Wendy Davis, who looks likely to lose her bid to be Texas governor. Photo: Stewart F House/Getty
Show Hide image

The US Midterms: the races you need to watch

Rarely has an election elicited a louder national cry of “meh”. But there are some important races buried beneath the banality.

America is abuzz with excitement today as it goes to the polls to elect a third of the Senate and all of the House of Representatives, as well as 38 governors of states or territories.

Well, no, actually, it isn't. In fact, despite the fact that more money will be spent on campaigns this year than in any other midterm election in America’s history, rarely has an election elicited a louder national cry of “meh”. Polls show that interest is record-breakingly low, and especially so among the undecided voters.

Americans are turned off by what many see as a choice between two fundamentally unappealing options: the Democrats, who have largely spent the campaign trying desperately to wriggle out of any suggestion of ties to the Obama administration; and the pretty much equally unpopular Republicans, including the extremist Tea Party.

The odd thing about all that is that actually this election is pretty important. Particularly, a couple of key races could decide whether the Democrats keep control of the Senate – the upper house of Congress – the balance of control of which currently relies on the narrowest of margins.

Then there are the gubernatorial races, which by and large have caught the media’s attention less. Wendy Davis, the Texas state legislator who held that incredible filibuster on reproductive rights last year, is looking likely to lose to current state Attorney General Greg Abbott. Wisconsin’s race is closer – Scott Walker, tipped as a possible Presidential contender in 2016, has the slimmest of leads. Florida, where former Governor Charlie Crist is trying to win back his old job against the genuinely alarming-looking current governor Rick Scott, is also close.

But the Senate is the really important thing about today’s election. Holding on to the upper house of Congress is crucial for the legislative possibilities of Obama's final two years in office, and the results today will shape the country in serious ways. The Republicans already control the House of Representatives; if they take the Senate too they will have carte blanche to pursue a right-wing legislative agenda.

The balance in the Senate could rest on a few key races; these are the ones that will receive the most coverage tonight:

 

Kentucky

The race between challenger Alison Lundergan Grimes and current Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell may not be looking as close now as it was a few weeks ago, but there’s still a chance Grimes could unseat the man who is otherwise the secont-most powerful Republican in the country. McConnell isn’t particularly popular, and has had trouble with his pledge to repeal Obamacare – mainly because Obamacare’s rollout in Kentucky has been a spectacular success. But Grimes has also suffered from an embarrassing episode in which she refused to say whether or not she voted for Obama in previous elections.

 

New Hampshire

Former Massachusetts senator Scott Brown has parachuted in to the state as something of a carpetbagger, but is currently neck-and-neck with incumbent Jeanne Shaheen, and the race is too close to call.

 

Alaska

The state that gave us Sarah Palin is a toss-up between incumbent Mark Begich and challenger Dean Sullivan. It’s a long way West, so polls don’t even close until 5AM GMT, so this will be one of the last races to be called – and last time around when Begich won, it was by so slim a margin that his Republican opponent didn’t concede until a full fortnight after election day.

 

Louisiana

Another popular Democratic incumbent, Mary Landrieu, is struggling to fend off a challenger. But under Louisiana’s electoral system, there can be multiple candidates from each party. If one candidate fails to get 50 per cent on the first ballot – which seems likely – then the state goes to a run-off election. There are two Republicans on the ballot, so once they combine, Landrieu could well be out of a job. But this one will run late.

 

South Dakota

A few weeks ago, nobody thought this was going to be interesting. But some recent polling has shown that an independent candidate, Larry Pressler, might be able to pull off an electoral miracle, beating both the Democrat and the Republican challengers. The incumbent is retiring, so the race is wide open. If the people of South Dakota opt for the outsider, it will be strongly emblematic of the people’s disgust with both parties.

 

Iowa

This one’s the big one. Obviously, each party wants to win as many Senate races as possible, but most election models portray Iowa as the bellwether. Polling has Democrat Bruce Braley running neck-and-neck with Republican Joni Ernst – who gained nationwide fame earlier in the campaign with this astonishing campaign ad.

 

Nicky Woolf is a writer for the Guardian based in the US. He tweets @NickyWoolf.

Getty
Show Hide image

Why is it called Storm Doris? The psychological impact of naming a storm

“Homes being destroyed and lives being lost shouldn’t be named after any person.”

“Oh, piss off Doris,” cried the nation in unison this morning. No, it wasn't that everyone's local cantankerous old lady had thwacked our ankles with her stick. This is a different, more aggressive Doris. Less Werther’s, more extreme weathers. Less bridge club, more bridge collapse.

This is Storm Doris.

A storm that has brought snow, rain, and furious winds up to 94mph to parts of the UK. There are severe weather warnings of wind, snow and ice across the entire country.

But the real question here is: why is it called that? And what impact does the new Met Office policy of naming storms have on us?

Why do we name storms?

Storm Doris is the latest protagonist in the Met Office’s decision to name storms, a pilot scheme introduced in winter 2015/16 now in its second year.

The scheme was introduced to draw attention to severe weather conditions in Britain, and raise awareness of how to prepare for them.

How do we name storms?

The Name our Storms initiative invites the public to suggest names for storms. You can do this by tweeting the @metoffice using the #nameourstorms hashtag and your suggestion, through its Facebook page, or by emailing them.

These names are collated along with suggestions from Met Éireann and compiled into a list. These are whittled down into 21 names, according to which were most suggested – in alphabetical order and alternating between male and female names. This is done according to the US National Hurricane Naming convention, which excludes the letters Q, U, X, Y and Z because there are thought to be too few common names beginning with these letters.

They have to be human names, which is why suggestions in this list revealed by Wired – including Apocalypse, Gnasher, Megatron, In A Teacup (or Ena Tee Cup) – were rejected. The Met Office received 10,000 submissions for the 2016/17 season. According to a spokesperson, a lot of people submit their own names.

Only storms that could have a “medium” or “high” wind impact in the UK and Ireland are named. If there are more than 21 storms in a year, then the naming system starts from Alpha and goes through the Greek alphabet.

The names for this year are: Angus (19-20 Nov ’16), Barbara (23-24 Dec 2016), Conor (25-26 Dec 2016), Doris (now), Ewan, Fleur, Gabriel, Holly, Ivor, Jacqui, Kamil, Louise, Malcolm, Natalie, Oisín, Penelope, Robert, Susan, Thomas, Valerie and Wilbert.

Why does this violent storm have the name of an elderly lady?

Doris is an incongruous name for this storm, so why was it chosen? A Met Office spokesperson says they were just at that stage in their list of names, and there’s no link between the nature of the storm and its name.

But do people send cosy names for violent weather conditions on purpose? “There’s all sorts in there,” a spokesperson tells me. “People don’t try and use cosy names as such.”

What psychological impact does naming storms have on us?

We know that giving names to objects and animals immediately gives us a human connection with them. That’s why we name things we feel close to: a pet owner names their cat, a sailor names their boat, a bore names their car. We even name our virtual assistants –from Microsoft’s Clippy to Amazon’s Alexa.

This gives us a connection beyond practicality with the thing we’ve named.

Remember the response of Walter Palmer, the guy who killed Cecil the Lion? “If I had known this lion had a name and was important to the country or a study, obviously I wouldn’t have taken it,” he said. “Nobody in our hunting party knew before or after the name of this lion.”

So how does giving a storm a name change our attitude towards it?

Evidence suggests that we take it more seriously – or at least pay closer attention. A YouGov survey following the first seven named storms in the Met Office’s scheme shows that 55 per cent of the people polled took measures to prepare for wild weather after hearing that the oncoming storm had been named.

“There was an immediate acceptance of the storm names through all media,” said Gerald Fleming, Head of Forecasting at Met Éireann, the Irish metereological service. “The severe weather messages were more clearly communicated.”

But personalising a storm can backfire. A controversial US study in 2014 by PNAC (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) claimed that hurricanes with female names lead to higher death tolls – the more “feminine” the name, like Belle or Cindy, the higher the death toll. This is not because female names are attached to more severe storms; it is reportedly because people take fewer steps to prepare for storms with names they perceive to be unintimidating or weak.

“In judging the intensity of a storm, people appear to be applying their beliefs about how men and women behave,” Sharon Shavitt, a co-author of the study, told the FT at the time. “This makes a female-named hurricane . . . seem gentler and less violent.”

Names have social connotations, and affect our subconscious. Naming a storm can raise awareness of it, but it can also affect our behaviour towards it.

What’s it like sharing a name with a deadly storm?

We should also spare a thought for the impact sharing a name with a notorious weather event can have on a person. Katrina Nicholson, a nurse who lives in Glasgow, says it was “horrible” when the 2005 hurricane – one of the fifth deadliest ever in the US – was given her name.

“It was horrible having something so destructive associated with my name. Homes being destroyed and lives being lost shouldn’t be named after any person,” she tells me over email. “I actually remember at the time meeting an American tourist on a boat trip in Skye and when he heard my name he immediately linked it to the storm – although he quickly felt guilty and then said it was a lovely name! I think to this day there will be many Americans who hate my name because of it.”

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.