Big John refused to go quietly into that bad night. 

When it became clear that Attorney General Ken Paxton would challenge Senator John Cornyn’s reelection, Cornyn could have opted to retire with dignity and spend his remaining golden years watching turtles sunbathe while strolling the shores of Austin’s Lady Bird Lake. 

Instead, he fought and clawed for the right to a fifth term (i.e., 30 years) in the U.S. Senate, where he amassed a great deal of political power—if not much enthusiasm back home.  

This race was personal for him. As Cornyn has previously acknowledged, he would’ve probably ceded his seat to an up-and-coming Republican who was more properly suited for the job. But to Paxton, the scandal-plagued man who had defiled the very attorney general’s office Cornyn once held himself? No way. 

He and his super PAC allies deployed a whopping $71 million in ad spending backing his campaign and napalming Paxton over his various scandals, affairs, and other myriad shortcomings. That’s the most spent in support of any incumbent in a non-presidential primary ever. 

To what end? As was revealed Tuesday night: a moderately stronger Cornyn performance than expected. 

With nearly all the vote in late Wednesday morning, the incumbent was besting Paxton by about a point—defying most of the public polling. Houston-area Congressman Wesley Hunt had proved every bit the paper tiger and inevitable spoiler as he pulled in less than 15 percent of the GOP vote. 

Onward, then, to what might be the bloodiest, most bruising, and most wince-inducing political primary Texas has seen in a very long time. 

As Cornyn told reporters on election night: “I refuse to allow a flawed, self-centered and shameless candidate like Ken Paxton risk everything we’ve worked so hard to build over these many years. … Judgment Day is coming for Ken Paxton.”

And as he said in the leadup to the election, “I think it’s going to be a miserable experience for him. And I think whatever positive he enjoys today will evaporate. And so he’ll be even less electable.”

It’s difficult to imagine what more the Cornyn camp could dig up and blast out on the airwaves that hasn’t already been put out there—and which has yet to sink Paxton. But that doesn’t mean they won’t commence with almost 90 days of firebombing anyway. 

As for Paxton, he remains defiant as ever, despite his somewhat lackluster performance. Speaking on Tuesday night, he said: “After all the personal attacks … after all the lies, you listened to what John Cornyn was selling and you weren’t buying.”

Indeed, Paxton may be right. He knows better than perhaps any other politician apart from his Supreme Leader Donald Trump that even the most repugnant personal and legal scandals are often not enough to fell a MAGA warrior. On the other hand, an establishment Republican who first entered office as a Bushie conservative nearly 25 years ago, and who has had a tenuous relationship with the Trump faction of his party? Now that’s someone who may be ripe for a fall—especially in a runoff contest. 

It’s a truism of Texas politics that an incumbent who is forced into a runoff is not long for his or her electoral world. As the thinking goes, a politician who enjoys the powerful benefits of elected office but cannot muster more than 50 percent of his party’s base voters in March will not likely be able to do so in a runoff contest after nearly three painfully long months. 

Cornyn doesn’t accept this destiny—at least not yet.  Perhaps he can lean on the fact that his runoff opponent is one of the most scandal-riddled politicians in state history—a man who, for what it’s worth in either direction, did survive his own runoff four years ago. (The fact that the man Paxton bested was George P. Bush, a Texas Republican decidedly in the Cornyn mold, may not lend as much comfort to the senator.)

And then there’s the Trump of it all. Despite persistent pleas, the president stayed out of this primary fight, backing neither Cornyn—more likely to help hold a Senate majority—nor Paxton, more likely to help Trump put a final end to the role of personal morality in politics. It seems possible the president could break this truce in the weeks to come.

Anyway, buckle up y’all, because the Republicans are fighting. As Trump’s former campaign manager and now-Cornyn operative Chris Lacivita posted last night in a warning to Paxton and his rival campaign manager Jeff Roe: “The  second wave is going to be a bitch…”

(Images via AP, Shutterstock; illustration/Texas Observer staff)

There were plenty more high-octane races up and down the Republican primary ballot Tuesday. 

Let’s start with the open race to succeed Paxton as attorney general. This primary featured four GOP candidates: right-wing Congressman Chip Roy, state Senator Mayes Middleton, state Senator Joan Huffman, and former Paxton Deputy Aaron Reitz. 

Reitz, who was Paxton’s endorsed candidate and who briefly served in Trump’s DOJ, had promised to use the OAG “to destroy the left.” Alas, he won’t be able to do so, as he was unable to first destroy anyone on the right, coming in last with 14 percent. Tough luck for him and his former boss. 

The biggest surprise was that Mayes Middleton, a conservative state senator and uber-wealthy oil heir from the Houston/Galveston region, ended up coming in first—fueled by over $12 million of his own money and a self-given nickname in “MAGA Mayes.” All that was missing? Practically any real legal experience. 

Middleton managed to purchase himself just shy of 40 percent of the vote, ensuring a runoff contest with the presumed frontrunner in the race, Roy, who got just over 30 percent. 

Roy, a boisterous limited-government conservative who’s oft proven an obstacle to Trump’s priorities in Congress, is a longtime player in Texas right-wing circles. He was Ted Cruz’s first chief of staff in the Senate and practically served as AG in absentia for Paxton, before the latter grew tired of Roy getting credit for running his office and they split on nasty terms. Roy later called for Paxton to get impeached. Roy and Middleton will be a runoff to watch. 

Further down the ballot, former state senator and tea-party firebrand Don Huffines easily won the primary contest for the Texas Comptroller post, which controls the state’s money, budgeting, state contracts, and more. Huffines ran on a promise to DOGE-ify state government—which is sure to go smoothly. 

Notably, in doing so he handily bested the Acting Comptroller Kelly Hancock, who was plucked from the state Senate and installed to that position by his political ally Governor Greg Abbott, who did seemingly everything in his power to help Hancock get elected. To no avail. 

Abbott did succeed however in ousting his political nemesis, Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller in favor of the Frisco-based honey purveyor Nate Sheets. What a ride. 

Christian nationalist winger Bo French, who left his post as Tarrant County GOP chair to run for Texas Railroad Commission, managed to force a runoff with incumbent Jim Wright by running on a platform promising to use the powers of the oil-and-gas regulator to… stop Sharia law in Texas, among other things. 

A few other down-ballot surprises (or not-so-surprises) for Republican incumbents: One-time GOP phenom and star of his own campaign action movies, Congressman Dan Crenshaw, was demolished by Conroe state Representative Steve Toth, who was boosted by a last-minute Trump endorsement. And scandalized Congressman Tony Gonzales was once again forced into a rematch runoff, even finishing second Tuesday, with gun-obsessed YouTuber Brandon Herrera. 

Lastly, Republican state Representative Stan Kitzman, tagged by the right-wing enforcement forces of Texas as too moderate, was ousted by a man named “Goose” Geesaman. 

The post Cornyn and Paxton Lead a Decadent GOP Empire into Ruinous Runoffs appeared first on The Texas Observer.

By SHAWN CHEN, AP Technology Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — Apple CEO Tim Cook promised a “big week” of product announcements has seen the introduction of a new budget-friendly iPhone trim, an entry-level Macbook tier, updated iPad Air models, refreshed monitors and higher-end chipsets. All of which was on display at hands-on media events held Wednesday in New York, London and Shanghai.

Related Articles

Supply chain disruptions from the Iran war could raise prices for drugs, electronics and more

How to save money: 14 easy tips

US stocks rebound after strong economic updates and an easing of oil prices

Pentagon dispute bolsters Anthropic reputation but raises questions about AI readiness in military

Justice Department lawyer says concert ticket industry is broken because of Ticketmaster

The tech titan recently saw its quarterly earnings rise to a new record, thanks to strong sales of its iPhone 17 models, even though the company still hasn’t delivered on its 2024 promise to smarten up its Siri assistance with AI.

Perhaps looking to capitalize on this sales momentum, Apple started the week off announcing the latest entry in its more budget-friendly phone lineup, the iPhone 17e, and its announcement frenzy with the introduction of the Macbook Neo, an entry-level laptop that represents the company’s most aggressive attempt at moving into the affordable laptop market.

Everything announced will be available for preorder starting Wednesday. So if you need more information before you start shopping, here’s the skinny:

iPhone 17e

This updated version of iPhone targeting budget-conscious shoppers will include the same A19 chip as the one powering the base iPhone 17 and offers double the standard storage space (256GB) as the previous 16e model (128GB).

The camera has been updated to a 48 megapixel system and its C1X modem promises faster cellular speeds.

As for display, the 17e clocks in with a slightly smaller screen compared with the base 17 model, has a slightly lower refresh rate and may be a little dimmer to the human eye, but you’re still getting the super retina display used in the rest of the lineup and Apple’s Ceramic Shield 2 system to guard against scratches.

Apple also put included MagSafe with Qi2 support for those looking for a more convenient wireless charging experience.

Starting at $599, the iPhone 17e comes in $200 cheaper than the base iPhone 17. Colors include black, white and light pink.

iPad Air M4

The midrange iPad refresh runs the slightly older M4 chip — for reference, the top-end iPad Pro model uses the newer M5 chip. But it’s still powerful enough to handle your streaming habits, web browsing, email and video editing. Cellular versions of the Air also include the updated C1X modem for faster connections.

You wouldn’t think there’s a RAM shortage in the world with what Apple has announced this week. The company bumped the Air’s RAM up from 8GB to 12GB without a price increase.

The 11-inch iPad Air starts at $599 while the 13-inch version starts at $799, each with 128GB of storage.

FILE – Apple CEO Tim Cook speaks on stage during an announcement of new products at Apple Park in Cupertino, Calif., Tuesday, Sept. 9, 2025. (AP Photo/Godofredo A. Vásquez, File)

Chip and MacBook updates

Apple’s high-end Pro lineup of laptops received newly announced chip upgrades (the M5 Pro and M5 Max), which claim higher performance for intensive usage and battery efficiency. But the new upgrades come with a higher price tag too.

The 14-inch MacBook Pro with the M5 Pro chip set comes with 24GB of RAM and 1TB of storage. It’s priced at $2,199, a $200 increase compared with 2024 base M4 Pro. For an extra cost, you have the option to upgrade to a higher tier of the M5 Pro or jump to the M5 Max chip. You can also bump the system’s RAM up to 48GB.

The 16-inch MacBook Pro already comes standard with the highest tier M5 Pro chip set, and starts with 24GB of RAM and 1TB of storage. It’s priced at $2,699, a $200 increase from previous model. You do have the option to upgrade to the M5 Max chip set and bump up the RAM.

For both models, the display hasn’t changed, nor has the front-facing camera. But Apple has upgraded their networking capabilities to support Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 6.

The brand new entry-level MacBook Neo made its debut at the in-person event on Wednesday. This new a 13-inch laptop comes packed with Apple’s A18 Pro chip (also found in the iPhone 16 Pro), 256GB of storage, two USB-C ports but only 8GB of RAM. The upgraded the 512GB model includes a TouchID sensor.

The 256GB model is available for $599, while the upgraded model is available for $699. Students and other educators can preorder either model with a $100 discount.

A refreshed MacBook Air was also announced. This more budget friendly machine has been upgraded to the company’s base M5 chip. Base storage has also been doubled from 256GB to a 512GB. It still 16GB RAM but now sports the same connectivity upgrades as the Pro models.

Because of the updates, the price of the 13-inch Air is priced at $1,099, $100 more than the M4 Air model. The 15-inch Air starts at $1,299.

Studio Display and Studio Display XDR monitors

Apple’s deep cut for the week is the announcement of its two 5K display monitors, the 27-inch Studio Display and Studio Display XDR.

Both 27-inch monitors have 5,120 x 2,880 resolutions, embedded 12MP Center Stage cameras, six-speaker audio systems, two Thunderbolt 5 ports and two USB-C ports.

The new, and more expensive, XDR model goes a bit further with mini-LED backlighting, better contrasting and dimming zones, and an improved 120Hz refresh rate (the standard edition is capped at 60Hz) — an update Apple gamers and HDR lovers should be pleased by.

The base Studio display is priced at $1,599, while its XDR variant comes in at a whopping $3,299. Upgrade options are available for both monitors.

By SETH BORENSTEIN and ANNIKA HAMMERSCHLAG

Climate change’s rising seas may threaten tens of millions more people than scientists and government planners originally thought because of mistaken research assumptions on how high coastal waters already are, a new study said.

Related Articles

Google behind proposed Hermantown data center

Meet the UMN beaver expert with a ‘Hoppers’ character named for her

With only 3 women left, an Amazon tribe faced extinction. An unexpected birth now brings hope

Shrinking North American bird population is getting worse faster. Experts blame agriculture, warming

Offshore wind triumphs over Trump in court, but future projects face delays

Researchers studied hundreds of scientific studies and hazard assessments, calculating that about 90% of them underestimated baseline coastal water heights by an average of 1 foot, according to Wednesday’s study in the journal Nature. It’s a far more frequent problem in the Global South, the Pacific and Southeast Asia, and less so in Europe and along Atlantic coasts.

The cause is a mismatch between the way sea and land altitudes are measured, said study co-author Philip Minderhoud, a hydrogeology professor at Wageningen University & Research in the Netherlands. And he attributed that to a “methodological blind spot” between the different ways those two things are measured.

Each way measures their own areas properly, he said. But where sea meets land, there’s a lot of factors that often don’t get accounted for when satellites and land-based models are used. Studies that calculate sea level rise impact usually “do not look at the actual measured sea level so they used this zero-meter” figure as a starting point, said lead author Katharina Seeger of the University of Padua in Italy. In some places in the Indo-Pacific, it’s close to 3 feet, Minderhoud said.

One simple way to understand that is that many studies assume sea levels without waves or currents, when the reality at the water’s edge is of oceans constantly roiled by wind, tides, currents, changing temperatures and things like El Niño, said Minderhoud and Seeger.

Adjusting to a more accurate coastal height baseline means that if seas rise by a little more than 3 feet — as some studies suggest will happen by the end of the century — waters could inundate up to 37% more land and threaten 77 million to 132 million more people, the study said.

That would trigger problems in planning and paying for the impacts of a warming world.

People at risk

“You have a lot of people here for whom the risk of extreme flooding is much higher than people thought,” said Anders Levermann, a climate scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts Research in Germany, who wasn’t part of the study. And Southeast Asia, where the study finds the biggest discrepancy, has the most people already threatened by sea level rise, he said.

FILE – Children play on an uprooted tree along a beach in Mele, Vanuatu, July 19, 2025, that was once lined with vegetation, now largely lost to storms, erosion and other environmental pressures. (AP Photo/Annika Hammerschlag, File)

Minderhoud pointed to island nations in that region as an area where the reality of discrepancy hits home.

For 17-year-old climate activist Vepaiamele Trief, the projections aren’t abstract. On her island home in the South Pacific archipelago of Vanuatu, the shoreline has visibly retreated within her short lifetime, with beaches eroded, coastal trees uprooted and some homes now barely 3 feet from the sea at high tide. On her grandmother’s island of Ambae, a coastal road from the airport to her village has been rerouted inland because of encroaching water. Graves have been submerged and entire ways of life feel under threat.

“These studies, they aren’t just words on a paper. They aren’t just numbers. They’re people’s actual livelihoods,” she said. “Put yourself in the shoes of our coastal communities — their lives are going to be completely overturned because of sea level rise and climate change.”

Paying attention to the starting point

This new study is pretty much about what is the truth on the ground.

Calculations that may be correct for the seas overall or for the land aren’t quite right at that key intersection point of water and land, Seeger and Minderhoud said. It’s especially true in the Pacific.

FILE – The coastline of Efate Island, Vanuatu is visible on July 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Annika Hammerschlag, File)

“To understand how much higher a piece of land is than the water, you need to know the land elevation and the water elevation. And what this paper says the vast majority of studies have done is to just assume that zero in your land elevation dataset is the level of the water. When in fact, it’s not,” said sea level rise expert Ben Strauss, CEO of Climate Central. His 2019 study was one of the few the new paper said got it right.

“It’s just the baseline that you start from that people are getting wrong,” said Strauss, who wasn’t part of the research.

Maybe not so bad, some scientists say

Other outside scientists said that Minderhoud and Seeger may be making too much of the problem.

“I think they’re exaggerating the implications for impact studies a bit — the problem is actually well understood, albeit addressed in a way that could probably be improved,” said Gonéri Le Cozannet, a scientist at the French geological survey. Most local planners know their coastal issues and plan accordingly, Rutgers University sea level expert Robert Kopp said.

That’s true in Vietnam in the high-impact area, Minderhoud said. They have an accurate sense of elevation, he said.

FILE – Gravestones sit submerged in water on Pele Island, Vanuatu, a country heavily affected by rising seas July 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Annika Hammerschlag, File)

The findings come as a new UNESCO report warns of major gaps in understanding how much carbon the ocean absorbs. That report said that models differ by 10% to 20% in estimating the size of that carbon sink, raising questions about the accuracy of global climate projections that rely on them.

Together, the studies suggest governments may be planning for coastal and climate risks with an incomplete picture of how the ocean is changing.

“When the ocean comes closer, it takes away more than just the land we used to enjoy,” said Thompson Natuoivi, a climate advocate for Save the Children Vanuatu.

“Sea level rise is not just changing our coastline, it’s changing our lives. We are not talking about the future — we’re talking about the right now.”

The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment

By MATTHEW PERRONE, AP Health Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, is working to hire a researcher and friend who wants the agency to add new warnings to antidepressants about unproven pregnancy risks, The Associated Press has learned.

Dr. Adam Urato, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist and critic of antidepressant safety, is pressing the FDA to add a boxed warning to SSRIs, the drugs most commonly prescribed for depression. Urato’s petition says the medications can cause pregnancy complications, including miscarriages and fetal brain abnormalities that may lead to autism and other disorders in children.

Related Articles

US maternal deaths fell in 2024 and may have dropped again last year, government data shows

Experts talk how to navigate distressing news stories and finding coping mechanisms

State lawmakers seek restraints on wage garnishment for medical debt

Penguins in party hats? Birthday cards cheer families of babies treated for botulism

Minnesota sues to block Trump administration’s holding back of Medicaid funds

That proposed labeling change has become a top priority for Hoeg, who regularly consults with Urato and is working to bring him on as a full-time FDA employee, according to people familiar with the situation. They spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential FDA matters.

Within the agency, Hoeg’s close relationship with Urato is viewed as a clear conflict of interest that, under normal FDA standards, would result in her recusing herself from any work on the petition. But Hoeg is actively working to speed up the agency’s review of her friend’s proposal, according to the people familiar with the situation.

Outside experts say the petition relies on flimsy data, including animal studies and small trials in people. They fear a new FDA warning could cause pregnant women to stop medication unnecessarily, leading to serious health risks from untreated depression.

“A black box warning is a big red flag with both practitioners and patients,” said Dr. Jennifer Payne, a University of Virginia reproductive psychiatrist. “What’s missing in this petition is an understanding of the risks of maternal mental illness during pregnancy, not just to the woman, but to the pregnancy and ultimately the infant.”

SSRIs include most of the bestselling depression medications, including Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft and their generic equivalents.

More than 15% of U.S. women, or about 26 million people, take medication for depression, according to the latest federal figures. Professional guidelines state that antidepressants are generally safe during pregnancy and should be discontinued only after careful consultation with a doctor.

Last fall, Hoeg gave a talk on the SSRI petition to top FDA drug officials, presenting the work as her own. Staffers who reviewed her slides found they were created by Urato, according to the people who spoke to the AP. The incident was first reported by Stat News.

Urato said in an email Wednesday that Hoeg is “an excellent scientist,” and that they have known each other for several years.

“I am friendly with her, as I am with many colleagues, but we do not have a longstanding personal friendship that would in any way prevent her from reviewing the citizen petition,” Urato said.

A spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the FDA, said that the agency would respond directly to Urato about his petition.

In January, Urato was named to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s panel on vaccine recommendations, which has been completely reshaped by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to include a number of anti-vaccine voices.

The latest COVID-19 contrarian elevated into FDA’s leadership

The antidepressant review is the latest in a series of controversial topics taken up by Hoeg, a sports medicine physician with no previous government or management experience.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Hoeg attracted attention as a critic of masking, vaccine mandates and other public health measures. She co-wrote papers with medical contrarians who would go on to join the Trump administration, including FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and FDA’s vaccine chief, Dr. Vinay Prasad. All three have become top surrogates for Kennedy.

Before the pandemic, Hoeg had published only a handful of medical papers, including one on health issues affecting ultramarathon runners.

A Danish American citizen and marathon runner, Hoeg was instrumental in the Republican administration’s recent decision to drop a number of vaccine recommendations for children. That is a change she has long proposed, to bring the United States more in line with Denmark.

Like many critics of vaccines, including Kennedy, Hoeg has also been skeptical of antidepressants, questioning their safety and benefits. Last July, she hosted a panel of outside experts at the FDA on SSRIs that included Urato and nine other critics of the drugs.

“Never before in human history have we chemically altered developing babies like this, especially the developing fetal brain, and this is happening without any real public warning,” Urato said at the meeting.

On a podcast shortly afterward, Hoeg echoed many of Urato’s points.

“I think women should be informed about the potential risks so that they have time to come off SSRIs if they want to when they’re trying to get pregnant,” Hoeg told the hosts of the Mom Wars podcast.

FDA officials typically avoid making public comments about matters under review because it could suggest the agency is basing its decision on individual opinions, rather than science.

But Hoeg has taken a hands-on approach to the SSRI petition, telling FDA staffers that their proposed review timeline of nine months needed to be shortened, according to the people familiar with the situation.

Reviewing a citizen petition involves detailed analysis of scientific references, legal issues and a number of other steps to ensure that the agency’s final decision can be defended in court.

“Apart from it serving FDA’s public health mission, there’s always going to be some concern about legal risk if the agency doesn’t take sufficient time to consider all the relevant data and arguments,” said Patti Zettler, a former FDA attorney now at Ohio State University’s law school.

Hoeg was tapped to the lead FDA’s drug center in December, inheriting the job during a period of unprecedented upheaval, including layoffs, buyouts and leadership changes. She is the sixth person to lead the 5,000-person center in the past year.

Staffers did not hear from Hoeg directly until a town hall last month, where she voiced her concerns about the safety of SSRIs and injectable RSV shots for children, a class of drugs that FDA is reviewing at her request. RSV is a respiratory virus that sends thousands of children in the United States to the hospital each year.

Antidepressant questions clouded by other health factors

The safety of antidepressants has been scrutinized for decades, leading to several updates to their FDA label, including the addition of a black box warning about the risk of suicidal behavior in children.

For pregnant women, the current label lists a number of documented safety issues, including risks of excess bleeding after giving birth.

Doctors who treat women with depression say they discuss those risks with their patients, balancing the possible safety issues against the potential harms of relapsing into depression: self-harm, substance abuse and other behaviors that negatively impact women and fetuses.

Researchers who have reviewed Urato’s SSRI petition say many of the studies claiming to show connections to disorders such as autism don’t take into account other important health factors. For example, women with depression have higher rates of smoking, diabetes and family histories of mental illness that can all increase the likelihood of developmental disorders.

“So how do we say that these outcomes are a result of the SSRI when all of these other factors are at play?” said Dr. Amritha Bhat, a University of Washington perinatal psychiatrist.

Bhat and other researchers say they support more research into the effects of SSRIs, and they acknowledge possible downsides to their use.

“But in the meantime we need to provide options to people that are struggling with these symptoms during pregnancy,” she said. “We cannot just ask them to white knuckle their way through it.”

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.