candidate

Neil Bush says that he will vote for Democrat James Talarico due to reservations about Republican candidate Ken Paxton.

Neil Bush, brother of former Republican President George W Bush, has said that he voted for the Democratic candidate James Talarico in a crucial race for the United States Senate.

In a social media post on Tuesday, Bush said he voted for Talarico due to concerns about the Republican candidate, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Talarico and Paxton are in a tight race for Texas’s open Senate seat. Democrats are hoping to seize control of the 100-member Senate in the November 3 midterm elections, when 35 seats will be on the ballot.

Bush’s endorsement of Talarico is the latest sign of division among Texas Republicans.

Bush comes from a prominent Republican family: not only was his brother a president, but his father, the late George HW Bush, was too.

“My concerns about his judgment and conduct are hardly mine alone,” Bush wrote. “He was impeached by the Republican-controlled Texas House, although subsequently acquitted by the Texas Senate.”

To explain his decision, Bush pointed to Paxton’s divisive track record, including efforts to support President Donald Trump’s false claims about the 2020 presidential election.

“I have been deeply troubled by Paxton’s conduct as Texas Attorney General, particularly his decision to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election in other states in an effort to help Donald Trump remain in power,” Bush said.

“I believe that effort was an affront to our democratic institutions and the peaceful transfer of power.”

His brother, the former president, has largely receded from political life and has declined to endorse candidates in recent elections. Before serving in the White House from 2001 to 2009, George W Bush was governor of Texas.

But George W Bush’s daughter Barbara Bush has also shown her support for Talarico by donating to a political action committee backing his campaign.

Texas has long been considered a Republican stronghold, and Democrats have not won a Senate race in the state since 1988.

But polls show Talarico locked in a close race with Paxton, who defeated incumbent Senator John Cornyn in the Republican Party’s primary run-off on May 26.

Paxton had secured an endorsement from Trump on May 19, days before the run-off.

In a statement, Trump criticised Cornyn as “not supportive of [him] when times were tough”, while praising Paxton as a “MAGA Warrior”.

Some Republicans have expressed frustration over Trump’s intervention on Paxton’s behalf, given the vulnerabilities posed by his state impeachment and other scandals.

A Marist poll released on October 14 found Talarico winning 47 percent of the vote compared to 45 percent for Paxton.

Israeli forces detained U.S. Democratic congressional candidate Brad Lander on Wednesday as he helped Palestinian farmers harvest olives in the occupied West Bank, releasing him hours later while dozens of other volunteers, including a group of American rabbis, remained in custody.

The incident was the latest in an annual olive harvest that has been marked by violence between Israeli settlers and Palestinian villagers attempting to gather their crops.

The Israeli military said the farmers and volunteers had failed to seek prior approval for the harvest and were detained “due to the security risk posed by conducting an uncoordinated harvest near an Israeli community.” It later added that it viewed “the arrival of dozens of activists as an act intended solely to provoke, which undermines the harvesting process.”

Lander is running in the U.S. elections on Nov. 3 to represent a heavily Democratic New York district in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“The occupation is a crime under international law,” Lander wrote on social media after he was detained. “Harvesting olives isn’t a crime under any law I know.”

“These detentions by the IDF are one more attempt to undermine Palestinians’ right to harvest their olive groves, travel on their roads, and live in their homes,” he added in a post after his release.

This year, Palestinians have been required to coordinate with the Israeli military to access more of their privately owned farmland than in previous years. The anti-settlement group Peace Now said last week that the army had expanded by nearly 30% the area of farmland that Palestinians cannot enter without prior approval, to 34 square miles. The Israeli military declined to comment on the exact figures but said Palestinian farmers must coordinate access to areas under Israeli security control.

The detained volunteers were taken to a police facility. Lander was among them but “released after it became known that he was a congressional candidate,” the Israeli police said in a statement.

Israeli rights group Yesh Din and the Palestinian Farmers’ Union have said the 2026 harvest has been the most violent in recent history, with hundreds of reported thefts, clashes and arson attacks.

Much of the violence has unfolded on land outside Palestinian villages, where Palestinians have historically harvested olives and Israeli settlers have increasingly erected outposts without authorization from Israel’s government.

But there were no clashes before Israeli forces arrived Wednesday, according to Beck Strober, a spokesperson for Protect the Harvest, the advocacy group that organized the volunteers at the grove.

Jill Jacobs, one of a dozen American rabbis detained, condemned the Israeli government restricting the ability of Palestinians to harvest freely.

“The Israeli government is actively advancing the forced displacement of Palestinian communities across the West Bank, using its military to deny Palestinians access to their land and intimidate those who stand alongside them,” Jacobs, chief executive of T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, said in a statement.

Lander, who was endorsed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, defeated U.S. Rep. Dan Goldman in a primary for New York’s 10th congressional district. The race was viewed as a referendum on the Democratic party’s support for Israel. Both candidates are Jewish and have criticized Israel, but only Lander called the war in Gaza a genocide.

Lander was not the first U.S. politician detained in the West Bank this year. U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, said Israeli forces detained him during a visit in July.

Lander says dozens remain in Israeli custody after being detained while helping Palestinian farmers harvest olives.

United States Democratic congressional candidate Brad Lander says he has been released from Israeli military custody with a warning after being detained alongside dozens of volunteers helping Palestinian farmers harvest olives in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday.

But several dozen others, including rabbis and international volunteers, remain in detention, according to Lander, who called them to be released immediately.

“I’ve been released from IDF custody with a ‘warning,’ apparently because of my public profile,” Lander wrote on X. “I told them I wasn’t even a congressmember yet, just a nominee.”

Lander, a former New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate, was among approximately 80 volunteers detained by Israeli soldiers and police near the village of Nahalin, outside Bethlehem, according to the Israeli organisation Rabbis for Human Rights.

The group, which included American, Israeli, Palestinian, British and Canadian volunteers, had been accompanying Palestinian farmers for about two hours when Israeli forces arrived and informed them that they were in a closed military zone.

The volunteers were then taken to a police station, according to Rabbis for Human Rights.

The Israeli government has not responded to a request for comment.

In the Los Angeles mayoral debate Tuesday night, I was reminded of two things.

First, as I’ve said before, it’s no surprise that roughly one-third of likely voters remain undecided with less than three weeks to go until election day.

Second, there is one key difference between the two candidates: We know who Mayor Karen Bass is, but we don’t yet know who Councilmember Nithya Raman is, even though she’s been leading in most polls.

Those two points are connected. I think a majority of voters want a change at City Hall because of the marginal progress on homelessness, the erosion of basic services and the bad decisions before and after the Palisades disaster, among a host of other issues.

But they’re not sure what they’d be getting in Raman.

Why not?

If you haven’t already seen the story a few days ago by The Times’ longtime City Hall reporting ace, Dave Zahniser, you need to check it out right here.

The headline neatly sums it up:

“L.A. mayoral candidate Nithya Raman has strong opinions. But they often change.”

Raman has flip-flopped so many times, it’s as if she’s having a political identity crisis, which is not a great selling point for a candidate.

She endorsed Bass, an ally, for reelection and then abruptly and surprisingly announced that she was running against her.

She rose to power as a darling of the Democratic Socialists of America and vowed to defund the police, only to later support an LAPD budget increase.

She embraced the so-called mansion tax, then said it needed an overhaul.

She supported and helped fund Bass’ signature homelessness initiative, Inside Safe, and now has turned against it.

“That’s the real wild card,” said Sara Sadhwani, assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “She has flip-flopped so extensively on policy that it’s unclear which version of her values we would get.”

Look, it’s not uncommon for a candidate of the left, or the right, to move toward the center to broaden support. And there’s nothing wrong with learning on the job and evolving. It’s all too rare, in fact.

The problem for Raman is that in somersaulting around on core issues, she’s alienating some of the people she would need as allies in order to be an effective mayor.

They might come around, because in the city’s shared system of power, there are times when the City Council and mayor need to paddle in the same direction in order to get anywhere. But among the 15 City Council members, 13 have endorsed Bass, and that support includes even the DSA wing of the council.

I like the idea of a rebel as L.A. mayor, but the job is hard enough with City Council allies. Without them, Raman could be cooked. And it’s not as if she’d have an easy time winning support for much of anything from the powerful public employee unions and traditional business interests, which are for the most part aligned with Bass, for better and for worse.

Both candidates had their moments in the debate, although I gave the edge to Bass. During The Times’ live chat, I said I think L.A. really needs a leadership change, and I think Raman did not prove that she’s the answer.

It’s probably the second-most important political job in the state, in one of the great cities of the world, and along with the ducking and punching, I wanted more love, more poetry, more unbridled passion and a contagious sense of possibility.

And please, all you Spencer Pratt toadies, don’t send me your whiny little notes about how he was the guy all along. Identifying some of the obvious problems is easy enough. (I do it all the time.) Having a plan is another matter, and that’s why I never ran for mayor, and why Pratt faded out of the picture.

So what next, as the final three weeks of the campaign play out?

If I were Raman, who is 45, I’d go heavy on touting the work she’s done on eviction protections and capping rent hikes, because nailing down younger voters could give her the keys to the throne. On homelessness, she knows the issue better than most, has detailed what’s wrong with the Bass program, has made headway in her own district, and has laid out a plan to speed up progress and efficiency citywide.

But her best argument is that City Hall and the entrenched political establishment need a major shake-up, because the machine is now a jalopy.

“We cannot afford another four years of decline, of mismanagement, of excuses,” Raman said in the debate.

As for Bass, 73, you can’t count her out just yet because she’s a fighter, and she’s better at campaigning than at being mayor. She also is likely to benefit from the fact that older voters — who are most likely to go to the polls — favor her by a huge margin.

“You are not ready for prime time,” Bass told her former ally during the debate, and Bass also hammered Raman for taking “different positions on different days of the week.”

In 2005, Mayor Jim Hahn became the first L.A. mayor to lose a reelection bid in more than three decades, falling to Antonio Villaraigosa. It was a rout, at 58% for Villaraigosa to 41% for Hahn.

I don’t see a rout this time.

The question for Los Angeles is this:

Have you had enough of the mayor you know, and are you ready to roll the dice on someone you don’t?

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Karen Bass and Nithya Raman faced off Tuesday night in a debate hosted by NBC4 and Telemundo52 in Universal City. It was the L.A. mayoral candidates’ last head-to-head before the Nov. 3 election.

Times columnists Lorraine Ali, Gustavo Arellano and Steve Lopez weigh in on the highlights and lowlights.

Arellano: Raman had the line of the night at the very beginning, channeling — of all politicians — Ronald Reagan, one of the last people you’d think of as an Angeleno, even though he absolutely was.

“Are you better off than you were four years ago?” she asked while looking directly into the camera.

For the vast majority of L.A. residents, the answer is a resounding no.

Up until tonight, Raman has done a good job of communicating a message of hope and change, while Bass, as the incumbent, has repeatedly tripped on her record over the biblically bad four years of her first term.

But I didn’t hear that Raman tonight — partly because Bass made her play defense, from her first answer to her closing statement.

The mayor won the debate, if we’re judging by forensics. She rarely looked down at her notepad, unlike Raman. It’s something I’ve never noticed about Raman before — either a new nervous tic, or an indication that the city councilmember can’t seem to speak with conviction, which has been a frequent critique against her.

Bass’ barrages got to Raman more than a few times, leading her to talk over the NBC and Telemundo moderators or even shush them. A whining Raman is not a good Raman, which her advisors need to drill into her sooner rather than later.

But Raman’s answers never meandered and weren’t too elliptical, even when she was pressed by the able moderators. Since she’s ahead in most reputable polls, Raman’s job for the night was not failing — and she cleared that low, low hurdle.

Bass, meanwhile, needed to deliver a knockout punch. Instead, as a politico friend who cares for neither candidate texted me after the debate, she won one round. There are only so many more rounds before Election Day for her to catch up — and Bass can’t rely on just winning on points anymore, especially with an opponent who’s now running like she’s ahead.

During closing remarks, Raman hearkened back to her Reagan shout-out, stating, “We cannot afford another four years of decline, of mismanagement, of excuses.” She then pivoted to her positivity message, smiling while proclaiming, “We can be joyful and ambitious again.” The more she sticks to that upbeat vibe, the better she comes off to a voter base tired of the doom and gloom that has fallen over L.A. under Bass.

Bass, meanwhile, came off as funereal, beginning with, “It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve in the city that I was born and raised.” That’s how you start a retirement announcement, not another four-year term. Let’s see what the voters say on Election Day.

Incumbent Karen Bass during a mayoral debate against City Councilmember Nithya Raman Tuesday night.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

City Councilmember Nithya Raman during Tuesday night’s debate against Mayor Karen Bass.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

Lopez: After watching the debate, I don’t think this thing is over.

Yes, Raman has been ahead in polling, and Bass is saddled with high negativity ratings, the baggage of the Palisades fire and the continued challenge of homelessness.

But this debate could have been a knockout punch for Raman, and instead, I think Bass won the night, not just by touting her achievements and responding sharply to criticism, but by seeming to have a better command of the moment.

My colleague Lorraine Ali made a good point — how many people were actually watching this debate? Probably not many, so it’s not like this one-hour back-and-forth tips the scale.

But as has been noted, a huge percentage of likely voters remain undecided. Maybe that’s because they’re not in love with either candidate. Or maybe they’re ready to move on from Bass but aren’t sure about who Raman really is. If they watched tonight, looking for an answer, I’m not sure they got one.

Raman came into elected office as a darling of the Democratic Socialists of America and was a high-profile member of that wing on the City Council. But even the council’s DSA members didn’t endorse her bid for mayor. In fact, Bass has gotten support from 13 of the 15 council members.

So how will Raman build a coalition in a city where mayoral power is shared with the council, and matters like homelessness are the joint responsibility of the city and the county, and any progress is stymied without strong mayoral relationships in Sacramento and D.C.?

It’s possible that the council will come around to her if she’s elected, because just as the mayor needs the council to get much done, the council needs the mayor.

But I’d like to know more about who Raman is and why she’s flip-flopped so much (on support for the LAPD, on the mansion tax, on the Inside Safe homeless initiative, etc., etc.), as my colleague David Zahniser reported just the other day.

Learning and evolving can be a good thing. But voters need to know who Raman is, what her vision is for the city and how she expects to lead.

I didn’t get that in this debate. Bass, whose first term works against her as much as for her, is still hanging on and hanging in.

It may come down to whether older voters, who are likely to favor Bass, turn out in greater numbers than younger voters, who are likely to favor Raman.

But from where I sit, it ain’t over. Except maybe for the Dodgers.

Ali: Raman was ahead in the polls headed into tonight’s mayoral debate, so her job wasn’t quite as hard as Bass’, who is fighting for her political life. Raman just needed to knock the mayor off balance — then keep her there for an hour. But that didn’t happen.

Bass came off composed, confident and in command of the conversation, while Raman appeared less sure of herself, frequently looking down to check her notes while defending her work on key concerns such as homelessness (until recently, she was chair of the city’s housing and homelessness committee) and attacking Bass for leaving the city “leaderless” during crises such as the Palisades and Lineage fires.

The overall tone of the debate was less heated than when the two candidates met in August to battle it out sans Spencer Pratt, the former reality TV personality and Republican contender who lost in the primary.

But there were moments Tuesday when the women’s history as colleagues — and onetime allies — informed their attacks on one another.

Bass said Raman was “not ready for prime time” and that she had a “contemptuous” relationship with her constituents. Raman continually pointed out that Bass had failed to remedy L.A.’s homelessness crisis, and did so from the perspective of someone who had worked closely with the mayor.

There’s still a question around how many folks actually watched the debate, and if the candidates’ points will resonate in subsequent clips or memes. Neither contender has the charm or spark of, say, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, and as vapid as it may sound, charisma matters.

Three weeks out from the election and there still isn’t a lot of excitement over the mayoral choices on the ballot. This debate didn’t help that cause, or juice the race.

Lucky for Bass, she has the presence of a leader, and that gave her the edge over Raman tonight. But was anyone watching beyond my fellow columnists Gustavo Arellano and Steve Lopez?

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Campaign mailers urging Ohio voters to support a socialist U.S. Senate candidate over Democratic nominee Sherrod Brown are being underwritten by a newly incorporated PAC with ties to President Trump’s MAGA Inc., public filings show.

The mailers are sponsored by Enough Promises Ohio PAC and began arriving in voters’ mailboxes in recent days. They promote independent candidate Greg Levy over Brown with messages such as “Join the Revolution” and “Send a Worker to the Senate.” Levy describes himself as “Socialist running for the U.S. Senate to represent Ohio in 2026” on his X account.

Levy condemned the fliers for falsely impersonating his campaign and engaging in “dirty tricks” designed to mislead voters. He said he is considering legal action.

“This is a highly undemocratic practice and does a disservice to voters in Ohio and throughout the country,” he wrote on X.

According to Federal Election Commission filings, Enough Promises Ohio was founded on Sept. 29. It has not yet had to disclose its contributors, but additional federal filings lay out a trail of associations linked to Republicans.

Enough Promises paid the firm Seven Farms more than $397,000 on two dates last week for printing, postage and mail services either supporting Levy or opposing Brown. Seven Farms, also a new entity, lists as its address the same South Carolina business suite as the one used by Whistlestop Strategies LLC.

Whistlestop is a direct mail outfit operated by Big Dog Strategies LLC, the strategy firm that advises Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC and that managed Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno’s successful campaign against Brown in 2024.

Messages seeking comment were left with Enough Promises Ohio and Big Dog.

MAGA Inc. and affiliated groups began pouring huge sums of cash into midterm races in September, after party officials had been urging Trump to begin spending some of the fortune he had amassed to help embattled Republicans before it was too late.

Smyth writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Jill Colvin in New York contributed to this report.