Elections

Rising frustration about housing shortages and surging rents in Spain has led to mass protests.

The demonstrations started last month after the eviction of Maricarmen Abascal, who died at age 87 this week.

The Socialist-led government tried to introduce measures to protect tenants and freeze rents, but Parliament rejected them. The conservative opposition says the solution is to ease regulations and build more homes.

Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has since announced early elections. Analysts say he wants to galvanise support, as he faces pressure on immigration and corruption investigations into his party.

Two recent polls indicate the right-wing People’s Party and far-right Vox are on track for a combined majority.

Can demonstrations against the housing crisis reverse Sanchez’s political fortunes?

Presenter: Sami Zeidan

Guests:

Hana Jalloul – Secretary of international politics and cooperation for the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party and a member of the European Parliament

Daniel Lacalle – Chief economist at Tressis and professor at the IE Business School

Pablo Calderon Martinez – Associate professor in politics and international relations at Northeastern University

Oil prices drop as Trump dismisses speculation of pre-midterm military action against Iran.

United States President Donald Trump has said the US will not attack Iran before the November 3 midterm elections.

The US president said late on Thursday: “we are having productive discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” in a post on Truth Social. “We will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the midterm elections to be held in the United States on November 3rd.”

Oil prices fell early on Friday as Middle East supply concerns eased somewhat after tensions in the energy-rich Gulf region had mounted in recent weeks.

The possibility of renewed fighting had appeared to drive up oil prices in trading on Thursday. Some analysts believe Trump’s comments were an attempt to try and bring prices back down.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran is reviewing the US response to its seven-day plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and that Iran will respond within the “next few days”.

He added that negotiations are continuing through mediators, Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported.

Hormuz explosions

Iranian media reported “massive explosions” in the southern Strait of Hormuz on Friday, with Fars citing unnamed military sources as saying tankers using “unauthorised” routes may have struck sea mines.

On Tuesday, US Vice President JD Vance said Iran must make a “meaningful” reduction in its uranium enrichment capacity as part of an agreement to end the war. Experts say this demand may signal a softening of Washington’s earlier insistence that Tehran abandon enrichment altogether.

On Monday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said negotiations with Washington were “futile”, accusing the US of using negotiations to attack Iran.

Russian President Vladimir Putin told Pezeshkian that Russia will “do everything” to help end the US-led war on Iran, Russian news agencies reported on Thursday.

The leading candidates in Michigan’s heated Senate race have faced off in their first televised debate, with less than a month remaining before the United States midterm elections.

Thursday’s hour-long debate was a microcosm of how tense the toss-up race has become.

Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed, formerly the health director for Wayne County, repeatedly sought to paint his Republican adversary Mike Rogers as a yacht-owning millionaire out of touch with ordinary voters.

For his part, Rogers, a former member of the US House of Representatives, lobbed accusations at El-Sayed that he was soft on “terrorism” and had foreign sympathies.

The Michigan-born El-Sayed has repeatedly faced Islamophobic attacks while on the campaign trail, with Republican President Donald Trump labelling him an “extremist, terrorist sympathizer” whose history “goes back to the days of the Jihad”. If elected, El-Sayed would be the first Muslim member of the US Senate.

The two candidates spent much of their hour onstage together speaking over one another, as they exchanged pointed barbs.

“He can’t condemn a terrorist act that happened on our soil in the state of Michigan. He can’t bring himself to condemn –,” Rogers began, referencing a March attack on a synagogue.

“I did condemn it,” El-Sayed said, jumping in. “No, you did not,” Rogers replied, with El-Sayed quickly responding, “You make stuff up. You make stuff up.”

The Senate race in Michigan is considered key to the battle for control of the US Senate. Democrats are seeking to flip both chambers of Congress, but shifting control of the Senate will be a tougher prospect, given that only a third of its 100 seats are on the November 3 ballot.

Host Rick Albin at times struggled to keep the debate on track, as tensions rose.

“We’ve got dozens of questions we want to get to. You can’t litigate all of these with 14 different rebuttals, so please work with me,” Albin told the two candidates at one point.

Here are the key takeaways from the evening’s debate.

Rogers insinuates El-Sayed family ties to ‘terrorism watch list’

The ferocity of the debate was underscored by the high volume of ad hominem attacks the candidates deployed against each other.

But Rogers repeatedly pushed a series of attacks that seemed to centre on El-Sayed’s identity as a Muslim.

In response to a question about healthcare, Rogers said that El-Sayed has “taken money from individuals on his campaign who openly support Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda”.

Later, when asked about his position on surveillance by Flock cameras, Rogers argued that such technology has helped catch people suspected of terrorism. He then implied that El-Sayed’s concerns about the cameras were suggestive.

“Why would that bother you?” Rogers asked El-Sayed. “Well, if you have somebody in your family that might be on the terrorism watch list …”

El-Sayed interjected, seeming to dare Rogers to continue his thought.

“Are you going to go ahead and say that I’m a – go ahead and say it,” El-Sayed said. “You’ve been tiptoeing about it the whole time. Just say it. Just say it. Go ahead and say it.”

Muslim and Arab candidates in the US have frequently been subjected to Islamophobic attacks on the campaign trail, accusing them of support for “terrorism” and Islamic fundamentalism.

Both sides agree on ending the Iran war

There were issues, however, on which both candidates found a measure of common ground.

Both Rogers and El-Sayed agreed the US-Israeli war against Iran should end, but they had opposite views on Washington’s relationship with Israel and its role in the conflict.

High gasoline prices and inflation, El-Sayed said, were directly caused by the Iran war, and he blamed the Trump administration for Iran’s decision to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, a critical trade route.

“This is what happens when you start wars you never should be fighting,” El-Sayed said. “We literally taught the Iranian regime that they have a choke on the Strait of Hormuz, and now we’re living in that reality.”

Rogers agreed that “we need [the war] to come to an end”, but he also justified the conflict, saying that Iran’s uranium enrichment programme had been “set back twenty years”, echoing a frequent White House talking point.

The Trump administration has argued that the war was necessary to prevent Iran from creating a nuclear weapon, a goal Tehran has long denied.

Rogers’s position led El-Sayed to accuse him of “cheerleading” for the war and the Trump administration.

Rogers backs continued Israel aid, El-Sayed calls for end

As part of the debate about US foreign policy, the candidates were also pressed on their positions about the US alliance with Israel.

The country is considered the largest overall recipient of US aid since World War II. From the start of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza in October 2023 through September 2025, experts estimate that Israel received nearly $21.7bn in military aid.

El-Sayed has openly called for ending aid to Israel, and he has repeatedly denounced the conflict in Gaza as a genocide, in line with evaluations from United Nations experts and human rights watchdogs.

During the debate, he indicated he preferred US taxpayer dollars to be spent on domestic concerns like education and healthcare, rather than Israeli aid.

“He wants unconditional support for a foreign government,” El-Sayed said of Rogers. “I want unconditional support for kids in our schools, unconditional support for our healthcare, childcare.”

He also blamed Israel for the US military action in Iran. “I don’t want to be pushed into war by Israel, and I don’t want to be in war with Iran,” El-Sayed said.

Rogers, meanwhile, has joined most of his fellow Republicans in continuing to support aid for Israel. He argued that the country had “the right to defend itself in a very difficult neighbourhood”.

“Is there anything Israel could do that would lose your support?” the debate host asked.

“Listen, if they’re talking about using nuclear weapons, they would definitely lose my support,” Rogers replied.

Rogers calls immigration crackdown ‘not appropriate’

Another hot-button issue during the debate was Trump’s crackdown on immigration.

The Republican leader has pledged to carry out the largest mass deportation effort in US history, and his campaign has spurred human rights concerns.

When asked how they would approach the crackdown, both Rogers and El-Sayed agreed on tempering the militarised nature of the campaign.

In several cities, including Minneapolis, Minnesota, immigration authorities have been accused of racial profiling and using excessive force against immigrants and protesters, as well as violating their rights to due process.

Multiple fatal shootings have occurred during immigration enforcement operations, including the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in January.

Rogers indicated he would not have supported such confrontational operations, but he repeated a Trump claim that the raids were taking dangerous criminals off the streets.

“I think the public efforts in Minnesota were probably not appropriate,” Rogers said. “You always want to go in quiet, get the bad guy, get out of the neighbourhood for less problems. So that, to me, was something that they could have done differently.”

He later claimed that, under Trump, the country had seen “the largest decrease in murders ever recorded”.

El-Sayed, meanwhile, has previously voiced support for abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a key agency in Trump’s deportation campaign. He defended that stance on the debate stage.

“ICE right now is not about immigration enforcement. ICE is about terrorising our streets,” he said.

Candidates debate Canada trade war and tariffs

Donald Trump’s trade war with Canada, felt acutely in neighbouring Michigan, was another key topic of conversation.

El-Sayed depicted Rogers as an uncritical backer of Trump and his tariffs and tied him to past free trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which paved the way for companies to shift manufacturing facilities out of the US – though Rogers did not enter Congress until 2001, eight years after NAFTA passed.

“You did that, man. That was your policy. NAFTA, that was your policy,” said El-Sayed.

Rogers sought to distance himself from the current trade war but expressed support for a deal with Canada that would loosen some of Ottawa’s tariffs on US goods.

“I would like to see the deal made,” said Rogers, adding that high Canadian tariffs for US goods “should be eliminated”.

Both candidates tried to strike a balance between criticism of the economic fallout of the trade war and qualifying their support for more selective tariffs, favoured by some industries and labour unions as a means of protecting domestic jobs.

Thousands of protestors honor Maricarmen Abascal’s life, while tributes within parliament spark debate.

Thousands of Spaniards protested outside Spain’s parliament after the death of Maria del Carmen Abascal, the 87-year-old woman whose eviction ignited nationwide protests and sparked a snap general election.

Meanwhile, tributes to Abascal were debated within the legislature as lawmakers accused each other of exploiting the case ahead of the election.

Maricarmen Abascal died on Wednesday after being hospitalised for severe anxiety and exhaustion since her eviction on a stretcher from her Madrid home on September 23.

While in the hospital, she reached a deal to return to her home but died before she could return. No cause of death has been announced.

‘Killing someone’

“They killed her through heartbreak,” Diana, a demonstrator, told Al Jazeera. “Taking an 87-year-old woman out of her home after she had lived in the same house for 70 years, that is killing someone.”

Diana joined thousands of protesters outside Spain’s parliament.

Outside Abascal’s building, mourners left flowers, candles, handwritten notes and children’s drawings.

“They’re not deaths; they’re murders,” protesters chanted as they walked from a protest camp in the central Puerta del Sol square to Abascal’s former home on Thursday.

Tributes in Spain’s legislature

Protests over home shortages and surging rents following her eviction prompted Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez to call a snap general election for November 29 after parliament failed to pass emergency housing measures.

Tributes to Abascal in the Madrid region’s legislature caused arguments as lawmakers accused each other of exploiting the case ahead of the election.

Alberto Nunez Feijoo, leader of the conservative opposition People’s Party (PP), accused Sanchez and the Socialists of trying to exploit the housing crisis for political gain ahead of the election.

“We will not allow this attempt to manipulate the emotions of the Spanish people; all of this has happened during their eight years in government. It won’t fly,” Feijoo said.

The PP, which holds absolute majorities in the Madrid regional and local assemblies, refused to observe a minute of silence in her honour. Instead, hard-left deputies staged one outside City Hall and gave Abascal a 60-second standing ovation during a tense debate in the regional assembly, while PP lawmakers remained seated with folded arms.

Left-leaning parties criticised conservatives for rejecting legislation in parliament aimed at curbing soaring rental prices.

Support for housing intervention

A survey carried out in June and published by state pollster CIS on Thursday found that 76.3 percent of Spaniards supported intervention in the market to guarantee access to housing, while 79 percent believed the right to housing should take precedence over treating homes as a market commodity.

Ombudsman Angel Gabilondo said addressing the housing crisis would require greater commitment from all levels of government.

He said his office was preparing a housing report and reiterated proposals to expand public housing, restrict tourist rentals, increase rent assistance and strengthen protections against evictions for vulnerable households.

Oct. 8, 2026 9:48 AM PT

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Thursday that he will not order a resumption of military strikes on Iran before the Nov. 3 midterm elections in the United States.

Trump, while stumping for Republicans this week, has hinted that he was confident that an endgame to the war could come in the days before or after the election, while also hinting that he remained open to resuming full-scale military operations against Iran.

For weeks, Trump has been threatening that a post-midterm election escalation in the seven-month-old war remains a viable option, despite his initial promises to Americans of a military campaign that would last a matter of weeks.

But Trump in a social media post on Thursday said the U.S. “will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the Midterm Elections to be held in the United States on November 3rd.”

Trump added that his team has been “having productive discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Negotiations had appeared at a standstill since Trump late last month publicly rejected Iran’s proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days if the U.S. met certain conditions.

Iran, however, said last week it had received a U.S. counterproposal. And Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Thursday said he expected Tehran would offer a formal reply within days.

Trump’s post comes as the military has dispatched more resources to the region. U.S. officials have said a third aircraft carrier, the USS Theodore Roosevelt, and thousands of troops aboard it and accompanying ships could arrive as early as the end of October.

Trump’s announcement was made the same day the USS Abraham Lincoln was due to arrive to its home port in San Diego after a record-long deployment in support of the Iran war. There have been reports of crew stress and poor mental health, as well as supply shortages, including food and hygiene products.

The USS George Washington, which is usually based in Asia, relieved the Lincoln in August. The other aircraft carrier in the Middle East, the USS George H.W. Bush, has been deployed for about six months, but it pulled into Phuket, Thailand, for a port visit several days ago.

Boak and Madhani write for the Associated Press.

The vote in London’s Holborn and St Pancras parliamentary seat tests whether Burnham can restore faith in Labour.

Londoners are voting in a special by-election in the electoral district of Holborn and St Pancras, where the Green Party is posing a threat to Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s Labour Party.

Zack Polanski, leader of Britain’s left-wing Greens, was among candidates bidding on Thursday to win the parliamentary seat vacated by the resignation of former Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Labour has held the seat continuously since its creation in 1983. Thursday’s vote is widely considered a two-horse race with the Greens, with thousands of activists from both parties out canvassing in recent weeks.

The vote is seen as a first test of whether Burnham can restore voters’ faith in Labour, which saw its popularity among left-wing voters plunge over the war in ⁠⁠⁠⁠Gaza.

The by-election also offers him a chance to rob the Greens of the momentum they have built up under Polanski, the 43-year-old self-styled “eco-populist” who became party leader in September last year.

Green gains in areas of London contributed to Labour’s dismal local election results in May, which helped ⁠⁠⁠⁠set in train a process that culminated on July 20 with Starmer’s resignation and his replacement by Burnham.

He has since adopted a tougher position on Israel and seeks to blunt the Greens’ rise by laying out a more left-wing vision for the UK.

Polanski, as the Greens’ candidate, faces Labour’s Sagal Abdi-Wali, a local council leader who arrived in Britain as a child refugee from Somalia in the 1990s and is expected to be declared the winner.

Polls are scheduled to close at 10pm local time (21:00 GMT) and the result is expected to be announced in the early hours of Friday.

The other candidates are: Barmy Brunch of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party; Ewan Cameron, Conservative Party; independent candidate Tom Darwood; Clare Fischer of the Climate Party; George Galloway, Workers Party; Tyler Johnson, Restore Britain; Briony Anne Lonbay Kapoor of Rejoin EU; Peter Newman of Reform UK; Ketankumar Pipaliya, UK VOICE; Jonathan Silberman of the Communist League; Helen Spiby-Vann, Christian Peoples Alliance; Patrick Thomas Stillman, Liberal Democrats; Ben Walker, UKIP.

Italy’s parliament is voting on Thursday on a new electoral law that would make it easier for election winners to form a majority government.

The law, proposed by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, would award extra seats to any party or coalition that obtains more than 42 percent of seats in both parliamentary chambers, ensuring it holds a majority.

Meloni has framed the legislation as a route to greater stability in Italy’s political system, which has often been run by fragile coalition governments. Her critics, however, say the move is actually aimed at boosting her own chances in elections next year.

Here’s what we know about the electoral law and what it means for Italian politics:

What is Italy’s current electoral system?

Italy currently has a mixed electoral system for its 600-seat parliament, with about 36 percent of members of parliament elected directly in constituencies where the candidate with the most votes wins, and the rest decided through proportional representation.

The system, called “Rosatellum”, has been in place since 2017. It encourages coalition-building but can produce fractured results that make a governing majority hard to forge.

What would the new law change?

The new legislation would replace the mixed electoral system with a fully proportional one, as well as awarding extra seats to the party or coalition that wins the most seats if it secures at least 42 percent in both chambers.

The bonus would be as many as 70 seats in the 400-member Chamber of Deputies, the lower house, and up to 35 seats in the Senate, which has 200 elected members.

That means if a party or coalition meets the 42 percent share threshold in both chambers, it would have stronger power to govern. If no party or coalition meets the threshold, representation would be decided proportionally.

The new law would also force coalitions to announce their candidates for prime minister before the elections. Rado Fonda, head of research at Italian pollster SWG, told the Reuters news agency this provision could “prove problematic for the centre-left, potentially forcing an early leadership contest and exposing divisions that could weaken the bloc”.

Meloni, who currently leads the country’s longest-serving government since World War II, has said the reform will help stabilise the country rather than serve any one political group. “Whoever wins the elections will have the numbers to govern,” she said.

What stage is the legislation at?

The proposed law has already been approved by the Senate and must now undergo a final secret-ballot vote in the Chamber of Deputies.

Giovanni Orsina, a political scientist at Rome’s Luiss Guido Carli University, predicted that the law is “extremely likely” to pass.

If it fails, Meloni has said she will resign.

Why is the legislation controversial?

Opponents say the law is undemocratic because it could potentially grant a winning coalition a disproportionate level of power in parliament.

They also say that the legislation is intended to favour Meloni, whose Brothers of Italy party (Fdl) is bracing for a tough election battle next year.

Riccardo Magi, head of the liberal More Europe party, who is on a hunger strike to protest the proposed reform, has called it an “anti-democratic law” that risks giving a minority bloc a huge majority in parliament.

Senator Matteo Renzi, who leads the Italia Viva party, has accused Italy’s governing coalition of pushing the electoral reform due to a fear of losing power.

Other critics have pointed out that the law would do little to stabilise the political system if no party or coalition reaches the 42 percent threshold in both chambers – a relatively high bar.

“This could produce a hung parliament, making post-electoral negotiations necessary to form a government,” Vincenzo Emanuele, a political science professor at Luiss Guido Carli University in Rome and a member of the Italian Center for Electoral Studies (CISE), told Al Jazeera. “Even relatively small changes in coalition composition could make the difference between a clear parliamentary majority and a situation of political deadlock.”

When are Italy’s next elections, and what do the polls show?

Italy’s next general election must be held by December 22, 2027, although the government can call elections earlier if it wishes.

Currently, Meloni’s Fdl is polling ahead of all other parties, with 27 percent support, according to Politico’s polling aggregator. Her coalition partners, Lega and Forza Italia, have a combined 12 percent support, according to Politico, bringing the coalition share to 39 percent.

Fdl’s polling has been dented by support for a new far-right group, Futuro Nazionale (National Future), Reuters reported. It currently has 7.8 percent support, according to Italian polling institute SWG.

In opposition, the Democratic Party (PD) has 21 percent support, the Five Star Movement (M5S) has 12 percent and the Alliance of Greens and Left (AVS) has 6 percent, according to Politico. The Italy Viva (IV) and More Europe parties have 2 percent support each.

Emanuele said the current landscape means the proposed electoral law would not necessarily favour Meloni and could even benefit the opposition.

He said recent simulations by the CISE have shown that a centre-left coalition including the PD and M5S could potentially reach 44 percent of the vote, securing a “comfortable parliamentary majority”, though that could change if Meloni allies with National Future.

“The reform does not inherently favour the incumbent government: Its effects will depend crucially on how the competing coalitions are formed,” said Emanuele.

The Democratic National Committee has filed a lawsuit against United States President Donald Trump over television advertisements that were publicly funded and allegedly used to promote his political policies.

Ken Martin, who heads the Democratic Party’s leadership body, suggested in a statement on Wednesday that the ads were designed to bolster Republican odds in the upcoming November 3 midterm elections.

“Donald Trump is misusing millions of taxpayer dollars to fund pure propaganda ads in a last-ditch attempt to save Republicans in November,” Martin said.

Later that day, Common Cause, a democracy watchdog group, filed a second lawsuit over the same set of ads.

It argued that the ads were “overtly political” and therefore ran afoul of laws that bar public funds from being used for political propaganda.

“These ads are not public-service announcements,” Common Cause said in its lawsuit, citing a justification Trump has offered for the television spots. “They are personal publicity and political propaganda through and through.”

Both lawsuits argue that, to create the ad campaign, Trump directed the White House to repurpose $20m in funds that Congress allocated for commemorative activities related to border security, including for those killed in the line of duty.

That manoeuvre, they argue, violates the separation of powers established in the US Constitution.

“The founders made clear more than 200 years ago that the executive can spend money only according to Congress’s direction,” Common Cause’s lawsuit said.

The two lawsuits also point to a provision Congress includes in its appropriations bills barring the use of taxpayer funds for “publicity or propaganda purposes”.

Both complaints seek to have the ads declared illegal, and the expenditures stopped. They also call for steps to be taken to recover any money already spent on the ads.

The Democrats’ lawsuit was filed in Washington, DC, while the Common Cause complaint will be heard in the Southern District of New York.

Trump has faced mounting criticism over the ads, which began airing in September.

So far, the advertising campaign has cost more than $12m to run, according to the media tracking firm AdImpact.

The $20m Trump tapped for the ads comes from a $175m package Congress assigned to the Department of Homeland Security as part of Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda.

Critics have pointed out that one of the ads appears nearly identical to a television spot Trump used in his 2024 re-election campaign.

Three ads have aired so far. In one, a choir sings “love me” over a montage of Trump as he declares the US will “never be a communist country”. Another uses images of Mount Rushmore as Trump heralds a new “golden age of America”.

The third is darker: Trump walks towards the camera in black and white, warning of a “final battle” against the “deep state” and other perceived enemies.

On Wednesday, the news agency Reuters and the research firm Ipsos released a poll showing the ads are highly unpopular. Some 86 percent of the Americans surveyed, including four out of five Republicans, said it was inappropriate for Trump to have used public money for them.

Trump has defended the ads as “promotion for the country”, and he has argued they were similar to public outreach campaigns put out by previous administrations.

But after a bipartisan backlash, Trump said on Monday that taxpayer funds would no longer be used for future ads.

He did not, however, commit to paying back the money already spent on the existing ads.

Members of Trump’s Republican Party have been among those speaking out against the ad campaign.

Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, said the advertisements resembled something former Hungarian leader Viktor Orban would put out.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, meanwhile, indicated he agreed with the message in one of the advertisements, but he emphasised that “it shouldn’t be paid for with taxpayer dollars”.

Thousands of people have taken to the streets of Rio de Janeiro in a student-led protest against presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro and the growing influence of Brazil’s far right.

The march happened on Wednesday, just days after far-right Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, earned the most votes in the first round of the country’s presidential race.

Bolsonaro won 47 percent, ahead of his closest rival, incumbent left-wing President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who gained 45 percent support.

Since neither candidate surpassed the 50 percent threshold, they will face each other in a run-off on October 25.

The results have triggered fears that Brazil could become the latest Latin American country to see its presidency switch from left to right.

Protesters marched through downtown Rio carrying signs reading “Never again Bolsonaro” and “No to the father, no to the son”. Others held banners reading “Dictatorship never again” and “Get out Bolsonaro”.

“I’m here because I believe in democracy. Because I’m scared,” said Alice Carneiro, 25, an administrator in maritime shipping who participated in the protests. She explained that, under a far-right government, she feared a backlash against her wife, who is transgender.

Jair Bolsonaro, the former president, led the country from 2019 to 2023. But his single-term tenure was marked by a series of controversies related to his far-right policies.

He voiced support for Brazil’s past military dictatorship, which was responsible for the disappearance and murder of hundreds of perceived dissidents. He also spread unfounded claims about the accuracy of Brazil’s election system, leading to a court ruling that barred him from holding office for eight years.

Currently, the former president is serving a 27-year sentence after being convicted of plotting to overturn his 2022 election defeat. After Lula’s inauguration in 2023, Bolsonaro’s supporters stormed government buildings in the capital, reportedly hoping to trigger a military uprising.

Critics have framed Jair Bolsonaro’s actions as a threat to Brazil’s democracy.

But Senator Flavio Bolsonaro has received his father’s endorsement, and he has backed amnesty for his father, a prospect that has raised concerns among protesters.

“I find this rise of the far right and the rise of Bolsonarism in Brazil very, very sad,” said Emmanuel Araujo, 19, who is preparing for university entrance exams.

“Lula might not be my preferred candidate,” Araujo added, “but amid this barbarism, we have to choose between someone we can keep criticising and someone who might take away our right to speak.”

A Gallup survey highlights a deep – and historic – partisan divide over confidence in the country’s elections.

With less than a month to go before the United States’ pivotal midterms, a new survey found that most independent voters and supporters of President Donald Trump’s Republican Party do not believe the elections will be honest.

Polling from Gallup, released on Wednesday, found 37 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of independents have confidence in the country’s electoral system, significantly lower than US Democrats (63 percent).

Overall, 49 percent of Americans said they were confident in the honesty of elections, while 51 percent said they were not. Those figures are unchanged from the country’s last midterm election in 2022.

This “marks a change from 2025, the first year of Trump’s second term, when confidence was nominally higher among approvers (51 percent) than disapprovers (45 percent)”, Gallup wrote in a statement highlighting the results of the survey.

The numbers highlight a deep, historic partisan divide over confidence in US elections.

“Since 2025 and Trump’s return to the White House, the relationship between leadership approval and confidence in elections has disappeared,” Gallup wrote.

Gallup said that the US is the only country out of more than 100 polled annually over the past 15 years to show this pattern – trust in US election integrity is markedly higher among those who disapprove of the country’s leadership under Trump (52 percent) than those who approve (41 percent).

In more than 100 countries where the polling organisation tracks views of national leadership and confidence in elections, people who approve of their governments have generally been more likely to trust their country’s elections.

In 2025, 70 percent of people globally who approved of their national leadership expressed confidence in the honesty of their elections, compared with 30 percent among those who disapproved.

“The current US pattern is highly unusual compared with the rest of the world,” Gallup wrote.

Under former US President Joe Biden, 81 percent of Americans who approved of the government expressed confidence in elections, compared with just 30 percent of those who disapproved, according to Gallup.

Gallup said the unusual divide could have implications for the November elections, raising questions about whether some voters will view the results as legitimate.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Rahul Gandhi has been arrested several times at protests demanding the resignation of poll body chief.

Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has been detained for the third time in two days during a protest demanding the resignation of the election chief over a controversial revision of voter lists.

Gandhi and other opposition lawmakers were apprehended by police on Wednesday as they marched towards Jantar Mantar, a designated protest site in India’s capital, New Delhi.

A live feed on the YouTube channel of Gandhi’s Congress Party showed police taking him into a vehicle and driving away. Authorities also detained several other opposition lawmakers and protesters.

Opposition parties, their student units and the “Cockroach” youth movement have been demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, accusing the poll body he heads of benefiting Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.

India’s Election Commission has so far removed more than 130 million names from the voter lists, with millions appealing the removals. About 969 million people were eligible to vote in the 2024 election.

Protesters allege the changes disproportionately removed voters who support opposition parties while preserving or adding voters more likely to back Modi’s party.

The commission and government deny the allegations. They say the revision has no political motive but is aimed at removing duplicate and ineligible entries while ensuring eligible voters remain registered.

Opposition lawmakers led by Gandhi protested on Tuesday as well, before police broke up their gathering and ‌‌briefly detained them.

Speaking before his detention on Wednesday, Gandhi said protesters showed up unannounced after Delhi police “stopped” their gathering the day before.

“We will go to the designated protest site, sit there, and tell the country that, for us, Gyanesh Kumar is not the legitimate commissioner,” he told reporters, referring to Jantar Mantar.

“The people who have done this [vote theft] are traitors … Gyanesh Kumar will have to resign,” he ⁠⁠added.

There was no immediate comment from the police on the detentions.

The demonstrations present a new political challenge to Modi midway into his third term, just months after similar protests led by the Cockroach Janta Party ‌‌youth ‌‌movement forced the resignation of his education minister over exam paper leaks.

The “Cockroach” protests, one of the most visible signs of public dissent against Modi’s government in recent years, reflected growing anger over job scarcity, corruption and a lack of government accountability.

Comments by one of Israel’s most senior ultra-Orthodox rabbis postulating that Jews may have been better off without a state have prompted controversy in the country.

In footage broadcast by Channel 12 on Monday, the 96-year-old Rabbi Dov Lando, the spiritual leader of the Degel HaTorah party, also said that soldiers adhering to “Religious Zionism” killed in Israel’s wars were dying because of what their rabbis had taught them. The remarks, made at a closed meeting at his home in Bnei Brak, have set off a political storm three weeks before Israel’s October 27 parliamentary election.

“They are killed because their rabbis teach them a distorted Torah,” Lando said, adding that many military operations are carried out “not for saving lives, but for the honour of the state”.

Lando’s comment came in response to a question about admiration among some ultra-Orthodox Jewish men – who have traditionally refused the military draft – for religious Zionists who combine Torah study with military service.

His comments aren’t new – they were first published in February 2025. However, their reemergence this week comes amid an election campaign in which ultra-Orthodox military service has become one of the sharpest fault lines in Israeli politics.

The Israeli Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that there was no legal basis for ultra-Orthodox seminary students to have exemptions from military service, and the government has since not been able to pass legislation restoring the exemptions. The issue has led to large protests on both sides of the divide.

“The question is not what he said, but why this discourse has been placed at the heart of the Israeli debate three weeks before the election,” Ehab Jabareen, a researcher on Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera.

Better ‘without a state’

Lando’s party is one of the two factions of the United Torah Judaism (UTJ) alliance, which won seven seats during the last election in 2022, and had been part of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government before its ministers resigned last year.

The bloc did continue to intermittently support the coalition government, however, and Netanyahu has been wary of removing the military exemption – despite widespread opposition to it from many in Israel – out of fear that the UTJ and similar parties would remove their support completely.

Along with his role within Degel HaTorah, Lando is also one of the spiritual leaders of Israel’s Lithuanian ultra-Orthodox community, which makes up roughly a third of the country’s estimated 1.45 million ultra-Orthodox Jews, also known as Haredim.

In May, he said he no longer trusted Netanyahu and called for parliament to be dissolved.

In the footage, he goes further. “It is possible to live well with the Arabs without a state,” he says, adding that international or Palestinian rule would have been “the best situation”.

Zionism, he argues, “caused the Arabs to hate us” and brought physical as well as spiritual disaster on the Jewish people. He describes secular Israelis as having built “a state of apostasy and heresy”.

The comments reflect non-Zionist and anti-Zionist positions that used to be dominant within ultra-Orthodox Judaism, but take on an overt reference to the possibility of living within a non-Zionist state, something that is even more controversial in Israel.

Ibrahim Khatib, a conflict studies scholar at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, said Lando’s remarks drew a line between Zionism and Judaism “from inside the Jewish community itself”, at a time when the official Israeli establishment “tries to bind them together”.

They also put to the test the narrative that Jewish communities in Arab societies were in danger and threatened, and that the Zionist movement came to “save them” at the formation of the state of Israel in 1948, he told Al Jazeera. However, Khatib cautioned that the ultra-Orthodox polity in Israel “is right-wing, its leaders hold right-wing positions, and some of them have made clearly offensive statements about Arabs and Palestinians”.

Political ammunition

Israeli opposition leaders moved quickly after the footage of Lando emerged this week, taking it as an opportunity to attack a figure from a party within Netanyahu’s electoral bloc.

Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett – one of Netanyahu’s main challengers in the upcoming elections – called the remarks “anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-[Israeli military]”, but aimed his fire at Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who he said “back [Lando] and funnel tens of billions of shekels to him and his friends”.

Gadi Eisenkot, another opposition leader whose Yashar party has campaigned on enforcing the military draft, urged every Zionist party to pledge not to sit with Lando’s party.

Netanyahu, who publicly rejected Lando’s remarks in July when the rabbi accused the Religious Zionism movement of “incitement to murder” for its support of the drafting of religious seminary students to the military, has not yet commented.

Yair Golan, leader of the Democrats, put it bluntly: “Netanyahu is silent because without Rabbi Lando and his emissaries, he has no government.”

Jabareen sees Netanyahu’s silence as “calculated”.

“If Netanyahu attacks Lando forcefully, he pays a price with the Haredim he needs to form a government,” he said. “If he stays silent, he hands his rivals material to tell right-wing voters that the man who speaks of Zionism and security depends on a religious leadership that doubts Zionism itself.”

Who fights and who dies

The military draft of the ultra-Orthodox, Jabareen added, has turned “from an old dispute over religion and state into a question about the Israeli [social] contract itself: Who fights? Who dies? And who gets the exemptions, the budgets and the political influence in return?”

Mohammad Abu Rumman, an academic adviser at the Politics and Society Institute in Amman, said the significance of Lando’s remarks lay in the question that prompted them. The example of a young religious man who combines Torah study with military service, he said, “raises a question inside the ultra-Orthodox world itself: Why don’t we do the same?”

“When Lando describes their teaching as a distorted Torah, he is trying to close the door on emulating them,” Abu Rumman told Al Jazeera. “His words are aimed at his own audience as much as at his opponents.”

But Jabareen argued that the row exposes a rift more dangerous for Netanyahu than the familiar clash between secular and religious Israelis, because it runs through the right itself. Religious Zionists have paid a heavy human price in the war, while the ultra-Orthodox leadership still rejects conscription. Caught between those who pay the price of war and those who refuse to, Netanyahu needs both, and cannot satisfy them at once.

Whether the outrage over Lando’s comments translates into votes is less clear. Abu Rumman expects the remarks to “reinforce existing positions more than change voters’ choices”. The space where they could matter, he said, lies among right-wing voters who serve in the army and resent Netanyahu’s protection of ultra-Orthodox demands.

“If Netanyahu needs these parties to build a majority, that need will not disappear because of a rabbi’s remarks, however shocking,” Abu Rumman said. Netanyahu is also not the UTJ’s only suitor: Channel 12 reported that, frustrated by his failure to secure a law exempting ultra-Orthodox men from military service, the party would not rule out or oppose a government led by Eisenkot.

“The Israeli right has managed to bring under one political roof two currents with almost contradictory visions of the Jewish state,” Jabareen said. “One sanctifies the state and the expansion of its sovereignty. In the other, one of its most important rabbis can say it might have been better had the state never been founded.”

Members of the Republican Party have joined Democrats in questioning remarks made by United States President Donald Trump about the California cities of Los Angeles and San Diego.

Much of the backlash came on Tuesday, a day after Trump told a midterm rally in Nebraska that Americans should be willing to make sacrifices to gain victory in the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Those sacrifices, he implied, could include the destruction of American cities, in case of an Iranian attack.

“It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe,” Trump said, seemingly in reference to the knock-on effects of the war, including rising fuel and fertiliser prices.

“They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay, and it’s going to be over with very soon.”

Trump has downplayed the impact of the war – now in its eighth month – despite polling that shows the conflict is widely unpopular in the US. He has also repeatedly promised the war would end soon, though no lasting ceasefire has been reached so far.

The fallout from his Nebraska remarks was swift. Gavin Newsom, an outspoken critic of Trump and the Democratic governor of California, said the president was “deranged”.

“This is not only madness. This is dangerous,” Newsom said in a video on the social media platform X, in which he called for Congress to rein in Trump’s behaviour.

Newsom, a possible contender in the 2028 presidential race, has clashed repeatedly with Trump.

Last year, the two faced off over Trump’s decision to deploy federal troops to California, as part of an effort to support a crackdown on undocumented immigration in the Los Angeles area.

In December, a federal judge ruled that the deployment had been illegal and ordered its end. Newsom, who opposed the deployment, cited that conflict in his remarks about Trump’s Nebraska rally.

“The president of the United States – the same one who sent in the National Guard into Los Angeles, sent 700 active duty Marines to the second largest city in the United States of America – just invited Iran to take out Los Angeles and San Diego,” Newsom said.

He added that Trump’s remarks should convince those who “didn’t think the November election mattered” to vote in the upcoming midterms.

Some from Trump’s own party have also expressed shock at his remarks.

Jim Desmond, a Republican running in a competitive race for the House of Representatives near San Diego, was among those who distanced themselves from Trump’s statement.

“I vehemently disagree with President Trump’s comments. America must stand up to Iran and defend our interests, but the first responsibility of our Commander in Chief is to protect the American people and our homeland,” Desmond wrote on X.

“No American city is expendable, and no American family should ever be treated as collateral damage.”

US Representative Kevin Kiley, an independent who caucuses with Republicans and is running for re-election in northern California, also called Trump’s comments “unhelpful”.

But the White House has dismissed criticism of the remarks, calling it part of a “media freakout” that “is not rooted in reality”.

“He was clearly stating U.S. cities would have been threatened if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped,” White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung wrote on social media.

“America is safer because of the President. Iran has no nuclear, no navy, no air force, and no money.”

California has the largest population and economy of any state in the US. Because of its population, it also has the most seats in the House of Representatives, at 52.

All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for grabs in November’s midterms, along with a third of the Senate. Also on the ballot are key state and local races.

With Republicans’ control of Congress on the line, the results of the midterms are expected to weigh heavily on the final two years of Trump’s second term.

Donald Trump still decides who gets to call themselves MAGA – but what happens when that power has to pass to someone else?

Josh Rushing is joined by Rina Shah, a Republican strategist and one of the original Never Trumpers, and Emma Doyle, former deputy chief of staff in Trump’s first administration, to ask whether MAGA can outgrow its frontman, or whether, as both guests agree, MAGA simply is Donald Trump.

Contributors:
Rina Shah – Republican strategist and political commentator
Emma Doyle – Former White House deputy chief of staff

Spain’s Constitutional Court ruled an amnesty law for Catalan separatists applied to the politician.

Self-exiled Catalan separatist leader Carles Puigdemont could be set to return to Spain after the country’s Constitutional Court ruled that an amnesty law for Catalan separatists applies to embezzlement charges against Puigdemont.

A Supreme Court judge then lifted a warrant for Puigdemont’s arrest on Tuesday, clearing the way for his return without fear of arrest.

Puigdemont, then president of Catalonia, fled to Belgium in 2017 after holding an independence referendum for his self-governing region to break away from Spain. Madrid said the vote was illegal.

Catalonia unilaterally declared independence from Spain that year after the referendum, with 90 percent of voters backing independence.

He has since avoided several extradition attempts by Spain to face trial over the vote, while many of his confidants and supporters spent time in prison.

Members of Puigdemont’s political party Junts welcomed his potential return.

“It’s a great victory for President Puigdemont and the two other exiled ‌[leaders in Belgium]”, Jordi Turull, secretary-general of Junts, told reporters.

“They held firm, they resisted, they prevailed in Europe, and today they have prevailed against the Spanish state.”

Junts’ role in Spain’s snap election

Puigdemont appears set to return to Spain just as the country is preparing for a snap election in November, although an official from his Junts party said he is unlikely to take part.

Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez was only able to remain in power in 2023 when Puigdemont’s Junts party, along with another Catalan party, backed his new government in exchange for the amnesties.

A year ago, Junts withdrew its support for the minority central government, and the party was decisive in Spain’s progressive government losing two key votes in parliament this week when it tried to push through emergency housing measures amid street protests.

Sanchez responded by calling a November snap election, hoping anger over housing will mobilise his voters.

The prime minister told ⁠reporters on Tuesday he did not regret launching the amnesty and welcomed the court ruling.

“I believe the important message is that of coexistence among Catalans,” he said.

Although separatism has lost ground and Junts is trailing in opinion polls, Puigdemont’s return could prompt renewed political drama.

Spain’s conservative People’s Party is leading in opinion polls ahead ‌of the election and may need to seek the support of Junts and other centre-right parties to govern.

Kosovo faces the risk of turmoil as protests against the convictions of former Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) leaders coincide with a midnight deadline to elect a president.

Demonstrators have called for changes to the law governing the Hague-based Kosovo Specialist Chambers, including measures affecting prison terms and where convicted people serve their sentences. The protests follow the September 16 convictions of former KLA leaders, including former President Hashim Thaci.

The protesters’ demands have become entangled with negotiations over the presidency, raising the prospect of new elections if lawmakers fail to reach an agreement. November 15 has emerged as a likely date for a new vote.

“New elections do not, in themselves, promise anything particularly positive,” political analyst Artan Muhaxhiri told Al Jazeera. “The chances of a radical political change are slim.”

He said that if a president is not elected by midnight, a new vote will take place in a tense political climate.

Anger over the verdicts will become a central campaign issue, he said, “overshadowing fundamental questions of socioeconomic development, and deepening the country’s downward spiral of systemic instability”.

How did Kosovo get here?

In 2015, the Specialist Chambers were established under Kosovo law following international investigations into alleged war crimes committed by KLA members during and after the 1998-99 conflict. Although formally part of Kosovo’s judicial system, the court sits in The Hague. It remains contentious in Kosovo because the KLA is widely revered for having fought against Serbian rule.

In September, protests erupted after the court sentenced Thaci to 25 years in prison.

Later, the opposition Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK) – formerly led by Thaci – proposed amendments aimed at curbing the tribunal. The plan included capping prison sentences at 15 years, allowing convicts to serve their sentences in Kosovo, enabling appeals before Kosovo’s Supreme Court, granting presidential pardons and narrowing the court’s temporal jurisdiction.

On October 2, 2026, Prime Minister Albi Kurti’s government concluded that there were no legal obstacles to the PDK initiative and forwarded its assessment to the parliament, the Assembly of Kosovo. Days later, Kosovo’s parliament approved the initiative at first reading with 91 votes in favour, although it has not been finally adopted.

Meanwhile, Kosovo has been mired in a political impasse after the expiration of President Vjosa Osmani’s term in April, as the National Assembly has been unable to select a new president.

Now, internal power struggles within the PDK following the September sentencing have left the party fragmented, rendering the largest opposition party incapable of negotiating a cross-party presidential compromise, according to Nexhmedin Spahiu, a Pristina-based professor of political science.

On Monday, as lawmakers failed to secure a quorum to elect a president, police deployed tear gas and water cannon outside the Assembly, following confrontations involving fireworks and bottles. The use of force prompted criticism from observers.

Tensions rise

Pristina-based journalist Gezim Baxhaku believes special police units overstepped their legal authority.

“There was an overuse of force,” Baxhaku told Al Jazeera. He said that while protesters threw firecrackers, police “exceeded their legal powers and acted entirely contrary to the situation on the ground”.

Among the hundreds of protesters were KLA veterans.

Pristina had witnessed nearly three weeks of largely peaceful gatherings before Monday’s escalation.

“Citizens were routinely bringing food, water, and coffee to the officers on duty,” Baxhaku said. “There was absolutely no reason for this to happen. For the first time since the late 2000s, police acted in such an uncalled-for manner – reacting upon orders to escalate a situation.”

Spahiu, the political science professor, said the protests should not be understood as a sign that people in Kosovo broadly reject the verdicts.

“A large majority of citizens in Kosovo are satisfied with the decision of the Specialist Chambers in The Hague,” said Spahiu.

He told Al Jazeera that the court’s rejection of Serbian claims of systematic crimes against humanity by the KLA “validated the liberation struggle”.

“Furthermore, people are relieved that individuals are finally being held accountable for crimes committed against political rivals within the Albanian community itself,” he said.

The political deadlock and Kurti’s ‘transactional’ approach

The Assembly remains deadlocked over the election of a head of state, as the PDK and other opposition parties boycott the voting session, denying the legislature its constitutionally required 80-MP quorum.

Muhaxhiri blamed Kurti for the crisis, criticising his decision to link the presidential vote to the Hague court amendments.

“Tensions escalated further when Kurti presented a plan based on a transactional approach to two fundamentally distinct issues: linking the draft law amending the Law on the Specialist Chambers to the election of the new president,” said Muhaxhiri.

“In effect, this amounted to a quid pro quo. By doing so, he appeared to be placing the historical, national, and identity-related significance of the liberation war on the same political bargaining table as the immediate objective of electing a president who would serve his political interests.”

WASHINGTON — Political advertising warns about Democratic plots to defund the police. Campaign events feature law enforcement unions and tough talk about law and order. Stump speeches boast about record low levels of violent crime.

From coast to coast, Republicans are focusing on public disorder, illegal immigration and violent crime in midterm campaigns as voters sour on their party’s handling of the cost of living and the war with Iran.

Democrats have tried to counter the attacks by recruiting candidates with law enforcement backgrounds and emphasizing their own anti-crime plans, but Republicans believe it’s a rare opportunity to go on the offensive in an otherwise challenging year.

“Do you know that right now we have the lowest violent crime rate in 126 years in America right now? Because we emphasize the rule of law,” House Speaker Mike Johnson recently told an audience at Louisiana State University. Crime rates have generally trended down since the 1990s with a brief spike during the COVID pandemic. “We have the most secure border we have had in the past half century.”

President Trump returned to the topic Monday night in Nebraska, warning about how the country used to be before he returned to the White House.

“We had a border with people pouring in, crime like nobody’s ever seen,” he said.

Republicans say Democrats will ‘defund the police’

In Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Texas and Wisconsin, Republican candidates for governor have attacked their Democratic rivals as weak on crime or warned they could cut police funding. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, for instance, has lambasted Democratic nominee and state Rep. Gina Hinojosa for not supporting legislation that would require judges to deny bail to illegal immigrants charged with a violent crime.

Hinojosa has campaigned on her tenure as a civil rights lawyer and criticized Abbott’s crime policies as violating civil liberties.

Rick Jackson, a billionaire healthcare executive running in Georgia, has repeatedly attacked Democratic opponent Keisha Lance Bottoms over her tenure as Atlanta mayor.

“I grew up in the type of neighborhood Keisha Lance Bottoms abandoned,” Jackson said at a summer campaign rally. “I know who gets hurt when politicians defund the police.”

In an interview with Atlanta station 11Alive, Bottoms emphasized that her administration gave pay raises to police and firefighters, and said she called for increased federal funding for public safety during her time as mayor.

Crime warnings pervade congressional races

It’s a similar story in U.S. House races.

In Virginia’s first congressional district, Rep. Rob Wittman has attacked his Democratic opponent, prosecutor Shannon Taylor, over her allegedly “soft on crime” record in office. In Michigan’s 10th district, Republican Michael Bouchard is running on his service as a Bronze Star Army captain and son of a longtime local sheriff. He’s claimed his Democratic opponent, former prosecutor Christina Hines, supports “woke, soft on crime, socialist policies.”

In Colorado’s eighth district, Rep. Gabe Evans touts his time as a police officer against Democratic challenger Manny Rutinel. And in Wisconsin’s third district, Rep. Derrick Van Orden hopes to win a third race against Democratic nominee Rebecca Cooke by painting her as a communist who wants to defund the police.

Republicans hope that by reprising warnings of crime and disorder the party can reenergize their disillusioned base and win back skeptical moderate voters who have drifted over concerns like affordability.

Democratic rivals have responded in kind. Taylor aired an ad featuring 13 local sheriffs who endorsed her campaign. Rutinel aired ads with local police and rolled out a safety plan that called for greater police funding and drug prevention programs. Hines said she’ll continue to prioritize public safety and prosecute corruption in Washington. Cooke has vowed to fully fund police departments in Congress.

Not all Republicans see crime as a winning issue

It’s yet to be seen if the strategy will prove effective.

“We’ve got to talk about it. I think that in many ways, we are the victim of our own success because it’s off the headlines a little bit more,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt, a Missouri Republican and former state attorney general. “Having a completely secure border now, no one even talks about it. But that’s a huge accomplishment from where we were at before.”

An AP-NORC poll conducted in September found that border security — which Trump and Republicans often link to crime — was a relative strength for the Republican president, with 48% of U.S. adults saying they approved of his performance on the issue. But that was still a decline from a year ago, when his approval on border security was at 55%.

Not everyone in the party is sold on Republicans rehashing the crime message.

“I don’t see that bubbling up as a major issue for the voters,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who chose not to seek reelection this year. Aiming to make the race to succeed Tillis a referendum on crime, Republicans have run ads claiming that Democratic nominee Roy Cooper went easy on convicts during his two terms in the governor’s mansion.

Black political leaders have criticized the ads as racist and reminiscent of past Republican campaigns that used dog whistles to appeal to suburban white voters. Trump made the message explicit when he invoked the infamous 1988 “Willie Horton” ad and displayed dozens of mugshots of men of color on a jumbotron during a rally stumping for Michael Whatley, Cooper’s Republican rival.

In contrast to his party’s messaging, Tillis noted his state’s safety in recent years.

“Frankly, when I hear somebody talking about crime in Charlotte, I live 25 minutes from downtown. I’m not worried about walking through Charlotte at night,” said Tillis.

Democrats accuse Trump of corruption

National Democrats contend that Republicans’ message on violent crime is undercut by the Trump administration’s hardline immigration enforcement actions, which resulted in the killing of two American protesters in January and the fatal shootings of multiple undocumented people. They accuse Trump of corruption and have hammered Republicans for alleged complicity in the president’s self-dealing.

“This is the biggest criminal organization that we’ve ever seen,” said Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat, of the current White House.

He added that, “Democrats should be pushing back with the fact that, if not for the fact that he was president, this guy would be leading some type of mafia right now.”

Lauren Bis, a White House spokeswoman, said “extreme Democrats are trying to deflect from their radical soft on crime agenda.”

Brown writes for the Associated Press.

London, United Kingdom– At a meeting organised by a Muslim group in London ahead of a closely watched by-election, candidates from the Green and Liberal Democrat parties made their cases to residents beside empty seats. Their Labour and Conservative peers did not turn up.

Labour candidate Sagal Abdi Wali, a Somali-Muslim woman, told The Guardian she did not attend because she had a prior obligation and the invite had come too late. But the organiser, the Camden Muslim Network, pushed back, saying that she was invited earlier.

Fifteen candidates are in the race for former Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s old seat, including Green Party leader, Zack Polanski, who hopes to become a member of parliament.

Since the seat was created in Holborn and St Pancras in 1983, the Labour Party has held it. Starmer was first elected in 2015 and held it until his resignation, which triggered the by-election.

At the meeting, the conversation ranged from local issues such as housing to Israel and Palestine.

Lib Dem candidate Patrick Stillman said his party had long called for Palestinian statehood but would not support a full boycott.

But Polanski had a different opinion.

“I think the Labour government’s position is deeply cynical to apologise over Gaza, to recognise that mistakes have been made but to continue to sell arms to Israel, a country that’s committing a genocide,” he said to applause, adding that his party, which recently voted to describe Zionism as racism, supports a full boycott.

‘Vote Palestine’

In leaflets sent to constituency residents, the Green Party focused on Abdi-Wali’s time as a Labour councillor and, more recently, as leader of Camden council – a role she secured in May.

One reads: “Bring change, Replace Labour, Vote Green”. On its reverse: “Every single Camden Labour councillor refused to sign the Palestine solidarity pledge or support pension fund divestment. Only Greens continue to stand firm on Palestine.”

Last month, Abdi-Wali spoke to the Camden New Journal, a local newspaper, about Gaza and the Green Party’s leaflets.

It was “obviously inaccurate” to say the Labour council did not feel strongly about the issue, she told the paper. “I want to focus on making sure that we’re able to put the message of what [Foreign Secretary] Ed Miliband is now doing with the government and on Palestine and Israel and Gaza and the West Bank.”

In January, Camden Friends of Palestine (CFOP), a local group that formed in response to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, presented a petition to the local council with 4,000 signatures calling for the council to divest its pension fund from companies involved in Israel’s actions in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Abdi-Wali, then a Labour councillor, did not support the motion. Rather than committing to divestment, most councillors voted to refer the question to the pension board for review.

“My impression of her and her politics is that she’s just really incredibly silent on everything, if there isn’t a career motive for her, and that’s kind of disappointing,” said 38-year-old Shadin, a resident and CFOP organiser, who plans to vote for Polanski.

“Watching a livestreamed genocide has made a lot of people that I know … disengage from mainstream politics or parliamentary politics”.

Like many London constituencies, a key issue is housing.

According to a “2026 state of the borough” report by Camden council, 8,380 households were on the waiting list for social housing at the end of March 2025, “an increase of 9.5 percent on the year before.”

On Friday, in the constituency’s more affluent area of Primrose Hill, one resident said they would vote for Labour in the upcoming election, while another believed that regardless of who wins, life will not change.

In Camden, another resident told Al Jazeera that while they live in the area, they were not aware of the election, as Labour canvassers buzzed to gain entry into a nearby estate in the background.

As both parties make their final efforts to secure victory, recent polls predict a close race.

In the 2024 general election, Starmer won the seat with 49 percent. Andrew Feinstein, a pro-Palestine independent candidate came second, with 19 percent. The British gambling firm Ladbrokes and Stats for Lefties, which examines polling, both predict Labour will win.

Parti Quebecois returns to power, promising a third referendum on Quebec’s independence from Canada.

The secessionist Parti Quebecois has won the most seats in Quebec’s election and will form the next government in the predominantly French-speaking Canadian province, according to media reports.

The result on Monday revives the question of whether the province should leave Canada, testing Prime Minister Mark Carney’s message of national unity.

Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, the party’s leader, is set to become premier.

During the campaign, he promised a third referendum on leaving Canada during his first term, although he said he would wait until US President Donald Trump leaves office in January 2029.

It was not yet clear whether the party had reached the 64 seats needed for a majority in the 127-seat National Assembly.

If it falls short, it would lead a minority government and need support from opposition lawmakers to pass major legislation and survive confidence votes.

The Parti Quebecois, or PQ, last governed the province from 2012 to 2014.

Monday’s victory marks a sharp recovery for the PQ, which won just three seats in the 2022 provincial election.

Its return also ends eight years in power for the Coalition Avenir Quebec, or CAQ, a centre-right Quebec nationalist party that does not support independence.

Daniel Beland, a political science professor at McGill University in Montreal, told The Associated Press news agency that the victory reflects Quebec’s multiparty system, where support is divided among several parties, rather than a surge in secessionist sentiment.

Support for independence remains at about 30 percent, low by historical standards, he said.

Still, Beland said a secessionist government in Quebec represents a new national-unity challenge for Carney, particularly with another independence-related vote approaching in Alberta.

“Seeing that a pro-independence party won in Quebec barely two weeks before an independence-related referendum takes place in Alberta might suggest to the Trump administration that national unity remains a major issue in Canada despite the popularity of Mark Carney,” Beland said.

Quebec held two previous referendums on independence, in 1980 and 1995, and voters rejected secession both times.

The second vote was decided by a narrow margin, but there has been no further referendum in the three decades since.

Hispanic voters are twice as likely to favour Democratic Party over Trump’s Republican Party in the November elections.

A new poll from the news agency Reuters and the research firm Ipsos has found that United States President Donald Trump’s approval rating remains at a record low as the midterm elections approach in November.

The six-day survey, completed on Monday, found that just 32 percent of US voters approve of the job Trump is doing as president.

While that low rate has held steady since September, the latest Reuters-Ipsos poll suggests his support among Latino voters is continuing to slide.

Trump’s approval rating shrunk this month to 24 percent among Hispanic voters, its lowest point in either of his two terms in office.

The Republican leader had previously made substantial inroads with that constituency.

The Pew Research Center estimated that Trump and his Democratic rival, Kamala Harris, were within three percentage points of each other in the 2024 presidential race, earning 48 percent and 51 percent of the Hispanic vote, respectively.

That rate marked a significant jump for Trump over the 2020 election, when he only earned 36 percent of the Hispanic vote.

Experts have credited the boost in Hispanic support with helping Trump win the 2024 race. His 2020 bid, by contrast, ended in defeat to Democrat Joe Biden.

The Monday poll found that Trump’s gains among Hispanics have largely evaporated.

About 52 percent plan to vote for the Democrats in the November midterms, compared to 26 percent for Republicans.

The upcoming midterm is largely viewed as a referendum on Trump’s second term and will decide whether the Republicans maintain their majorities in the US House of Representatives and the Senate.

Democrats have seized on Trump’s low approval ratings, hoping to translate frustration with the president into voter momentum for their party.

A Democratic majority in one or both houses of Congress would place substantial constraints on Trump’s agenda for the remainder of his time in office.

But Trump has also faced rumblings from within his Republican Party as the November 3 midterms approach.

One Republican incumbent, Representative Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida, released a campaign advertisement last month that addressed Trump directly, saying, “The same Hispanics who helped you get to the White House in 2024 feel betrayed today.”

She cited Trump’s hardline immigration crackdown as a source of tension. “Some of your immigration enforcement efforts have gone too far,” she said, pointing to the detention and deportation of immigrants with no criminal record.

Experts have also warned that the president’s shrinking popularity, driven in part by concerns about the cost of living and his decision to launch a war on Iran, could weigh down Republican candidates in key races across the country.

Still, Trump has continued to express confidence about the prospects of his Republican Party in the upcoming midterms.

He has also defended his decision to place himself at the centre of the Republican election campaign strategy. Trump recently launched a 32-day blitz of cross-country rallies ahead of the November 3 midterms.

“Just so you understand, they all want me to go,” Trump said, denying that some Republicans would prefer he keep his distance. “They all want me to go campaign.”