politics

Russian President Vladimir Putin has cast the vote as a test of support for his ongoing war in Ukraine.

Polls have closed in Russia’s first wartime parliamentary elections, with the ruling United Russia party on course to win the tightly controlled vote.

The Kremlin wants the elections, the first parliamentary vote since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, to showcase popular support for the war and legitimise its action.

Russian government officials accused Ukraine of trying to disrupt voting after Kyiv launched hundreds of drones at Moscow and other regions in what the TASS state news agency said was the biggest attack of its kind since the war began.

The drone strikes on Sunday killed at least three people in the Moscow region and two more in the Russian-held part of Ukraine’s Kherson region, including an election official, according to the region’s governor and the election commission.

Russian authorities also reported attacks on the country’s electronic voting systems and communication lines during the polls, but said the electoral process was mostly smooth.

Initial results showed the United Russia party comfortably ahead, and Russia’s Central Election Commission said turnout at the close of polls stood at 56.66 percent.

The first official results and turnout are expected on Monday morning.

Voting in Russian-held Ukrainian areas

The vote, which began on Friday for 111 million eligible voters, included residents of four Ukrainian regions that Moscow illegally annexed after the war began, but still doesn’t fully control, as well as those in Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula that was illegally annexed by Russia in 2014.

Authorities in Kyiv denounced the voting in the Russian-held areas as illegal and urged foreign governments not to recognise the result. The European Union on Friday called the action a “blatant violation of international law”.

Voters cast two separate ballots, filling half of the lower house’s 450 seats by selecting political parties listed on the ballot. The rest are contested in single-seat constituencies, with voters choosing individual candidates.

The main Kremlin party, United Russia, is widely expected to retain its overwhelming control of the State Duma. Several smaller parties of the “systemic opposition” that vote in sync with Putin’s views on all key issues are also expected to maintain their presence.

A massive state media campaign and tight control over the elections in the absence of genuine opposition all but assure the Kremlin will keep tight control of Russian politics amid mounting economic costs and increasing Ukrainian drone attacks deep inside the country.

The liberal Yabloko party, the only registered political entity that dared to publicly criticise the war, was removed from the ballot last month by Russia’s Supreme Court. It only has a few dozen candidates in the single-constituency races.

Additionally, some anti-war politicians were imprisoned or forced to flee abroad ahead of the campaign.

Russia didn’t invite election observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Russian Foreign Ministry has accused the body of “double standards” for its criticism of Russia.

Tensions flared on the eve of a critical week ahead for Paramount Skydance’s proposed $111-billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, amid new urgency for talks aimed at settling antitrust litigation brought by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and 11 other states.

Over the weekend, opposition intensified to a proposed settlement as details trickled out, including a proposal to establish a bipartisan editorial board to monitor cable news channel CNN, one of Warner’s premier properties that Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison would control along with CBS News.

It wasn’t clear Sunday whether a proposed settlement would require Warner to sell off assets — something Bonta repeatedly has insisted upon. Critics of the deal urged Bonta and other state attorneys general to resist pressure to reach a settlement that would allow Ellison’s deal to move forward.

“State Attorneys General, please hang tough against the giant proposed Paramount-Warner Brothers merger,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) wrote on social media late Saturday.

“Paramount, run by the Ellisons, should not own both CBS and CNN. California must not cave and take a deal that leaves both under the same owner,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) wrote.

Bonta and Ellison have made progress in the talks in recent days, according to four people familiar with the matter not authorized to speak publicly.

However, New York’s Letitia James and at least two other attorneys general who joined Bonta’s lawsuit in July privately have expressed reservations about the proposed compromises, believing they don’t go far enough to mitigate concerns about the power Paramount-Warner Bros. would wield over the film and TV industries should the merger go through, according to the people familiar with the matter.

James isn’t on board with Bonta’s proposed settlement, two of the people said. A potential split within Bonta’s coalition could be a setback because Bonta needs the other state attorneys general who joined his legal effort to sign off on any deal.

A spokesperson for Bonta did not respond Sunday to a request for comment.

Paramount maintains its deal to bring HBO, CNN, CBS, TBS, Comedy Central and two legendary film and television studios together would create a stronger company that could withstand the fierce competition from tech giants such as Apple, Netflix, Google (which owns YouTube) and Amazon. The two studios, on their own, would not be strong enough on their own to remain viable in the streaming age, the company has said.

On Thursday, Paramount lawyers plan to demand that U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín in Oakland require the states and the Writers Guild of America to post a $1.88-billion bond that would cover some of Paramount’s delay-related deal costs should the company eventually prevail.

The states and the WGA, which also sued to block the merger, have balked at the request, which was designed by Paramount to create fissures within the coalition of states, which also include Minnesota, Oregon, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts.

Ellison wants the merger finalized by Oct. 1, when his company will be obligated to make a higher payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders. The company has threatened to move its Hollywood base from its historic Melrose Avenue lot to Tennessee or Texas should the antitrust battle stretch into October.

The prospective loss of an iconic California business — a century-old film studio that helped establish Hollywood — has rattled state and local politicians, who are fearful of losing more jobs at a time when Los Angeles film production levels already are at alarming lows.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and Xavier Becerra, the Democratic nominee for California governor, have publicly called on Bonta to settle the suit rather than prepare for a trial next spring. City Councilmember Nithya Raman, Bass’ opponent in the L.A. mayor race, has been one of few California politicians in support of Bonta’s fight.

In an opinion essay Sunday, a trio of 1st Amendment and antitrust experts dismissed Paramount’s threat to leave Los Angeles as a ploy that doesn’t make business sense.

“Ellison’s threat is empty, and the AG should call that out — not give into it,” the experts — Fiona Scott Morton, Gene Kimmelman and Norm Eisen — wrote in the Contrarian.

Both Morton, an economics professor at the Yale School of Management, and Kimmelman formerly served in the U.S. Justice Department during Democratic administrations. Eisen, founder of the group Democracy Defenders Action, is helping lead the Block the Merger campaign.

“Paramount [would be] sinking the cost of moving before it knows what businesses it owns and how best to combine and organize them — which makes expensive strategic mistakes inevitable,” the trio wrote. “A company that raises its own costs while leaving behind the most valuable labor in the industry does not threaten California; it threatens itself.”

The group noted Paramount, in its regulatory filings, still lists its Times Square offices in New York as its corporate headquarters — not its Melrose Avenue campus in Hollywood.

“There is also the possibility that Ellison is planning to move Paramount to Tennessee regardless of how the lawsuit resolves,” the group wrote.

Bonta and Paramount have discussed including in any settlement a condition that Paramount would keep its operations in California for a set period, according to people familiar with the proposal but not authorized to comment.

Merger opponents planned a Sunday evening rally outside Bonta’s offices in Oakland to encourage him to stand tough. The group plans subsequent demonstrations this week outside James’ office in New York City and the Paramount lot in Hollywood.

The jockeying comes as President Trump, who favors the Ellison takeover of CNN and Warner Bros., has sought to block several prominent news organizations, including CNN and Politico, from reporting from the White House.

“Trump just locked CNN out of the White House. Now his billionaire allies want to own it,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) added in a Sunday post. “State attorneys general: Don’t settle. Hold the line. Block this merger.”

The LA Times/SurveyMonkey poll set out to measure feelings about football and Super Bowl, both in the U.S. as a whole and in the Los Angeles region.

Each day, a huge range of organizations — schools, churches, bowling leagues, companies and more — use SurveyMonkey’s online platform to poll their members, customers or associates.

In total, more than 2 million people take SurveyMonkey polls on an average day, giving the company access to a broad cross-section of the American public.

To conduct surveys on questions of broad public interest, like this one, SurveyMonkey randomly selects some of those people and asks them if they’d be willing to take an additional online poll. Those who say yes get a survey to fill out.

As with traditional telephone surveys, the results then are weighted to match standard Census Bureau measures of the nation’s population — to make sure that the sample mirrors the nation’s distribution of age, race, gender, geography and education levels.

The result is a representative sample of the adult population.

In this case, the poll, which was developed jointly by SurveyMonkey and The Times, was conducted in English and Spanish from Feb. 1-7 among a national sample of 7,590 adults. The sample included 1,659 Californians and 743 people who live in Greater Los Angeles, which encompasses Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, San Bernardino and Riverside counties.

As with all polls, the results are subject to sampling error. For this survey, the modeled error estimates are 2 percentage points in either direction for the national sample, 3.5 percentage points for the statewide California sample and 5 percentage points for the Los Angeles metro area.

EDINBURG, Texas — Quinten Martinez, pumping gas under a hot south Texas sun, remembers a time when fueling up didn’t require difficult decisions.

“Is it going to be groceries this week?” said the 28-year-old Amazon delivery driver as he watched the numbers tick higher. “Is it gonna be getting gas in our tank to go to work?”

He shook his head when asked about President Trump’s assertion last week that higher gas prices are a small price to pay for the war with Iran.

“I don’t feel like it’s a good trade-off,” Martinez said. “I don’t feel like this is good for anyone.”

Voters across the country, and across the political spectrum, tend to agree.

Interviews with voters in several states, along with a fresh round of national polling, reveal an overwhelming sense of frustration that skyrocketing gas prices — a direct result of Trump’s war — are creating serious and sustained financial hardships for America’s working class.

The acute concerns are adding to a bad political environment that may be worsening for Trump and his Republican Party as early voting gets underway in the November midterm elections.

Historically, the party holding the White House has suffered major losses in midterms. About seven weeks before election day, Republican candidates at all levels are struggling with the additional burden of Trump’s weak approval ratings, an unpopular war and an affordability crisis that Trump and his congressional allies had promised to fix.

But when Trump campaigned in North Carolina on Wednesday, he played down the effect of surging gas prices.

“You have a little higher. It’s a very inexpensive price to pay for what we’ve done,” Trump said of the war, which he describes as necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. “Remember that. It’s a little more. Frankly, even if it was a lot more.”

‘Gas prices matter’

Despite what Trump says, there are few things that may matter more this election year than the price of a gallon of gasoline, according to political operatives in both parties.

Gas prices are moving sharply in the wrong direction at a time of year when drivers typically get some relief. The national average for a gallon of gas reached $4.48 on Friday, according to the American Automobile Assn., up roughly 17 cents over the last week, 40 cents in a month and $1.27 from a year ago.

“Gas prices matter because they’re one of the few economic indicators voters experience and see in real time,” said veteran Republican strategist Chris Wilson. “The price is literally staring them in the face several times a week. So I wouldn’t minimize the frustration we’re seeing, particularly among working- and middle-class voters.”

Interviews with voters last week found bipartisan frustration and disappointment.

Democrats and unaffiliated voters were especially motivated to punish Republicans at the ballot box for their economic hardship, while some of Trump’s working-class supporters pledged to support Republicans this fall, even if they weren’t happy with the president’s leadership on the economy.

Some Republicans say they’re disappointed

Dan Lloyd, who voted for Trump, lamented the president’s leadership as the 63-year-old carpenter paid $4.39 a gallon to fill up his pickup truck in Mesa, Ariz.

“He hurt himself stepping into this,” Lloyd said of Trump. “Where’s all this oil from Venezuela? I thought we were flush with gas and everything, but no. The American people eat it every time, whether it’s interest rates, food, gasoline.”

Still, he expects to vote Republican in the midterms.

“I think the Democratic Party has lost its way,” Lloyd said. “I just feel like the whole system’s on the verge of collapse.”

In sweltering Edinburg, Texas, 52-year-old Kristin Jimenez shrugged off the rising price of gas after filling up her Mercedes.

“We’ve paid the same price under Republican presidents, we’ve paid this price under Democrat presidents,” said Jimenez, a mother who runs a small business. She plans to vote for a Republican because they’re the “lesser of two evils.”

She said gas prices aren’t part of her calculation.

“We don’t mind paying $8 for a cup of coffee at Starbucks, but we have a problem paying four bucks at the pump?” she said. “Make it make sense.”

More than 1,500 miles to the north in central Michigan, 35-year-old Garth Johnson is trying to make ends meet running a deep-cleaning business with several gas-powered vehicles and one machine fueled by diesel, which was $6.79 a gallon as he filled up his SUV.

Johnson voted for Trump, but doesn’t know what he’s going to do in November. He said he doesn’t feel qualified to second-guess the president’s evaluation of the war, but he’s feeling financial pressure in his own life.

“I like a lot of the things he’s done,” Johnson said, but added, “I’m a little guy and I’ve got to live my life.”

Other voters are less forgiving

Midterm voting was already underway Friday in Virginia, where Alan Johnson said Trump seems to have “no empathy” for Americans who are struggling financially.

“With the gas prices being what they are and continuing to grow, we’ve got to do something. Hopefully the Democrats can get into office and turn the ship around,” said the 60-year-old engineer, who cast ballots in the morning for Democrats for the U.S. Senate and House.

In Raleigh, N.C., teacher Brittney Bivins sees surging gas prices as evidence that Trump and his Republican Party aren’t dealing with the issues that matter most to people like her.

“He really doesn’t care about everyday people,” the 45-year-old said. “He can afford the gas, but most of us can’t. So it feels like he’s not even connected to his own people.”

Bivins, who described herself as an independent, said she’s eager to support Democrats this fall — especially the party’s emerging democratic socialist wing.

At a gas station in Lansing, Mich., Rina Risper spent $50 on eight gallons of premium gas.

“When I rolled up I was in shock, actually, and said, well, maybe I should drink water instead of having that $4.99 bottle of whatever it was I was gonna get,” Risper said. She thinks Trump’s tariffs will make affordability even worse.

“We’re not in Miami. We’re in Lansing, Michigan,” she said. “It’s really going to impact our people.”

Polls reflect economic distress

Nationwide, more than three times as many voters say they are falling behind financially as getting ahead, according to a Fox News survey released Wednesday. By a 15-point margin, Democrats are considered the party that would better handle inflation and prices at a time when the cost of living and the economy are voters’ top concerns.

The Fox poll found that 61% of voters say gas prices are a major problem for their household, compared with 48% two years ago, while 52% say the same for healthcare costs, compared with 44% in 2024. Majorities also view housing costs and grocery prices as major problems, although neither has increased.

Overall, nearly two-thirds of voters (63%) say the administration has made the economy worse, compared with 52% in September 2025, including one-quarter of Republicans. Only 46% of Republicans say the administration has improved the economy, while about one-quarter don’t see an impact.

Back in rural south Texas, an area where Trump’s GOP made gains in recent elections, Martinez, the Amazon delivery driver, could not contain his frustration.

Trump “likes to tout that we are the best economy in the world,” said Martinez, but in rural towns, “you don’t see any of the winning, you don’t see any of the ups that he’s talking about.”

“You just see struggles for day-to-day life,” he said.

Peoples, Bedayn and Cooper write for the Associated Press. Peoples reported from New York and Cooper from Mesa. AP writers Allen G. Breed in Raleigh, Jacqueline GaNun in Lansing, Sarah Rankin in Richmond and Nicholas Riccardi in Mason, Mich., contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Sunday that the massive arch he wants to build between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery would become a “top grade military complex” able to host drones and snipers while storing ammunition.

It is one more example of how Trump is insisting that his initiatives to remake the White House and its environs are also serving a defensive purpose. Trump has been calling the new White House ballroom a “military complex” and arguing it is necessary for national security purposes, at least in part to help it pass legal muster.

The Pentagon said it had no information beyond the president’s statement.

Trump’s announcement comes as the arch, like his other projects, faces legal challenges. Though the arch has received early approval from the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose members were all appointed by Trump, a group of three veterans and an architectural historian sued, saying the project needs to be approved by Congress.

“The president’s belated efforts to manufacture a national security justification for this project do nothing to cure its fundamental illegality,” Nicolas Sansone, one of the attorneys representing the litigants, said Sunday. “Congress has not authorized the arch, and unless and until Congress does so, the project should not be permitted to move forward.”

The president said in a social media post that he had agreed, at the “strong request” of the military, to convert the planned 250-foot-tall memorial arch “into a top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch, to house, store, and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus Snipers, on both the roof and plaza areas, and additionally have and hold large quantities of sniper ammunition in storage.”

The arch is proposed for a circle adjacent to the Memorial Bridge, which is a heavy traffic area as one of several connecting bridges between the nation’s capital and northern Virginia.

Among the other projects Trump is pursuing to refashion Washington’s cityscape are renaming and renovating the Kennedy Center, refurbishing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and rebuilding a golf course in East Potomac Park that could significantly reduce the public’s access to running and biking paths. Some of the projects have run into trouble: The Kennedy Center now faces closure and perhaps demolition, and the botched Reflecting Pool renovation, originally set for completion by July 4, remains incomplete.

The groundbreaking for the arch was to have happened sometime this month. The project has not yet received final approval from the National Capital Area Planning Commission, which greenlighted the site and preliminary plans at its July meeting. The commission is expected to take up the matter again this fall.

Kim writes for the Associated Press.

Abbotsford, British Columbia – Every second day, 28,000 litres of raw milk leave Casey Pruim’s farm in Abbotsford in western Canada, entering a distribution system built on the assumption that the milk and the products made from it will have somewhere to go.

While most is consumed in Canada, some had been sold across the border to the United States.

Those sales have largely come to a standstill since US President Donald Trump’s 50 percent tariff on $20bn in Canadian goods, including dairy products, came into effect on August 22.

Pruim, who is also chair of the British Columbia Dairy Association representing about 400 dairy farmers across the province, told Al Jazeera that Canadian farmers do not individually decide which products are exported.

Instead, producers such as Pruim –  whose farm has 330 cows milked three times a day  –  sell into the provincial milk-marketing system, which distributes milk to processors according to demand, including for products exported to the US.

If a processor loses US demand, it may require less milk, with the impact then spread across the provincial pool.

Dylan Kruger, director of public affairs at BC Dairy, told Al Jazeera “there is still considerable uncertainty around the impact of the US tariffs”.

He said it was too early to know how the industry would be impacted or whether milk no longer sold to the US could be sold elsewhere, mitigating financial losses.

But the tariffs and wider trade tensions have already introduced uncertainty and instability for businesses.

“If the processor who’s exporting some of his product to the United States can no longer sell into that market because he’s now priced out of the market with a 50 percent tariff, that’s how it would impact the dairy farm,” Pruim said.

Pruim said if processor demand is squeezed, farmers would be forced to dump the milk. In the worst-case scenario, the herd has to be cut.

“Cows aren’t like a tap; you can’t just turn them on or off,” he said.

His warning captures dairy’s particular vulnerability in a tariff war: Milk is highly perishable, collected on a tight schedule and dependent on processors whose demand can change much faster than farmers can adjust production.

“These tariffs are completely unwarranted,” David Wiens, president of the Dairy Farmers of Canada, told Canada’s CBC News, adding that they would affect “the supply chain, not only in Canada but in the US as well”.

Supply-management system

Dairy trade between Canada and the US has largely operated under a free trade agreement between the US, Mexico and Canada, known as CUSMA in Canada.

Canada manages the supply of dairy, poultry and eggs through a national agricultural policy known as supply management. The system uses production quotas and import controls, including tariffs, to provide farmers with more stable and predictable prices while maintaining domestic supply.

Critics describe the system as protectionist and as a government-backed cartel.

Washington argues that Canada’s supply-management system restricts US dairy exports. Trump posted on Truth Social that “Canada had been ripping off the United States of America for years” and accused it of imposing “ridiculously high tariffs” that made life impossible for US farmers.

Canadian producers reject that argument, saying the existing trade agreement already gives US imports substantial tariff-free access that is not fully utilised.

Canada’s dairy trade deficit with the US has grown significantly since CUSMA came into force on July 1, 2020, according to the Dairy Processors Association of Canada.

In 2020, Canada exported 241.3 million Canadian dollars ($173m) in dairy products to the US and imported 647.4 million Canadian dollars ($462.7m) worth of dairy and dairy products. In 2025, Canadian dairy exports had risen to 308.7 million Canadian dollars ($220.7m) while dairy imports from the US had more than doubled to 1.355 billion Canadian dollars ($968.5m), accounting for 13.8 percent of total value of US dairy exports, according to the association.

Bryan Yu, chief economist at Central 1 credit union, said the immediate shock of losing a major market could be difficult for Canadian producers to absorb because replacement buyers cannot be found quickly.

“There is going to be pain in the near term for a lot of our producers,” Yu told Al Jazeera.

“You really can’t quickly adjust to a 50 percent tariff, because it’s uncharted waters for a lot of industries … and ultimately it shuts [Canadian producers] out, because a lot of them don’t have the margins that they can play with,” he said.

Yu said Canadian consumers might absorb some of the additional supply while exporters search for new markets and higher-value products, but neither adjustment is instantaneous.

“There are global markets as well, especially when you talk about chilled, chilled beef, chilled products and really it’s a question of whether … other types of markets that could be available.”

Canada has also imposed retaliatory tariffs, which came into effect on September 8 and cover $20bn worth of US products.

Dairy products are among the targeted goods. The list includes a 50 percent tariff on milk, cream and whey products and a 25 percent tariff on many cheeses imported from the US.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has framed Ottawa’s response as both retaliation and an attempt to build greater economic resilience.

Announcing the collapse of the latest negotiations, he said Canada would match Washington’s new tariffs “dollar for dollar” to protect workers, farmers, families and businesses.

But retaliatory measures carry risks of their own.

“Canada’s new retaliatory tariffs will help some industries but hurt most and weaken economic growth across the country by raising costs for producers and consumers,” Oxford Economics said in a report.

For now, geography remains important for perishable goods like dairy products that once moved quickly across the US border and cannot be redirected overnight to a distant market without new buyers, logistics and regulatory approvals.

Ottawa’s Trade Commissioner Service is advising affected companies to check their CUSMA compliance, explore available relief and contact trade commissioners about potential new markets.

Yu predicted that the US and Canada could reach a tariff deal in the following months but said the interim period could bring “higher prices, weaker economic activity and deeper mistrust”.

For Pruim, the uncertainty is as destabilising as the tariff threat itself.

“I think, like [for] any Canadian, it’s disappointing to have these trade talks collapse again and just the uncertainty around it.”

WASHINGTON — As President Trump tells supporters to vote in November as if he were on the ballot, California Republicans in tight congressional races are sending a different message to voters.

The four California Republicans running in the state’s most competitive U.S. House races, plus a fifth opposing a fellow Republican in a close contest, are appearing to keep some distance from Trump as they campaign ahead of the Nov. 3 election.

They all skipped the president’s midterm convention in Dallas this month. Two candidates in tough races removed references to Trump on their campaign websites. And most are favoring a heavy focus on local and state issues in their campaigns — a contrast to Trump’s approach, driven home in Dallas, of casting the election as a loyalty exercise.

President Trump watches as balloons fall at the Republican convention.

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

“You’ve got to do me the biggest favor you’ve ever done me. You’ve got to do this for me: You have to pretend I am on the ticket,” Trump told a crowd at the GOP midterm convention. “Pretend I am on the ticket because this is going to turn out to be one of the most important elections.”

The dynamic within the GOP reflects several competing factors: the need to attract new voters in districts made more purple by California’s redistricting, the hope that Trump can rally the base while candidates focus on swing voters, and the fear among Republicans that the president’s flagging approval ratings could cost them crucial seats in the midterms.

“There is a bit of jujitsu to it,” said Rob Stutzman, a longtime California Republican consultant. “These candidates are hoping that Trump motivates these voters to vote … [while they] focus on gaining votes, particularly from independents who don’t like the president right now.”

The state’s redistricting under Proposition 50, which redrew the congressional map to be more favorable to Democrats, also handed Republican candidates the necessity of persuading more unaffiliated voters and moderate Democrats — likely a major factor in their stances toward the White House, said Pete Peterson, dean of the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy.

“To the degree that Republican candidates are distancing themselves, they’re understanding that they’re actually appealing to newer electorates,” Peterson said. “[The districts] have been made more moderate, more purple, and candidates may be responding accordingly as a way of trying to attract those voters.”

Facing headwinds

The party in power typically faces an uphill battle in midterm elections, and vulnerable candidates often distance themselves from the sitting president. As Republicans fight to keep control of the House and Senate in November, however, they are dealing with particularly serious challenges stemming from Trump’s low favorability rating and public frustration with the economy, the war in Iran and the escalating trade war with Canada.

Trump largely has dismissed concerns about the economy and the war, even as polling shows both are weighing heavily on voters. He also has exacerbated challenges for his party amid the growing public backlash to data centers and artificial intelligence, doubling down on his support for AI advancement in recent days even as GOP candidates in tight races look to respond to constituents’ concerns.

He also drew criticism from some within his party after promising to give a $5,000 payment to every adult citizen if Republicans win the House and Senate in November, a legally murky idea.

Still, Trump has urged Republican lawmakers in tough reelection campaigns to run on his record and earlier this month vowed to spend the last month before the election stumping for candidates in 35 battleground races, including in Alaska and Texas. He has not yet mentioned plans for California.

“All you have to do is talk about it, and you’re going to win and you’re going to win big,” Trump said of his record.

Candidates nationwide seem unconvinced. A Washington Post analysis found that Republican politicians have stopped mentioning Trump on social media, doing so about half as often as they did in January. Many in competitive races skipped his convention, and in recent weeks some have broken with him on data centers and the payout pitch.

In California, the headwinds for the GOP were captured in a survey released last week: A greater share of independents said they would vote for the Democratic candidate over the Republican in their House districts, the Public Policy Institute of California found, and a majority of likely voters polled Sept. 4-10 said they would choose the Democratic candidate if the election were held now.

Robert Rivera, left, of San José and Corky Galey of Modesto listen to gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton during a town hall in Modesto on Aug. 26.

(Sara Nevis/For The Times)

Last week, Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton’s campaign blasted a fundraising text to voters that began: “We get it. Maybe you don’t like Trump. Maybe you can’t stand MAGA.”

Democrats have seized on the dynamic.

“California Republicans know their loyalty to a toxic MAGA brand is a losing strategy,” said Anna Elsasser, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Unlucky for them, no desperate rebrand can save them from their clear record of broken promises — from raising costs, to ripping away health care, to supporting another forever war everyone hates.”

Leaning on the local

Rep. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) stripped her campaign website of the “America first” branding and references to Trump that defined it before the primary.

(Bill Clark / CQ Roll Call via Associated Press)

In Orange County, Rep. Young Kim — in a close contest with fellow Republican Ken Calvert — has stripped her campaign website of the “America first” branding and references to Trump that defined it before the primary. And in Northern California, Rep. James Gallagher has scrubbed Trump’s endorsement from his campaign website, which months ago prominently featured his close ties to the president.

Other candidates in tight races — Rep. David Valadao, running for reelection in the Central Valley; Kevin Lincoln, challenging Democratic Rep. Adam Gray; and Jim Desmond, running to fill the seat of retiring Republican Rep. Darrell Issa — have leaned on campaign optics centered around their regions rather than on sharply partisan politics.

None of the three attended Trump’s convention. Valadao rarely mentions Trump on social media and is the last House Republican still running who voted for Trump’s second impeachment. Desmond does not mention his support from Trump on his endorsements web page; Lincoln does.

Rep. Kevin Kiley, who left the Republican Party this year after his district was redrawn and after he clashed with Trump over tariffs, also is making an appeal to middle-of-the-road voters, promoting legislation around AI safeguards while taking aim at Sacramento policies. Kiley still caucuses with congressional Republicans but says he won’t if reelected.

Representatives for Gallagher, Lincoln, Desmond and Valadao did not respond to requests for comment.

Chris Pack, a spokesperson for Kim, said she was “proud of her work with President Trump to deliver results for Southern California.” But he framed her race as a choice between Kim and her opponent, saying the campaign’s messaging is focused on Calvert’s record. Pack didn’t answer a question about the removal of Trump’s name from Kim’s website.

Moves like Kim’s and Gallagher’s are angled at conveying to moderate voters that “they’re not going to be beholden to the party line, they’re simply going to run on common sense,” and may give centrist Democratic voters “permission” to consider the candidates, said one GOP operative who works in the state, granted anonymity in order to speak candidly.

In competitive districts like the ones California Republicans are trying to hold on to, Trump’s ask for voters to pretend he’s on the ballot is “probably not as helpful,” the operative said.

Instead, strategists see the local focus as the most effective strategy for California Republicans, along with a focus on statewide issues that allow them to counter policies of Gov. Gavin Newsom that they perceive as unpopular with voters.

“California Republicans know what’s best for their districts,” the operative said. “They all have their own independent records and are pretty well-known by their communities.”

Republicans are making the case that California’s long-term affordability issues, which far predate the current national economic landscape, have been exacerbated and mishandled by Democrats. The party also is leaning on an argument that Democrats are overly focused on Trump and have few substantive policy solutions.

Texas attendees hold up flags and cowboys hats at the Republican convention.

(Smiley N. Pool / Dallas Morning News via Getty Images)

Mike Madrid, a veteran California Republican political consultant, argued that a last-minute rebrand is unlikely to stick for candidates whose party has built a political identity around loyalty to the president and his policies. He said Republicans’ retreat is a sign of how Trump’s popularity is dwindling.

“I wouldn’t call that subtle in politics,” he said. “When you’re distancing yourself from the president of your own party, a man that everybody’s been championing as a political and cultural hero in those parts, I don’t think that’s subtle at all.”

When asked to make his case to midterm voters in an interview last week, Vice President JD Vance argued that Americans should give his party more time to deliver.

“Give us another chance,” Vance said on the All-In Podcast. “Give us another couple of years to continue to work on the amazing things that we have been doing for the past two years.”

In the second week of the college football season, in a clash of titans, the University of Texas scored 21 unanswered points to surge past Ohio State in the fourth quarter and win, 24-23.

The comeback, Gov. Greg Abbott decreed, was the greatest home victory in more than 130 years of Longhorn football.

A screen grab of one celebratory moment showed a group of students ecstatic beyond belief. They were clad in the university’s signature burnt orange. Two wore cowboy hats. One flashed “Hook ‘em Horns,” the university’s proud hand signal.

To see the picture earlier this month was to witness pure, untempered joy.

But Bo French, the Republican candidate for Texas Railroad Commission, saw something different.

Most of the students were darkly complected and apparently of South Asian heritage. French posted the photo and wrote on X, “I heard UT graduation this year looked like this. I didn’t believe it. The problem is now obviously far worse than anyone imagined.”

He followed with a second post, doubling down on the racist “Great Replacement” theory.

“Like body-cams exposed criminals, social media is exposing how many Americans have been displaced by foreigners,” French spewed. “It’s everywhere and far worse than any of us could imagine.”

In many places, French’s unapologetic, unvarnished bigotry would be disqualifying. But given Texas’ strong Republican leaning he stands a better-than-even chance of being elected in November to the state Railroad Commission, which, despite its name, oversees Texas’ vast oil and gas industry.

The hateful gibe was perfectly in character. “In some ways in Texas this is old news,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, who teaches political science at the University of Houston.

Last year, as chairman of the Tarrant County GOP, French posted an online poll asking, “Who is a bigger threat to America?” The choice on offer: Muslims or Jews.

Speaking in March at a political conference, he urged President Trump to round up and deport every Muslim in the country, calling the Islamic faith subversive and a clear and present danger to America.

“The Republican Party is used to Bo French making these kinds of outrageous statements,” Rottinghaus said.

Still, the response to French’s latest acrid emission was telling, not least for what it says about reflexive partisanship and today’s political reward structure.

As you’d expect, his Democratic opponent, state Rep. Jon Rosenthal, was scathing. “I spent 25 years as an oil and gas engineer,” he wrote on social media. “Bo French spent Sunday morning sorting our student section by skin color … A man who can’t tell a Longhorn from a foreigner has no business regulating anything in TX.”

The state’s outgoing U.S. senator, Republican John Cornyn, was also quick to denounce French. “This is the Republican nominee for statewide office,” Cornyn said in a post. “Are other Republican elected officials going to condemn the intolerance and racism, or look the other way while it becomes normalized.”

For Abbott and for Ken Paxton, who beat Cornyn in an eye-gouging, rabbit-punching Republican Senate primary, the answer was, for all intents, the latter.

“That is not my message,” Abbott said in a written statement, summoning the moral clarity and political courage of a puff pastry. “We all support our college football teams. The way we win the state is the same way we win football games. We unite under the brand of Texas.”

Then, just to have it both ways, Abbott suggested “that doesn’t mean that Texas cannot also lead in having the toughest immigration laws of any state in America and freezing H1B visas at our universities.” (The overwhelming majority of those holding H1B visas are Asian nationals from India and China.)

Paxton responded by attacking his Democratic opponent, state Rep. James Talarico, for saluting Cornyn for taking a stand against French’s prejudice. “I condemn racism in all its forms,” Paxton wrote on X, adding, “Only one person in this race has a history of dividing Texans by race, and it’s James Talarico.”

A simple, straightforward condemnation shouldn’t have been hard. Lacey Hull, a Republican state representative from Houston, was among those in the GOP who showed how.

“Please delete this,” she urged French on X. “This post breaks my heart. I see college kids cheering on their football team. I see Texans.”

But Abbott, bidding for an unprecedented fourth term, is facing a tougher than expected race against Democratic state Rep. Gina Hinojosa.

Paxton, whose unsavory resume includes impeachment, indictment, petty theft and charges of adultery, has managed the rare feat of turning his race against Talarico into a nail-biter. (It’s been more than three decades since a Democrat won statewide office in Texas.)

Both need a robust GOP turnout to win in November and neither wants to risk alienating too many within the party’s xenophobic, anti-immigrant wing.

“They’re concerned about turnout,” said Mark Jones, a political scientist at Rice University. “Texas is a red state, but one thing that Republicans are concerned about is that the base may not turn out in as large a number as they need.”

Given French’s loathsome history, Abbott and others in the party establishment worked hard to keep him from winning the Republican nomination, Rice noted. But not Paxton. He headlined the kickoff to French’s campaign and has good reason to be glad he won and is now part of the GOP ticket.

His presence means that Paxton is only the second most odious figure seeking statewide office in Texas in November.

Selected by Beijing in 1996, Tung Chee-hwa’s tenure shaped post-handover Hong Kong during a turbulent political era.

Hong Kong has given a state funeral to Tung Chee-hwa, its first post-colonial leader, only the third time the city has granted such an honour since Britain returned it to Chinese rule in 1997.

Senior Chinese and Hong Kong officials bid farewell to Tung at the Hong Kong Funeral Home in North Point on Sunday, a day after a public vigil that drew dozens of political and business figures.

Tung, Hong Kong’s first chief executive, died on September 8 at the age of 89.

Members of the public could pay their respects by signing condolence books at three community halls until Sunday noon.

The funeral committee, made up of 87 members, was chaired by Shi Taifeng, a senior Chinese Communist Party Politburo member and vice chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), the top political advisory body, underlining the level of official backing from Beijing.

Shi attended the funeral alongside Xia Baolong, Beijing’s top official for Hong Kong and Macau affairs; current chief executive John Lee; former chief executives Leung Chun-ying, Carrie Lam and Donald Tsang; and other political and business figures, reported government-funded Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK).

Lee and Leung were among the pallbearers who carried Tung’s coffin, draped in China’s national flag, from the hall to a hearse, which headed to Cape Collinson Crematorium.

A shipping tycoon with little political experience, Tung was selected in 1996 by a Beijing-appointed committee to become Hong Kong’s first leader after the 1997 handover from Britain.

Tung led the city through the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the 2003 SARS outbreak, and mass protests that year forced him to shelve proposed national security legislation.

He was re-elected unopposed in 2002 but resigned in 2005, midway through his second term, citing poor health, in a move widely seen as driven by Beijing’s loss of confidence in him.

He went on to serve as a vice chairman of the CPPCC until 2023.

Two business leaders, industrialist Ann Tse-kai and tycoon Henry Fok, who both served as vice chairs of the CPPCC, were given state funerals in 2000 and 2006, respectively.

Chinese state media described Tung as a “renowned patriot”, while his successor, Tsang, called him “an easy-going, gentle and refined man with a broad-minded outlook and far-reaching vision”.

Critics recalled his tenure as marked by governance struggles and public discontent that never fully recovered after the financial crisis.

Far-right AfD defeated German chancellor’s CDU in recent Saxony-Anhalt state election, casting doubt on his future.

Voters in the eastern German states of Berlin and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania are heading to the polls as far-right and far-left gains threaten to affect the political standing of Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

About 2.5 million people are eligible to vote in the city-state of Berlin, Germany’s capital, and nearly 1.3 million in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania on Sunday. Polling booths in both states – traditionally seen as more left-leaning – opened at 8am local time (06:00 GMT) and will close at 6pm (16:00 GMT).

Pressure on Merz has been mounting after the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) delivered a major defeat to his Christian Democratic Union party (CDU) party two weeks ago in the key state of Saxony-Anhalt. The AfD fell just short of an absolute majority, which would have allowed it to govern on its own.

And after just 16 months in power, Merz’s approval ratings have plunged to about 14 percent, the latest polls suggest, as he struggles to push through promised economic and social welfare reforms with his centre-left coalition partners, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), raising doubts among fellow party members whether he can continue to lead.

In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Merz’s party is an onlooker to the main battle between the SPD’s popular state premier Manuela Schwesig and the AfD’s lead candidate, former radio presenter Leif-Erik Holm.

While the AfD was polling at 36 percent against the SPD’s 37 percent, Merz’s CDU, at just 6 percent, was dangerously close to the 5 percent hurdle needed to stay in the state parliament, according to public broadcaster ZDF.

Reporting from a polling station in Schwerin, Al Jazeera’s Dominic Kane said there was “very much all to play for” in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

“The race between the AfD here and the Social Democrat government is very close indeed,” he added, pointing out to the recent opinion polls.

In  Berlin, the CDU is running a tight race against the far-left Die Linke (The Left), which promises drastic measures to solve a dire housing crisis and is popular with young people.

Regional elections would not usually draw much interest outside Germany, but the AfD’s success in Saxony-Anhalt, which it sees as the first step towards winning federal elections due in 2029, has sent shockwaves through Europe.

“Saxony-Anhalt was certainly a revolution for the German party system,” Florian Hartleb, a professor of international relations at Modul University in Vienna and an expert on far-right movements, told Al Jazeera.

Hartleb said the AFD had been “fundamentally excluded” from the power system, with the other political parties trying “everything” against it in recent years. “But it didn’t work out,” he said, citing voters’ dissatisfaction over migration, the economy and social inequality.

Merz has reportedly scheduled a crisis CDU meeting and cleared his calendar to deal with potential aftershocks from Sunday’s elections.

The Krankies – Scottish comedy duo Ian and Janette Tough – were a huge hit on TV in the 1980s, but Janette’s health battle sadly forced Wee Jimmy Krankie to retire permanently

For a generation of TV viewers, few catchphrases trigger nostalgic memories of anarchic 1980s television quite like “Fan-dabi-dozi!” From the late 1970s through to the 1990s, Ian and Janette Tough – the real-life husband and wife duo behind iconic double act The Krankies, who coined the catchphrase – were titans of light entertainment.

Playing a long-suffering dad and his naughty son, Wee Jimmy Krankie, the pair – now both 79 years old – were staples of Saturday night prime shows and children’s TV.

After shooting to stardom on the Royal Variety Performance in 1978, they became household names on programmes like Crackerjack before landing their own series, from The Krankies Klub to The Krankies Elektronik Komik.

A TV resurgence followed in the 1990s when they featured on Dawn French and Jennifer Saunders‘ TV programmes and also starred in a number of pantomimes.

But after several decades at the top, the pair eventually stepped away from the spotlight, leaving a legion of fans wondering what came of the beloved Scottish duo.

Speaking to the Mirror seven years ago, the couple refuted claims from friend Christopher Biggins that political correctness had brought an end to their innuendo-laden panto performances.

Instead, they revealed that medical issues had sadly forced Wee Jimmy to hang up his school uniform for good.

“I was diagnosed with osteoporosis three years ago,” Janette disclosed, then aged 73. “My back’s not good and I can’t do as much as I used to. So, when Ian and I went off on a Caribbean cruise to celebrate our golden wedding last month we decided it’s time to put our feet up.”

The pair had accidentally courted controversy in 2017, during their run in Dick Whittington alongside close friend John Barrowman. “One woman called it smutty” Janette recalled. “We did a scene in bed with John. Wee Jimmy said ‘I can feel your Tinkie Winkie’ and pulled out a Teletubby. Then John said ‘No – this is MY Tinkie-Winkie’ and pulled out a big one.”

But they denied longstanding ‘swinging’ rumours in the Mirror’s interview, with Ian explaining: “It was never orgies or wife-swapping parties or swingers’ clubs. We just had a bit of a wild spell when we had lots of fun – our Dirty Thirties.”

Janette continued: “We were doing a revue act in 1981, which featured a magician who had a leopard called Scorpio in his act.

“He had a lion tamer called Rocky and an assistant called Angie – so I had a little ding-dong with Rocky and Ian did the same with Angie. Ian used to joke that I’d come home smelling of leopard while he’d get back with glitter on his bits. We had an anywhere, anytime attitude to sex but we each knew what the other was doing.”

Despite announcing their retirement in 2019 – with Janette also still feeling the lasting effects of a horrific pantomime fall in which she fractured her skull in the early noughties – the pair have continued to make occasional TV appearances.

And fans were delighted last year when the pair unexpectedly popped up in the remastered version of the classic 90s video game Tomb Raider.

A framed pictured of the pair was seen hanging on an office wall as Lara meet the editor of The Times before combing through the newspaper archives.

Reacting to the unexpected appearance, Janette joked to The Scottish Sun: “She did well to dig us up – we’ve been retired for years now.”

PM Anthony Albanese asks Apple CEO Tim Cook to back Canberra’s online safety laws to ‘keep Australians safe’.

The Australian government is seeking support from global tech giants as it works to strengthen the country’s online safety laws and artificial intelligence (AI) regulations.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who met Apple CEO Tim Cook at the tech company’s headquarters in Cupertino, California, on Saturday, said that “Australia can’t do it alone” when it came to protecting children from the dangers of the internet.

“We spoke about what we’re doing to protect children from online harm and the work ahead,” Albanese wrote on social media.

“We’re putting stronger rules in place to keep Australians safe online,” he said. “And now, big tech companies like Apple are stepping up too.”

Albanese, who is also in the United States for the United Nations General Assembly, used his trip to call for stronger AI regulation after dire safety warnings from industry leaders.

Australia will introduce new standards for AI by the end of the year, he said.

In a video posted to his X account, Albanese said his Labor government is “making sure technology works for Australians”, and not the other way around.

In a post on X, Cook also said he shared with Albanese new “strong and intuitive controls to help keep kids safe online”.

New Australian legislation unveiled this month would place a “duty of care” requirement on the firms behind popular platforms, such as Facebook, TikTok and Instagram, and allow users to turn off their algorithms.

The draft laws will be introduced to parliament later this year after consultation with social media companies, industry bodies and civil society groups.

The opposition Liberal-National Coalition opposes the bill “in its current form”, according to a statement published on September 10, saying that it “contains inadequate safeguards for free speech and journalism, and leaves too much power in the hands of the Communications Minister”.

Australia implemented legislation barring children under 16 from social media platforms last year as part of a world-first crackdown designed to protect children from online bullying and “predatory algorithms”.

However, data last month found that Australians under 16 continued using social media apps such as Instagram and TikTok despite the ban.

Fidan highlights Turkiye’s readiness to assist Saudi Arabia militarily, as Houthi attacks escalate in Yemen.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has said that Saudi Arabia may have unmet military needs from the attacks by Yemen’s Houthi rebels and that Turkiye would consider how to support the kingdom as part of a trilateral defence pact.

Speaking to Turkish broadcaster NTV on Friday, Fidan said it was unacceptable for Saudi Arabia to be dragged into the US-Iran war, adding that Riyadh had no desire to join the conflict.

He added that proposals had been conveyed to all sides in an effort to end the fighting, without further elaborating.

The Iran-backed Houthi rebels and Saudi Arabia continue trading attacks in an escalating war in Yemen, as the Houthis press gains that have brought large stretches of the Red Sea coast, including the strategic Bab al-Mandeb Strait, under their control.

Pakistan has made a similar pledge to defend Saudi Arabia under the defence pact.

Lieutenant-General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, a spokesperson for Pakistan’s military, told Arab News on Thursday that Islamabad would defend Saudi Arabia “to any extent”, including “physically”, though he did not say whether Riyadh had asked for more Pakistani troops.

Pakistan’s Foreign Office has said no military response is currently under discussion under the pact, adding that Islamabad would act “when time comes”.

The trilateral agreement, known as the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, was signed on August 7 in Mecca by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

The three countries formally named the arrangement the Mecca Defence Alliance on August 31, after officials meeting in Istanbul agreed to set up a secretariat in Riyadh, to be headed initially by a Pakistani secretary-general.

Its founding principle is that an armed attack against any one of the three states will be treated as an attack against all three.

Fidan said at the time the alliance was built on “respecting the sovereignty of other states, territorial integrity and not intervening in internal affairs”, and remained open to other countries joining.

Analysts have questioned how much substance lies behind the pact so far, noting it lacks the integrated command structure and standing forces that underpin NATO.

Its institutional shape, including how the mutual defence clause would actually be triggered, remains unclear.

The trilateral pact was struck as Gulf states grow increasingly concerned about being pulled into the wider US-Iran war, which has continued for more than six months since Washington and Israel first struck Iran in February.

WASHINGTON — Several of the nation’s largest voter engagement and racial justice organizations are facing steep funding shortfalls and staffing cutbacks just as voting is getting underway in an election that will determine control of Congress for the final two years of President Trump’s term.

The shortfalls are setting off alarms among Democratic strategists, who are betting on high turnout and robust voter protection efforts to boost the party’s chances this fall. They are worried that many grassroots groups will not be able to mount effective registration and get-out-the-vote efforts, much less protect against the possibility of election interference from the administration given Trump’s efforts to restrict voting access and assert federal control over the election.

America Votes, a coordinating hub for more than 400 progressive groups, has fallen “well below” the level of funding it had during the 2022 midterms, the group’s executive director, Daria Dawson, said in a statement to the Associated Press. America Votes has acted as a nerve center for the voter mobilization efforts of groups such as the NAACP, Planned Parenthood, the League of Conservation Voters, the AFL-CIO and SEIU labor unions, as well as local groups focused on racial justice, climate and civil liberties.

“There is still time to reach voters and bring them into this election, but we are no longer talking about a future opportunity,” Dawson said. “The window to engage them is open now, and it is narrowing every day.”

Racial justice activists feel betrayed

Wealthy donors and philanthropic groups have reduced their support of many liberal causes since the 2024 presidential election. That pullback has been especially stark for voting groups geared toward engaging communities of color.

While multiple organizers said some funders had expressed an interest in adopting different strategies, racial justice organizers have felt that as a betrayal.

A retreat in donor support is “handcuffing our ability to persuade our communities to vote in a year where there is no Voting Rights Act,” said Esosa Osa, a veteran Democratic strategist and founder of Onyx Impact, a research group focused on combating misinformation in Black communities.

A Supreme Court ruling this year knocked out one of the last remaining pillars of that landmark 1965 law, essentially gutting it.

“We are watching surrender, not strategy,” Osa said.

A July memo that circulated among major Democratic fundraisers warned that “the organizations that registered and persuaded millions of voters to participate in the 2018 and 2022 midterms are drastically underfunded. They have raised nearly 40% less than they had at this point in those cycles.”

It further warned that funding voter mobilization groups was especially critical “given that the Democratic brand is underperforming on generic ballot tests relative to historical comparisons and the president’s approval ratings.”

The shortfalls have led organizations focused on engaging and mobilizing key voting groups to scale back operations and staffing over the last year. That has included programs aimed at registering and mobilizing lower-propensity voters, voters of color, and rural and younger voters.

The Democratic National Committee, which has faced its own funding challenges, has consolidated voter engagement efforts this year partly in response to the ecosystem’s past shortcomings. The DNC in a statement said it was making “historic investments” in its organizing but did not address the weaknesses among allied groups.

“We are expanding our voter protection infrastructure to defend Americans’ sacred right to vote, hold Trump and Republicans accountable in court, and register and mobilize voters across the country,” said Angelo Fernández Hernández, a DNC spokesperson.

‘Being Black … again has become a bad word’

The reasons for the troubled funding landscape are varied and at times unclear, according to nearly two dozen fundraisers and organizers who spoke with the AP. Some donors, still disappointed with the Democratic Party and some of its allies following the 2024 presidential election, have closed their pocketbooks to liberal causes entirely.

While a small group of liberal megadonors has continued to bankroll progressive causes, most focus their support on liberal legal organizations that have taken the Trump administration to court, rather than political or voter engagement groups.

Others, including major philanthropic institutions, have pulled back out of fear of retribution that giving to political or racial justice causes could draw the administration’s ire. Organizers who have engaged with potential donors said the administration’s targeting of political opponents and diversity initiatives seems to have put a chill on fundraising for their causes.

Tameka Ramsey-Brown, founding director of the Michigan Coalition on Black Civic Participation, said multiple donors since the 2024 election had asked whether her group could remove the word “Black” from its name or find financial conduits to mask the source of donations for fear of retribution from the administration.

“Just being Black in this country again has become a bad word, and it has made it that much more difficult just to raise money because funders don’t want the added pressure and stress or attacks on them by funding us,” she said.

Smaller budgets, shifting strategies

Many of the nonprofit groups that traditionally have conducted the registration, voter education and organizing say they are trying to adapt to their new, leaner reality.

Vamos a Votar, an initiative of the largest civil rights and advocacy groups focused on Latino communities, has had to readjust its ambitions this year due to a lack of investment from funders.

“This is shaping up to be a cycle where investments haven’t gone to the Black and brown communities that will ultimately decide this election,” said Juan Proaño, chief executive of the League of United Latin American Citizens, a member of the initiative.

In a September pitch circulated among donors, the coalition said it aimed to invest $27.5 million in voter engagement and persuasion efforts this year, but still required $5.4 million from donors to fund voter turnout efforts across 10 states and 17 House districts. Even that investment reflected reduced ambitions from previous pitches to donors early this year.

“It has been extremely disappointing to see that progressive donors are not meeting the moment,” said Héctor Sánchez Barba, head of Mi Familia Vota, one of the affiliated organizations. “We are not waiting. We are always on the front lines for our democracy and our communities.”

To counter the funding cutbacks, some groups have begun relying more heavily on artificial intelligence to provide voter registration guides, share information in multiple languages and track potential election issues. Some groups have increased their partnerships with ride-sharing companies to provide free rides to polling places instead of bus shuttles.

With fewer in-person organizers, some groups are also focusing on social media and partnering with liberal content creators to boost their messages.

“In my more than 30 years of organizing, it has never been this bad to raise money to support Black causes of any kind,” said Melanie Campbell, president and chief executive of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, a nonpartisan civil rights group.

“We’re going to do the work, our state affiliates are doing all that is possible. … But the bottom line is that those who believe that democracy matters should make sure they fund the work.”

Brown writes for the Associated Press.

COMSTOCK, Texas — The Trump administration has started building a border wall through a west Texas section of the Big Bend region, marking the first major construction in an area of the U.S.-Mexico border where the administration’s plans have met heavy, bipartisan opposition.

The start of construction marks a milestone in the administration’s $46-billion efforts to line the border with walls, barriers, roads and technology as it seeks to make good on a campaign promise by President Trump to finish the wall. And it comes as Customs and Border Protection says it has doubled the pace at which it is building the wall across the border.

Customs and Border Protection said in a statement to the Associated Press that “border wall panel installation is underway” in a 47-mile stretch of Hudspeth County in west Texas known as Big Bend 1. There are five project areas that make up the roughly 500-mile Big Bend region stretching from an area of Hudspeth County south of El Paso to Lake Amistad.

CBP said the first panels were erected Wednesday. On a map on the agency’s website where it posts updates of wall construction along the southern border, a photo showed a crane lifting one of the 30-foot-tall steel wall panels into place as construction workers looked on.

The new activity was separate from a border infrastructure project in the nearby Big Bend National Park, where the administration has suspended construction in an attempt to reach out to opponents.

In the broader Big Bend region of Texas, CBP has run up against concerted opposition from landowners, environmental groups, business owners and ranchers who say the remote region isn’t a high-traffic area for illegal immigration. Political leaders from both parties, including U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), have joined the opposition.

Activists said Friday they would continue opposing the border infrastructure projects in the rest of the Big Bend region, even as the panels were being installed.

Clara Benson, one of the founders of the No Big Bend Wall Coalition, which has been fighting against CBP’s plans, said in an interview Friday that the organization had been receiving reports of trucks moving supplies into the remote area along the Rio Grande and that contractors had been clearing yards to stage supplies.

Speaking from Washington, D.C., where she and others in the coalition were meeting with lawmakers, she said that the organization and others would continue to fight the wall-building plans across the region.

“We will continue to fight for this land no matter what the outcome is. We will continue fighting to the end,” said Benson. “You talk to people in west Texas and they say even if they put it up, we’ll fight for them to take it down. So this fight is not over.”

The news comes as the administration is speeding forward with a plan to line the entire border with a combination of 30-foot-tall steel bollard walls, barriers designed to stop vehicles from crossing the border, new patrol roads, and various technologies to deter and detect migrants or smugglers from crossing the border.

Customs and Border Protection said it is building an average of 12 miles of barriers per week along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico and recently reached a milestone of 200 miles of new barriers built since the second Trump administration took office. The 12-miles-a-week average is double the pace that the agency’s head, Rodney Scott, cited earlier this year.

The agency has faced opposition from environmental groups, a small town that worries the wall will cause flooding in its area, Native Americans who say the construction is disturbing sacred sites and landowners who say the construction will infringe on their land.

In Texas, much of the opposition has centered on the agency’s plans for Big Bend National Park, in the state’s southwest on the Rio Grande that is a draw for tourists from around the world. But up- and downriver outside the park, much of the land is owned by private landowners, many of whom have organized against the government’s efforts.

Earlier this week, landowners, ranchers and business owners in the Big Bend region along with a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting the region’s landscape and heritage sued to stop the administration’s plans.

Activists and landowners have also shown up at county meetings to push their elected officials not to cooperate with contractors hired by CBP to build the wall, and many landowners have refused to allow government officials or contractors onto their land to survey it.

Santana writes for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday signed legislation to increase security for the state’s voting systems and protect Californians’ ability to cast ballots in an effort to guard against potential interference in the Nov. 3 election, including by the Trump administration.

Newsom pointed to the Trump administration’s recent effort to restrict mail-in voting through the U.S. Postal Service, which was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, and the presence of federal monitors at California polls last year as evidence that Trump “will continue his efforts to interfere with the November election.”

“Donald Trump won’t stop until he can exert dictatorial control over your free vote and disenfranchise millions of people this November. California will stop him at every opportunity,” Newsom said in a statement.”We have no bigger task than fighting to protect the right to vote from interference and meddling — the future of democracy is on the line. These bills today build upon the wall California has built to safeguard our electoral process.”

The governor signed the package of bills at the Japanese American National Museum in Little Tokyo, where a year earlier federal agents gathered outside a political rally he was hosting. Then Border Patrol Sector Chief Gregory Bovino, who had been leading the immigration operations in California, was among those outside the event, joined by agents in helmets, camouflage, masks and holding guns. Newsom described their presence as political intimidation.

One bill Newsom signed Saturday cites efforts to “weaponize law enforcement authority for political purposes,” including Republican “Sheriff Chad Bianco’s seizure of ballots in Riverside County,” and the election monitors sent by the U.S. Justice Department to polling sites in five counties during a 2025 special election on redistricting.

Such moves “have given rise to unprecedented concerns about law enforcement interference” in elections and “[demonstrate] that these threats are not merely hypothetical,” the bill by Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) reads.

The law, Senate Bill 884, which takes effect immediately, requires counties to open ballot drop-off locations 30 days before an election — two days earlier than usual — and allows counties to ban electioneering, or trying to influence voters’ decisions, within up to 200 feet of polling sites. It also bans police from making arrests near voting locations except for crimes against people, property, or disrupting the voting process.

Bianco, a GOP candidate for governor who placed fourth in the primary, drew swift condemnation and legal challenges this spring after he ordered deputies to seize more than 650,000 ballots from the Riverside County elections office. Voting rights groups and Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta challenged the move, which is being decided by the California Supreme Court.

Bianco carted off truckloads of ballots from the Riverside County Registrar of Voters in February after securing a warrant based on claims that the office allowed fraudulent votes in the special election to redraw California’s congressional districts under Proposition 50 in 2025.

Earlier this year, Newsom signed a bill preventing local and federal law enforcement agencies from taking ballots without a warrant.

On Saturday the Democratic governor signed a bill making it a felony to seize or order the seizure of ballots, election records or voting machines. Future seizures could be punishable by up to four years in prison.

“The federal administration and those seeking to spread lies about our democracy continue to call for interference in elections in ways we have never seen before in this country,” Assemblymember Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz), the bill’s author and a former longtime county elections chief, said last month. “AB 282 helps ensure that every lawfully cast vote can be counted, and that the will of the voters of every political party will be respected.”

Republican lawmakers argued in previous hearings that the bill is unnecessary because it is already a crime to steal ballots.

Another bill, Senate Bill 259, makes it a crime to interfere with a mail ballot on the way to or from a voter or order the seizure of ballots that are in transit to a local elections office.

Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1664, which requires elections officials to immediately notify the attorney general and secretary of state immediately upon learning of any warrants, subpoenas or law enforcement investigations involving election records or voting equipment.

Newsom also signed bills to boost protections under the California Voting Rights Act, including an explicit ban on voter suppression and expanded access to election materials in languages other than English.

The governor also signed legislation to require more transparency from social media influencers who are paid by political campaigns. The measure, Assembly Bill 1130, came in the wake of a controversy in the June primary election when social media influencers took on a more visible role in the campaigns.

Candidates including Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer paid thousands of dollars to influencers who posted videos endorsing Steyer or talking about him in a positive light. These videos did not always disclose that influencers were paid by a candidate’s campaign.

Sept. 19, 2026 Updated 8:37 AM PT

NEW YORK — Journalists from three major news organizations — CNN, MS NOW and Politico — were denied access to the White House on Saturday morning, with reporters from the two cable networks both going live to report they’d been barred following a ban imposed by President Trump.

The actions escalated Trump’s long-running efforts to restrict news coverage by journalists he finds objectionable, and is the latest test of 1st Amendment protections in the United States. Trump said Friday he would ban all three organizations because of their coverage — which he called “fake news.”

Politico said its White House reporter Cheyenne Haslett was denied entry to the White House and had her badge confiscated Saturday. The announcement came shortly after the turning away of MS NOW and CNN journalists.

Editor in chief Jonathan Greenberger said in a statement to the Politico newsroom: “We stand by her and all reporters here covering the White House. … We will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights.”

CNN and MS NOW have issued similar statements.

“We will not be deflected from our duty to hold the government and other public bodies to account,” CNN said. The statement was shown on the air before senior White House reporter Betsy Klein began to report on her ban.

Journalists from three major news organizations — MS NOW, CNN and Politico — were denied access to the White House on Saturday morning.

(Graeme Sloan / Getty Images)

MS NOW said in a statement that it stands behind its journalists. “The White House belongs to the American people and the decisions made inside are funded by our tax dollars,” the network said in a statement Saturday. “MS NOW intends to take any and all steps necessary to defend our First Amendment rights and the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy.”

In his second term, Trump and his administration have upped the ante and punished certain media outlets, both in the courtroom and through regulatory action. Trump has also lashed out at individual reporters in person or over social media, sometimes in strikingly personal terms.

Turned away, badges confiscated

Both CNN White House reporter Betsy Klein and MS NOW reporter Akayla Gardner went on the air to report they’d been banned from entering the White House.

Network correspondents are usually present on the weekends when the president is in Washington or at nearby Camp David. Trump is at the presidential retreat in Maryland this weekend.

Gardner was turned away and her entry badge confiscated, she said. She noted she had walked through two gates successfully, but once she got to where her badge needed to be scanned, an officer told her it was disabled and asked her to hand it over. He said the decision “was above him,” she reported. An MS NOW producer was able to get in, but a photographer’s badge was also disabled, Gardner said.

CNN Senior White House Reporter Betsy Klein, left, walks to the White House, Saturday.

(Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)

Klein, senior White House reporter at CNN, also said her badge had been deactivated.

CNN media analyst Brian Stelter called the move “a direct threat to press freedom in the United States.”

“It’s so much bigger than CNN,” Stelter said. “This is a free speech test in America.”

Continued attacks on press freedom

The president wrote on his social media site Friday that effective immediately, “I am banning” CNN, MS NOW and Politico “from the White House as a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!” Minutes later, speaking at an event in the Oval Office, Trump was asked to explain his statement.

“Because they’re fake news,” he said. “You get so tired of reading and seeing fake news. When you look at CNN, it’s just fake. That’s why their ratings are no good. When you look at MS NOW … , it’s fake news.”

President Donald Trump arrives at the Ellipse before departing the White House on Friday. Trump hosting a MAGA fundraiser at his private club in Sterling, Virginia, before spending the weekend at Camp David.

(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

“And when you look at Politico … the stories they wrote are fake. So there’s a lot of news and there may be others to join them, and maybe they can get better,” he said. “But our country has to have honest news.”

The move follows the president’s decision last year to bar Associated Press reporters from the Oval Office, Air Force One and other events in retaliation for the news outlet’s decision not to follow his lead in changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico, which lies partially in Mexican and other waters. The AP said that it would note when appropriate that Trump had ordered it renamed the “Gulf of America.”

The AP filed suit and the case is ongoing. Since returning to office, Trump has pursued other legal action against a variety of outlets, including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the BBC. His administration is also involved in a long-simmering confrontation involving ABC over renewal of its broadcast licenses.

Noveck writes for the Associated Press.

The advertising blitzkrieg of L.A.’s mayoral campaign is here.

Mayor Karen Bass and her opponent, City Councilmember Nithya Raman, dropped new campaign commercials over the last week, buying time on television, streaming channels and other platforms. Supporters of both candidates released ads as well.

The two candidates relied heavily on free media for most of the summer, putting videos on Instagram and inviting the news media to cover their appearances.

The dam effectively burst on Monday, with Raman touting her new Hollywood-themed ad “For Your Consideration,” timed to coincide with the Emmy Awards.

The 30-second spot starts with Raman stepping out on the town, then shifts to some standard L.A. imagery: freeways, palm trees, Echo Park Lake and, of course, the Hollywood sign.

“L.A. shows the world what it means to be a star,” declares the ad’s narrator, actor and screenwriter Bob Odenkirk. “And every Angeleno deserves the chance to reach for their own.”

After Raman has stopped off at a taco stand and hugged a dog, Odenkirk delivers the ad’s final message: “Change. Affordability. An L.A. that loves you back.”

That ad ran on television a few times before being cycled onto social media, per the Raman campaign.

Three days later, Bass went up with a 30-second spot — on digital platforms for now — centered on President Trump’s immigration raids.

The ad offers footage from the day in July 2025 when Bass confronted federal immigration agents in MacArthur Park. The video features images of gun-toting federal agents in military uniforms and Bass hopping out of a car in an aquamarine pant suit to face them.

“When someone comes after your family, you don’t hesitate,” Bass says. “You stand up. You fight.”

One of Bass’ most formidable allies — the Los Angeles Police Protective League — went hard negative with its first ad of the runoff campaign, offering the message that Raman “Doesn’t Get It.”

The commercial, released Friday, follows a young girl as she walks past a homeless encampment, juxtaposed against video of Raman talking about her opposition to a law that prohibits encampments near schools.

“I don’t think a kid’s gonna be safer because a tent is 500 feet away from a school,” Raman said in the clip, which was taken from a 2024 candidate forum in Sherman Oaks.

The backpack-wearing child speaks to the camera and says: “Walking to school shouldn’t be scary.”

“I’m just a kid,” she says. “But even I know I’d be safer if this was 500 feet away.”

The police union says the ad will start running on television this weekend and already is on social media platforms.

Meanwhile, Raman’s backers have an assortment of attack ads running on Facebook and Instagram.

Streets For All, a group that wants to expand the city’s bus and bike lane network, pulled video footage from a different Sherman Oaks candidate forum — this one featuring Bass and Raman last month.

At that event, Bass told the audience that Raman is unresponsive to her constituents, forcing many in Sherman Oaks to contact the mayor’s office directly.

“Many of you have my cellphone, you have called me,” Bass says in the ad. “You called on me specifically for help.”

Streets For All contends those remarks show that Bass gives wealthy homeowners her number while “regular Angelenos get ignored.”

“L.A. deserves a mayor who doesn’t just listen to the rich and powerful,” the ad says.

By Friday, Streets For All had nearly two dozen different video spots opposing Bass over such issues as homelessness, transparency and the Palisades fire, according to Ethics Commission filings.

The biggest backer of the group’s political action committee is hedge fund manager Aaron Sosnick. Of the $1.2 million that the group plans to spend in the mayor’s race, Sosnick has provided $1 million, said Michael Schneider, who heads the group.

Schneider said the committee also has financial support from retired real estate developer Yuval Bar-Zemer — known for his work in the Arts District — and Todd Wexman, chief principal of 4SITE Real Estate, a real estate development company.

Raman pollster says she’s in the lead

The Raman campaign shared the results of a new internal poll that showed their candidate with a five-point lead over Bass.

Of the 600 likely voters who were surveyed, 44% supported Raman and 39% backed Bass, with 17% undecided, according to a memo provided to the campaign and viewed by The Times. The survey, conducted by Hart Research Associates in early September, had a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

“In the initial trial heat for Los Angeles mayor, Councilmember Nithya Raman is in the rare position for a challenger of already LEADING the incumbent,” the polling firm wrote.

Another poll, commissioned by an independent expenditure group supporting Raman, portrayed the race as a statistical tie, at least initially. Estamos con Nithya for Mayor of LA 2026, sponsored by the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, said its poll showed Bass with 38% and Raman at 37%.

However, when voters received more information on the candidates, Raman took a 7-percentage-point lead, with 41% supporting her and 34% supporting Bass, according to a memo prepared by the group’s pollster.

The margin of error was 3.7 percentage points.

The Bass campaign declined to share its internal polling when contacted by The Times.

However, Neighborhoods for a Better L.A., an independent expenditure group supporting the mayor, said a survey it commissioned in early August showed the mayor with an edge over Raman of 41% to 35%, with 24% of the electorate undecided.

That poll, conducted by Tulchin Research, surveyed 1,200 likely Los Angeles voters and has a 2.8-percentage-point margin of error, the group said.

The poll also found that when given “balanced biographies” about both candidates, Bass’ support grew to 45% while Raman went down to 33%.

“Communications focused on Raman’s record can both reduce her support and consolidate voters behind Bass,” the pollsters wrote.

Giving back El Grito cash

Los Angeles City Councilmember Imelda Padilla locked down sponsorships for the city’s celebration of El Grito, which marks Mexico’s independence.

Tuesday’s event, which featured an evening of musical performances, was sponsored by an assortment of city contractors and government agencies, including waste hauler Athens Services and the Department of Water and Power.

Still, Padilla decided she didn’t want to partner with one particular business, announcing at the last minute that organizers no longer would accept a $5,000 sponsorship from Home Depot.

On the day of the celebration, Padilla issued an apology on Instagram, saying she had heard from community members upset over the event’s affiliation with Home Depot, whose parking lots have been the site of many federal immigration raids.

“We have rescinded their partnership for this event,” Padilla said in her post. “The spirit of El Grito is rooted in celebrating our Latino heritage and creating a space where our families feel welcomed, safe, and celebrated.”

In an email, a Home Depot spokesperson said the company is not involved in immigration enforcement activities and doesn’t coordinate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement or U.S. Border Patrol. The company also doesn’t receive advance warning about enforcement actions, the representative said.

“We cannot legally interfere with federal enforcement agencies, including preventing them from coming into our stores and parking lots,” Home Depot spokesperson Evelyn Fornes said.

State of play

— COZY WITH CARUSO: Billionaire developer Rick Caruso, who was defeated by Bass in 2022, appeared alongside the mayor at a groundbreaking for the Palisades Recreation Center. Caruso praised her for her work on the project but stopped short of endorsing, saying he intends to meet with Raman in the coming weeks.

— LIFE AFTER PRATT: The voters who picked reality TV personality Spencer Pratt in the June 2 primary election are now up for grabs. But will they stay home instead of picking a mayoral candidate?

— BASS BAILS: The mayor skipped a congressional hearing on waste and fraud in homeless spending this week, calling the session politically motivated. Rep. Tim Burchett, the Republican who chaired the subcommittee meeting, accused her of dodging accountability.

— FINDING FRAUD: Federal authorities arrested three people who were working in Los Angeles-area homeless nonprofits this week, accusing one of them of misappropriating more than $7.5 million in taxpayer funds. Scott Turner, secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, said the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, which provided the funding, had allowed fraud to “run rampant.”

— WE’RE IN THE MONEY: The 2028 Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles will generate up to $40.6 billion in increased economic output and add as many as 224,000 jobs, according to an upbeat economic forecast released this week. Another, more tempered estimate put the increase at $20.5 billion to $25.4 billion.

— SEETHING OVER SKID ROW: Some activists want dogs taken away from homeless residents living in Skid Row, saying those animals are living in an unsafe environment. A Bass aide responded by cautioning that it is “neither humane nor legal to remove animals from their human companions without appropriate cause.”

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to combat homelessness went to Avalon Boulevard and 64th Street in South L.A., an area represented by Councilmember Curren Price.
• On the docket next week: The council’s Public Works Committee meets Tuesday to discuss ways of cleaning, safeguarding or demolishing nuisance properties.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

In La Palma Park Stadium in Anaheim, a month before the Bay of Pigs invasion, 7,500 students and parents skipped school or work and gathered to learn about communist plans to take over the United States.

“Right now, we have a 50-50 chance of defeating the communist threat,” Herbert Philbrick, a former FBI agent, told the crowd on March 8, 1961. “Each day our chances grow less.”

Walter Knott, of berry-farm fame, sponsored the five-day “Christian Anti-Communist School” to help Orange County see the world that he saw, one where big government and liberalism led to Soviet domination.

The message stuck. Within the decade, Orange County would have 38 chapters of the conspiracy-minded, ultra-right-wing John Birch Society, which called Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower a “communist tool.” Knott and actor John Wayne were members, as was the county’s congressman.

The rightward mobilization during the suburban explosion of the 1960s gave Orange County a national reputation for hard-line conservatism with a crackpot edge — “nut country,” in the words of Fortune magazine.

The county’s deep pockets funded right-wing candidates and movements throughout the nation. At home it spawned popular but ultimately doomed measures such as the Briggs Initiative in 1978 to ban gays and lesbians from working in public schools, and Proposition 187 in 1994, which would have denied public services to immigrants in the country illegally.

The Republican Party reached its peak in the Reagan era and has been slowly losing its membership edge since 1990, as the diversity of Los Angeles and the world at large started to bleed through the so-called Orange Curtain.

Source: California Secretary of State

(Priya Krishnakumar / Los Angeles Times)

Registered Republicans today outnumber Democrats by only 2 percentage points, down from 22% at the peak, with a large contingent of self-declared independents positioned to swing elections either way. The GOP has a chance of losing four congressional seats in the county in Tuesday’s midterm election. If so, it would be the first time since the 1930s that Orange County would be without Republican representation in the House.

A GOP loss of even one or two seats would be significant, not as a turning point so much as a powerful sign of change — hastened by dislike for President Trump — in this one-time heart of American conservatism.

Source: Political Data, Inc.

(Priya Krishnakumar / Los Angeles Times)

::

Orange County seceded from its northwestern neighbor, Los Angeles, in 1889, led by fiercely independent ranchers, sheepherders, beekeepers, citrus growers and crop farmers who had bristled under the control of a rich city 30 miles up the rail line.

The county then was a constellation of small farm and dairy towns in the north and scattered resort towns along the coast. In the south, the basin tapered off into a narrowing valley between the Santa Ana Mountains and the coastal San Joaquin Hills, where sheep and cattle ranches had thrived since California was part of Spain and Mexico.

Americans had taken over the ranchos in the late 19th century after a devastating drought left many old landowners of Spanish ancestry, the Californios, broke.

Lewis Moulton was one of the Yankee migrants. He came from Boston in 1874 and grazed sheep on the open range from Oceanside to Long Beach. Family lore has it that natural gas seeps were so rich in some spots that, as he camped, he would light them to cook his breakfast.

After two decades of renting land, he and a Basque shepherd, John Pierre Daguerre, had enough money to buy Rancho Niguel, which they eventually expanded to 22,000 acres. It was rugged, isolated country, good mostly for grazing. The cheapest land was the steep part near the coast, between what would become Laguna Beach and Dana Point — about $15 an acre. Today, small fractions of an acre go for double-digit millions.

In the second half of the 20th century, these backwater ranchers and farmers, the Moulton family, the O’Neills, Floods, Irvines, Segerstroms, would physically and culturally shape Orange County into the suburban giant it is today.

But there was always an underclass that made their dreams work.

Tenant farmers — often with roots in Mexico, the Basque country or in California before the American conquest — rented spots on these ranches to graze and grow barley. Others toiled as hands for the landowners.

In the north, they lived in segregated barrios in Santa Ana, Westminster, Anaheim and Garden Grove — where their children attended separate “Mexican schools” until a federal appeals court ruled them unconstitutional in 1947. In the south, they made up smaller communities in El Toro and San Juan Capistrano.

Stephen Rios stands in the doorway of the adobe house in San Juan Capistrano built by his family in 1794.

(Mark Boster / For The Times)

“My tata got killed right there by the train when he was 93 years old,” Stephen Rios said of his grandfather, an American Indian named Mochanai, as he sat in his front garden across from the Mission San Juan Capistrano. “He was a vaquero, a well-known horse trainer.”

Rios’ family worked for the Moultons and O’Neills and lived in the adobe house built in 1794 for their ancestor Feliciano Rios, who came to California as a Spanish soldier and married an American Indian woman.

Rios, an attorney, inherited the home from his father and lives there today. His son’s bedroom has the ceiling boards that the famed bandito Joaquin Murrieta, a family friend known as the Robin Hood of El Dorado, would lift to hide in the attic in the 1850s. A flat-screen TV sits below them now.

The American Indian, Californio and Mexican residents of their dirt street — the oldest neighborhood in California — were conservative. “They loved their families, their church,” he said. “They loved their pieces of land. They were strong, religious independent people.”

Republicans reigned during the rural era. The land barons did not want labor organizers anywhere near their field hands.

When orange pickers walked out of the orchards in 1936, the strikers were arrested and beaten by police and mobs. The Times reported “old vigilante days were revived in the orchards of Orange County yesterday as one man lay near death and scores nursed injuries.”

Changes in Orange County’s 948 square miles — physical, demographic and political — have always rolled from north to south. While the Rios family was still living in the cowboy era, World War II brought rapid transformation to the northern part of the county.

The military needed more West Coast bases to fight the Japanese, and the open space between Long Beach and San Diego was perfect. The government built bases in Seal Beach, Los Alamitos, Santa Ana and El Toro.

Defense contractors and other big manufacturers followed: Hughes Aircraft, Rockwell, Ford Aeronutronic, Boeing, American Electronics, Beckman Instruments.

The farmers and ranchers became developers, or sold their land to other builders, creating vast tracts of homes across the northern end of the county from Huntington Beach to Fullerton. In this era of big cars and backyard barbecues, houses turned inward. Garages replaced porches and picture windows; neighborhoods were quiet.

The newcomers, many from the South and Midwest or white-flighters from Los Angeles, converged at church.

::

At its core, Orange County held a tension between Midwestern traditionalism and California’s drive for reinvention.

The midcentury suburbs in the north were libertarian-leaning enclaves, yet living on Washington defense spending, and listening to a sunny California-bred gospel of self-empowerment and prosperity.

An Iowan named Robert Schuller put out a newspaper ad in 1955, “Come as you are … In the family car!”

He preached from the roof of the snack bar at the Orange Drive-in theater, not about fire and brimstone, but about “possibility thinking” with catchphrases like “Turn your scars into stars.”

Robert Schuller, who delivered a new type of self-healing Gospel to the country, at the new Crystal Cathedral in 1980.

(Tony Barnard / Los Angeles Times)

Schuller’s congregation boomed, becoming one of the nation’s first megachurches. His “Hour of Power” television sermon beamed across the country. In 1980, he built a glass church longer than a football field, the Crystal Cathedral.

Orange County birthed hugely influential ministries that mixed God with conservative politics: Chuck Smith’s Calvary Chapel, Greg Laurie’s Harvest Crusade, Paul and Jan Crouch’s Trinity Broadcasting Network and Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church.

“The megachurches reinforced and marinated the conservatism coming out of the defense plants,” said Fred Smoller, associate professor of political science at Chapman University.

Orange County’s open space and space-age technology, coupled with fervent entrepreneurship and an-edge-of-the-continent mentality, let tinkerers and visionaries experiment with minimal regulation.

This was a suburban county that, like no other, reached deep into popular culture.

Knott’s Berry Farm was the nation’s first theme park. Disneyland became one of the world’s biggest destinations. The ministries reached millions. South Coast Plaza shopping mall would draw more people from around the world than Disneyland. The Irvine ranch grew into the largest planned city in America. Leisure World became the first retirement community.

Leisure World resident Jerry Wyss enjoys the pool in 1999.

(Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times)

In new coastal towns such as Dana Point and San Clemente, Hobie Alter, Gordon “Grubby” Clark and John Severson (living next door to Orange County native Richard Nixon in his “Western White House”) helped create a whole new culture around an ancient Polynesian sport that would become a multibillion-dollar surf industry.

In Laguna Beach, Tom Morey, a Douglas Aircraft composites engineer, invented the bodyboard. In Anaheim, the Van Doren brothers opened the first Vans store.

And the likes of Knott and Anaheim’s Carl Karcher, the founder of Carl’s Jr., would help give America a new brand of conservatism, with their friend John Wayne in Newport Beach to embody it.

With the Cold War at its peak in the 1960s, families in Orange County, so many of them in the military or defense industry, heeded their call.

“At living room bridge clubs, at backyard barbecues, and at kitchen coffee klatches, the middle-class men and women of Orange County ‘awakened’ to what they perceived as the threats of communism and liberalism,” wrote Lisa McGirr, a professor of history at Harvard, in “Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right.” “They became the cutting edge of the conservative movement in the 1960s.”

“The lack of a large organized working class and the near absence of racial minorities made it likely that Orange County’s political rainbow would consist of relatively few colors.”

The quiet homogeneity of the walled and gated communities allowed politicians to exploit fears of the outsider — whether they be African Americans from Los Angeles, immigrants from Mexico, or gays, Muslims and Koreans.

“The anti-minority stuff accelerated political careers here,” said Smoller, the political scientist. “We have a history of sending some real oddballs to Congress.”

An early one was Rep. James Utt, who in 1963 warned about the United Nations training “a large contingent of barefooted Africans” in Georgia to take over the country.

Cementing this conservatism: its daily newspaper, the Register, and its libertarian owner Raymond C. Hoiles. He had once waged war against a measure to improve mental health care in Alaska because he said it was a communist plot to brainwash Americans in concentration camps.

Will California flip the House? The key races to watch »

In 1964, Pat Donnelly, a young aerospace engineer working at McDonnell Douglas, bought a small home in Buena Park for $18,500. His neighbor’s first admonition to him: They must help ensure no blacks, Mexicans or Catholics moved in.

Donnelly was a Catholic, and even worse, a union-card-carrying Democrat who once played guitar and banjo in a touring folk band. He and his wife had two girls and joined the St. Pius V Church on Orangethorpe Avenue and started a choir. With his own slice of suburbia, he became more concerned about taxes and grew more conservative.

“I didn’t like some of the stuff I was seeing in the cities, the drugs and crime. It seemed like people were abusing welfare. I was paying for that.”

He switched parties and never looked back.

After Orange County’s favorite candidate Barry Goldwater lost to President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, Republican rainmakers turned their attention to Reagan’s run for governor. His first political fundraiser was at a home in Anaheim, and the county would nurture his ambitions the rest of his career.

By the 1970s, developers had reached deep into south Orange County. The Irvine Co. had wound down its cattle operations and was parceling out its 185 square miles of land. Some 1,500 acres near Newport Beach would become UC Irvine. The company developed a master plan for a city to grow around the university, which would incorporate in 1971.

The Moultons sold their land soon after to developers who would build Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Laguna Niguel and Aliso Viejo. In their yards, homeowners would find rattlesnakes that wandered out of the wild canyons and steep hillsides between subdivisions.

To the east and south, the O’Neills’ vast scrubby land would give way to even newer, posher cities such as Rancho Santa Margarita, Ladera Ranch and the community of Coto de Caza — the setting for the “Real Housewives of Orange County.”

With all this construction, Stephen Rios’ 225-year-old adobe home is hemmed in by suburbia.

The “Los Rios District” is now on the National Register of Historic Places and is highly sought-after real estate for its quaint atmosphere.

Most of the old Californio families sold and moved on.

“Everyone else wants to live here now,” Rios said.

Jared Mathis, left, and Scott T. Barnes stand off the trail in the Aliso and Wood Canyon Wilderness looking over the 22,000 acres that their great-grandparents bought in the 1890s.

(Mark Boster / For The Times)

Lewis Moulton’s great-grandson, Jared Mathis, came back from a job back east to Laguna Hills to manage the family’s remaining holdings. A few years ago, he took his dad — who moved away in the 1970s — for a drive to look at the old ranch where he grew up.

But his father couldn’t get his bearings. All the landmarks were gone, the hills terraced, new trees and houses blocked once wide views. “They say they moved more dirt building Aliso Viejo than they did digging the Panama Canal,” Mathis said.

Mathis drove his father to the ridgeline of Laguna Beach. From there, you could see the whole ranch area, smell the laurel sumac in Aliso Canyon, glimpse some old corrals in the distance, get a grip of the topography. The white striations of terraced neighborhoods faded in the haze. The twin peaks of Modjeska and Santiago, called Old Saddleback, framed the view, as they did in most of the county, one thing that never changed.

“He could see where they had the old roundups,” he said. “That was a powerful image for him.”

As development moved south, the older, northern parts of the county lost some of their luster. The affluent white Republicans drifted to the shinier places depicted in shows such as “The O.C.”

The explosion in South County home construction created thousands of jobs. “The people building all of those houses were Latino,” said Smoller, the political science professor. Like the old tenant farmers, they helped families such as the Irvines realize their dreams.

Thousands of other Latinos would follow to work in service jobs in these wealthy new areas.

The humming economy overall and good schools also lured professional and middle-class Latinos to the northern neighborhoods that Anglos were leaving in their migration south.

In Santa Ana in the 1970s, the population of Latinos went from 40,000 to 90,000. Today, Latinos account for 78% of Santa Ana’s population. Northwest Orange County looks a lot like Southeast L.A. County. La Habra is 57% Latino; Anaheim, 52%; Buena Park, 40%; Garden Grove, 37%.

The other big factor that brought demographic change was seeded 53 years ago, when the federal government removed racist quotas on immigrants from Asia, and Greater Los Angeles became a major destination for Koreans and Chinese.

In 1975, after Saigon fell, 50,000 South Vietnamese landed in nearby Camp Pendleton, and conservative Orange County stepped up to take the anti-communist refugees.

The Register called on churches and citizens to sponsor these newcomers. They were put up in apartments in neglected parts of Westminster and Garden Grove still surrounded by bean fields.

Soon the fields and dilapidated commercial strips gave way to bustling places such as Saigon Market and Hoa Binh Market, ushering in a wave of new Vietnamese businesses that would revitalize the area.

Frank Jao started off in America selling Kirby vacuum cleaners in Whittier. Within a year, he moved to Garden Grove, became a real estate agent, then developer, first building a shopping mall in Westminster with the help of Chinese investors.

So many Vietnamese storefronts were opening in Westminster, changing its look so rapidly, that more than 100 residents signed a petition calling for the city to stop issuing business licenses. It was an ugly time.

“Anyone driving on Bolsa would more than occasionally be confronted by drivers who rolled down their windows and asked us to roll down ours, and they’d give us the middle finger,” recalled Jao, now 70. “When we’d go to work in the morning, we’d find the windows shot out by BB guns.”

His buildings became the core of Little Saigon, notably its landmark Asian Garden Mall. His company built $400 million worth of shopping centers and apartment buildings throughout Orange County and beyond.

Upscale Chinese families took to Irvine. Many had left China because of the lack of opportunities for their children to attend college, and this master-planned community, built around UC Irvine, was a huge draw, as it was to moderately affluent Koreans, Iranians and Latinos. Irvine is nearly 40% Asian now.

Koreans had begun trickling in from Los Angeles during the 1980s, seeking better schools. The 1992 Los Angeles riots, in which many Korean store owners lost their businesses, sped up the flow. They often stuck close together, moving into specific neighborhoods in Garden Grove, Fullerton and Buena Park.

The Asian influx has also contributed to the reordering of politics in once reliably Republican Orange County.

As a whole, Asian Americans are more likely to register as “no party preference” and vote based on specific issues, not party, said Karthick Ramakrishnan, a professor of political science and public policy at UC Riverside. They leaned Republican during the Reagan era and well into the 1990s while subsequent generations moved to the left.

“About one-third of Asian Americans voted for Clinton in 1992,” Ramakrishnan said, “but two-thirds voted for Obama in 2008.”

He said in the last five years strong GOP outreach to the community in Orange County — and encouragement of Asian Americans to run for office — has brought many back to the party. But Ramakrishnan said too many factors are at play to say how they will vote on Tuesday. An example: They don’t like Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric, but Vietnamese, Taiwanese and Koreans like his confrontational stance toward China.

In Buena Park, Pat Donnelly, still a Republican, met a Korean American estate attorney named Sunny Park — a Democrat — at his Lion’s Club. He came to realize she had values he admired: honesty, a family focus, strong work ethic. Now he’s campaigning for her as she runs for City Council.

Park had followed her aging Korean clients from Los Angeles, moving into the affluent and increasingly Korean Bellehurst neighborhood. When she knocks on doors, many white people have offered support. But some have grumbled “No Koreans” and shut the door in her face.

A couple weeks ago, she started seeing campaign signs that said “No Sunny Park, Carpetbagger.”

She says the message that sends the Korean community is that she — and by extension they — are not from here and they shouldn’t try to take part in politics.

The political dynamic in Orange County is not so much a rising blue tide, but an ebbing red one. Since 1999, registered Democrats rose by less than 2 percentage points to 33.6%, while Republicans have fallen 14 points to 35.6% of voters. The wave is of independent voters who increased in numbers nearly as much as the Republicans fell.

A majority of Latinos vote Democrat, and growth in their community has buoyed the party. While they tend to be more socially conservative, they favor more lenient immigration policies, social programs that help the poor, strong unions and high minimum wages.

Historically, turnout has not matched their share of the population, but some Republican strategists fear Trump’s derogatory comments about Mexican and Central American immigrants might motivate them this year.

In 1996, the anti-immigrant rhetoric surrounding Proposition 187 helped end the ultra-right Orange County Republican Bob Dornan’s political career, and put Democrat Loretta Sanchez in Congress.

Just like the development, the diversity and Democratic edge are pushing south in this county of 3.2 million people.

In 2002, Democrats outnumbered Republicans only in Santa Ana, Buena Park and Stanton. Now they do in 11 cities reaching down to Irvine.

In Laguna Niguel, Candy Antone, 47, said Democrats such as her essentially lived in the closet until recently. She would go quiet when a Republican friend or neighbor would go on a political rant. “You just had to bite your lip,” she said.

But Trump is repelling even many Republicans here. “Democrats are coming out of the woodwork,” Antone said. “People we’ve known for years, we’re just finding out they’re Democrats.”

joe.mozingo@latimes.com

Twitter: @joemozingo