‘Just saying it like it is’: A comparative study on the characterizations of Chris Christie and Donald Trump as tough-guy politicians

A Conversation with Megan Abbott Megan Abbott (bio) and Annie Adams (bio) The Edgar Award-winning author Megan Abbott feels at home writing about subjects most of us wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. Her newest novel, Give Me Your Hand, concerns a young scientist researching premenstrual dysphoric disorder, a severe, poorly understood form of PMS. Periods aren't the only taboo Abbott's intent on examining. Her previous novels engage parent-child relationships, mass hysteria, and the desires of young people with a Hitchcockian fluency and sense of urgency. Abbott is the author of nine novels and The Street Was Mine, a nonfiction study of gender and race in twentieth-century hardboiled fiction which grew out of her graduate studies at New York University. In time, Abbott's enthusiasm for detective novels led to a somewhat accidental career writing novels that inhabit the world of classic noir while tangling with contemporary issues. Her books are described as crime fiction, psychological thrillers, and domestic noirs, labels which disguise the fact Abbott's stories are first and foremost works of supremely consumable art. There is an art in sustained momentum, after all, an artfulness in telling a story so well that readers simply "can't put it down." Abbott is gracious but skeptical of the labels applied to her work, with a keen sense of the [End Page 397] impulses that drive us, often subconsciously, to use certain words or categories. Abbott traveled from her home in Queens to meet with me over two days in February in an office off of Times Square, now nearly unrecognizable as the grimy seventies setting of The Deuce, the David Simon HBO series about New York City police corruption, organized crime, and the dawn of the pornography industry, for which Abbott is a writer. Abbott's encyclopedic knowledge of film, psychology, and pop culture led our discussion to such fascinating and unlikely places as noir's popularity in times of tumult, the gothic nature of the suburbs, and why The Real Housewives reality-TV series reminds her of an Edith Wharton novel. SR: Your first book, The Street Was Mine, is a critical study of the white male hero figure in hard-boiled fiction. It grew out of your PhD dissertation at NYU, correct? Abbott: Yes. At that time, the late nineties, there was very little academic study of hard-boiled fiction being done — it was considered pulp, not to be taken seriously. But, for me, these books were — and are — so rich. I became very interested in the trope of the "tough guy" as we see it take shape in the genre. The "tough guy" persona derives primarily from writers like Mickey Spillane. His detective hero, Mike Hammer, is hypermacho, wildly violent: he'll take on the mob, the Russians. He's almost a Superman. But when you look at most hard-boiled heroes, they're not so tough. Instead, you find a kind of gender panic. Masculinity in crisis. Take Raymond Chandler's detective hero Philip Marlowe — in those books, manhood is constantly under threat. He risks violence at the hands of powerful men, emasculation at the hands of the femme fatale. Masculinity [End Page 398] doesn't feel secure, and it doesn't feel like the solution to anything. Alternately, Marlowe seems to find a fascination with — and fear of — the feminine. If Spillane has control over everything, Marlowe feels control over nothing, not even himself. Race is complicated in these books too. There's a great fear that whiteness doesn't mean what it once did — it no longer guarantees privilege. When these tough guys appeared in Hollywood movies, however, all that ambiguity and hysteria was erased. Instead, you have Humphrey Bogart as Marlowe, or as Dashiell Hammett's Sam Spade, and he's so cool and tough and can handle anything or anyone. People tend to remember the movies, but those books present a much more ambiguous and sometimes even subversive view of identity. During my research, I read nothing but noir for about two years, immersing myself in Chandler, Chester Himes, and James M. Cain. I just fell head over heels for these books, the world...

Norman Mailer's 1984 detective novel Tough Guys Don't Dance, this paper argues, is an allegorical satire on the politics of the Reagan eighties and its codes of masculinity. Taking as its starting point Kate Millett's feminist assertion that Mailer always seems to understand what's the matter with masculine arrogance, but he can't give it up, this paper contends that Tough Guys Don't Dance encodes masculinity as a form of addiction. The addiction of masculinity is played through an analysis of the novel's identification of differing masculine language games. The revenge plot of Mailer's detective tale of buried heads in the marijuana patch is read as a satire of the eighties twin backlashes against feminism and the sixties. Set in Cape Cod's Provincetown, the novel's tough guy plot is also entangled in early AIDS crisis.

This study aims at investigating impoliteness strategies in 351 tweets taken from Donald Trump’s personal Twitter account (@realDonaldTrump) from the first presidential debate to the Election Day of the 2020 United States presidential election. The current study employed Bousfield’s (2008) taxonomy of impoliteness strategies to analyze the data. There are 368 occurrences of eleven impoliteness strategies across 351 tweets. The most common impoliteness strategy is use inappropriate identity markers (23.59%), followed by threaten/frighten (21.13%) and condescend, scorn, and ridicule (20.59%). These strategies were employed to attack and discredit Trump’s political opponents as well as attracting prospective voters. On the other hand, two impoliteness strategies, namely hinder/block and enforce role shift, were not identified in the tweets. The results indicate that Donald Trump’s tweets exhibited impoliteness and that it played quite a significant role as a means of political campaign during the 2020 United States Presidential Election.

This research examines impoliteness strategies in the context of political campaign debates by the presidential candidates, particularly by Donald Trump against other candidates. The data used in this research, taken from the last three National Republican debates, were Donald Trump’s utterances in which he employed impoliteness strategies. The data were analyzed using Garcia-Pastor’s (2008) impoliteness strategies. The results show that Donald Trump employed the negative-face oriented strategies much more frequently (66.15%) than the positive-face oriented strategies (33.85%). The negative-face oriented strategy ‘state the communicative act(s) as common or shared knowledge’ was the most frequently used (30.38%). These results suggest that for the purposes of asserting power in the debates, Donald Trump tends to use negative-faced oriented impoliteness strategies in his political debates.

The pragma-stylistic approach offers a robust framework for examining the intricate dynamics of language use in political texts. Flaming is a term for verbal abuse that is intended to hurt someone, a group, or an organization. In other words, it constitutes profanity or personal insults that is used by politicians. The present study aims at investigating meanings of flaming as a pragma-stylistic phenomenon and identifying which meaning is mostly used by Donald Trump’s Rallies against Harris. It also aims at identifying which impoliteness strategies and stylistics devices are used by Donald Trump and their contribute of flamed speeches. The study hypothesis that directs faming is commonly used in Trump’s speech and bald on record and hyperbole are mostly used in his rallies. The study uses eclectic model: Bansal et.al (2012) Meanings of Flaming, Culpeper (1996) Impoliteness Strategies

Immigrant doctors have helped fill physician shortages for years. In the current political climate, are they welcome?

Background. There is evidence to suggest that early life exposures including birthweight, history of having been breastfed during infancy, in utero exposure to maternal smoking, and parental education are associated with BC risk. Potential underlying mechanisms include variability in exposure to maternal endogenous sex and growth hormones. Also, parental socioeconomic status may be a proxy for environmental characteristics that impact biological processes in early life, and ultimately influence BC risk. Research has focused on EA women; relatively little is known about associations between early life exposures and BC risk for AA women. Methods. We conducted a case-control study in AA and EA women aged 22-75 years living in metropolitan New York City and eastern New Jersey (Women's Circle of Health Study). Breast cancer cases (AA n=827; EA n=772) were diagnosed with primary, incident, histologically confirmed invasive BC or ductal carcinoma in situ. Controls (AA n=905; EA n=715) were frequency matched to cases on age and race. Birthweight, history of having been breastfed during infancy, history of in utero exposure to maternal smoking, and parental education were by self-report using an interviewer-administered questionnaire. Results. Birthweight was not significantly associated with BC risk in this study for AA or EA women. Having been breastfed during infancy was associated with significantly increased BC risk for both groups (ORAA=1.60, 95% Cl: 1.27-2.02; OREA=1.45, 95% Cl: 1.14-1.85). For EA women, but not AA women, reporting in utero exposure to maternal smoking was associated with significantly decreased BC risk (OR=0.61, 95% Cl: 0.45-0.82). Among AA women, those born to mothers with at least a college degree had a significantly lower BC risk compared to AA women born to mothers with a high school or less education (OR=0.67, 95% Cl: 0.49-0.93). Among EA women, we found no association with maternal education. However, EA women born to fathers with at least a college degree had a significantly lower BC risk compared to EA women born to fathers with a high school or less education (OR=0.65, 95% Cl: 0.51-0.84). Conclusions. Our findings support the hypothesis that early life exposures impact adult BC risk. History of having been breastfed during infancy, in utero exposure to maternal smoking, and parental education were all associated with BC risk. While minor differences in risk estimates were found between EA and AA women, associations were similar. Citation Format: Mark L. Glasgow, Jo Freudenheim, Gary Zirpoli, Elisa Bandera, Christine Ambrosone. Early life exposures and breast cancer (BC) risk among African American (AA) and European American (EA) women. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-13. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-LB-13

<scp>Urban–rural</scp>justice

Policing in drag: Giuliani goes global with the illusion of control

Jails, justice, and public health

Purpose This paper aims to examine how disruptive presidential leadership reshapes the business–government nexus by analyzing the Trump administration as a critical case of political and economic transformation. It explores how unilateral governance, policy volatility and weaponized interdependence compelled firms to adopt short-term, defensive and state-contingent innovation strategies. Through a comparative analysis of the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations, the study seeks to clarify how differing leadership styles influence corporate behavior, policy uncertainty and long-term institutional resilience. Ultimately, the paper reframes presidential power as a structural force shaping corporate adaptation, innovation trajectories and the stability of capitalist governance. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a comparative qualitative design, integrating theoretical analysis with empirical evidence across the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations. It combines insights from presidential power theory, institutional economics and business strategy to construct an analytical framework linking leadership style to corporate adaptation under policy uncertainty. Data sources include policy documents, economic policy uncertainty indices and secondary literature on trade, innovation and regulation. Comparative case analysis is used to trace causal mechanisms connecting disruptive governance to firm-level strategic responses. This multi-level approach allows for identifying both short-term adaptive behaviors and long-term institutional consequences within the evolving business–government nexus. Findings This study finds that the Trump administration’s disruptive leadership produced policy chaos that often operated as administrative incompetence, forcing firms into defensive, opportunistic and state-contingent innovation. Executive orders, tariffs and regulatory reversals aimed less at creating opportunities than at protecting existing hierarchies. Short-term gains in sectors like semiconductors came alongside fractured supply chains and declining predictability. Firms either aligned with shifting state priorities or diversified abroad to manage volatility. Ultimately, chaotic governance accelerated adaptation, but eroded the coordination, regulatory stability and institutional trust needed for long-term competitiveness. Originality/value This paper reframes presidential power by linking disruptive leadership, and the chaos that signals Trump’s administrative incompetence, to firm-level strategic behavior. Instead of treating policy uncertainty as external, it shows how leadership style and governance design actively produce it. Integrating theories of presidential power, business influence and institutional resilience, the study bridges political science and corporate strategy. A comparison of the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations reveals how politically generated chaos becomes a structural force shaping innovation, exposing the trade-offs between short-term adaptability and long-term institutional stability.

T he night was December 6, 2005. I could not go to sleep. As I tossed and turned, my entire life replayed in my mind. How did I get to where I was? I went all the way back to my childhood. I was raised in a middle-income home with an older brother and sister and two loving parents. We were far from rich, but had what we needed. I was a normal kid. I loved riding my bike and being with friends. I never got into any real trouble. My thoughts on December 6 moved forward to college. I made good grades and was extremely involved in extracurricular activities. Lying in bed, my thoughts drifted forward. When I graduated from college, I had a job waiting at Ernst & Young. I passed the CPA exam, and for the next five years served as an auditor and specialized in the healthcare industry. I was surrounded by a lot of smart, hardworking people. As is so common with staff within CPA firms, with five years’ experience, my phone began ringing with various job offers. Then one day, a former colleague called and wanted to have lunch. An opportunity had opened at a small startup company named HealthSouth Rehabilitation Corporation. The next day, I interviewed with HealthSouth’s CEO and Founder, Richard Scrushy. He was extremely engaging and had a strong vision for the growth of the company. He also talked a lot about making money. I believed it was a great opportunity and accepted the position. The years rolled by and the company became enormously successful. During those years, HealthSouth grew from a dozen locations to over two thousand, located in all 50 states and five countries. I had risen from a middle-management position to become the company’s CFO. With a large salary, bonuses, and stock options, I had become financially successful. From the outside looking in, it was a dream come true. But why was I thinking about all of this on December 6? Let me tell you where I was. I was not at home in my comfortable bed that night. I was on the top rack of a bunk bed in a federal prison camp, looking at spending the next two years of my life there. All because I had become involved in a $3 billion accounting fraud at HealthSouth. Never in a million years would I have imagined being in prison. After all, I had always done all the ‘‘right things.’’ How on earth had I become a convicted felon? Simple. I crossed the line. In business and in our personal lives, we are constantly faced with situations of crossing the line. I am not writing about $3 billion frauds, I am talking about everyday life—the small temptations to cross the line are always there. Therein lies the danger. Facing a new line will create trepidation, but may be answered with the simple rationalizations, ‘‘It’s not that big of a deal,’’ ‘‘Everyone does it,’’ ‘‘It is

The Trump administration has enacted or proposed many policies that could impact public health. These include attempts to dismantle or repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), restricting funding for women's health care, and loosening of environmental regulations. To develop a surveillance system to monitor the public health impacts of the Trump administration in New York City. Epidemiologic assessment. Public health surveillance system. New York City. New York City residents. We identified approximately 25 indicators across 5 domains: access to care, food insecurity, reproductive health, environmental health, and general physical and mental health. Sources of data include the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's (DOHMH's) health and risk behavior telephone survey, vital statistics, emergency department visits, DOHMH sexual health clinics, Federally Qualified Health Centers, lead and diabetes registries, Medicaid claims, Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program enrollment, Women, Infant, and Children program enrollment, and 311 call records. Data are collected monthly or quarterly where possible. We identified measures to stratify indicators by individual and area-based measures of immigration and poverty. Since April 2017, we have compiled quarterly reports, including establishing a historical baseline of 10 years to account for secular trends and encompass the establishment and enactment of the ACA. Indicators are interpreted within the context of changes in programming or local policy that might explain trends. We have successfully established an adaptive surveillance system that is poised to rapidly detect changes in the health of New York City residents resulting from changes by the Trump administration to public health policy. The development of such systems is a critical function for health departments across the country to play a role in the current political and policy environment.

The paper explores the tale of two 'epicentres’ – metropolitan New York and Lombardy – and seeks to depict the socio-demographic patterns that characterise the worst cases of infection, hospitalisation, and death during the first six months of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. By drawing upon secondary data concerning sub-territorial units within the two regions – ZIP-code level and counties in New York and municipalities in Italy – the paper compares the characteristics of the two areas in an effort to understand bothhowthey became the original major epicentres andhowtheir experiences of the pandemic differed. We suspected initially that the pandemic in Lombardy was a function of a complex constellation of variables, such as the age of the population, the unexpected emergence of the virus, and features of the local health system. In New York, the pattern seemed to fit a more familiar dynamic, the kind one would expect from the course that most pandemics take: the poor suffer the worst. The paper tries to extend the understanding of the complex and not univocal mix of social variables that can facilitate the spread of a pandemic and make its effects extreme.

COVID-19 Testing Should Be Prioritized for Those Most at Risk for Spreading the Disease and Those Interacting with Vulnerable Populations