Trump-Putin summit tentatively set for next week, White House official saysNew Foto - Trump-Putin summit tentatively set for next week, White House official says

A meeting between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin is tentatively scheduled for the end of next week, a senior White House official told NBC News on Friday. The location is still being discussed, this official said, but possibilities include the United Arab Emirates, Hungary, Switzerland and Rome. Further details and logistics of the meeting are still unclear and remain very fluid, including whether Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will be involved. The White House official said the Russians have provided a list of demands for a potential ceasefire, and the U.S. is now trying to get buy-in from Ukrainians and European allies. Zelenskyy and Ukrainian officials have long said they would not concede any territory that Russia illegally annexed. In a statement Friday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told NBC News, "President Trump has been clear since he inherited this war from Joe Biden six months ago: he wants it to end at the negotiating table. At the President's direction, Special Envoy Witkoff once again met with President Putin to discuss potential paths to peace, and the President and his national security team are discussing those paths with both the Ukrainians and the Europeans. Out of respect for our sensitive diplomatic discussions with Russia, Ukraine, and our European allies, the White House will not comment on alleged details in the news media." On Friday, European national security advisers and the White House were expected to join a call to make sure everyone has a common understanding of what is under discussion with Russia, according to a person familiar with the call. Secretary of State Rubio Marco was expected to be on the call, as well as White House special envoys Steve Witkoff and Keith Kellogg. On Thursday, Trump publicly acknowledged that a meeting between himself and Putin could be forthcoming,telling reporters in the Oval Officethat a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy was not be a prerequisite for a meeting between the U.S. and Russian leaders. The White House had previously floated the possibility of a trilateral meeting between Trump, Putin and Zelenskyy, but the Kremlin dismissed that idea on Thursday. Later Thursday, Putin told reporters in the Kremlin that the idea of a Trump-Putin meeting had been floated, saying, "Interest was shown on both sides. Who said what first — it is no longer important." He also spoke about the possibility of himself meeting directly with Zelenskyy, telling reporters that his "conditions" for such a meeting haven't yet been met. "I have already said many times that I, in general, have nothing against it. It is possible. But for this to happen, certain conditions must be created. Unfortunately, such conditions are far away yet," Putin said. On Friday, Zelenskyy wrote about the details of his conversation with South African president Cyril Ramaphosain a post on X, blaming Russia for the war's continuation. "Cyril also shared details of his conversation with the Russian side. Ukraine's position is absolutely clear: the path to peace must begin with a ceasefire," Zelenskyy wrote. He added, "We are ready for this, as well as for meetings at the highest level in various formats. From the very first seconds of the war, we have wanted it to end, as it was not Ukraine that started this war. And it is Russia that is the only reason for its prolongation and the absence of peace." A potential summit next week between Trump and Putin would be the first meeting between the two leaders so far in the second Trump administration. Trump and Zelenskyy have met several times over the last seven months, including duringa February Oval Office gatheringthat ended in a shouting match between Trump, Zelenskyy and Vice President JD Vance. The two alsomet on the sidelinesof Pope Francis' funeral in April. Throughout the presidential campaign last year, Trump often told voters that one of his priorities was ending the war in Ukraine. Over the last few months, he's waffled between blaming Putin and Zelenskyy for the war's continuation. During his Oval Office remarks on Thursday, Trump said that he was "very disappointed" and that he expected Putin to decide by Friday about a potential ceasefire in the war. "It's going to be up to him. We're going to, we're going to see what he has to say. It's going to be up to him. Very disappointed," Trump told reporters.

Trump-Putin summit tentatively set for next week, White House official says

Trump-Putin summit tentatively set for next week, White House official says A meeting between President Donald Trump and Russian President V...
How closely do congressional delegations reflect how people vote? Not veryNew Foto - How closely do congressional delegations reflect how people vote? Not very

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Constitution makes it clear: "The People" get to pick thosewho'll represent their interestsin the U.S. House of Representatives. But just how closely do those choices reflect the overall political leanings of the people? The question is at the heart ofa power playin Texas, where Republicans are trying toreshape the state's congressional boundariesto help them maintain control of the House in next year's midterm elections. In many cases, a state's congressional delegation doesn't align very closely with what would seem to be the will of the voters, although that's not always because ofpartisan gerrymandering. Every statedecides how to draw its own congressional boundaries. Some, like California, rely on independent redistricting commissions, while most leave it to the state Legislature and the governor to hammer out a plan. It's states where one party controls all the levers of government where redistricting dramas like the one in Texas often play out as the majority tries to maximize its power. Regardless of the process, the resulting maps often produce congressional delegations much more lopsided in favor of one party than the state's partisan demographics might suggest. A state's presidential vote result isn't a precise tool for measuring what its congressional delegation ought to look like, but it can provide a compelling point of comparison. Politicians frequently cite it when decrying partisan redistricting practices they think are unfair. President Donald Trump,who's pushing Texasandother GOP-controlled statesto redraw their maps, said this week Republicans were "entitled to five more seats" in Texas based in part on the size of his win there in November. Trump won 56% of the Texas vote, but Republicans already hold 65% of the state's congressional delegation — which would rise to 79% if the GOP's new maps are adopted and past voting patterns hold in the next election. During an event with Texas Democratic lawmakers in Boston, Missouri state Rep. Ashley Aune cited her state's presidential vote results in warning of possible Republican-driven redistricting efforts there. "Fifty-eight percent of Missouri voted for Trump, but they want to send an 87% representation to Congress," said Aune, a Democrat. It's actually fairly common for a state's congressional delegation not to align with statewide presidential vote results. In 41 of the 44 states with more than one congressional district, the party of the winning presidential candidate had a larger share of the state's congressional seats than its share of the presidential vote, an Associated Press analysis found. In most cases, it was a much larger share, a gap of at least 10 percentage points. Here's a comparison of the congressional delegations and presidential vote results in a sampling of states, including some of those considering a redraw of their congressional boundaries after Texas called its special session. California and Illinois In remarks to CNBC, Trump pointed to California and Illinois as justifications for redrawing the Texas map in Republicans' favor. "You notice they go to Illinois for safety, but that's all gerrymandered," he said in reference to the Texas Democrats who relocated to the Chicago area to block, at least temporarily, the Republican redistricting efforts. "California's gerrymandered. We should have many more seats in Congress in California," he said. He's right about Illinois: Democrats have gerrymandered the lines so they hold 14 of the 17 House seats. Not so in California. Democrats there do have an outsized majority, holding 43 of the state's 52 House seats, about 83%. Vice President Kamala Harris, a Democrat, received about 59% of the November vote. But that's not because of Democratic gerrymandering. A ballot initiative took the process away from state lawmakers and gave it to an independent citizens commission. California's lopsided map is due in part to the waylike-minded people cluster: California Democrats tend to live in and near major cities that get more congressional districts because of their population. Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis scored a legal victory in July when thestate Supreme Court upheldhiscongressional redistricting planredrawing a district with a large Black population. That plan resulted in Republicans holding about 71% of the state's 28 U.S. House seats. Trump carried the state in November with 56% of the vote. DeSantis later indicatedthere may be more "defects" in the map that need to be addressed before the next census. Republicans held an 18-7 advantage over Democrats in Florida's House delegation after the 2000 census. Democrats slowly narrowed the gap, reaching 13 seats to Republicans' 14 after the 2018 election. But Republicans reestablished their advantage after the redistricting that followed the 2020 census, when they reached the 20-8 split they hold today. New York Democrats have long enjoyed an advantage at the New York ballot box in presidential and congressional elections. Harris received nearly 56% of the vote in 2024, while Democrats hold 73% of the state's 26 House seats. With Democratic advantages in both chambers of the state Legislature, New York might have been a ripe target for Democrats looking to offset Republican redistricting gains in Texas and elsewhere. But they would need to amend the state constitution to conduct a new round of redistricting before the next census. That constraint means the earliest Democrats could enact a new map would be for 2028. North Carolina North Carolina, among the most closely divided states, has been embroiled inits own redistricting drama. State Republicans implementednew House boundariesin 2023 that turned a 7-7 congressional delegation into one in which Republicans took a 10-4 advantage with the 2024 elections. Several districts are now the subject ofa federal lawsuit, with Democrats alleging Republicans illegally diluted Black voting power. North Carolina has been among the most competitive states in the last several presidential elections. While Trump carried the state in November with about 51% of the vote, it has elected Democrats as governor and attorney general and to other statewide offices. In the 2008 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama narrowly edged Republican John McCain with 49.7% of the vote. The congressional delegation at the time mirrored that with an almost even split, with Democrats holding seven seats and Republicans six after the 2010 midterms. But following rounds of Republican-controlled redistricting after the 2010 census, Republicans held a 10-3 or 9-4 advantage in the congressional delegation for the rest of that decade. After the 2020 census, a Democratic-majority North Carolina Supreme Court threw out a Republican-drawn plan and permitted elections under a map adopted by trial judges that produced the 7-7 split. The U.S. Supreme Courtallowed the boundaries to be usedin the 2022 elections. Afterflipping to a Republican majorityin 2023, the state Supreme Court ruled partisan gerrymandering wasn't outlawed by the state constitution, allowing GOP lawmakers to redraw a congressional map in use today that led to their party's 10-4 majority. Minnesota Minnesota is the state where the congressional breakdown most closely matches the 2024 presidential result. Harris received 51% of that vote, compared with Trump's 47%. Democrats and Republicans split the state's eight House seats with court-imposed maps. Nevada Nevada, where a Democratic Legislature drew the lines, is the only state where the party of the winning presidential candidate is outnumbered by the other party in the state's congressional delegation. Trump received 51% of the vote in Nevada, but Democrats hold three of the state's four House districts. ___ Associated Press writer Leah Willingham in Boston contributed to this report.

How closely do congressional delegations reflect how people vote? Not very

How closely do congressional delegations reflect how people vote? Not very WASHINGTON (AP) — The Constitution makes it clear: "The Peop...
Watch: Olympic gold medallist 'attacks' sprinter boyfriend at airportNew Foto - Watch: Olympic gold medallist 'attacks' sprinter boyfriend at airport

Credit: Port of Seattle Police Department Footage has emerged of Olympic gold medallist sprinter Sha'Carri Richardson allegedly attacking her boyfriend Christian Coleman at an airport. Richardson was detained last week in Seattle and a police report said footage appeared to show Coleman being shoved into a wall before an item was thrown at him. The 25-year-old Richardson was released following the incident after her boyfriend "declined to be a victim," the police report read. CCTV images, first obtained by TMZ, appear to show Richardson slamming Coleman into a wall and bumping into him after the first altercation. The argument continues as the pair bump into each other as he walks towards a checkpoint at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Port of Seattle Police said Richardson claimed the argument was started over a pair of headphones. "Richardson advised she did not assault him in any way and the dispute was only a verbal argument," police documents said. Richardson, who won a 100m silver medal and 4x100m relay gold medal at the 2024 Olympics, was arrested and charged with fourth-degree assault before she was released without further action. Coleman, 29, later said: "For me personally, I feel like it was a sucky situation all round. I don't feel like she should have been arrested. "I'm the type of guy who's in the business of extending grace, and mercy and love. She's just had a lot of things going on, lot of emotions and forces going on inside of her that not only I can't understand, but nobody can. She's one-of-one. I know it's been a tough journey for her this year. But she's gonna bounce back because she's the best female athlete in the world. I see it every day. She's gonna be just fine. She's gonna be good, and I'm gonna be good too." Richardson will run in the 100m at the World Championships in Tokyo next month but missed out on qualifying for the 200m by one-hundredth of a second. She finished fourth in her heat in Oregon last week and declined to speak to reporters afterwards. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Watch: Olympic gold medallist ‘attacks’ sprinter boyfriend at airport

Watch: Olympic gold medallist 'attacks' sprinter boyfriend at airport Credit: Port of Seattle Police Department Footage has emerged ...
New England Patriots to Unveil 'Larger Than Life' Bronze Statue of Tom Brady In Honor of QB's 'Legendary Legacy'New Foto - New England Patriots to Unveil 'Larger Than Life' Bronze Statue of Tom Brady In Honor of QB's 'Legendary Legacy'

Kevin Sabitus/Getty The New England Patriots will unveil a 12-foot bronze statue of Tom Brady outside of its stadium the evening of Aug. 8 The "larger than life" statue is meant to "to perpetuate the legendary legacy of the great Tom Brady," according to owner Robert Kraft Brady, 48, will be on hand for the ceremony Bronze Brady is coming to New England!The New England Patriots plan to unveil a 12-foot "larger than life" statue of the team's legendary quarterbackTom Bradythe evening of Friday, Aug. 8, before the team's first preseason game against the Washington Commanders. Brady, 48, is expected to be at the pregame ceremony in front of Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass., where the quarterback led the Patriots for 20 seasons throughout his record-breaking career, according tothe Associated Press. Patriots owner Robert Kraft is also expected to make remarks before the bronze statue is unveiled to the public, while Brady will also deliver a speech in front of fans gathered outside the team's stadium. The statue was commissioned by a local sculptor and is meant to "to perpetuate the legendary legacy of the great Tom Brady," Kraft first announced last summer. The statue will stand outside the entrance to The Patriots Hall of Fame, located inside the team's stadium. Brady led the Patriots to six Super Bowl titles throughout his career in New England, winning 17 division championships and leading the team to nine championship appearances while being named NFL MVP three times. Brady left the Patriots in free agency following the 2019 season and played his final three seasons with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, leading the team to a Super Bowl title in 2021. https://people-app.onelink.me/HNIa/kz7l4cuf The Patriotsretired Brady's No. 12 jerseyin September 2023, hosting the future Pro Football Hall of Fame quarterback for a halftime ceremony where he and Kraft also addressed the fans at Gillette. Brady said at the time that "coming back to New England to celebrate what [he and the team] accomplished was so special, and it's a day that I'll never forget." "All our lives take us on different journeys," Brady said during his speech that day. "They take us to different places. They bring different people into our lives. But one thing I am sure and that will never change is that I am a patriot for life!" Never miss a story — sign up forPEOPLE's free daily newsletterto stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Brady later added on his podcastLet's Go! with Tom Brady, Larry Fitzgerald and Jim Gray on SiriusXMthat returning to New England for the ceremony was a "special reunion" for him and Patriots fans. "I had two decades of incredible life-altering experience," he said. "I have so many memories from my time there." The San Mateo, Calif., native was drafted No. 199th overall by New England in the 2000 NFL Draft – the final pick that year – after playing college football at the University of Michigan. Following his 23-year NFL career, Brady joined the broadcast booth last season to call games for Fox, including last season's Super Bowl between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Philadelphia Eagles. Read the original article onPeople

New England Patriots to Unveil 'Larger Than Life' Bronze Statue of Tom Brady In Honor of QB's 'Legendary Legacy'

New England Patriots to Unveil 'Larger Than Life' Bronze Statue of Tom Brady In Honor of QB's 'Legendary Legacy' Kevin S...
J.D. Vance Begins U.K. Visit Amid High Transatlantic TensionNew Foto - J.D. Vance Begins U.K. Visit Amid High Transatlantic Tension

U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy meets J.D. Vance at the Munich Security Conference, Feb. 14, 2025. Credit - Tobias Schwarz—AFP/Getty Images Vice President J.D. Vance willmeetwith British Foreign Secretary David Lammy at his country residence in the U.K. at a time of heightened transatlantic tensions. The meeting comes ahead of a private family holiday that will see Vance, his wife Usha, and their three children stay at the Grade 1 listed mansion Chevening, before heading to the Cotswolds, which has been dubbed the "Hamptons of England." The bilateral meeting on Friday lacks a formal agenda, officials said, but is likely to cover trade and the Gaza and Ukraine crises. Prime Minister Keir Starmer last weekannouncedthat the U.K. would recognize a Palestinian state in September unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire and addresses the "intolerable" situation on the ground in Gaza. Lammy himself has said he is "appalled and sickened" by the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, and accused Israel of "drip feeding" aid to the Strip. The White House has said that recognizing a Palestinian state would amount to "rewarding Hamas." Anupcoming summitbetween President Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin is also expected to be on the agenda. The U.K. and other European nations fear that a meeting would see Putin attempt to force Ukraine to unfavorable terms with President Volodymyr Zelensky not at the table. Exclusive:The Secret White House Backchannel That Paved the Way For Trump's Summit With Putin But the Labour government has cultivated strong ties with the White House that may help it press its position. The U.K. in May became the first country tostrike a trade dealwith the U.S. The British Foreign Secretary has wooed Vance,describing himas a friend, and drawn a number of parallels between their working-class childhoods with a single mother and absent father. Lammy once said that Vance's memoir reduced him to tears:"I said to JD: 'Look, we've got different politics, but we're both quite strong Christians and we both share quite a tough upbringing'." That approach marks a different tone to when Lammy, as a backbench Member of Parliament years earlier,referred to Trumpas a "far right extremist" and a "neo-Nazi." But the Foreign Secretary hadreportedlyworked to cultivate ties with MAGA Republicans even before the 2024 U.S. election. The choice of the U.K. as a holiday will also bring renewed scrutiny to Vance's past remarks about the country and its government. Vance oncesaidthat the U.K. could become the first "truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon" under the Labour Party. He has also claimed that freedom of speech is being undermined in the U.K., referencing an incident from 2022 in which a man wasconvicted after breachinga safe zone outside an abortion clinic. The Vance-Lammy meeting comes weeks after Trump traveled to Scotland to visit his golf courses in a trip that included sit-downs with Starmer and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Trump will return to the U.K. next month for an unprecedentedsecond state visit, with King Charles hosting Trump and his wife Melania at Windsor Castle. Trade unions, pro-Palestinian demonstrators, and climate activists have warned that they will protest Vance's U.K. trip. Contact usatletters@time.com.

J.D. Vance Begins U.K. Visit Amid High Transatlantic Tension

J.D. Vance Begins U.K. Visit Amid High Transatlantic Tension U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy meets J.D. Vance at the Munich Security Conf...
Meet the Texas Democrat Who Earned Joe Rogan's Presidential NodNew Foto - Meet the Texas Democrat Who Earned Joe Rogan's Presidential Nod

James Talarico is everywhere now. He's on major television networks. He's on the front page of news websites. He's even beenon the most popular podcastin America,TheJoe Rogan Experience.But the one place he's not, is in the Texas Capitol building, where his Republican adversaries in the State House of Representatives aim to redraw electoral districts in their favor ahead of the 2026 midterms. The thirty-six-year-old middle-school teacher-turned-politician isn't in Texas at all, actually. He's in an Illinois hotel room no bigger than a college dorm, barely sleeping in a twin bed that faces a lonely sink, taking calls from the media and constituents back home. It's not that he and his fellow Democratic representatives don't want to be there. But without their presence in the state house, a vote can't occur—which is exactly the point. They're breaking quorum to protest Donald Trump's attempt to "rig the next election," as Talaricowrote on Instagram. But by being everywhere except the Lone Star State, he's made himself a national name—one that might grace an upcoming Senate ballot. Esquire talked to Talarico about fleeing Texas, how his Christian faith informs his politics, and what the Democrats can do to earn America's favor. Questions and answers have been edited for length and clarity. Esquire: How are things in Illinois? What's the morale like? James Talarico:It's an intense work road trip. I had a journalist asked me what I was going to do on my break. And this is the break. It's the worst break I've ever had, because we have been working around the clock here, talking to media and talking to our constituents about what's happening in Texas, shining a national spotlight on this redistricting power grab. But even though we're not in Texas, we're still serving our constituents. I've been on the phone with my team back in the Capitol, ensuring that the folks in our district have everything they need. It's been exhausting to say the least. Early mornings, very late nights. But I would say the morale is good. I am here in Illinois with probably the largest group of Democratic members. Yesterday was a little scary when we woke up to a bomb threat and had to evacuate the premises. But we shouldn't have been shocked, given that [Texas Attorney General] Ken Paxton has put out a tweet asking for his followers to "hunt us down." Some of our Republican colleagues have put our location out on national news outlets. Of course this was going to be a security risk, but we all know that we have right on our side, and that we are fighting for our constituents, for all Texans, and their right to elect representatives of their choice. That's bigger than any one of us. It's bigger than any one politician or any one political party. How are your accommodations in Illinois? The rooms where we're staying are probably the smallest hotel rooms I've ever stayed in. They're much more like a college dorm room or a prison cell, whichever way you want to look at it. One twin bed with a sink across from the bed—not in a bathroom. But we're on a budget on this quorum break. But we're all very proud to be doing this important work, standing up to these wannabe tyrants. You're fined every day for your absence, and there's also the cost of hotels, meals, and so on. How long do you and your colleagues think you can hold out? We earn $600 a month for our service in the legislature. We have day jobs. That's how we make ends meet, pay our bills, and support our families. And we've left those jobs behind and families behind to do this. It was not a decision we made lightly. Quorum breaks are not easy, which I think is important. If they were easy, the minority party would probably do it all the time. But they're incredibly hard—personally, financially, politically, legally, and logistically. They're only reserved for the most egregious abuses of power, whether it's voter suppression or mid-decade redistricting. When Trump called Georgia Republicans and asked them to find him 11,000 more votes after he lost the 2020 election, they said, "No, sir." But when Donald Trump asked Texas Republicans to find him five more congressional seats, they said, "How about Thursday?" So, the responsibility to defend this American experiment fell to Texas Democrats. We are proud to answer the call. The governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, has threatened to remove you and your colleagues from office. How have you reacted to that threat? It's concerning when a governor tries to remove duly democratically elected representatives from office, especially when they are engaging in a constitutional activity. Quorum breaks are protected in our state constitution. They are a tool the minority has to check the abuses of the majority, so we haven't broken any law. There's two hundred years' worth of history of quorum breaks in this country. We're here in Illinois, the land of Abraham Lincoln, where he broke quorum as a state senator back in 1840 by jumping out of a window of the Illinois State Capitol. Thankfully, I didn't have to jump out of any windows in Texas. But we are participating in a long American tradition of standing up to bullies, speaking truth to power. Of civil disobedience, of good trouble. The current special legislative session is slated to end August 19, but the Texas House Republicans could always call another session. How do you see this playing out? We were most worried about, what if we had done nothing? What if we had just allowed this blatant power grab to go through with maybe a few floor speeches? That, to me, was a much more disturbing reality. I don't know what the future holds. I don't know what will happen. But I know we have to take a stand. If throughout American history, people only took a stand when they knew they were definitely going to win, I fear to think about what our country would look like right now. I'm proud that we're taking this moral stand against this power grab. That said, we do want to be strategic. The last quorum break I was a part of was in 2021, against the voter suppression bill. It shined an international spotlight that pressured our Republican colleagues to take the worst parts out of that bill. It still passed, and I voted against it, but it was materially less harmful to my constituents and the people of Texas because of our quorum break. I think it's important for national outlets to remember that, although they sometimes want to look at it as a loss, there are shades of gray. I think our act of civil disobedience is inspiring Democrats in blue states to retaliate or at least threaten retaliate. If Texas Republicans cheat in this way, then we can at least even out the playing field and ensure that the American people can elect to Congress to hold the President accountable next year. Do you think that it's the necessary next step, for blue states to redistrict in retaliation? When one side shoots, all bets are off. I pray every night that Texas Republicans don't cheat and don't break the next election. But if they do, it requires a response. We have to look bullies in the eye and not blink. That's the only way you beat a bully, and that's exactly what I expect other states to do. We want gerrymandering out of every state. I've introduced a bill to create an independent citizen-led redistricting process in Texas, and I want that in every state, blue or red. We've got to get the politics out of map-drawing, but we cannot unilaterally disarm as Democrats. Is it simply a left versus right battle? Because you've also said it's a top versus bottom economic battle in this country. What are your thoughts on that? I do not think this is an issue of party. I think this is an issue of power. People in power want to stay in power. The only way that you can check power is through free and fair elections. This is not about the Democratic Party. It's about the democratic process. I am fighting for Democrats, independents, and Republicans alike, and their ability to change their government from the bottom up, their ability to elect the representatives of their choice, their ability to hold the most powerful politician in the country accountable. That is what this is about. I know people are tempted, especially in the media, to make this just a red team versus blue team thing. That couldn't be further from the truth. They may be coming for Democrats right now, but they come for all of us in the end. That's how this playbook works in other countries. We need to wake up through that fact before it's too late. In your role as a red-state Democrat, what's the lesson you're learning right now, and how can that apply to blue-state Democrats? I don't think the divide the Democratic Party right now is moderate versus progressive. I think it's fighters versus holders. I hope Texas Democrats are reminding the Democratic Party nationally how to fight for the people. That's why most folks are frustrated with the national Democratic Party: Its inability to get things done and inability to deliver for our constituents. How do you delineate between actions that make a difference and performative action? We have to play to the fullest extent of the rules. We have to use every tool in our toolbox. I'm not going to diminish speeches. Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech was performance, but I hear what you're saying. Getting on cable news and saying some sound bites into the camera when you may have actual tools that you can use legislatively or legally or politically, that's just theater. Rhetoric used to be an art form, and I do think communication is a tool in that toolbox. But if it's your only tool, I would encourage you to think more deeply about the power you actually have to fight for your constituents and fix this democracy. You've gained national attention partially because of your identity as a Christian who's also a Democrat. How does your faith inform your politics? I can talk about how my faith is informing quorum break. It's what gives me the courage and the strength and the peace to do something like that, to risk arrest, to risk financial ruin for my constituents. I don't think most normal people would want to do that, right? I don't think I would want to do that normally. But my granddad was a Baptist preacher who taught me that we follow a barefoot rabbi who gave us two commandments: Love God and love neighbor. Loving thy neighbor requires action, not just in the sanctuary, but in the streets. That's why I went into public service, first as a middle school teacher, and now as a state representative. This democracy is more than a Constitution. It's a covenant, a relationship between neighbors, a promise that we make to each other, to share this country, even when we disagree, even when we're different. Two thousand years ago, when the powerful few abused the many, that barefoot rabbi didn't stay in his room and pray. He walked into the seat of power, and he flipped over the tables of injustice. I would say to my fellow Christians, that if we love democracy, if we love our neighbors, it's time to start flipping tables. That's an interesting analogy. People sometimes forget about that story from the Bible, that Jesus was taking action. It's what got him killed by the government. He was killed by the Roman Empire and executed. Crucifixion was the punishment for rebels. We sometimes over-spiritualize the gospel. Our whole faith is built on incarnation, the idea that God took human form, that God cares about our human bodies and our physical existence. How much we have to eat and drink, whether we have health care, and that. We miss that when we over spiritualize. Spirituality is a central part of my faith, but has to be balanced out with concrete action in the world, for human beings. How can Democrats win over the evangelical Christian vote? There's a lot of diversity within the Christian church. Black Christians are some of the most deeply religious Christians in our country and historically and continue to this day to vote for Democratic candidates. When we're talking about white Christians, which is an important caveat, I think part of the problem is that my party has stopped talking about faith over the last forty, fifty years, really since Jimmy Carter. Of course, there are candidates who do the obligatory church visit and all that. But I'm talking about how central our faith is to everything we do. And it is central for me. It is my foundation for everything I do in my life, including public service. So I'm going to talk about that. I'm not going to be ashamed to talk about it. And it may, it may rub some people in my coalition wrong in the wrong way, and I've gotten pushback from some progressive Democrats about how outspoken I have built my faith. But I'm going to show up as I am, and I'm going to be myself, even if that bothers some people my own party. I do think that it's helpful, building a bridge to folks who don't feel like they belong in the Democratic Party because of their faith. I want them to know they have a seat at our table if they'd like to join us. There is data I've seen from groups that have been reaching out to evangelicals that it is moving the needle. In Pennsylvania, some of the only counties that that moved toward Vice President Kamala Harris were counties where the group Evangelicals for Harris campaigned, which I helped support. You recently went onThe Joe Rogan Experience.What did you think of the reaction to your appearance? Do you think it will help you spring into the next phase of your political career? I was surprised to get the invite to go on Joe Rogan, the biggest podcast in the country, as a state rep in Texas. We got an email, and all it said was, "Joe saw one of your social media videos, and he'd love to talk." That was it. Typically, when a journalist interviews an elected official, they lay out the topics they're going to cover to give a sense of what the conversation is going to be about. That was not the case, probably because I don't think Joe Rogan considers himself a journalist. He's, in a lot of ways, just a very curious guy who is a good conversationalist. It was unusual, as an elected official, to engage in such a long, unscripted conversation with someone who's a little skeptical the Democratic Party. I was a little nervous, to be honest, because of those things, and that it's such a big audience. But Joe Rogan is good at what he does. Once I put on those headphones, he drew me into a real human conversation, like you would have at a bar with friend. Two and a half hours flew by. It was a shock when they were over. I had a blast. Like any really great conversation, it went down all these different rabbit holes and explored all these weird ideas and hot takes. It was cool to have a conversation like I would have with a friend on such a big platform. It seems like people responded to that. It's been overwhelming. I'm flooded with messages and calls and DMs and emails from people who are not partisan Democrats. A phrase kept popping up in almost every message that I got: "This is the first time I've messaged a politician." I must have received thirty or forty messages that started with that exact phrase, which I thought was interesting. It shows you the kind of audience he has: People who aren't super partisan. They're very suspicious of this corrupt political system and are sick of both parties. It certainly is reaching a whole group of people that don't watch MSNBC or Fox News or tune into the legislative live stream here in Texas. There is a clip going around in which Rogan told you to run for president. What's the next step in your political career? I am seriously looking at the U.S. Senate race. I haven't made a decision yet. I'm trying to figure out if I should run for that seat or whether I should continue my work in the legislature. I see drawbacks and advantages to both positions. But ultimately, I've got to figure out what's right for me and more importantly, what's best for the people of the state. I had set a deadline to make a decision next week, funnily enough, and then this quorum break happened. So, it's kind of been pushed off the agenda for me right now. I was elected by 200,000 people in Central Texas to fight for them at the state capitol. I'm basically their lawyer in state government, even though I'm not a lawyer. I am fighting for their interests here in Illinois by breaking quorum. I take that very seriously, and so I intend on doing this job before I start applying to other jobs. If you were to pursue the Senate and win, what would you hope to accomplish on a national level? I have worked hard in Texas to get big money out of our politics. I've been outspoken about the billionaire mega donors who basically run our state government. And if that's true in Texas, it's certainly true at a national level, increasingly so. I would hope to be a voice against corruption. I would hope to fight for specific systemic changes to our political system that would allow us to make progress on all the other issues we care about, housing, healthcare, education. But I'm not sure if there's enough voices really talking about anti-corruption measures at the national level. That would certainly be even more important if Ken Paxton is the Republican nominee for the Senate seat. He is perhaps the most corrupt politician in the entire country. I was part of the bipartisan effort in the Texas House to impeach Paxton, so I know his crimes more than most people do so. I hope that whoever Democrat nominee is, whether it's me or one of my colleagues, shines a spotlight on how corruption is preventing us from being the country we can be. What does the Democratic Party need to do next to address these things and create a fairer system? We have to remember our heritage as Democrats, that we're the party that fights for regular people, for the little guy. That was true in the New Deal era, and it was true in the Great Society era, when another Texas Democrat was transforming this country to help working people. We've lost touch with that unfortunately in the last few years, and we need to remember that legacy. How can you reconnect with that legacy? This quorum break is showing you how you how you can have a backbone, have a spine, and fight. There's a Spanish word here in Texas,ganas,which is hard to translate in English. But it means heart, desire, passion that comes from something deeper, somewhere else. That's what our party, our politics in general, is missing. You Might Also Like Kid Cudi Is All Right 16 Best Shoe Organizers For Storing and Displaying Your Kicks

Meet the Texas Democrat Who Earned Joe Rogan’s Presidential Nod

Meet the Texas Democrat Who Earned Joe Rogan's Presidential Nod James Talarico is everywhere now. He's on major television networks....
Why Ben Shelton will break the American men's tennis Grand Slam droughtNew Foto - Why Ben Shelton will break the American men's tennis Grand Slam drought

The incomprehensible 22-year Grand Slam drought in American men's tennis will end soon. Maybe not this year, maybe not even next. But it's going to happen, and we're not going to have to wait too much longer. Ben Sheltonis going to do it. The 22-year old from Atlanta via the University of Florida won his first Masters 1000-level title on Thursday night at the Canadian Open, beating Karen Khachanov 6-7, 6-4, 7-6 in a terrific final. Sure, you can put some asterisks on the significance of this tournament – namely, that No. 1 Jannik Sinner and No. 2 Carlos Alcaraz opted to take an extra week off after meeting in both the French Open and Wimbledon finals. Those two have dominated the Grand Slams for the last two years, and Shelton – to this point – has yet to prove he belongs in their company. But what Sheltonhasproven this summer will serve him extremely well in the chase to remove Andy Roddick's 2003 U.S. Open title from the genre of frustrating tennis trivia. At this moment, Shelton has a very good argument as the third-best player in the world. If not him, then who? It's not Alexander Zverev, who is technically No. 3 in the rankings but hasn't felt like a threat to win anything important since Sinner embarrassed him in the Australian Open final back in January. It's hard to make an argument for Taylor Fritz, the highest-ranked American at No. 4, especially after Shelton dismantled him 6-4, 6-3 in the Toronto semifinals and showed that he simply has a higher gear of athleticism and shot-making when he's playing well. Jack Draper? The British lad is 29-9 on the year with his own Masters 1000 title this year at Indian Wells. But his record in the Slams doesn't measure up to Shelton's and hasn't shown the same level of physical durability, particularly in a best-of-five setting. Some would argue it's still Novak Djokovic, and they may have a point. Despite slipping to No. 7 in the world, one spot behind Shelton, he's made the semifinals in all three Slams this year and he's still Novak freaking Djokovic. But at a physically diminished 38 and barely playing a real schedule anymore (he's skipping both big North American hard court tournaments leading into the U.S. Open), it would take everything breaking his way to win his 25thGrand Slam. At the moment, nobody else is really a factor. So here's the overall takeaway: Yes, Sinner and Alcaraz are going to win most of the big titles over the next few years as long as they stay healthy, much like Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal in the mid-2000s. But they're not going to meet ineverySlam final. Injuries happen, bad days happen. Especially at the U.S. Open, we often see players who have had long, grueling years struggle to find the energy it takes to deal with the heat and all the other unique elements of playing in New York. And when it's inevitably someone besides Alcaraz or Sinner hoisting a big trophy at some point, who's most likely to pick up the pieces? It's Shelton – and on a hard court, it's not particularly close. Though Canada was just his third title, and by far his biggest since turning pro three years ago, we are seeing some signs now that he's headed for a potentially special career. This win wasn't a fluke. Rather, it was the culmination of a summer in which Shelton's game is breaking through in ways we haven't really seen before. He's always had the elements to be a top player: Huge lefty serve, dynamic athleticism, weaponry with the forehand and better-than-average net skills. He's also shown a flair for stepping up at the Grand Slams with two semifinals and two quarterfinals in just 12 appearances. By any measure, a 30-12 record at the Slams is exceptional for a young player. But Shelton's father and coach, Bryan Shelton, has stressed repeatedly that Ben isn't a finished product. And their approach to addressing his weaknesses has been targeted and methodical. The eye test, particularly since Shelton made his run to the Wimbledon quarterfinals (where Sinner stopped him in three close sets), says that it's starting to pay off in areas like decision-making, consistency from the baseline and deployment of his backhand slice to change the rhythm of points. Even on return, where the advanced stats show that Shelton is one of the three worst players in the top-50, there were some interesting numbers in Toronto. Across his five matches, Shelton won 36.2% of return points. While that's basically average for a top-50 player, it's significantly better than the 32% he's posted this year. It's also worth noting that he broke Fritz and Brandon Nakashima – two of the seven hardest guys on tour to break – three times each. It was much the same story the week before in Washington. Despite throwing in a semifinal stinker against Alejandro Davidovich Fokina, Shelton won 38.3% of return points across four matches. If that's real improvement and not just statistical noise, Shelton is a threat to win the U.S. Openthis year. And if he can merely become an above-average returner on a regular basis, a Grand Slam title is probably going to happen at some point. Shelton's first Masters title was a major breakthrough in his career, and at 22 made him the youngest American to do so since Roddick at the very same tournament in 2003. Guess what happened next? A few weeks later, he lit up New York and became a U.S. Open champion. The way Shelton played this week, don't be surprised if he follows the same path to a Grand Slam title. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Ben Shelton will break American men's tennis Grand Slam drought

Why Ben Shelton will break the American men's tennis Grand Slam drought

Why Ben Shelton will break the American men's tennis Grand Slam drought The incomprehensible 22-year Grand Slam drought in American men...

 

MARIO VOUX © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com