Elections

WASHINGTON — Thousands of protesters are rallying Friday on the National Mall in support of voting rights and racial justice ahead of the midterm elections, following a wave of changes to voting laws and redistricting that civil rights groups have condemned as detrimental to Black Americans.

The 2026 “Defend the Vote” March on Washington, organized by the Rev. Al Sharpton and Martin Luther King III, echoes the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 march. The event follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark April decision in Louisiana v. Callais that reinterpreted key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, allowing Southern states to redraw their congressional maps in a way that erodes equal representation in Black communities.

“We’ve been doing these marches for years, but this is probably the most important because this is the first year we are marching that the voting rights bill has been nullified by the Supreme Court,” Sharpton, founder of the National Action Network, said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“Marches are designed to grab attention and then go into the trenches and organize around that,” he said.

The march opened with prayer and statements from Interfaith Alliance representatives. They spoke on diversity, equity and inclusion practices, voting rights and systemic racism.

“Creator of all, let us draw on each other, with love and mercy, and hold each other up as we march, wipe each other’s tears, heal each other’s wounds,” Ambereen Kahn, an Interfaith Alliance representative, said. “Most compassionate, protect our leaders who guide, instill in their hearts the values of our shared humanity.”

This year’s march, which Sharpton’s group is co-hosting with King’s Drum Major Institute, a progressive think tank and community action group, features dozens of speakers, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.

Sharpton said thousands of civil rights activists from across the southeastern U.S. were traveling to the capital by bus for the rally.

Event echoes iconic Lincoln Memorial rally

On Thursday, Courtney Pope, 48, was marching across the King Bridge to the Civil Rights Museum in Memphis. But on Friday, she and other members of the National Handmaid Army were at the Washington march with plans to travel to New York and New Jersey over the next few days.

For Pope, the rally is about finding community alongside promoting voting rights.

“I know that we’ll only be successful if we band together despite our differences,” Pope said.

Friday’s event harkens back to King Jr.’s historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963, when more than 200,000 people gathered at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial. That march, an inflection point in the Civil Rights Movement, came at a fraught moment for the country, when economic headwinds, civil unrest, political division and the Vietnam War bitterly divided Americans.

Sharpton said the Trump administration’s immigration policy for Haitians and white South Africans, as well as cuts to social programs like Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act’s health subsidies, are unifying policies for this year’s ideologically diverse march attendees. But the redistricting efforts by Republican-led states set to reduce the number of Black lawmakers in Congress loom large over Friday’s march.

“This march is about people who refuse to be counted out. When the courts and the legislature broke apart District 6, they did not just redraw lines,” Rep. Cleo Fields, D-La., said in a texted statement. “They told hundreds of thousands of Black families from Baton Rouge up through the Delta that their voice could be taken away at any moment.”

Fields was the central character in the Supreme Court decision that hollowed out the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The court ruled that his district, created just one term ago to permit a second majority-Black district in a state where Blacks make up 33% of the population, was unconstitutional because it relied too heavily on race.

The court has held that maps can be redrawn for partisan reasons.

Louisiana’s legislature rushed to redraw the district after the high court’s decision, reshaping Fields’ district to cluster it around predominantly white communities in the Baton Rouge area and southern Louisiana.

Fields has opted not to seek reelection to Congress and instead is pursuing a seat in the state Senate.

“The people taking part in this historic march are answering back, and history will remember that they did,” Fields said.

Embattled Black lawmakers see need for continued rights push

Rep. Shomari Figures, an Alabama Democrat whose majority-Black district was targeted by the state’s Republican-led redistricting effort, said the original voting rights fight required local movements, national figures, lots of coordination and strategy. He sees this year’s march as a continuation of that legacy.

“My district includes Montgomery, which was the birthplace of it all. It started with a bus boycott in 1955 and that, ultimately, morphed into a broader struggle for civil rights and led to a more broad Civil Rights Movement,” Figures told the AP.

“It led to a Civil Rights Act, led to the Fair Housing Act, led obviously to the Voting Rights Act, and the voting rights movement,” Figures added.

Ahead of Friday, organizations participating in the march, including the NAACP, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and Black Voters Matter, filed new claims in federal court in their existing lawsuit against President Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting. The Supreme Court cleared a path Monday for possible implementation of the order, though it remains unclear how much can be put in place before the midterms.

“We will not stand idly by while the voices of the people are silenced,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said in a statement Thursday. “We must protect every eligible citizen’s right to cast their ballot.”

Brown and Junkroski write for the Associated Press. AP writers Gary Fields in Washington and Kimberly Chandler in Montgomery, Ala., contributed to this report.

Judge blocks Trump’s mail voting rules for a second time, just days before ballots go out for the midterms.

A United States federal judge has for a second time blocked the Trump administration’s overhaul of election rules aimed at limiting voting by mail.

District Judge Indira Talwani late on Thursday blocked the US Postal Service’s new ballot rules for 14 days, hours after the agency said they had taken effect.

The ruling is part of an ongoing battle prompted by President Donald Trump’s bid to limit voting by mail, which is heating up as the US heads towards midterm elections in November that will decide control of Congress and the Senate.

Nearly a third of American voters cast votes by mail. The first ballots for the midterms are due to be sent out in about a week.

The new rules require states to submit approved voter lists and follow new ballot formatting before USPS can deliver voting slips. The restrictions were enacted on Thursday after the Supreme Court cleared the way for them.

Talwani wrote in a statement late on Thursday that states “have neither time nor funds” to redesign ballots, update election systems or train officials on the new USPS portal before the upcoming election.

The fight traces back to March, when Trump ordered the Postal Service to withhold ballots unless states supplied approved voter lists and new formatting rules.

Voting rights groups and democratic officials sued, arguing only states and Congress, not the president, can set election rules. Talwani agreed, blocking the rules over the summer.

On Monday, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority threw out that earlier ruling on a technicality, saying that the legal challenge on which it was based was filed too early.

Democratic officials and voting rights groups quickly refiled their challenge once the rules became official, allowing Talwani to block them once more in a late-night order.

Separately, attorneys general from 24 states filed a new lawsuit this week making the same core argument: that only the Senate and Congress, not the president, can have constitutional authority to set election rules.

A hearing on the refiled case is scheduled for September 3, just as ballots are set to go out. That timeline means whatever Talwani or a higher court decides next could take effect as voting begins, or after it is already under way.

Voting from home

California’s mail-in voting system has also become a particular target for Trump.

Voting by mail surged during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, California passed a law to automatically mail a ballot to every registered voter.

More than 80 percent of the state’s voters cast a mail-in ballot in 2024 alone.

Moreles, the Santa Clara registrar, said his county has an even higher rate. More than 90 percent of voters in his jurisdiction use mail-in ballots to vote.

His county processed more mail-in ballots in the last general election than the entire state of Texas did. While Texas accepted roughly 342,000 mail-in votes, Santa Clara County sent out more than a million.

That widespread use suggests that voters do not share Trump’s scepticism of the mail-in system, according to Moreles. “They like the accessibility of it. They must believe it’s secure as well,” he said.

But mail-in ballots can continue to trickle in after the election ends, causing vote tallies to fluctuate in the days and weeks after polling stations close. In California, all mailed ballots are valid so long as they are postmarked by election day, and must also be received no later than seven days after.

Trump has pointed to those long vote counts and shifting tallies as evidence of fraud.

Even some Democrats have pushed for the process to be faster. By law, elections must be certified within 30 days of the election. But Moreles argued that not rushing can have its virtues, too.

“For the folks who are living here and are used to it, it makes sense and, to a lot of people, is reassuring,” Moreles said. “Taking the time to get it right is something that intuitively makes sense to people.”

Still, on August 24, the Supreme Court opened the door to additional uncertainty surrounding mail-in ballots.

In a six-to-three ruling, the court’s conservative majority allowed the Trump administration to begin implementing a March executive order that would impose new restrictions on mail-in voting.

The order could impact both the design of mail-in ballots and who is eligible to receive one.

But state officials have questioned the feasibility of redesigning and reprinting ballots with so little time before the midterm elections. Early voting in some states starts as early as September.

Others have speculated about whether the legal wrangling with cause confusion or discourage voters who rely on mail-in ballots.

On Wednesday, California announced it was co-leading a group of 24 state attorneys general in filing a new lawsuit to see the executive order blocked.

“Donald Trump does not run elections. States do. And his latest attack on democracy is proof of how weak he has become,” the state’s Governor Gavin Newsom said in a statement accompanying the suit.

“California will continue to lead the way in defending democracy — using every tool at our disposal and every minute in our day. This perilous moment in history demands no less from us.”

A second court order pausing part of Trump’s plan for mail-in ballots remains in effect.

The amended law was an attempt by state Republicans to crack down on unproven claims of voting by noncitizens.

A United States federal court has temporarily blocked an Ohio law that required proof of US citizenship from residents who wanted to register to vote while they obtained a driver’s license.

In his ruling on Tuesday, US District Judge Solomon Oliver Jr granted a preliminary injunction against the law, saying it likely violates the US National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) because it requires more information than necessary to determine a resident’s eligibility to vote.

“Election officials do not need documentary proof of citizenship to assess a voter registration applicant’s citizenship because signed attestation of citizenship is enough,” Oliver wrote.

The judge also pointed to a clause in the act that says each US state’s driver’s license application “shall serve as an application for voter registration with respect to election for Federal office unless the applicant fails to sign the voter registration application”.

Oliver said that Ohio must offer applicants the opportunity to register once they’ve submitted their driver’s license application, not after it’s been approved by the state’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV).

“To interpret this section of the NVRA otherwise would allow States to make registering to vote at the BMV more onerous, and could result in fewer voter registrations because the opportunity to apply was not proactively offered to otherwise eligible citizens,” Oliver added.

In 1995, Ohio passed a so-called “motor-voter” law that allowed residents the opportunity to register to vote when they applied for a driver’s license

But that law was amended last year by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature in an attempt to crack down on unproven claims, pushed in part by US President Donald Trump, that noncitizens were voting in the state’s election. US law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections.

The ruling marks a victory for voting rights advocates like Red Wine & Blue, which sued Ohio’s secretary of state, Frank LaRose, over claims that the law disenfranchised eligible voters and violated the NVRA.

One of the group’s lawyers, Ben Stafford, praised the ruling, calling it “a win for Ohio voters.”

“With the registration deadline just weeks away, eligible Ohioans will now have the opportunity to register to vote at the BMV without having to produce unnecessary paperwork that is not required by federal law,” Stafford, an attorney at Elias Law Group, said in a statement.

LaRose said his office disagrees with the decision and will appeal.

Mass kidnappings highlight Nigeria’s security crisis in the north as elections approach.

Kidnappers have released a video of what appears to be a large group of people being held captive by armed men in a forested area in Nigeria.

The video emerged on Sunday, two days after gunmen abducted as many as 600 worshippers during Friday prayers at a mosque in Dekera village in Nigeria’s north-central Niger state.

The incident comes as Nigeria prepares for presidential elections in January, with security likely to be high on the agenda due to a wave of mass kidnappings for ransom across the north of the country.

Dekera village residents have reported that gunmen took people away in simultaneous raids on several communities.

In the video, posted on Facebook and WhatsApp and circulating widely, children can be heard crying. A gunman speaking in the Hausa language speaks directly to families of the captives, telling them to identify relatives.

“These are all your people,” the gunman ⁠says.

News agencies reported that they could not verify the exact date or location where the video was filmed. However, no older version of the video has been found posted online before Sunday.

Residents, including Abdulmutallib Muqaddas Dindi, were able to confirm the identities of some ⁠of the hostages.

“We have identified our elders, relatives, and some of us have seen their wives and children in the video,” he said.

Police and state authorities have not responded to requests for comment.

Amnesty International has urged Nigerian authorities to secure the release of the worshippers, warning of the growing threat posed by mass abductions in northern Nigeria.

State Commissioner for Information and Orientation Obed Nana told the Anadolu news agency that an operation is under way to “assess the situation, track the attackers, and facilitate the rescue of the abducted worshippers”.

Mass abductions for ransom have become common in parts of northwestern and north-central Nigeria, with armed gangs frequently raiding villages, schools and highways and holding abductees until the gangs are paid large sums of money.

Increasingly, the gunmen are targeting communities further south, beyond ‌hot spots in the north.

As he prepares for the election, President Bola Tinubu has faced growing criticism over lax security.

Aug. 23 (UPI) — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Saturday rejected calls for wartime elections, saying the move would “destroy the country.”

Under martial law, elections have been suspended since Russia invaded the country in 2022.

Last week, ousted Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov called on the president, whose five-year term ended in 2024, to allow Ukrainians to vote again.

Responding to Fedorov for the first time, Zelenky said such a move would split the country.

“I believe that if we want to destroy the country, then during such a war we can move in the selection of elections,” Zelensky told reporters on Saturday.

“I believe that during such a war, elections in general are big risks,” the president added. “Elections right now are a tsunami for the state that will split Ukraine.”

Zelensky said he would consider fresh elections under “specific conditions,” the Guardian reported.

Those conditions include the “participation of the military, in frontline territories, abroad, where millions of our citizens have gone, fleeing the war,” the president said.

Fedorov’s removal as defense minister in July sparked protests across Ukraine. On Tuesday, he said democracy was not a “peacetime luxury.”

“Democracy cannot be held hostage by Russia,” Fedorov said. “We are fighting precisely because we want to remain a free European state.

“Therefore, we must find a legal, safe, and realistic mechanism that will allow Ukraine to restore a full democratic process even amidst a prolonged war.”

Responding to Zelensky’s comments on Sunday, Fedorov told the BBC, “Democracy should not be the hostage of Putin.”

Zelensky last discussed open elections in December, after U.S. President Donald Trump accused him of using the war as an excuse to stay in power.

Back then, the Ukrainian president said he would hold elections so long as he could secure help from the United States and other allies to keep citizens safe when they go out to vote.

Only state-approved parties loyal to President Tokayev permitted to take part amid a sweeping constitutional overhaul.

Voters are heading to the polls in Kazakhstan’s snap parliamentary election, which critics say will strengthen the power of the president.

Polling stations opened at 7am local time (02:00 GMT) and are scheduled to close at 8pm (15:00 GMT). More than 12 million of Kazakhstan’s 20 million people are eligible to vote.

The election will usher in a new 145-member unicameral legislature that is expected to be dominated by supporters of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, who has led the Central Asian country since 2019.

Constitutional overhauls earlier this year abolished Kazakhstan’s upper house in favour of a one-body parliament. Officials claim the change will give parliament more weight in political decision-making, having previously been confined to a mostly auxiliary role.

However, only seven state-approved parties, all loyal to Tokayev, have been allowed to put forth candidates.

The constitutional changes also reset term limits to allow Tokayev to run again in 2029.

The 73-year-old was the chosen successor of longtime leader Nursultan Nazarbayev, who ruled for almost 30 years from the 1990s. But he broke with his predecessor amid cost-of-living protests in 2022 that led to the deaths of 238 people, and has since touted a reform agenda called “Just Kazakhstan”.

A former Soviet state, Kazakhstan balances relations with China, Europe and Russia, with Tokayev navigating recent tensions over Moscow’s war with Ukraine.

Kazakhstan is oil-rich and makes up about 2 percent of daily world supply, mostly exporting to European countries through the Caspian Pipeline Consortium to Russia’s port of Novorossiysk.

For the first time since becoming vice president of the United States, JD Vance has returned to his hometown of Middletown, Ohio, with a goal of rallying Republican voters ahead of November’s pivotal midterm elections.

Vance delivered Friday’s speech at a symbolic location: the steel plant where his late grandfather once worked.

He used the appearance to tout a $1bn investment from the steel manufacturer Cleveland-Cliffs that was supported by $500m in government awards.

That funding, he said, illustrated his party’s commitment to the manufacturing sector and reinvigorating the US economy overall.

“I’m not saying it’s going to be easy – or it’s all going to happen overnight – but in just 18 months, we have seen an explosion of rebuilding in the American heartland,” Vance said, crediting the growth to policies under President Donald Trump.

Vance’s speech comes at a critical time for the Republican Party and Trump in particular.

November’s midterm races will decide whether Republicans are able to maintain control over both chambers of Congress. Should their hold on the legislature slip, Democrats could stymie Trump’s policy priorities for the last two years of his presidency — or even impeach him, as Trump himself has suggested.

Polls have shown that the state of the economy remains the top issue ahead of the midterms.

But how voters perceive each party’s ability to address economic strain has shifted. Before the start of Trump’s second term, the Pew Research Center found that voters were more likely to favour Republican policies on the economy.

In July, however, the dynamic had switched: Thirty-seven percent of those surveyed backed the Democratic approach to the economy, compared with 36 percent for Republicans.

Another poll this month from the news agency Reuters and the firm Ipsos likewise found slightly more respondents siding with the Democrats on economic policy than Republicans, upending a longtime trend that stretched back to 2017.

Trump, for his part, has publicly appeared to dismiss cost-of-living issues as a partisan invention, calling questions of affordability a “hoax” and a “con job” engineered by Democrats.

At Friday’s speech, Vance took a different approach, trying to assuage concerns about the administration’s handling of the economy.

“We got a lot of work to do, but we’re making progress on all the things that matter the most,” Vance said, citing efforts to make homeownership more affordable.

The speech is part of an intensifying campaign under Trump to boost the prospects of Republican candidates ahead of the midterms, with the president and other top officials holding rallies for their party’s candidates.

Ohio, part of a historic manufacturing region known as the Rust Belt, has become increasingly conservative since Trump’s first White House victory in 2016.

But amid rising dissatisfaction with Republican leadership, Democrats see a chance to win back the state’s governor’s office, as well as the US Senate seat left vacant when Vance became vice president.

Whoever wins the special election in November will serve the remainder of Vance’s Senate term, which would have ended in January 2029.

The Republican nominee in the race, Senator Jon Husted, joined Vance on stage at the Middletown rally on Friday. Husted was appointed to fill Vance’s Senate seat until a special election could be held.

Vance, for his part, dedicated part of his speech to attacking Husted’s Democratic rival, former Senator Sherrod Brown, who lost his re-election race to Republican Bernie Moreno two years ago.

He accused Brown of being among the politicians “who pretend to be friends of the workers in this facility”, while instead advancing their own priorities.

“It’s hard to understand what these modern Democrats actually stand for,” Vance said, characterising the party as having strayed from its ideals.

He pointed to Brown’s record of siding with the policies of former Democratic President Joe Biden, who defeated Trump in the 2020 presidential race.

“[Brown] was a man who claimed to represent this state but never once raised his voice against Joe Biden’s border crisis or against the inflation that was brought on by Joe Biden underinvesting and trying to destroy American industry,” Vance said.

The vice president also singled out Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed, repeating a false claim that the Democratic Senate candidate called for “Sharia law” in the US.

“I’d love to go back in time and tell my papaw that there’s a man who claims to stand for working people, who says not only should we have Sharia law, but if you criticise it, you are a white supremacist,” Vance said about El-Sayed.

Trump’s approval rating currently sits at 33 percent, according to Reuters-Ipsos polling from this month.

Dhaka, Bangladesh – Bangladesh is holding its first contested presidential election in 35 years, with the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) candidate Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir pitted against former army officer Oli Ahmad, the nominee of the Jamaat-e-Islami-led 11-party opposition alliance.

A total of 349 members of parliament are eligible to vote in the parliamentary chamber between 08:00 GMT and 11:00 GMT on Thursday, with the result expected hours later, according to Bangladesh’s Election Commission.

The election was triggered by the resignation last month of Mohammed Shahabuddin, who was elected unopposed in 2023 as a nominee of ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League (AL) party. He quit halfway through his five-year term after serving through Hasina’s removal in August 2024, the Muhammad Yunus-led interim administration, and the BNP’s return to power in February.

Thursday’s vote will be the first contested presidential election since October 1991, when BNP candidate Abdur Rahman Biswas defeated AL nominee Badrul Haider Chowdhury by 172 votes to 92. Every presidential election since was uncontested.

The outcome, however, is widely seen as a foregone conclusion.

Of the 349 lawmakers eligible to vote, 247 belong to the BNP and 90 to the Jamaat-led opposition alliance, giving Alamgir a decisive numerical advantage.

Still, the vote carries symbolic significance for a country reshaping its institutions two years after the 2024 uprising that ended Hasina’s iron-fisted 15-year rule.

Who are the candidates?

Alamgir, 78, is one of the BNP’s most prominent leaders. He became the acting secretary-general in 2011 and was formally appointed to the post in 2016, emerging as one of the party’s principal public faces during its long years in opposition under Hasina.

After the BNP swept this year’s election, Alamgir became minister for local government, rural development and cooperatives.

At a BNP parliamentary party meeting on Wednesday, he thanked Prime Minister Tarique Rahman for nominating him and pledged not to compromise on Bangladesh’s independence and sovereignty. Rahman in turn urged BNP lawmakers to vote for Alamgir.

Alamgir’s opponent, retired Colonel Ahmad, 85, is a decorated veteran of Bangladesh’s 1971 Liberation War, chairman of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), and a six-time member of parliament.

Once a close associate of former President Ziaur Rahman, the father of current Prime Minister Tarique Rahman, Ahmad joined the BNP in 1980 after leaving the army the year before. He served as communications minister under former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, and founded the LDP in 2006.

Ahmad’s nomination is politically striking: his main backer, the Jamaat, had opposed Bangladesh’s independence in 1971 and sided with Pakistan during the war, while Ahmad fought in the Liberation War.

Despite Ahmad’s slim chances of winning, the opposition alliance has hailed him as an experienced and broadly acceptable candidate, ensuring that the presidency will be decided through a vote and not remain uncontested.

Among Bangladeshis, views are divided over the two men’s political records.

For Anwarul Islam, a former Bangladesh Bank official, Alamgir stands out for his personal integrity.

“I visited Mirza Fakhrul’s constituency. People, irrespective of race or religion, have enormous affection for him,” Islam told Al Jazeera. “His integrity is rare among Bangladeshi politicians.”

Abdul Baten, a manager at a construction site in the capital Dhaka, said he preferred Ahmad.

“I would definitely prefer Oli because he is a seasoned politician,” Baten said. “His opponent, Fakhrul, and the BNP did not keep their promises on state reforms.”

Historic, but how important?

Bangladesh’s constitution makes the president the head of state, but grants the office little independent executive authority. Article 48(3) requires the president to act on the prime minister’s advice, except in appointing the prime minister and the chief justice.

Ali Riaz, a political scientist who served as co-chair of the National Consensus Commission on state reforms under the Yunus-led interim government, said the return of a contested election was welcome, but its practical significance should not be overstated.

“It’s good to see that someone who has been at the forefront of the democratic movement and fought against a fascist regime will be occupying the office of the president,” Riaz told Al Jazeera.

“However, the presidential election has very little significance due to the limited powers of the president.”

Riaz said the July National Charter on key reforms agreed by political parties after the 2024 uprising, and ratified through a referendum in this year’s election, proposed that the president be elected by members of both houses of parliament. The plan for an upper chamber of parliament, with significant powers over key constitutional and statutory bodies to balance power, has still not been implemented.

Riaz also questioned the significance of an open vote in which the governing party already has the numbers to win. “The election is more of a ritual than substantive in terms of governance and politics,” he said.

Questions over the process

For the families of more than 1,400 people killed by the security forces during the 2024 uprising, Shahabuddin’s departure and the election of a new president are overdue.

“It should have happened much earlier, but it is still good to see it happening now,” Sanjida Khan Deepti, mother of 17-year-old Shahriar Khan Anas who was killed during the uprising, told Al Jazeera.

But Deepti questioned whether MPs should be bound by their party’s choice.

“If an MP cannot vote for the person they believe is best for the country, then what is the point of holding a vote?” she said. “Our children gave their lives for democracy.”

The election has revived debates over whether Article 70 of the constitution – which can cost lawmakers their parliamentary seats for voting against their party – should apply to a presidential election.

For all its constitutional limitations and predictable arithmetic, Thursday’s vote will mark a rare moment in Bangladesh’s politics: for the first time in more than three decades, lawmakers will have two names on the ballot for the country’s next head of state.

Aug. 19 (UPI) — Former Ukrainian Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov called for elections in Ukraine, arguing that the war with Russia was not an excuse and that the suspension of democracy was incompatible with the goal of the war, which was freedom.

Fedorov said in a YouTube video Tuesday that as Ukraine grappled with the fundamental question of how a state should function if war lasts for years he was convinced that the answer was not to effectively give Russia a veto over when Ukrainians could exercise their democratic rights again.

“Democracy cannot be held hostage by Russia. We are fighting precisely because we want to remain a free European state. Therefore, we must find a legal, safe, and realistic mechanism that will allow Ukraine to restore a full democratic process even amidst a prolonged war,” said Fedorov, who was dismissed as defense minister in July.

Fedorov, whose removal sparked protests across Ukraine, added that democracy was not a “peacetime luxury” but was part of “what we are fighting for today, saying that people could not “endlessly live in a state where they do not understand why certain decisions are made.”

Fedorov acknowleged the complexities of holding wartime elections, in particular guaranteeing the voting rights of military personnel, millions of Ukrainians living abroad. and of people living in regions on the frontline.

“We need to ensure the security of the electoral process, the independence of institutions, and trust in the outcome, he said, but stressed that complexity did not mean it could not be done.

“Ukraine has repeatedly done what the world considered impossible. We can find a solution here as well,” said Fedorov.

President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a decree imposing martial law in Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, immediately after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of the country, suspending certain fundamental rights and processes, including elections.

Zelensky’s five-year term expired more than two years in May 2024, but elections cannot be held while martial law remains in effect, according to the constitution.

In December, Zelensky held up the prospect of holding elections within the next three months in response to allegations by U.S. President Donald Trump that his administration was using the war as an excuse to stay in power.

Zelensky said he was ready for elections and would seek to hold them on condition that the United States and other allies provided guarantees to keep voters safe at a time when Ukraine’s cities were under attack day and night.

“I’m asking now, and stating this openly, for the United States to help me. Together with our European partners, we can ensure the security needed to hold elections. If that happens, Ukraine will be ready to conduct elections in the next 60 to 90 days,” said Zelensky.

The offer came after Trump called for elections, complaining that Ukraine liked to talk about democracy “but it gets to a point where it’s not a democracy anymore.”

Primary races across the country have offered an early read on where voters want their parties to head before November’s consequential midterms in the United States.

With only a handful of US states remaining in the congressional primary calendar, voters in Alaska and Wyoming — two reliably Republican strongholds — head to the polls on Tuesday, with races that could send ripples well beyond their small electorates.

Although the state has long been safe Republican territory in federal elections, this year marks the third consecutive election cycle in which Alaska finds itself among a handful of states at the centre of the fight for control of Congress.

Wyoming offers a different kind of race: a rare wholesale turnover of Republican leadership. Wyomingites have a glut of new leaders to choose from at the statehouse, in the governor’s mansion and in the US Capitol. Contests that could further consolidate the state’s ultraconservative politics or begin to push them to the centre.

Here’s what’s on our radar.

Alaska

When do polls open and close?

Polls open at 7am (15:00 GMT) and close at 8pm local time (04:00 on Wednesday GMT), although Alaska’s two time zones stagger poll closings across the state.

What makes Alaska’s primary different?

Unlike most states, Alaska uses a single primary rather than separate Republican and Democratic contests. This comes after Alaska voters approved Ballot Measure 2 back in 2020, which effectively eliminated the state’s traditional party-primary system for most offices. Instead, all candidates appear on a single, nonpartisan primary ballot. The top four vote-getters advance.

What are the key races to watch in Alaska?

The US Senate race carries the clearest national stakes because it could tip control of the chamber. The governor’s race is worth watching because of its exceptionally crowded and competitive field.

Seventeen candidates are running to replace Alaska’s staunchly pro-Trump Republican Governor Mike Dunleavy, who is barred by term limits from seeking a third term. Among them is former Governor Bill Walker, who is running as an independent. Republican candidates include former state Senators Click Bishop, Shelley Hughes and Lesil McGuire, former Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson, former state revenue Commissioner Adam Crum, Matanuska-Susitna Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, former state Attorney General Treg Taylor and business owner and conservative activist Bernadette Wilson.

Former state Senator Tom Begich and former state Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins are the two Democrats in the race.

Meanwhile, sixteen candidates are running for Alaska’s US Senate seat, but the race has two chief frontrunners: incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan and former Democratic Representative Mary Peltola. The Cook Political Report ranks the race among the country’s most competitive Senate contests.

Why the Senate race matters nationally

Though Alaska has not sent a Democrat to the Senate since 2008, former Representative Peltola, who represented Alaska in the US House from 2022 to 2025, demonstrated that a Democrat can win statewide there.

The race has drawn millions in campaign spending, including money being spent to elevate political unknowns who are unlikely to win the seat, but could materially alter the November field.

Super PACs have spent more than $2m trying to boost candidates who are not considered serious contenders for the seat, according to Alaska Public Media.

An Alaska Survey Research poll conducted in March found Peltola ahead of Sullivan among primary voters, 46.4 percent to 40.9 percent. In a simulated general-election matchup using Alaska’s ranked-choice system, Peltola also polled ahead of Sullivan.

A tale of two Dan Sullivans

There is an unusual Senate subplot: two Republicans named Dan Sullivan are on the ballot. One is the incumbent senator; the other, Dan J Sullivan Jr is a retired teacher from Petersburg. The state’s Division of Elections initially removed him from the ballot after determining that his candidacy appeared intended to confuse voters, but the Alaska Supreme Court later ordered officials to restore him to the primary ballot.

That creates a problem that is particularly acute in Alaska’s primary. Unlike the November election, the primary is not ranked-choice: voters select a single candidate, and the four highest vote-getters prevail in the general election. With two Dan Sullivans vying for the same electoral spot, even a relatively small number of mistaken votes could influence which candidate clears the hurdle.

Senator Sullivan will appear on the ballot as “Dan S. Sullivan” alongside the labels of “Registered Republican” and “Incumbent”. Challenger Sullivan will be listed as “Daniel J. Sullivan Jr.” without any party affiliation listed, although he filed for office as a Republican.

On Israel, Sullivan and Peltola find common ground

Much of the attention around incumbent Dan Sullivan’s fundraising reflects the issues that have defined his Senate career, including his strong support for Israel and his hawkish approach to Iran.

The 61-year-old has repeatedly backed military aid and closer US-Israel defence ties while vehemently opposing efforts by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute Israeli officials. His congressional record includes repeated efforts to maintain or strengthen sanctions on Iran.

Sullivan’s reelection run has attracted substantial backing from high-profile political organisations, including the Republican Senate Leadership Fund, which has committed at least $15m towards his campaign. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC ) has also helped funnel about $250,000 in individual contributions to Sullivan during the first quarter of 2026.

Peltola has also championed Israel-related legislation during her time in the House, and sometimes even broke with fellow Democrats on Israel-related votes. The Jewish Democratic Council of America, which describes itself as advocating for a strong US-Israel relationship, endorsed her Senate campaign back in March.

Wyoming

When do polls in Wyoming open and close?

Voting begins at 7am local time (13:00 GMT) and ends at 7pm local time (01:00 GMT the following day).

What’s one big race to watch?

The Senate Republican primary.

In deep-red Wyoming, the Senate primary is less a contest about whether the GOP will hold the seat than about which Republican candidate will win it.

The Cowboy State has voted Republican in every presidential election since 1964, with the exception of 1976, when Jimmy Carter carried Wyoming. The Senate race is also interesting because it is an open-seat succession fight.

What are the important races in the Wyoming primary election?

The US’s least populated state is in for a political makeover, with a shake-up at nearly every level. With incumbent Senator Cynthia Lummis declining to seek re-election and Representative Harriet Hageman relinquishing her House post to try to succeed her in the Senate, Wyoming is poised for an unusually broad reshuffling in elected officeholders.

Wyoming’s Republican Party is divided between a hard-right bloc that already controls the state House and more traditional conservatives who retain greater influence in the Senate.

Hageman, the Trump-backed hard-lined congresswoman who rose to national prominence after unseating Liz Cheney in the 2022 Republican primary, is the clear favourite to succeed retiring Senator Cynthia Lummis. Among the other Republicans running to replace Lummis in the US Senate are former Kirby Mayor Sam Mead and former environmental services business owner Jimmy Skovgard.

In an April interview with Jackson Hole Community Radio (KHOL), Mead said that the endorsements Hageman received from Trump, Lummis and Barrasso come with an expectation that she will support the administration “no matter what.” While Mead has promised that he would push back against Trump on public lands, tariffs and foreign wars when he believes the administration’s policies run counter to Wyoming’s interests.

Nine active candidates are competing for the Republican nomination to replace Hageman in the US House in what’s shaping up to be the most expensive contest on Tuesday’s ballot. The field includes former state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jillian Balow, state Senate President Bo Biteman, businessmen Steve Friess and Reid Rasner, and Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray.

Democrats in the United States have approved a shakeup to their 2028 presidential primary calendar as the party looks to take back the White House.

During a meeting on Saturday in Austin, Texas, Democratic National Committee (DNC) members voted to overhaul which states have the first say in picking the party’s presidential nominee.

South Carolina will once again take centre stage as the party’s first official nominating contest, with its Democratic primary scheduled for January 22, 2028.

Nevada will go second on February 1, followed by New Hampshire on February 8. New Mexico, Michigan and Virginia will round out the early states over the course of that month.

The new calendar formalises a change that began during the last presidential election cycle in 2024, when the national Democratic Party similarly put South Carolina at the front of its primary lineup.

The 2028 primaries set up a more competitive calendar for Democrats, giving greater influence to states with more racial diversity, in an effort to better represent the party’s key constituencies.

Debate over primary calendar

But plans to reshape the primary calendar have been met with controversy in the past.

In 2024, for instance, local leaders in New Hampshire defied party leaders by holding a state-run primary ahead of the first party-led vote in South Carolina. As justification, New Hampshire officials cited a state law requiring their primary to be the first in the nation.

There was also pushback in Iowa, whose state caucus had ushered in the primary season for decades.

Iowa Democrats warned that moving the state lower in the party’s calendar could send the wrong signal to rural voters, who often feel overlooked in national politics and tend to lean rightward.

Still, proponents of the calendar change argue that it will help the Democratic primaries better mirror the overall population of the US.

South Carolina has normally been Democrats’ first contest in the southern US, and it has a significant population of Black voters. Roughly a quarter of the state identifies as Black, according to census estimates.

Nevada and New Mexico, meanwhile, have large Latino or Hispanic populations, with 31 percent and 49 percent of their residents identifying as such, respectively. All three states will be at the forefront of the primary calendar, come 2028.

DNC Chairman Ken Martin took to social media on Saturday to tout the changes as capturing the demographic shifts in the country.

“These states reflect the diversity of America and will help ensure our nominee is best positioned to take back the White House in 2028,” Martin wrote on X.

Ongoing party feud

Iowa and New Hampshire both have overwhelmingly white electorates, and critics have long argued the two states have played outsized roles in shaping presidential elections.

Notching early victories in the party primaries can help a candidate build momentum, and that, in turn, can help presidential hopefuls secure party nominations.

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, who led the DNC from 2005 to 2009, told The Associated Press (AP) news agency that the calendar changes will make for a more representative nominating process.

“These states look more like the country,” Dean said, pointing to places like South Carolina and Nevada, “whereas Iowa and New Hampshire don’t”.

But it remains uncertain how the new calendar could affect the growing intra-party feud between progressive and more moderate, establishment candidates.

Democrats in Michigan, one of the states given a boost in the calendar shakeup, narrowly voted earlier this month to select progressive Abdul El-Sayed as their Senate nominee.

Given that Michigan will now have an earlier say in the voting process, some experts have speculated that the swing state could help progressives assert greater influence over the party overall.

But other states given more prominence in the 2028 lineup have a more moderate streak.

South Carolina, for instance, favoured then-candidate Joe Biden in the 2020 primaries over his more progressive opponents, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

“I think our primary voters up north are probably a little different than primary voters in South Carolina,” Boyd Brown, a former DNC member from South Carolina, told AP.

Here is the full list of the six states that will have the first say in Democrats’ 2028 presidential primaries:

• South Carolina: January 22, 2028
• Nevada: February 1, 2028
• New Hampshire: February 8, 2028
• New Mexico: February 15, 2028
• Michigan: February 22, 2028
• Virginia: February 29, 2028

A new poll shows Lula leading Bolsonaro, but the gap has closed ahead of Brazil’s high-stakes presidential election.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has retained his lead over right-wing Senator Flavio Bolsonaro ahead of October’s election, according to a new poll.

A Quaest survey published on Friday found Lula would take 43 percent of the vote in a simulated run-off, against 40 percent for Bolsonaro, effectively a statistical tie given the poll’s two-point margin of error.

The result marks a narrowing from an earlier Quaest poll on August 5, which had put Lula ahead by a wider five-point margin, 44 percent to 39 percent.

In a first-round scenario, Lula leads more comfortably with 38 percent, followed by Bolsonaro at 31 percent. Three other candidates trail far behind: Renan Santos and Ronaldo Caiado each polled at 4 percent, and Romeu Zema at 2 percent.

Under Brazilian electoral rules, if no candidate secures more than half the valid votes in the first round, the top two finishers advance to a run-off.

Flavio Bolsonaro, the eldest son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, has emerged as the standard-bearer for Brazil’s right after his father was barred from running in the election.

The elder Bolsonaro was ruled ineligible for office after Brazil’s top electoral court found he had abused his power while in office. He was later convicted separately over a plot to overturn his 2022 election loss to Lula.

The poll, conducted by Quaest between August 10 and 13, surveyed 2,004 people and was commissioned by the Brazilian media group Globo.

Lula launched his re-election bid on August 2 at the Workers’ Party convention in Sao Paulo, casting himself as a defender of Brazilian “sovereignty” as pressure from the administration of United States President Donald Trump looms over the race.

He called for increased defence spending and pledged to shield Brazil’s reserves of rare earths and other critical minerals from foreign control. “I want to be prepared, so that no one invades this country,” he said.

He warned that China, the US and France would not get access to Brazil’s mineral wealth without respecting the country’s sovereignty. He also told the convention: “In Brazil, we do not accept anyone sticking their nose where it does not belong.”

Trump has maintained close ties with the Bolsonaros. In June, Lula warned Trump not to interfere in the presidential race.

“Don’t meddle in the Brazilian elections, because the Brazilian elections are a Brazilian problem, just as American elections are their business, not mine,” Lula said.

With the race tightening two months out from the vote, the results so far have shown a competitive presidential race, even as Lula continues to hold a narrow structural advantage heading into the final stretch of the campaign.

The Reform UK leader received 22,239 votes in the Clacton by-election, compared with 9,455 for Binface.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has regained his parliamentary seat, besting his main challenger Count Binface in a by-election he triggered by resigning his post last month.

Farage received 22,239 votes in the Clacton by-election compared with 9,455 for serial joke candidate Binface, who wears a rubbish can on his head and calls himself an “intergalactic space warrior”. The United Kingdom’s main political parties boycotted the election, creating the embarrassing face-off for Farage who had sought to use the election to boost his standing after allegations of financial impropriety.

Farage did not attend the official vote count early Friday and cancelled a planned victory speech, the BBC reported.

In earlier remarks as votes rolled in, Farage claimed a “convincing, overwhelming win”.

“I called this by-election because I wanted the people of Clacton, the voters of this constituency to be my judge, not the mainstream media in Britain,” he said, adding that Clacton voters had “stuck two fingers up to the entire political establishment”.

Binface, whose campaign promises included putting a cap on croissant prices and moving the restroom hand dryer of a local pub, told Al Jazeera “there’s more than one way to win.”

Listing former British premiers he has challenged in previous elections, he said: “You guys are fixated on winning numerically, but … where’s Theresa May, where’s Rishi Sunak, where’s Boris Johnson?”

The 9,455 votes in Clacton for Binface, who has run in six elections since 2019, were his best-ever electoral result.

Voter turnout in Thursday’s election was 44 percent, lower than the 59 percent turnout recorded at the 2024 general election, but not unusual for a by-election.

Farage and Binface both topped a long list of joke candidates, independents and members of fringe political parties.

Candidates on stage at the Clacton Leisure Centre, where the count was held, were seen cheering for each other as the results were announced, with many receiving fewer than 100 votes.

Many view Farage, a right-wing populist who was a vocal campaigner for Brexit, as a prospective candidate for prime minister. He has pledged to crack down on migration, including using the British navy to intercept and return asylum seekers arriving by boat.

Farage quit his seat in parliament in July during an investigation into whether he failed to report a 5 million pound ($6.75m) gift from a crypto billionaire overseas, triggering the by-election he took part in.

“I have done nothing wrong. I have not broken the law in any way at all,” said Farage of the allegations at the time.