We don’t like saying it any more than you like hearing it, but COVID-19 has not gone away. Many of us know people who’ve recently gone down with coughs and sneezes, and you may even have asked yourself that timeless question: do I have hay fever or COVID? But what about symptoms that don’t mimic other respiratory conditions? It might be a good time to refresh your memory of some of the weirder ways in which COVID can present.What’s the COVID situation right now?According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), COVID-19 cases in the US were slowly ticking upwards as of week ending July 6, 2024. That week, 11 percent of tests for the virus came back positive, compared to 9.1 percent the week before. Similarly, emergency department visits and hospitalization rates showed small increases, although deaths from the virus remained stable.In the UK, up to and including July 3, positive COVID case numbers were actually trending downwards, with a 16.6 percent week-on-week decrease. However, deaths and hospital admissions increased in the seven days up to June 28.CDC data show that the most prevalent circulating variant in the US right now is KP.3, one of the FLiRT variants that have been rising to prominence this year, seemingly due to mutations that allow them to better evade the human immune system.The availability of vaccines, coupled with lessons learned about how non-pharmaceutical measures like masking can help stop the virus in its tracks, mean that the COVID of 2024 is a very different beast than the COVID of early 2020. However, it’s still proving its ability to disrupt our lives, as we’ve seen with the recent reintroduction of mask mandates at the Tour de France amid riders dropping out of the race.   IFLScience is not responsible for content shared from external sites.What are the most common symptoms of the latest COVID variants?The CDC list of the most common COVID symptoms was last updated in March 2024, and includes many of the signs we would expect with a respiratory illness, such as a cough, fever, and fatigue. Sore throats and headaches are also common, and many people also still report a loss (usually temporary) of their sense of taste and/or smell. But as the CDC points out, COVID symptoms can be very variable, and there are some more surprising signs that you might want to be aware of.What are some unexpected COVID symptoms?Gastrointestinal issuesIf posts on social media are anything to go by, many people have been surprised to learn that COVID can make itself known via an upset tummy.Low appetite, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea can all be signs of a COVID infection, and they may occur with or without other, more typical symptoms. Gastrointestinal distress can also be caused by drugs that may be used to help treat COVID, and stomach and bowel issues may persist in people with long COVID.All this leads some people to mistake a COVID infection for a bout of food poisoning, or other infections like norovirus – but it’s worth bearing in mind that just because you don’t have a cough, it doesn’t mean it’s not COVID.“If everybody in your house has COVID and you have diarrhea, then you have to put two and two together,” infectious disease specialist Dr Peter Chin-Hong told the New York Times.COVID tongueSo-called “COVID tongue” is a symptom that’s been recognized since quite early on in the pandemic. While rare, ulcers and odd white patches on the tongue or inside the mouth have been reported by people with COVID, so if you experience any of these things unexpectedly it’s possible that that is the culprit. If you’re concerned about changes in your mouth, it’s always best to discuss them with your dentist.Treatment for COVID can also have some unfortunate side effects in this area too, with a small percentage of people taking the drug Paxlovid reporting dysgeusia – a bitter, metallic, or sour taste in the mouth.COVID toesSimilarly, COVID can also cause a condition that resembles chilblains on the feet and toes, with reddening or dark discoloration of the skin, pain, itching, and sometimes blisters.Discoloration of the toes, similar to what is seen with chilblains, can accompany COVID-19.Image credit: Chris Curry/Shutterstock.comThe takeawayIf you come down with cough or cold symptoms in the next few weeks, unfortunately you should continue to assume that it could be COVID-19. The only way to really be sure on the eternal cold/hay fever/COVID debate is to get tested.If you’re in the Southern Hemisphere, you should probably also add flu to your list of potential diagnoses, since the season is currently in full swing, but for those of us in the Northern Hemisphere influenza currently remains at very low levels as we approach the middle of summer.But it’s not only coughs and sniffles that can herald a bout of COVID. Hopefully, we’ve reminded you to keep an eye out for the more unexpected symptoms as well.The content of this article is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of qualified health providers with questions you may have regarding medical conditions. 

Roxy, a four-year-old English Mastiff, found herself in a heartbreaking situation that has garnered significant attention. This lovable dog was discovered in a flea-ridden state, tied to a light pole with a short leash and accompanied by a food bowl. Her plight was noticed by Ray Quinones, a Garden City sanitation worker, who heard her... The post Scared dog found tied to pole by highway with heartbreaking note explaining why appeared first on Animal Channel.

Elon Musk has made strides to turn X (formerly Twitter) into a free speech platform but there are still remnants of the Old Twitter censorship regime and they are interfering in the 2024 election. It now appears that X is actively boosting content posted by Democrat congressional members’ accounts, while simultaneously de-amplifying their GOP counterparts in the middle of an election year. X’s algorithm is actively boosting Congressional Democrats’ content in a chilling display of election interference. Using X’s AI chatbot, Grok, MRC was able to peer into X’s algorithm to see how it was treating all members of Congress. What MRC found was that X gave a distinct advantage to Democrats in both the House and the Senate over their Republican counterparts. The blatant bias in X’s algorithm reveals an internal revolt against Musk within the company’s ranks. With the 2024 election just months away, MRC’s evidence suggests that a radical remnant is still working against Musk in secret by tilting the scales in favor of the left. MRC had uncovered a spike in censorship cases following Musk’s acquisition of Twitter in 2022, which was the first red flag that holdovers from Old Twitter were actively undermining him and his free speech vision for the platform. The censorship practices of Old Twitter that were thought to be a thing of the past are very much active today. The more right-leaning a congressional member, the worse their X visibility score is. MRC discovered a glaring continuum within X’s algorithm. Generally speaking, the more left-leaning a congressional member is, the more visible their account is to X platform users. On the flip side, the more right-leaning a congressional member is, the more their account is penalized by the algorithm.  Leftist Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) is considered the highest-ranked House member by X’s algorithm. The way the X algorithm applies its criteria to determine which accounts to boost is nothing short of baffling. For example, Waters is considered to be the least toxic, most reputable, and highest-ranked House member by X’s algorithm. This is despite her history of numerous falsehoods and toxic political and racial flamethrowing posted on her account.  Radical Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is crowned King of Congress by X’s algorithm. While Waters is the highest-ranked House member, Schumer is the highest ranked among all 535 members of the House and Senate combined with a whopping 92 out of 100 “visibility” score on a 0-100 scale, indicating that his content is being boosted the most. X considers House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) to be more toxic than anti-Israel extremist Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN). X’s algorithm considers House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-LA) account to be more toxic than that of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), who has a history of spewing “anti-Semitic” extremism. In June 2021, Omar put out a tweet equating the United States and Israel to the Taliban and Hamas terrorist organizations. She was also censured by the House in 2019 for her tweet accusing Jewish people of buying political support and mocking accordingly, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” X’s methodology is based on four metrics to produce a single “visibility” score for each account holder. The higher the visibility score, the better the tweets will perform. On a 0-100 scale, the average “visibility” score for Senate Republicans stood at an abysmal 66.8 out of 100, while Senate Democrats boasted a stellar 82.4 out of 100. In the House, the Republicans’ score was worse than the score assigned to their Senate counterparts, averaging a mere 58.6 out of 100. The House Democrats’ score, by contrast, was 67.0 out of 100, almost ten points higher than the House Republicans’ average.   STUDY: X Is Giving Congressional Dems a Sizable BOOST Before the 2024 Election Introduction Elon Musk has been outspoken about his intention to make X the preeminent digital town square and a platform free of censorship and political interference. But new evidence suggests a radical remnant within the ranks of Musk’s company is side-swiping his free-speech vision by resurrecting the infamous censorship techniques of Old Twitter.  MRC Free Speech America researchers discovered that X is actively boosting content posted by Democrat congressional members’ accounts, while simultaneously de-amplifying their GOP counterparts during an election year. The X algorithm assigns each account a “visibility score” on a scale of 0-100. Each of these scores determines which accounts the platform boosts and which it de-boosts, according to X’s AI chatbot, Grok. MRC’s analysts prompted Grok to examine the social media platform's algorithm — which Musk open-sourced in 2023 in a display of transparency — to calculate the visibility scores for all members of Congress. The algorithm, per Grok, uses four core metrics, also based on a 0-100 scale, to calculate the overall visibility score. The results are in: X’s algorithm overwhelmingly favors the left.  Tilting the scales in favor of Democrats is well-trodden ground for the company, but it is now generally thought of as a thing of the past. These results suggest, however, a continued conflict within X about which policies should guide its operations.  On one side is Musk and his new approach to technology (like Grok and his commitment to algorithmic transparency); on the other side are legacy algorithms and certain holdover employees loyal to the prior censorship regime.  “I suspect the radical lefties at X are helping their radical besties in Congress, or it could be that the ghosts of Jack Dorsey are still plaguing the algorithm. Either way, it appears to be an inside job,” said MRC Vice President for Free Speech America Dan Schneider in response to our findings. He added, “It might make more sense if the moderates got treated the best by the algorithm, but they don’t. X assigns much better scores to the hard left than it assigns to moderates, and treats moderates better than conservatives. The X continuum consistently favors the left.”  Regression analysis of Grok-analyzed data confirms this trend.  As rated by the Institute for Legislative Analysis (“ILA,” a non-partisan Congressional ratings organization), the firebrands in Congress with the most leftwing voting records are treated the best by X. Among these lawmakers are Reps. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (a self-proclaimed socialist who caucuses with Democrats). X’s treatment of members of Congress generally gets worse as their voting records become more conservative. Based on their ILA-rated voting records, Sens. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Reps. Chip Roy (R-TX), Greg Steube (R-FL) and Scott Perry (R-PA) are all among the most conservative members, and their X visibility scores are among the worst. Whereas Sens. Shelley Capito (R-WV), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Reps. Don Bacon (R-NE), Thomas Kean (R-NJ) and Maria Salazar (R-FL) received relatively moderate ILA ratings, and the X visibility scores are worse than the most liberal but better than the most conservative. One shocking result of MRC’s findings was that Waters is considered to be the least toxic, most reputable and highest-ranked House member by X’s algorithm with a total visibility score of 86.5 out of 100. This is despite her history of numerous falsehoods and toxic political and racial flamethrowing posted on her account.  The average score for Senate Republicans stood at an abysmal 66.8 out of 100, while Senate Democrats boasted a stellar 82.4 out of 100. In the House, the Republicans’ score was worse than the score assigned to their Senate counterparts, averaging a mere 58.6 out of 100. The House Democrats’ score, by contrast, was 67.0 out of 100, almost ten points higher than the House Republicans’ average. In May, Musk assured the public that he is attempting to address the problem of reduced content visibility for certain users. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) asked Musk in a May 23 post, “[H]ow long will it take to get rid of the stage-five clingers at X—those who still periodically throttle conservatives?” Musk responded candidly, “Well, neither conservative nor progressives should be throttled. The point is to have an even playing field. I will investigate.”  Well, neither conservative nor progressives should be throttled. The point is to have an even playing field. I will investigate. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 24, 2024 Schneider expressed hope, “Musk is clearly on their trail, trying to root out the problematic employees and algorithms in conflict with his vision. We hope that our findings will alert him to where these problems might be lurking.”  X’s Lefty Kingmaker Algorithm: How It’s Done  MRC researchers have used Grok to good effect. Musk’s AI platform spelled out exactly how the algorithm effectuates its political favoritism.  Grok revealed that X scored accounts across four separate categories, each on a scale 0-100.  The “Mass Appeal” category refers to an account’s diversity of followers. The “Reputation” category refers to an account’s alleged credibility. The “Toxicity” category refers to an account’s “offensiveness” or perceived “harmfulness.” Lastly, the “Follower” category references an account’s ability to retain followers. Each category is weighted differently to come up with a total final score that determines which accounts X boosts and which it deboosts.  MRC researchers prompted Grok with eight tests between July 1 and July 2 to assess how the platform weighted each of the metrics to determine a congressional member’s final visibility score. The four categories were weighted as follows: Mass Appeal (38 percent), Reputation (30 percent), Toxicity (21 percent), and Follow (11 percent).  Across all four categories, X on average consistently rated Democrat members of Congress better than members of the GOP.  X’s algorithm gave House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) a high toxicity score of 42 points, which is worse than that of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) who had a 40 out of 100. The “Toxicity” metric is the only category where a higher toxicity is worse for the total visibility score. This means that the X algorithm considered Johnson more toxic than a notorious member of Congress who has a history of spewing “anti-Semitic” extremism.  In June 2021, Omar put out a tweet equating the United States and Israel to the Taliban and Hamas terrorist organizations. She was also censured by the House in 2019 for her tweet accusing Jewish people of buying political influence and mocking accordingly, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” In another example of X’s glaring bias, the algorithm gave admitted-socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) an excellent rating of 82.4 out of 100, while libertarian Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) barely managed a C-minus at 70.9 out of 100.  Congressional members's reputation scores reflected the most egregious examples of bias. Grok noted that the X algorithm uses “Reputation” scores, which Grok dubbed as “Tweepcred,”  to determine “the visibility and likelihood of a user's content being recommended to others.” When MRC prompted Grok to explain further, it stated that “the minimum Tweepcred [reputation] score required for a user to be recommended on Twitter is 65,” indicating that any account with a lower score is de-amplified. Further, wrote Grok, “Accounts with higher Tweepcred scores are more likely to have their posts seen by a larger audience, while those with lower scores may have their posts deprioritized in the platform's algorithm.”  Javi Lopez, a tech expert and founder of image generator Magnify AI, wrote in an Oct. 25, 2023 X post that if one’s “Tweepcred” score “is above 65, you're in luck. Below that, you're out of the game. The shadow ban I experienced last week must have sent my reputation to the depths.”   The average reputation scores for Democrats and Republicans in both the House and Senate unveiled a glaring political bias: The average score for House Republicans was a paltry 55.7 out of 100 — meaning they’re severely limited in recommendation by the algorithm — while House Democrats enjoyed an above-65 average reputation score of 66.2 out of 100. The bias was even more pronounced in the Senate, with GOP members scoring just above the 65 threshold with an average score of  67.6 out of 100. In contrast, Democrats boasted an astronomical 86.0 out of 100, giving the left an overwhelmingly undue advantage in terms of X recommending Democrats’ content. X’s Algorithm Has a Bizarre Affinity for Senate Democrats Fomenting Dishonesty  X revealed its love affair with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and when it gave him the highest visibility score out of all of his colleagues in both the House and Senate. His left-wing colleagues in the Senate, by extension, also greatly benefited from this cozy relationship. Out of 100 senators, the top 42 scores were exclusively bestowed upon Democrats.  Republicans made up nearly all the bottom 43 ranked senators. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), a former Democrat who split from the party, was the only exception.  Not only did X crown Schumer’s account with the highest overall “visibility” score (92 out of 100), it also rated him one of the most credible senators on the platform. X gave Schumer a stellar reputation score of 95 out of 100, appearing to overlook many major canards that the senator posted from his account.  Schumer’s X account has repeatedly pushed various fallacies. In one post, Schumer lent credence to former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, who gave what is now known to have been false testimony about Trump trying to wrestle the steering wheel of his motorcade from Secret Service agents. Trump reportedly trying to overpower Secret Service and lead the insurrection is the lowest any president has ever gone Presidents are supposed to protect Americans Cassidy Hutchinson’s courageous testimony about the effort to undermine democracy should frighten every American — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) June 29, 2022 Schumer also posted the debunked claim that Trump had called white supremacists who attended the Charlottesville, Virginia Unite the Right rally in 2016 “very fine people.” A Snopes fact-check rated this claim “false.”  Nobody who meets with antisemites like Nick Fuentes, called white supremacists in Charlottesville “very fine people,” disgustingly said Hitler “did some good things” has any right to lecture Jewish Americans on their personal political beliefs Everyone must condemn Trump’s words pic.twitter.com/EJgRLIr1mC — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) March 19, 2024 But Schumer isn’t the only Senate Democrat that X’s algorithm highly regards. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is one of the highest-ranked members of Congress by X’s algorithm. X gave Warren’s account the lowest toxicity score in the Senate despite her oftentimes vitriolic language.  Warren used her account in 2017 to smear Trump’s then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions as a racist and a sexist and even outright threatened him.  If Jeff Sessions makes even the tiniest attempt to bring his racism, sexism & bigotry into @TheJusticeDept, he'll hear from all of us. — Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) February 9, 2017 X also granted Warren’s account the highest reputation score of any senator, but her post history tells a different story. One Warren post falsely blamed the unfortunate suicide of an overdose victim as a “killing” perpetrated by anti-trans “extremists.”  She actually killed herself. Source: The Oklahoma Chief Medical Examiner — Andy Ngô ?️‍? (@MrAndyNgo) March 13, 2024 Meanwhile, X’s algorithm punished and downranked Republicans, including those with a history of being on the right side of the truth. Consider Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY). X put Paul in the bottom half of the Senate in overall “visibility” scores (70.9 out of 100). In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, Paul, who is also an ophthalmologist, emerged as one of the preeminent voices on the origins of the virus on the platform. Paul consistently argued that COVID-19 was likely a man-made pathogen created in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. President Joe Biden’s Federal Bureau of Investigation and his Department of Energy have both since affirmed that COVID likely came from a lab.  X also significantly de-boosted the account of Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO), ranking him in the bottom five in the Senate with a failing 59.4 out of 100 visibility score. Schmitt has continuously called out Biden’s White House for verifiably censoring Americans even while many on the left derided the allegation as a baseless “conspiracy theory.” Schmitt’s account also suffers from a low 55 out of 100 reputation score, below the 65 “Tweepcred” threshold needed to be recommended by the algorithm. X’s bias barely abated even when calculating the average visibility scores just for senators running for reelection in 2024. When reviewing the individual account scores of Republican and Democrat Senators running for reelection, X’s algorithm displayed a 14-point preferential bias in favor of Senate Democrats. Republican candidates received an average score of 68.6 out of 100 while Democrat candidates received an average score of 82.5 out of 100.  X’s algorithmic favoritism threatens to subvert the outcomes of some of the most highly competitive senate elections in November, as social media platforms such as X provide candidates with indispensable resources such as donations and exposure to on-the-fence voters.  X Continues Its Inexplicable Favoritism in the House While only one-third of Senators are running for reelection this year, nearly every House member will be vying to retain control of their seat in November. The X algorithm is seemingly playing a similar censorship game in the House, which is ultimately benefiting the left and diminishing the reach of House Republicans on the platform. X gave far-left House Democrats a distinct advantage over their GOP opponents, just like it did for members of the Senate. House Republicans received an especially low average score across all four “visibility” metrics with a 58.6 out of 100. Conversely, House Democrats scored almost ten points higher with an average of 67.0 out of 100.  Inexplicably, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) received the highest visibility scores out of any member of the House. X’s algorithm assigned her an overall score of 86.6 out of 100. X’s algorithm ignored Waters’s habitual tendency to purport false and toxic narratives, as the social media platform rated Waters with a reputation score of 87 out of 100 and a meager toxicity score of 9 out of 100. This bafflingly high score seems to ignore Waters’s repeated trend of posting false narratives on X. After the high-profile case of Jacob Blake’s fatal encounter with police, Waters proceeded to smear the later-vindicated officer involved in the shooting on X as a potential murderer without evidence.  Another unarmed black man, shot in the back, by a WI police officer! No matter the outrage at the killing of George Floyd by a police officer, knee on his neck, the killing of black men continues. Is this a defiance by the police that indicates they don’t intend to stop? — Maxine Waters (@RepMaxineWaters) August 26, 2020 Waters also had a chronic habit of launching Twitter tirades against Trump. She disparaged Trump as a “mad man,” and a “deranged lunatic.”  Trump threatening protestors from exercising their constitutional right to freedom of assembly. He’s goading the protestors & will be responsible for confrontation & violence in Tulsa. He’s not beyond tear gassing & probably has the military on alert. Mad man needs to be stopped! — Maxine Waters (@RepMaxineWaters) June 20, 2020 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is another unreputable Democrat that X’s algorithm considers trustworthy. Schiff was a vocal peddler of the debunked Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy, which was revealed to be a coordinated campaign perpetuated by the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016 and members of the top law enforcement and intelligence agencies to smear Trump as a Russian puppet. Schiff, who was the head of the Intelligence Committee, famously claimed that he had “ample evidence” of Trump working with Russia. He tweeted false claims numerous times about Trump as well as the Mueller Report which cleared Trump of those allegations. Robert Mueller was clear: Russia interfered in our election to help Trump. Trump's campaign welcomed and used this illicit help. They never reported it to the FBI. Instead, they lied about it to investigators. And used those lies to obstruct justice. pic.twitter.com/EVfYRrfn8p — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) July 28, 2019 Conclusion Musk’s $43 billion acquisition of Twitter in 2022 was a major turning point in the free speech fight against Big Tech censorship. But it’s becoming apparent that holdovers from Old Twitter aren’t letting go of the power they tasted during the 2020 election.  The theory of an internal revolt among Old Regime holdovers at X is also not a new one.  Using its CensorTrack.org database, MRC revealed a shocking spike in censorship cases in 2023 following Musk’s acquisition. This was a major red flag showing how Old Twitter employees  had actively undermined Musk’s pragmatic approach to free speech online.  This time, however, Musk’s AI and his actions to make the algorithm transparent are making it much harder for the radical remnant to hide their insubordination from Musk.  METHODOLOGY: Between June 7 - June 25, MRC researchers gave Grok specific prompts in order to ascertain “visibility” scores for individual members of Congress. The questions were specifically tailored so Grok would only report the essential criteria that would determine whether or not a specific account on X is pushed/recommended to other users on the platform (“Mass Appeal,” “Reputation,” “Toxicity,” and “Follow”). Grok calculated numerical value scores between 1 and 100 for each member of Congress. MRC researchers then calculated the average scores for all members of Congress across all four criteria used by the algorithm to determine X’s “visibility” scoring process. To determine how X weighted each of the four categories in determining a “visibility” score, MRC researchers prompted Grok with eight tests between July 1 and July 2 to assess how each of the metrics were weighted to uncover which was considered most important when determining whether or not an account would be boosted. Grok repeatedly provided information with minor variations on how each category was weighted to determine a congressional member’s final “visibility” score. MRC researchers then took the average weighted percentages across the eight tests to deduce a mathematical formula. When the averages were computed, the categories were weighted as follows: Mass Appeal (38 percent), Reputation (30 percent), Toxicity (21 percent), and Follow (11 percent). “Mass Appeal” and “Reputation” scores were consistently in the top two spots in measures of importance across the eight tests.  

Tuning in to MSNBC this morning, interested to get the take of Joe Scarborough and his cohort of fellow Trump haters on the attempted assassination, it was surprising to find that the show had been pre-empted in favor of generic coverage hosted by Ana Cabrera. What was behind the decision to yank Joe and Mika off the air? CNN's Oliver Darcy, perhaps gloating over the temporary suspension of its early-morning rivals, ran an article on the matter, "‘Morning Joe’ pulled from air Monday because of Trump shooting," that included this line [emphasis added]: "A person familiar with the matter told CNN that the decision was made to avoid a scenario in which one of the show’s stable of two dozen-plus guests might make an inappropriate comment on live television that could be used to assail the program and network as a whole." A likely explanation. But odd that the unidentified source said that the concerns about an "inappropriate comment" centered on the show's regular guests. The biggest danger of someone popping off might surely have come from Scarborough himself.  After all, Scarborough is Biden's informal adviser, who boasts spending hours at a time with him. And Scarborough's the guy who rarely gets through a show without repeatedly calling Trump a fascist. And who maintains a drumbeat of condemnation of Trump as a threat to end American democracy. Not to mention Mika Brzezinski, a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat and fierce critic of Trump in her own right.  Darcy called the Trump-will-end-democracy hype just "hard-knuckled reporting" on the future:  In the wake of the attempt on Trump’s life, some of the former president’s supporters have vehemently criticized the press and liberal media commentators for their hard-knuckled reporting, which has sounded the alarm on what four more years under the former president would look like. In contrast with MSNBC, over on CNN Kasie Hunt was at her regular early-morning post. Perhaps a reflection of the fact that while she has her liberal moments, she is generally more even-handed than the wild-eyed liberal partisans over at Morning Joe. For better or worse, it appears that Morning Joe will be back on the air on Tuesday.  We'll be watching, looking to see if Scarborough & Co. can restrain their Trump-bashing enthusiasm. Note: As mentioned, Ana Cabrera has been hosting the coverage this morning at MSNBC. And as NewsBusters has documented, as here, here, and here, she herself is another standard-issue media liberal.

What if enough minorities — Latinos, African Americans, Jews, and Asians — broke ranks with their default political loyalties and split their vote this November?If the taken-for-granted and ill-served among these groups just split their vote to reflect their present dissatisfaction, their political power would tangibly increase within both parties overnight.This is the unstated reason Democratic men don’t stage a political walkout: It would infuriate the women in their lives and raise the heat on them at home.Put it this way: Instead of one seat at the Democratic table that is not serving you and yours, you would have seats at two tables — both competing to serve you and yours. It’s a pretty good deal. So, why is it not being pursued aggressively?Politics is the art (and science) of understanding what’s possible and making it happen.Smart Republicans understand that this election will be won with (and lost without) a big swing in Hispanic support. Democrats’ black, Jewish, and Asian blue wall appears to show signs of cracking, and this vulnerability is gaining electoral polling attention.If enough of this cohort walked away from the Democratic camp, it would mark a tectonic shift in American politics. It would push the Democratic Party back to the center — a good, salutary development, and far from where it currently resides.A whisper to dissatisfied Democrats: Please don’t register and vote as independents. It’s such a political waste.Independents come in two primary political colors: embarrassed Democrats and embarrassed Republicans. Only 10% of independents are truly independent — that is, nonaffiliated.Traditionally, these two dissatisfied voting blocs vote for the brand and party that they disavowed for doing them dirty when Election Day comes around. Doing so is a form of political Stockholm Syndrome, which is when you identify with and support your captors. It’s worse than a wasted vote. Independents know what the problem is — yet they still contribute to it.That might not be completely fair. In the 2020 presidential election and the 2022 midterms, dissatisfied Republicans and their adjacent independent cohort crossed partisan lines and contributed to the Democratic win. In their defense, they wanted their establishment, deep-state perks back and their more liberal spouses, kids, and friends to stop hating them. (Kellyanne and George Conway are notable exceptions to this broad-brush rendering).But dissatisfied Democrats and adjacent independents have not reciprocated. They consistently fail to do their part, and, in doing so, they send a confusing, illiberal message: that it’s OK to turn up the woke heat, when all the polling data suggests otherwise.Ruy Teixeira over at the Liberal Patriot— a must read on Substack — has captured the growing divide within the Democratic and adjacent independent ranks. The dissatisfaction runs deep and wide. But in contrast to dissatisfied Republicans and adjacent independents, dissatisfied Democrats and adjacent independents have shown a structural inability to cross the political picket line and send a clear “knock-it-off” message at the polling both.As a result, the “wash, rinse, repeat” insanity of Democratic partisan politics continues and probably will do so again this November. This is the leading reason why “We, the People” can’t have nice things and why we are not currently enjoying a happy, well-adjusted, pursuit-of-happiness-oriented 21st century.Who can lead the way out of this illiberal, woke madness?Dissatisfied Democratic men — or so the polling suggests. Males across blue-wall ethnic cross-tabulations are rightfully unhappy, more than concerned by the madness, and want better.In contrast, the ladies have not budged in their commitment to the party in power and its woke program. And herein lies the challenge.This is the unstated reason Democratic men don’t stage a political walkout in the requisite numbers: It would infuriate the women in their lives and raise the heat on them at home. Not just from their girlfriends, wives, and daughters, but from their mothers and grandmothers, not to mention church ladies. The blue wall is devoutly defended by women.I come from an Irish, New Deal, Democratic family. My grandfather was a machine politician. But it was my grandmother who was the enforcer of political faith and morals. She has been gone for more than a decade, but her stay-on-the-political-reservation voice and influence is still felt and followed within our extended clan. Might my experience be typical among Democratic households, as well as among mating and dating partners?I think it is. But more importantly, what do our politically unsatisfied and potentially tectonic-plate shifting Democratic men, stuck on the sidelines, think is holding them back? There is not a poll to consult on this yet. You need to look inside yourself for the answer.What’s a conflicted guy to do?How about following your political gut in the polling booth?The polling booth remains a “safe space” for now. You don’t have to share your voting choices with anyone, including your loved ones. Just vote based on what you think is best politically for you, your family, your job, and your country.When the election results are tallied — it might take a few days for Pennsylvania to come in — and the message is sent, you’re not obliged to take credit for what has happened.Just say, “Wow.” Ask the women in your lives what they think happened and listen patiently. Shake your head in supportive disbelief.“Wow.”If asked for your thoughts, say something like this: “I guess, for the silent majority of American voters, the bad-orange-boogie-man card we played was less scary than the woke-boogie-woman-and-party-in-charge-for-the-past-four-years card.”You might add: “My read going forward is that the Democratic Party needs to find the winning, common-sense center, or else it’s going to lose even more of the base that it has taken for granted and served so poorly for years.”Throw in one more “wow” if you think it will help. And leave it at that.

The bigger you build in strategy games, the more divorced you become from the ground-level human drama. In the opening turns of Civilization 6, Age of Empires, and Cities Skylines 2, you feel a connection to every citizen - each decision has a measurable effect on a knowable, empathetic number of people. By the closing stages, however, you don’t really care. More buildings. More units. More land. Combining the space-age style of Starfield with the automation and colony-sim mechanics of Factorio, The Crust is a new Steam strategy game that tries to remain identifiably human. If you like the people-management tension of Frostpunk, this could be for you. Continue reading New space strategy game The Crust blends Starfield with Frostpunk MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best strategy games, Best city-building games, Best management games

Nvidia has reportedly been working on a GeForce RTX 4070 card with even less VRAM than the original 12GB version. According to leaked images, a 10GB Nvidia RTX 4070 card was doing the rounds during the GPU’s development, with quite a different spec from the 12GB card. Nvidia has come under a lot of flak for not supplying its powerful GPUs with enough VRAM, but if these pictures are legitimate, the RTX 4070 could have been even more unbalanced. In terms of the core spec, this leaked Nvidia RTX 4070 10GB card has quite a lot in common with the new RTX 4070 Super, which is the current top recommendation on our guide to the best graphics card. In particular, it looks as though the 10GB RTX 4070 was supplied with 7,168 CUDA cores, which is the same number as the new RTX 4070 Super card, while the original RTX 4070 only has 5,888 CUDA cores enabled. Continue reading Nvidia’s GeForce RTX 4070 could have had even less VRAM, reveals leak MORE FROM PCGAMESN: GeForce RTX 4070 Super review, DLSS explained, Best graphics cards

If you're in the market for a new pixel pusher to prepare for the upcoming game release season, we've found some brilliant graphics card deals that will power you through 2024 and beyond. These Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE cards have both dropped to new, low prices but only for a limited time. We originally ranked the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 as one of the best graphics cards but replaced it once the Super variant was released, as it offered better performance for the money. With this new deal dropping the RTX 4070 to just $499.99, however, there's never been a better time to upgrade. As for the Radeon RX 7900 GRE, this card still holds a place on our list as the best mid-range card. Continue reading Nvidia’s RTX 4070 GPU just dropped to its lowest ever price MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Ryzen 7 7800X3D review, Best gaming CPU, Radeon RX 7800 XT review

Doing the right thing by emphatically ending lawfare might not win the president reelection, but it would improve his chances.

'Amazing Admission': Here's the Reported Reason 'Morning Joe' Is Nowhere to Be Found on MSNBC