Connect with us

Politics

How Maryland Democrats are thwarting Wes Moore’s political ambitions

Published

on

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore speaks during a press conference announcing the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act, in Severna Park, Maryland, Jan. 20, 2026.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore’s national political ambitions could be stymied by Democrats in his own backyard.

The governor’s power play to redraw the state’s congressional lines and snare Democrats a single House seat has earned him accolades from progressive activists and party leaders in Washington, raising his profile as he weighs a 2028 presidential run. But Moore also has been outmaneuvered at times by members of own party, particularly those in the Maryland Senate where his gerrymander blitz is facing an unceremonious death.

The redistricting gambit is one of the first big political tests Moore has faced that has national implications and could elevate him further within the party — or expose weaknesses as he positions himself as a counterweight to President Donald Trump.

Critics say Moore hasn’t been aggressive enough in using bare-knuckle tactics to push through his agenda. Supporters say the first-term governor is focused on redistricting because he sees it as vital to his future national ambitions. Some national Democrats question whether Moore can lead the nation if he fails to bend lawmakers in a solidly blue state with a Democratic-controlled Legislature to enact his policy priorities. POLITICO spoke to almost two dozen state and federal lawmakers and Democratic strategists for this story.

Advertisement

David Turner, Moore’s senior adviser and communications director, said the governor spearheading Maryland’s redistricting effort is not about furthering his political career.

“Anyone who thinks this is about national ambitions isn’t paying enough attention to the damage being done in 2026,” he said. “The Governor has been clear: at a time when other states are discussing mid-decade redistricting, Maryland needs to as well.”

Moore’s inability to convince enough Maryland Democratic senators to go along with redrawing maps has drawn unfavorable comparisons to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, another likely 2028 White House contender who successfully pushed through a major redistricting effort in his state. After California voters approved the state’s redistricting proposal, Newsom urged other states, including Maryland, to “contribute a verse” in the party’s gerrymandering push.

“If he did kind of match Gavin in terms of that effectiveness, being able to take this issue, win on it and kind of help build his image, I think that would [have been] a great opportunity for him,” said Paul Mitchell of Moore. Mitchell is a redistricting expert and architect of the newly adopted California congressional maps.

Advertisement

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore speaks during a press conference announcing the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act, in Severna Park, Maryland, Jan. 20, 2026.

While Moore championed bills to raise the state’s minimum wage, worked to reduce Baltimore’s homicide rate to near 50-year lows and helped Marylanders cover soaring energy costs, in December, Maryland Democrats overrode at least 16 of the governor’s vetoes — tying his predecessor, GOP Gov. Larry Hogan, for the most he had in a single year during his two terms. That included one override veto over an issue that peeved many Black lawmakers months earlier: Moore’s blockage of the formation of a commission to study reparations in the state.

Weeks after his reparations veto, Moore traveled to an early presidential primary state to deliver the keynote remarks at the South Carolina Democrats Blue Palmetto Dinner, where he said: “Gone are the days when we are the party of bureaucracy, multi-year studies, panels and college debate club rules.”

It is a stark illustration of the criticism that’s followed Moore since he cruised to victory in his first-ever election four years ago: that he’s using the governor’s mansion as a springboard to Washington instead of doing the work of building relationships in Annapolis to get his bills across the finish line.

“Truly, Wes Moore is a great candidate…He has the pizzazz and the swagger that some folks wish they could have,” a Democratic strategist who has worked on state, local and presidential campaigns said and granted anonymity to offer an unvarnished assessment of Moore. “But the operations of his political tentacles are weak. His inside political network is weak.”

Advertisement

Moore addressed some of this criticism head on last week, where the tension was palpable during a joint address of the General Assembly.

“I will not stand here and tell you that I have gotten it all right,” Moore said in his State of the State address Wednesday. “It’s taken time to build relationships. It’s taken time to learn Annapolis. I am an outsider at heart, and I don’t see that changing,” he said before ramping up to a central theme of his remarks – and pressuring Senate Democrats to take up a congressional redistricting bill.

He characterized his months-long public tussle with Maryland Senate President Bill Ferguson as “a very principled disagreement.”

Though the Maryland House of Delegates approved legislation Moore backed to redraw the seat of the state’s lone Republican, House Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Andy Harris, Maryland’s gerrymandering effort is still being blocked in the state Senate.

Advertisement

Ferguson has maintained he will not bring the bill up for a vote, saying there is not enough support for it in his chamber, it’s legally risky and adopting the new maps would jeopardize Maryland’s current 7-1 advantage.

Maryland State Senate President Bill Ferguson addresses the senate chamber during the opening session of the Maryland General Assembly, at the State Capitol in Annapolis, Maryland, Jan. 10, 2024.

Many national Democrats have pressured Ferguson and other holdouts, including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who in an interview with CNN on Sunday suggested he would travel to Annapolis to meet with Ferguson.

Two Moore aides, granted anonymity to discuss internal strategy, also point out that top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who previously served in the Maryland Senate, penned a letter to state lawmakers this week calling it a “clear and present danger” not to act. Raskin also sought to undercut Ferguson’s legal justification for not acting, pointing to recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court allowing both Texas and California to use their redrawn maps ahead of the midterms. But the Senate leader appears unswayed.

“I think the miscalculation is that a lot of people are being led to believe that it’s only Bill who doesn’t want the map,” said one Maryland Legislative Black Caucus member granted anonymity to discuss internal party dynamics.

Advertisement

Maryland’s Feb. 24 candidate filing deadline is quickly approaching — the date Ferguson and supporters say any changes beyond that date will be too late and overly disruptive to the state elections calendar.

The two Moore aides argued that it is an arbitrary deadline and pointed to legislation working its way through the Maryland House pushing the filing deadline to late March.

A December poll by University of Maryland, Baltimore County found just 27 percent of Maryland residents said redrawing maps was a top issue, signaling affordability and quality education were top of mind.

Maryland-based Democratic strategist Len Foxwell said Moore’s attempts so far to win over voters in the state have been too focused on cable television and podcast appearances, adding the governor’s redistricting push never gained steam because he and his team “botched the rollout so badly.”

Advertisement

Instead of engaging in the kind of aggressive public relations campaign that Newsom launched to sell voters on the need to gerrymander, Moore created an advisory commission to solicit public input. Its meetings were held virtually and typically at odd hours, with most proceedings taking place late on Friday afternoons. The outcome of whether the commission was going to recommend new maps was never in doubt.

“The work of the commission was a rather dreary exercise in muscle-flexing,” Foxwell said. “The clear message was that we are doing this because we can do it. And I don’t think that was a message that was satisfying.”

Moore hasn’t deployed scorched-earth tactics against Ferguson, unlike the kind Trump encouraged where he threatened to primary Indiana Republicanswho wouldn’t support his attempt to gerrymander in the Hoosier state. Indiana Senate Republicans ultimately blocked Trump’s push.

Jeffries, who could become the nation’s first Black speaker should Democrats take back the U.S. House this fall, said during a hastily arranged press conference in the U.S. Capitol in late January that Marylanders “deserve an up or down vote.” Moore, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Jeffries, looked on as the Democratic congressional leader directed his disdain toward Ferguson, though he never named him.

Advertisement

Behind the scenes, Jeffries and other top Democrats backing Moore are working around Ferguson by leaning on the Black Caucus to force a rarely-used state Senate procedure to discharge the redistricting bill out of the chamber’s Rules Committee. If it’s successful it will force a floor vote on the House-passed bill. But just one member of the Black Caucus is openly supporting that tactic and the prevailing thought is the legislation will sit in purgatory until the General Assembly session ends in April.

The Maryland Legislative Black Caucus member added that while Moore is seen as a rising Democratic star on the national stage, there is work to be done by the governor in Annapolis.

“I think it’s that his folks are trying to insulate him from some things,” the lawmaker continued. “Because if he starts to have those relationships, then he’s going to start to hear that some of these ideas that he has are not necessarily the best, and that becomes a problem for some of his national aspirations.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

UK hospitals urged to scrap Palantir over health and human rights risks

Published

on

UK hospitals urged to scrap Palantir over health and human rights risks

A coalition of leading human rights, health groups and trade unions has urged NHS England to cancel its contract with Palantir based on serious risks to the NHS. Medact has sent its new briefing document, Concerns Regarding Palantir Technologies in NHS Data Systems, to all NHS trust and Integrated Care Board CEOs.

It urges them to exercise their local autonomy and not comply with NHS England’s instruction to adopt Palantir’s Federated Data Platform.

Palantir embedded across the NHS

Assessing the risks posed by the company’s technology to patients and the NHS, the briefing raises alarm over data protection, governance, procurement practices, state surveillance and the wider human rights implications of embedding Palantir’s systems across the health service.

The briefing warns that adopting Palantir’s Foundry platform under the NHS Federated Data Platform could cause irreparable reputational damage to NHS bodies and permanently undermine public trust.

Advertisement

It argues that Palantir’s links to alleged human rights abuses, the US and Israeli militaries, controversial policing practices, deportations and surveillance operations should have excluded it from NHS procurement entirely.

The Good Law Project’s Duncan McCann said:

Palantir is a direct threat to our health service that could see millions of people refuse to share their records – fatally undermining the very system it claims to improve.

At the heart of the warning is the interoperability of Palantir’s platforms. Its civil software Foundry and military software Gotham share underlying architecture. Because of this, the NHS’s adoption of the technology could indirectly contribute to the advancement of militarised tools that have been linked to alleged human rights abuses.

Defence and policing as well

With Palantir’s expansion into the Ministry of Defence and police forces across the country, groups warn of the risk of data-sharing across government departments.

Advertisement

Foundry software is currently enabling US Immigrations, Customs and Enforcement (ICE) to track migrants using the Department of Health and Human Services. This highlights the power of Palantir technology to drive data-driven abuses of state power.

The groups also raise concerns about procurement processes. They point to overlapping relationships between political figures, contractors and NHS leadership. This includes Peter Mandelson and his lobbying firm Global Counsel.

The Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has acted as a showcase site for Palantir technology. Its chair Matthew Swindells also simultaneously advised Palantir and Global Counsel.

Anna Peiris of Medact said:

Advertisement

For health workers, patient safety – and the security of their data – is non-negotiable. The launch of this briefing will help them to continue resisting Palantir, a company known for supporting the genocide in Gaza and mass deportations in the US, and ensure the rollout of Palantir’s data platform is stopped for good.

Cuts are driving Palantir dependence

The briefing also highlights new data privacy concerns. This is an issue which NHS leadership has repeatedly dismissed. The report reveals that, as part of the Federated Data Platform rollout, NHS data teams are reportedly receiving multiple requests each week from Palantir staff seeking access to stored patient-identifiable information.

Amid widespread staffing cuts across the NHS, analysts are increasingly reliant on Palantir personnel for implementation and system management. The groups warn this risks ‘vendor lock-in’, with Palantir retaining intellectual property and becoming entrenched as the dominant NHS data supplier.

The document also points out that, in a 2025 meeting, the health secretary Wes Streeting promised to review the governance of confidential patient information. He described this to Palantir as presenting “opportunities”.

The political context is shifting rapidly. The British Medical Association has announced its intention to explore how doctors can refuse to use Palantir’s software. Meanwhile, the Green Party has pledged to mobilise its members and councillors to oppose the rollout.

Advertisement

The briefing predicts further resistance from both NHS staff and patients if implementation continues, and urges local NHS bodies not to implement the technology.

A spokesperson for the United Tech and Allied Workers Union said:

Palantir’s encroachment into public services should be of utmost concern to the public and the government. The question of control is critical to maintaining both infrastructure and healthcare delivery.

Our members in the tech sector understand the importance of trust and oversight in tech, and this company has repeatedly proven itself to be untrustworthy and scruple-less.

Our NHS systems should be built and owned with public oversight and accountability. We should be leveraging and building in-house NHS technology expertise to deliver the data system we rely on, rather than giving Palantir profit and control of our private health data.

Advertisement

Hope Worsdale of Just Treatment said:

The trust between a patient and their doctor is paramount: it is the bedrock of the health service. Placing Palantir at the heart of our NHS – despite its immoral business practices, deadly products, anti-democratic leadership, and ineffective services – will have an irreparable, corrosive effect on that trust.

It begs the question: why have the lines of lobbyists mattered more to this government than the lives of patients?

We call on everyone with power within the NHS to heed this report’s warning, and resist at every possible point the imposition of Palantir’s control over patient data.

We call on parliamentarians to demand the government rips up its contract with Palantir, and develops a data processing system owned and controlled by our health service focused solely on the interests, needs, and rights of NHS patients.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

US FCC threaten stations who report damage from Iranian attacks

Published

on

US FCC threaten stations who report damage from Iranian attacks

The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has threatened the licenses of news broadcasters for reporting on the damage that Iranian strikes have done to the US military.

The Chairman of the FCC, Brendan Carr, said:

Advertisement

Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions – also known as the fake news – have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up.

He quoted a separate X post, which included a post from Donald Trump on Truth Social. Specifically, Trump pointed to the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and other “lowlife papers”.

According to Trump no plane was damaged, but “one had slightly more damage” than the rest.

We can only presume that this means the US is not doing so well in the war.

US — free press

A free press is more important than ever — especially when Trump and Netanyahu have waged an illegal and unprovoked war.

Even more so, when Trump is sending US troops to fight in a war which he only started because his incompetent ‘advisors’ (i.e., Trump’s son-in-law) did not have the “technical expertise” to understand the negotiations with Iran.

Advertisement

Importantly, the First Amendment in the US Constitution states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Therefore, the FCC or Trump threatening media organisations is illegal.

In January, 2025, the White House said:

Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve.

Yet here Trump is, telling news broadcasters what they can and cannot publish during his illegal war.

Even Brendan Carr said in December 2023:

Free speech is the counterweight—it is the check on government control.

That is why censorship is the authoritarian’s dream.

And in December 2024:

Advertisement

Censorship isn’t just about silencing words—it is about controlling ideas and replacing robust debate with the cement of orthodoxy.

So, how much has Trump paid him to change his tune?

Nazi Germany

It’s ‘Never forget’ World War Two, unless one of Jeffrey Epstein’s pedo-friends is telling you to.

When Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, his regime destroyed the country’s free press. It shut down hundreds of opposition newspapers and issued daily orders dictating what could and could not be published.

Advertisement

See the similarities yet?

It is straight out of the Nazi Germany propaganda playbook.

Freedom of the press is the backbone of society. It allows us to report on the truth and hold powerful people to account. The Committee to Protect Journalists has called state-sponsored censorship one of the “most urgent threats facing journalists worldwide”. However, it appears the US is now heading towards countries like North Korea and Burma — where independent journalists cease to exist.

Advertisement

Ultimately, the US government does not want the American people to know that its attacks on Iran are illegal and that they’re failing badly.

Feature image via CNN/YouTube

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Here's the one role Leo DiCaprio regrets turning down

Published

on

Here's the one role Leo DiCaprio regrets turning down

!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”87fb3dc3-97a5-4b2a-a385-3b4f5d48e0ea”}).render(“69b6d9f5e4b0e8cdfdd26cc2”);});

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Here’s The Difference Between Venting And Complaining

Published

on

Intention, tone and level of emotion can help you determine if something is amiss.

When your partner frustrates you or your mum is on your last nerve, it’s natural to call a friend or talk about your feelings at the next wine night. But not all emotional unloading is created equal.

“Although they seem similar on the surface, venting and complaining are actually distinct phenomena that lead to different outcomes for your mental health,” Natalie Moore, a licensed marriage and family therapist, told HuffPost.

So what exactly is the difference? And when does talking to friends about your feelings about a person or situation go from a healthy outlet to an unproductive cycle of negativity?

Below, Moore and other relationship experts break it down.

Advertisement

What is venting?

“I think of venting as letting off steam about the annoying habits or behaviours that are inevitable in a relationship,” said Tracy Ross, a licensed clinical social worker specialising in couples and family therapy. “And more often than not it’s helpful to have a friend who listens, validates and just understands why you feel the way you do – without judgment.”

Having a little vent session with a close friend can be a healthy way to engage with something that’s bothering you.

“Venting typically involves expressing emotions and frustrations in a way that seeks understanding or relief,” said relationship therapist Joy Berkheimer. “It allows for an honest exploration of feelings and can facilitate personal insight or clarity when approached constructively. Essentially, venting can be a form of processing, providing a necessary outlet for emotional burdens.”

Advertisement

It feels good to get something off your chest and discuss how it’s been affecting you.

“Venting often sounds like, ‘I just need to talk this through – I had a moment, and I need someone to hear me out,’” said Sanah Kotadia, a licensed professional counsellor with Balanced Minds Therapy. “There’s usually emotion, but also a sense of release or clarity afterward.”

Getting to hear someone else’s perspective can also help you see the situation more clearly.

“Honestly, sometimes we need to talk to our friends when we’re confused, frustrated, or even just want someone to say, ‘Yeah, that would drive me nuts too,’” said April Davis, the founder of Luma Luxury Matchmaking. “It can be a way to process what you’re feeling in a safe, supportive space.”

Advertisement

A little venting can give you the chance to calm down and explore why you’re feeling strongly so that you can address the issue directly with the other person later with a cooler head.

Intention, tone and level of emotion can help you determine if something is amiss.
Intention, tone and level of emotion can help you determine if something is amiss.

“Venting can be a healthy outlet if it’s done intentionally, with self-awareness,” said dating coach Sabrina Zohar. “It’s about releasing tension, exploring feelings, and often includes self-reflection. It sounds like, ‘I’m overwhelmed and need to talk this through so I can make sense of it.’”

Maybe you had an argument with your partner over something small, like not getting to go to the beach for a weekend because you have to go visit your in-laws.

“Sometimes, all we need is the opportunity to let off steam and we’re ready to let the situation go,” Moore said. “Other times, the venting allows us to transition into problem-solving mode. Venting primarily indicates that there is an emotional release that needs to occur to avoid a blowup, much like relieving pressure on a pressure cooker so it doesn’t explode.”

What is complaining? How does it differ?

Advertisement

“Complaining often carries a more negative connotation,” Berkheimer said. “It tends to focus on grievances without seeking resolution or understanding. Complaining may involve repetitive criticism that doesn’t foster growth, and it can lead to a cycle of negativity that detracts from the relationship.”

There’s a greater focus on blame in complaining, which has a critical edge to it.

“It’s more about being right than being real,” Zohar said. “It sounds like, ‘Can you believe they did this again?’ and usually doesn’t leave room for personal accountability or change.”

Rather than exploring and shifting your own thinking on the subject, you tend to circle the same frustration over and over.

Advertisement

“When someone engages in chronic complaining, they aren’t just releasing tension from the system – they’re actually subtly communicating that they aren’t ready to make the necessary changes to solve the problem,” Moore said.

“For example, someone who isn’t ready to face conflict head-on might complain to their friends about their partner as a way of expressing frustration without having to face their own fears.”

Ultimately, complaining feels like an attack rather than a way to blow off steam. There might even be a sense that you’re putting the weight of these issues on your loved ones and expecting them to solve the problem.

“Complaining goes more to the character of the person and can be detrimental,” Ross said. “It can be disloyal depending on the content and the intent behind sharing. It may backfire – if you have serious complaints about your partner that you want to address, the person to do that with is your partner, not your friends.”

Advertisement

Understanding the difference between venting and complaining can help people nurture healthier relationships.

“While both can emerge from a place of frustration, the intention behind venting is generally to seek support and empathy, whereas complaining often lacks this constructive purpose,” Berkhaimer said.

“Venting is more of an emotional release and desire to fix the issue, whereas complaining is the same story, over and over, with no real intention to fix your relationship,” Davis echoed.

Emotional expression should ideally have a positive long-term impact on your personal well-being and your connections with others.

Advertisement

“One way to tell the difference is by noticing how you feel afterward – do you feel clearer and more grounded, or more stuck and frustrated?” Kotadia noted.

Experts see more nuance in venting, whereas complaining often flattens complex situations into black-and-white thinking.

“One is a step toward repair. The other is a step toward emotional gridlock,” Zohar said. “And when complaining becomes habitual, it reinforces powerlessness – it makes you the victim of a relationship you’re not taking ownership in.”

How do you know if you’re engaging in healthy venting or an unhealthy complaining cycle?

Advertisement

“Venting is often a healthy, normal, outlet for letting off steam that is inevitable in a relationship,” Ross said. “Venting about everyday annoyances like domestic chores, messiness or being late is normal and often helpful. There are things we just have to accept about our partners, yet they still annoy us and make us angry.”

Releasing the tension by talking to friends can feel validating, particularly if they sometimes get annoyed with their partner over similar things. By venting to a group, you also give everyone else permission to do the same.

“In groups of people, it’s common for themes to emerge and for friends to feel less alone in their frustrations,” Moore said. “If the group venting sessions lead you feeling seen, heard and supported, then it’s an overall positive experience.”

You might want to reevaluate your participation in the group venting sessions if the experience leaves you feeling demoralised or hopeless, however. The goal is to process your emotions and gain perspective in a positive way.

Advertisement

“Ideally, venting should be approached with intention,” Berkheimer said. “It’s beneficial when it fosters constructive discussions and deeper understanding, not just about our partner, but about our own needs and patterns. When we share in a way that seeks support and growth rather than merely complaining, it can strengthen our relationships with both our partners and our friends.”

Experts emphasise that venting about someone is not inherently “good” or “bad”. Life and relationships are complex and nuanced.

If you find yourself venting about someone often, it might be time for some serious reflection.
If you find yourself venting about someone often, it might be time for some serious reflection.

“When determining whether your behavior is healthy or not, look at the big picture,” Moore said. She recommended asking yourself questions: “Am I overall fulfilled in my relationship?” “Do I feel better after venting to my friends?” “Am I willing to look at my part in problems and address them with my partner head-on most of the time?”

If the answer to all three of these questions is yes, then you probably don’t need to worry. But maybe you’ll discover these vent sessions are your only coping mechanism and just keep you stuck in repetitive negativity.

“We can easily fall into this cycle of rehashing the same issues over and over because we aren’t addressing the root of the problem,” Davis said. “That might mean you need to have difficult conversations with your partner or consider couples counseling.”

Advertisement

Therapy provides a safe, supportive environment to discuss your frustrations with a trained professional, and with couples or family counseling, you and the other person can go into it with the shared goal of improving the health of your relationship.

“Repeated venting can sometimes be a sign that you don’t feel equipped to bring certain things up with your partner, or that you don’t believe anything will change,” Kotadia said. “That’s when it might be worth exploring those patterns more intentionally – either through self-reflection or with support from a therapist.”

She advised looking inward and examining what you’re seeking when you vent. Is it just a little support and perspective? Or are you feeling utterly unheard, underappreciated and overwhelmed in your relationship? Maybe you’re using these conversations as an avoidance technique.

“Venting should be a release valve, not a lifestyle,” Zohar said. “If you’re constantly bringing your relationship to the group chat instead of the person you’re dating, something deeper is going on – and it’s not just about them.”

Advertisement

Think about the tone and level of emotion you bring to these conversations. Look for negative patterns in your communication and whether you feel comfortable having an honest, open conversation with your partner.

“There is a difference between sharing, talking it through and figuring out what you want to do about it – and revealing serious issues and disturbing behaviours that are red flags,” Ross said. “If you have serious doubts or concerns about your relationship, be clear before you start the conversation, know whether you are venting so that you can then put your head in the sand and ignore the flags, or because you aren’t sure what to do and need a friend to talk it through.”

That’s why it’s important to consider your audience, the content of what you’re discussing and your priorities. Perhaps you know you need to accept your partner will never be as neat as you are, but you cope by occasionally complaining to a trusted friend. Or maybe you’re diving into serious problems that go into a partner’s character or the viability of your relationship.

“Venting can put friends in an awkward situation,” Ross noted. “In the heat of the moment, you may be very upset about an argument, and if that’s when you complain to your friend, it can come across as more serious than it actually is.”

Advertisement

Understand that what you say may well change your friend’s opinion of your partner and lead them to question your choice to stay in the relationship. Consider how you would feel if your friend shared something similar about their partner.

“Remember, venting is only one person’s side of the story and may be taken out of context,” Ross added. “The thing to ask yourself is, ‘If my partner knew I was sharing this, how would they feel?’ While they may not love it in any instance, there is a difference between things you can laugh off and things that feel like a breach of loyalty and confidence.”

Basically, you should give the other person involved a chance to work on big issues directly with you before you go off about them with your friends.

“Sometimes venting is a symptom of emotional self-abandonment,” Zohar said. “You’re not a bad partner for needing support, but if you’re outsourcing all your emotional expression to friends, you’re not in a full relationship with the person you’re dating. You’re managing perception, not building connection.”

Advertisement

That’s why it’s worth getting curious – without judgment – about why you aren’t saying these things to the other person. Do you feel emotionally safe? Are you worried that bringing it up would cause insurmountable conflict or rejection?

“Many people aren’t venting to gain clarity – they’re avoiding direct conflict,” Zohar said. “They’re using their friends to emotionally regulate, validate their side, or make sense of dynamics that feel unsafe to bring up in the relationship. If your friends know more about your emotional needs or resentments than your partner does, that’s not communication – that’s emotional outsourcing.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Indigenous people blockade highway to protest destruction of their territory

Published

on

Indigenous people blockade highway to protest destruction of their territory

More than 100 Indigenous Ayoreo-Totobiegosode people, most of whom were forcibly contacted between 1979 and 2004, have blockaded a major Paraguayan highway in the heart of South America. They’re trying to stop the destruction of the forest where their uncontacted relatives still live.

Porai Picanerai, one of the Ayoreo leaders, said:

After forced contact, we have been abandoned by our government, which ignores our rights while allowing big companies to destroy our forest. Our uncontacted relatives depend on the forest. We also depend on the forest. But it’s being destroyed by bulldozers and fires. Others make money from our forest while we are left with nothing, and our needs and rights are ignored.

The uncontacted Ayoreo live in a rapidly shrinking island of forest surrounded by devastation. They’re the last uncontacted Indigenous people in South America outside the Amazon. Their forest is being chopped down, stolen and occupied by farms. The rate of destruction is one of the fastest in the world. And it’s leaving the Indigenous owners of the land facing drought and famine.

The contacted Ayoreo-Totobiegosode, having been forced out of the forest in recent decades, live in two communities on the forest edge. They are blockading one of the area’s major highways in protest at:

Advertisement
  • The continuing destruction of their ancestral territory by cattle ranchers and agribusiness. Legally, the forest should have protection.
  • Neglect by the state that forced them out of their nomadic and self-sufficient life in the forest. It’s left them stranded in two inaccessible, remote communities without proper healthcare or access to water or food.
  • The government continuing to refuse to title the land to them. This is despite the Interamerican Commission on Human Rights ordering it to do so.

Survival International’s Director Caroline Pearce said:

The satellite photos of western Paraguay paint a harrowing picture: just a few decades ago this was a vast area of Indigenous forest – now it’s a wasteland of destruction. The uncontacted Ayoreo are trapped in a forest island that’s being destroyed by the day.

All this destruction is illegal: this is the Ayoreo’s home, which should have been recognized as Indigenous territory and titled to them. The Ayoreo who were forced out of the forest are deeply worried for their uncontacted relatives who are somehow managing to survive, but must be fleeing from one corner of the forest to another.

As Survival’s recent report on uncontacted peoples made clear, they are resisting this brutal colonization but their survival absolutely depends on their land being protected. Paraguay’s authorities must finally do the right thing, by expelling the ranchers and upholding the Ayoreo’s rights to their land.

Featured image via Survival International

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Take Back Power supporters redistribute food from supermarkets to foodbanks

Published

on

Take Back Power supporters redistribute food from supermarkets to foodbanks

Take Back Power supporters have been redistributing food from supermarkets to local foodbanks across the country this morning. Take Back Power is a nonviolent civil-resistance group, demanding that the UK government establish a ‘House of the People’. This is a permanent citizen-led assembly with the power to tax extreme wealth.

From around 8.30am on 14 March, teams across four UK cities – Manchester, London, Exeter and Truro – entered supermarkets. They began putting food and necessities into boxes emblazoned with:

These things are going to those who need them.

The Take Back Power supporters left the shops without paying for the produce and then redistributed these items to local foodbank drop off points.

In Exeter, a team of five supporters took five boxes of produce from Morrison’s supermarket in Prince Charles Road. However security stopped them and took away two of the five boxes. The remaining three boxes were successfully liberated and taken to a local foodbank drop-off point.

Advertisement

From 9am, in London, on liberating boxes of food, two supporters set up a stall outside Sainsburys in the Lewisham centre, to give the food back to the local community. Security staff arrived by around 9.40 and police arrived onsite at around 9.50. There were no arrests and the supporters left at around 10am.

In Manchester, three action takers filled boxes with food from Tesco, on Pars Wood Lane in Didsbury. All three left the store without incident and redistributed the food to a foodbank drop-off point at a local Aldi.

In Truro, two supporters loaded boxes from the Sainsburys on Treyew Rd. They left the produce at the foodbank drop-off point in the same store.

6.5 million people using UK foodbanks

A spokesperson for Take Back Power said:

Advertisement

It is sickening that 6.5 million people in the UK are forced to turn to foodbanks every year and a third of children under five are living in homes where there is insufficient access to nutritious food.

This is because our country is in crisis, with billionaires hoarding wealth, whilst ordinary people suffer. We need to tax extreme wealth to fix Britain, and we need ordinary people to decide how.

One of those taking action was Eve Middleton 25, from Manchester, who said:

I refuse to sit by while billionaires hoard wealth and capture our democracy. We can all see the impacts of inequality on our streets, in our schools and hospitals and in our own homes.

Taxing the super rich is the first simple step to solving these crises. Yet our political system will not deliver a wealth tax, as it is rigged to benefit parasitic billionaires instead of the masses.

It’s time for ordinary people to be put at the heart of decision making, through a House of the People with powers to tax the rich and fix Britain.

Advertisement

Also taking action is Ruth Cook, 74, a company director from Somerset, who said:

I’m taking this action and risking arrest because we have a terrible situation in this country. Families are struggling and children are going hungry, while the profits some companies make are obscene.

The answer is to tax the super-rich. I’m taking this food and delivering it to a foodbank collection point because we need to do something about this. We need to tax the super rich and give ordinary people a say in how our taxes are spent. Join us at takebackpower.net.

Today’s action comes in the wake of the raid of a Quaker meeting house and the arrest of 15 people during a nonviolence training. Police arrested one other at their home later and raided the houses of seven supporters in connection with these actions so far.

This occurs as the UK remains in crisis. Last year, 14 million people in the UK faced the prospect of going hungry due to a lack of money. Whilst in 2024, 6.5 million people turned to foodbanks.

Advertisement

Take Back Power is demanding that the UK government establish a permanent House of the People. This is a citizen’s assembly chosen by democratic lottery, that has the power to tax extreme wealth and fix Britain.

Until the government makes a meaningful statement in response to its demand, the group says it will undertake nonviolent action to resist the super-rich, who are driving us towards social collapse. Donate or sign up to take action at TakeBackPower.net.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Miliband: We Will Intervene on Energy Bills if Necessary

Published

on

Miliband: We Will Intervene on Energy Bills if Necessary

Miliband: We Will Intervene on Energy Bills if Necessary

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Dating In Your 40s: My Time On A Reality Dating Show

Published

on

The author on set on her first day of shooting Kings Court.

I never imagined that finding love in my 40s would lead me to reality television. Yet there I was, staring at an Instagram DM from a friend that read: “This show sounds perfect for you 👀.” She’d tagged me in a casting call for Kings Court, a new show set to premiere on Bravo TV and Peacock.

My first instinct was to laugh. I’m a doctor. I’m used to saving lives, not competing for declarations of love on prime-time television.

But after years of long hospital shifts, well-meaning advice from friends and dating apps that felt more like an obstacle course than a love story, I had to face a quieter truth: success hadn’t made dating easier. It had made it lonelier. So, I didn’t delete the message. I sat with it. And eventually, I clicked on the link.

Dating in my 40s as a successful Black woman isn’t what people might imagine. From the outside, it looks like options. On the inside, it often feels like silence.

Advertisement

Between 12-hour workdays, raising my son, and building a life I’m deeply proud of, my time and energy were stretched thin. But what surprised me wasn’t just the lack of time, it was how my success seemed to narrow the dating pool.

As a girl, I grew up with the pressure to perform. This isn’t unique to me – it’s the reality for many Black and brown girls. I understood early that who I was didn’t just reflect on me, it reflected on my household, my community and the generations who came before me.

Excellence wasn’t optional; it was expected. And beneath that expectation, an unspoken question took root: if I have to be twice as good to be seen, what will it take to be chosen?

I grew up watching so many of my aunties, elders and mother figures navigate life on their own – strong, brilliant, resilient, unchosen. If no one was choosing these extraordinary women, what did that mean for me? Even though I was raised to believe that no matter what adversity I faced, God loved me and I was already chosen, I still internalised another message: I had to earn love and acceptance.

Advertisement

I wasn’t searching for someone to complete me. I wanted someone who could meet me. Someone who could stand beside me without needing me to shrink. Someone who understood that being loved shouldn’t require diminishing who you are to fit someone else’s comfort.

The author on set on her first day of shooting Kings Court.

Courtesy of Khaliah Johnson

The author on set on her first day of shooting Kings Court.

So, when I walked onto that reality show set for the first time, I was nervous in a way that surprised me. This was all new: being on camera, sharing myself in an intimate way while millions might eventually watch. My faith in God and the confidence I have in my unique story and all I bring to the table grounded me.

I gravitated toward kindness – the production team was incredibly supportive, and several of the women in the cast were true “girls’ girls”. We had so much fun behind and in front of the camera, cheering one another on and steering clear of drama.

As the cameras rolled, I found myself … just being me. I didn’t feel I had anything to hide, but I did have something to protect: my heart and my sense of worth. I allowed my emotions to unfold in real time.

Advertisement

As I got to know my love interest, there were moments that frustrated and confused me, and viewers saw that on-screen. There were also ooey-gooey moments, deep conversations about our lives, and dreaming out loud about what a future together might look like.

All the ups and downs I’ve experienced over years of dating were compressed into a very intense three-week journey. When you’re living with someone 24/7, you get to learn important aspects of who they are quickly. I was blown away by how much I loved being on camera – not for the attention, but for the rush of creativity. The storytelling, the reflection, the awareness of watching your own life from a new angle – all of it lit something in me. I left the show with a genuine interest in the film world that excites me to this day.

I entered Kings Court in the final round of introductions of bachelorettes as my love interest’s “perfect match,” according to a professional matchmaker. The stakes felt high. But honestly, once I felt a connection forming, everyone else faded into the background. I wasn’t thinking about competition. I believed that if something was meant to be, we would leave together.

There were also surprises in the process that weren’t particularly romantic or exhilarating. It was hard living in a house with 15 other women and three bachelors. We were all established adults, used to our own space and rhythms. Sharing bathrooms, squeezing in sleep, getting dressed up for dates with dozens of eyes and ears nearby – it was a lot. But I leaned into the absurdity. When in life would I get to do something like this again?

Advertisement

Something shifted in me as filming went on: I realised I had nothing to lose by being honest. If I was truthful and vulnerable, my potential match would see me, and if he chose me, it would be with eyes wide open. And if he didn’t, that told its own story.

I let him see my world: my life as a single mum, the intensity of my career in medicine, the pain and healing that followed intimate partner violence. I wasn’t afraid to have fun or let my guard down either. I showed up more fully than I had before in my dating life, and that alone made the experience worthwhile.

The author (far left) on the set of Kings Court.

Courtesy of Khaliah Johnson

The author (far left) on the set of Kings Court.

There was one moment that especially stands out for me, when he said I seemed “too polished,” like he wasn’t seeing the real me. I told him gently but firmly, “This is me.” Reality TV or not, I knew I didn’t need to perform to be chosen. I’m not everyone’s cup of tea. But the right person will love my aroma, temperature and flavour without trying to add anything to or take anything away from me.

Before the show, I mostly rolled my eyes at reality dating series. But I’m also a hopeless romantic! I’m a sucker for the kind of stories that leave you warm inside, like Lauren and Cameron on Love Is Blind Season 1. Their vulnerability and willingness to fall for someone without playing by the conventional rules truly resonated with me. I wanted a love narrative that freed me from expectations too.

Advertisement

Prior to this process, I was both skeptical and curious. But I’m in a season of life where I’m willing to try new things, stretch myself and take risks. My career caring for children with serious illness has taught me that life is short. I don’t want to miss anything that’s for me, even if it comes in an unusual package.

The reality dating show experience wasn’t perfect. There were catty dynamics with some women that don’t align with how I show up in friendships. I didn’t let those interactions define my experience; they were growth moments. I let that energy roll off me like water off a duck’s back. Overall, being on the show exceeded every expectation. I had fun. I was proud of how I carried myself and how I was portrayed. I walked away with clarity about what I need and deserve in partnership. I grew in self-esteem, in my ability to prioritise my heart’s desires amidst a demanding life, and in my sense of worthiness in romantic love.

My friends and family were so excited for me. They’ve seen the highs and lows of my dating journey and want me to win. Those who are fans of reality TV warned me about the public commentary, but nothing could have prepared me for that. What I have learned on the other side of it all is simple: not everyone will like you, and people will always create their own narratives. Let them talk. None of that determines who you are or what you will achieve. I’m grateful for the thicker skin I’ve developed as a result and the steadier sense of self.

And, yes, I formed a powerful love connection that was meant to be at the time. I let myself be seen, and someone saw me. And sometimes, that alone is enough to change you.

Advertisement

I didn’t walk away with a fairytale ending, I left with something more honest – a reminder that love at this stage of life isn’t about fixing what’s missing. It’s about being fully seen, even when the world believes it already knows who you are.

"I could always find something to smile about during my 'Kings Court' journey," the author writes.

Courtesy of Khaliah Johnson

“I could always find something to smile about during my ‘Kings Court’ journey,” the author writes.

For much of my life, I waited to be chosen. I carried that quiet ache – the one passed down through generations of women who carried everything except the certainty of romantic partnership. But somewhere along this journey, I realised something radical: I can choose myself.

I’ve spent years caring for others, building a career, and showing up strong. Saying yes to dating on a reality show was my way of choosing softness too. And whether love finds me on national television or over a quiet cup of coffee, I now know it will find me exactly as I am – whole, grounded and chosen by me first.

Khaliah Johnson, MD, was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York, and currently resides in Atlanta, Georgia. She is a practicing paediatric palliative care physician and health care advocate who leverages her skills in medical education, writing, and media to promote health equity. Khaliah is the mother to an incredible 10-year-old boy and two Frenchie puppies. In her downtime, she is an avid aerial artist, lover of food and wine, and a travel adventurer.

Advertisement

Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch at pitch@huffpost.com.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

My Mother Broke A Generational Curse By Learning How To Swim

Published

on

The author's daughter, Zuri, diving in a competition

My grandmother never stepped foot in a swimming pool. The closest she ever came was the afternoon I held my phone in front of her face, tilting the tiny glowing screen so she could see her great-granddaughters slicing through bright blue water at a swim meet. They were still little then, just beginning to race. Her eyes were tired but sharp.

“Shana,” she said, squinting at the screen, “what is that girl doing in that water?!” There was real fear in her voice; the kind that doesn’t come from ignorance, but from history.

“She’s racing, Grandma,” I told her. “That’s Zuri. Don’t worry – she’s safe.”

She leaned closer, watching those small arms churn. “Do they like swimming?”

Advertisement

She nodded slowly, and looked on. “I never did learn to swim, baby. Never even been in a pool.” I squeezed her hand. “I know. But we aim to change all that with Zuri and Amara.”

What I didn’t say was that this wasn’t just about safety. It was about rewriting something.

My grandmother never learned to swim, but my mother did. In her childhood, sparkling public pools were not invitations. They were exclusions.

During segregation, Black families had been barred from entry. When desegregation came, many towns chose to close pools rather than integrate them. Access to water – something so innocent and basic – became a quiet marker of who belonged.

Advertisement

The effects are still visible today. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Black Americans drown at rates about 1.5 times higher than white Americans, and the disparity is especially stark for children. In swimming pools, Black children ages 10–14 drown at rates 7.6 times higher than white children. Public health researchers have linked these disparities in part to generations of unequal access to pools and swim instruction.

But in the late ’70s, my mama stepped into the water anyway. Two months after she gave birth to me – the first of her seven children – she signed up for swim lessons. If she learned, her children would not inherit fear as instinct.

When we were little, she made sure every one of us took lessons. We grew up in Charleston, where sometimes it feels like there is more water than land. Rivers stretch wide. Marshes wind through neighbourhoods. The ocean is never far. Every summer, we went to W.L. Stephens pool. The smell of chlorine. The echo of whistles. The sting of sun on wet shoulders.

Each year, we grew stronger. My brother and I kept up our lessons into high school – we were not racers, but continued swim education for safety: yardage, endurance, treading water until our legs shook. In our family, swimming was non-negotiable.

Advertisement

But “basic” has not always meant “accessible”. Many of our Black and brown friends didn’t take lessons. They came to the pool, yes, but they stayed close to the sides, where the waves slipped gently into the gutters and onto the deck. My siblings and I could go much farther out – not recklessly, but confidently. The water was our friend, not a stranger.

The author's daughter, Zuri, diving in a competition

Photo By James Singletary

The author’s daughter, Zuri, diving in a competition

Years later, I found myself sitting in the bleachers at that very same pool – W.L. Stephens – but this time as a mother. Zuri was seven. It was her first swim meet. She stepped up for the 25-yard freestyle – tiny, serious, goggles slightly crooked. The buzzer sounded. She dove. She touched the wall first.

Her coach ran up to me, wide-eyed: “Looks like her time was one of the fastest in the state for her age group.”

One of the fastest in the state. In the same pool where I learned to tread water. In the same water my mother insisted we master. I felt the past and future colliding in chlorinated air.

Advertisement

What I did not expect was that Zuri would fall in love with racing. At eight, she swam anchor at the 8 & Under State Championships. Her team was seeded low. The role of anchor, or the last team member to swim in a relay, is often filled by the fastest or most experienced swimmer. She dove and touched first. The tiny swimmers took first in the state.

“I covered my mouth before I realized I was crying. It was not just her time. It was the inheritance, interrupted.”

Years later, at her final Age Group State Championship, she stood on the blocks again as anchor. Same pool, but she was older, stronger. The natatorium hummed. The starter beeped. She dove with quiet poise and remarkable strength. I didn’t breathe. When she touched the wall, the scoreboard flashed: 24.91.

Under 25. On a relay. At 14 years old.

Three other girls had already poured everything into that water before she dove in. Four bodies. One finish. They broke their team record and placed third in the state – less than a second from first.

Advertisement

I covered my mouth before I realised I was crying. It was not just her time. It was the inheritance, interrupted.

There were not many girls who looked like her in that heat. USA Swimming reports roughly 2% of its membership is Black. Two percent. Better than my grandmother’s day. Better than my mother’s. Still small enough to notice.

I do not let Zuri carry that weight. From me, she gets steadiness. Her dream is hers.

My grandmother passed away in March 2024. She never stepped into a pool. But she empowered the next three generations to step forward anyway.

Advertisement

In just four generations, a grandmother was barred from entry, a mother stepped in anyway and a daughter made swimming non-negotiable. Now a great-granddaughter anchors relays and breaks swimming records with her teammates. Four generations of unconditional love. Lifetimes of growth and development.

I miss my grandmother. But she saw the beginning of this change, and that matters more than I can fully explain. Water once represented exclusion. Now, in our family, it represents possibility. And that feels like victory.

Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch at pitch@huffpost.com.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Iran ‘s revolutionary guards to target Netanyahu ‘if he’s still alive’

Published

on

Iran 's revolutionary guards to target Netanyahu 'if he's still alive'

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) have threatened to continue targeting Benjamin Netanyahu if he’s still alive.

In a statement, the IRCG said:

The unknown fate of the criminal Zionist Prime Minister and the possibility of his death or escape with his family from the occupied territories reveals the crisis and instability of the Zionists. If this child-killing criminal is alive, we will continue to pursue and kill him with power.

Rumours have been circulating on social media over the last week about Netanyahu’s whereabouts.

Whilst he was missing from an important security briefing, the rumours are, at present, nothing but conspiracy theories.

Did anyone actually expect Netanyahu to start an illegal war with Iran and then stay in Israel? He’s probably drinking tea in Poland — his ancestral land and hiding like the spineless rat he is.

Previously, he dodged a corruption court date because he had ‘non-serious’ bronchitis.

So maybe he’s getting a BBL?

Of course, his office has said he ‘is fine’, and the rumours are ‘fake news’.

No one with even half a brain thinks Netanyahu deserves any more oxygen to be wasted on him.

But can you imagine the absolute hell that Israel will rain down on Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and who the hell knows where else if Iran kills Netanyahu? It will pinball all around the region like a deflating balloon.

Advertisement

We would have said Netanyahu, along with Trump and every other Israeli politician, belong in the Hague — but then again that would assume international law is alive and well, and works for everybody equally. So props to those defending themselves and resisting Empire.

Feature image via Global Military Update/ YouTube

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025