher Monika Mathur in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.
___
The Associated Press receives support for health and science coverage from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
___


huffpost--2020-03-07--New York State Coronavirus Cases Jump to 76, Gov. Cuomo Declares State Of Emergency

New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo declared a state of emergency on Saturday as the number of novel coronavirus cases surge across the US .
Twenty more people in New York have tested positive for coronavirus , Cuomo said Saturday , bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the state to 76 .
Cuomo said there are 11 confirmed cases in New York City , 57 in Westchester County , two in Rockland County , four in Nassau County , and two in Saratoga County .
Officials have reported 312 cases of coronavirus and 17 deaths across the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first death on the East Coast on Friday and a number of new cases along with Georgia on Saturday .
Meanwhile , 21 people on board the Grand Princess , a cruise ship docked off the coast of California , have tested positive for the virus .
In New York , according to The New York Times , a taxi or ride-hailing driver tested positive , resulting in more than 40 doctors and others at the hospital treating him to go into self-quarantine .
Also on Saturday , Amtrak canceled its nonstop service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because of a lack of demand .
The company said it would cancel service until May 26 and said in a statement , “ We are making temporary adjustments to our schedule , such as removing train cars or canceling trains when there is a convenient alternative with a similar schedule that will have minimal impact to customers.
” The Trump administration , meanwhile , is facing intense scrutiny over its response to the coronavirus outbreak .
President Donald Trump has largely downplayed the severity of the outbreak and placed officials with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health crises or infectious diseases in charge of spearheading the White House ’ s response .
On Friday , the president drew sharp backlash when he told reporters that although scientific and medical experts had urged him to bring infected Americans off the cruise ship , he didn ’ t want to do so because it would cause the number of reported cases to go up and it “ wasn ’ t our fault .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared a state of emergency on Saturday as the number of novel coronavirus cases surge across the US.
Twenty more people in New York have tested positive for coronavirus, officials said Saturday, bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the state to 76.
Cuomo said there are 11 confirmed cases in New York City, 57 in Westchester County, two in Rockland County, four in Nassau County, and two in Saratoga County.
The total number of confirmed cases across the US is 312, and there have been 17 deaths as of Saturday.
Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared a state of emergency on Saturday as the number of novel coronavirus cases surge across the US.
Advertisement
Twenty more people in New York have tested positive for coronavirus, Cuomo said Saturday, bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the state to 76.
Cuomo said there are 11 confirmed cases in New York City, 57 in Westchester County, two in Rockland County, four in Nassau County, and two in Saratoga County.
This is what a declaration of emergency means, per @NYGovCuomo office: pic.twitter.com/sBRMwyt8fI — Linda B. Rosenthal (@LindaBRosenthal) March 7, 2020
Officials have reported 312 cases of coronavirus and 17 deaths across the US as of Saturday. Florida reported the first death on the East Coast on Friday and a number of new cases along with Georgia on Saturday. Meanwhile, 21 people on board the Grand Princess, a cruise ship docked off the coast of California, have tested positive for the virus.
Advertisement
In New York, according to The New York Times, a taxi or ride-hailing driver tested positive, resulting in more than 40 doctors and others at the hospital treating him to go into self-quarantine.
Also on Saturday, Amtrak canceled its nonstop service between New York and Washington, DC, because of a lack of demand.
The company said it would cancel service until May 26 and said in a statement, “We are making temporary adjustments to our schedule, such as removing train cars or canceling trains when there is a convenient alternative with a similar schedule that will have minimal impact to customers.”
The Trump administration, meanwhile, is facing intense scrutiny over its response to the coronavirus outbreak.
President Donald Trump has largely downplayed the severity of the outbreak and placed officials with little to no background in managing public health crises or infectious diseases in charge of spearheading the White House’s response.
Advertisement


huffpost--2020-05-23--Kayleigh McEnany Scorched After Demeaning Journalists For 'Desperately' Opposing Church Openings

“ I object to that , ” Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason countered .
“ I go to church .
I ’ m dying to go back to church.
” What reporters want to know , he emphasized : “ Is it safe.
” The confrontation occurred after President Donald Trump demand that churches and other houses of worship open immediately amid the COVID-19 crisis .
He threatened to override governors who ignore him out of concern for health and safety — even though most legal experts say he has no authority to do so .
McEnany was first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about Trump ’ s legal authority to second-guess governors .
“ What specific provision of federal law allows the president to override a governor ’ s stance ?
” he asked .
McEnany dodged the question , answering : “ The president will strongly encourage every governor to allow their churches to reopen.
” ( At another point , she referred to the situation as “ hypothetical.
” ) Then she added : “ Boy , it ’ s interesting to be in a room that desperately wants to see these churches and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The question we are asking you and would have liked to have asked the president ” — who left without answering any questions after his announcement — “ is : Is it safe ?
” Mason said .
“ Jeff , it is safe to reopen your churches if you do so in accordance with the guidelines ” issued by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , McEnany declared .
In fact , the revised CDC guidelines on reopening houses of worship do not say it ’ s “ safe ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommends certain steps to take to decrease the risk of spreading the coronavirus in such a gathering .
The CDC issued a report Friday that detailed a COVID-19 infection rate of more than 30 % among members of a rural Arkansas church in March that resulted in four deaths .
Mason also emphasized to McEnany that he and his colleagues celebrate the First Amendment right to freedom of religion , and their questions don ’ t concern prohibiting people from praying but instead addressed safety .
In addition to the Arkansas case , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignored health and safety regulations in various states to reopen , triggering new COVID-19 cases and deaths .
Outbreaks not only occur among church members but in surrounding communities as congregants return to their homes , their jobs and stores .
CNN ’ s Jack Tapper bashed McEnany ’ s comment as “ such a hideous and inappropriate thing to say .
And just wrong , ” he added in a tweet .
“ Many journalists are people of faith .
It ’ s also our job to ask if it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to churches and other houses of worship.
” This is such a hideous and inappropriate thing to say .
And just wrong .
Many journalists are people of faith .
It ’ s also our job to ask if it ’ s *safe* for people to go back to churches and other houses of worship .
https : //t.co/YCdjCSM5Cg — Jake Tapper ( @ jaketapper ) May 22 , 2020 I would love to get back to my church and enjoy that fellowship , but it may do more harm to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus .
As my pastor says , the building is closed , but the church is open .
— Alex Keown ( @ alexkeown ) May 22 , 2020

A frustrated reporter shot back Friday at White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany after she berated “all journalists” for being “desperately” opposed to reopening houses of worship.
She seemed to be implying that reporters are anti-religion.
“I object to that,” Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason countered. “I go to church. I’m dying to go back to church.” What reporters want to know, he emphasized: “Is it safe.”
Advertisement
The confrontation occurred after President Donald Trump demand that churches and other houses of worship open immediately amid the COVID-19 crisis. He threatened to override governors who ignore him out of concern for health and safety — even though most legal experts say he has no authority to do so.
McEnany was first pressed by CBS News’ Ben Tracy about Trump’s legal authority to second-guess governors. “What specific provision of federal law allows the president to override a governor’s stance?” he asked.
McEnany dodged the question, answering: “The president will strongly encourage every governor to allow their churches to reopen.” (At another point, she referred to the situation as “hypothetical.”)
Then she added: “Boy, it’s interesting to be in a room that desperately wants to see these churches and houses of worship stay closed.”
Advertisement
That’s when Mason unloaded.
"Kayleigh, I object to that. I go to church. I'm dying to go back to church" -- @jeffmason1 takes umbrage after McEnany suggests that reporters don't want churches to reopen because they have something against religion pic.twitter.com/uEJQDgcApN — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 22, 2020
“The question we are asking you and would have liked to have asked the president” — who left without answering any questions after his announcement — “is: Is it safe?” Mason said.
“Jeff, it is safe to reopen your churches if you do so in accordance with the guidelines” issued by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, McEnany declared.
In fact, the revised CDC guidelines on reopening houses of worship do not say it’s “safe” to return to holding services. It recommends certain steps to take to decrease the risk of spreading the coronavirus in such a gathering.
The CDC issued a report Friday that detailed a COVID-19 infection rate of more than 30% among members of a rural Arkansas church in March that resulted in four deaths.
Advertisement
Mason also emphasized to McEnany that he and his colleagues celebrate the First Amendment right to freedom of religion, and their questions don’t concern prohibiting people from praying but instead addressed safety.
In addition to the Arkansas case, a number of houses of worship have ignored health and safety regulations in various states to reopen, triggering new COVID-19 cases and deaths. Outbreaks not only occur among church members but in surrounding communities as congregants return to their homes, their jobs and stores.
Sources told Politico that Trump demanded that houses of worship reopen because of slipping poll numbers among white evangelicals and white Catholics, who had been crucial backers.
CNN’s Jack Tapper bashed McEnany’s comment as “such a hideous and inappropriate thing to say. And just wrong,” he added in a tweet. “Many journalists are people of faith. It’s also our job to ask if it’s ‘safe’ for people to go back to churches and other houses of worship.”
This is such a hideous and inappropriate thing to say. And just wrong. Many journalists are people of faith. It’s also our job to ask if it’s *safe* for people to go back to churches and other houses of worship. https://t.co/YCdjCSM5Cg — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 22, 2020
Advertisement
I would love to get back to my church and enjoy that fellowship, but it may do more harm to the church body by potentially spreading a deadly virus. As my pastor says, the building is closed, but the church is open. — Alex Keown (@alexkeown) May 22, 2020
Since @PressSec want to make religion an issue, reporters should ask trump to recite common prayers
Who thinks he could even get “Hail Mary” right without prompting?? — Bob (@bobpi31415) May 22, 2020
A HuffPost Guide To Coronavirus


huffpost--2020-05-23--Jenna Bush Hager Pays Emotional Tribute To White House Butler Who Died Of Coronavirus

Jenna Bush Hager paid an emotional and heartfelt tribute to former White House butler Wilson Roosevelt Jerman , who died last weekend , describing him as “ the loveliest ” person who made the official residence feel like a real home .
Jerman died at the age of 91 after contracting the coronavirus .
He served 11 presidents , from Dwight Eisenhower to Barack Obama , during his 55-year career at the White House .
He retired in 2012 .
Bush Hager , the daughter of former President George W. Bush , reflected on Jerman ’ s impact on her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hoda Kotb on Thursday ’ s episode .
“ He was the loveliest .
I think ‘ lovely ’ is a word that can kind of be overused .
But he was always smiling , ” she said .
“ You know , it ’ s interesting because people will say , ‘ Gosh , how was the White House ?
Did it feel like home ?
’ And the reason why it felt like home was because of people like him.
” Bush Hager recalled telling former first lady Michelle Obama , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that the staff would become part of their family .
At the funeral of another butler whom she called “ Smiley , ” Bush Hager said Obama approached her and said she now knew what she meant .
“ Smiley made my girls feel like this place was a home , ’ ” Jenna remembered Obama telling her .
“ And Mr. Jerman did that in tenfold .
We loved him .
He was beloved by my family , and he will be so missed.
” Check out the interview here :

Jenna Bush Hager paid an emotional and heartfelt tribute to former White House butler Wilson Roosevelt Jerman, who died last weekend, describing him as “the loveliest” person who made the official residence feel like a real home.
Jerman died at the age of 91 after contracting the coronavirus. He served 11 presidents, from Dwight Eisenhower to Barack Obama, during his 55-year career at the White House. He retired in 2012.
Bush Hager, the daughter of former President George W. Bush, reflected on Jerman’s impact on her family to “Today” show co-host Hoda Kotb on Thursday’s episode.
“He was the loveliest. I think ‘lovely’ is a word that can kind of be overused. But he was always smiling,” she said. “You know, it’s interesting because people will say, ‘Gosh, how was the White House? Did it feel like home?’ And the reason why it felt like home was because of people like him.”
Bush Hager recalled telling former first lady Michelle Obama, when showing her around the White House, that the staff would become part of their family. At the funeral of another butler whom she called “Smiley,” Bush Hager said Obama approached her and said she now knew what she meant.
“Smiley made my girls feel like this place was a home,’” Jenna remembered Obama telling her. “And Mr. Jerman did that in tenfold. We loved him. He was beloved by my family, and he will be so missed.”
Check out the interview here:


huffpost--2020-05-23--I'm An Adult Who Is Constantly Mistaken For A 12-Year-Old. This Is What My Life Is Like.

I have always been small compared to my peers .
As a child , I was consistently one of the shortest in my class , lagging behind the others when we ran laps in gym .
I would get asked if I was one or two years younger than my age , which irritated me but only to a point .
On good days , I ’ d imagine myself as Cinderella due to my uncommonly small shoe size .
As far as I know , I have no growth hormone deficiency or underlying condition other than being petite .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of genetic markers that signal youth : a round face , slight bone structure , minimal chest definition , and wide eyes .
These are all features I can ’ t change .
I also have relatives on both sides who hover around the 5-foot mark .
My mother , too , is narrow in frame , and early in her marriage she was often mistaken for my father ’ s daughter .
Getting IDed is a matter of course for me : “ That ’ s really your age ?
Are you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IDed all the time !
” I ’ ve taken the advice of loved ones ― and nosy strangers ― and tried responding to comments like these with humor , but the people asking the questions have merely looked confused .
I have attempted to improve my confidence and posture with little effect ; it ’ s hard to stand tall when I have to look up to speak to everyone , no matter how straight my spine .
“ You ’ re so lucky , ” people tell me as they roll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IDed or mistaken for a preteen .
I want to tell them that they ’ d change their minds if they were the ones who had heard infantilizing remarks for over three decades .
Would they enjoy repeatedly being mistaken for a date ’ s child or asked if they were old enough to sit in an airplane ’ s exit row ?
( At least the minimum age for that is 15 . )
While pursuing my master ’ s degree , I went to my brother ’ s Christmas concert .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and five years my junior ; my family moved to a new town when I started university , so his teachers didn ’ t know me .
“ Are you starting junior high next year ?
” they asked when they were introduced to his “ little ” sister .
Situations like that one make me want to ask people who insist that a youthful appearance is a gift : Would you appreciate having your educational efforts and experience reduced or erased with a glance ?
Maybe they would ― but I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it feels more embarrassing to go out in public .
My shoulders tense in anticipation of the next remark someone might make .
I have grown to divide the world into spaces of competence ― the ones where I am known and respected , and public encounters , where people see only my body and where a comment or misperception could occur at any time .
Work falls into the former category for me now .
In earlier years , as a camp counselor , teacher , or professor , the pitfalls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ job .
I would often hear , “ How old are you ?
” or “ Are you a student ?
” I started shoehorning in phrases marking my age whenever I could .
My current editorial position affords me some peace .
Professionals respond to my emails like any colleague ’ s , and I am grateful they can ’ t see my face .
I first dated in earnest via websites that prominently list a user ’ s age , thereby avoiding misperceptions of me from the get-go , and I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online .
My written eloquence has garnered me much of my professional and romantic success , but words desert me when yet another stranger assumes that I ’ m too young to interpret a question about my age to be rude .
White hairs peek from my temples and pepper my eyebrows , but no one notices ; people are too distracted by my body ’ s small scale to see the details .
Adulthood has brought another unwelcome factor for me : body shaming .
This is something I share with other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t look like most of them .
I ’ ve been accused of having an eating disorder and my clothing has snidely been referred to as “ doll clothes.
” Others refuse to believe that I hear the things I hear , or tell me these comments shouldn ’ t bother me because “ of course you look 12.
” I may look young , but I ’ m old enough to recognize that these comments are neither helpful nor constructive .
Many of us are culturally conditioned to feel insecure about our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make derogatory comments about how other people look .
Sometimes I look in the mirror and have trouble taking myself seriously or connecting the voice inside my head with the elfin creature looking back at me .
From a physical accessibility standpoint , it ’ s uncomfortable to move through a world where my clothing choices are limited to a fraction of stores and my legs dangle above the floor in most seats .
Despite insecurities and challenges , however , I don ’ t believe my body is inherently wrong .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ responded , I would be happier in my skin .
I suspect this is true for many others as well .
I ’ ve shed more tears over my “ first world problem ” than I ’ d like to admit .
Conversely , I understand that my size affords certain privileges .
I am virtually immune to catcalls and some manifestations of sexism ( comments like , “ When are you going to have children ?
Your biological clock must be ticking !
” ) , and I do not tend to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move .
I am fortunate not to deal with fat shaming or worrying that I might be too big to fit anywhere or for anything .
I have an easier time weaving my way through a crowd than most people .
Fortunately , I have found a few hacks to help mitigate mistaken public perceptions .
Dressing in business clothes while traveling , wearing massive platform heels when an occasion permits , relying on tailored items , darker colors , bold lipstick , and keeping my hair short have all , at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But if I drop one of these shields , I find they resume .
While many of my peers can get away with wearing a hoodie , it turns me into a juvenile hobbit .
I ’ d love to be able to dress comfortably and remain free from judgment , but I celebrate the little things , like when a guide on an architecture tour I took last year called me a “ lady.
” The COVID-19 pandemic has also intensified my sense of public peace .
Social life has moved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asks my age , and when I am out in the world , customer service people are more concerned with safety than small talk .
It seems in a world where anyone might be capable of infecting someone else , public remarks on each other ’ s bodies have dwindled for a time .
Ironically , while a respiratory illness floats around the globe , I breathe more easily .
My physical concerns are focused on sanitation , eating well , and exercising ― keeping myself healthy in the ways that I can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been , I hope that perhaps the changes in public etiquette that I have experienced will continue into the future — that maybe the temporary habit of staying six feet apart from one another will lessen people ’ s tendencies to judge each other to their face .
Our bodies are going through a lot right now , and I am seeing signs that we are beginning to realize just how interconnected we are and how dependent our welfare is on each other .
Those of us who live through the pandemic will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and resilience , and the image we see in the mirror seems trivial in comparison to that .
Hopefully , we can learn from this unprecedented time and the challenges it has brought , and as we continue to press forward and face whatever uncertainties lie ahead , maybe we ’ ll recognize that how we look pales in comparison to what we do and how we treat each other .

A photo of the author taken on recent vacation. Courtesy of Melanie Bell
I was at the airport, waiting for a TSA full-body scan, when the woman managing the line asked me, “Are you old enough to go in the scanner?”
I stared at her face and wished I had the luxury to be surprised by her question. I was 30 years old. Full-body scans are a requirement for everyone once they’ve turned 12.
Advertisement
I have always been small compared to my peers. As a child, I was consistently one of the shortest in my class, lagging behind the others when we ran laps in gym. I would get asked if I was one or two years younger than my age, which irritated me but only to a point. On good days, I’d imagine myself as Cinderella due to my uncommonly small shoe size.
Once I became older, the perceived gap increased dramatically. My friends filled out while I remained spindly. I was given the freshman nickname “Itty-Bitty,” and people began calling me “tiny” as a matter of course.
As far as I know, I have no growth hormone deficiency or underlying condition other than being petite. But, I do have a confluence of genetic markers that signal youth: a round face, slight bone structure, minimal chest definition, and wide eyes. These are all features I can’t change. I also have relatives on both sides who hover around the 5-foot mark. My mother, too, is narrow in frame, and early in her marriage she was often mistaken for my father’s daughter.
Getting IDed is a matter of course for me: “That’s really your age? Are you sure? Hahaha, you must get IDed all the time!” I’ve taken the advice of loved ones ― and nosy strangers ― and tried responding to comments like these with humor, but the people asking the questions have merely looked confused. I have attempted to improve my confidence and posture with little effect; it’s hard to stand tall when I have to look up to speak to everyone, no matter how straight my spine.
Advertisement
“You’re so lucky,” people tell me as they roll their eyes jealously whenever I mention getting IDed or mistaken for a preteen. I want to tell them that they’d change their minds if they were the ones who had heard infantilizing remarks for over three decades. Would they enjoy repeatedly being mistaken for a date’s child or asked if they were old enough to sit in an airplane’s exit row? (At least the minimum age for that is 15.)
“'You’re so lucky,' people tell me as they roll their eyes jealously whenever I mention getting IDed or mistaken for a preteen. I want to tell them that they’d change their minds if they were the ones who had heard infantilizing remarks for over three decades.”
While pursuing my master’s degree, I went to my brother’s Christmas concert. He’s over six feet tall and five years my junior; my family moved to a new town when I started university, so his teachers didn’t know me. “Are you starting junior high next year?” they asked when they were introduced to his “little” sister. Situations like that one make me want to ask people who insist that a youthful appearance is a gift: Would you appreciate having your educational efforts and experience reduced or erased with a glance? Maybe they would ― but I’m sick of it.
Every year, it feels more embarrassing to go out in public. My shoulders tense in anticipation of the next remark someone might make. I have grown to divide the world into spaces of competence ― the ones where I am known and respected, and public encounters, where people see only my body and where a comment or misperception could occur at any time.
Work falls into the former category for me now. In earlier years, as a camp counselor, teacher, or professor, the pitfalls of public life were present at my job. I would often hear, “How old are you?” or “Are you a student?” I started shoehorning in phrases marking my age whenever I could. My current editorial position affords me some peace. Professionals respond to my emails like any colleague’s, and I am grateful they can’t see my face.
Advertisement
I first dated in earnest via websites that prominently list a user’s age, thereby avoiding misperceptions of me from the get-go, and I have met every one of my partners online. My written eloquence has garnered me much of my professional and romantic success, but words desert me when yet another stranger assumes that I’m too young to interpret a question about my age to be rude. White hairs peek from my temples and pepper my eyebrows, but no one notices; people are too distracted by my body’s small scale to see the details.
Adulthood has brought another unwelcome factor for me: body shaming. This is something I share with other women, even though I don’t look like most of them. I’ve been accused of having an eating disorder and my clothing has snidely been referred to as “doll clothes.” Others refuse to believe that I hear the things I hear, or tell me these comments shouldn’t bother me because “of course you look 12.”
I may look young, but I’m old enough to recognize that these comments are neither helpful nor constructive. Many of us are culturally conditioned to feel insecure about our bodies. That’s no excuse to make derogatory comments about how other people look. Sometimes I look in the mirror and have trouble taking myself seriously or connecting the voice inside my head with the elfin creature looking back at me.
From a physical accessibility standpoint, it’s uncomfortable to move through a world where my clothing choices are limited to a fraction of stores and my legs dangle above the floor in most seats. Despite insecurities and challenges, however, I don’t believe my body is inherently wrong. If I could change how the public responded, I would be happier in my skin. I suspect this is true for many others as well.
I’ve shed more tears over my “first world problem” than I’d like to admit. Conversely, I understand that my size affords certain privileges. I am virtually immune to catcalls and some manifestations of sexism (comments like, “When are you going to have children? Your biological clock must be ticking!”), and I do not tend to get sexualized unless I make the first move. I am fortunate not to deal with fat shaming or worrying that I might be too big to fit anywhere or for anything. I have an easier time weaving my way through a crowd than most people.
Advertisement
“While many of my peers can get away with wearing a hoodie, it turns me into a juvenile hobbit. I’d love to be able to dress comfortably and remain free from judgment, but I celebrate the little things, like when a guide on an architecture tour I took last year called me a 'lady.'”
Fortunately, I have found a few hacks to help mitigate mistaken public perceptions. Dressing in business clothes while traveling, wearing massive platform heels when an occasion permits, relying on tailored items, darker colors, bold lipstick, and keeping my hair short have all, at least on occasion, seemed to silence questions. But if I drop one of these shields, I find they resume. While many of my peers can get away with wearing a hoodie, it turns me into a juvenile hobbit. I’d love to be able to dress comfortably and remain free from judgment, but I celebrate the little things, like when a guide on an architecture tour I took last year called me a “lady.”
Since I moved from Canada to the U.S. before finally landing in the U.K., the comments have diminished. Brits seem to feel less entitled to comment on strangers’ bodies, or maybe they’re simply less preoccupied with them.
The COVID-19 pandemic has also intensified my sense of public peace. Social life has moved online, where nobody pops up and asks my age, and when I am out in the world, customer service people are more concerned with safety than small talk. It seems in a world where anyone might be capable of infecting someone else, public remarks on each other’s bodies have dwindled for a time. Ironically, while a respiratory illness floats around the globe, I breathe more easily. My physical concerns are focused on sanitation, eating well, and exercising ― keeping myself healthy in the ways that I can.
As devastating as the coronavirus has been, I hope that perhaps the changes in public etiquette that I have experienced will continue into the future — that maybe the temporary habit of staying six feet apart from one another will lessen people’s tendencies to judge each other to their face. Our bodies are going through a lot right now, and I am seeing signs that we are beginning to realize just how interconnected we are and how dependent our welfare is on each other.
Advertisement
Those of us who live through the pandemic will share a legacy of both embodied stress and resilience, and the image we see in the mirror seems trivial in comparison to that. Hopefully, we can learn from this unprecedented time and the challenges it has brought, and as we continue to press forward and face whatever uncertainties lie ahead, maybe we’ll recognize that how we look pales in comparison to what we do and how we treat each other.
Melanie Bell is a writer, editor, and co-author of “The Modern Enneagram.” She holds an MA in creative writing from Concordia University and has written for several publications, including Cicada, xoJane, Autostraddle, and Every Day Fiction. Connect with her at InspireEnvisioning.com or on Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram.