Why White Actors Should Not Be Cast In Latinx Roles — On Broadway Or Off

Once upon a time, years before “Hamilton” ever blew our minds, the gifted soul that is Lin-Manuel Miranda created and starred in a little (Tony-winning) musical called “In the Heights.”

The musical follows protagonist Usnavi, a bodega owner who dreams of winning the lottery and wooing the girl of his dreams, for three days in his New York neighborhood. 

Like “Hamilton,” the show is known for its inclusion of contemporary musical styles not usually found on the Broadway stage, including salsa and rap. It also, taking place in the predominately Dominican community of Washington Heights, featured a wonderfully diverse cast, starring, of course, LMM himself (and later, “sexy” Alexander Hamilton, Javier Muñoz). 

One of Miranda’s great gifts to the theater community has been the creation of bold and intricate roles for actors of color. It’s in part due to him that this year’s Tony Awards was by far the most diverse in its history.

However, this month, a Chicago production of “In the Heights” failed to continue Miranda’s legacy of diversity on stage. The Porchlight Music Theatre received widespread criticism after announcing that Jack DeCesare, a white actor of Italian descent, would play the lead role.

In piece titled “Porchlight’s ‘In the Heights’ names its authentic cast,” the show’s artistic director Michael Weber published a strangely self-congratulatory statement introducing the cast.

“After an exhaustive audition process, during which we saw hundreds of the Chicago-area’s diverse music theater talent—both established and new—and even reached out to our city’s vast hip-hop dance community, we are excited to introduce the cast…We have made every effort to present a company that reflects the true spirit of this story of community…”

It didn’t take people long to say, quite appropriately, “Wait, huh?” 

Could the casting team really have made, as they put it, every effort to find a cast that represents the stories unfurling on the stage, when people of Latinx descent make up over 20 percent of the Chicago population?

Even if so, if the efforts didn’t pan out as planned, maybe it would have been better to think of a Plan B? As scholar Trevor Boffone put it: “If you can’t field a majority Latin@ cast and hire a predominately Latin@ creative team, then perhaps do a different show.

These roles were written by Latin@s for Latin@ actors. The Latin@ community wants their stories told, but in an ethical way that speaks with the community in question. To gentrify In the Heights is to completely miss the point of the musical.

The casting decision raises important questions about diversity and representation on the stage. When there already exist so few roles for Latinx performers, what does it say when the few roles that do exist go to white actors? In a musical that deals explicitly with the issue of gentrification as a theme, the casting seems especially mishandled.

In an interview with American Theatre, playwright and composer Quiara Alegría Hudes, who wrote the book for “In the Heights,” expressed her disappointment, describing how one of the main motivations behind the musical was to create complex, dynamic roles for Latinx actors when hardly any exist. “For decades, the vast majority of Latino roles were maids, gangbangers, etc,” she said. “It’s demoralizing, obnoxious, and reductive of an entire people. It’s a lie about who we are, how complicated our dreams and individuality are.”

Following the controversy, Porchlight released a statement expressing their commitment to genuine casting and diverse, thoughtful representation. They cast DeCesare, Weber explained, without explicitly knowing his ethnic background. Only after his exceptional audition and landing of the role did the production team realize his heritage was Italian. 

The crew has no plans to replace DeCesare, though they expressed understanding at the dissatisfaction expressed vocally by the Chicago community. “We absolutely stand by the cast and creative team that has been hired for this production,” Weber wrote, “but we recognize that more must be done to assure a truthful dramatic representation of this work, as well as how we at Porchlight approach diverse and representative casting in the future.”

Demonstrating his commitment to the ideals the musical is based on, Weber expressed his plans to reach out to cultural groups like the Chicago Inclusion Project, the Latina and Latino studies department of Northwestern University, and the Latin American and Latino studies department at DePaul University for suggestions to add Lantinx voices to the creative team.

He also invited the many individuals who reached out online and through social media expressing their disappointment with the casting decision to participate in post-performance discussions on the topic, pushing the dialogue forward. 

Such voices would likely include Tommy Rivera-Vega, who posted a stunning note detailing his disappointment with the casting choice on Facebook. 

Being Latinx is not just putting an accent, getting a cool haircut, the prominent beard, lot of hair, shuffling your feet so it looks like you can salsa. It is about who we are as people. It is about growing up and trying to understand the reason why we have to work harder than everyone else. Asking our parent(s) why all the Latinxs that we see on tv are drug dealers, or criminals, or picking fights, never successful. We rap because it is the only way we will be heard. It is about understanding that no matter how well you are doing in life, you still go back to your community to spread that love and success.

Looking forward, theaters need to understand that creating a diverse cast and crew may not be easy, but it is necessary. Not trying hard enough is no longer an excuse. 

Hudes elaborated on simple ways to prioritize diversity in casting. It might take more time, more money, and way more work, but that’s the task at hand. “You cannot just put out a casting call and hope people come and then shrug if they don’t show up,” she said.

“You may need to add extra casting calls (I do this all the time), go do outreach in communities you haven’t worked with before. You may need to reach out to the Latino theatres and artists and build partnerships to share resources and information. You may need to fly in actors from out of town if you’ve exhausted local avenues, and house them during the run.”

In other words, you must, to quote LMM’s other musical, “work!” Casting directors of the world, let’s not make this mistake again. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

At Least 16 Feared Dead In Fiery Texas Hot Air Balloon Crash

AUSTIN, Texas, July 30 (Reuters) – At least 16 people were feared dead after a hot air balloon caught fire and crashed in a pasture near the central Texas city of Lockhart on Saturday morning, according to federal and local authorities.

The Federal Aviation Administration confirmed the crash, which occurred in Lockhart, about 30 miles (50 km) south of Austin. The agency did not offer any information on fatalities but said at least 16 people were on board the balloon.

“It does not appear at this time that there were any survivors of the crash,” Caldwell County Sheriff Daniel Law said in a statement.

Emergency responders in Texas said the fire hit the basket portion of the hot air balloon.

“Right now, we have a number of fatalities,” a National Transportation Safety Board spokesman said from the scene, adding that a Federal Bureau of Investigation team was being dispatched to help in evidence-gathering.

The NTSB offered no details on what may have caused the accident, which occurred on a clear day. It said it believed the balloon belonged to a tour group that offers hot air balloon rides.

The crash of the balloon is the deadliest on record in the Western Hemisphere, said Jeff Chatterton, a spokesman for the Balloon Federation of North America.

“There are thousands of balloons that go up every year,” he said. “This is unspeakably tragic but it is rather unique.”

More than 150 commercial hot air balloon companies are in operation in North America, he said.

The sheriff’s office said it was working to determine the identities of those aboard.

More than a dozen police vehicles could be seen on pasture land at the site of the crash, in live video provided by Austin TV station KVUE.

The FAA said the crash took place at about 7:40 a.m. (1240 GMT).

Texas Governor Greg Abbott offered his condolences to those killed in the crash.

“Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families, as well as the Lockhart community,” he said in a statement.

Lockhart is a town of about 13,000 people near state parks and home to a variety of barbecue restaurants considered to be among the best in the state.

The accident occurred about three years after 19 people, mostly Asian and European tourists, were killed in a hot air balloon crash in Luxor, Egypt.

A year before that incident, a hot air balloon burst into flames and crashed in New Zealand, killing all 11 people on board in the country’s worst air accident in more than three decades.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Additional reporting by Frrank McGurty in New York; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn and Steve Orlofsky)

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Jeremy Lin's 'Space Jam 3' Anime Spoof Is Out Of This World

“Space Jam 2” may still be a fantasy for now, but at least we have “Space Jam 3!”

Wait, what? But it’s true! Brooklyn Nets guard Jeremy Lin has teamed up with YouTuber Ryan Higa for a take on the classic Loony Tunes meets the NBA movie — this time with an anime twist.

The short video includes classic anime characters, a daunting team of villains, a quick reference to Pokemon Go, and, of course, that iconic, arm-stretching, buzzer-beater finish. Sorry, no Bugs Bunny or Bill Murray.

Can Jeremy Lin help the Tune Squad “AnimeNiacs” persevere on basketball’s wackiest stage? Watch the video to find out. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

How Hillary Just Won the White House

Spoiler alert: Scott Baio does not thrust Trump into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. The conventions are over. We are approximately one hundred days away from November 8th. In my world, the party conventions are the March Madness of rhetoric and public address. They are a whirlwind of sound bites, gaffes, hashtags and spin. As such, the question is now, of course, what did the conventions do for each of the candidates?

Juxtaposing this year’s RNC to the DNC is akin to comparing a karaoke performance at the local County Fair, to a headlining act at Madison Square Garden. Yes, the RNC was that bad–and, yes, the DNC was that good. Let’s quickly review: the RNC consisted of angry mob chants (lock her up), the conjuring of Hillary as a devil-worshiper, Malania “borrowing” Michelle’s words, Mark Rubio literally dialing it in and Ted Cruz denouncing Trump on the world stage. And, yes, Scott Baio. The DNC had a rough start. The convention was overshadowed with the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Shultz, and the Bernie-or-Bust supporters threatening party disruption. However, by the end of day four, Debbie was a distant memory, the majority of the party was unified, and the rocky start was replaced with four days of, perhaps, some of the best political speeches ever delivered, in our Country’s history. While understanding the big picture is critical, when analyzing the speeches of Trump and Hillary, we must also know the context.

Going into the convention, Trump was trailing Hillary by 4-7 points, nationally, depending on which poll you cite. In addition to trailing nationally, Trump supporters were presented with a startling poll: Trump was polling zero percent with African Americans in the swing states of Pennsylvania and Ohio. In order to catch Hillary, between now and November, Trump would have to win over more African American and Latino votes than both John McCain and Mitt Romney. He would also need to flip numerous swing states, which the majority are already leaning blue. In other words, he needed to pull off a gaffe-free and close-to-perfect convention. As we know, that did not happen. Trump and the RNC left a wide window for the DNC machine to fly through. Not only did the RNC view like an SNL skit, more importantly, the Republicans ceded key rhetorical ground, which the DNC capitalized on, in spades.

We will begin with the RNC. Trump’s speech was dark–perhaps best exhibited by the meme of Trump as Emperor Palpatine. Ronald Reagan’s shining city on a hill was nowhere to be found. We were in a dark, dystopian and dismal place. On the other side of the aisle, we had Hillary riding the coattails of Obama’s audacity of hope. It could not be a more stark contrast. Trump painted himself as the savior, where he alone, could save our country. Hillary, in contrast, reminded the nation that we are all in this together–working alongside the American people, in the well-known village. Which narrative would prevail?

Hillary, of course, had the advantage of following Trump. At the same time, she had both the advantage and disadvantage of following President Obama, Vice President Biden and the First Lady, Michelle–the advantage, as they all delivered, perhaps, the best speeches of their lives, which functioned to propel the DNC back into the lead after the RNC post-convention bump. And, simultaneously, Hillary had the disadvantage, precisely because they delivered the best speeches of their lives–which Hillary, then, had to follow. No easy task, especially for a political figure that does not possess the same history of poetic oratory as POTUS and FLOTUS. She needed to bring her A game.

There were three things that Hillary needed to do to protect and propel her lead: she needed to address the trust factor with the American people, provide specific remedies for our nation’s problems, and talk about how we are stronger as a nation together, rather than as a sole savior. Let us first detail how Hillary skillfully crafted a narrative of a world where not only Hillary can, indeed, be trusted, but one where Trump is, in fact, disqualified, altogether, for the role as Commander-in-Chief. How did she accomplish this?

She accomplished this task by presenting herself as a slow-and-steady candidate, versus a reckless loose cannon. The pre-speech video, narrative by Morgan Freeman, was brilliant. Audience members were deluged with powerful images of her forty-five years as a public servant. Chelsea reminding us that Hillary always said, “service is about service.” These images painted her as a workhorse, one that is “cool” and steady with “resolve,” in contrast to Trump, the show horse, full of “bigotry and bombast.” The number one Achilles heel, for Hillary, a lack of trust, was turned on its head and attached to Trump’s personae. She constructed his identity, through Kennedy’s words–as “a little man filled with fear and pride,” -often how wars begin. She asked Americans to consider: if Trump does not have the temperament to handle a Presidential campaign, how can he handle the role of Commander-in-Chief? In other words: “A man you can bait with a tweet, is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons.” These narratives put Americans in the position of knowing that they may not have complete trust in Hillary, but a choice for Hillary is a better choice than a man who is disqualified and unfit for the role.

The next task that she needed to accomplish was countering the narrative of Trump, as the sole savior, to save America from the dismal abyss. She skillfully led us through Trump’s failed business dealings–alluding to his litany of bankruptcies, his Atlantic City unpaid workers, and failed business deals. Can he do this, alone, she implies? However, in addition to creating a veil of doubt, she went one step further. Hillary painted the figure of the lone ranger, the Western Hero, riding in to save the townspeople from their problems not only as risky, but as un-American: “Remember: Our Founders fought a revolution and wrote a Constitution so America would never be a nation where one person had all the power. Two hundred and forty years later, we still put our faith in each other.” She then weaved Trump-the-businessman into an un-American businessman: “He also talks a big game about putting America First. Please explain to me what part of America First leads him to make Trump ties in China, not Colorado. Trump suits in Mexico, not Michigan. Trump furniture in Turkey, not Ohio. Trump picture frames in India, not Wisconsin. Donald Trump says he wants to make America great again–well, he could start by actually making things in America again. For Americans the picture was beginning to come into focus: Trump is unqualified and un-American. Onto the next theme.

Stronger together. Hillary reminded us that Trump’s discourse is steeped in rhetorics of fear. Appealing to an audience’s fears is a powerful rhetorical strategy. Hillary is betting that strength, through unity, is stronger. Here, she pulls from FDR, to rebuke Trump. She counters Trumps xenophobic discourse in relation to minority groups: “We will not build a wall, we will build an economy.” We will “not ban a religion, we will work with our allies to defeat terrorism.” In other words, “love trumps hate”–or, more specifically, as she operationalized it for us: strength, through unity, trumps fear, rooted in isolation. Hillary’s themes, taken together, presented the Democrats as the American, patriotic, strong and unified party–grounds that the Republicans have had strongholds on, for decades, until the last day of the DNC. Until November 8th, of 2016.

Yes, there are one hundred days of campaigning left. I contend, however, that the narrative arc is solidified. I assert that Hillary’s hopeful world–a world where America is trusted, unified, strong and patriotic, will outweigh Trump’s dark, reckless, isolated, and un-patriotic future. If I am proven to be wrong . . . well, then Scott Baio needs a better agent.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

David Bowie's Son Welcomes Baby Boy Exactly Six Months After Singer's Death

Ch-ch-ch-changes are afoot! Six months after rock legend David Bowie died of cancer, his son, director Duncan Jones, has welcomed a baby boy with wife, Rodene Ronquillo. 

“Stenton David Jones. Born July 10th, exactly six months after his granddad made room for him. Love you both so,” he tweeted with a light-hearted cartoon sketch featuring generations of Jones men. 

The “Warcraft” director also expressed his love and gratitude to his “warrior woman” wife on social media after their son’s birth. 

The couple announced the pregnancy in February with a drawing of a cartoon fetus and the words “I’m waiting” in the speech balloon. The tweet also revealed that the late rocker knew he was going to be a grandfather before his death in January. 

“1 month since dad died today. Made this card for him at Christmas. Due in June. Circle of life. Love you, granddad,” he captioned the photo. 

After news of Bowie’s death broke, Jones shared a heartbreaking tribute to his father, posting an old photo of himself as a toddler on his dad’s shoulders. 

“Very sorry and sad to say it’s true. I’ll be offline for a while. Love to all,” he wrote on Twitter.

Bowie would have been proud.

Congrats to the new parents!

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Our America: Remarks To The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community

These are the prepared remarks “Our America”: Brian Levin; Director, Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism, California State University, San Bernardino for the Annual Jalsa Salana Conference in Harrisburg, PA; July 30, 2016

A Star in The Constellation of American Faiths
Distinguished hosts and all my dear friends and neighbors in the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, thank you so very much for the privilege of sharing in your annual Jalsa Salana conference.

My address today is entitled “Our America” and my name is Brian Levin. For almost two decades I have directed the Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism at California State University in San Bernardino, a community that has endured the evil scourge of violent hatred by extremists who distorted your faith and claimed to be Muslim.

But, as his holiness Mirza Masroor Ahmad explained, “If a person does not follow a particular teaching properly whilst claiming to subscribe to it, then it is he who is in error, not the teaching.”

Indeed, for over a century your community has been a shining star in our twinkling constellation of American faiths, from veterans on foreign battlefields, to scientists and medical doctors, and of course your incredibly outsized contributions to the uniquely American art form of jazz music.

The Ideal of Religious Liberty
Most importantly, though it is our common embrace of two core American values that brings me here today: the divinity of human life and the centrality of individual liberty, particularly in the area of religious freedom–not only for our individual lives, but our collective ones as well.

To appreciate the centrality of religious liberty in Our America, one need look no further than the words of our foundational texts and those of our founding fathers. Pluralism and religious freedom transcend contemporary politics, and are critical to the moral framework that dates back to our genesis and makes America truly exceptional.

Our American Constitution’s Article 5 bans religious tests for any office or public trust; the first amendment prohibits the establishment of religion, as well as laws impeding the free exercise of it; and the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection of the laws.

Of the myriad accomplishments of his life, Thomas Jefferson, America’s second president, who interestingly died on July 4, picked only three for the epitaph on his tombstone:

Author of the Declaration of American Independence
And of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom
& Father of the University of Virginia

Like our current President, Jefferson’s detractors, exploited the prejudices of the time by falsely accusing him of being a secret Muslim.

The words of America’s first president, George Washington, over two and one quarter centuries ago to the Touro Synagogue in Newport Rhode, Island still ring true today for all of us in our America:

[F]or, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support….May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants–while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.

His Holiness, Mirza Masroor Ahmad, embraces this very ideal “All people should have fundamental freedoms, such as religious, political, national and civil freedom.”

Muslim American Heroes
Yet, the extraordinary mosaic of Muslim Americans, of which you are a proud part, has produced numerous unique American heroes.

One, sports legend Muhammad Ali, who we lost just this June, counseled in the months before his passing:

I am a Muslim and there is nothing Islamic about killing innocent people in Paris, San Bernardino, or anywhere else in the world. True Muslims know that the ruthless violence of so called Islamic Jihadists goes against the very tenets of our religion…

But perhaps Ali’s greatest strength lay not in his punch, but in his faith, which inspired pacifism and tolerance: “When you believe in God, you should believe that all people are part of one family. If you love God, you can’t love only some of his children.”

Just two nights ago in Philadelphia, we heard about another Muslim-American hero, U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan. His grief stricken father, Khizr Khan while holding a copy of the Constitution, told America how Humayun lost his life in Iraq while valiantly protecting other American soldiers under his command. Mr. Khan’s eloquence moved the nation, when he noted that had bans on Muslims actually been enacted, his son would never have been able to serve our country.

[Video added for column only]

Our Embrace of Pluralism Is A Bulwark Against Extremism
These messages stand in stark contrast to the deafening cacophony of gunfire that struck my beloved community and later Orlando. While these killers severed the lives of family members from loved ones, in Our America we will simply not allow radical killers the additional harm of defeating American pluralism, by severing communities of good will from one another. This counterfeit violent hatred, which represents the most prominent terror threat since 9/11, for all its notoriety is nothing more than an apocalyptic death cult in religious giftwrap, that has both Muslims around the world, as well as Europeans and Americans in its crosshairs.

At a mosque in Baltimore this spring President Obama observed:

America rejects bigotry. We reject every act of hatred against people of Arab background or Muslim faith America values and welcomes peaceful people of all faiths — Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu and many others. Every faith is practiced and protected here, because we are one country. Every immigrant can be fully and equally American because we’re one country.

Oh, excuse me for a second, that was President George W. Bush, speaking in my home state of California in 2002.

President Obama actually said this:

[Y]ou’ve seen too often people conflating the horrific acts of terrorism with the beliefs of an entire faith. And of course, recently, we’ve heard inexcusable political rhetoric against Muslim Americans that has no place in our country…..We’re one American family. And when any part of our family starts to feel separate or second-class or targeted, it tears at the very fabric of our nation.

Over the past year, candidates have boldly argued for, and sometimes backtracked on, temporarily banning entry to all Muslims, irrespective of who they are; shuttering mosques, registering Muslims in databases, killing relatives of terrorists, denying entry to America even to a five year old orphan refugee child, torture beyond waterboarding, as well establishing a religious test for refugee admission and the presidency. One candidate likened Muslim refugees to rabid dogs, while another proclaimed “I think Islam hates us.”

Our Center’s study found that in the non-calendar month following the November 13 Paris terrorist attack, hate crimes against Muslim Americans tripled from the monthly average of the previous five years. Two criminals struck mosques in our area, an Ahmadiyya Muslim mosque in Hawthorne was vandalized, while a mosque in the Coachella Valley was set ablaze.

Liberty, In Our America, Shines on All
When contemporary terrorists attack, they make no distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims. But more importantly when God’s light shines down from the stars over our American heroes in national cemeteries from Arlington, Virginia to Riverside, California, he makes no distinctions, between Muslim and non-Muslim either, and neither should we.

In Our America, our religious liberty fulfills the dreams of our ancestors, but only if we work together to sustain it. My departed refugee Russian grandmother and World War II era POW father, after facing the violent scourge of anti-Semitism in Europe, were cradled by a welcoming nation that they in turn loved so very much. Now we all must work to extend the promise of Emma Lazarus’ prose inscribed on the Statue of Liberty to embrace yet a new generation of Americans, who come here for the promise of religious freedom.

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

My fellow Americans, and friends watching this around the world, it is such a heartfelt privilege to share the blessings of Our America with you on this special day. Salam Aleikum and God bless the United States of America.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Why Clinton Will Win

Election results do not reflect merely personal popularity or the appeal of issues positions. Pure politics matter as well. And so, here are three reasons that Hillary Clinton will win the November election.

THE GROUND GAME. Public opinion polls are worth nothing when compared to the ability to register and turn out people who will vote for you. This requires sophisticated, comprehensive organization in precincts throughout the country, including carefully planned use of internet venues such as social media. In 2008, Hillary Clinton was overmatched in these matters when running against Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries. Obama’s team understood how to make best use of old and new tools in organizing his campaign, and this was a big factor in his being able to defeat Clinton and later John McCain. During the 2012 campaign, Obama’s supporters refined their techniques. Many of those supporters are now working for Clinton. She will not be outmaneuvered again, particularly because Donald Trump’s campaign reflects total lack of understanding of grass-roots organizing.

People do not just show up at the polls on Election Day; they must be courted and reminded even about basics such as where they should go to vote. A solid ground game, which Clinton has, is needed to accomplish that.

THE MINORITY VOTE. According to the Pew Research Center, 226 million Americans are eligible to vote this year, 11 million more than in 2012. More than two-thirds of this net growth of the electorate comprises Black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans. Among these three groups are 64 million eligible voters. In 2000, 78 percent of the U.S. electorate was white; in 2016, that figure is 69 percent.

Clinton is likely to win minority votes by a massive majority, particularly because Trump has alienated so many of these voters. To consider just the Hispanic vote, in crucial states such as Florida and Virginia, as well as throughout the Southwest, Trump’s provocative comments have spurred Hispanic voter registration, which could give Clinton an even bigger boost. This takes us back to the previous point about organization. If the Clinton campaign can turn out minority voters on Election Day, they may provide the margin of victory in numerous states, including some that have voted Republican in recent years.

THE HISTORIC MOMENT. The 2008 campaign was shaped in part by the historic opportunity to elect the first African American president, and in 2016 the prospect of the first woman president will certainly motivate many voters (men as well as women). Some Republican women and others who might not particularly care for Clinton are likely vote for her for this reason. The question is, how many? A larger number, particularly among Democrats, will be extraordinarily enthusiastic participants in the election process, egged on by the misogynistic comments that Trump is almost certain to keep making during the course of the campaign. Whatever voters’ feelings about Clinton herself, the idea of a woman as president will do much to shape the election results.

Trump certainly has assets as well, primarily his ability to cultivate dissatisfaction with America’s current direction. But in terms of getting actual votes on November 8, his strengths do not compare with those of Clinton. She will win.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Watch These Basking Sharks Feed From The Safe Distance Of A Drone

A shark is a stunning wonder of nature, but you probably don’t want to bother one that is eating.

Luckily, Basking Shark Scotland has shared this spectacular drone footage of a few dozen sharks feeding off the coast of Oban, Scotland.

The narrator in the video, which was first posted Friday, explains that the sharks are drawn to areas of high plankton concentration where they can feed.

Basking sharks can grow over 33 feet long and open their mouths several feet wide when they eat. And since they only feed on plankton, it’s even possible to swim with them.

Basking Shark Scotland said they counted about 50 sharks in their “mega day” of sightings.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

'Game Of Thrones' To Officially End After Season 8, With Hopes Of A Spinoff

Winter has come. 

At the Television Critics Association’s press tour in Beverly Hills on Saturday, HBO finally confirmed that “Game of Thrones” would end after Season 8, Entertainment Weekly reports. 

When asked whether the network intended to honor showrunners David Benioff and D. B. Weiss’ eight-season plan, HBO programming president Casey Bloys told reporters that the long-rumored end date was in fact true. 

“Yes, they have a very specific plan about the number of seasons they want to do,” Bloys said. “Believe me, as the new [programming executive] coming in, if I could get them to do more. I would take 10 more seasons. But we take their lead on what they think they can do the best version of the show.” 

The news comes after HBO sent “GoT” fans everywhere into a tailspin with a press release announcing that Season 7 of the fantasy saga would only consist of seven episodes and debut in Summer 2017, months later than initially anticipated. The official episode count for the final season is still up for debate, according to EW, although it is expected to consist of only six episodes. 

But Bloys did give fans some hope when asked about the possibility of a spinoff after the series comes to a close, most likely in 2018. 

“We’ve talked about it, it’s something I’m not opposed to, but of course it has to make sense creatively,” he said. “I’m not sure that [Benioff and Weiss] could really wrap their heads around it when they’re just about to start production [on season 7]. It’s a pretty intense production, they’re about to start production soon. I’m open to it. The guys weren’t opposed to it, but there’s no concrete plans for it at this point.” 

Um, we’re down if you you are.  

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Two Books Bill O'Reilly–and all Americans–Should Read

The last two weeks in American politics and society have been full of controversies and debates, but none engaged with our collective memories and historical narratives more overtly than did the response to Michelle Obama’s statement, in the midst of her powerful speech to the Democratic National Convention, that “I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves.” Putting on his amateur historian hat, Fox News pundit Bill O’Reilly took it upon himself to fact-check Obama, admitting that slaves were among the workers who built the White House but arguing that those slaves were “well fed and had decent lodgings provided by the government.”

The responses to O’Reilly’s response have been swift and ongoing, and have featured a veritable who’s who of historians of slavery and the African American experience. Rice University professor and historian Caleb McDaniel, for example, Tweeted a series of concise and brilliant responses and contexts, offering not only rebuttals to O’Reilly’s claims but also and most importantly the kinds of nuance and depth that genuine historical scholarship (unlike the facile variety found in O’Reilly’s co-authored “historical” books) can provide.

There’s no doubt that O’Reilly, and all Americans, would benefit from reading into the impressive and growing body of scholarship on slavery in America. Even a brief glimpse into another historically focused Twitter account run by McDaniel, Every Three Minutes (a reference to how often on average a slave was sold between 1820 and 1860), reminds us all of the kinds of inescapable realities and horrors faced by every American slave, whatever the state of their food and lodgings.

Yet I would argue that Obama’s point wasn’t just about slavery–it was also and even more importantly about American identity, and the fundamental interconnections between slavery and our national origins. On that note, O’Reilly and all Americans would also do well to examine a classic and still deeply relevant scholarly work, Edmund Morgan’s American Slavery, American Freedom (1975). While Morgan’s book (like any scholarly text) has been challenged and critiqued as well as complemented and extended in the four decades since its release, its ground-breaking argument about the relationship between slavery and our Revolutionary ideals remains a vital perspective.

That is, it’s relatively easy, and not wrong, to note the fundamental hypocrisy of American Framers like Thomas Jefferson and George Washington arguing for equality and liberty while owning slaves. Yet beneath and beyond that contradiction lies the inescapable fact that these historical realities and narratives did coexist, that the best and worst of American identity developed alongside and influenced one another. Morgan was one of the first historians to work to make sense of those interconnections, and his book provides a perfect context for Obama’s remark and the White House histories of which she was reminding us.

Obama’s quote didn’t end there, though–she added, “and I watch my daughters, two beautiful, intelligent, black young women, playing with their dogs on the White House lawn.” While she was of course noting the striking shift that the Obama administration and first family have represented, this image also reminds us of how much every American community and culture has contributed to our identity and society throughout our decidedly cross-cultural history. On that note, O’Reilly and all Americans should also peruse another classic and crucial scholarly book, Mechal Sobel’s The World They Made Together: Black and White Values in Eighteenth-Century Virginia (1987).

A central limitation with Morgan’s book and so many of our historical narratives, after all, is that they focus on those (usually European white men) who seemed to hold the political and social power throughout our history. In this understanding, slaves–and all other minority or less powerful communities–were victims whose oppression we should better remember. Indeed we should, but it’s just as important that we remember as well the vital contributions that American slaves (like all those communities) made to our society and identity. Sobel’s book examines every aspect of life in 18th-century Virginia to make precisely that case, analyzing the ways in which African and European American influences came together to shape that place and time comprehensively and potently.

The historical fact that slaves and other workers built the White House doesn’t just tell us about slavery and labor, after all–it tells us just as much about the White House, and how cross-culturally constructed such spaces and images always are in America. While Bill O’Reilly and all Americans need to understand the specific histories of slavery much more fully, we need even more to correct our most overarching and defining collective memories and narratives, to understand just how interconnected and cross-cultural our identity and culture truly are. These books, along with Obama’s speech, provide wonderful starting points for that crucial work.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.