latest

WASHINGTON — After two years of struggling to slow down the Trump administration agenda under a Republican governing trifecta, Democrats are hoping to capture both chambers of Congress in the upcoming midterms.

All 435 House of Representatives seats are up for election, with 37 considered competitive, 21 of them toss-ups, by the Cook Political Report — a respected polling analysis site. Republicans currently hold a 218-214 edge over Democrats, with two seats vacant and one independent in the chamber.

To control the House, Democrats need a net gain of four seats.

Recent polls have shown Democrats creeping up on or surpassing their Republican opponents as President Trump’s approval rating hovers under 40%, which may offer an opening in unexpected places. But still, in a time when a more progressive wing has risen in popularity on the left, even some moderate Democrats are suffering from associations with the current administration.

Here is a look at five competitive races:

Ohio 7th: Miller vs. Poindexter

Incumbent Republican Max Miller, mired in controversy, will face union ironworker Brian Poindexter in a 7th Congressional District race that went from solidly Republican to a toss-up in the matter of weeks.

Miller, a second-term congressman, is facing a House Ethics Committee investigation after his ex-wife, Emily Moreno — daughter of Ohio Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno — accused Miller of extreme physical abuse, which he has denied.

Miller also faced accusations from former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham that Miller had abused her during their relationship. An Ohio judge recently ordered both parties to remove social media posts about each other that were considered disparaging.

Brian Poindexter, Democratic nominee for Ohio’s 7th Congressional District, speaks at the Strongsville Democratic Club meeting on Aug. 5 in Strongsville, Ohio.

(Nate Manley / Associated Press)

Poindexter, a relative unknown, has surged in the meantime. According to a Co/efficient poll last month, Poindexter was leading Miller by 14 points, with 86% of respondents claiming they were aware of allegations against Miller.

Poindexter has centered his campaign on strengthening unions, retaining healthcare benefits for retirees and injured workers and raising wages.

Miller has attacked his opponent for a 1998 arrest in which Poindexter, a teenager at the time, allegedly tried to swallow a rock of crack cocaine during a traffic stop. Miller also homed in on an instance of alleged assault at a baseball game in 2013 by Poindexter.

Texas 34th: Gonzalez vs. Flores

Incumbent Democrat Vicente Gonzalez Jr. is attempting to retain his seat against challenger Eric Flores, an Army veteran endorsed by Trump.

Elected in 2016, Gonzalez held the 15th Congressional District for three terms until 2021, when a Texas redistricting shift absorbed his McAllen home into the 34th district. He is currently serving his second term under a new map, which favors Republicans and has shed many of his Latino constituents.

Flores, a political newcomer, made his first national appearance at the Republican National Committee’s midterm convention in Dallas, touting his commitment to border security and accusing Gonzalez of allowing migrants to make the community unsafe.

Immigration looms as an issue in the race. Gonzalez has introduced bills to prevent federal and state immigration enforcement officers from entering homes without an official warrant, and to force agents to wear clear identification. He has publicly criticized raids targeting hospitality, medical and construction workers.

Gonzalez has scored endorsements from several progressive organizations in the state, including LUPE Votes — a subsidiary of La Unión del Pueblo Entero.

In a Barbara Jordan Public Policy Research and Survey Center poll from August, Gonzalez was leading Flores, 45% to 42%, with 8% undecided.

North Carolina 1st: Davis vs. Buckhout

Incumbent Democrat Rep. Donald Davis will have to contend with a district that has grown more conservative to retain his seat against Republican challenger Laurie Buckhout.

North Carolina’s 1st Congressional District was the state’s only swing seat held by a Democrat before last year’s redistricting, which made the area lean Republican. This will be a rematch of the 2024 race, which Davis won by less than 2 points, or around 6,000 total votes.

Laurie Buckhout speaks as President Trump and North Carolina Rep. Jennifer Balkcom look on during a campaign rally at the Gastonia Municipal Airport on Sept. 16 in Gastonia, N.C.

(Matt Kelley / Associated Press)

Cook Political Report ranked this race as leaning Republican, calling Davis “the most vulnerable House Democrat in the country.”

It is unclear whether the gerrymandering effort will have been effective enough to make the district flip to Republican. Trump endorsed Buckhout in March and reiterated his support last week.

New York 17th: Lawler vs. Conley

New York Republican incumbent Rep. Mike Lawler is attempting to fend off a challenge from Democrat Cait Conley, a former White House director of counterterrorism on the National Security Council.

Cook Political Report rankings showed that early this year, the 17th Congressional District race went from likely Republican to a toss-up.

Pete Buttigieg went on the campaign trail last week with Conley to promote the candidate’s bid to unseat Lawler.

“Cait is as serious as it gets about keeping our country safe,” Buttigieg said on a rally stage in Tarrytown, “just like she is serious about bringing down the cost of housing, healthcare and energy.”

Lawler has presented a bipartisan image in Congress, but has come under fire in his purple district for aligning himself with the Trump administration on several issues, including his support for the Iran war.

At the Republican National Committee’s midterm convention, Lawler focused much of his speech on lambasting “socialist” Democrats and attempting to appeal to the more “common sense” wing of the opposition party.

“Radical socialists are winning Democratic primaries,” he said. “They claim to be well-meaning, but there is nothing kind-hearted about protecting criminals at the expense of American families … nothing compassionate about prioritizing illegal immigrants.”

Conley, however, has publicly refused to campaign with New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — without condemning either figure — to avoid the open conflict between establishment figures and the more progressive wing of the party.

A July poll from co/efficient showed Lawler leading Conley 50% to 45%, with a nearly 3% margin of error.

Dr. Amish Shah, shown in July, is a Democrat running in Arizona’s 1st Congressional District.

(Ross D. Franklin / Associated Press)

Arizona 1st: Shah vs. Feely

A Democratic PAC plans to invest nearly $1 million to support Democrat state Rep. Amish Shah against Republican Jay Feely, a former NFL player with close ties to the president.

The 314 Action Fund — which seeks to elect Democrats with backgrounds in science, technology, engineering and mathematics — has made a big bet on the Democrat running in the 1st Congressional District, Arizona’s wealthiest, according to the Arizona Mirror.

Former professional football player Jay Feely, shown in April, is the Republican nominee in Arizona’s 1st District.

(Ross D. Franklin / Associated Press)

Subsequent ads have brought attention to Feely’s close association with Trump and his recent attendance at the Republican National Committee’s midterm convention in Dallas. Trump won the state by five points in 2024.

Elon Musk has also figured in this race, with his America PAC giving $24,000 to Republican candidates Feely in the 1st District and Juan Ciscomani in the 6th District, according to the Copper Courier.

The Cook Political Report called the 1st District “one of the most competitive … in the country.”

Los Angeles Councilmember Nithya Raman has taken a wide lead over incumbent Karen Bass in the L.A. mayor’s race, according to a new poll released Wednesday, although a high percentage of voters remain undecided less than two weeks before mail-in ballots are sent out for the Nov. 3 election.

Raman is favored by 39% of likely L.A. voters, compared with 28% for Bass, according to the poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, which was co-sponsored by The Times. The poll found that 33% of voters were undecided.

“Raman clearly has the advantage. Her task is a little less onerous than Bass’,” said Mark DiCamillo, the director of the Berkeley IGS Poll.

Adding to Bass’ low poll numbers are high unfavorability ratings.

The mayor had 63% unfavorable ratings, the poll found, with 28% favorable and 9% having no opinion. By comparison, 40% had a favorable view of Raman, according to the poll, while 39% said they had an unfavorable view of her and 21% had no opinion.

The survey released Wednesday was conducted online with a sample of 2,150 likely city voters between Sept. 15 and Sept. 20. It has a margin of error of about 3 percentage points.

The poll represented the strongest showing yet for Raman, who trailed Bass in almost every poll during the primary campaign and who came in second to Bass in the primary election, with 29% of the vote compared with Bass’ 34%.

Mayoral candidate and Councilmember Nithya Raman, center, enjoys a light moment with Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) Action members at La Cita Bar in downtown Los Angeles.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Even so, DiCamillo said the large number of undecided voters means the race is far from over.

“It’s extraordinarily unusual to see this many undecided voters at this point in the race,” he said. Mail-in ballots will be sent out beginning Oct. 1, local elections officials say.

The large number of undecided voters can be linked to the elimination of mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt in the June 2 primary, according to DiCamillo. The former reality TV star received 26% of the vote in the primary, and most of the voters who cast ballots for him — 63% — say they haven’t decided whom to vote for in the runoff, the poll found.

Among those Pratt voters who have decided, 22% favored Bass compared with 16% for Raman.

One of the most significant findings in the poll was a massive “generational divide” among L.A. voters, DiCamillo said.

Raman, 45, dominated the 72-year-old Bass among younger voters, with 66% of likely voters ages 18 to 29 choosing the council member while just 4% chose Bass, according to the poll.

Raman also had 64% of likely voters ages 30 to 39 compared with Bass’ 12%, and the council member had 50% of likely voters ages 40 to 49 compared with Bass’ 18%. Raman also was leading among voters 50 to 64 years old by a slim margin of 35% to 33%.

Bass, meanwhile, led among the oldest set of voters — those 65 and up — but not by the same margins. Bass had 41% of likely voters in that group compared with Raman’s 21%.

The mayor has had negative favorability ratings since the 2025 Palisades fire.

According to the poll, 56% of likely voters thought Bass did a poor or very poor job responding to the disaster, which killed 12 people and destroyed more than 4,000 homes, including Pratt’s.

Fourteen percent of the likely voters thought Bass had done either an excellent or a good job and 17% thought she had done a fair job.

Mayor Karen Bass campaigns at Ernest E. Debs Regional Park on Sunday.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

The most important issues to likely voters were fixing city infrastructure, moving homeless people indoors, crime and public safety, and building more affordable housing, the poll found.

The poll shows Raman leading in nearly every geographic area of the city. Bass was leading in South Los Angeles and the Harbor region, 37% to 34%, but central Los Angeles as well as northeast and the east side of Los Angeles broke strongly for Raman.

The San Fernando Valley went 34% to Raman and 26% to Bass with 40% still undecided. The Westside favored Raman by a single percentage point, at 35% to 34%.

Raman has led in other polls recently, though none by as wide a margin as in the Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll. Shortly before the primary, a separate Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll showed Raman leading Bass in a potential head-to-head matchup by just four percentage points, with 32% support compared with the mayor’s 28%.

But the gap between the two has widened since then, the latest poll found, as Bass weathered a difficult news cycle, including rising homelessness numbers citywide as well as the fallout from the Lineage warehouse fire in Boyle Heights that burned for nearly a week, leaving rotting food and a rancid stench in the neighborhood for more than a month.

Raman, meanwhile, picked up largely positive headlines this summer. She gained key endorsements from the carpenters’ union and Unite Here Local 11, the union representing hospitality workers at hotels and the airport, as well as an endorsement from the Democratic Socialists of America. Street homelessness also dropped in her district, which she said was due to her office’s strong outreach, though the Bass campaign credited the mayor’s Inside Safe program for the reduction in Raman’s district.

On the negative side, Raman was booted from her position in the council as chair of the Housing and Homelessness Committee, a move she said was politically motivated.

In an internal Raman campaign poll from early September, the council member was ahead, 44% to 39%, with 17% undecided. She was also leading, 38% to 32%, in a poll commissioned by the group Streets for All, which is backing Raman.

In an early August poll commissioned by an independent expenditure group supporting Bass, the mayor had the edge, 41% to 35%, with 24% undecided.

In April 2022, Moore tested positive for nandrolone and boldenone at a WTA 250 event in Bogota, with an independent tribunal ruling in December 2023 that contaminated meat was the source.

Moore, who was Britain’s leading women’s doubles player at the time of the failed test, was found to bear “no fault or negligence”, but the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) appealed against the decision.

Last year, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) ruled in favour of the ITIA and Moore was banned until 2028.

Moore then initiated proceedings with the American Arbitration Association, in which she claimed the WTA’s “failure to warn against eating meat in Colombia was a direct cause of her positive test result and the harm that followed”.

The arbitrator supported the ruling made by Cas and dismissed the case against the WTA.

In response, Moore filed a motion against the decision at the United States District Court in New York.

Moore, who was ranked a career-high 77th in the world in 2022, claimed she was denied a fair hearing by the arbitrator.

The motion detailed how Moore was seeking “no less than $20m in compensatory damages” after claiming the WTA “stayed silent in the face of a known and specific danger and then shifted the blame for its own negligence” to the player.

On Friday, United States district judge Andrew Carter found Moore’s challenge was “not justified” on a legal basis.

The WTA and ITIA have been approached for comment.

Sudan’s collective memory has long carried stories of famine-induced tragedies. Now, as war pushes the country deeper into a catastrophic food crisis, historians and humanitarian activists fear that some of those horrors are being repeated.

The ongoing war between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, which erupted in April 2023, has plunged the country into one of its worst modern food crises, with conditions deteriorating sharply since 2024.

Sudan has endured severe famines before, often triggered or made worse by drought and other environmental shocks. However, the current hunger crisis, which has triggered famines in Sudan in 2024 and 2025, has been brought on by a man-made factor: war.

Past starvation

One of the earliest recorded major food crises in what is now Sudan occurred in 1684, during the Funj Sultanate. The crisis, which lasted several years, brought severe grain shortages across central Sudan. Historical accounts describe people driven to desperation, and in some cases forced to eat dog meat. The hunger triggered mass displacement, as well as a deadly smallpox outbreak.

Similar climate-driven crises were recorded in 1750 and again between 1835 and 1838 during a period of Ottoman-Egyptian rule, exacerbated by severe drought and low water levels in the River Nile.

The famine most deeply embedded in Sudanese popular memory occurred between 1888 and 1889, during the rule of Khalifa Abdullahi al-Taashi.

Drought, locust infestations and conflict combined to cause widespread hunger and death. Some historical estimates put the death toll at more than one million people, although precise figures from the period are difficult to establish. The crisis was reported to have been so severe that some families shut themselves inside their homes to die rather than going out to beg for food.

Sudan experienced more periods of food shortages during the 20th century. Droughts and poor harvests during the colonial period of the first half of the century forced the authorities at times to import grain from abroad.

Then, in 1984, during the rule of President Jaafar Nimeiri, a devastating drought hit western Sudan, including Darfur and Kordofan, where there were widespread crop and livestock losses, displacing hundreds of thousands of people from rural areas to the capital, Khartoum.

Man-made catastrophe

Unlike many of those historical crises, the current famine is distinctly man-made.

War has disrupted agricultural production and trade, forced farmers to leave their land, and made it difficult to move food and humanitarian aid across the country.

Abdullah al-Tijani, a social historian and humanitarian activist, noted the unprecedented scale of the current disaster.

“Most previous famines were often confined to specific regions, as happened in 1984, or areas in southern Sudan before its secession in [2011], while the capital and major cities continued to have the necessities of life and services,” al-Tijani told Al Jazeera.

This time, he said, hunger and the collapse of basic services have spread across the entire country.

“A comprehensive food crisis has struck the heart of major urban and agricultural centres in the states of Khartoum, Gezira, Sennar, Darfur, and Kordofan, causing millions of citizens to be displaced inside and outside the country,” al-Tijani added.

He pointed to what he described as the “systematic destruction of infrastructure, disruption of large agricultural projects, and targeting of markets, bakeries, and crops, along with disrupting the banking system and communication networks, which isolated entire regions”.

Al-Tijani also cited the “restrictions on humanitarian access and delays in granting transit permits for relief workers”. He accused the warring parties of using control over food supplies as a tool of war, while warning that international funding has fallen short of the size of the crisis.

Lost agricultural potential

The scale of the crisis is stark because of Sudan’s agricultural potential. The country has immense resources, including roughly 200 million acres (81 million hectares) of arable land, abundant water from the Nile, and extensive livestock resources, but Sudan’s potential as a global breadbasket remains unfulfilled.

Mohammed Abdul Rahman, an economic researcher, explained that the current food security crisis reflects a clear development gap, and a longstanding weakness in Sudan’s agricultural sector compounded by war.

“Wars and armed conflicts are among the most influential factors on food production,” Abdul Rahman said, “along with the displacement of farmers from their lands, the absence of political stability and agricultural policies, weak funding and government guarantees, and reliance on traditional farming methods.”

Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is running in October’s election for a fourth non-consecutive mandate as Brazil’s president.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Senator Flavio Bolsonaro remain deadlocked in the latest polls, with the first round of Brazil’s election less than two weeks away.

Two new polls on Monday showed that the pair are statistically tied in simulated runoffs ahead of next month’s election. If no candidate wins more than 50 percent of valid votes in the October 4 first round, the two frontrunners advance to a runoff on October 25.

Lula is seeking a fourth non-consecutive term as Brazil’s president, but faces a challenge from the political right in Flavio Bolsonaro, the son of former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro, an ally of US President Donald Trump.

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.

A Quaest poll released on Monday showed Bolsonaro with 42 percent of voter support in a potential runoff, versus 41 percent for Lula.

Meanwhile, a BTG Pactual/Nexus poll has Lula receiving 46 percent of voter support, compared with 45 percent for Bolsonaro in a potential runoff.

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

US pressure looms over election

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 US administration looms over the race.

The US imposed two fresh rounds of tariffs on Brazilian products in July, which Lula denounced as an attempt to influence the elections through economic pressure.

The Brazilian leader is currently in New York, where he is preparing to address the United Nations General Assembly.

Lula met New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani for the first time on Monday. In a brief statement to reporters after the meeting, the Brazilian president said the two had talked about problems common to both Brazil and the United States, particularly the rising cost of living.

WASHINGTON — As Republicans contend with President Trump’s deep unpopularity, Democrats are attempting to seize the opening to take the U.S. Senate in the Nov. 3 midterm elections. Polls have shown Trump with an approval rating consistently below 40%, with no end in sight to the Iran war and voters expressing deep economic anxiety.

Republicans currently hold a 53-47 edge in the Senate, and 35 seats are on the November ballot.

Months of polling indicate that eight Senate seats — six of which are currently held by Republicans — are now up for grabs. Democrats will need to win at least four of them, while holding on to two contested seats currently held by their party, in order to flip the chamber.

Five key races are unexpectedly close, with some polls giving Democrats a better edge than expected, but the outcomes are still in doubt, as swaths of voters remain undecided. The Cook Political Report, a leading forecaster, rates each one a toss-up. Here’s how they are shaping up:

Michigan: El-Sayed vs. Rogers

In perhaps the highest-profile contest, former public health official Abdul El-Sayed is facing Republican Mike Rogers for the seat being vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters.

El-Sayed, aligned with the party’s progressive wing, narrowly defeated moderate Rep. Haley Stevens in a heated Democratic primary. He is looking to rally her supporters as well as disaffected Republican voters.

Rogers is courting independents and a cohort of Jewish Democrats who view El-Sayed’s desire to reduce funding to Israel’s military as a dangerous proposition.

According to a CNN/SSRS poll of likely voters released Sept. 9, El-Sayed led Rogers 47% to 44%, a result within the margin of error. Notably, 26% of respondents said they could still be persuaded to vote for either candidate, leaving the race wide open.

The barbs in this race have become deeply personal, with anti-Muslim rhetoric taking center stage.

In a series of ads and artificial-intelligence-generated images, Republican groups — including the National Republican Senatorial Committee and Front Line Action — have cast El-Sayed as a supporter of terrorism. During speeches and interviews, members of the Trump administration, including the president, have repeatedly referred to the candidate by his full name, Abdulrahman Mohamad El-Sayed.

Rogers has continually drawn attention to a campaign event hosted by El-Sayed that included Hasan Piker — a Los Angeles-based online political commentator who recently drew widespread attention for a 2019 comment that “America deserved 9/11” while discussing blowback against U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

El-Sayed has railed against Rogers for refusing to debate and for his endorsement by Trump.

This week, El-Sayed stood alone on the Fox 2 Detroit debate stage after Rogers declined an invitation, dubbing his opponent “Mike Dodgers” on several occasions.

Rogers later accused the moderator of bias toward the Democratic candidate. The candidates have agreed to debate on Oct. 8 and 21.

Texas: Talarico vs. Paxton

State Rep. James Talarico is seeking to become the first Texas Democrat elected to the Senate since 1993.

His Republican opponent, state Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton, received Trump’s endorsement and defeated four-term incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the primary.

While gaining a seat in Texas has long been a far-off dream for Democrats, Paxton’s controversies have dogged him during the race. A Mason-Dixon Research poll showed the Democrat leading Paxton 46 to 43, in a state that Trump won by nearly 14 points in 2024. Other polls, including one from Insider Advantage, had the margin at a single point.

Paxton is seen as a prominent fixture in the MAGA movement, using his position as attorney general to contest Obama-era clean energy and healthcare acts and launching lawsuits against the Biden administration for its immigration policy.

Talarico has made Paxton’s association with the president a key piece of his campaign, slamming Paxton as “the most corrupt politician in Texas” and spotlighting his impeachment by the Texas House of Representatives in 2023 over allegations of bribery, breach of public trust and misuse of his office to aid a donor. (Paxton survived the impeachment vote and denied wrongdoing.)

Several attack ads on Talarico, launched by Republican political action committees, have focused on his past support for transgender youth and accused him of exaggerating his faith to garner the Christian vote.

Maine: Jackson vs. Collins

Six-term incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins is hoping to retain her seat as Democratic challenger Troy Jackson attempts to replicate the grassroots success of former nominee Graham Platner’s campaign.

Jackson, a former state lawmaker, was chosen by Maine Democratic Party delegates to run in place of Platner, who dropped out in July after sexual misconduct allegations against him. A former lumberjack, Jackson shares Platner’s working-class background and is running on Medicare for All and increased taxes for billionaires.

Collins has repeatedly demonstrated her staying power and won reelection in 2020 even as the state went blue in the presidential race. Her willingness to stand up to Trump could become a deciding factor this time around; Collins is working to highlight her votes to block Trump’s $1.8-billion Department of Justice anti-weaponization fund and against the Iran war.

She has mostly stuck to promoting her decades-long record on the campaign trail, which has recently focused on increased healthcare access for seniors, workforce development and Social Security benefit increases.

She has faced criticism from Jackson and others over her vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, who faced sexual assault allegations, which he denied, and later voted to strike down Roe vs. Wade, which had granted a constitutional right to choose an abortion.

Jackson has had difficulty generating the same enthusiasm among voters as his predecessor, Platner, who consistently held town halls across the state and had a viral social media presence. Over Labor Day weekend, Jackson hosted at least a dozen events up and down Maine to make his first public introductions to voters deep into the cycle.

A recent poll from YouGov shows Jackson narrowly leading the incumbent, 46% to 44%, with a crucial 9% undecided.

Alaska: Peltola vs. Sullivan

Former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola and incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan are leading a field of candidates — including another Dan Sullivan — ahead of a ranked-choice general vote.

Alaska hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since 1995, giving Peltola an uphill battle in a state that Trump won by 13 percentage points in 2024.

A late July poll by Change Research showed Peltola in the lead by six percentage points. A more recent poll from Alaska Survey Research had the race within 1 point in favor of Peltola.

Much of the media attention surrounding this race, however, has focused on the third-place candidate, who only received 2.5% of the primary vote — and also happens to be named Dan Sullivan.

Dan J. Sullivan, a retired teacher who made the top four in ranked-choice voting, has been accused by Republicans of being a Democratic plant that could potentially confuse voters. Sullivan has denied these accusations and the Alaska Supreme Court decided to keep him on the ballot.

If none of the candidates receive over 50% of first-place ranked-choice votes — which is likely in this race — the last-place candidate will be eliminated, with their vote distributed to their next choice until one candidate receives a majority of the total.

Iowa: Turek vs. Hinson

In a race that has seen the candidates trade political jabs in separate speeches on the same state fairgrounds, Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson and Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek are nearly neck and neck.

According to a Suffolk University poll, Hinson is leading Turek 45% to 40%, in a state where Trump won by 13 points in 2024. A poll conducted by YouGov, however, has Turek in front by a single point.

GOP incumbent Sen. Joni Ernst elected not to run this year, leaving the seat open for a potential flip.

Turek, a two-time Paralympics gold medalist, has attacked Hinson for past campaign ads in which she said: “I don’t trade stocks, and no one else in Congress should either.” Tucker pointed to the fact that Hinson purchased and sold stocks in Amazon, Tesla and insurance firms after she was elected, according to financial disclosure forms.

In return, Hinson criticized Turek for missing over half of his state Legislature floor votes, and labeled him an “anti-ag” activist.

Israeli settlers have stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem again and performed Jewish prayers in the courtyard.

The weekend witnessed a series of provocative acts by Israeli politicians and settlers in the build-up to Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, and next month’s Israeli election.

On Thursday, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and others again stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound for Yom Kippur. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also visited a labyrinth of tunnels below occupied East Jerusalem on Saturday.

Early on Sunday morning, Netanyahu released videos and photographs on his official Instagram account documenting his participation in Jewish “Selichot” prayers at the Western Wall, known as the al-Buraq Wall to Muslims.

The tunnels lie underneath occupied East Jerusalem’s bustling Old City and the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, making the incursions particularly sensitive for the occupied territory’s Palestinian population.

Translation: Happy New Year and a good final signature to all Israelis from the Western Wall.

Under the protection of security forces, Netanyahu, accompanied by several government ministers and thousands of Israeli settlers, made his way onto the plaza of the wall in occupied East Jerusalem on Saturday evening, ahead of Yom Kippur.

Footage shared by the prime minister showed him performing the rituals from behind bulletproof glass. In another video, Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, passed through one of the excavation tunnels running beneath the Western Wall while Jewish prayers took place.

“Well, we are in the tunnels at the al-Buraq Wall. It is moving to touch the rock of our existence. We are here very close to the Holy of Holies. We are here, and we will always remain here,” Netanyahu stated in the video.

Translation: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife in prayer for the safety of Israeli soldiers tonight at the Western Wall.

Yom Kippur incursions

The prime minister’s subterranean visit unfolded alongside a wave of settler incursions into the holy site above ground.

On its official Facebook page, the Palestinian Jerusalem governorate reported that about 570 settlers had stormed the courtyards of the Al-Aqsa Mosque by 10am local time on Sunday. According to the governorate, the settlers performed Talmudic rituals and “epic prostrations” to mark Yom Kippur.

The Palestinian group Hamas strongly condemned the incursions in a press statement published on its official Telegram channel.

“The storming by Benjamin Netanyahu, against whom an arrest warrant has been issued by the International Criminal Court, of the tunnels and excavations beneath the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and the al-Buraq Wall, and the provocative statements and false claims accompanying it about the so-called Holy of Holies, represents a blatant attack on the identity of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and its status, and a provocation to the feelings of our Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nations,” the statement in Arabic said.

The group emphasised Al-Aqsa’s exclusively Islamic heritage and rejected Israel’s ongoing excavations under the holy site.

Religious or political?

Israel has been digging beneath occupied East Jerusalem for years, a move that has been condemned by archaeologists and the United Nations. The works are believed to be intended to find proof of the rampart wall of the Second Temple, but experts say there is no proof of this claim. Others view these measures as an attempt by Israel to cement its rule over occupied Palestinian land.

In 2022, Netanyahu led a cabinet meeting in the labyrinth, describing Israel as the “landlords of Jerusalem”. East Jerusalem has been earmarked as the capital of a future Palestinian state by Palestinians.

The timing of Saturday’s visit not only comes on the eve of Yom Kippur but also at a time of huge political significance for the Israeli leader, who trails in the polls against his rival Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar party.

Ahmed al-Hila, a political analyst specialising in Middle East affairs and the Arab-Israeli conflict, told Al Jazeera that Netanyahu is using religious symbolism to try to secure his political survival ahead of October’s general election.

“Benjamin Netanyahu wanted, through this visit … creating this symbolism for himself as a leader spearheading the right wing to consolidate the Israeli political and religious narrative in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, to attempt to gather the largest possible number of votes to serve as an electoral lever for him,” said al-Hila.

“As for the intense security mobilisation and Benjamin Netanyahu’s appearance behind a bulletproof glass shield [during a speech above ground], this is a direct indication that this city has not, up to this moment, submitted to Israeli security control, despite the repeated and frequent talk that Jerusalem is ‘the capital of the State of Israel’.”

The visit could also be a message to the wider world, amid global criticism of the controversial illegal settlement project E1, which the Israeli government has issued tenders for, and which appears designed to sever East Jerusalem from the occupied West Bank.

“What further confirms this conclusion is that initiating the settlement project called E1 does not only isolate the northern West Bank from its south … but this settlement project completes the isolation of the city of Jerusalem from its Palestinian surroundings,” Al-Hila said. “Therefore, this visit with its political symbolism confirms the idea of Israeli sovereignty over the city of Jerusalem.”

Iran’s security chief Mohsen Rezaei has laid out Tehran’s latest set of conditions to end its war with the United States.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera on Saturday, Rezaei said that Tehran has conveyed its conditions to the US via Qatari mediators, but added that Tehran was more battle-hardened now than in the first 40 days of the war, which began in late February following joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran.

“We will confront America with greater force, and with more numerous and more painful strikes,” said Rezaei.

While full-scale fighting has been paused for months, the two sides are nowhere close to peace. A June 17 memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the US and Iran expired last month. Since then, attacks have risen, especially in and around the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively closed, while the US maintains a blockade of Iran’s southern ports.

The escalating attacks on oil tankers attempting to pass through the strait and the effective Houthi control of the Red Sea route, which Saudi Arabia used to export oil, have caused oil prices to cross the $100 mark in recent weeks.

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, described Rezaei’s remarks as part of the “two-sided, twofold message” Iran has maintained throughout the conflict – combining openness to diplomacy with continued preparations for war”.

So what are Iran’s latest conditions, and do they differ from the June MoU?

What are the Iranian conditions to end the war?

Here is what Rezaei told Al Jazeera:

• An end to the war on all fronts, including, in particular, Lebanon.
• The release of its frozen funds that run into billions of US dollars.
• An end to the naval blockade on Iranian ports.
• An end to US interference in Iran’s internal affairs.
• An end to US cooperation with “the opponents of our revolution”.
• An end to all US attacks on Iranian territory.

“It is in Washington’s interest to accept these conditions. Trump’s threats will not achieve any results. We are prepared for a decisive war,” said the security chief.

On Sunday morning, Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf reiterated Tehran’s stance on the Strait of Hormuz, saying the critical waterway will remain closed until the US fulfils its commitments.

“Until these conditions are met, the legitimate rights of the Iranian nation are recognised, and American commitments are fulfilled, there will be no opening for a return to the previous state of negotiations or for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz,” said Ghalibaf.

What is different to the June MoU?

Iran’s latest set of conditions bears similarities to its demands under the MoU deal signed in June. That agreement also included an end to the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon; respect for each side’s sovereignty and not meddling in internal affairs; an end to the naval blockade by both sides; and the release of Iran’s frozen funds.

The MoU also called for a $300bn US-backed reconstruction plan, while the two sides also agreed that Iran would not procure or develop nuclear weapons and that Tehran would open the Strait of Hormuz for the safe passage of vessels.

It also required the US to issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil and other services, no new sanctions on Iran, and no deployment of additional US forces in the region.

In the interview, Rezaei did not mention war reparations from the US as Tehran has been demanding previously.

While there is little genuinely new in the substance of Iranian demands, what has changed is the timing and the channel through which it was delivered, said Adel Abdel Ghafar, a senior fellow focusing on the Middle East at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

“With the Islamabad MoU dead and … Rezaei delivering the conditions through Qatar, Iran is putting the onus back on Washington and doing it publicly, for maximum effect,” Abdel Ghafar told Al Jazeera.

Both sides are in a stalemate, he explained, with the US able to sustain the naval blockade and hold air superiority but unable to compel capitulation from Iran.

Iran, meanwhile, cannot break the blockade but “keeps enough asymmetric leverage to make things difficult for everyone”, he said.

“Basically Iran is betting [on the] war’s unpopularity and [that the] US midterms [will] shift things in its favour, so it’s going public with demands and putting the ball in Trump’s court.”

Rezaei, in his interview with Al Jazeera, rejected the US accusation that Tehran violated the MoU by striking an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, stating that Iran’s actions came only after US attacks on Bandar Abbas and an Iranian surveillance platform there.

He said any agreement, including the MoU, required recourse to a dispute-resolution committee agreed between Ghalibaf, Iran’s chief negotiator, and US Vice President JD Vance, which Washington unilaterally withdrew from.

What did Rezaei say on Iran’s nuclear progamme, Yemen and others?

On the nuclear programme, Rezaei said Iran could have withdrawn from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty following attacks by the US and Israel – something that Tehran would not rule out in the future.

“We were indeed threatened, but we have not withdrawn from the treaty to this day,” he said.

For now, however, the country continues to abide by a fatwa (decree) from the former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei prohibiting nuclear weapons, said the security chief.

“But we do not know what will happen in the future,” he said, citing further sanctions or a UN Security Council referral of Iran’s nuclear file as potential future pressure.

On the intensifying war in Yemen, Rezaei denied any Iranian involvement, adding that it could offer mediation between the warring sides. He also said Tehran was not exploiting the conflict “for its own political ends”.

“We are fully prepared to help achieve peace between Yemen and Saudi Arabia,” said Rezaei.

The security chief also dismissed speculation, including inside Iran, that it could close the Bab al-Mandeb Strait to pressure global energy markets, stating the waterway “is a Yemeni matter” relating to the Houthi movement, not Iran.

On the Strait of Hormuz, Rezaei said Tehran came within “a short step” of announcing a deal with Oman to manage it, but it may require regional endorsement before being made public.

What has been the US response?

The US has not yet responded to Iran’s new conditions. Rezaei said Iran is “waiting for the Americans to accept and implement” them.

The US did, however, on Saturday warn its citizens in Iraq, Bahrain, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, Lebanon, Kuwait and Jordan to exercise “heightened vigilance”, stating that “the security environment remains complex with the potential for unforeseen escalation”.

US President Donald Trump also cut his weekend short from his trip to Camp David, returning to Washington, DC on Saturday from the secluded presidential complex in rural Maryland, the White House said. No explanation was given for the early return, which comes as fighting between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis has escalated.

According to Rob Geist Pinfold, a lecturer at King’s College London, Trump may take Iran’s memo seriously – in an effort to end the war before the US midterm elections in November.

“Trump very much wants a deal to wind up the war before the midterms,” Pinfold told Al Jazeera.

“The US’s Gulf allies will also likely push for a renewal of talks. But it doesn’t mean there still aren’t significant substantive gaps between the parties, which make a comprehensive deal unlikely anytime soon.”

David Des Roches, a former Pentagon director of Arabian Peninsula affairs, however, told Al Jazeera that Washington was unlikely to see Iran’s terms as a serious opening.

“At first glance, probably not serious; they would be viewed as surrender,” Des Roches said.

But he pointed to Iran’s apparent abandonment of war reparations as a sign of movement.

HOLLY Willoughby has given fans a rare glimpse inside her marriage to Dan Baldwin as they packed on the PDA in the trailer for her next YouTube show episode.

The couple shared a sweet kiss during his cameo on Holly Willoughby Together while she got glammed up for the National Television Awards.

In the video, Holly could be seen fresh out of the shower in her robe, ready for her hair and makeup team.

“I could fall asleep sitting here, literally that’s what I was thinking” admitted Holly as her crew set to work.

Later, Dan walked onto the set suited and booted and Holly gushed: “Hi, you look very handsome.”

Dapper Dan then leaned in and gave Holly a sweet kiss on the lips.

Read more on Holly Willoughby

HOL’S BACK

Holly Willoughby makes comeback at NTAs 3 years after being booed by audience

cheeky lady

Holly Willoughby make joke about her ‘bangers’ amid YouTube show criticism

“Awwww,” said her crew before Holly’s makeup artist made it clear Dan wasn’t allowed to kiss her cheeks as it could ruin her glam.

Taking the stern warning in his stride, Dan replied: “Alright Patsy.”

He told a beaming Holly: “I’ll see you later.”

She said: “I’ll see you later, when I’m on stage.”

“Bye everyone,” waved TV producer Dan as he disappeared out the door following his very short cameo.

In another scene, Holly was seen telling her crew that she had to be strict with pre-drinking before appearing on telly.

She said: “I can’t have a Buzz Ball and go on stage at the NTAs… I’ll stick two down my top for emergencies.”

The next episode of Holly’s show is a ‘Get Ready With Me,’ which sees the legendary presenter chat everything getting glam.

Holly said: “So last night when I got the dress sorted from Danielle, I messaged the girls the picture.

Showing the camera a picture of her makeup inspiration, Holly continued: “And so I was looking and I thought with that dress being black, I wanted to do a tiny flick but a smudgy one [for her makeup].

“It’s almost like it’s been wiped… wide winged.”

One of Holly’s team questioned: “Aren’t they sanitary products, wide wings?”

At the end of the trailer, Holly revealed her bedazzled black dress, Hollywood-style bouncy curls and flawless makeup look.

Holly launched her YouTube series Together on July 28 2026, following her previous role presenting Netflix’s Celebrity Bear Hunt in 2025.

Her new show is produced by Hungry Bear Media, which was co-founded by her husband, Dan.

SYDNEY Sweeney bounced in a little white bralette and underwear – while launching the latest Syrn campaign.

The Euphoria and White Lotus actress, 28, launched lingerie brand Syrn in January 2026.

On Instagram, Syrn’s account posted a clip of Sydney showing off her incredible physique as she modelled some of its clothing range.

The caption read: “Comfy, cozy and layered for extra support.

“Syd’s look: Top: Tit for Tat Triangle Bralette layered with the Lowdown Cami.

Read more on Sydney Sweeney

SILLY SYDNEY

Sydney Sweeney pops out of bra then smacks her model pal’s butt in Syrn pics

SYD SCORES

Sydney Sweeney shows off her ball skills as she drops sexiest naked shoot EVER

One person commented: “I want this outfit.”

Another penned: “So adorable but I know I won’t look like this.”

It comes as Sydney previously spilled out of an incredibly sexy Syrn bra while licking cake off her fingers – ahead of her 29th birthday.

The star, who is turning 29 on September 12, showcased a black bra, thong and garters that she designed for her lingerie brand.

One person commented: “I LOVE YOU I LOVE YOU.”

Another added: “Prettiest girl and most beautiful lingerie.”

A NEW teaser video from Oasis ‘confirms’ an upcoming tour location – with a subtle nod to a moment that happened around the group’s original split.

The legendary rock band – led by brothers Liam Gallagher and Noel Gallagher – reformed in 2024 after breaking up in 2009.

It saw the pair overcome their 15-year feud as they embarked on a reunion tour in summer 2025.

The band have now posted a cryptic clip online, with fans certain they sussed out an upcoming tour location.

Fans were convinced the clip hinted at a France tour date – with references to “Rock en Seine” and “Au Marché” visible.

One person commented: “A French date for next year’s tour I see! Possibly for the 7th of July?? Interesting…”

BACK IN ANGER

Oasis shock as secret recordings to be released by ex employee for huge sum

FERRY NICE

Oasis tease another huge gig with cryptic post that throws back to chaotic tour

Another added: “Hey Oasis, you owe me a gig in Paris!!! I was there that night in 2009. F*****g night. So VIVE LA FRANCE!!”

In addition to this, the video also includes a reference to an infamous moment in Oasis history.

A viewer remarked: “Please tell me that was a plum he threw. Genius.”

While a second person said: “OMG ITS LIAM THROWING A PLUM AT NOEL !!!!!”

In the clip, a man wearing a leather jacket took out a plum from a paper bag and began eating it.

Soon after this, he lobbed the plum away somewhere off camera, into the distance.

It references Noel previously telling how – during a heated 2009 argument at the Rock en Seine Festival in Paris the time of his Oasis departure – Liam threw a plum at him.

In 2011, he said at a press conference for solo album Noel Gallagher’s High Flying Birds: “He storms out of the dressing room and on the way out, he picked up a plum and threw it across the dressing room and it smashes against the wall.”

Noel added: “Part of me wishes it did end like that – “plum throws plum.”

Reading scores among 15-year-olds in the United States have fallen to the lowest level in about 25 years, according to an international education assessment.

On Tuesday, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) released findings from the 2025 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a global metric for educational achievement.

The results showed that US reading scores fell 14 points from 2022, the last time PISA results were released.

The decline was part of a broader international trend, with an OECD average from 23 countries also dropping 16 points.

But the US stood out for the size of its performance gap. Some 25.7 percent of US students were ranked as low performers in reading, while 13.3 percent were flagged as top performers.

“Looking across all 90 participating countries, there was not a single country with significantly wider inequality in reading scores than the US,” Michael Kieffer, a professor of literacy education at New York University, told Al Jazeera. “What is clear is that we are under-serving many students.”

The PISA results come as the administration of US President Donald Trump seeks to reshape the federal government’s role in education.

In March 2025, Trump issued an executive order calling on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of dismantling the Department of Education, a federal agency that tracks student achievement, distributes federal education funds and enforces civil rights in schools.

The Education Department, however, does not establish school curriculums or academic standards. That responsibility has traditionally fallen to state and local authorities.

Still, Trump pointed to slipping test scores as a reason to shutter the department. He has also denounced the department for its “entrenched bureaucracy” and called for its responsibilities to be redistributed to the states.

In response to a request for comment on Tuesday, McMahon sent a statement to Al Jazeera echoing Trump’s push.

“The United States of America is a nation built to lead the world, yet our one-size-fits-all federal education bureaucracy has shortchanged our children and stifled our future,” McMahon wrote.

The White House has argued that federal education spending is excessive and has failed to translate into higher standardised test scores.

Since the Education Department was founded in 1979, it has spent more than $3 trillion, according to the White House.

“This moment is a stress test for our nation’s future,” McMahon said in her statement to Al Jazeera. “To pass it, we must enact a hard reset that stops protecting a failed status quo and instead builds a system that empowers state leaders and embraces innovative learning options through school choice.”

“School choice” has been a rallying cry for many US conservatives. The term refers to the practice of diverting taxpayer money away from public education to help parents finance alternative choices for their child’s schooling, like charter schools, homeschooling or private institutions.

The practice is controversial. Critics have accused the “school choice” system of weakening public education in favour of less regulated school systems that receive money with little oversight.

But since returning to office in 2025, Trump has embraced “school choice” as a form of “educational freedom”.

Last year, the Education Department announced $500m for its Charter School Program, touting the funds as the “largest investment” the initiative has ever received.

The money was earmarked to allow states to expand their charter school systems and fund new charter-school developers.

In July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act – Trump’s signature piece of legislation – also created the first federal tax credit for donations to organisations that provide scholarships for primary and secondary school students, including for private-school tuition and tutoring.

Last month, Trump hosted a “school choice”-themed event at the White House to kick off the start of the new school year.

But critics warn that greater investment in education is needed across the board to reverse diminishing test scores.

“PISA 2025 shows that reversing declines in student performance is urgent,” OECD Secretary-General Mathias Cormann said in a statement.

“The most successful education systems focus on fewer areas in greater depth, invest in teachers, engage parents and provide targeted support for the students and schools that need it the most.”

Muslims are embroiled in yet another war, but this one isn’t in the Middle East, Southeast Asia or another predominantly Islamic region.

The battleground is Michigan. New York. Minnesota. Or anywhere else in the U.S. where a politician with a name like Abdul El-Sayed, Zohran Mamdani or Ilhan Omar have run for office — and won.

Today’s primary target is Michigan Democratic U.S. Senate candidate El-Sayed. Since his victory in August, the right’s main strategy to beat him this fall is a familiar one: paint El-Sayed, the Muslim son of Egyptian immigrants, as an anti-American extremist.

Vice President JD Vance recently told a crowd that “there’s something about Abdul El-Sayed that is very, very evil,” suggesting that Democratic nominee represents a divisive ideology. Representative Nancy Mace warned of a larger problem when she said that “every single Muslim holding public office in America” is “a threat to both national security and our republic.” Senator Tommy Tuberville flat-out called El-Sayed a “terrorist.”

“The message is that these candidates are a civilizational threat that is going to destroy American society and Western civilization from within,” says Salam Al-Marayati, president and co-founder of the non-profit Muslim Public Affairs Council. “You saw that a lot when Mamdani was elected.”

And given that he was elected, the Islamophobia playbook may need an overhaul.

New York City Mayor Mamdani and El-Sayed are among the more than 255 Muslim elected officials serving across 26 states and at nearly every level of government, according to the Council on American-Islamic Relations. That number includes a historical high of four Muslim Americans in Congress.

But as their political power has grown, so too has the bigoted rhetoric about the dangers of electing a Muslim to office. But now, there’s pushback.

CBS News, now under the leadership of conservative editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss, caught flack this week for publishing a story with the headline: “Michigan Democrat Abdul El-Sayed’s deleted tweets on Sept. 11 attacks invite scrutiny of past remarks.”

Criticisms of the piece were immediate, including commentary in The Atlantic that called the story a political dog whistle for using a tenuous connection to align El-Sayed’s name with the phrase “9/11 attacks.”

The pandemic-era posts from El-Sayed did not celebrate the tragedy or the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks. He instead compared the nearly 3,000 people killed in the September 11 attacks to the growing COVID-19 death toll in the U.S., and called for a strong response against the virus as there was to the 9/11 attacks. In the second tweet, El-Sayed wrote that more Americans had died from COVID than in the 9/11 attacks, so he hoped “that means we’ll spend the next ten years fighting a war for public health & against poverty … like we launched a global #WaronTerror after 9/11. We could save lives rather than take them.”

Hardly the smoking gun that puts him in an Afghan cave, scheming with bin Laden.

The tweets were deleted along with all of Al-Sayed’s other posts dated before July 2023. His campaign said he did so to prevent “old posts from being taken out of context.” Oh the irony.

Similar tactics were used against Mamdani in his run for mayor. After a particularly rousing speech leading up to his 2025 win, the New York Times noted that “…Republican elected officials and right-wing media figures [are] accusing him of promoting Islamic law, supporting terrorism and posing a threat to the safety of New Yorkers, especially Jews.”

Before Mamdani, Somali-American Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) was the subject of “Send her back” chants at Trump rallies. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) publicly referred to Omar as a member of the “Jihad Squad.”

Nevertheless, Omar became the first African refugee to become a Member of Congress when she assumed office in January of 2019.

“What we have found out from previous elections is that candidates like Abdul Sayed are speaking to the masses,” says Al-Marayati. “They’re not speaking to the Democratic and Republican establishment who believe in this hierarchical structure where you only have a few in control, whether it’s corporate influence or lobbies or a certain race and religion that that are on top and the rest of us are merely visitors who should just be thankful for getting the crumbs from the economy. [El-Sayed and Mamdani] are returning to the vision of a pluralistic democracy.”

The latest efforts to derail El-Sayed’s campaign include weaponizing his association with leftist Twitch streamer Hasan Piker. Piker, who earlier this year appeared on the campaign trail with El-Sayed, is a major influence among progressives and a bogeyman to establishment Republicans and Democrats alike. The right can’t stop talking about his sharp criticisms of MAGA leadership, disdain for US foreign policy, and his pro-Palestinian stance. The left is terrified of being associated with Piker.

Now the candidate is pressed daily to answer for things said by Piker’ stretching as far back as 2019, when the influencer commented that “America deserved 9/11” (a quote that was incorrectly attributed to El-Sayed). El-Sayed has denounced the statement as “stupid,” and Piker has walked back his words.

But the unyielding scrutiny over dubious associations doesn’t cut both ways. Relative to El-Sayed, there’s been little inquiry of Michigan’s Republican U.S. Senate candidate, Mike Rogers, and his close ties with Pastor Lorenzo Sewell. A member of Roger’s faith advisory team, Sewell in August co-organized and led a “Christian Crusader March” and anti-Islam protest in Dearborn, MI alongside far-right activist and January 6 pardoned defendant Jake Lang.

Campaigns that leverage hate and fear against Muslim candidates and elected officials are nothing new, but they appear to be less effective with each passing election season. It’s possible more and more voters see through the prejudiced subterfuge, but it’s more likely that folks simply need a change.

“The real threat that Abdul Sayed represents is that he is knocking down that hierarchical structure, and that’s why you have the attacks on him of being a radical, being a terror sympathizer, being a threat to civilization,” says Al-Marayati. “When Thomas Jefferson was drafting the Charter on Religious Freedom, he included Muslims, and even he was accused of being a Muslim. So you’ve had this problem for a long time. Abdul Sayed’s affiliation with Thomas Jefferson is a badge of honor.”

WASHINGTON — Confronted by an intransigent Iranian government that has refused to back down in the face of a massive military campaign, President Trump appears to have settled on a dual-prong approach that combines economic pressure with the potential of a devastating escalation in force.

Having launched “Operation Economic Outcast” just last week to try to isolate Iran from its remaining global trade partners, the Trump administration also resumed strikes in recent days, prompting Iranian retaliation that has renewed concerns of an all-out regional war.

However, the combination of already intense sanctions on Iran and an off-and-on bombing campaign since the war began more than six months ago has not bowed the Iranian leadership and has left the administration struggling to find a way to wind down the conflict. Tehran has dug in its heels — to Trump’s frustration — as energy prices rise, the global economy roils and poll numbers on the administration’s handling of the war dip ahead of November’s midterm congressional elections.

Trump said Wednesday that he didn’t think the conflict would last “much longer,” but he again shrugged off suggestions that its unpopularity and high gasoline prices resulting from Iran’s chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz would affect the elections for Republicans.

“It doesn’t matter. And I’m not affected by the election,” he told reporters. “I’m not running. But my party is running, and I’m going to help my party. But I think my party respects the fact that we’re not allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

A regional diplomat briefed on the matter described the current impasse between Tehran and Washington as reflective of both countries’ domestic priorities: the midterm elections for Trump and Republicans and the internal crises within Iran.

Domestic issues are critical reasons why neither side is willing to blink first, said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations.

The diplomat said negotiations, including those between Iran and Oman or even Iran and the U.S., will not go anywhere without addressing the initial catalyst of war: Israel. And the diplomat was skeptical of the Trump administration’s new sanctions plan, saying the threats require more explanation than what the U.S. has provided so far.

The Trump administration’s economic isolation of Iran is off to a slow start

The administration’s new push for Iran’s economic isolation was announced with great fanfare last week and a dire warning for all remaining countries to cut off financial and trade ties with Iran or face U.S. retaliation — but the campaign so far has fallen flat.

Just one branch of an Egyptian bank in the United Arab Emirates has been targeted so far. For actual sanctions to bite, experts agree that they must apply to Iran’s main trading partners: mainly China but also India and Russia. But Trump is loath to target China especially as he is preparing to host President Xi Jinping later this month.

Trump also insists that the U.S. has control over the Strait of Hormuz, where one-fifth of the world’s oil transited before the war began. The strategic waterway has been a key pressure point for Iran, and reopening it fully has become one of the prime goals for the U.S. administration.

Ship traffic through the strait is well below pre-war levels due to the risk of attack if vessels don’t comply with an Iranian vetting regime near its coastline, which is in sharp contrast to the unhindered navigation before the war. There were 102 transits last week and 126 the week before, according to shipping data company Lloyd’s List Intelligence, compared with 130 or more per day before the war.

“As President Trump said, the strait is open and all mines have been cleared,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said Thursday. “The naval blockade remains in full force and effect, and Operation Economic Outcast is underway to sever every remaining economic lifeline sustaining the regime.”

The White House has repeatedly touted the economic impact that the sanctions have had on Iran, citing its rampant inflation and the massive loss in the value of its currency. U.S. officials have described Iran’s financial system as “one big house of cards.”

Going forward, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said “the price” Iran will pay will be primarily economic, “but we reserve the right … to take military action when necessary — not just to protect ourselves but to prevent them from being able to threaten others as well.”

“They’re going to continue to feel the squeeze,” he told Fox News host Brian Kilmeade in an interview that aired Wednesday.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent this week likened Iran to a snake that has been decapitated but whose body is still writhing.

“We are burying the head of the Iranian snake,” he said Tuesday. “The snake doesn’t know it’s dead yet, but it will stop wiggling when the sun goes down. And so the Iranian regime — they are in demise, and they will figure it out.”

Combining military force and sanctions on Iran ‘is the only option,’ one analyst says

Complicating things for the U.S., Iran’s leadership has shown signs of divisions between moderates more open to a diplomatic solution and hardliners who want to press ahead with a more confrontational approach.

President Masoud Pezeshkian is one of the most prominent voices still calling for a negotiated solution. But the hardliners appear to have gained the upper hand, and Iran shows no sign of backing down. Tehran continues to lash out at U.S. interests and allies around the region in response to military strikes.

“This kind of a hybrid approach — the combination of military force, blockade and economic pressure — that is the only option that seems to be available to the United States at this moment,” said Hamidreza Azizi, consulting senior Iran analyst for the International Crisis Group.

Still, he said, “it’s been for a long time, but now maybe more than ever, a battle of endurance between the two sides.”

Amr Hamzawy, director of the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, pointed to two main reasons for the deteriorating situation.

“One, none of the two parties is satisfied with the outcome — meaning that the current situation does not serve U.S. interests well, and it does not serve Iranian interests well,” Hamzawy said.

The other reason is how leaders from both sides are perceived at home.

“The Trump administration is afraid of being portrayed in the U.S. as an administration that failed to end a military campaign successfully, and that’s going to impact the midterm elections,” he said. “And the Iranians, especially the Revolutionary Guard, are quite afraid of appearing as if they are submitting to U.S. sanctions with no actions on their side, which might hurt them domestically.”

Lee, Magdy and Amiri write for the Associated Press. Magdy reported from Cairo. AP writers Will Weissert in Washington and David McHugh in Frankfurt, Germany, contributed to this report.

Sept. 2 (UPI) — A federal judge on Wednesday blocked U.S. President Donald Trump‘s latest attempt at limiting birthright citizenship, saying Trump’s order “is almost certainly unconstitutional.”

Trump signed two executive orders related to the topic on Aug. 6, about a month after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his earlier order banning birthright citizenship.

One of the August orders expanded the list of non-citizens whose children would not be granted citizenship automatically. These categories include children of whom either parent is “an alien enemy” or “a foreign government employee.”

The other would ban so-called birth tourism, which is when a traveler enters another country specifically to give birth there for citizenship reasons – a practice that is already illegal.

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman said in Wednesday’s ruling that the August executive orders are likely unconstitutional “for the simple reason that the Supreme Court … already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth” in its June ruling.

“This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President’s most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them,” Boardman wrote.

Birthright citizenship stems from the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

In its June decision, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 against Trump’s original executive order, which sought to end birthright citizenship for any children born to parents who are not U.S. citizens.

Chief Justice John Roberts said there was “scant evidence” for Trump’s interpretation of the principles of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War to protect the rights ofthe formerly enslaved.

“Citizenship then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community,” Roberts wrote. “… We keep that promise today.”

Trump said the Supreme Court ruling “was too bad for our Country” and called on Congress to pass legislation against birthright citizenship.

The ruling follows a 6-3 decision from the Supreme Court that found Trump’s effort to limit birthright citizenship was illegal.

A United States federal judge in Maryland has blocked President Donald Trump’s latest effort to roll back birthright citizenship, after the Supreme Court ruled that his last attempt violated the Constitution.

District Judge Deborah Boardman issued a preliminary injunction on Wednesday against Trump’s new executive order, which was issued on August 6.

The new order took aim at what Trump has called “birth tourism”, the practice of intentionally giving birth on foreign soil.

It sought to deny citizenship to children of foreign nationals in certain groups, including those accused of engaging in a commercial transaction to obtain citizenship or classified as an “alien enemy”.

Boardman, however, said the order was unconstitutional for the same reason Trump’s previous effort failed. She cited the Supreme Court’s June decision in the case Barbara v Trump.

The order “is almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class for the simple reason that the Supreme Court in Barbara already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth”, she wrote.

“This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President’s most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them.”

In the Barbara case, the Supreme Court ruled six to three that birthright citizenship was protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.

Birthright citizenship confers automatic citizenship on anyone born in the US, outside of a handful of narrow exceptions, such as the children of diplomats or invading armies.

The constitutional basis for birthright citizenship has been upheld in several Supreme Court cases over the years, most notably in US v Wong Kim Ark, the case of an American man born to Chinese parents.

But Trump campaigned for a second term as president on the pledge to crack down on immigration into the country.

One of his promises was to reform the concept of birthright citizenship. Trump and his allies have argued that children of temporary or undocumented immigrants do not qualify for the right, as they are not under the “jurisdiction” of the US.

Since the Supreme Court defeat in June, Trump and his allies have continued to probe for ways to challenge the constitutional protections for birthright citizenship.

Wednesday’s legal challenge was brought by immigrant rights advocates and families, including groups like the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project.

They had previously won an injunction from Boardman last year, blocking the Trump administration from enforcing his initial executive order about birthright citizenship.

Last week, Boardman instructed the plaintiffs to revise their complaint to specifically address the second executive order, rather than relying on the same material used for the first.

But she signalled scepticism at the time about the constitutionality of Trump’s latest attempt, calling it “unprecedented”.

“The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are ‘citizens at birth’,” she wrote in Wednesday’s decision.

Johnstone, who won the last of his four England caps in 2023, made 17 appearances last season but lost his starting place at relegated Wolves in December and has not played since an FA Cup loss to Liverpool in early March.

“I’m buzzing to be here and I’m excited to get going,” said the goalkeeper, who began his career at Manchester United and has had spells at Aston Villa, West Bromwich Albion and Crystal Palce.

“I didn’t need convincing by anyone, but Joe Hart rang me the other day just to reiterate what a place this is, what a great group of lads and how the fans are unbelievable.

“You hear about the size of the club, but just being here for a day, you notice how big the club is. And the pressure to win, which is what I like – pressure to win, pressure to perform and we all want to win trophies.”

Kasper Schmeichel had been first choice at Celtic since the summer of 2024, but played his last game in February and subsequently retired due to a shoulder injury.

Manager Martin O’Neill said Johnstone would be “a very good addition” and that Mheuka has “great quality”.

O’Neill also said new left-back Emenalo “has many attributes which I think can benefit us”, adding he is “very quick on the ball and, while he can defend, he certainly gets up the pitch into attacking positions too.”

Meanwhile, Raskin has been consistently linked with a move away from Glasgow after impressing during the World Cup, but Besiktas’ offer was rejected.

The 25-year-old has missed Rangers’ past two matches amid transfer speculation, but manager Derek McInnes insisted Raskin has been “good as gold” during that period.

“Until an offer comes in that the club need to consider, Nico just has to knuckle down and train,” McInnes said earlier this week.

“I’ve no doubts that, if the window closes and Nico’s still a Rangers player, he’ll give brilliant service as he’s done previously.

“He’s getting interest because he’s a good player. I want to work with good players. We just needs to wait and see how things develop.”