polls

Buchanan Poised at the Edge of Political Credibility Gap : Campaign: No matter what polls and receptive New Hampshire voters say, GOP pols insist he’s not electable.

The problem for Patrick J. Buchanan, the silver-tongued Republican who would be President, is people like George Anthes.

“It seems that Pat Buchanan has truly caught fire,” says Anthes, the king of talk radio at station WMVU, introducing the candidate to a listening audience of flinty New Englanders. “There seems to be a change brewing.”

And so Buchanan begins his spiel: The national polls–three of five in August–that peg him No. 2 behind Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole of Kansas in the race for the GOP nomination. His recent endorsement by the Manchester Union Leader, the paper of record for New Hampshire’s hard-core conservatives. A credible showing in the recent Iowa straw poll–in his eyes, No. 3 with a bullet.

“We have crossed the threshold,” said a confident Buchanan, “of credibility and electability.”

Not so fast. Thirty minutes later, with the microphone off and the candidate heading quickly for the door, Anthes gets a little more honest. “I’d love to see Pat as President, but I have my doubts.” A pause. “He is picking up though.”

Well, sort of. Somehow, even when they suffer setbacks or fail to make headway in the polls, Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, ex-Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander and California Gov. Pete Wilson get taken seriously as potential nominees. Even when Buchanan is on a roll–like the one that fuels his hopes today–he is rarely accorded the same respect.

The reasons are plentiful. Buchanan rose to prominence as a commentator and author; although he ran for President in 1992, he has never won an elected office. He is an unabashed, uncompromising conservative, and thus a polarizing figure to many. And the disdain he does not hide for some in his own party has cut into his ability to raise money.

Buchanan and his followers are “outsiders, they’re populists,” said political analyst Kevin Phillips. “In terms of the Republican power elite, they’re not Buchananites. He could never be the nominee.”

Striving for Second

Buchanan, 56, is undeterred by such naysayers. And his quest, at least for now, is not to be No. 1, but to come in second in the early primaries and caucuses of 1996–a crucial three weeks, Buchanan contends, that will decide if he can raise the money to continue campaigning.

“I’ve got the resources to go three weeks,” said the candidate, who so far has raised about $3 million and spent an estimated $2.5 million. A bad showing in those crucial contests and contributions will dry up, leaving him at great disadvantage to his cushier competitors who have the money “to sustain the kinds of defeats I can’t.”

Indeed, as of June 30, in the most recent Federal Election Commission statistics available, Dole had raised $13.5 million and had $6.5 million cash on hand; Gramm had raised $16.8 million and had $7.3 million left.

Dole’s and Gramm’s years in public office have given them extensive lists of big-money campaign donors. Buchanan, on the other hand, appeals to ideologically inspired small donors and reports an average contribution of less than $40. “We are appealing to the grass-roots,” said K. B. Forbes, Buchanan’s deputy press secretary.

Buchanan is struggling mightily to claim the crown of true conservative in a crowded field of candidates, to fuse together the disaffected, the religious, the working class, Ross Perot voters, gun owners, the Christian Coalition. He is striving to be second.

“Dole might be ahead of me,” Buchanan contended, “but then the conservatives will say: ‘It’s Buchanan or Dole.’ If they say that, then I can beat Bob Dole.”

Hanging over the upbeat campaign for the past month was the ill health of Buchanan’s mother, Catherine, 83, who was injured in a fall. She died Monday, and Buchanan headed home from a campaign swing in the West.

One recent Sunday morning, he could be found striding into Washington’s National Airport, fresh from a hand-clapping, foot-stomping success at the Christian Coalition’s annual meeting. He was armed with a newspaper and briefcase, garbed in the politician’s standard-issue blue suit. He was headed to New Hampshire for three days of campaigning. No one paid a bit of attention.

This is the conservative made famous by his 1992 declaration of a cultural war “for the soul of America,” a battle that he will likely wage as long as he can breathe–and talk.

“Have you read that U.N. report?” he asked supporters at a Republican town hall meeting in New Hampshire later the same day. “They say there aren’t two sexes, there are five genders.”

He paused for laughter, warmed to his crowd and continued: “They started with heterosexual; I followed them there. They went on to homosexual; I was slowing down. They said transsexual, that’s the third one. I don’t understand the last two. I tell you this: God created man and woman, I don’t care what Bella Abzug says.”

In the circles Buchanan travels, that one always goes over well. So do his stands on affirmative action (against), abortion (vehemently against), the death penalty (oh, yes), the Department of Education (oh, no).

He would bury the North American Free Trade Agreement and erect an ideological wall around the nation to rival the actual wall he would build along the U.S. border with Mexico. No more foreign aid, no more global free trade. In Buchanan’s brand of economic nationalism, “we must stop sacrificing American jobs on the altar of transnational corporations.”

And he would tell the nation about his economic platform, unveiled in a recent Wall Street Journal essay, if only people would tear their attention away from his stand on social issues. His program, he contends, will make America “the enterprise zone for the entire industrialized Western world.”

The highlights: A flat tax on personal income. A flat tax for big corporations. A much lower tax for small ones. No more inheritance tax on family businesses and family farms. He will pay for the plan with a 10% tariff on Japanese imports and a 20% tariff on Chinese goods.

In New Hampshire, with its recent memory of economic privation, of local industries fleeing oversees, the Buchanan plan resonates.

Norma Moreau, 38, stands in front of Martha’s Exchange restaurant and brew pub here in Nashua, waiting for a friend so they can map out the future of her small-business career. Moreau said that she is likely to cast her ballot for Buchanan, even though she disagrees with his rock-solid stand against abortion. Everything else, she says, she likes–particularly the tariffs.

“I think there should be tariffs put on anything from another country,” said the owner of Imprints Ink, a struggling silk-screening firm. “We have to protect our own jobs. All we do is help other countries. Why don’t we take the money and help the United States?”

She has too many friends who have lost their jobs, run out of unemployment assistance, lost their homes. “It’s sad,” she said.

Familiar Territory

Buchanan used this New Hampshire despair, coupled with Republican anger at the 1991 tax increase shepherded by then-President George Bush, to garner an unimaginable 37% of the vote in the 1992 GOP primary here.

He still considers the region his, with its picket fences, clapboard houses, and guys named Charlie who wear shirts and ties when they go to work pumping gas at the local Shell station.

People here still smoke in restaurants; adults are not required to wear seat belts or motorcycle helmets. The state motto is, “Live Free or Die.”

At St. Marie Parish in industrial Manchester, where Buchanan took in Sunday Mass, the homily began with a tale about how burdensome laws in New York City required Mother Teresa to install an elevator for the handicapped in her refurbished community center. The result, according to the priest: She left.

“I notice Pat Buchanan is here,” said Father Marc Montminy to great applause. “Welcome in our midst.”

Charles M. Arlinghaus, executive director of New Hampshire’s Republican State Committee, contends that the race here is still wide open and that Buchanan still has a shot. “Anyone could win New Hampshire,” he said, “with a couple of exceptions I won’t name.”

Phillips concedes that Buchanan was underestimated in New Hampshire in 1992.

But the author of the American Political Report figures that a GOP presidential nomination for the conservative commentator and author is “unlikely.” Chances are, Phillips says, Buchanan will not even win 25% of the vote in the upcoming New Hampshire primary.

“I think 25% would be doing very well,” Phillips said. “It would probably put him second place, clearly put him third. He does have a chance of going that high. On the other hand, the chance of Pat lasting with a lot of pep into March is not very good. He doesn’t have the budget.”

But the lengthy race to choose a President is still in its very early stages, as was painfully evident as Buchanan campaigned in Concord Sept. 11.

Performing the mandatory New Hampshire dance of meet and greet the voters, he introduced himself to Bea McGinnis, 76, a loyal Republican, shook her hand and went on his way. And who does McGinnis like in the Republican race? “Well, you got Bill Wilson, running, right? He’s a Republican. And I like John over there,” she said, glancing at Buchanan’s receding back. “That’s his name, right?”

La Ganga reported this story while on assignment in New Hampshire.

Source link

Slovenia heads to polls with diverging views on Israel in focus | Elections News

Slovenia heads to the polls on Sunday in a closely contested race between incumbent Prime Minister Robert Golob and right-wing former Prime Minister Janez Jansa.

Opinion polls currently suggest no clear winner between Golob’s Freedom Movement (GS) and Jansa’s Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS), with the outcome likely to hinge on smaller parties and coalition-building.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Jansa has served three times as prime minister, between 2004-2008, 2012-2013 and 2020-2022.

Golob’s domestic agenda has been broadly reform-driven and welfare-focused, with a mix of social policy, green transition, and institutional reforms, something Jansa has promised to reverse by introducing tax breaks for businesses and cutting funding for welfare programs.

The election will also decide which direction the Alpine nation, which gained independence in 1991, will take on foreign policy, especially given the wildly divergent views on Israel and Palestine.

Slovenia’s government has been an outspoken critic of Israel’s war; in contrast, Jansa is a staunch supporter of Israel.

Slovenia Israel
Slovenian then Prime Minister Janez Jansa and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met in Jerusalem on December 8, 2020 [Ohad Zwigenberg/Pool via Reuters]

Diverging views on Israel-Palestine

For a small nation – roughly the size of New Jersey in the United States – home to two million people, the Israel-Palestine conflict has played a significant role in its politics.

Slovenia’s current government has openly criticised Israel’s actions in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, even introducing a ban on imports of goods produced in the occupied Palestinian territory.

In May 2024, the country recognised Palestinian statehood, raising a Palestinian flag alongside the flags of Slovenia and the European Union in front of a government building in downtown Ljubljana.

A Palestinian flag flies next to a Slovenian and a European Union flag, at the government building in Ljubljana, Slovenia
A Palestinian flag flies next to a Slovenian and an EU flag, at the government building in Ljubljana, Slovenia, May 30, 2024 [Borut Zivulovic/Reuters]

In May 2025, Slovenia’s President Natasa Pirc Musar told the European Parliament that the EU needed to take stronger action against Israel, condemning “the genocide” in Gaza.

Later in the year, it banned far-right Israeli cabinet ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich from entering the country and became the first country in the EU to ban all weapons trade with Israel over its genocidal war on Gaza.

It has also backed Slovenian International Criminal Court (ICC) Judge Beti Hohler, after she was sanctioned by the US for her role in issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

In a letter sent to the EU heads of state on March 13, Golob and Musar warned that Europe’s refusal to condemn the sanctions indicated that “concern for economic consequences has taken precedence over a principled defence of judicial independence and international justice … at a moment when armed conflicts rage, when international law is being violated, when the victims of the gravest crimes look to the ICC as their last hope for justice.”

Slovenia Israel
Palestinian Foreign Minister Varsen Aghabekian Shahin meets with Slovenia’s Prime Minister Robert Golob, at the Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Slovenia, in Ljubljana, Slovenia, August 25, 2025 [Borut Zivulovic/Reuters]

Nika Kovac, a Slovenian sociologist and cofounder of the 8th of March Institute, a nongovernmental organisation focused on human rights, told Al Jazeera that support for Palestine is in part rooted in the fact that Slovenia is “a very young country”, which means “there is … solidarity with countries that want to be independent, and they cannot be.”

However, the country’s approach to Palestinian rights could shift if pro-Israel Jansa were to be elected.

Jansa has been a close ally to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and lambasted Slovenia’s decision to recognise the state of Palestine, with a statement from his party claiming it was tantamount to “supporting the terrorist organisation Hamas”.

FILE PHOTO: A person votes during the early voting ahead of national elections, in Ljubljana, Slovenia March 17, 2026. REUTERS/Borut Zivulovic/File Photo
A woman votes during the early voting before national elections, in Ljubljana, Slovenia, March 17, 2026 [Borut Zivulovic/Reuters]

Accusations of ‘foreign information manipulation’

In the lead-up to the election, a series of covertly recorded conversations was published online, featuring a Slovenian lobbyist, a lawyer, a former minister and a manager.

The videos purportedly show the individuals discussing ways to influence decision-makers in Golob’s coalition to expedite procedures and secure contracts.

On Tuesday, Golob accused “foreign services” of interfering in Slovenia’s elections, after a report by the 8th of March Institute and investigative journalists claimed that representatives of the Israeli private spy firm Black Cube had visited the country in December and Jansa’s headquarters in the weeks leading up to the leaks.

On Wednesday, Slovenia’s Intelligence and Security Agency confirmed the arrival of Black Cube representatives in Slovenia and presented a report on foreign interference in elections, which the agency’s director said was alleged to have been carried out at the behest of people in Slovenia.

The State Secretary for National and International Security in the Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Slovenia, Vojko Volk, made a statement following the announcement, saying, “According to information available to date, representatives of Black Cube have stayed in Slovenia on four occasions over the past six months.”

On Thursday, Golob sent a letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen notifying her of “alarming information regarding what appears to constitute a grave instance of foreign information manipulation and interference currently unfolding in the Republic of Slovenia”.

French President Emmanuel Macron told reporters on Thursday that Golob “was the victim of clear-cut interference” by “third countries”.

“Today, in every election in Europe, there is interference that disrupts electoral processes,” Macron said.

Jansa has admitted to meeting with a Black Cube representative but denied any wrongdoing.

Source link

Georgia voters go to polls to replace Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

March 10 (UPI) — Votes are being cast in the Georgia special election to replace Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., on Tuesday.

Greene’s resignation, announced earlier this year, leaves an open seat in Congress to represent Georgia District 14. More than a dozen Republican candidates are vying for the seat, along with a small handful of Democrats.

The special election is open, meaning there are no party primaries to determine the candidates. A candidate must earn a majority of votes to win the election. If no candidate meets this criteria, a runoff election will be held on April 7.

The seat is in a largely Republican leaning district. Greene won the 14th Congressional District by 29 percent in 2024.

The winner of the election will serve out the remainder of Greene’s term that ends on Jan. 3, 2027.

Greene, long an ardent supporter of President Donald Trump, became at odds with the president over a number of issues in the past year. Notably, she pushed for the release of government files on notorious sex trafficker and former Trump friend Jeffrey Epstein. She also broke with Trump over his support of Israel and military actions abroad, including strikes against Iran.

Trump has weighed in on the race to replace Greene, giving his endorsement to Clay Fuller, a district attorney and Air National Guard officer.

Political pundits are watching Tuesday’s election closely to see how much weight Trump’s endorsement carries with voters.

With Greene’s resignation, Republicans hold a narrower majority in the U.S. House. The majority falls to Republicans by a 218-14 count with three vacancies.

Republican Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif., died on Jan 6, the day after Greene announced her resignation. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J., resigned on Nov. 20.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., speaks to the press outside the U.S. Capitol on Thursday. Earlier today, President Donald Trump announced Mullin would replace Kristi Noem as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Source link